Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

The Cost of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation: A Brief Overview AT 760: Global Carbon Cycle Jonathan Vigh December 18, 2003.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "The Cost of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation: A Brief Overview AT 760: Global Carbon Cycle Jonathan Vigh December 18, 2003."— Presentation transcript:

1 The Cost of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation: A Brief Overview AT 760: Global Carbon Cycle Jonathan Vigh December 18, 2003

2 The Problem Increasing Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions may cause considerable global and regional climate change leading to significant economic, environmental, and ecological costs over the next century. Increasing Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions may cause considerable global and regional climate change leading to significant economic, environmental, and ecological costs over the next century. Global Warming Potentials (over 100 y): Global Warming Potentials (over 100 y): CO 2 1 CO 2 1 CH 4 23 CH 4 23 N 2 O296 N 2 O296

3 World GHG Emissions by Sector§ Sector CO 2 Emissions (GtC)Share growth raterate trend Buildings1.7331%+1.8%decelerating Transport1.2222%+2.5%steady Industry2.3443%+1.5% decelerating Agriculture0.224%+3.1%decelerating Total Emissions5.5100%+1.8%decelerating (Total energy emissions accounted for 5.5 GtC emissions in 1995). § Energy usage only, does not include other emissions such as cement production, landfill emissions, and land-use changes such as forest management, etc. Average annual growth rate from 1971-1995 Average annual growth rate from 1971-1995 The agriculture sector accounts for 20% of CO 2 equivalents because of methane emissions. The agriculture sector accounts for 20% of CO 2 equivalents because of methane emissions. [Adapted from Price et al. 1998, 1999, out of table in Climate Change 2001: Mitigation, 3 rd Assessment Report (TAR), IPCC Working Group 3]

4 Current Energy Usage of USA [U.S. EPA Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions, April 2002]

5 Worldwide Energy Trends The average annual growth rate of global energy consumption was 2.4% from 1971-1990, but dropped to 1.3% from 1990-1998. The average annual growth rate of global energy consumption was 2.4% from 1971-1990, but dropped to 1.3% from 1990-1998. The average annual growth rate of global energy-related CO 2 emissions dropped from 2.1% to 1.4% in the same periods. The average annual growth rate of global energy-related CO 2 emissions dropped from 2.1% to 1.4% in the same periods. Why? Why? Improved energy efficiencies Improved energy efficiencies Increased fuel switching to less carbon-intensive sources Increased fuel switching to less carbon-intensive sources Adoption of renewable energy sources Adoption of renewable energy sources Dramatic decrease in countries with economies in transition (EIT) as a result of economic changes Dramatic decrease in countries with economies in transition (EIT) as a result of economic changes Why arent emissions dropping then? Why arent emissions dropping then? Countervailing trends of population growth, economic growth, increased energy usage per capita, and development of the Third World. Countervailing trends of population growth, economic growth, increased energy usage per capita, and development of the Third World.

6 Costing Methodologies Top-down approach Top-down approach Uses integrated macro-economic models to estimate the cost of GHG reduction activities. Uses integrated macro-economic models to estimate the cost of GHG reduction activities. Good for examining the effectiveness of overall mitigation policies. Good for examining the effectiveness of overall mitigation policies. Bottom-up approach Bottom-up approach Estimates the cost of GHG reduction from a given technology or mitigation activity. Estimates the cost of GHG reduction from a given technology or mitigation activity. Must compare to some baseline emissions from current or expected technology portfolio. Must compare to some baseline emissions from current or expected technology portfolio.

7 What is the cost anyway? Direct (levelized) costs of delivered energy includes: Direct (levelized) costs of delivered energy includes: Capital costs (plant infrastructure) Capital costs (plant infrastructure) Cost of capital (depends on interest rates) Cost of capital (depends on interest rates) Operation costs (personnel, etc.) Operation costs (personnel, etc.) Maintenance costs Maintenance costs Fuel costs (mining, drilling, transport) Fuel costs (mining, drilling, transport) Transmission costs Transmission costs Indirect costs Indirect costs Waste disposal Waste disposal Environment Environment Climate Climate Opportunity cost of land use Opportunity cost of land use Distortion to the economy Distortion to the economy Opportunity cost of capital, export of capital for import of energy Opportunity cost of capital, export of capital for import of energy Competition for resources (physical and personnel) Competition for resources (physical and personnel) Effect on economic stability – energy security Effect on economic stability – energy security Equality on local, regional, and global scales Equality on local, regional, and global scales

