MiniCAM Results:USA Technology and Emissions

Mitigation

1

Page Kyle, Leon Clarke, Graham Pugh, Marshall Wise, Kate Calvin, Jae Edmonds, Sonny Kim

GTSP Technical ReviewMay 28, 2009

College Park, MD

Scenario Design

2

What is the value of technology in reducing emissions?Implications of not having CCS or expanded nuclearRole of energy efficiency and renewable energyImplications of technological development for banking or borrowing of emissions

Technology Area REF NUCCS EE RE EERE ADV

Carbon capture and storage X X

Expanded nuclear power X X

Enhanced geothermal systems X X X

Advanced grid for renewables X X X

Low-cost solar power (PV, CSP) X X X

Low-cost wind power X X X

Advanced building technologies X X X

High-mpg ICE vehicles (e.g. HEVs) X X X

Plug-in vehicles (e.g. BEVs, PHEVs) X X X

Advanced manufacturing processes X X X

Advanced boilers and motor systems X X X

Technology Scenario

Scenario Design and CO2 Emissions Price Paths

Policies implemented by CO2 price that rises at 5%/yrTechnology determines carbon prices

3

203

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

2005

$/ t

CO

2e

REF

NUCCS

EE

RE

EERE

ADV

167

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

REF

NUCCS

EE

RE

EERE

ADV

Two policies203 bmt CO2 from 2012 to 2050 (50% of 1990, by 2050)167 bmt CO2 from 2012 to 2050 (80% of 1990, by 2050)

Primary Energy Consumption in 2050: No policy and 167 bmtWithout policy, primary energy mix is similar across scenarios and similar to 2005

EE technologies reduce energy consumptionWith policy, structure of energy system varies dramatically by scenario

4

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2005

RE

F

NU

C/C

CS

EE

RE

EE

RE

ADV

EJ/y

r

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2005

RE

F

RE

F_16

7

NU

CC

S_1

67

EE

_167

RE

_167

EE

RE

_167

AD

V_1

67

EJ/y

r

2050: No policy 2050: 167

Oil Oil w/CCS Gas

Gas w/CCS Coal Coal w/CCSBiomass Biomass w/CCS NuclearHydro Wind Solar

Geothermal Reduction: policy Reduction: technology

Primary Energy Consumption: 167 policy, 2020 and 2050Primary energy mix does not dramatically differ by scenario in 2020

In 2020, REF_167 and RE_167 have low coal consumption

5

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2005

RE

F

RE

F_16

7

NU

CC

S_1

67

EE

_167

RE

_167

EE

RE

_167

AD

V_1

67

EJ/y

r

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2005

RE

F

RE

F_16

7

NU

CC

S_16

7

EE_

167

RE_

167

EE

RE_

167

AD

V_16

7

EJ/y

r

2020: 167 2050: 167

Oil Oil w/CCS Gas

Gas w/CCS Coal Coal w/CCSBiomass Biomass w/CCS NuclearHydro Wind Solar

Geothermal Reduction: policy Reduction: technology

Electricity Production by Technology, 2050, no policy and 167 bmtWithout policy, scenarios are similar in electricity demand and generation mix

EGS is used when available, even without policyPolicy causes large shifts in total generation and generation mix

REF: heavy reliance on wind and storage (due to lack of alternatives)NUCCS: 330 GW nuclear, 540 GW CCSEERE: 460 GW wind, 175 GW geothermal, 780 GW solar

6

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2005

REF

NU

CC

S EE RE

EER

E

ADV

EJ/y

r

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2005

RE

F

RE

F_16

7

NU

CC

S_1

67

EE

_167

RE

_167

EE

RE

_167

AD

V_1

67

EJ/y

r

2050: No policy 2050: 167

-10-505

101520253035

2005

REF

REF

NU

CE

E_R

E_E

ER AD

V

Reduction: technologyReduction: policyGeothermalSolarWindHydroNuclearBiomass w/CCSBiomassCoal w/CCSCoalGas w/CCSGasOil w/CCSOil

Liquid Fuel Production by Technology, 2050, no policy and 167 bmt

Without policy, non-crude sources supply about 40 percent of fuelsAdvanced energy efficiency cuts liquid fuel demand by 35 percent

With policy, shift towards crude oil and biomass liquidsLimited cost-effective, low-carbon options even with stringent policy

No policy: 2050

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

REFNUCCS EE RE

EERE

ADV

EJ

Coal-to-liquids w/CCS

Coal-to-liquids

Gas-to-liquids

Biomass liquids

Unconventional oil

Crude oil

167: 2050

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

REF_167

NUCCS_167

EE_167

RE_167

EERE_167

ADV_167

EJ

Bioenergy

Bioenergy grows in all scenariosIn the future, biomass is used for refining when CCS is not available.Split between electricity and refining when CCS is available

8

Note: Scenarios assume that bioenergy is not traded with other regions, but no restrictions are placed on imported food.

