Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Connecting the gaps: Energy demand projections and the disparity between current NDCs and the 2ºC Paris target

41 views

Published on

Connecting the gaps: Energy demand projections and the disparity between existing NDCs and keeping global warming below 2ºC Paris target

Published in: Environment
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Connecting the gaps: Energy demand projections and the disparity between current NDCs and the 2ºC Paris target

  1. 1. Connecting the gaps: Energy demand projections and the disparity between current NDCs and the 2⁰C Paris target 73rd SEMI-ANNUAL ETSAP MEETING 17th – 18th June 2018 Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden Luís Fazendeiro, Sofia Simoes CO2 ENERGY & CLIMATE New Technologies & Low Carbon Practices Climate Mitigation/ Adaptation Consumers Profiles & Energy Efficiency Policy Support Energy Transitions Integrative Energy City Planning
  2. 2. MAIN GOALS OF THIS WORK (a) Analysis of uncertainty in energy demand projections1, renewable energy implementation (and how they compare with observed values) (b) How does this uncertainty differ from region to region? (e.g., OECD vs. Non-OECD; Developed vs. Developing nations, etc.) (c) What can these “gaps” teach us about current NDCs, national compliance and increased ambition levels? (e.g., BAU scenarios based on “large” energy demand projections) [1]- One of the exogenous factors with greater impact in least-cost optimization bottom-up technological (EEE) energy systems models, e.g., Simoes et al., Technol Forecast Soc. Change, 94:221-235, 2015.
  3. 3. NDCS GAP - For 2030 emissions level (with a chance > 66% of staying below 2ºC) the gap is: - 13.5 GtCO2eq (unconditional NDCs) – 24% of the total 55.5Gt; - 11 GtCO2eq (conditional NDCs) - NDCs to be reviewed in 2018…. Source: UNEP Emissions Gap Report, 2017, Fig. ES.2: GtCO₂e
  4. 4. NDCS EMISSIONS UNCERTAINTY - Estimation of uncertainty in the NDCs’ emissions projections; Fig. 3c-d) of Rogelj, Fricko, et al., Nature Comms, 8:15748, 2017.
  5. 5. PREVIOUS WORK ON ENERGY MODELLING ANALYSIS - Smil, V., 2000. Perils of long-range energy forecasting: reflections on looking far ahead. Technol Forecast Soc. Change, 65(3): 251-64. - Morgan, M.G., Keith, D.W., 2008. Improving the way we think about projecting future energy use and emissions of carbon dioxide. Clim Change, 90(3): 189-215. - Cornell, S., Constanza, R., et al., 2010. Developing a systematic “science of the past” to create our future. Glob Environ Change, 20(3): 426-7. - Wilson, C., Grubler, A., et al., 2013. Future capacity growth of energy technologies: are scenarios consistent with historical evidence? Clim. Change, 118: 381-95. - Trutnevyte, E., 2014. The allure of energy visions: are some visions better than others? Energy Strategy Rev 2:211-9. - “Comparison of past projections of global and regional primary and final energy consumption with historical data” – Cabeza, Palacios, et al., Renew. Sustain Energy Rev 82: 681–688, 2018.
  6. 6. PREVIOUS WORK II - “Comparison of past projections of global and regional primary and final energy consumption with historical data” – Cabeza, Palacios, et al., Renew. Sustain Energy Rev 82: 681–688, 2018. - Looked at OECD (North America, Europe, Pacific) + China - WEO: 1977, 1982, 1994, 1998, 2004; - Population, Primary energy supply, FEC, energy intensity; SOME KEY FINDINGS: - For 1974–1980 GDP projections were very optimistic, giving values higher than the real growth; - WEO projections greatly overestimated total final energy consumption for OECD countries from 1975; - BUT China FEC was greatly underestimated (particularly after 2000…);
  7. 7. PREVIOUS WORK III Cabeza, L. F., Palacios, A., et al., Renew. Sustain Energy Rev 82: 681–688, 2018. Figs. 2a, 2e Total FEC projection vs. reality for: all of OECD (left), China (right)
  8. 8. METHODOLOGY - 8 “regions” considered: World, OECD, OECD North America, OECD Europe, China, India, Russia and Africa; - Analyzed data for: TPES, CO2 emissions and RES electricity (for now)
  9. 9. TPES 0 50 100 150 200 250 1970 1990 2010 2030 2050 TPESMillionsGWh World measured WEO 1994 WEO 2000 WEO 2004 WEO 2010 WEO 2015 WEO 2017 0 20 40 60 80 100 1970 1990 2010 2030 2050 TPESMillionsGWh OECD measured WEO 1994 WEO 2000 WEO 2004 WEO 2010 WEO 2015 WEO 2017 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1970 1990 2010 2030 2050 TPESMillionsGWh China measured WEO 1994 WEO 2000 WEO 2004 WEO 2010 WEO 2015 WEO 2017 Total Primary Energy Supply estimated in IEA-WEO, editions 1994, 2000, 2004, 2010, 2015, 2017
