Perspectives on Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy Payback Ratios

Document Sample
Perspectives on  Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy Payback Ratios Powered By Docstoc
					Perspectives on Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy Payback Ratios for Fusion Power Paul J. Meier Gerald L. Kulcinski
Fusion Technology Institute University of Wisconsin Madison WI

Objective
• Calculate the Energy Payback Ratio (EPR) for Coal, Natural Gas, Fission, Wind, and DT Fusion Electrical Power Plants

Perform “Birth to Death Analysis”

• Calculate the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Associated With Coal, Natural Gas, Fission, Wind, and DT Fusion Electrical Power Plants

Include all fossil input to fuel and structural materials procurement, operations, and decommissioning • Assess How the U.S. Electrical Generating System Can “Do Its Share” to Meet the 1997 Kyoto Limits
Consider the 1990 minus 7% case

The Energy Investment in a Power Plant is Comprised of Many Components
Energy to Decommission Reactor GJ / GWe

Total GJ GWe - yr
Capital Energy Investment

Energy to Construct Reactor GJ / GWe

Power Plant GJ / kg of material i

Energy To Operate Reactor

Material Inventory kg material i / GWe

Power Plant Equipment Operation GJ / GWe

Fuel Gathering GJ / GWe

Natural Gas

Coal

Uranium

Deuterium & Lithium

Calculation of Energy Payback Ratio (EPR)

EPR =

En,L (Emat,L + Econ,L + Eop,L + Edec,L)

where

En,L= the electrical energy produced over a given plant lifetime, L. Emat,L= total energy invested in materials used over plant lifetime, L.
Econ,L= total energy invested in construction for a plant with lifetime, L. Eop,L= total energy invested in operating the plant over the lifetime L. Edec,L= total energy invested in decommissioning a plant after it has operated for a lifetime, L.

Summary of the Normalized Energy Investments Made in Electrical Generating Plants - (TJ th /Gwe y)
Process Fuel Related Plant Materials & Construction Operation Decommissioning Total Natural Gas 7,327 90 323 3 7,743 Coal 2,318 147 440 20 2,925 Fission 1,299 195 239 191 1,923 Wind 0 875 489 50 114 DT Fusion 30 927 318 51 1,326

The Energy Payback Ratio Varies by a Factor of Nearly 6 Between Natural Gas and Fusion Power
30

Energy Payback Ratio

25 20 15 10 5 4 0 Natural Gas Coal Fission Wind DT Fusion 11 23 16 24

Summary of the Normalized Greenhouse Gas Emission Factors (Tonnes CO2/GWeh)
Process Fuel Related Plant Materials & Construction Operation Decommissioning Total Natural Gas 77 2 385 0.02 464 Coal 17 1 956 0.2 974 Fission 10 2 2 1.0 15 Wind 0 10 4 0.4 14 DT Fusion 0.2 8 2 0.4 11

Relative to the CO2 Emissions of Coal, Those from Nuclear and Wind Technologies are Low, But Not Zero
1,000 900

Tonnes CO2/GWeh

800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Natural Gas Coal 464 15 Fission 14 Wind 11 DT Fusion 974

U.S. Electricity Generation-Fuel Contribution
0%

20%

% Coal Generated Electricity 40%
51% 60%

80% 1999

100%

U.S. Electricity Generation Contribution
0% 100%

20%

80%

% Coal Generated Electricity
60%

40%

60%

51%

% Natural Gas & Oil Generated Electricity
40%

80% 1999

20% 19%

100%

0%

U.S. Electricity Generation Contribution
0% 100%

20%

80%

% Coal Generated 40% Electricity
51% 60%

60%

% Natural Gas & Oil Generated Electricity
40%

80% 1999 100% 0% 20% 30% 40% 60% 80%

20% 19%

0% 100%

% Nuclear & Renewable Generated Electricity

Relative CO2-Equivalent Emissions
Mixtures to the RIGHT of could If the this mixture of technologies, Usingfollowing “mixtures” the line, would result in fewer emissions, have U.S. used to the produce of 1999 been Electricity Productionthe while amount to the LEFT they same mixturesof electricity, of the 3.7 million GW eh, line would result in the same would have emittedhigher emissions. amount in GHG emissions resultedof CO2 equivalent. of about 2.2 billion metric tonnes.
40% 20%

