international workshop on co meti's energy …meti's energy technology vision 2100 and ccs...
TRANSCRIPT
M. Akai; AIST 1
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
METI's Energy Technology Vision 2100 and CCS Technologies
International Workshop onCO2 Geological Storage
February 20, 2006Toranomon Pastoral Hotel Tokyo
Makoto AkaiNational Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST)
M. Akai; AIST 2
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Contents
• Energy Technology Vision 2100 (METI)http://www.meti.go.jp/committee/materials/g51013aj.html (J)http://www.iae.or.jp/2100.html (E)
• Scenario Study on ETV 2100
• Concluding Remarks
M. Akai; AIST 3
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Energy Technology Vision 2100
M. Akai; AIST 4
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Development of “Energy Technology Vision 2100”
Purpose• To establish METI strategic energy R&D plan
– To consider optimum R&D resource allocation.– To prioritize energy R&D programs and specific
project of METI.• To prepare strategy for post-Kyoto and
further deep reduction of GHG• To develop technology roadmap to be
reflected in METI's energy, environmental and industrial policy
M. Akai; AIST 5
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Why to consider Ultra Long-term?
• Timeframe for future risk or constraint– Resource (10s ~ 100yrs?)– Environment (100 ~ 1000 yrs)
• Long lead time for energy sector in general– Research and development to
commercialization– Market diffusion – Infrastructure development– Stock turnover time (10s yrs)
M. Akai; AIST 6
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Scope of Work
• Timeframe – Vision: - 2100– Technology roadmap: -2100
• Benchmarking years: 2030 and 2050
• Approach– To introduce backcasting methodology– To compile experts' view – To confirm long-term goal using both top-
down and bottom-up scenario analysis
M. Akai; AIST 7
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
ANRE, METI
IAESecretariat
Steering Committee
WG - General
SWGTransformation
SWGIndustry
SWGResidential &Commercial
SWGTransport
Steering Body•Goal setting•Stocktaking•Project management
Workshops•Goal definition•Demand specific
Work StructureDevelopment of Draft “Technology Vision”
M. Akai; AIST 8
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Methodology - Backcasting
Exploratory (opportunity-oriented):• what futures are likely to happen? ⇒ Forecasting
– starts from today’s assured basis of knowledge and is oriented towards the future
Normative (goal-oriented): • how desirable futures might be
attained? ⇒ Backcasting– first assesses future goals, needs, desires,
missions, etc. and works backward to the present
Clement K. Wang &Paul D. Guild
M. Akai; AIST 9
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
20302000 21002050
• Desirable Future
• Quantitative Target
• Enabling Technologies
Backcasting
• Quantitative Target
• Enabling Technologies
Backcasting
Existing Roadmaps, etc.
Specification Based
Technology Roadmaps
Specification Based
Technology Roadmaps
Constraint (Resource, Environment, etc.)
Framework of Backcasting
M. Akai; AIST 10
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Basic Recognition on the Energy Sector
• Constraints on energy connect directly to the level of human utility (quantity of economic activity, quality of life).
• Consideration of future energy structure should take into account both resource and environmental constraints.
• The key to achieve a truly sustainable future is technology.
• However, there is great uncertainty because various kinds of options are selected in the actual society.
M. Akai; AIST 11
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Premises
• Resource and environmental constraints do not degrade utility but enrich the human race (improve utility)
• To develop the technology portfolio for the future in order to realize it through development and use of the technologies.
• Not to set preference to specific technologysuch as hydrogen, distributed system, biomass, etc.
M. Akai; AIST 12
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
AssumptionsDeveloping a Challenging Technology Portfolio• The effect of modal shift or changing of
lifestyle were not expected.• Although the assumption of the future
resource and environmental constraints includes high uncertainties, rigorous constraints were assumed as "preparations".
• To set excessive conditions about energy structure to identify the most severe technological specifications. – As a result, if all of them are achieved, the
constraints are excessively achieved.
