Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Tinker global energy transition feb 2012
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Tinker global energy transition feb 2012

1,192

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,192
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
29
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Tinker, 2012 Our Mission Today Energy, Economy and Environment Energy Supply  Scale, Time Frames and Challenges Efficiency and Security
  • 2. Tinker, 2012 Global Population and Energy 7,000 500 450 6,000 400 Population (millions) 5,000 350 4,000 300 Quads 250 3,000 200 2,000 150 100 1,000 50 0 0 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Population Primary Energy (Q)http://www.eia.gov/iea/wecbtu.html
  • 3. Tinker, 2012 OECD Non-OECD Energy Demand Energy DemandQuadrillion BTUs Quadrillion BTUs450 450400 400350 350 Other300 300 Africa250 250 Middle East200 Other 200 Latin America150 150 India Europe OECD100 100 50 United States 50 China 0 0 1980 2005 2030 1980 2005 2030 ExxonMobil Corporation, 2010, The outlook for energy: a view to 2030: ExxonMobil report, 53 p.
  • 4. Tinker, 2012 China vs. USYear in which China: overtook / overtakes the United States 1999 01 03 05 07 09 2011 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 Steel consumption 99 6.6 Mobile phone 01 3.3 Exports 07 1.3 Fixed investment 09 1.4Manufacturing output 10 1.1Energy consumption 10 1.1 Car sales 10 1.2 Patents granted to residents 10 1.1 Retail sales 0.7 14 Imports 0.8 14 GDP at PPP* 0.8 16GDP at market rates 0.5 18 Stockmarket cap. 0.3 20 Consumer spending 0.2 23 Defence spending 0.2 25 The Economist, 2011, Economic focus: how to get a date: December, p. 61. Sources: BP,CEIC; ITU; Thomson Reuters; WIPO; World Bank; WFE; World Steel Association; The Economist estimates. QAe70
  • 5. Tinker, 2012Energy and GDP 1980-2004 After: Koonin, 2008
  • 6. Tinker, 2012 U.S. Economy and Oil Price 90 Oil Price $ of the day 80 10.00 $ 2010GDP Growth (% change on 2000 chained dollars) 70 8.00 Nixon Ford Carter Reagan Bush Clinton W Bush Obama 60 Oil Domestic Wellhead Price ($) 6.00 50 4.00 40 2.00 30 0.00 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 20 -2.00 10 http://www.bp.com/sectiongenericarticle800.do?categoryId=9037172&contentId=7068612 1970-1983 Arabian Light -4.00 0 1984-2010 Brent dated Year Data: EIA and BP Statistical Analysis; US Department of Commerce
  • 7. Tinker, 2012 Our Mission Today Energy, Economy and Environment Energy Supply  Scale, Time Frames and Challenges Efficiency and Security
  • 8. Tinker, 2012 U. S. Energy Flows Net electricity 0.11 Solar 0.01 Imports 0.09 8.45 12.68 6.82 Electricity Nuclear generation 8.45 39.97 Hydro 2.43 20.54 2.45 4.70 0.51 Wind Residential 0.51 11.48 9.18 0.31 0.08Geothermal 0.2 0.35 1.17 4.99 0.49 4.61 0.1Natural gas Commercial 23.84 8.58 6.86 Energy 3.20 services 0.01 0.57 3.35 42.15 0.06 0.10 Coal 8.14 Industrial 22.42 23.94 19.15 8.58 1.79 0.42 Biomass 2.03 0.02 3.88 0.46 0.67 0.83 Trans- 26.33 portationPetroleum 27.86 6.96 37.13 (2008 Quads) Source: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and U.S. DOE based on Annual Energy Review, 2008 (EIA, 2009) From National Academies Press, America’s Energy Future, 2009 QAd8174
  • 9. Tinker, 2012 U. S. Energy Flows Net electricity 0.11 Imports 12.68 Electricity generation 39.97 20.54 4.70 Residential 11.48 9.18 Foundational 1.17 4.61 Commercial Energies 0.06 0.57 8.58 3.35 6.86 Energy services 42.15 Coal Industrial 22.42 23.94 19.15 8.58 1.79 0.02 0.46 Trans- 26.33 portationPetroleum 27.86 6.96 37.13 (2008 Quads) Source: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and U.S. DOE based on Annual Energy Review, 2008 (EIA, 2009) From National Academies Press, America’s Energy Future, 2009 QAd8174
