Search for: All records

Abstract Electricity generation in the United States entails significant water usage and greenhouse gas emissions. However, accurately estimating these impacts is complex due to the intricate nature of the electric grid and the dynamic electricity mix. Existing methods to estimate the environmental consequences of electricity use often generalize across large regions, neglecting spatial and temporal variations in water usage and emissions. Consequently, electric grid dynamics, such as temporal fluctuations in renewable energy resources, are often overlooked in efforts to mitigate environmental impacts. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has initiated the development of resilient energyshed management systems, requiring detailed information on the local electricity mix and its environmental impacts. This study supports DOE's goal by incorporating geographic and temporal variations in the electricity mix of the local electric grid to better understand the environmental impacts of electricity end users. We offer hourly estimates of the U.S. electricity mix, detailing fuel types, water withdrawal intensity, and water consumption intensity for each grid balancing authority through our publicly accessible tool, the Water Integrated Mapping of Power and Carbon Tracker (Water IMPACT). While our primary focus is on evaluating water intensity factors, our dataset and programming scripts for historical and real‐time analysis also include evaluations of carbon dioxide (equivalence) intensity within the same modeling framework. This integrated approach offers a comprehensive understanding of the environmental footprint associated with electricity generation and use, enabling informed decision‐making to effectively reduce Scope 2 water usage and emissions. 

Abstract Civil infrastructure underpins urban receipts of food, energy, and water (FEW) produced in distant watersheds. In this study, we map flows of FEW goods from watersheds of the contiguous United States to major population centers and highlight the critical infrastructure that supports FEW flows. To do this, we draw upon detailed records of agriculture, electricity, and public water supply production and couple them with commodity flow and infrastructure information. We also compare the flows of virtual water embedded in food and energy commodity flows with physical water flows in inter‐basin water transfer projects around the country. We found that the virtual blue water transfers through crops and electricity to major US cities was 53 billion and 8 billion m³in 2017, respectively, while physical interbasin water transfers for crops, electricity, and public supply water averaged 20.8 billion m³. Highways are the primary infrastructure used to import virtual water associated with food and fuel into cities, although waterways and railways are most utilized for long‐distance transport. All of the 204 watersheds in the contiguous US support the food, energy, and/or water supplies of major US cities, with dependencies stretching far beyond each city's borders. Still, most cities source the majority of their FEW and embedded water resources from nearby watersheds. Infrastructure such as water supply dams and inland ports serve as important buffers for both local and supply‐chain sourced water stress. These findings can inform efforts to reduce water resources and infrastructure risks in domestic supply chains.