CCS and the Carbon Budget

1,108 views
951 views

Published on

Presentation by David Hawkins of NRDC at launch of ENGO white paper on CCS at COP 18 in Doha.

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,108
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
195
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • This slide shows the road we are onThe road we could be on with some fairly modest effortAnd the road we should be on if we are going to do right by our kids and grandkids.Note: this chart is from WEO 2011; WEO 2012 is only slightly different.
  • The striking thing about these budgets is that they are much smaller than existing fossil-fuel reserves. I underscore reserves, not all conceivable recoverable resources. These are the fossil fuel amounts that are carried on companies’ books today and form an important part of companies’ stock value. This should be a wake up call for company management, investors, and any planners depending on these reserves.
  • More than a fifth of world coal capacity is less than 5 years old; more than a third is less than 10 and more than half is less than 20.
  • Lifetime CO2 from existing and new coal plants (assuming 60 year life and 75% capacity factor) is 1049 Gt CO2.About 396 Gt from existing plants and 654 Gt from new plants projected by IEA to be built between 2012-2035 under the Current Policies Case.
  • About 3700 TWh of CCS generation in the 450 case in 2035 under the 450 case.Total coal generation in 450 case is 4364; so the CCS generation amounts to 85% of coal generation.Total fossil generation in 450 case is 10487. So CCS generation amounts to 35% of total fossil generation.391 GW of 822 GW of coal additions use CCS180 GW of 1138 GW of gas additions use CCS
  • The next rule will address CO2. It is limited to new units.
  • EPA has not proposed a standard for existing plants but one is needed and one is feasible. CAA requires any such rule to be justified as technically achievable and economically reasonable.
  • CCS and the Carbon Budget