  • 10. Tinker, 2012Coal Powder River Basin, WY
  • 11. Tinker, 2012Coal Parish Plant, TX
  • 12. Tinker, 2012 Coal Coal Challenges• Mining Impacts• CO2• Air Quality• Mercury• Fresh Water Parish Plant, TX
  • 13. Tinker, 2012 Long-Term Oil Supply Resources and Production 140 140 NGLs Unconventional oil 120 120 Crude oil - to be developed or found Deepwater and Crude oil - currently producing fields Ultra Deepwater 100 100Production Cost, $ 2008 Coal to Oil Shales Gas to Liquids 80 80 Mb/d Liquids Arctic CO2EOR 60 60 EOR Heavy Oil & Bitumen 40 40 Other Conven 20 Produced MENA -tional 20 Oil 0 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 2000 2008 2020 2030 Resources, Billion Barrels Annual Production Source: IEA World Energy Outlook 2009
  • 14. Fort McMurray Tinker, 2012 Alberta Oil Sands
  • 15. Tinker, 2012Oil Shales North Dakota Bakken
  • 16. Tinker, 2012 US Oil ProductionFrom: James D. Hamilton, Working Paper 17759, NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH, 2012
  • 17. Tinker, 2012 US Oil Production Oil Challenges• Conventional Production Plateau• Limited Geographic Control• Environmental Impact• CO2 Emissions• Public Perception and Policy• Pipelines (?) From: James D. Hamilton, Working Paper 17759, NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH, 2012
  • 18. Tinker, 2012 Oil Consumption 35Per capita oil consumption (bbl/yr) 30 25 U.S. 20 15 10 5 China 0 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Year BP Statistical Review of World Energy, CIA World Factbook, Census Bureaus, Marc Faber Limited, RJ Estimates From Raymond James and Associates, Inc., August 2, 2010 QAd8173
  • 19. Tinker, 2012 Global Demand US and China Vehicle Sales 25 20 ChinaMillion vehicles U.S. 15 10 5 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010E 2011E Year U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, RJ Estimates, China Association of Automobile Manufacturers From Raymond James and Associates, Inc., August 2, 2010 QAd8173
  • 20. Tinker, 2012 Transportation Demand by Region North America Europe Asia Pacific20 20 20 Marine15 15 15 Aviation Rail Heavy duty 1010 105 5 5 Light duty 0 0 0 1980 2005 2030 1980 2005 2030 1980 2005 2030 ExxonMobil Corporation, 2010, The outlook for energy: a view to 2030: ExxonMobil report, 53 p.
  • 21. Tinker, 2012 Powertrain Technology in 2030Millions of vehicles350 Advanced: full hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and electric vehicles Hybrid and advanced vehicles300 will gain share in all regions. CNG Diesel By 2030, they will account for250 ~25% of global new-car sales.200150 Gasoline100 50 0 North Europe Other China India Middle Latin Other America OECD OECD East America Non- OECD ExxonMobil Corporation, 2010, The outlook for energy: a view to 2030: ExxonMobil report, 53 p.
  • 22. Demand Tinker, 2012
  • 23. Tinker, 2012 Alternativesto Petroleum
  • 24. Tinker, 2012 Options to OilI. Unconventional OilII. Biofuels
  • 25. Tinker, 2012 BiofuelsCarbohydrates to Liquid Hydrocarbons Perennial Cellulosic  Sorghum  Switch Grass  Miscanthus  Shrub Willow
  • 26. Tinker, 2012 BiofuelsCarbohydrates to Liquid Hydrocarbons Biofuels ChallengesPerennial Cellulosic  Sorghum  Switch Grass • Fresh Water Use  Miscanthus Shrub Willow • Land Access  • Conversion Facilities • Drought • Scale
  • 27. Tinker, 2012 Options to OilI. Unconventional OilII. BiofuelsIII. Natural Gas (CNG, LPG, LNG) I. Deliverability and accessIV. Electricity (Batteries) IV. Charging today means coal, natural gas, nuclear…
  • 28. Tinker, 2012Options to Oil
  • 29. Tinker, 2012 Options to OilI. Unconventional OilII. BiofuelsIII. Natural Gas (CNG, LPG, LNG) I. Deliverability and accessIV. Electricity (Batteries) IV. Charging today means coal, natural gas, nuclear…V. Hydrogen (fuel cells) V. Just ten years away!
