350 likes | 449 Vues
This presentation explores the significant potential of offshore wind energy as a key strategy for climate change mitigation. It discusses non-CO2 renewable resources, specifically focusing on offshore wind technology, its cost-effectiveness, and its capability to drastically reduce CO2 emissions in highly populated coastal areas. By analyzing resource availability, implementation feasibility, and comparing the urgency of climate action with historical production efforts, it outlines a pathway for rapid deployment. The findings highlight the need for strategic policy changes to enable swift actions in renewable energy development.
E N D
Can we achieve significant mitigation? • Willett Kempton and Jeremy Firestone • Center for Carbon-free Power Integration • College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment • University of Delaware • Strategic Planning and Financing for Mitigation Activities • Global Oceans Conference 2010 • UNESCO Fonteroy • 6 May 2010
Climate Change and Ocean AcidificationrequireLarge non-CO2 Resources, Fast Action
Non-CO2 Resources • Ocean renewable Resources: • Offshore wind • Tidal • Wave • Ocean current (e.g. Gulf stream, Japan current) • Salt gradient • Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion • Non-ocean renewable energy sources: • Building solar, central solar • Wind over land, high-altitude wind • (and many others)
Why Focus on Offshore Wind? • Technology available and proven today • Costs near-competitive with fossil • OS Wind €.12, solar €.25, market €.05 - .10 / kWh • Near-term technology, or higher volumes, or policy, will reduce costs further • Only economical and large non-CO2 resource in many highly populated coastal areas • Definitely continue R&D of other ocean (and land) renewable sources -- implement wind today!
Problems with Offshore Wind • Some avian deaths (3-6 birds/tower/year) • Pelagic species displaced during construction • Aesthetic or viewshed impact • Recommendation: Calculate net impact, subtracting impact of power plants displaced • Net health & environmental benefit is huge • Still, site choices should consider impacts
Example offshore system layout from: Søren Juel Petersen, Rambøll Wind Energy (talk at UD, 2 Oct 06)
Example Resource Size • Examine one small state: Delaware • Compare practical resource size • Solar, on-land wind, offshore wind, biomass, offshore oil and gas • Which resource can reach 80% reduction?
Today’s use vs. Resources elec oil nat. gas
Power for a large region? • Compare available power • With uses of power • Is offshore wind enough for the 80% reduction? • Can we build it fast enough to mitigate climate change?
Large resource on Mid-Atlantic • Examine resource of entire Mid-Atlantic • Vs. load
Needs vs. Resource All of electricity, cars and heating uses 2/3 of the wind resource, dropping regional CO2 by 68%. Yes, this makes a significant difference.
You can't make that many wind turbines! • 108 GWa supplies all electric plus all cars • Assume that each wind turbine is 5 MW nameplate at 40% CF, so 2 MWa average output • Requires 54,000 wind turbines for all electricity and all cars for mid-Atlantic • The technology is ready today; at these volumes, cost would be below market • Can we do this in 50 years?
WW II Aircraft Production(1,000s) And that’s not to mention all the tanks, ships & guns! 54,000 for U.S. East Coast by year 4 at WWII rates, or
WW II Aircraft Production(1,000s) And that’s not to mention all the tanks, ships & guns! 54,000 for U.S. East Coast by year 4 at WWII rates, or 10 Factory complexes can do this in 15 years!
What is needed to build and develop? • A WWII production effort would do it in four years. • No new technology needed. • But what if we don’t have a WWII (politically)? • What policies are needed? Rosie the Riveter Poster by J. Howard Miller
What is needed • Rethink! Differentiate among renewable energy sources • Environmental policy and permitting • Economic policies
First, need to rethink • Renewable sources are not all the same! • Some are expensive • Some can be cost-competitive with fossil • Some are small • Some are much bigger than current resources • Environmentalist need to calculate Net Impact • Towers in ocean are much less impact than either ocean acidification or climate change
Environmental Policy • Environmental policy “precautionary,” slow development, study any possible impacts • Climate change urgency changes that • “Precaution” for renewable development may be--move while studying impacts • For example, compare ... • UK ocean zoning to speed development, vs. • US processes cumbersome and slow
Economic policy • Solution in EU: “Feed-in tariff” fixes price • Renewable cost is mostly up front--no fuel, low O&M • Thus, low cost capital leads to cheaper power • Solutions: Public bonds, loan guarantees • Fossil policies: pass-through future fuel cost increases • Solution: Bids require future costs to be set • US state power decisions require “least cost” • Solution: Include health and environment costs (then, least cost is already wind)
Summary: we can do this! • Large resources with cost-competitive technology already are here • The barriers are economic/regulatory policies inherited from the fossil era • Taylor policies for each renewable resource--rapid development vs. R&D • Precautionary habits and rules must allow pro-active ocean protection
END • More information: • www.carbonfree.udel.edu • Thanks to: • Delaware Sea Grant • Delaware Green Energy Fund • College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment, U Delaware