Can we achieve significant mitigation?

1. 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

2. New Thinking in Mitigation

3. Climate Change and Ocean AcidificationrequireLarge non-CO2 Resources, Fast Action

4. What is in our toolkit?(a regional study)

5. 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)

6. 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!

7. 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

8. What is offshore wind power?

11. Example offshore system layout from: Søren Juel Petersen, Rambøll Wind Energy (talk at UD, 2 Oct 06)

12. Art: NY Times Magazine

15. Is this resource big enough to impact climate change?

16. 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?

17. Today’s use vs. Resources elec oil nat. gas

18. Resource size

19. 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?

20. Large resource on Mid-Atlantic • Examine resource of entire Mid-Atlantic • Vs. load

21. Needs vs. Resource

22. 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.

23. Can we implement fast enough?

24. 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?

25. B-24E (Liberator), 1942

26. 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

27. 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!

28. 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

29. How to actually move forward?

30. What is needed • Rethink! Differentiate among renewable energy sources • Environmental policy and permitting • Economic policies

31. 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

32. 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

33. 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)

34. 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

35. END • More information: • www.carbonfree.udel.edu • Thanks to: • Delaware Sea Grant • Delaware Green Energy Fund • College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment, U Delaware