© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Steven Rose
2017 Energy Information Agency Energy ConferenceJune 27, 2017
Global Climate Goals and Developing Country Electrification
2© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
USA EU Other G20 China India Other Countries
Billi
on to
nnes
CO
2e /
yea
rBaselineNDC onlyNDC +NDC ++Level 1Level 2Level 3
Potential Regional Emissions Constraints
Even leveling off non-trivial
Rose et al. (2017)
Other Developing
3© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
Billi
on to
nnes
CO
2eq
uiva
lent
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2000 2050 2100 2150 2200
Degr
ees C
elsi
us a
bove
pre
-indu
stria
l
Global Emissions & Temperature Implications
Global Emissions Global Temperature
US/EU/OG20/China
Adding India & OD
Baseline
NDC only
NDC +
NDC ++
Shading reflects some of the uncertainty in the climate response to emissions
(shown for only a few scenarios)
2˚CNDC ++ w/ Level 1
NDC ++ w/ Level 2
NDC ++ w/ Level 3
Peaking global emissions requires more than
NDCs, and more than developed countries
Rose et al. (2017)
2100
• Reduction in warming risk for all policy pathways
• For a chance at < 2˚C, significant mid-century abatement needed
4© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
Billi
on to
nnes
CO
2eq
uiva
lent
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2000 2050 2100 2150 2200
Degr
ees C
elsi
us a
bove
pre
-indu
stria
l
Global Emissions & Temperature Implications
Global Emissions Global Temperature
US/EU/OG20/China
Baseline
NDC only
NDC +
NDC ++
NDC ++ w/ Level 1
NDC ++ w/ Level 2
NDC ++ w/ Level 3< 2˚C post-2030 path
For pursuing a medium likelihood of < 2˚C,
precipitous drop in global emissions post-2030
2˚C
Adding India & OD
Rose et al. (2017)
2100
Shading reflects some of the uncertainty in the climate response to emissions
(shown for only a few scenarios)
5© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
USA EU Other G20 China India Other Countries
Billi
on to
nnes
CO
2e /
yea
rBaselineNDC onlyNDC +NDC ++Level 1Level 2Level 3
Potential Regional Emissions Constraints
Rose et al. (2017)
Other Developing
6© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
2000
2020
2040
2060
2080
2100
USA EU Other G20 China India Other Countries
Billi
on to
nnes
CO
2e /
yea
rBaselineNDC onlyNDC +NDC ++Level 1Level 2Level 32 deg C post-2030
Potential Regional Emissions Constraints
For a medium likelihood of < 2˚C, dramatic immediate regional and mid-century
emissions reductions
Rose et al. (2017)
Other Developing
7© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Regional Electricity Supply Transformation by 2050
Rose et al. (2017)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
2010
NDC
onl
y
NDC
+
NDC
++
2 de
g C
2010
Leve
l 1
Leve
l 2
Leve
l 3
2 de
g C
2010
Leve
l 1
Leve
l 2
Leve
l 3
2 de
g C
2050 2050 2050
China India Other Countries
Gene
ratio
n (1
000
TWh
/ yea
r)
Non-bioe renewable
Nuclear
Bioenergy w/ CCS
Bioenergy
Fossil w/ CCS
Fossil
Other Developing
• Decarbonization and growth in electricity supply can be consistent
• Fossil non-existent in 2˚C case
8© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Costs Increase with Stringency at an Increasing Rate(% loss in present value per capita consumption through 2100)
Negative values imply benefits. Max temperature results first for climate outcomes with 3˚C equilibrium climate sensitivity, and then, in parentheses, outcomes with 1.5˚C to 4.5˚C sensitivity.Rose et al. (2017)
9© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Various Factors Shape Regional Electrification
Policy– Stringency– Design
Technology– Electricity generation options– End-use technologies – electric and non-electric availability and efficiency
Investment environmentOther
– Preferences – demand for services– Fuel markets
Net electrification response a function of the above– Determining electricity prices, price elasticity, and electricity demand
10© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
0 10 20 30 40 50
2050
ele
ctric
ity F
E sh
are
2050 electricity consumption (EJ/yr)
Electrification and Climate Policy Stringency
China
India
Other developing
20102010
2010
Most stringent policy (post-2030 2˚C)
With emissions constraints, potentially larger cost-effective role for electricity (greater
consumption & dependence)
However, extremely aggressive policies imply larger dependence with less system growth
11© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Electrification and Low-Carbon Electricity Supply Optionse.g., CCS unavailable (fossil and bioenergy)
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
0 10 20 30 40 50
2050
elec
trici
ty F
E sh
are
2050 electricity consumption (EJ/yr)
China
India
Other developing
20102010
2010
Without CCS, lower electricity consumption &
dependence.
