International Workshop on CO METI's Energy …METI's Energy Technology Vision 2100 and CCS...

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


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


Energy Technology Vision 2100

M. Akai; AIST 4


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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)


0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

2000 2050 2100

(PJ)


0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

2000 2050 2100

(PJ)


Energy Creation

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

2000 2050 2100

(PJ)


Energy Creation

M. Akai; AIST 27


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


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


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


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


Scenario Study on the Vision

M. Akai; AIST 32


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


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


Energy Scenario of Japan≈ Case-A (Fossil + CCS)


0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

50000

2000 2050 2100

Others

Ren

Hydro

Nuclear

Gas

Oil

Coal


0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

2000 2050 2100

DS RenHeat

BiomassSynFuel

H2Electricity

GasOil

Coal


0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

2000 2050 2100



0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

2000 2050 2100


Hydrogen

M. Akai; AIST 35


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


Energy Scenario of Japan≈ Case-B (Nuclear)


0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

2000 2050 2100

Others

Ren

Hydro

Nuclear

Gas

Oil

Coal


0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

2000 2050 2100

DS RenHeat

BiomassSynFuel

H2Electricity

GasOil

Coal


0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

2000 2050 2100



0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

2000 2050 2100


Small amount of

CCS

Nuclear

M. Akai; AIST 37


Energy Scenario of Japan≈ Case-C (Renewable)


0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

2000 2050 2100

Others

Ren

Hydro

Nuclear

Gas

Oil

Coal


0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

2000 2050 2100

DS RenHeat

BiomassSynFuel

H2Electricity

GasOil

Coal


0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2000 2050 2100



0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

2000 2050 2100


No CCS

M. Akai; AIST 38


Energy Scenario of Japan≈ Mix (Moderate limit for Nuc. + Case-C; w/o. CCS)


0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

2000 2050 2100

Others

Ren

Hydro

Nuclear

Gas

Oil

Coal


0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

2000 2050 2100

DS RenHeat

BiomassSynFuel

H2Electricity

GasOil

Coal


0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2000 2050 2100



0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

2000 2050 2100


M. Akai; AIST 39


Energy Scenario of Japan≈ Mix (w. CCS, Cumulative CCS potential: 10Gt-CO2）


0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

2000 2050 2100

Others

Ren

Hydro

Nuclear

Gas

Oil

Coal


0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

2000 2050 2100

DS RenHeat

BiomassSynFuel

H2Electricity

GasOil

Coal


0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2000 2050 2100



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

2000 2050 2100


M. Akai; AIST 40


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


Concluding Remarks• On-going R&D under METI• Towards the Future of CCS

M. Akai; AIST 42


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


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


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


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


Thank you!

Date post:	18-Apr-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

International Workshop on CO METI's Energy …METI's Energy Technology Vision 2100 and CCS...

Documents