Peak Oil Futures
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Peak Oil Futures

on

  • 1,594 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,594
Views on SlideShare
1,594
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
27
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Peak Oil Futures Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Peak Oil Futures:a possible transport scenario to 2030 and itsconsequences, using the “4see” model By Simon Roberts, Arup (Foresight, Innovation and Incubation Group) 15th November 2011 For APPGOPO, Westminster
  • 2. • “Peak oil” is a global problem..→ • ..but take a UK perspective • How might the UK prepare? • Apply Arup’s “4see” model (socio-economic and energy) • Develop an example scenario (not a forecast) of possible ITPOES Report 2, February 2010 feasible proactive steps to reduce oil dependency Global oil demand for 1920-2008 with extrapolations to 2050.2 Introduction
  • 3. Challenge for the scenario • Acceptable by society: - acknowledge driving behaviour • Technically feasible: - scaleable over next 10 years • Economically affordable: - not bankrupt UK economy • Politically acceptable: - check side effects on economy • Data sources: - use official statistics and other reputable sources3 Scenario constraints
  • 4. • Total oil (petroleum Total petroleum products consumed products) use by UK, 4,000 historical data → 3,000 PJ/y 2,000 1,000 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 • Petroleum products (pet-prod) use in transport → • Chart shows the main users: - vans (LGV) - trucks (HGV) * - aviation - cars *4 Use in the UK of petroleum products
  • 5. 4see modelIntroduction to one part of the model
  • 6. Cars6 Cars
  • 7. Cars: data for numbers of Size of car fleet New cars per year 32,000 3,200 24,000 2,400 k veh/y 16,000 1,600 k 8,000 800 0 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 1990 2000 2010 2020 20307 Cars data
  • 8. Cars: stocks-and-flows model Size of car fleet New cars per year 32,000 3,200 24,000 2,400 k veh/y 14.5 years 16,000 1,600 k 8,000 800 0 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 1990 2000 2010 2020 20308 Cars stocks and flows
  • 9. Cars: data for fuel use and distance travelled Pet-prod use by cars Total car km 1,200 440,000 900 330,000 M veh km/yPJ/y 600 220,000 300 110,000 0 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 9 Cars data
  • 10. Cars: process flows model Average car fuel consumption Average car km per year 0.004 20 0.003 15 k km/(y*veh)PJ/M veh km 0.002 10 0.001 5 0 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 1990 1998 2006 2014 2022 2030 10 Cars process flows
  • 11. Cars: full model, trended forward New cars per year 3,200 14.5 years 2,400 k/y 1,600 800 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 203011 Cars model
  • 12. Trucks12 Trucks
  • 13. Trucks: stocks-and-flows and process flows model New trucks per year New trucks per year 8060 10.2 years 6045 k veh/y k veh/y 4030 Average truck fuel consumption Average truck km per year Average per year Average truck fuel consumption 0.016 80 80 0.016 2015 0.012 60 60 0.012 0 0 k km/(y*veh) PJ/M veh kmPJ/M veh km 1990 2000 2006 2014 2022 2030 1990 1998 2010 2020 2030 0.008 40 40 0.008 Size of truck fleet 0.004 20 20 0.004 600 0 0 0 0 450 1990 1998 2006 2014 2020 2030 1990 2000 2010 2022 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 300 k 150 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 13 Trucks model
  • 14. ScenarioDeveloping the transport part
  • 15. Business as usual (BAU) Petroleum products for transport 2,400 • Total consumption of 1,800 petroleum products used by all transportation → PJ/y 1,200 600 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 • Cumulative costs of measures £(1990) cost of measures to reduce use of petroleum 16,000 products by transportation → 12,000 AM£/y 8,000 4,000 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 203015 Developing scenario I
  • 16. • The upper estimate assumes 10% supply from first generation biofuels because biofuels will also be important to achieving the Fuel Quality Directive • A significant proportion of "Analysis of Renewables Growth to 2020", AEA Techology, March 2010, July 2011 UK biofuels are currently sourced abroad • First generation technologies for biofuel: • Difference between AEA’s - bioethanol technologies use upper and lower estimates in sugar beet or wheat 2030 is 2,000 Ml/y (53 PJ/y) - biodiesel processes use rape seed oil, palm oil or soy oil16 Bioliquids
  • 17. • Bioliquids Petroleum products for transport - Additional 53 PJ/y (2,000 Ml/y) 2,400 ↓ in 2030 1,800 PJ/y 1,200 600 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 £(1990) cost of measures 16,000 12,000 AM£/y 8,000 4,000 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 203017 Developing scenario I