8 Cost of GHG reductions Compare a current energy production method or portfolio to an alternative one Compare a current energy production method or portfolio to an alternative one Compute difference in GHG emissions Compute difference in GHG emissions Compute difference in direct and indirect costs Compute difference in direct and indirect costs Arrive at cost of GHG avoidance ($/tC) Arrive at cost of GHG avoidance ($/tC) Proper analysis includes direct and indirect costs, and macroeconomic effects Proper analysis includes direct and indirect costs, and macroeconomic effects

9 Mitigation of Greenhouse Gases Energy Efficiency Energy Efficiency Low or no carbon energy production Low or no carbon energy production Sequestration Sequestration

10

11 Electricity The U.S. spends over $216 billion on electricity each year (out of a total energy expenditure of $558 billion, mostly petroleum) The U.S. spends over $216 billion on electricity each year (out of a total energy expenditure of $558 billion, mostly petroleum) Current installed capacity is 816 GW, average production is ~750 GW, or 5000 TWh/y Current installed capacity is 816 GW, average production is ~750 GW, or 5000 TWh/y Growth rate is ~1.6% per year Growth rate is ~1.6% per year Current electrical production portfolio of the USA is: Current electrical production portfolio of the USA is: TypeShareEfficiencyCurrent best efficiency2020 Coal52%33%48.5%55% Nuclear20%~30%-- Gas-fired 16%60%60%70% Hydro7%--- Biomass~3%--- Geothermal~2%10%?-- Wind power0.2%--- Solarminute---

12 Lifecycle Emissions g/kWh CO 2 JapanSwedenFinland coal975980894 gas thermal6081170 (peak, reserve)- gas combined cycle519450472 solar photovoltaic535095 wind295.514 nuclear22610-26 hydro113-

13 Estimated total costs of various forms of electricity production For power production in Switzerland

14 The human cost of energy production

15 Current U.S. Electrical Trends To a good approximation, all additional electrical capacity over the next 5 years will be natural gas fired turbines. To a good approximation, all additional electrical capacity over the next 5 years will be natural gas fired turbines. Natural gas-fired turbines are roughly twice as efficient as existing coal- fired power plants and emit roughly half as much C per unit energy produced Natural gas-fired turbines are roughly twice as efficient as existing coal- fired power plants and emit roughly half as much C per unit energy produced

16

17

18

19 Wind Power Wind energy has become cost-competitive with other sources of production for high wind classes. Wind energy has become cost-competitive with other sources of production for high wind classes. The doubling time of installed capacity is now 3-4 years The doubling time of installed capacity is now 3-4 years For each doubling, costs drop ~15% For each doubling, costs drop ~15% Costs in 2006 should be 35-40% less than costs in 1996 Costs in 2006 should be 35-40% less than costs in 1996 By 2030, the wind farms in the best wind classes could be as low as 2.2 ¢/kW-h, cheaper than even natural gas-fired electricity. By 2030, the wind farms in the best wind classes could be as low as 2.2 ¢/kW-h, cheaper than even natural gas-fired electricity. In the U.S. In the U.S. Total installed US Wind Power capacity is now 5.3 GW as of Oct. 27, 2003 (0.6% of total installed electrical capacity) Total installed US Wind Power capacity is now 5.3 GW as of Oct. 27, 2003 (0.6% of total installed electrical capacity) 1.6 GW of new U.S. wind capacity coming online by the end of 2003 1.6 GW of new U.S. wind capacity coming online by the end of 2003 1.5 ¢/kW-h production tax credit (expires Dec 31, 2003) has provided ~$5 billion subsidy over the past 10 years 1.5 ¢/kW-h production tax credit (expires Dec 31, 2003) has provided ~$5 billion subsidy over the past 10 years

20 U.S. Installed Capacity (MW) Total Installed U.S. Wind Energy Capacity: 5,325.7 MW as of Oct 27, 2003 [American Wind Energy Association]

21 U.S. Installed Wind Capacity (MW) 1981-2003

22 Conclusions: Best Strategies The most cost effective short-term (2-20 y) strategies for avoiding emissions due to electricity production are: The most cost effective short-term (2-20 y) strategies for avoiding emissions due to electricity production are: Substitute natural gas for coal Substitute natural gas for coal Substitute nuclear for coal Substitute nuclear for coal Substitute wind for coal Substitute wind for coal Substitute hydro for coal Substitute hydro for coal For the longer term (20-100 y), the following methods of electricity production may become cost effective as fossil fuel costs increase: For the longer term (20-100 y), the following methods of electricity production may become cost effective as fossil fuel costs increase: More wind, nuclear, and hydro More wind, nuclear, and hydro Biomass and energy cropping Biomass and energy cropping Coal fired electricity, hydrogen production with sequestration Coal fired electricity, hydrogen production with sequestration Solar Solar Technology wildcards that probably arent likely, but could radically alter the mix: Technology wildcards that probably arent likely, but could radically alter the mix: Artificial photosynthesis Artificial photosynthesis Nuclear fusion Nuclear fusion Other? Other?

