CO2 Reductions

It is instructive to examine the implications of an aggressive energy technology mitigation program. The Blue scenario is a useful option to examine, since it involves early and deep carbon reductions across all energy sectors, and since the

Best Guess Equilibrium Warming

Te=2.8C

Industrial C capture & storage, 4.3

New OO2 Technology

New generation vehicles,

Adv. Renewable pwr: solar, wind, 5.8

Nuclear Power-next generation, 20

Conservation

Power generation C capture&storage, 4.8

High Efficiency vehicles,

Te=3.8C

& Existing Technology

Natural Gas combined cycle, 2.0

Reduce building fuel and power use, 5.3

SBBB)

IEA Blue Map

■ industrial C capture & storage

□ Existing and new industrial upgrades

■ New generation vehicles

Uimproved High efficiency vehicles

□ Adv.Renewable pwr: solar, wind

□ Nuclear Power-next generation HNext Generation coal&gas (non CCS)

Power generation C capture&storage Advanced Appliances and Bulbs

■ Advanced heating/cooling&insulation industrial motors and efficiency upgrades

High Efficiency vehicles Renewable power: wind, hydro, etc. Natural Gas combined cycle Nuclear Power-current generation Reduce building fuel and power use

Fig. 1.26 Existing and new technologies needed for the ACT and Blue Scenarios

Biofuels, 22

in-depth IEA analysis of this option offers us valuable insights regarding the research, development, demonstration, and deployment needs; the role that new technology must play and investment requirements. Figure 1.26 illustrates the role that new technology will have to play in order to control emissions consistent with the Blue scenario. The author has used engineering judgment to divide the technologies into existing and new categories. Also, best estimate equilibrium warming using the MAGICC model is included as a function of the Gt of CO2 mitigated in 2050. As can be seen, new technology is projected to play a major role. Also note, in the absence of new technologies, it will be difficult to constrain ultimate warming below about 4°C, +/- the uncertainties!

In order to help quantify the technology requirements, IEA [7] generated Fig. 1.27. It attempts to quantify the annual need of low carbon power generation facilities in order to reduce emissions consistent with the two scenarios. As can be seen, a fundamental transformation of the power generation sector will be necessary. In addition to unprecedented construction of nuclear facilities and a fundamental shift of coal and gas facilities to incorporate carbon capture and storage, the Blue scenario will require a massive deployment of solar, wind, and geothermal plants.

Coal-fired with CCS Gas-fired with CCS Nuclear Hydro Biomass plants Wind-onshore Wind-offshore Geothermal Solar PV Solar CSP

30 - 35 CCS coal-fired plants (500 MW) 1 - 20 CCS gas-fired plants (500 MW) ► 24 - 32 nuclear plants (1000 MW) 1/5 of Canada's hydropower capacity 30 - 100 biomass plants (50 MW)

-2900 - 14000 Wind turbines (4MW)

775 - 3750 wind turbines (4 MW) 50 - 130 geothermal units (100 MW)

115 - 215 million m2 solar panels 45 - 80 CSP plants (250 MW)

"1

50 60

GW per year

Fig. 1.27 Numbers of power generation plants and their GW per year production needed for ACT and Blue scenarios (note: CSP concentrated solar power)

A key question is: What are the research, development, demonstration, and deployment (RDD&D) requirements by technology for each energy sector? Fig. 1.28 has been derived from IEA's Blue scenario [7] to relate RDD&D resource needs compared with the quantity of CO2 projected to be mitigated by technology. Note that the units are Gt per year, and for the costs, monthly expenditures in $ billions required over the assumed 40 year period (2010-2050). The monthly interval was used to allow the graphic to use the same ordinate values for mitigation and resource requirement quantification.

Note that when added together by technology, the monthly RDD&D requirements are estimated at $30 billion and total costs over the 40 year period at $14 trillion. Of this amount about $11.9 trillion is the projected deployment costs. This suggests an RD&D requirement of about $2.1 trillion or about $52 billion per year, five times current funding levels. IEA [7] defines deployment costs as the total investment cost over time, needed to allow evolving technologies to improve to the point they are deemed to be cost competitive with existing technology, or if this is not possible, at least deemed affordable in the context of an aggressive mitigation program. As can be seen from the figure, most of the resources are required for mobile source technologies (electric, hybrid, and hydrogen/fuel cell vehicles) and for carbon capture and storage (coal generation, energy transformation, and industrial facilities). When these technologies are commercial and utilized per the Blue scenario, IEA estimates capital investment requirements over the baseline as $45 trillion. However, per IEA energy savings associated with these technologies could recover $43 trillion of that investment over time, assuming a 10% discount rate.

10 9

e

■ CCS power generation

□ Fuel switching coal togas

■ Biornass IGCC & coal co-combustion n Solar-Photovoltaic®

■ Solar - Concentrating Solar Power

■ Ultra per critical coal

■ Geothermal

□ Gas efficiency

□ Hydroelectric

■ Buildings:Electricity efficiency

■ Buildings. Fuel savings

■ Buildings:Heat pumps

■ EuildingvSGlar heating

Power Generation Elsgs Tram. led.

»

IHf

Generation Bldgs Trans. Ind

3 2 1

f-

I

m Transport:Fuel efficiency □ Transported generation biofuels

i

1

L

r

□ Plug-Ins and electTic vehicles

□ Hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles (FCVs}

Blue Map Gt C02 Mitigated in 2050

Blue Map

Ï Billions MONTHLY RDD&D, for 40 yis.

□ CCS industry 4 fuel transformation

□ lndustry:fuel Efficiency

□ Ind ustry :electric efficiency

□ industry:fuel & feed stock switching

Fig. 1.28 CO2 mitigated and corresponding RDD&D requirements by technology, for Blue scenario (Units, left, Gt CO2 mitigated in 2050, right, $ billions of monthly RDD&D)

Fig. 1.28 CO2 mitigated and corresponding RDD&D requirements by technology, for Blue scenario (Units, left, Gt CO2 mitigated in 2050, right, $ billions of monthly RDD&D)

Let us now focus on these four critical sectors and examine the technology options available, their current state of the art, and the required RD&D for them to meet their potential to avoid CO2 emissions. Tables 1.1-1.4 summarize the potential and status of key technologies based on the following recent energy technology assessments: IEA [6, 7], Hawksworth [8], Pacala [14], and Morgan [15]. Two additional references contained useful information relative to hydrogen/fuel cells, USEPA [16], and nuclear technologies, USEPA [17].

Was this article helpful?

0 0
Waste Management And Control

Waste Management And Control

Get All The Support And Guidance You Need To Be A Success At Understanding Waste Management. This Book Is One Of The Most Valuable Resources In The World When It Comes To The Truth about Environment, Waste and Landfills.

Get My Free Ebook


Post a comment