  • 18. • Cars energy efficiency - Lightweighting 10% - Low rolling resistance tyres 3% - Improved aerodynamics 3% - Direct injection and lean burn 11% - Variable valve actuation 6% - Downsizing engine capacity with - turbocharging or supercharging Interim analytical report , October 2007 12% “By adopting a small selection - Dual clutch transmission 4% of the most cost-effective - Stop–start 3% technologies, 30 per cent - Stop–start with regenerative efficiency savings could be braking 7% - Electric motor assist 7% achieved for the average new - Reduced mechanical friction vehicle, relative to today’s components 4% equivalent model.”18 Car energy efficiency
  • 19. • Bioliquids Petroleum products for transport 2,400 ↓ • Energy efficiency of new cars 1,800 - “by adopting a small selection of the most cost-effective PJ/y 1,200 technologies” - 30% improvement 600 - £1,500 per vehicle (in 2007) 0 - 50% of all new cars 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 £(1990) cost of measures 16,000 12,000 AM£/y 8,000 4,000 0 ↑ 1990 2000 2010 2020 203019 Developing scenario I
  • 20. Trucks energy efficiency: • Aerodynamically shaped trailers • Aerodynamic fairings • Spray reduction mud flaps Ricardo report, March 2010 • Low rolling resistance tyres • Single wide tyres • Automatic tyre pressure adjustment • Vehicle platooning20 Truck energy efficiency
  • 21. • Bioliquids Petroleum products for transport 2,400 ↓ • Energy efficiency of new cars 1,800 • Energy efficiency of new PJ/y 1,200 trucks - 44% improvement 600 - £16,300 per truck (in 2009) 0 - 50% of all new trucks 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 £(1990) cost of measures 16,000 12,000 AM£/y 8,000 4,000 0 ↑ 1990 2000 2010 2020 203021 Developing scenario I
  • 22. 1999: Peugoet 106 electric with on-street charging point, opened by Kate Hoey MP 2004: 1kWp PV array on roof providing 2/3 of electricity for EV Prius hybrid (2000) Vegetable oil filling diesel VW camper22 Personal experience
  • 23. 23 "Review of low carbon technologies for heavy goods vehicles“ April 2010Cars trips and fuel use
  • 24. 24 Opel/Vauxhall Ampera, range-extended EV
  • 25. • Bioliquids Petroleum products for transport 2,400 • Energy efficiency of new cars ↓ 1,800 • Energy efficiency of new PJ/y 1,200 trucks 600 • Plug-in hybrid/ ranged-extended EV 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 - range 35km corresponding to 57% of usage £(1990) cost of measures - but presume plugged in for only 16,000 2/3 of potential electric range - £6,500 per vehicle (in 2007) 12,000 from The King Review AM£/y - 50% of new vehicles 8,000 4,000 ↑ 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 203025 Developing scenario I
  • 26. 26 Natural & bio Gas Vehicle Association (NGVA)
  • 27. • Bioliquids Petroleum products for transport 2,400 • Energy efficiency of new cars 1,800 ↓ • Energy efficiency of new PJ/y 1,200 trucks 600 • Plug-in hybrid/ranged- extended electric vehicle 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 • Compressed natural gas (CNG) on new cars £(1990) cost of measures 16,000 - £5,000 per vehicle (in 2003) - 50% of new vehicles 12,000 - convert 1,300 filling stations ↑ AM£/y 8,000 4,000 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 203027 Developing scenario I
  • 28. • Increased gas use… → Total consumption of gas 4,000 3,000 ↑ “2050 Pathways Analysis” PJ/y 2,000 DECC 1,000 • Onshore wind: - Level 1: 11 GW 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 - Level 2: 20 GW - Level 3: 31 GW Total consumption of gas • Offshore wind: 4,000 - Level 1: 8 GW 3,000 - Level 2: 46 GW PJ/y - Level 3: 68 GW 2,000 1,000 • …offset by wind turbines → 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 203028 Offset gas use by wind turbines
  • 29. • Bioliquids Petroleum products for transport 2,400 • Energy efficiency of new cars 1,800 • Energy efficiency of new PJ/y 1,200 trucks 600 • Plug-in hybrid/ranged- extended electric vehicle 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 - With extra 9 GW onshore • Compressed natural gas £(1990) cost of measures 16,000 (CNG) on new cars - With extra 27 GW offshore 12,000 ↑ AM£/y 8,000 4,000 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 203029 Developing scenario I
  • 30. • Bioliquids Petroleum products for transport 2,400 • Energy efficiency of new cars ↓ 1,800 - 25% of new cars PJ/y 1,200 • Energy efficiency of new trucks 600 - 50% of new trucks 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 • Plug-in hybrid/ranged- extended electric vehicle £(1990) cost of measures - 25% of new cars 16,000 - With extra 3.5 GW onshore 12,000 • Compressed natural gas AM£/y (CNG) on new cars 8,000 - 25% of new cars ↑ 4,000 - With extra 17 GW offshore 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 203030 Developing scenario II
  • 31. • Cost compared to GDP: - 0.76% → Measures cost as proportion of GDP 0.02 0.015 0.01 • Does this low proportion mean the economy can 0.005 ↑ “afford” the investment? 0 • What side effects across the 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 economy might result from systemic interaction?31 Cost of measures compared to GDP
  • 32. GDPAnother part of the 4see model
  • 33. 33 Supply and Use Tables for deriving GDP