  • 30. Tinker, 2012Electricity
  • 31. Tinker, 2012 Electricity Demand by Region by SectorThousands of terawatt hours Thousands of terawatt hours30 30 Global electricity usage in 203025 will be about 25 four times Commercial that of 1980.20 20 Residential15 15 Non-OECD Transportation10 10 Other industry OECD 5 5 Heavy industry 0 0 1980 2005 2030 1980 2005 2030 ExxonMobil Corporation, 2010, The outlook for energy: a view to 2030: ExxonMobil report, 53 p.
  • 32. Tinker, 2012 Power Generation by Fuel Quadrillion BTUs North America Europe Asia Pacific120 120 120100 100 10080 80 8060 60 6040 Renewables 40 40 Nuclear20 20 20 Coal Gas 0 Oil 0 0 1980 2005 2030 1980 2005 2030 1980 2005 2030 ExxonMobil Corporation, 2010, The outlook for energy: a view to 2030: ExxonMobil report, 53 p.
  • 33. Tinker, 2012 Cost of U.S. Electricity Generation 2025Cost per kilowatt hour in 2010 cents20 Generating costs are for new, base-load, power-generation plants that come online in 2025.15 At $60 per ton10 of CO2 No CO2 cost 5 0 Coal Gas Nuclear Wind* Coal/CCS Gas/CCS Solar* *Wind and solar exclude costs of backup capacity and additional transmission. ExxonMobil Corporation, 2010, The outlook for energy: a view to 2030: ExxonMobil report, 53 p.
  • 34. Tinker, 2012 Electricity Net electricity 0.11 Solar 0.01 Imports 0.09 12.68 Electricity generation 39.97 Hydro 2.43 2.45 4.70 0.51 Wind Residential 0.51 11.48 9.18 0.31 0.08Geothermal 0.2 0.35 4.61 0.1 Commercial 8.58 6.86 Energy services 0.01 3.35 42.15 Electricity Industrial 23.94 19.15 Alternatives 0.02 Trans- portation 27.86 6.96 (2008 Quads) Source: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and U.S. DOE based on Annual Energy Review, 2008 (EIA, 2009) From National Academies Press, America’s Energy Future, 2009 QAd8174
  • 35. Tinker, 2012 Hydro Norway300 MW Nameplate
  • 36. Tinker, 2012 Hydro Norway300 MW Nameplate Hydro Challenges • Fresh Water Capture • Land Use & Topography • Drought
  • 37. Tinker, 2012 GeothermalIceland 300 MW Nameplate
  • 38. Tinker, 2012 GeothermalIceland Geothermal Challenges • Thermal Conversion 300 MW Nameplate • Geology
  • 39. Tinker, 2012Distributed Solar San Francisco, CA
  • 40. Tinker, 2012 Industrial Solar Andusal, PVSpain 60 MW Nameplate Solucar, CSP 11 MW Nameplate Olmedilla de Alarcon, Parabolic Troughs 50 MW Nameplate
  • 41. Tinker, 2012 Industrial Solar Andusal, PV Spain 60 MW Nameplate Solar Challenges Solucar, CSP• Cost 11 MW Nameplate• Manufacturing Olmedilla de Alarcon,• Intermittency Parabolic Troughs• Energy Storage 50 MW Nameplate• Transmission• Land Use
  • 42. Tinker, 2012Wind
  • 43. Tinker, 2012Global Power-Generation Capacity The Reality of Intermittency Gigawatts 800 Capacity 600 not utilized 400 Intermittent wind and sun reduce output of installed capacity. Capacity utilized 200 0 2005 2030 2005 2030 2005 2030 Nuclear Wind Solar ExxonMobil Corporation, 2010, The outlook for energy: a view to 2030: ExxonMobil report, 53 p.
