Energy Security and Climate Change Linkages: The U.S. Bubble Chart
Jeffrey Logan and John Venezia World Resources Institute Beijing 20-21 October 2007
Today’s Talk
The challenge of energy security and climate change What’s changed and what’s at stake? The Bubble Chart Assumptions Findings
Energy Security and Climate Change
Greatest global challenges of the 21st Century No country will escape the impacts of a failed effort; but will they cooperate? U.S. consumes one-quarter of global oil supply and leads in cumulative emissions – must take the lead
Chinese CO2 Emissions Will Soon Surpass Those of the U.S.
10 Billions of Tons Carbon Dioxide
China - IEA (2006)
8
6
U.S. - EIA (2006)
4
2
China - EIA (2006)
0 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
But cumulative emissions from 1920-2020 will be only half as large
Why have we become energy insecure?
Resource nationalism/concentrated statecontrol of resources “Terror” and geopolitics Environmental awareness/NIMBY Peak oil concerns Speculation US$ devaluation Demand surge Climate change
Result: Price rise; Is it permanent?
No Time to Lose
If we don’t ask the right questions today… …the next generation will be asking even harder questions
2007 Sustainable Development Comprehensive Energy Policy Environmental Balance New Energy Technology Equitable Resource Allocation Globalization Population Growth Climate Change
Source: JAStanislaw Group, LLC.
2035 Economic Collapse Energy Chaos Loss of Human Habitat Oil Wars Resource Depletion Irreversible Damage Fragmentation Famine
Energy Security and Climate Solutions are Linked
Cannot solve one without considering the other Energy security
Coal-to-liquids: carbon dioxide/water Ethanol: food security/environment Heavy oil: resources
Climate
Natural gas: security/stability Nuclear: Proliferation, NIMBY
Lifecycle Carbon Emissions for Oil Substitutes
grams CO2-equivalent per mile 1500 1000 500 0
Arab light Coal-to-liquid Gas-to-liquid Heavy Oil
Net (104g)
-500 -1000 -1500 Conversion/Refining Transport End Use
Plantation Biomass
Extraction/Production
Some oil options carry a carbon penalty
A Snapshot of Selected U.S. Energy Options Today: Climate and Energy Security Impacts and Tradeoffs in 2025
Positive Climate Characteristics
II
I
Reduce Energy Security
Business As Usual In 2025
Increase Energy Security
III
IV
Negative Climate Characteristics
U.S. Energy Options Considered
Electric Power
Nuclear Wind Ultra-supercritical IGCC w/ CCS Solar/PV Building efficiency Expanded LNG imports
Oil/Gas
Expanded production Expanded imports Enhanced oil recovery Vehicle efficiency Corn ethanol Cellulosic ethanol Plug-in electric hybrids Coal- and gas-to-liquids
A Snapshot of Selected U.S. Energy Options Today: Climate and Energy Security Impacts and Tradeoffs in 2025
This chart compares the energy security and climate characteristics of different energy options. Bubble size corresponds to incremental energy provided or avoided in 2025. The reference point is the “business as usual” mix in 2025. The horizontal axis includes sustainability as well as traditional aspects of sufficiency, reliability, and affordability. The vertical axis illustrates lifecycle greenhouse gas intensity. Bubble placements are based on quantitative analysis and WRI expert judgment.
Positive Climate Characteristics
Raise CAFE
Building Efficiency
[yielding 30 MPG for all LDVs]
Nuclear Solar PV Wind
Clean Coal (IGCC) with CO2 Capture
Power Sector (this size corresponds to 20 billion kWh) Transport Sector (this size corresponds to 100 thousand barrels of oil per day)
Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Imports
CO2 -Enhanced Oil Recovery
Cellulosic Ethanol
Plug-In Hybrids Corn Ethanol
Reduce Energy Security
Expanded Oil Imports
Business As Usual In 2025
Expanded Domestic Oil Production Gas-to-Liquids
Increase Energy Security
For specific details on the assumptions underlying the options on this chart, go to www.wri.org/usenergyoptions
Coal-to-Liquids (with carbon capture) Heavy Oil Imports Ultra Supercritical Coal
Revised 6/14/2007
Frozen MPG for Vehicle Fleet (at 2005)
Coal-to-Liquids (no carbon capture)
Negative Climate Characteristics
Assumptions
Bubble size represents modest policy driver beyond BAU in 2025 Bubbles comparable in size: measured as primary energy Not a forecast, no feedback effects; discussion platform Expanded definition of energy security (horizontal placements are subjective)
Energy (EJ)
EIA BAU forecast
Supply Addition Demand Reduction
2005 Year
2025
Examples
Option Energy CO2 Delivered/Offset (MMT) (EJ) 1.3 1.1 -6.3 1.5 0.7 1.0 -1.8 -80 -40 -410 +85 -10 -25 -110 Assumptions
Nuclear IGCC w/CCS Raise CAFE CTL Corn Ethanol EOR w/ CCS Building Efficiency
Extra 20 GW Extra 15 GW of plants Fleet 30 MPG Extra 0.75 mb/d (11 bgal) Extra 0.5 mb/d (8 bgal) Extra 0.5 mb/d Extra savings of 5%
A Snapshot of Selected U.S. Energy Options Today: Climate and Energy Security Impacts and Tradeoffs in 2025
This chart compares the energy security and climate characteristics of different energy options. Bubble size corresponds to incremental energy provided or avoided in 2025. The reference point is the “business as usual” mix in 2025. The horizontal axis includes sustainability as well as traditional aspects of sufficiency, reliability, and affordability. The vertical axis illustrates lifecycle greenhouse gas intensity. Bubble placements are based on quantitative analysis and WRI expert judgment.
Positive Climate Characteristics
Raise CAFE
Building Efficiency
[yielding 30 MPG for all LDVs]
Nuclear Solar PV Wind
Clean Coal (IGCC) with CO2 Capture
Power Sector (this size corresponds to 20 billion kWh) Transport Sector (this size corresponds to 100 thousand barrels of oil per day)
Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Imports
CO2 -Enhanced Oil Recovery
Cellulosic Ethanol
Plug-In Hybrids Corn Ethanol
Reduce Energy Security
Expanded Oil Imports
Business As Usual In 2025
Expanded Domestic Oil Production Gas-to-Liquids
Increase Energy Security
For specific details on the assumptions underlying the options on this chart, go to www.wri.org/usenergyoptions
Coal-to-Liquids (with carbon capture) Heavy Oil Imports Ultra Supercritical Coal
Revised 6/14/2007
Frozen MPG for Vehicle Fleet (at 2005)
Coal-to-Liquids (no carbon capture)
Negative Climate Characteristics
Findings for the U.S.
Vehicle efficiency is most powerful option CTL, even with CCS, is less than ideal Corn ethanol has marginal climate benefits and increasing number of food and environmental distortions Fundamental change needed quickly
For more information
http://www.wri.org/usenergyoptions Interactive description of options Expanded assumptions