0%

100%

80%

% Coal Generated Electricity
60%

60%

% Natural Gas & Oil Generated Electricity
40%

80%

More CO2

Less CO2

20%

100%

0%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% Nuclear & Renewable Generated Electricity

Relative CO2-Equivalent Emissions
However, ifpreviously, this electricity If we wanted toamount maintain the As shown we increase electricity Assuming any want to of line same electricity consumption, line consumption to projected 2010but represents we can plot a line production,a constant emission decreasethe mixtures to eh), below levels current electricity7% and meet for the emissions which will still showing(4.2 million GW 1990 levelsemissions to the Kyoto decrease (KyotoLevels”. the consumption levels. “Target Emission Protocol), constant emission line would shift to target, the constant emission line the right. Anything to the right of this would shift further to the right. line, would be below the target emission level.
40%

Electricity Production (106 GWeh)

CO2 Emission
(109 tonnes)

3.7
0% 100%

2.2 1.7 1.7

3.7 4.2
80%

20%

60%

% Coal Generated Electricity
60%

% Natural Gas & Oil Generated Electricity
40%

80%

Below Target Below Target Emission Level Emission

20%

Level
100%

0% 100%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

% Nuclear & Renewable Generated Electricity

An Increasing Reliance on Nuclear and Renewable Sources is Required, to Satisfy Proposed Kyoto Emission Targets at Anticipated U.S. Electricity Growth Rates (1.3%).
0.00 1.00

0.25

0.75

2010 6 4.2x10 GWeh 4.2 x 106 GW

2010

eh

il s/O Ga

CO AL

0.50

0.50

2050 6 7.1x10 6 GW 7.2 x 10GWeh eh
0.75 0.25

2050

1999
1.00 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 0.00 1.00

RENEWABLE/NUCLEAR

The Required Nuclear/Renewable Contributions to U.S. Electricity Generation* That Would Meet the 1997 Kyoto GHG Target** for the U.S. Would Have to More Than Double From the Level in 2000. 100% 90% 80% 80%
Gas/Oil Contribution = 0%

100%

% of U.S. Generation

70% 60% 50%

60%

Nuclear/Renewable
40% 30%
Actual % N/R

40%
Coal Contribution = 0%

20% 10% 0%

20%

0%

*Future Electrical Growth assumed 1.3% **Target assumes that the U.S. electric industry meets its proportion of the Kyoto commitment by reducing emissions to 7% below its 1990 baseline.

90 19

95 19

00 20

05 20

10 20

15 20

20 20

25 20

30 20

35 20

40 20

45 20

50 20

The Absolute Amount of Electricity Required From Nuclear/Renewable Sources is More Than 4 Times the 2000 Level if the U.S. is to Meet the 1997 Kyoto GHG target**.
7.0

6.0
Total U.S. Generation

5.0
projected

GWeh x 106

4.0
Gas/Oil Contribution = 0%

3.0
actual

2.0

Nuclear/Renewable
Coal Contribution = 0%

1.0

0.0

*Future Electrical Growth assumed 1.3% **Target assumes that the U.S. electric industry meets its proportion of the Kyoto commitment by reducing emissions to 7% below its 1990 baseline.

90 19

95 19

00 20

05 20

10 20

15 20

20 20

25 20

30 20

35 20

40 20

45 20

50 20

What If the Level of Electricity from Fission and Hydro Sources Remain Constant in the 2000-2050 Time Period?

Assume: New fission and hydro replace retired fission and hydro in the 2000-2050 period.
• The electricity generated from other low GHG emitting sources (wind, solar, fusion, etc.) must increase dramatically after 2010.