M. Akai; AIST 13
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Desirable Futures
• Society where the economy grows and the quality of life improves
• Society where necessary energy can be quantitatively and stably secured
• Society where the global environment is maintained
• Society where technological innovation and utilization of advanced technology are promoted through international cooperation
• Society with flexible choices depend on national and regional characteristics
M. Akai; AIST 14
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Assumptions towards 2100
• Population and economy– To increase continuously
• Energy consumption– To increase following the increase in
population and GDP
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100Year
Pop
ulat
ion,
bill
ions
IPCC-SRESS(A1)IPCC-SRESS(B2)IIASA-WEC
Forecast of world population
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100Year
GD
P, t
rillio
n U
S$
IPCC-SRES(A1)IPCC-SRES(B2)IIASA-WEC(A)IIASA-WEC(B)IIASA-WEC(C)
Forecast of world GDP
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100Year
Prim
ary
ener
gy c
onsu
mpt
ion,
Gto
e
IPCC-SRES(A1)IPCC-SRES(B2)IIASA-WEC(A)IIASA-WEC(B)IIASA-WEC(C)
Forecast of energy consumption
M. Akai; AIST 15
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Resource Constraints
• Although assumption of the future resource constraints includes high degree of uncertainties, the following rigorous constraints were assumed as "preparations". – Oil production peak at 2050– Gas production peak at 2100
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100 2120 2140Year
Gto
e (g
igat
onne
s oi
l equ
ival
ent)
Conventional oil
Total conventional and non-conventional oilproduction from 2000
Date and volume of peak:conventional and non-conventional oil
The Complementarity of Conventional and Non-Conventional Oil Production: giving a Higher and Later Peak to Global Oil Supplies
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100 2120 2140Year
Gto
e (g
igat
onne
s oi
l equ
ival
ent
Conventional gas
Total conventional and non-conventional ags production
Date and volume of peak:conventional and non-conventionalgas production
The Complementarity of Conventional and Non-Conventional Gas Production: giving a Higher and Later Peak to Global Gas Supplies
Example of estimates for oil and natural gas production
M. Akai; AIST 16
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Environmental Constraints
• CO2 emission intensity (CO2/GDP) should be improved to stabilize atmospheric CO2 concentration– 1/3 in 2050– Less than 1/10 in 2100
(further improvementafter 2100)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
2000 2050 2100 2150Year
Gt-C
/yea
rWGI450 WGI550WRE450 WRE550
Global carbon dioxide emission scenario
M. Akai; AIST 17
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
To Overcome Constraints ---
• Sector specific consideration– Residential/Commercial – Transport – Industry– Transformation (Elec. & H2 production)
• Definition of goal in terms of sector or sub-sector specific CO2 emission intensity.
• Identification of necessary technologies and their targets Demand sectors and their typical CO2
emission intensity Industry : t-C/production volume = t-C/MJ × MJ/production volume Commercial : t-C/floor space = t-C/MJ × MJ/floor space Residential : t-C/household = t-C/MJ × MJ/household Transport : t-C/distance = t-C/MJ × MJ/distance (Transformation sector: t-C/MJ) Conversion
efficiency Single unit and equipment
efficiency
M. Akai; AIST 18
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Three Extreme Cases and Possible Pathway to Achieve the Goal
• Cases A & C assume least dependency on energy saving
100%
100%
Fossil fuel
Renewable energy Nuclear power
100%
Case B
Case A
Case C
(together with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS))
(together with nuclear fuel cycles)
(together with ultimate energy saving)
<Advantage> ・Potential of reduction in
fossil resource consumption is high.
・Technology shift is easy. ・Cost may be reduced. <Disadvantage> ・Uncertainty due to factors other
than technological factors.
<Advantage> ・ Reduction is certain if
technology is established. <Disadvantage> ・Quantum leap in technology is necessary. Current status
M. Akai; AIST 19
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Basic Approach to Achieve the Desirable Future
Increase in Final Energy Demand
Increase in Primary Energy Demand
Increase in Fossil Fuel Demand
Increase in CO2Emissions
Utility Improvement
Fossil Resource
Constraints
Cost Increase
Cut off the chain between "utility" and "energy demand" energy saving, efficiency improvement,self-sustaining, and material saving
Cut off the chain between "final energy demand" and "primary energy demand"improvement of energy conversion efficiency
Cut off the chain between "primary energy demand" and "fossil fuel demand"Fuel switching to non-fossil
Cut off the chain between "fossil fuel demand and CO2 emissions"CO2 capture and sequestration
①
②
③
④
Environ-mental
Constraints
Economic Constraints
M. Akai; AIST 20
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Sketch of Technology Spec. 2100Extreme Case-A (Fossil + CCS)
*Value is comparedto that in 2000
[ Target in the Industrial Sector ](1) Over 80% of fossil fuel consumption to be put
to CCS process
(2) Over 65% of sector’s energy to be supplied with electric power and/or hydrogen from the conversion sector
Supplying by coal thermal power with CCS [ Target in the Transport and Res/Com Sectors ]
(1)100% of energy demand is supplied with electric power and/or hydrogen
The total amount of CO2 sequestration in conversion and industrial sectors is approximately 4.0 billion t-CO2/year.Additional energy required for the CCS process is not included.