23 Conclusions: Costs Current cost of energy in the U.S. is 5% of GDP Current cost of energy in the U.S. is 5% of GDP If the cost of mitigation is $100/tC avoided, then this would add an expense of $200-300 billion per year, or 2- 3% of GDP If the cost of mitigation is $100/tC avoided, then this would add an expense of $200-300 billion per year, or 2- 3% of GDP Perhaps up to half of the initial reductions actually have negative direct costs (due to energy saved) Perhaps up to half of the initial reductions actually have negative direct costs (due to energy saved) How does this compare with other economic costs? How does this compare with other economic costs? Total health care expenditures in 2001 were 13.9% (8.4% average for OECD countries) Total health care expenditures in 2001 were 13.9% (8.4% average for OECD countries) Total spending on defense in the U.S. has fallen to 3-5% Total spending on defense in the U.S. has fallen to 3-5%

24 Defense Spending [Defense and the National Interest web page] [Defense and the National Interest web page]

25 Other outcomes Even if we ignore the climate effects, other issues could come into play Even if we ignore the climate effects, other issues could come into play

26 Recommended Policies: Kyoto Measures, American-style Institute a moderate carbon tax on refined gasoline, coal Institute a moderate carbon tax on refined gasoline, coal Reduce or eliminate subsidies for oil and coal Reduce or eliminate subsidies for oil and coal Promote increased infrastructure capacity for natural gas transport, eventual hydrogen transport Promote increased infrastructure capacity for natural gas transport, eventual hydrogen transport Modernize the electrical grid, allow for distributed generation Modernize the electrical grid, allow for distributed generation Continue R&D on clean coal technologies (with sequestration), with transition to hydrogen production Continue R&D on clean coal technologies (with sequestration), with transition to hydrogen production Continue R&D towards commercialization of solar energy, biomass Continue R&D towards commercialization of solar energy, biomass Increase tax credits and incentives for use of renewable sources (wind, solar, biomass) Increase tax credits and incentives for use of renewable sources (wind, solar, biomass) Continue tax credits and incentives for efficiency improvements Continue tax credits and incentives for efficiency improvements

27 General Conclusions for the GHG Problem We (the U.S.) can definitely afford to keep moving towards a lower carbon-intensive economy. We (the U.S.) can definitely afford to keep moving towards a lower carbon-intensive economy. Accelerating our movement on this path will incur nominal additional costs for our energy. Accelerating our movement on this path will incur nominal additional costs for our energy. Future costs of GHG emissions avoidance may be even lower as technologies mature. Future costs of GHG emissions avoidance may be even lower as technologies mature. Stabilization to 550 ppm will not be excessively hard to achieve, but 450 ppm will be very expensive. Stabilization to 550 ppm will not be excessively hard to achieve, but 450 ppm will be very expensive. We still have a bit of time left – stabilization will be much harder with departures beyond 2030 (T. Wigley, 1997). We still have a bit of time left – stabilization will be much harder with departures beyond 2030 (T. Wigley, 1997).

