1 / 37

Strategies for a sustainable, CO 2 neutral energy economy Daniel M. Kammen

Strategies for a sustainable, CO 2 neutral energy economy Daniel M. Kammen Director, Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory Energy and Resources Group & Goldman School of Public Policy University of California, Berkeley Solar to Fuel – Future Challenges and Solutions

lucine
Télécharger la présentation

Strategies for a sustainable, CO 2 neutral energy economy Daniel M. Kammen

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Strategies for a sustainable, CO2 neutral energy economy Daniel M. Kammen Director, Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory Energy and Resources Group & Goldman School of Public Policy University of California, Berkeley Solar to Fuel – Future Challenges and Solutions Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, March 28, 2005

  2. http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/total.html#IntlCarbonhttp://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/total.html#IntlCarbon Mobilizing for a Low-Carbon Economy The time-scale of the Greenhouse problem (and opportunity) is ~ 5 decades. Doubling the pre-industrial CO2 level in the atmosphere is roughly theboundary between altered and unsafe; without action this be crossed within roughly 50-75 years. (This is not a prescription to wait, but a call for dramatic action now.) Unconventional oil and gas, and coal, are abundant. With 15 times or more of these resources than oil, action on climate won’t be initiated significantly by resource depletion (i.e. I disagree with Hubbert’s Peak) A portfolio approach is essential. The most basic lesson of our energy past is that diversity is our greatest ally (and the one we abandon most rapidly in a crisis). Basic research and policy analysis leading to action are both needed to open new opportunities for a low-carbon economy. Bottom line: Despite some important successes, a seed change is needed

  3. http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/total.html#IntlCarbonhttp://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/total.html#IntlCarbon World Annual Carbon Dioxide Emissions from the Consumption of Fossil Fuels, 1980-2000 Climate-carbon connection: 2.1 Gt(C) = 1 ppm(v)

  4. Modeled Response to Natural & Anthropogenic Climate Forcings GCM: Natural forcings only GCM: human + natural forcings Global Circulation Model (GCM) results; summarized in IPCC 2001 Philosophical changes require motivation: Yet we have both local and global ‘smoking guns’

  5. The ‘slice’ heuristic: Gt(C)/yr 18 Expected path (BAU) 12 Doubled CO2 ‘target’ 6 Ecological CO2 ‘target’ 0 2000 2050 2100 Socolow and Pacala (2004)

  6. 15 “slices” 50 year pathways to evolve 1.0 Gt(C)/yr carbon offsets Gt(C)/yr 18 12 6 0 2000 2050 2100 Socolow and Pacala (2004)

  7. A. Capturing SolarEnergy in space(Peter Glaser et al., 1970s) A View of our energy system as unlikely to make sufficient progress toward a low-carbon future without revolutions B. Global Superconducting Transmission Grid (Buckminster Fuller, 1970s) Hoffert et al. (2003)

  8. Between you and me, I am rather dismayed by the responses. We have done too little to move beyond ‘solving’ the (easy) boundary value problems… which are the ones we want to hear

  9. Savings Wedge Average in Berkeley Residential Electricity Use (kWh/capita, 1960 - 2000) Energy Star Home Average Dane

  10. Conclusions: Moderate path: 1.5% annual improvement Emissions growth halted at a savings B) Aggressive path: 2.9% annual improvement Meet Kyoto levels by efficiency alone & facilitate clean energy market development Energy Efficiency Futures Source: Kammen & Ling, in press

  11. Annual Rate of Change in Energy/GDP for the United States 2% - 3.4% - 2.7% Average = - 0.7% 1% 0% -1% -2% -3% -4% IEA data EIA data -5% 1989 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 -6% Rosenfeld, CEC, LBL

  12. Source: T. J. Berniard, NREL

  13. World PV Module Shipments (Megawatts)(25% annual growth for 10+ years) 2003 Annual growth: 34%; 50% in 2004 (to 1200 MW) Today: global PV production is equivalent (MW) to one large fossil-fuel power plant/year

  14. A useful (?) heuristic, or an example of stagnant thinking 6 Boxes at 3.3 TW Each = 20 TWe

  15. Solar Across Scales Moscone Center: 675,000 W Kammen home: 2400 W Kenyan PV market: Average system: 18W

  16. Performance Results for a-Si PV Modules

  17. Learning Curve for PV Modules(crystalline silicon) 100 [€/Wp] 2000 1980 1990 10 2010 2020 1 102 103 10-4 10-3 10-2 10-1 1 10 Cumulative installed PV Peak Power [GWp] Today PV electricity costs about $0.20 - 0.25/kWh, Which can be compared with $0.32/kWh PG&E charges for TOU customers during peak time (noon-6pm)

  18. Biomass accounts for : 70% of total energy use 90% of household use Compared with 3% for OECD countries Of harvested wood : ~ 75% used for cooking ~ 15% used to make charcoal Charcoal use is: Growing faster than woodfuel Mainly commercial urban fuel Attributed main blame for unsustainable forest use Biomass – in Sub Saharan Africa(500 million tons/yr) Bailis, Ezzati and Kammen (2005)

  19. World Wind Electricity Capacity (Megawatts)(20%+ annual growth for over a decade!) Megawatts Global leaders: Germany, Denmark, Spain, US, UK, China, India (> 85 of global market) US was a global leader, today we are a player, but not the leader.