(Also, no solution for most stringent policy)
12© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Electrification and Policy Designe.g., emissions tax vs. low-carbon generation subsidy
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
Econ
omic
pot
entia
l
Subs
idy
(w/ d
eliv
ery
risk)
Econ
omic
pot
entia
l
Subs
idy
(w/ d
eliv
ery
risk)
Econ
omic
pot
entia
l
Subs
idy
(w/ d
eliv
ery
risk)
Buildings Industry Transportation
EJ /
yea
r
Electricity
Coal
Gases
Liquids
Biomass
Other
Net
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Economic potential with$20/tCO2
Low-carbon energy subsidy (w/delivery risk) with $20/tCO2
EJ /
ye
ar
Solar
Wind
Geothermal
Biomass|w/o CCS
Biomass|w/ CCS
Hydro
Nuclear
Oil|w/o CCS
Oil|w/ CCS
Gas|w/o CCS
Gas|w/ CCS
Coal|w/o CCS
Coal|w/ CCS
Change in International (Non-US) Final Energy Consumption in 2020 by Sector and Fuel (relative to baseline) with $20/tCO2eq
Change in International (Non-US) Electricity Generation from Reference in 2020
Rose et al. (forthcoming), Calvin et al (2015)
With
tax
With
sub
sidy
With
tax
With
sub
sidy
With
tax
With
sub
sidy
With tax With subsidy
Subsidy increasing electricity, but…
…increasing fossil and low-carbon
generation
A separate issue: sector specific policies can preclude cost-effective cross-sector mitigation (e.g., electrification)
13© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Cars and Light Trucks
Bus and Passenger Rail
Aviation (domestic)
Aviation (international)
Light Commercial Trucks
Heavy Trucks
Freight Rail (non-energy)
Shipping (domestic)
Shipping (international)
Military
Fuel Transport (rail)
Pipeline
ICEV
PHEV
EV
FCV
Autonomous Vehicles
Agriculture
Construction
Mining (non-energy)
Non-Building Commercial
Water Services
Bulk Chemicals
Iron and Steel
Paper/Pulp/Wood
Food
Cement
Other Manufacturing
Refining
Upstream Energy Extraction
Boilers
Co-gen Boilers
Process Heat
Motor Drive
Feedstocks
Facilities
Off-Road Transport
Space Cooling
Space Heating
Water Heating
Clothes Dryers
Cooking
Lighting
Other Appliances
Electronics
Ventilation
Other Building
Central A/C
Window A/C
Air-Source Heat Pump
Ground-Source Heat Pump
Electric Furnace/Resistance
Gas Furnace
Oil/LPG Furnace
Wood Furnace/Stove
Electrification and End-Use (Technologies and Demand)
Residential and Commercial
Transportation IndustryBuildings
SECTORS / ACTIVITIES END-USES TECHNOLOGIES
14© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Electrification and Investment Risks
Country and technology risks
(some institutional) represent
uncertainty and additional costs
For EV/HEV
Rose et al. (forthcoming)
For T&D Grid Expansion
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%India
Brazil
Tanzania
Country Technology Overall Country Technology Overall
No risk =
15© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Electrification and Investment Risks
Relative investment risk will be important.
Risks for electricity supply and demand.
No risk = Risk factors for country-technology combinations (international)
Rose et al. (forthcoming)
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Coal
min
e CH
4Ge
o. S
eque
stra
tion
Affo
rest
atio
nBi
omas
s for
H/P
EV/H
EVAd
ipic
/nitr
ic ac
id N
2O
Coal
min
e CH
4Ge
o. S
eque
stra
tion
Affo
rest
atio
nBi
omas
s for
H/P
EV/H
EVAd
ipic
/nitr
ic ac
id N
2O
Coal
min
e CH
4Ge
o. S
eque
stra
tion
Affo
rest
atio
nBi
omas
s for
H/P
EV/H
EVAd
ipic
/nitr
ic ac
id N
2O
Coal
min
e CH
4Ge
o. S
eque
stra
tion
Affo
rest
atio
nBi
omas
s for
H/P
EV/H
EVAd
ipic
/nitr
ic ac
id N
2O
Coal
min
e CH
4Ge
o. S
eque
stra
tion
Affo
rest
atio
nBi
omas
s for
H/P
EV/H
EVAd
ipic
/nitr
ic ac
id N
2O
Coal
min
e CH
4Ge
o. S
eque
stra
tion
Affo
rest
atio
nBi
omas
s for
H/P
EV/H
EVAd
ipic
/nitr
ic ac
id N
2O
China Brazil Mexico South Africa Tanzania Canada
16© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Concluding Thoughts
Limiting global warming to 2˚C implies stringent emissions constraints for developing and developed countries
Potentially large cost-effective role for electrification in developing country decarbonization
Potential synergies with development goals (decarbonization & electricity growth)
Electrification’s decarbonization contribution, and the societal cost, will be defined by policy, technology (energy supply and demand), and institutions (and more)
Valuing economy-wide emissions important for realizing cost-effective decarbonization electrification
17© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Thank you!
Steven Rose
18© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Resources
Calvin, K., S. Rose, M. Wise, H. McJeon, L. Clarke, J. Edmonds, 2015. Global climate, energy, and economic implications of international energy offsets programs. Climatic Change 133(4): 583–596.
Rose, S.K., R. Beach, K. Calvin, B. McCarl, J. Petrusa, B. Sohngen, R. Youngman, A. Diamant, F. de la Chesnaye, J. Edmonds, R. Rosenzweig, M. Wise, forthcoming. Market Realities for Global Mitigation Supplies: Accounting for Risks and Incentives. EPRI Report #1025510.
Rose, S.K., R. Richels, G. Blanford, T. Rutherford, 2017. The Paris Agreement and Next Steps in Limiting Global Warming. Climatic Change 142(1), 255-270. [Discussion Paper – EPRI Report #3002007427, http://epri.co/3002007427]
19© 2017 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Cost Comparisons of Different U.S. Climate Policy Architectures
Cumulative Emissions Reductions (GtCO2)
NPV
of T
otal
Cos
t (tr
illio
n $)
, 5%
DR
Regulations found to be more costly than market-based approaches due to
their partial coverage
Weyant et al. (2014)
