the energy problem and what we can do about...
TRANSCRIPT
1
The energy problem and what we can do about it.
Global Climate and Energy ProjectStanford University
18 September, 2006
2Chair: Norm Augustine, former Chairman and CEO of
Lockheed-Martin
3
“Transitions to Sustainable Energy”The world has a clear and major
problem, with no global consensus on the way to proceed: how to achieve
transitions to an adequately affordable, sustainable clean energy supply”
Co-chairs: Jose Goldemberg, BrazilSteven Chu, USA
4
•19 of the 20 warmest years since 1860 have all occurred since 1980.
•2005 was the warmest year in the instrumental record and probably the warmest in 1,000 years (tree rings, ice cores).
5
Temperature over the last 420,000 yearsIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
We are here
CO2
6
Concentration of Greenhouse gases
1750,the
beginning of the industrial
revolution
7
Climate change due to natural causes (solar variations, volcanoes, etc.)
Climate change due to natural causes
and human generated
greenhouse gases
Temperature rise due to human emission of greenhouse gases
8
T changes for 2x CO2
Computer simulations by the Princeton Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Lab:
2x increase in CO2 from the pre-industrial level⇒ 5 -12 °F increase
4x increase in CO2
⇒ 15-23°F!
9
Summer soil moisture in N America under doubled & quadrupled CO2(from the Princeton GFDL model)
Mid-continent soil-moisture reductions reach 50-60% in the 4xCO2 world.
10
Significant climate change:
• Damage from storms, floods, wildfires
• Property losses and population displacement from sea-level rise + hurricanes or typhoons
• Productivity of farms, forests, & fisheries
• Heat-induced deaths
• Distribution & abundance of species
• Geography of disease
11
Nature, 2005
Hurricane power in the North Atlantic and Pacific have doubled in the last 30 years
(Smoothed Data)
12
1 σ = 68 % confidence level
2 σ = 95.4% confidence level
3 σ = 99.7% confidence level
For a Gaussian distribution:
13
14
Unstable Glaciers
Surface melt on Greenland ice sheet
descending into moulin, a vertical shaft carrying the water to
base of ice sheet.
Source: Roger Braithwaite
15
16
Bleached coral head: Bleaching occurs when high water temperature kills the living organisms in the coral,
leaving behind only the calcium carbonate skeleton.
17
Ocean chemistry• Average pH ~ 8.2 ±0.3 • CO2 dissolved in seawater has lowered the
average pH of the oceans by about 0.1 (30% increase in hydrogen ions) from pre-industrial levels (Caldeira & Wickett Nature (2003).
• Changes in pH up to 0.5 are possible.
In laboratory experiments on the symbiont-bearing foraminiferans … a strong reduction in the calcification rate occurred as pH decreased from 9 to 7.”(Bijma et al 1999, 2002; Erez 2003).
18
Emissions pathways, climate change, and impacts on California,K. Hayhoea, et al., PNAS 101, 12422 (2004)
Using two state-of-the-art climate models that bracket most of the IPCC emissions scenarios:
B1 A1 fi
Heat wave mortality: 2-3x 5-7xAlpine/subalpine forests 50–75% 75–90% Sierra snowpack 30–70% 73–90%
“…with cascading impacts on runoff and streamflow that, combinedwith projected modest declines in winter precipitation, couldfundamentally disrupt California’s water rights system. AlthoughInter-scenario differences in climate impacts and costs of adaptationemerge mainly in the second half of the century, they are stronglydependent on emissions from preceding decades.”
19
1) Conservation: maximize energy efficiency and minimize energy use, while insuring economic prosperity
2) Develop new sources of clean energy
A dual strategy is needed to solve the energy problem:
The Demand side of theEnergy Solution
21
Total Electricity Use, per capita, 1960 - 2001
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,00019
60
1962
1964
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
KW
h
12,000
8,0007,000
California
U.S.
kWh
The Rosenfeld Effect ?