  20. ME: 30% by 2000 NY – in development: 7.5% new by 2013 MN: 10% by 2015 for Xcel + >800 MW RE requirement MA: 4% new by 2009 WI: 2.2% by 2011 RI: 16% by 2019 NV: 15% by 2013 CT: 10% by 2010 PA: varies by utility IA: 105 aMW NJ: 6.5% by 2008 MD: 7.5% by 2019 AZ: 1.1% by 2007 NM: 10% by 2011 TX: 2880 MW by 2009 State Renewables Portfolio Standards and Mandates – 16 States NY: 25% by 2020 11/2/04 CA: 20% by 2017 HI: 20% by 2020 • Renewable energy “goals” established in Illinois and Minnesota • RPS being considered in many other states (e.g., VT, WA); potentially revised in others (ME, PA, WI); and national RPS is being discussed (by some) R. Wiser, LBL

  21. Study reviews: • 13 studies of • job creation • Message: • energy • efficiency and • renewables • create large • numbers of • high quality • jobs Report available at: http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~rael/papers.html

  22. New SUV Models Coming Soon The Kenworth GrandDominator - Extra high roof/cathedral ceilings - Power expandable sides - Full lavatory The Peterbuilt Crusader All Sport Denali The worlds first two story high performance sport brute Crusader-E Edition: includes elevator Source: http://poseur.4x4.org/futuresuv.html

  23. Greenhouse Comparison:FCVs, ICEs and Hybrid Vehicles Source: Bevilacqua-Knight, 2001

  24. U.S. Population 400 million people (up 40%) Electricity Use 3 kWe/capita (up 37%) Wind 300,000 5 MW Turbines (All the wind- power available from the Dakotas) Solar PV 150 million 25 kW roofs (Every roof top in the United States) Biomass Not included, but could be > 10% of total Advanced Fission 300 1 GWe nuclear plants (50% efficient) 100% H2 Vehicles “80 mpg” average for cars and SUV’s 3 million H2 trucks, 5000 LH2 airliners Carbon-Free Power by 2050(Berry and Lamont)

  25. So, What are We Doing About All This? Well, ….

  26. Federal R&D Investments, 1955 - 2004

  27. Private Sector R&D Investment in Health and Energy Kammen qnd Nemet, 2005

  28. Federal R&D Policy Can be Very Effective(All sectors of the U. S. Economy) Patents Granted (thousands) R&D Spending (billions) Margolis and Kammen (1999)

  29. The Same Funding-Patent Correlation …But Now for Energy Only Patents Granted (thousands) R&D Spending (billions) Margolis and Kammen (1999)

  30. Kammen and Nemet (2005) in review

  31. Some Critical Needs for Research • Low cost photovoltaics (< $1/Watt) • Drivers: funding; technology diversity; markets • Low cost energy storage • H2, flywheels, compressed air, pumped hydro, … • Biomass gassification across scales of application • Power electronics for mini-grids, distributed systems • Carbon sequestration • Nano energy and wireless systems to initiate a second • ‘wave’ of energy efficiency increases • Understanding and action on the economics of carbon • (and pollutants generally)

  32. Opportunities for Policy Action • Expand state renewable energy portfolio standards • Support Solar Home bills (build clean energy markets) • & renewable energy/energy efficient mortgages • Accelerate the CA Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard • Enact carbon cap & trade: work with western states, • northeast US (RGGI), UK • Get serious about Kyoto and a carbon tax

  33. To Address Climate Change, we must utilize renewable energy Atmospheric CO2 concentration in 1850: 265 ppm Atmospheric CO2 concentration in 2000: 370 ppm Advanced coal technologies kg (carbon)/kWh of Electricity Carbon/kWh for atmospheric stabilization at 450, 550 ppm

  34. To Address Climate Change, we must utilize renewable energy Atmospheric CO2 concentration in 1850: 265 ppm Atmospheric CO2 concentration in 2000: 370 ppm Advanced coal technologies kg (carbon)/kWh of Electricity Carbon/kWh for atmospheric stabilization at 450, 550 ppm  = -1%/yr

  35. Potential 1 Gt Carbon Industries in 2050 (p.1 of 2) View of energy system as available solutions (Socolow & Pacala, 2004)

  36. Achieving stabilization, slice by slice (p.2 of 2)

More Related