28 References The primary reference for this presentation is Climate Change 2001: Mitigation, the 3 rd Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, Working Group 3. Chapter 3 was most relevant to this presentation. The report can be obtained online at: http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg3/index.htm The primary reference for this presentation is Climate Change 2001: Mitigation, the 3 rd Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, Working Group 3. Chapter 3 was most relevant to this presentation. The report can be obtained online at: http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg3/index.htm http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg3/index.htm A secondary reference for energy issues can be found in the World Energy Assessment: Energy and the Challenge of Sustainability, 2000. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). This report can be obtained online at: http://www.undp.org/seed/eap/activities/wea/drafts-frame.html A secondary reference for energy issues can be found in the World Energy Assessment: Energy and the Challenge of Sustainability, 2000. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). This report can be obtained online at: http://www.undp.org/seed/eap/activities/wea/drafts-frame.html http://www.undp.org/seed/eap/activities/wea/drafts-frame.html Price, L., L. Michaelis, E. Worrell, and M. Khrushch, 1998: Sectoral Trends and Driving Forces of Global Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 3, 263-319. Price, L., L. Michaelis, E. Worrell, and M. Khrushch, 1998: Sectoral Trends and Driving Forces of Global Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 3, 263-319. Price, L., E. Worrell, and M. Khrushch, 1999: Sector Trends and Driving Forces of Global Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Focus on Buildings and Industry. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, LBNL-43746, Pergamon Press, Berkeley, CA. Price, L., E. Worrell, and M. Khrushch, 1999: Sector Trends and Driving Forces of Global Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Focus on Buildings and Industry. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, LBNL-43746, Pergamon Press, Berkeley, CA. Wigley, T. M. L., 1997: Implications of recent CO 2 emission-limitation proposals for stabilization of atmospheric concentrations. Nature, 390, 267-270. Wigley, T. M. L., 1997: Implications of recent CO 2 emission-limitation proposals for stabilization of atmospheric concentrations. Nature, 390, 267-270. Williams, Robin. H., 2001: Nuclear and Alternative Energy Supply Options for an Environmentally Constrained World: A Long-term Perspective. Prepared for the Nuclear Control Institute Conference Nuclear Power and the Spread of Nuclear Weapons: Can We Have One Without the Other? Washington, D.C., April 2001. Williams, Robin. H., 2001: Nuclear and Alternative Energy Supply Options for an Environmentally Constrained World: A Long-term Perspective. Prepared for the Nuclear Control Institute Conference Nuclear Power and the Spread of Nuclear Weapons: Can We Have One Without the Other? Washington, D.C., April 2001. On the web: On the web: Statistics on U.S. wind energy production (American Wind Energy Association): http://www.awea.org/projects/index.html Statistics on U.S. wind energy production (American Wind Energy Association): http://www.awea.org/projects/index.htmlhttp://www.awea.org/projects/index.html Current News on Wind Energy Production Tax Credit: http://www.awea.org/news/news031125ptc.html Current News on Wind Energy Production Tax Credit: http://www.awea.org/news/news031125ptc.htmlhttp://www.awea.org/news/news031125ptc.html Defense Spending as % of GDP (Defense and the National Interest webpage): http://www.d-n- i.net/charts_data/defense_percent_gdp_1940_2000.htm Defense Spending as % of GDP (Defense and the National Interest webpage): http://www.d-n- i.net/charts_data/defense_percent_gdp_1940_2000.htmhttp://www.d-n- i.net/charts_data/defense_percent_gdp_1940_2000.htmhttp://www.d-n- i.net/charts_data/defense_percent_gdp_1940_2000.htm U.S. Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (EPA): http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/Emissions.html U.S. Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (EPA): http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/Emissions.htmlhttp://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/Emissions.html Terasen Gas Greensheet: Natural Gas and the Environment Terasen Gas Greensheet: Natural Gas and the Environment Energy Information Administration (EIA), U.S. Department of Energy (DOE): http://www.eia.doe.gov Energy Information Administration (EIA), U.S. Department of Energy (DOE): http://www.eia.doe.govhttp://www.eia.doe.gov External costs of electricity production, GaBE Project – Comprehensive Assessment of Energy Systems, Paul Scherrer Institut: http://gabe.web.psi.ch/eia-external%20costs.html External costs of electricity production, GaBE Project – Comprehensive Assessment of Energy Systems, Paul Scherrer Institut: http://gabe.web.psi.ch/eia-external%20costs.html http://gabe.web.psi.ch/eia-external%20costs.html Energy subsidies and external costs, UIC Nuclear Issues Briefing #71: http://www.uic.com.au/nip71.htm Energy subsidies and external costs, UIC Nuclear Issues Briefing #71: http://www.uic.com.au/nip71.htmhttp://www.uic.com.au/nip71.htm Too Little Oil for Global Warming, New Scientist, Oct 2003: http://www.newscientist.com/news/print.jsp?id=ns99994216 Too Little Oil for Global Warming, New Scientist, Oct 2003: http://www.newscientist.com/news/print.jsp?id=ns99994216http://www.newscientist.com/news/print.jsp?id=ns99994216 Upsalla Protocol: http://www.isv.uu.se/uhdsg/UppsalaProtocol.html Upsalla Protocol: http://www.isv.uu.se/uhdsg/UppsalaProtocol.htmlhttp://www.isv.uu.se/uhdsg/UppsalaProtocol.html


Download ppt "The Cost of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation: A Brief Overview AT 760: Global Carbon Cycle Jonathan Vigh December 18, 2003."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google