ta project: “improving emissions control”
Post on 22-Feb-2016
31 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
TA Project: “Improving Emissions Control”
Session 2
Scenarios for Emissions Management
Dr Russell C FrostProject Team Leader
Contents
• Scenarios – an introduction• Three scenarios– Without Measures (WoM)– With Measures (WM)– With Additional Measures (WAM)
• WoM Scenario– General – based on planning assumptions– Indicative potential damage costs – Example – electricity generation
• WM and WAM Scenarios• Cost-benefit analysis and economic appraisal
Scenarios - General
• Alternative visions of the possible future considering– Population change– Economic development– Environmental management
• Basis for estimating emission projections 2011 to 2025 and for identifying possible emission ceilings: NOx, NMVOCs, SO2, NH3
• They force planning assumptions to be made– Assumptions need to be assessed and reviewed
Three Scenarios
Scenario DefinitionWithout Measures (WoM)
Also known as ‘Business as Usual
1. Adopts baseline data and planning assumptions common to all scenarios
2. Adopts national commitments pre 20113. Adopts national energy policy 4. Adopts National Climate Change Action Plan
2011-2023
With Measures (WM) As WoM but assumes the implementation of1. EU Directives transposed in 2010 and 2011
With Additional Measures (WAM)
As WM but assumes the implementation of 1. EU Directives expected to be transposed in
2012 and beyond
WoM Scenario - Population Growth
• Assumption: linear annual growth in population of 1.15% of 2010 population
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 20101.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
1.25
1.30
1.35
1.40
Percent year-on-year Population Growth 2000-2009 (OECD)
WoM Scenario - Economic Growth (1)
• Basis: – 7.5% growth in 2011,
expected– 2.75% growth forecast
in 2012: slowdown in European economy
– Rebound to average long-run rate of growth of 4.5 % through 2013-2025
2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 20260
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
GDP % annual growth – actual, forecast and long-run potential
WoM Scenario – Economic Growth (2)
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 20250
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
GDP in 2010 Increase over year 2010
Billi
on U
SD
WoM Scenario – Growth in Emissions and Impacts
• Economic growth without measures to curb emissions will result in emissions growth– Strength of the relationship between economic growth
and emissions growth will vary between sectors• Emissions do have negative impacts on human
health, agriculture and the environment– The impacts impose damage costs on society – often
termed externalities because it is not the polluter who directly pays the costs
Estimated Marginal Damage Costs (€/tonne emission)
• Data from study undertaken for EEA, reported Nov 2011• Marginal damage costs are at year 2005 price levels• Damage costs are related to source location and population distribution• Damage costs are regional i.e. not confined to the country source of
emission – but excludes effects outside the region
NH3 NOx SO2 NMVOCs PM2.5
Highest 27200 18800 13500 1930 44600
Lowest 1330 647 1400 - 7130
Turkey 4 600 1918 3060 8 19100
Indicative Additional Damage Costs Associated with WoM
• Assumption: increase in emissions from 2010 is directly proportional to the forecast increase in GDP
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 20250
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
NH3SO2NMVOCNOxBi
llion
USD
WoM – Electricity Generation (1)National Policies
• National energy and related policies – Security of supply
• Develop renewable sources to full economic extent – hydro, wind, geothermal, biomass, solar
• Natural gas (imported) to be limited to 30% of electricity generation/supply by year 2023
• Use of domestic lignite to expand - use of imported hard coal to be constrained
• Nuclear to provide 5% of supply by 2020 – Privatisation of generation and transmission systems– Energy efficiency to reduce growth in generation capacity– National Climate Change Action Plan 2011-2023
Per capita electricity consumption and GDP – selected OECD (2009)
- 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 -
5
10
15
20
25
f(x) = 0.000284137267080082 x + 1.96157432578994R² = 0.452982436507794
Per Capita GDP (2000 USD)
MW
h/pe
rson
.y
WoM – Electricity Generation (2) Potential Demand & Generation
• Basis and assumptions:– Association of per capita electricity consumption
with per capita GDP – selected OECD countries– Growth of population and GDP in Turkey as indicated
previously – Reduction in own use and electricity transmission
losses from over 15 % in 2010 to 11.5 % by 2025
Potential electricity generated to meet demand 2011-25
2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 -
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
500,000
GWh
WoM – Electricity Generation (3) Energy Mix to Meet Demand
• Structured approach and quantitative rules:– By 2023, hydro capacity 66% of NCCAP goal; wind at 50% and
geothermal at 50% – Nuclear comes on stream in 2020 to meet 5% of national
demand– Natural gas: year 2010 capacity maintained – no growth– Year 2010 ratio of lignite to hard coal generation capacity
maintained through to 2025– Closure of oil-fired generation capacity– Key performance parameters:
• GWh generated per unit of fuel (gas, coal, etc)• Effective number of hours/year plant runs at full capacity
Performance Parameter – GWh / unit of fuel consumed
Fuel Units 2009 2010 2011-25
Natural gas Million m3 4.69 4.57 4.60
Lignite – existing Ktonne 0.62 0.65 0.65
Lignite – new Ktonne - - 0.65
Hard coal ktonne 2.54 2.39 2.47
Performance Parameter – Effective plant hours/year
Energy Source 2009 2010 2011-25Hydro 2471 3272 2850Wind 1889 2209 2050Geothermal 5664 7106 7100Nuclear - - 7446Natural gas 5783 5400 5600Lignite – existing 4820 4415 4620Lignite – new - - 6500Hard coal 7158 5011 6500
Ratio of electrical power generated (GWh) to installed capacity (GW)
WoM – Electricity Generation (4) Energy Mix: 2010 vs 2023
GWh generated Percentage
2010 2023 -
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
Other
Wind
Hydro
Nuclear
Hard coal
Lignite - new
Lignite - exist -ing
Natural gas
2010 20230%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
OtherWindHydroNuclearHard coalLignite - newLignite - exist -ingNatural gas
WoM – Electricity Generation (5) Potential Fuel Consumption
ktonne/year except natural gas – million m3/year
20092010
20112012
20132014
20152016
20172018
20192020
20212022
20232024
2025 -
20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000
100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 180,000 200,000
Natural gas
Lignite - ex-isting
Lignite - new
Hard coal
Other
WM Scenario: With Measures
Sectors Measures to be ImplementedElectricity generation LCP Directive 2001/80/EEC
OG 27605 (8/6/2010)
Industrial processes using large scale combustion plant
LCP Directive 2001/80/EECOG 27605 (8/6/2010)
Waste management Landfill Directive 99/31/EECOG 27533 (26/3/2010)
Waste Incineration Directive 2000/76/ECOG 27721 (6/9/2010)
WAM Scenario: With Additional Measures
Sectors Measures to be Implemented
Industrial processes IPPC Directive 08/01/EC and Solvent, Storage and Decopaint VOCs Directives - superseded by Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) 2010/80/EEC
Transport EURO 5 and EURO 6 / EURO V and EURO VI
Agriculture IPPC – large scale poultry rearingNitrates DirectiveGood practice in fertiliser application and livestock rearing/manure management
Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA)
• CBA of the incremental costs and benefits provided by specific techniques and of scenarios– WM vs WoM– WAM vs WM
• Costs of techniques for implementing LCPD have been collected – others to follow– Costs comprise investment and operating expenditure
• Benefits recur for as long as plant are operated • Since costs and benefits arise over a period of time, CBA
requires economic appraisal using discounted cash flow (DCF) techniques – TA will provide basic introduction to economic appraisal
top related