    1. 1. CCS and the Carbon Budget
    2. 2. Key Points• Climate Protection requires a budget limit on cumulative GHG emissions.• Efficiency, Renewable Electric, Biofuels, Electrification/FCV, CCS, Nuclear(?) all play a role.• Each has challenges at scale.• Preserving climate budget options requires immediate change in focus, especially for coal.
    3. 3. Energy policies will determine long-term temperature increase World energy-related CO2 emissions by scenario 45 Gt OECD Current Policies 28% 40 Non-OECD Scenario 7 Gt 71% (6°C) 35 New Policies 33% Scenario 30 (3.5°C) 15 Gt 65% 25 450 Scenario (2°C) 20 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2035 Without further energy and climate policy action, we are committing to a trajectory leading to up to 6 degrees long-term temperature increase© OECD/IEA 2011
    4. 4. IEA 2° Energy CO2 Budget 50% chance of exceeding 2°900 277 Budget800 2036-2050700600 884 Budget Gt CO2500 2012-2050 607400 Budget300 2012-2035200100 0 Source: IEA, WEO 2012
    5. 5. Stranded Fossil Assets 2860300025002000 Gt CO21500 8841000 607500 0 Budget Budget Current Proved 2012-2035 2012-2050 Fossil Reserves Source: IEA, WEO 2012 ©OECD/IEA 2012
    6. 6. CO2 in Proved Reserves 2012 New estimate: 2860 Gt total Source: IEA, WEO 2012 ©OECD/IEA 2012
    7. 7. Cumulative CO2 to 2035: BAU v 450 1000 900 800Billion Metric tonnes 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Coal BAU Oil BAU Gas BAU Total 450 Case Source: IEA, WEO 2012
    8. 8. Lock-in from Coal Power• Large budget lock-in from: – existing coal plants – and new planned coal plants
    9. 9. New Coal Build 2012-2035: CPS (1709 GW) Russia Rest World 42 Africa 80 3% 72 5% 4% EU 70 4% China Rest Asia 797 245 47% 14% USA 57 3% India 345 20% Source: IEA, WEO 2012
    10. 10. World Coal Power Capacity 2010 (1649 GW) Poland 2% Korea Rest of World 2% 15% Australia 2% China South Africa 41% 2% Japan 3%Russia 3% India Germany 6% 3% United States 21% Source: IEA, CCS Retrofit Paper, 2012; WEO 2012
    11. 11. New Coal Plant CO2 is 25%Greater Than From All Pre-2000 Coal Use 74% of remaining budget for 450 ppm700 654600500 524400 Gt CO2300200100 - Total Coal CO2 Projected New Coal Plant 1751-2000 Lifetime CO2 Source: ORNL, CDIAC; IEA, and WEO 2012
    12. 12. Existing Coal Fleet – 1649 GW >50%Source: IEA, CCS Retrofit Paper, 2012
    13. 13. Coal Power v. Carbon Budget 119% of 1049 Budget12001000 new coal: 654 Gt 884800 Gt CO2600400 existing coal: 396 Gt200 0 Based on IEA, WEO 2012
    14. 14. Carbon/Energy Impacts of CCS• Cut CO2 from new fossil sources• Cut CO2 from existing sources pre- retirement• Create space in the budget for easier transition away from oil.• Reduce bio-energy pressure on forested lands
    15. 15. New Coal Plant CO2 is 25%Greater Than From All Pre-2000 Coal Use 74% of remaining budget for 450 ppm700 654600500 524400 Gt CO2300200100 - Total Coal CO2 Projected New Coal Plant 1751-2000 Lifetime CO2 Source: ORNL, CDIAC; IEA, and WEO 2012
    16. 16. Cutting CO2 Lock-in from New Coal700 1709 GW600 without CCS500400 Gt CO2 391 GW with CCS300 654 431 GW 22200 524 without CCS100 165 -Total Coal CO2 New Coal Plant Lifetime CO2 1751-2000 New Coal Plant CPS Case Lifetime CO2 450 Cas Source: IEA, WEO 2012
    17. 17. CCS Cuts CO2 from Power 85% of total coal generation; 35% of total fossil gen. Source: IEA, WEO 2012 ©OECD/IEA 2012
    18. 18. Prime CCS Retrofit Candidates Source: IEA CCS Retrofit Paper, 2012
    19. 19. Prime CCS Retrofits by Country USA, 20 India, 24 China, 481 Japan, 25 Korea, 21 Source: IEA CCS Retrofit Paper, 2012
    20. 20. Cumulative CO2 to 2035: BAU v 450 1000 900 800Billion Metric tonnes 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Coal BAU Oil BAU Gas BAU Total 450 Case Source: IEA, WEO 2012
    21. 21. Fossil Budget Competition Billion tonnes CO2Current Policies (889 Gt) 450 Case (607 Gt) 191 22% 403 45% 157 205 26% 34% 296 33% 245 40% Coal Oil Gas Coal Oil Gas Source: IEA, WEO 2012
    22. 22. Fuel Amounts (Mtoe) 4 500 4 113 4 000 3 682 3 500 3 474 33% drop 3 293 3 000 2 740 Coal 2 500Mtoe 2 337 Oil 2 000 Gas 1 500 1 000 500 - 2010 2035: 450 case Source: IEA, WEO 2012
    23. 23. CO2: 2010 v. 2035; 450 case 14000 12000 13105 57% drop 10000Mtonnes CO2 8000 Coal Oil 6000 Gas 4000 5664 2000 0 2010 2035: 450 case Source: IEA, WEO 2012
    24. 24. Biofuels Demand (mboe/d)98 0.6 0.876 Other5 Aviation Road Transport4 6.8321 1.30 2010 2035 450ppm Source: IEA, WEO 2012
    25. 25. U.S. Carbon Pollution Standard• Proposed New Source Performance Standard” for CO2 from new fossil fuel fired power plants• First national carbon pollution standard for stationary sources• Builds on “endangerment finding” following Mass v. EPA Supreme Court decision
    26. 26. What U.S. CPS Requires• 1000 lbs/MWh standard for new fossil fuel fired plants (NGCC and coal)• Achievable by natural gas combined cycle plants• Also achievable by coal plants with carbon capture and storage (CCS) – 30 year compliance option• EPA projects no added cost because forecasts show no new coal plants
    27. 27. Standards for Existing Plants• 2.4 billion tons CO2 from existing plants each year• Clean Air Act requires CO2 standards for existing plants (Section 111(d))• EPA sets performance standards, states implement through SIPs• Flexible compliance options
    28. 28. Potential Reductions from Power Sector …Twice What’s Being Achieved by Clean Car Standards 1,000 900 MillionCO2 Emissions Reductions (million short tons) 900 800 700 600 MDV and HDV 500 Million Standards 500 400 MDV and HDV 300 Standards LDV Standard 200 100 LDV Standard 0 2020 - EPA Vehicle 2025 - EPA Vehicle 2020 - NRDC 2025 - NRDC Standards Standards Recommended 111(d) Recommended 111(d) Existing Power Plant Existing Power Plant Standards Standards Note: The reductions shown are from BAU in the forecast years. Sources: EPA/NHTSA rule documents at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/regulations.htm and NRDC estimates. 28
    29. 29. BENEFITS SWAMP COSTS 60,000 50,000 Million 2010$ 40,000 COSTS BENEFITS 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Compliance Costs Low Estimate High Estimate 2020 2020 Compliance Costs SO2 and NOX Benefits CO2 BenefitsNOTES• Benefits from SO2 and NOX reductions estimated by extensively peer-reviewed dispersion model developed by Abt Associates to estimate health impacts from power plants for EPA. Lower and Higher estimates based on different statistical relationships between pollution concentrations and health effects that are used by EPA. Value of statistical lives lost is the primary component of the monetary value of the estimated benefits.• Lower carbon reduction benefit calculated with Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) of $26 per ton in 2020, reflecting the Administration’s current estimate, using a 3% discount rate. Higher carbon benefit calculated with SCC of $59 per ton in 2010, reflecting a discount rate of 2%. OMB recommends using a discount rate of 1-3% for inter-generational issues such as climate change. At a discount rate of 1%, the SCC is $254 per ton in 2010.
    30. 30. ENGO Network Recommendations for Canada• Adopt higher price on carbon and/or mandate CCS on new facilities.• Adopt strong, protective standards throughout Canada regulating sequestration facilities.
    31. 31. ENGO Recommendations for Developing Countries• Use UNFCCC to agree on mechanism to provide: – financial aid for CCS projects – Tech transfer – Support for mapping of storage formations – Market mechanisms to support CCS – Capacity building for safe and effective regulation.• MEF: Strengthen Technology Action Plan
    32. 32. Thank You David HawkinsNatural Resources Defense Council www.nrdc.org dhawkins@nrdc.org

    ×