  • 34. Output Expenditure ↓ ↓34 GDP from production by three larger economic sectors (2008)
  • 35. GDP(output) GDP(expenditure) ↓ ↓ ↓35 GDP from production by three larger economic sectors (2008)
  • 36. Sector dependency (intermediate consumption) ↓36 GDP from production by three larger economic sectors (2008)
  • 37. Destination of final demand ↓37 GDP from production by three larger economic sectors (2008)
  • 38. Investment maintains and grows assets ↓38 GDP from production by three larger economic sectors (2008)
  • 39. Sector inputs: fuels, electricity, jobs ↓39 Inputs to the economy
  • 40. One sector alone: service sector40 Service sector
  • 41. Economic sector: stocks-and-flows, process flows41 Service sector stocks-and-flows and process flows
  • 42. Measures increase investment proportion of GDP ↓42 GDP expenditure components over time
  • 43. Side effects of measuresSystemic consequences suggested by the 4see model
  • 44. 44 Unemployment
  • 45. Growth Growth of GDP per year 0.04 • Annual growth peaked at 4% in the past → 0.03 per y 0.02 • Scenario here has growth of about 1.8% → 0.01 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 Unemployment Unemployment rate (%) 12 • Increased by 0.4 percentage points → 9 percent 6 ↑ • 150,000 more unemployed 3 • Results from differing jobs 0 intensity of goods and services 1990 2000 2010 2020 203045 Economic growth and unemployment
  • 46. • Trade in fuel: derive price Crude oil price from actual trading costs 12 (from the “Pink Book”) → 9 FM£/PJ • Reference price to basket of 6 27 economies using REER 3 (Real Equivalent Exchange Rate) 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 • Oil refineries Petroleum products price - historical constant capacity 12 - so constant demand for crude 9 - and constant output FM£/PJ 6 • Therefore, 3 - as less petroleum products are used, 0 - more petroleum products exported 1990 2000 2010 2020 203046 Trading price of fuels with respect to a basket of currencies
  • 47. • Imports of fuel decreased Fuel net exports (higher level on chart of net 14,000 exports) → 0 • Cost reduction by M£6,000/y EM£/y -14,000 (at 1990 prices) -28,000 ↑ -42,000 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 • Imports of goods (less fuel) Goods (less fuel) net exports increased (lower level on 0 chart of net exports) → -30,000 EM£/y • Cost increase of M£4,000/y -60,000 (at 1990 prices) -90,000 -120,000 ↓ 1990 2002 2014 202647 Changes in trade
  • 48. • Effect on CO2 emissions compared to BAU (reference case) • Reduction by 40 MtCO2/y in Total CO2 emissions 2030 → 600 450 ↓ MtCO2/y 300 150 0 • Implementation of low- 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 carbon measures for other parts of economy not considered in this scenario48 CO2 emissions
  • 49. Final comments
  • 50. Generation: Consumption: • Biomass electricity • Efficiency in workspace, warehouse and retail • Bioenergy boilers • Aviation efficiencies • Solar thermal hot water • Passiv haus new housing • PV (photovoltaics) • Double glazing • CCS (carbon capture and sequestration) • Loft insulation • CSP (concentrator solar • Cavity wall insulation power) electricity transmitted from North Africa • Solid wall insulation • Heat pumps • LED lighting50 Other measures in the 4see model
  • 51. • GDP analysis blind to ownership within economy • If full cost of measures were put onto use of petroleum Measures cost per litre of fuel products then.. 0.4 • ..about 20p per litre (at current prices) → 0.3 £curr/litre 0.2 ↑ 0.1 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 203051 Possible payment system
  • 52. Petroleum products for transport • 1,300 CNG refuelling 2,400 stations ↓ 1,800 • 3.5GW increase in onshore and 17GW in offshore wind PJ/y 1,200 600 • Unemployment up 150,000 0 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 • Fuel imports down M£1,100/y (1990£) • Petroleum products 22% • Goods imports up M£600/y reduction in 2030: (1990£) - 2% from biofuels - 3% from efficiency of cars • CO2 emissions reduction - 4% from efficiency of trucks 40MtCO2/y - 3% from plug-in hybrid or range- extended EV • Cost 0.7% GDP as 20p/litre - 9% from CNG fuelled on fuel52 Scenario II
  • 53. Observations from applying the 4see model to reduce petroleum products use by transportation • Main pet-prod users: cars, HGVs, LGVs, aviation • Note trends in vehicle ownership and driving behaviour • Apply a combination of technology and fuels • The 4see model can calculate marginal costs to the economy • A shift from final consumption (of GDP) to investment might increase unemployment • Comparing changes in value of imported fuel to imported goods could show a benefit • This scenario is a starting point for examing the system interactions and sensitivies of these issues53 Conclusions
  • 54. www.driversofchange.com peakoiltaskforce.net Simon Roberts simon.roberts@arup.com
  • 55. Supply Table55 Supply Table
  • 56. Use Table56 Use Table
  • 57. Factor incomes57 Factor incomes
  • 58. Final demand58 Final demand