Art Rosenfeld turns his attention to the energy problem
Regulation stimulates technology: Refrigerator efficiency standards and performance. The expectation of
efficiency standards also stimulated industry innovation
US Electricity Use of Refrigerators and Freezers compared to sources of electricity
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Bill
ion
kWh
per y
ear
150 M Refrig/Freezers
at 1974 eff at 2001 eff
Nuclear
Conventional Hydro
3 GorgesDam
ExistingRenewables
50 Million 2 kW PV Systems
Save
d
Use
d Use
d
The Value of Energy Saved and Produced. (assuming cost of generation = $.03/kWh
and cost of use = $.085/kWh)
0
5
10
15
20
25
Bill
ion
$ pe
r yea
r
Dollars Saved from150 M Refrig/Freezersat 2001 efficiency
Nuclear
Conventional
Hydro
Existing Renewables
50 Million 2 kWPV Systems
3 GorgesDam
ANWR
United States Refrigerator Use (Actual) and Estimated Household Standby Use v. Time
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
1947
1949
1951
1953
1955
1957
1959
1961
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
Ave
rage
Ene
rgy
Use
per
Uni
t Sol
d (k
Wh
per
year
)
Refrigerator Use per Unit
1978 Cal Standard
1990 Federal Standard
1987 Cal Standard
1980 Cal Standard
1993 Federal Standard 2001 Federal
Standard
Estimated Standby Power (per house)
The attack of the “vampire” drains on energy
26
US energy consumption by end-use sector1949 – 2004
Potential supply-side solutions to the Energy Problem
• Coal, tar sands, shale oil, …
• Fusion
• Fission
• Wind
• Solar photocells
• Bio-mass
28
US Energy consumption by fuel
29
New electricity generation by fuel type including combined heat and power
(DOE/EIA 2006 report)
Carbon capture and storage costs
“To achieve such an economic potential, several hundreds to thousands of CO2 capture systems would need to be installed over the coming century ... The actual use of CCS … is likely to be lower due to factors such as environmental impacts, risks of leakage, and the lack of a clear legal framework or public acceptance”.IPCC Special Report on Carbon dioxide Capture and Storage
Potential supply-side solutions to the Energy Problem
• Coal, tar sands, shale oil, …
• Fusion
• Fission
• Wind
• Solar photocells
• Bio-mass
Nuclear Fission
• Nuclear waste• Nuclear proliferation • Economic and regulatory constraints
• 3 TW x 40% of US power = 1.2 TW
• By 2020, projected electricity increase = 0.4 TW.
• If all new electricity is nuclear power, we will need to build a 1 GW reactor every 10 days.
Can nuclear fission satisfy future electrical power needs?
• 0.24 TW (existing nuclear power plants) will have to be replaced in ~ 15 - 30 years.• To maintain 20% generation of electricity by nuclear power ⇒ five 1 GW reactors every year.
Research must be done to see if fuel re-cycling can be made proliferation resistant and economically feasible.
Potential supply-side solutions to the Energy Problem
• Coal, tar sands, shale oil, …
• Fusion
• Fission
• Wind
• Solar photocells
• Bio-mass
Cost of AC and DC high voltage transmission lines
~ 100,000 TW of energy is received from the sun
Amount of land needed to capture 13 TW:20% efficiency (photovoltaic) = 0.23% 1% efficiency (bio-mass) = 4.6%
100,000 TW (1012 watts) of solar energy absorbed by the Earth
World population will peak at < 1010 peopleUS consumes ~10 kW / person, EU ~ 4 kW
Future energy needs:
4 x 103 W/person x 1010 people= 40 x 1012 watts= 0.14 % of incident solar poweron land
Long-term incentives were essential to stimulate long term development of wind power
3 MW capacity deployed and 5 MW generators in design(126 m diameter rotors).
The Betts Limit:
Assuming:• Conservation of mass for incompressible flow• Conservation of momentum,
Maximum kinetic energy delivered to a wind turbine = 16/27 (½)mv2
~ 0.59 of kinetic energy
va vb vb vc
Aa, Pa
Ab, PbD
Ac, Pc
Ab, PbU
41
Potential supply-side solutions to the Energy Problem
• Coal, tar sands, shale oil, …
• Fusion
• Fission
• Wind
• Solar photocells
• Bio-mass
42
Sunlight
CO2, H20,
NutrientsBiomass Chemical
energy
Self-fertilizing,drought and pest
resistant
Improved conversion of cellulose into chemical fuel
Cellulose 40-60% Percent Dry WeightHemicellulose 20-40%
Lignin 10-25%
The majority of a plant is structural material
43
~13 B ha of land in the Earth• 1.5 B ha for crops• 3.5 B ha for pastureland• 0.5 B ha are “built up”• 7.5 B ha are forest land or “other”
44
Land best suited for biomass generation (Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa)
is the least utilized
Potential arable land suitable for rain-fed crops:1.5 Billion ha ⇒ 4 Billion ha
45
~ 2 billion ~ 6 billion
46Source: US Dept of Agriculture
47
> 1% conversion efficiency may be
feasible.
