Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Strategies that Maximize Portfolio-wide Life Cycle Cost Reduction, Resilience, and Environmental Justice Benefits

Amy E Solana^*Andrea MottDavid M AndersonChristopher R NiebylskiPaelina J DeStephanoMark R Weimar

• Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (DOE), Richland, United States

Strategies to achieve net-zero emissions at an individual site are well understood; however, organizations with multiple facilities, each with concurrent priority goals, require a comprehensive evaluation of net-zero goals using new analysis methods. At a portfolio level, distinct locations present varied challenges that cannot be addressed through singular solutions, and competing goals can take precedence with the assumption that net-zero emissions strategies deter from energy resilience and cost savings, therefore negatively impacting nearby communities. This study tests these theories by analyzing 16 diverse sites (varying in size, climate, and energy use) to identify strategies that reduce emissions and assess the impact these strategies have on life cycle costs, resilience, and communities with environmental justice concerns. Methods were developed to approximate missing information essential to net-zero evaluation. Established methods were augmented to evaluate life cycle costs, resilience, and environmental justice impacts across a set of strategies and accommodate the multi-criteria analyses. Potential benefits from identified strategies were quantified using site characteristics and a set of corresponding metrics. The net-zero analysis found that 11 sites could use on-site strategies to eliminate all but 2% of emissions generated. The remaining emissions can be offset, for instance through sequestration, executed at the portfolio scale. On-site carbon-free energy was found to reduce 51% of emissions across all sites; efficiency reduced 19% of emissions; sequestration 16%; procured carbon-free energy 15%; fuel switching 1.6%; and fleet electrification 1.3%. Building electrification, however, increased emissions by 4.4%. Different strategies also provide cost, resilience, and/or environmental justice benefits—the degree to which varies with individual site conditions. The findings indicate an advantage to considering the strategies as a comprehensive set, which leads to co-benefits, both in the ability to achieve net-zero goals and in advancing other goals. The results present the case for comprehensive advanced planning at the portfolio level to prioritize investments that will balance the minimization of emissions and life cycle cost with the maximization of resilience and environmental justice benefits. The novel methods for evaluation and integration, valuation of benefits, and consideration at the portfolio scale allow organizations to select investments that simultaneously address multiple key priorities.