REF: No Policy

0

2

4

6

8

10

2005 2020 2035 2050

EJ

REF: 167

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

2005 2020 2035 2050

ADV: 167

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

2005 2020 2035 2050

H2 w /CCSBiogas and H2Electricity w /CCSElectricityRefiningIndustry (direct)Building (direct)

Bioenergy: the role of imports

When importing is allowed, it is a large part of the energy system when the U.S. has a far more aggressive policy than the rest of the world

Carbon emissions prices are cut in half, and bioenergy demand increases by a factor of 2 to 4

9

Bioenergy imports not allowed

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2005 2020 2035 2050

EJ

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2005

$ / t

CO

2

REF_167ADV_167REF_167ADV_167

Bioenergy imports allowed

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2005 2020 2035 20500

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400REF_167ADV_167REF_167ADV_167

Buildings sector final energy by service, 2005-2050, with and without policy

Regardless of policy, shift from heating and water heating, towards “others”Technology advance and internal gain retention

Policy furthers the trendsElectrification of fossil fuel-supplied services

REF

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2005 2020 2035 2050

EJ

REF_167

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2005 2020 2035 2050

Heating Cooling

Water Heating Lighting

Residential Appliances Residential Other

Commercial Office Commercial Other

EE_167

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2005 2020 2035 2050

Buildings sector final energy by fuel, 2050

Electrification of buildings takes place without policyPolicy enhances electrificationAdvanced technology facilitates electrification

2005

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2005

EJ

No policy: 2050

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

REFNUCCS EE RE

EERE

ADV

Biomass Electricity Gas Liquids Reduction

167: 2050

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

REF_167

NUCCS_167

EE_167

RE_167

EERE_167

ADV_167

EJ

Industrial Sector: Cogeneration

Cogeneration deployment depends onThe costs of additional fuel and carbon emissions from the cogeneration facility (compared with steam- or heat-only systems), andThe value (price) of the electricity produced

Low-cost central electricity

203

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

2005 2020 2035 2050

EJ

REF REF_203 NUCCS_203

167

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

2005 2020 2035 2050

EJREF REF_167 NUCCS_167

Light-Duty Vehicle Deployment Implied by Technology Scenarios, No Policy

In all scenarios, the number of vehicle miles grows, generally at about the rate of the populationIn ADV, there are more miles driven on electricity than liquid fuels (even without a policy)

“Rebound” effect of advanced transportation technologies is small

NUCCS

0

0.5

1

1.5

22.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

2005 2020 2035 2050

trillio

n ve

h m

i

0

50

100

150

200250

300

350

400

450

Fuel cell

Electric

ICE

Population

ADV

0

0.5

11.5

2

2.5

33.5

4

4.5

2005 2020 2035 2050tri

llion

veh

mi

0

50

100150

200

250

300350

400

450

Light-Duty Vehicle Deployment Implied by Technology Scenarios, 167 bmt PolicyService demand is relatively unresponsive to climate policyHigher carbon prices lead to increased use of electric vehicles

Even with stringent policy and advanced technology assumptions, light-duty vehicle stock is >90% ICE in 2020

A tax of $100/t CO2 increases fuel costs by about $0.85/gal, but actual driving costs only increase by ~3 cents per mile (at 28 mpg)

ADV_167

0

0.5

11.5

2

2.5

33.5

4

4.5

2005 2020 2035 20500

50

100150

200

250

300350

400

450

NUCCS_167

0

0.51

1.52

2.53

3.54

4.5

2005 2020 2035 2050

Tril

veh

mi

0

50100

150200

250300

350400

450

2005

$ / t

CO

2

CO2 Emissions, No Policy

Advanced energy efficiency scenarios have declining CO2emissions over time

Much of these technology-related reductions are in transportation and refining

15

Reference CO2 Emissions

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2005 2020 2035 2050

Gt C

O2/

yr

REF

NUCCS

EERE

EERE

ADV

2050: No Policy

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

REF

NU

CC

S

EE RE

EER

E

AD

V

Gt C

O2 /

yr

Reduction:technologyReduction:policyTransportation

Industry

Buildings

Gas

Hydrogen

Refining

Electricity

CO2 Emissions by sector, 167 bmt policy, 2020 and 2050

Negative emissions from electricity when CCS is availableTransportation accounts for the majority of emissions in 2050 in all policy scenarios

16

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

REF

REF

_167

NU

CC

S_16

7

EE_1

67

RE_

167

EER

E_16

7

AD

V_1

67

Gt C

O2 /

yr

-10123

45678

REF

REF

_167

NU

CC

S_16

7

EE_1

67

RE_

167

EER

E_16

7

AD

V_1

67

Gt C

O2 /

yr

Electricity Refining HydrogenGas Buildings IndustryTransportation Reduction: policy Reduction: technology

2020: 167 2050: 167

CO2 as a Portion of CO2e

Non-CO2 gases become more important with tighter policy target and with advanced technologies

Advanced technologies reduce CO2

Most of these emissions are from non-point sources (agriculture, refrigerants)

17

203

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

2005 2020 2035 2050

Perc

ent o

f CO

2e fr

om n

on-C

O2

GH

Gs

REF

REF_203

NUCCS_203

ADV_203

167

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

2005 2020 2035 2050

REF

REF_167

NUCCS_167

ADV_167

Total US CO2e Emissions Trajectories

Expectations of future technology affect near-term reductionsDramatic near-term cuts (“banking”) required when technology options are not available in the long termAdvanced technology allow near-term emissions to remain high

80 percent CO2e is low; all scenarios “borrow” in 205018

203

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2005 2020 2035 2050

Gt C

O2e

/ yr

Linear_203REF_203NUCCS_203EE_203RE_203EERE_203ADV_203

167

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2005 2020 2035 2050

Linear_167REF_167NUCCS_167EE_167RE_167EERE_167ADV_167

ConclusionsMany futures are possible, but with dramatically different costs and implications for the future of the energy system

REF costs and implications (e.g. early retirement of capital, very high deployment of wind energy) may be socially and politically unacceptableNUC/CCS allows the energy system to remain reliant on fossil andnuclear energy, but may incur socially and environmentally unacceptable costs and risksEERE entails a departure from the structure of the present energy system, which takes place mostly between 2020 and 2050

Technology advance in the end-use sectors (EE) reduces costs of meeting policies by:

reducing the scale of emissions mitigation requirements, andfacilitating electrification of end uses

Most of the action required for meeting aggressive policy targets takes place between 2020 and 2050

In the U.S., the energy infrastructure will have little opportunity for large-scale changes in the next decade (unless existing capital is retired early)