• Miscanthus yields: 30 dry tons/acre
• 100 gallons of ethanol / dry ton possible ⇒ 3,000 gal/acre.
• 100 M out of 450 M acres ⇒ ~300 B gal / year of ethanol
• US consumption (2004) = 141 B gal of gasoline~ 200 B gal of ethanol / year
• US also consumes 63 B gal diesel
48
49
Greenhouse Gases
-
25
50
75
100
125
-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24Net Energy (MJ / L)
Net
GHG
(gC
O2e
/ M
J-et
hano
l)
Pimentel
Patzek
Shapouri
Wang
Graboski
Gasoline
de OlivieraToday
CO 2 Intensive
Cellulosic
Original data Commensurate values Gasoline EBAMM cases
Dan Kammen, et al. (2006)
50
Sunlight
CO2, H20,
NutrientsBiomass Chemical
energy
Self-fertilizing,drought and pest
resistant
Improved conversion of cellulose into chemical fuel
Cellulose 40-60% Percent Dry WeightHemicellulose 20-40%
Lignin 10-25%
The majority of a plant is structural material
51
Cellulose (40 – 60% of dry mass)• Linear polymer of the glucose-glucose dimer• Hydrolysis ⇒ glucose (6C sugar) ⇒ ethanol
Hemicellulose (20 -40%)Highly branched, short chain, 5C and 6C sugars
such as xylose arabinose, galactoseFermentation of hemicellulose in infancy(Ethanol substituted for other hydrocarbon
e.g. butanol, octanes, etc. ?)
Lignin (10 – 25%)• Does not lead to simple sugar molecules
52
53
“The large coal deposits of the Carboniferous primarily owe theirexistence to two factors… the appearance of bark-bearing trees (and in particular the evolution of the bark fiber lignin) [and] the development of extensive lowland swamps and forests in North
America and Europe. It has been hypothesized that large quantities of wood were buried during this period because
animals and decomposing bacteria had not yet evolved that could effectively digest the new lignin.”
54From Christopher Somerville, IAC workshop, 2006
55
Commercial ethanol production from cellulose
The biggest energy gains will come from improved fuel production from cellulose/lignin
A-CoA
AA-CoA
HMG-CoA
Mev
Mev-P
Mev-PP IPP
PMK MPDMK idi ispAHMGSatoB tHMGR
DMAPP
AmorOPP
FPP
ADS
Synthetic Biology:Production of artemisinin in bacteria Jay Keasling
Identify the biosynthesis pathways in
A. annua
Can synthetic organisms be engineered to produce
ethanol, butanol or more suitable hydrocarbon fuel?
57
Matrix Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR)Solving the Macro-Micro Interface Problem
Red: Primer Input (Multiplexed by N)
Blue: Template Input (Multiplexed by N)
Yellow: Taq Input (Multiplexed by N2)
N2 independent PCR reactions performed with 2N+1 inputs!
58
Is it possible to develop a new class of durable solar cells with high efficiency at 1/5 to 1/10th
the cost of existing technology?
59
Gen I: Silicon Gen II: Thin filmGen. III: Advanced future structures
Helios
60
UC BerkeleyCampus
Berkeley Lab 200-acre site
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory3,800 employees, ~$520 M / year budget
10 Nobel Prize winners were/are employees of LBNL, and at least one more “in the pipeline”
Today:
59 employees in the National Academy of Sciences,18 in the National Academy of Engineering,
2 in the Institute of Medicine
61
Helios: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory’s attack on the energy problem
CellulosePlantsCellulose-degrading
microbesEngineered
photosynthetic microbesand plants
ArtificialPhotosynthesis
ElectricityPV Electrochemistry
MethanolEthanolHydrogenHydrocarbons
62
Bell Laboratories (Murray Hill, NJ)
15 scientists who worked at AT&T Bell laboratories
received Nobel Prizes.
63
64
Shockley
Bardeen
BrittainMaterials Science
Theoretical and experimental physics- Electronic structure of
semiconductors- Electronic surface states- p-n junctions
65
I. Sunlight to Fuel via Biomass• Improved conversion of biomass to fuels• Improved biomass production •Novel biofuel synthesis from organisms
II: Microbial synthesis of biofuels using photosynthesis
66
III. Direct Photochemical or Photo-electrochemical Solar to Fuel Conversion
IV: Sunlight to Electricity to Fuel
IIIA. Nanotechnology enabled solar cells
IIIB. Electricity to Fuel. A new generation of electrochemical systems