Transport Res/Com (Residential)
Res/Com(Commercial)
[ Target in the Transformation Sector ]
(1)Production of Electric Power and Hydrogen
Eight times* the current total amount of power generation CO2
Fossil FuelCO2 Capture and Sequestration (CCS)
- Case A assumes a situation where we cannot heavily rely on energy saving.
- The growing ratios of electricity and hydrogen in composition are considered.
CCS
CO2Electric powerand/or
Hydrogen
Effective use of fossil resources together with carbon capture and sequestration
M. Akai; AIST 21
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
CCS Activities under Case-A and Geological Sequestration Potential
0
1
2
3
4
5
2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100Year
Ann
ual a
mou
nt o
f CO
2se
ques
tere
d, b
illio
n t-C
O2
0
50
100
150
200
250
Cum
ulat
ive
amou
nt o
f CO
2se
ques
tratio
n, b
illio
n t-C
O2
Potential of geologic CO2 sequestrationin Japan and the sea near the shore
Cumulative amount of CO2sequestration, right axis
Annual amount of CO2sequestration, left axis
M. Akai; AIST 22
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Sketch of Technology Spec. 2100Extreme Case-B (Nuclear)
- Case B assumes a situation where we cannot heavily rely on energy saving.- The growing ratios of electricity and hydrogen in composition are considered.
[ Target in the Transformation Sector ] [ Target in the Industrial Sector ]
(1) Production of ElectricPower and Hydrogen
Nuclear PowerSupplying by nuclear power
Electric powerand/or
Hydrogen
*Value is comparedto that in 2000
Eight times* the current totalamount of power generation
(1)All demand is supplied with electric power and/or hydrogen with the exception of feedstocks and reductants
[ Target in the Transport and Res/Com Sectors ](1)100% of energy demand is supplied with electric
power and/or hydrogen
Transport Res/Com(Residentila)
Res/Com(Commercial)
Effective use of nuclear power (with fuel cycle establishment)
M. Akai; AIST 23
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Sketch of Technology Spec. 2100Extreme Case-C (Renewable + Ultimate Energy Saving)
(1) Production of Electric Power and Hydrogen
Renewable Energies
[ Target in the Transformation Sector ]
Supplying by renewable energies
[ Target in the Industrial Sector ]
Electric Power,
Hydrogen and/or
Biomass
[ Target in the Res/Com Sector ]
(1) Energy demand to be reduced by 80%
Res/Com(Residential)
(1) 70% of the energy demand** is reduced through energy-saving and fuel switching.
Transport
For automobile, 80% is reduced
[ Target in the Transport Sector ]
Twice* as much as the amount of the current total power generation
Energy demand** to be reduced by 70%(1) 50% of the production energy intensity is
reduced.(2) Making the rate of material/energy
regeneration to 80% (3) Improvement of functions such as strength by
factor 4
Res/Com(Commercial)
* Value is comparedto that in 2000** Per unit utility
Maximum use of renewable energy sources combined with ultimate energy saving
M. Akai; AIST 24
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Significance of CCS in Case A(Fossil + CCS)
• ... while it can reduce CO2 emission generated from use of non-conventional fossil resources significantly, it is merely a transitional solution ... However, this has an immediate effect, and can be regarded as an emergency measure.
• Potential of CO2 sequestration is supposed to be high worldwide. On the other hand, there may be a limitation for geological sequestration potential in Japan. However, if ocean sequestration is realized, the potential in Japan becomes larger.
M. Akai; AIST 25
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Sector Specific Considerations on CCS
• Transport– If we try to make CO2 emissions zero in
the transport sector, we have to supply energy to vehicles in the form of electricity or hydrogen which are supplied by nuclear power, renewables, or fossil fuels with CO2 capture and sequestration.
• Industry– The process and scale in this sector
enables CO2 capture and sequestration if required when using fossil resources.
M. Akai; AIST 26
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Scenario Analysis on Extreme Cases and Mix Case
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
2000 2050 2100
(PJ)
Electricity, Hydrogen, etc.(incl. Renewables, Methanol for Transport, etc.)Oil & GasCoal (incl. Direct use, Methanol for Industry & Res/Com)
Energy Creation
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
2000 2050 2100
(PJ)
Electricity, Hydrogen, etc.(incl. Renewables, Methanol for Transport, etc.)Oil & GasCoal (incl. Direct use, Methanol for Industry & Res/Com)
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
2000 2050 2100
(PJ)
Electricity, Hydrogen, etc.(incl. Renewables, Methanol for Transport, etc.)Oil & GasCoal (incl. Direct use, Methanol for Industry & Res/Com)
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
2000 2050 2100
(PJ)
Electricity, Hydrogen, etc.(incl. Renewables, Methanol for Transport, etc.)Oil & GasCoal (incl. Direct use, Methanol for Industry & Res/Com)
Energy Creation
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
2000 2050 2100
(PJ)
Electricity, Hydrogen, etc.(incl. Renewables, Methanol for Transport, etc.)Oil & GasCoal (incl. Direct use, Methanol for Industry & Res/Com)
Energy Creation
M. Akai; AIST 27
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Possible Solution with the Combination of Three Cases (1/2)
• ... capacity for geological sequestration is considered to have limitations. We have to consider ocean sequestration to satisfy the required capacity ...