In Order to Meet the 1997 Kyoto Target for the U.S., the Absolute Amount of Electricity From Low GHG Emitting Technologies Will Have to Be Approximately 3 Times the Current Level by the Year 2050.
7.0

6.0
Total U.S. Generation

5.0
projected

GWeh x 10

6

4.0
Gas/Oil Contribution = 0%

3.0

actual

2.0
Fission/Hydro

Fusion/Other

1.0
Coal Contribution = 0%

0.0

Implies potential for any nuclear or renewable technology other than fission or hydroelectricity. Future Electrical Growth assumed 1.3% Target assumes that the U.S. electric industry meets its proportion of the Kyoto commitment by reducing emissions to 7% below its 1990 baseline.

90 19

95 19

00 20

05 20

10 20

15 20

20 20

25 20

30 20

35 20

40 20

45 20

50 20

Conclusions
• The “birth to death” analysis of energy payback ratios (EPR’s) for electrical generating plants reveals that DT fusion plants have one of the highest EPR values at 24.
This compares to 4-23 for conventional (natural gas, coal, fission, and wind) power stations.

• The greenhouse gas emission rate per GW eh for DT fusion plants is low at 11 tonnes CO2/Gweh. This compares favorably to 14-15 for wind and fission respectively and 464 to 974 for natural gas and coal respectively.

Conclusions (cont.) • Adherence to the 1997 Kyoto agreement’s emission rate (1990 minus 7%) and 1.3%/y electricity demand growth rate will require quadrupling the nuclear/renewable capacity in the United State over the next 50 years (not considering replacements).
Factoring in replacements, quadrupling requires approximately 600 new 1,000 MW e low-greenhouse gas emitting electricity-generating power plants in the U.S. over the next 50 years.

There are Two Methods to Measure Energy Input to Power Plants
Process Chain Analysis (PCA)
unit mass GWe or GWey M aterial GJ/tonne Aluminum 207 Concrete 1.4 Copper 131 Stainless Steel 53 Vanadium 3711 Rocket Fuel (LH2) 460 Rocket Fuel (LOx) 10 Titanium (for lunar 444 mining equipment)

X

GJ GWe or GW e y

Input/Output (I/O)
Energy Intensity (GJ/1977$) New Construc. 32 Elect. Utility Auto Repair 23 Railroad 49 Paving 192 Commodity "service" GWe or GWey

X

$ unit "service"

X

20 Years of Increased Reliance on Coal and Nuclear Power Sources Stalled in the 1990's
0.00 1.00

0.25

0.75

1970 1980 1990 1999
Ga s/O
0.50

CO

AL
0.50

il

0.75

0.25

1.00 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75

0.00 1.00

RENEWABLE/NUCLEAR

If Fission and Hydro Sources are Kept Constant, Other Sources of Low GHG Emitting Power Plants Are Needed No Later Than 2010 if the U.S. is to Meet the 1997 Kyoto GHG Target.

100% 90% 80%
% of U.S. Generation

100%

80%

70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
90 19 95 19 00 20 05 20 10 20 15 20 20 20 25 20 30 20 35 20 40 20 45 20
Coal Contribution = 0% Gas/Oil Contribution = 0%

60%

Fission/Hydro

40%

Fusion/Other
20%

0%
50 20

Implies potential for any nuclear or renewable technology other than fission or hydroelectricity. Future Electrical Growth assumed 1.3% Target assumes that the U.S. electric industry meets its proportion of the Kyoto commitment by reducing emissions to 7% below its 1990 baseline.

There Would Have to be a Major Shift Toward Nuclear/Renewable and Natural Gas Technologies, In Order to Immediately Comply With the 1997 Kyoto Emission Target for the U.S.
0.00 1.00

0.25

Any point along this line would satisfy the 1997 Kyoto emission target for 0.75 the U.S. at 1999 electricity generation rates.

il s/O Ga

CO AL

0.50

0.50

0.75

0.25

1999
1.00 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 0.00 1.00

RENEWABLE/NUCLEAR


				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Stats:
views:26
posted:4/28/2008
language:
pages:24