How Does Flexibility Affect Environmental Performance? Evidence from the Power Generation Industry

David F. Drake () and Suresh Muthulingam ()
Additional contact information
David F. Drake: Leeds School of Business, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309
Suresh Muthulingam: Smeal College of Business, Penn State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802

Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 2025, vol. 27, issue 2, 569-587

Abstract: Problem definition : It is well known that the power sector requires flexibility, especially from fossil fuel–based power-generating units, to balance demand side variability and supply side fluctuations. However, the environmental consequences related to possessing and exercising such flexibility remain relatively unexplored. In this study, we examine the environmental impact of two forms of flexibility pertinent to power generation: fuel flexibility —that is, the ability to utilize multiple fuel types, and volume flexibility —that is, the ability to alter production volumes quickly. Methodology/results : We assembled a data set that spans 1998–2016 and includes details on fuel usage, power generation, generating unit characteristics, and carbon dioxide (i.e., CO 2 ) emissions for 3,135 fossil fuel power-generating units that account for more than 92% of the United States’ fossil fuel–generating capacity. Our empirical analysis reveals that power-generating units that possess fuel flexibility or volume flexibility generate greater CO 2 emissions than comparable nonflexible generating units. Additionally, when power-generating units exercise fuel flexibility (i.e., they use multiple fuel types in a period) or volume flexibility (i.e., they vary production to a greater degree in a period), they generate greater CO 2 emissions. By contrast, when power-generating units exercise both fuel and volume flexibility, we find that they diminish the aggregate emissions increases expected from exercising fuel or volume flexibility alone. Managerial implications : We add to the literature by exploring how flexibility affects environmental performance and by disambiguating the effects of possessing flexibility and exercising flexibility. These results are important when considering the penetration of renewables, the adoption of utility-grade storage, and demand response as each of these paths can significantly affect the flexibility burden placed on conventional sources of power. Thus, our results are relevant to policy makers and practitioners because they crystallize the environmental tradeoffs involved with deploying flexibility in fossil fuel–based power-generating units.

Keywords: environment; flexibility; carbon emissions; power generation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/msom.2023.0522 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:inm:ormsom:v:27:y:2025:i:2:p:569-587

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Manufacturing & Service Operations Management from INFORMS Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Asher ().