• Case A (fossil + CCS) cannot be a long-term solution due to the limitation of fossil resources. Therefore, the combination of case C (renewable + energy-saving) and case B (nuclear) is desirable ... on a long-term basis, by avoiding rapid climate change by CCS as required on a mid-term basis.
M. Akai; AIST 28
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Possible Solution with the Combination of Three Cases (2/2)
• ... combination of these cases can vary according to situations in the future. It is important to prepare technologies through R&D for social and economic changes at various occasions in the future.
• As a result, we can acquire an optimal and robust energy system structure...
• Also, if we prepare for the three extreme cases ..., their synergy effect enables the reduction of fossil resources consumption and CO2 emissions...
M. Akai; AIST 29
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Ongoing and Future Tasks
• To coordinate with domestic activities on short- & mid-term energy strategy– Development of roadmaps based on
forecasting approach– Prioritization on energy R&D (incl. CCS) in
Council for Science and Technology Policy– Development of National Energy Policy– Revision of energy related action plans
• To coordinate with international activities
M. Akai; AIST 30
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Related International Activities
• International Energy Agency– Energy Outlook 2006– Energy Technology Perspective– Response to Gleneagles Action Plan
• Suggesting cooperation of IEA and CSLF
• Asia-Pacific Partnership for Clean Development and Climate
• Work Plan includes collaboration on CCS
M. Akai; AIST 31
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Scenario Study on the Vision
M. Akai; AIST 32
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Energy Scenario of Japanbased on Energy Technology Vision 2100
• Case Study by an Energy Model “ATOM-J”developed by Akai.
Structure of ATOM-J Model
日本の
結果
日本の
結果
日本最適解Optimized Results for Japan
Japan Model
Global Model
JapanResults of Japan
(Globally optimized)
ATOM-J Model– Optimized LP– Term:1990-2100– 18 world regions – Demand Sectors
IndustryHouseholdServiceTransport
M. Akai; AIST 33
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Energy Scenario of JapanBAU defined in the ETV 2100
Primary Energy Supply (PJ)
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
2000 2050 2100
Others
Ren
Hydro
Nuclear
Gas
Oil
Coal
Final Energy Demand (PJ)
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
2000 2050 2100
DS RenHeat
BiomassSynFuel
H2Electricity
GasOil
Coal
Electricity Supply (TWh)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
2000 2050 2100
RenNuclearGasOilCoal
CO2 Capture and Sequestration (Mt-C)
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
2000 2050 2100
IndustryH2 Prod.SynFuel Prod.Fossil Pow er
No CCS
M. Akai; AIST 34
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Energy Scenario of Japan≈ Case-A (Fossil + CCS)
Primary Energy Supply (PJ)
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
2000 2050 2100
Others
Ren
Hydro
Nuclear
Gas
Oil
Coal
Final Energy Demand (PJ)
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
2000 2050 2100
DS RenHeat
BiomassSynFuel
H2Electricity
GasOil
Coal
Electricity Supply (TWh)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
2000 2050 2100
RenNuclearGasOilCoal
CO2 Capture and Sequestration (Mt-C)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
2000 2050 2100
IndustryH2 Prod.SynFuel Prod.Fossil Pow er
Hydrogen
M. Akai; AIST 35
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Hydrogen Society with CCS is NOT a Sustainable Option
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
2070
2080
2090
2100
Renewables &Nuclear
Oil & Gas
Coal (known & unknown)
World’s Primary Energy Supply (MTOE)
M. Akai; AIST 36
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Energy Scenario of Japan≈ Case-B (Nuclear)
Primary Energy Supply (PJ)
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
80000
2000 2050 2100
Others
Ren
Hydro
Nuclear
Gas
Oil
Coal
Final Energy Demand (PJ)
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
2000 2050 2100
DS RenHeat
BiomassSynFuel
H2Electricity
GasOil
Coal
Electricity Supply (TWh)
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
2000 2050 2100
RenNuclearGasOilCoal
CO2 Capture and Sequestration (Mt-C)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
2000 2050 2100
IndustryH2 Prod.SynFuel Prod.Fossil Pow er
Small amount of
CCS
Nuclear
M. Akai; AIST 37