  10. 10. TPES – MAXIMUM VARIATION -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% %variationamongTPES projectionsmadein1994- 2017 2020 2030 2040 -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% %variationamongTPES projectionsmadein2010- 2017 2020 2030 2040 - Max. variation (percentage) among WEO TPES projections for: 1994-2017 (left) 2010-17 (right), for the years 2020, 2030, 2040. - Positive variation: corrected upwards; - Negative variation: corrected downwards;
  11. 11. CO2 EMISSIONS 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 1970 1990 2010 2030 2050 MtCO2 World measured WEO 1994 WEO 2000 WEO 2004 WEO 2010 WEO 2015 WEO 2017 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 1970 1990 2010 2030 2050 MtCO2 OECD measured WEO 1994 WEO 2000 WEO 2004 WEO 2010 WEO 2015 WEO 2017 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 1970 1990 2010 2030 2050 MtCO2 India measured WEO 2000 WEO 2004 WEO 2010 WEO 2015 WEO 2017 - CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion (IEA-WEO, editions 1994, 2000, 2004, 2010, 2015, 2017)
  12. 12. CO2 EMISSIONS – MAX. VARIATION -100% -50% 0% 50% 100% %variationamongCO2 projectionsmadein1994- 2017 2020 2030 2040 -30% -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% 30% %variationamongCO2 projectionsmadein2010- 2017 2020 2030 2040 - Max. variation (percentage) among WEO CO2 emissions (fuel combustion) projections for: 1994- 2017 (left) 2010-17 (right), for the years 2020, 2030, 2040. - Positive variation: corrected upwards; - Negative variation: corrected downwards;
  13. 13. RES ELECTRICITY Slide [13] 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 1970 1990 2010 2030 2050 %Renewableelectricity World measured WEO 1994 WEO 2000 WEO 2004 WEO 2010 WEO 2015 WEO 2017 - percentage of electricity generated from RES sources (hydro, geothermal, biomass, solar, wind, etc.) - IEA-WEO, editions 1994, 2000, 2004, 2010, 2015, 2017 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 1970 1990 2010 2030 2050 %Renewableelectricity OECD measured WEO 1994 WEO 2000 WEO 2004 WEO 2010 WEO 2015 WEO 2017 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 1970 1990 2010 2030 2050 %Renewableelectricity Africa measured WEO 2000 WEO 2004 WEO 2010 WEO 2015 WEO 2017
  14. 14. RES ELECTRICITY – MAX. VARIATION 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% %variationamongRE projectionsmadein1994- 2017 2020 2030 2040 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% %variationamongRE projectionsmadein2010- 2017 2020 2030 2040 - Max. variation (percentage) among WEO electricity generated from RES projections for: 1994- 2017 (left) 2010-17 (right), for the years 2020, 2030, 2040. - Positive variation: corrected upwards; - Negative variation: corrected downwards;
  15. 15. COMPARISON WITH NDCS - current gap between existing NDCs and reduction in GHG emissions (until 2030) needed to comply with the Paris Agreement (2ºC) estimated at 13.5 GtCO2eq, or ~24% (UNEP, 2017); - This work found variations of 45%, 47% and 47%, for OECD, OECD Europe and OECD North America regions, respectively, in CO2 emissions projected for 2030 by the WEO (in the period 1994- 2017); - More relevantly, variations in CO2 projections for 2030 of 20%, 25% and 27%, for Russia, Africa and India, respectively, in the period 2010-17; - Many NDCs (e.g., Mexico, South Korea,Turkey) are made in relation to “BAU scenarios” (conditional NDCs), where typically very high economic growth is assumed, with a corresponding high increase in energy demand and emissions;
  16. 16. FUTURE WORK - Include more projections beside WEO (ETP, and perhaps others); - Account for GDP, population, energy intensity, improve data analysis; - Important regions that might be missing?: e.g., OECD Pacific, South America…; - Clarify relation/interaction between conditional NDCs and BAU scenarios/ energy demand projections!!!;
  17. 17. “It is very hard to make predictions… specially about the future!” - Niels Bohr THANK YOU! Luís Fazendeiro l.fazendeiro@campus.fct.unl.pt Sofia Simões sgcs@fct.unl.pt CO2 ENERGY & CLIMATE New Technologies & Low Carbon Practices Climate Mitigation/ Adaptation Consumers Profiles & Energy Efficiency Policy Support Energy Transitions Integrative Energy City Planning

×