+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Meeting the Energy Challenges of the 21 st Century Feryal Ozel University of Arizona.

Meeting the Energy Challenges of the 21 st Century Feryal Ozel University of Arizona.

Date post: 21-Dec-2015
Category:
View: 215 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
Popular Tags:
43
Meeting the Energy Challenges of the 21 st Century Feryal Ozel University of Arizona
Transcript

Meeting the Energy Challengesof the 21st Century

Feryal OzelUniversity of Arizona

What exactly is the “crisis”?

Claim #1:The Energy Crisis and the Climate Crisis are the same thing

What exactly is the “crisis”?

The Energy Crisis and the Climate Crisis are the same thing

FALSE

Claim #2: If we just drilled more, we would meet our energy needs

Our Resources

FALSE

Alternative Energy and Oil Imports

Claim #3: If we develop alternative energy sources, this will end our dependence on

imported oil

FALSE

It is better for the environment to replace your 1998 Toyota Tercel with 2009 Toyota Prius

FALSE

The State of Fossil Fuels:USA and World Resources

• The United States consumes 21 million barrels/day• 25% of the world consumption• Highest consumption per capita after Canada and Saudi Arabia• About 70% of this amount is imported (from Canada, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Venezuela, Nigeria, Iraq….)

Why don’t we produce more?

How Much Oil Do We Have?

Country Proved Reserves*

Billion barrels

ProductionMillion barrels

No of Producing Wells

Saudi Arabia 263 9.1 1560

Canada 179 3.3

Iran 131 4.0 1120

Iraq 115 1.1 1685

UAE 98 2.4

Kuwait 97 2.2 790

Venezuela 78 2.1 15,395

Russia 69 9.2 41,192

U.S.A. 29 5.7 521,070

* excludes oil shale

Drill Baby Drill!

In the US, average production from a single well: 11 barrels/day

In Saudi Arabia, production from a single well: 5800 barrels/day

Drill Baby Drill!

Best case scenario (1 in 20 chances): 1% of world’s production5% reduction in imports in 2030

Source:US Dept

of Energy,2008

The Peak of US Oil

This decline is despite large drilling efforts between 1973 and 1985

Cost of Drilling

Between 1973 and 1980:

New capital investment in the US economy going to oil industry increased from 2% to 7%

Total footage of drilled wells increased three fold

THE RETURN?US production declined by 7%

$100 Billion net loss (2% of GDP)

US Energy ConsumptionEnergy flow in 2007 from the US Department of Energy

Petroleum: 39.82

Importe

d Pet

role

um:

28.7

0Transportation: 29.10

Unit: Quadrillion Btus

Petroleum Use

• Primary Use: Transportation

Transportation uses up all of the imported oil

How can we replace the petroleum use?

Other uses: Heating, Production of Plastics, Lubricants, Asphalt, Wax

• Agriculture: Industrial farming is extremely oil-intensive

Biofuels?

• A very complex question

• Idea: derive liquid fuels such as ethanol from agricultural crops (prime crops)

• Has 2/3 the energy content of petroleum, at roughly twice the cost

• Has benefited from federal and state subsidies

• Takes about 1 gallon of petroleum to make enough ethanol to replace 1 gallon of petroleum (unless derived from agricultural/bio waste)

• Look at the larger relationship between petroleum and agriculture

Fossil Fuels and Agriculture

• After transportation, agriculture uses the largest amount of oil at 17%

Fossil Fuels and Agriculture

• After transportation, agriculture uses the largest amount of oil at 17% • We use fossil fuels to make fertilizers, operation of machinery, transportation, irrigation

Fossil Fuels and Agriculture

• After transportation, agriculture uses the largest amount of oil at 17% • We use fossil fuels to make fertilizers, operation of machinery, transportation, irrigation

• Today, 400 gallons of oil is used to feed each American annually

• It is accurate to say our diet includes fossil fuels

• Policies for single-crop farming have worsened the situation

Non-Prime Crops

Feedstock grasses Picture courtesy of Steven Chu, LBNL

Responsible Biofuels

IF prairie grass can be grown in otherwise unusable land, and IF enzymes can be developed to produce ethanol economically, a good solution

OTHERWISE,

Economically, socially, environmentally, and scientifically

a bad idea

First order of business:Couple electricity to transportation

Electric / Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles HAVE TO BE PART OF THE SOLUTION!

Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV)Use on on-board electricityRecharged from electrical gridNo combustion engine

Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV)Combustion engine plus one or more electric motors. Uses only hydrocarbon fuel

Slide Credit: Electric Power Research Institute

Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV)

Should I replace my car?