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Energy Scenario of Japan≈ Case-C (Renewable)
Primary Energy Supply (PJ)
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
2000 2050 2100
Others
Ren
Hydro
Nuclear
Gas
Oil
Coal
Final Energy Demand (PJ)
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
18000
2000 2050 2100
DS RenHeat
BiomassSynFuel
H2Electricity
GasOil
Coal
Electricity Supply (TWh)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
2000 2050 2100
RenNuclearGasOilCoal
CO2 Capture and Sequestration (Mt-C)
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
2000 2050 2100
IndustryH2 Prod.SynFuel Prod.Fossil Pow er
No CCS
M. Akai; AIST 38
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Energy Scenario of Japan≈ Mix (Moderate limit for Nuc. + Case-C; w/o. CCS)
Primary Energy Supply (PJ)
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
2000 2050 2100
Others
Ren
Hydro
Nuclear
Gas
Oil
Coal
Final Energy Demand (PJ)
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
18000
2000 2050 2100
DS RenHeat
BiomassSynFuel
H2Electricity
GasOil
Coal
Electricity Supply (TWh)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
2000 2050 2100
RenNuclearGasOilCoal
CO2 Capture and Sequestration (Mt-C)
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
2000 2050 2100
IndustryH2 Prod.SynFuel Prod.Fossil Pow er
M. Akai; AIST 39
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Energy Scenario of Japan≈ Mix (w. CCS, Cumulative CCS potential: 10Gt-CO2)
Primary Energy Supply (PJ)
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
2000 2050 2100
Others
Ren
Hydro
Nuclear
Gas
Oil
Coal
Final Energy Demand (PJ)
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
18000
2000 2050 2100
DS RenHeat
BiomassSynFuel
H2Electricity
GasOil
Coal
Electricity Supply (TWh)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
2000 2050 2100
RenNuclearGasOilCoal
CO2 Capture and Sequestration (Mt-C)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
2000 2050 2100
IndustryH2 Prod.SynFuel Prod.Fossil Pow er
M. Akai; AIST 40
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Implications from Scenario Study
• Case-A “Fossil + CCS” would contribute to hydrogen economy but not be a sustainable option from the viewpoint of resource depletion.
• Nuclear and CCS (especially as a mid-term option) would increase the flexibility of energy supply and demand structure.
• Energy efficiency is the key!
M. Akai; AIST 41
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Concluding Remarks• On-going R&D under METI• Towards the Future of CCS
M. Akai; AIST 42
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Towards the Future of CCS- Bridging over Science and Society -
• Social acceptance for the technology⇑
• Conformity with regulations– London Convention, OSPAR, Domestic Laws, etc.– Action for amendment, if necessary
• Definite recognition by IPCC and UNFCCC• Better communication
– Audience: general public, scientists, industries, policy makers, NGOs, etc.
⇑• Accumulation of scientific knowledge
M. Akai; AIST 43
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
CCS R&D Projects under METI
• Ocean Sequestration(Environmental Assessment for CO2 Ocean Sequestration)
– 1997 - 2001 (Phase-1)– 2002 - 2006 (Phase-2)
• Geological Sequestration– 2000 - 2004 (Phase-1)– 2005 - (Phase-2)
• ECBM– 2002 - 2006 (Phase-1)
M. Akai; AIST 44
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Other CCS Research under METI
• Accounting Rules on CO2 Sequestration for National GHG Inventories [ARCS] (2002 -)– Development of accounting methodology– Contribution to NGGIP– Policy studies including CCS-CDM
• Environmental Impact and Safety Management based on Natural Analogue(2005 - )
• Methodology of Applicability of CCS to Kyoto Mechanism including CDM (2004 - )
• Public Perception on CCS (2002 - )– Cooperation with AGS Project
M. Akai; AIST 45
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Strategic Action Plan on Putting CO2Sequestration on the Viable Policy Agenda
• Establish a epistemic community– Forums by the stakeholders/policy makers
• Establish validation methodologies of emissions reduction– Analysis/assessment of existing scientific works
on the technologies– Evaluation of the effectiveness, provision for
monitoring requirements, etc.• Establish communication strategy
– Audience includes general public, scientists, industries, policy makers, etc.
98.01; 00.10: M. Akai to USDOE – MITI Meeting
M. Akai; AIST 46
International Workshop on CO2 Geological Storage; February 20, 2006
Thank you!