  • 44. Tinker, 2012ERCOT Power Curve
  • 45. Tinker, 2012 ERCOT Power Curve Wind Challenges• Transmission• Intermittency• Energy Storage• Siting• Materials• Infrastructure
  • 46. Tinker, 2012 U. S. Energy Flows Net electricity 0.11 Imports 8.45 12.68 6.82 Electricity Nuclear generation 8.45 39.97 4.70 Residential 11.48 9.18 4.99 4.61Natural gas Commercial 23.84 8.58 6.86 Energy 3.20 services 3.35 42.15 8.14 Industrial 23.94 19.15 Emerging 0.02 Foundational 0.67 Trans- portation 27.86 6.96 Energies (2008 Quads) Source: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and U.S. DOE based on Annual Energy Review, 2008 (EIA, 2009) From National Academies Press, America’s Energy Future, 2009 QAd8174
  • 47. Tinker, 2012 NuclearLe Hague Waste RecyclingNormandy, France
  • 48. Tinker, 2012 NuclearLe Hague Waste RecyclingNormandy, France Nuclear Challenges • Natural and Human Disasters • Front End Cost Permitting and Regulatory • Waste Protection • Proliferation
  • 49. Natural Gas Supply - Tinker, 2012 Resources and Production 15 100% 5 Pre-2008 fields 90% Post-2008 fields Share from new fieldsProduction Cost, $/Mbtu 2008 80% 4 10 70% 60% 3 Coal Bed Methane Deep Arctic Tcm Water 50% Sour Shale 40% 2 Tight 5 Conventional LNG 30% Produced 20% 1 Transportation cost 1000 km pipeline 10% 0 0% 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 2007 2015 2020 2025 2030 Resources, Trillion Cubic Meters Annual Production Source: IEA World Energy Outlook 2009
  • 50. Tinker, 2012 LNG - Conventional Natural Gas QatarNorth Field
  • 51. Tinker, 2012 U.S. Natural Gas Production and Reserves 30 300 25 250 AnnualMarketed Production (Tcf) Proved Reserves (Tcf) U.S. Production 20 200 15 150 10 100 End-of-Year U.S. Proved Reserves 5 50 0 0 After Steve Harvey, EIA
  • 52. Tinker, 2012 U.S. Natural Gas Production 20.0Annual Natural Gas Production (Tcf) . 18.0 16.0 14.0 12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 Onshore unconventional 4.0 Alaska Offshore 2.0 Onshore conventional - After Steve Harvey, EIA
  • 53. Tinker, 2012 U.S. Natural Gas Production 20.0Annual Natural Gas Production (Tcf) . 18.0 16.0 14.0 12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 Onshore unconventional 4.0 Alaska Offshore 2.0 Onshore conventional - After Steve Harvey, EIA
  • 54. Tinker, 2012 U.S. Gas Shale Production 5.0 Eagle Ford Shale 4.5 Marcellus Shale 4.0Annual shale gas production, Tcf Haynesville-Bossier Shale 3.5 Woodford Shale 3.0 Fayetteville Shale 2.5 Barnett Shale Antrim Shale 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Year Boyer, C., Clark, B., Jochen, V., Lewis, R., and Miller, C. K., 2011, Shale gas: a global resource: Oilfield Review, Autumn, p. 30 [adapted from U.S. DOE and NETL, 2011, “Shale Gas: Applying Technology to solve America’s Energy Challenges,” Washington, D.C.: http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/oil- gas/publications/brochures/Shale_Gas_March_2011.pdf (accessed 8-22-11)]. QAe63
  • 55. Tinker, 2012 Barnett Shale Nanopores in Organics Orange dots are 20 nm in diameterHuman Hair 0.2 m 200 nm50 µm T.P. Sims #2; 7625’ After Reed, BEG
  • 56. Tinker, 2012Innovation driven by necessityCarrizo location – UT Arlington Barnett drilling location University of Texas at Arlington From XTO annual report
  • 57. Tinker, 20121 mile
  • 58. Tinker, 2012 Shale Gas Plays Bakken-Three Forks Utica Shale Oil * * *Monterrey * * * * Bone Spring/Avalon * * Wolfberry Eagle Ford Map: DOE Shale Gas Primer, 2009
  • 59. Tinker, 2012 Shale Gas Plays Potential Global Shale Gas BasinsSource: IHS CERA
  • 60. Tinker, 2012Woodford Shale Frac Depth
  • 61. Water Use (1000s AF/yr) M 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 un ici M p al an uf ac tu rin g M St ini ea ng m -e lec tri c Li ve st oc k Water Use in Texas Irr ig at io nFrom JP Nicot, BEG Tinker, 2012