• It costs a lot of energy and materials to build a new car

• If you have a functioning, reasonable fuel-efficiency car

(> 20 or so mpg), do not replace it

When you replace it, buy a plug-in hybrid electric car

Hydrogen Fuel Cells• Hydrogen cells store energy, do not produce it

• Hydrogen is a very inefficient way of storing energy

• Manufacturing (liquid) hydrogen tanks is extremely expensive

• Overall efficiency (electrolysis x compression x fuel cell) = 40 %

Hydropower 7%

Oil 3%

Renewables 2%

Coal 52%

Nuclear 20%

Natural Gas 16%

US Electricity Production Sources

Source: US Department of Energy

Are there any concerns with the current state of affairs?

Sustainable? Economical? Environmentally friendly?

Prospects for Electricity Production

• Natural gas: burns reasonably cleanly, cheapest in plant construction and fuel costs but reserves diminishing rapidly

• Hydroelectric: truly clean and renewable, some environmental concerns, but most of the U.S. capacity developed

• Coal: 200 yrs reserves, cheapest after natural gas, but…

The Climate Crisis

Temperature increase: 1.3 F

Source: IPCC, endorsed by ALL National Academies

of Science

Very tight relation between Temperature

and CO2 in the atmosphere

6

Billions of Tons Carbon Emitted per Year

Current p

ath =

“ram

p”

Historical emissions

0

30

60

1950 2000 2050 2100

The Projections

27

Current CO2:375 ppm

Historical:180-280 ppm

for ~million yrs

Clean Coal = Carbon capture and “geological” storage

CaptureCapture UndergroundUndergroundInjectionInjection

PipelinePipelineTransportTransport

CompressionCompression

• Will make coal electricity twice as expensive

Clean Coal

• Impacts of unintended leakage

– Health and safety of workers and general population

– Environmental impacts– Unwanted intrusion

into drinking water• Earthquakes

Tree kill at Mammoth Mountain, CA http://quake.wr.usgs.gov/prepare/factsheets/CO2/

Unfortunately, not clean enough

Nuclear

• Civilian uses and weapons uses completely separated in the U.S.• Enough fuel for > 30 yrs if ALL U.S. electricity is from nuclear plants• Enough fuel for thousands of yrs if fuel is reprocessed

• High(er) cost is entirely due to weak policy• There has never been an injury related to nuclear power plants

in the U.S.• Waste issue needs to be addressed before construction of any new

plants

Multi-faceted question: fuel reserves, economy, safety, proliferation, waste

PROS:

QUESTIONS:

Solar Energy

Solar Energy

• It is possible to capture the sun’s energy for direct electricity generation OR for heat generation in a power plant

• Can provide all of the U.S. electricity needs with solar energy

(100 square miles in AZ or Nevada covered with 20% efficient solar

cells can do it: e.g., Turner, 1999, Science, 285, 687) • Currently, focus is on decreasing cost

Solar Concentrators

Efficiency

Energy efficiency has to be the first component of any

national energy plan or response to climate change

Energy/cost savings can be HUGE with simple steps

Just a few examples

Per Capita Electricity Sales (not including self-generation)(kWh/person) (2006 to 2008 are forecast data)

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

1960196219641966196819701972197419761978198019821984198619881990199219941996199820002002200420062008

United States

California

Per Capita Income in Constant 2000 $1975 2005 % change

US GDP/capita 16,241 31,442 94%Cal GSP/capita 18,760 33,536 79%

2005 Differences = 5,300kWh/yr = $165/capita

California: World’s 6th Largest Economy

data from the California Energy Commission

Total $700 Billion savings

Impact of Standards on The Efficiency of 3 Appliances

Source: S. Nadel, ACEEE,

in ECEEE 2003 Summer Study, www.eceee.org

75%

60%

25%20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006

Year

Ind

ex (

1972

= 1

00)

Effective Dates of National Standards

=

Effective Dates of State Standards

=

Refrigerators

Central A/C

Gas Furnaces

SEER = 13

MANY Other Savings

LED lights, glazed low-E windows, cogeneration plants,

mileage standards, ………

“pay-back time” is typically ~1 yr for most of these

Compare to 11 years development time for drilling

Windows for heating and cooling climates

Image credit: Stephen Selkowitz, LBNL

Cool Color Cars

• Toyota experiment (surface temperature 18F cooler)

• Ford, BMW, and Fiat are also working on the technology

slide credit: Akbari, LBNL

A Similar Approach to Climate Stabilization

from the McKinsey report

Conclusions

Priority List:

1. Efficiency Standards

2. Car Batteries/PHEV Cars

3. Solar and Nuclear Energy to generate electricity

(including research funds for fusion)

4. Reduce Agriculture’s dependence on Fossil Fuels

Despite the agendas pushing for them, drilling, prime-crop ethanol, hydrogen fuel cells, and “clean” coal are unsupported ideas

Solar Energy and Demand

Solar Energy provides most of the demand, can be supplemented in evening hours


Recommended