  • 62. Tinker, 2012 80 Water Use in Texas Water Use (1000s AF/yr) 70 12,0002008 Water Use (Thousand AF) 60 10,000 50 8,000 40 6,000 4,000 30 2,000 20 0 g ng n al 10 k c io rin oc tri p ini at ici lec tu st M ig un ac ve -e Irr 0 M uf Li m an l ea s a s rs Ga Co ga te he Ot M St nd re O il a Ag g From JP Nicot, BEG
  • 63. 2008 Water Use (Thousand AF) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Water Use (1000s AF/yr)O il a nd Ga s M 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 un ici M al p an uf ac tu rin Water Use (1000s AF/yr) Co a g l 0 10 20 30 40 Water 50 M D ini rill in St ea ng g mAg g -e rega lec te C s tri om c pl 1990’s vs. 2008 Li et io ve n st oc k Use in Texas Ot Irr he ig rs at EO io R n From JP Nicot, BEG Tinker, 2012
  • 64. Tinker, 2012 U.S. Shale Gas Implications Environmental  Traffic (-)  Noise/light (-)  Water (-)  Land Use (-)  NORM (-)  Carbon (+/-) Energy Security (+) Fuel Diversity (+)
  • 65. Tinker, 2012 U.S. Shale Gas Implications Natural Gas Challenges Environmental • Traffic (-) Deliverability  Noise/light (-)  • Water (-) Access  • Land Use Emissions CO2 (-)  NORM (-) • Carbon (+/-) Water • Micro Quakes Energy Security (+) Fuel Diversity (+) • Educated Regulation
  • 66. Tinker, 2012 Our Mission Today Energy, Economy and Environment Energy Supply  Scale, Time Frames and Challenges Efficiency and Security
  • 67. Tinker, 2012 U. S. Energy Flows Net electricity 0.11 Imports 12.68 Electricity generation 27.39 39.97 Rejected energy 2.29 4.70 57.07 Residential 11.48 1.71 4.61 Commercial 8.58 4.78 3.35 Efficiency Industrial 23.94 0.02 20.90 Trans- portation 27.86 (2008 Quads)Source: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and U.S. DOE based on Annual Energy Review, 2008 (EIA, 2009) From National Academies Press, America’s Energy Future, 2009 QAd8174
  • 68. Tinker, 2012 Efficiency Fuel Energy Lighting efficiency can be improved across Electronics all consumption Insulation sectors.
  • 69. Tinker, 2012 Energy SecurityAvailable Access to substantial, national resourcesAffordable Electricity: produced Kwh is inexpensive Facility: inexpensive to build the plant Volatile: stable fuel priceReliable Intermittent: source consistent or variable Safe: potential harm from natural/human causesGreen Dense: small land footprint to collect/produce Dry: fresh water use or potential risk Clean: air emissions minimal
  • 70. Tinker, 2012 Energy Security Available Affordable Reliable GreenSolar 2.0 1.3 2.0 2.3Hydro 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.7Wind 2.0 2.3 2.0 2.3Geothermal 2.0 1.7 3.0 2.7Nuclear 3.0 2.3 2.5 2.7Natural Gas 3.0 2.7 3.0 1.7Coal 3.0 2.7 2.5 1.3Biomass 2.0 1.0 2.7 1.3Petroleum 2.0 1.7 2.5 2.0
  • 71. Tinker, 2012 A Look at the Global Future 50% Petroleum Consumption Coal Consumption 45% Natural Gas Consumption 40% Nuclear Electric Power Consumption Hydroelectric Power Consumption 35% Biomass, Geothermal, Solar & Wind Consumption 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080Tinker Forecast
  • 72. Tinker, 2012 A Look at the Global Future 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 200.0 180.0Global Consumption (Q) 160.0 140.0 120.0 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080Tinker Forecast
  • 73. 100% Tinker, 2012 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 800.0 700.0Global Consumption (Q) 600.0 500.0 400.0 300.0 200.0 100.0 0.0 Tinker1980 1990 Forecast 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080
  • 74. Tinker, 2012 A Few Things About Energy• The scale of energy demand is difficult to comprehend; energy supply transitions take many decades.• Energy security should be the goal of good policy.• Energy efficiency is underappreciated; individual behavior matters!• Natural gas and uranium (nuclear) are premier fuels of this century.• Renewables are good regional supplements, but will remain such until major advances are made in energy storage.• Oil and coal are abundant at the right price, and difficult to replace as transportation and electricity fuels.• Energy, the economy and the environment are intimately linked. Energy choices are based largely on cost.

×