The only way for the carbon intensity of energy generation to decline in the long-term will be for carbon-intensive fossil fuels to be replaced by very low carbon alternatives. Switching from coal to natural gas can accelerate decarbonization a bit, but not nearly enough.
It would thus seem pretty important to track the proportion of global energy consumption that comes from low carbon sources. Remarkably (at least to me), this is not done by any leading organization in the US or internationally in a manner that is readily accessible (but perhaps someone will correct my impression).
I have found data from the Renewable Energy 21st Century Policy Network that indicates that in 2008 the world had a primary energy consumption from non-hydro renewables of 219 million tonnes of oil equivalent (Mtoe) (from footnote 1 in this report in PDF). According to BP's historical data on primary energy consumption (here in XLS, which does not track renewables) the world in 2008 consumed a total of 11,315.2 Mtoe -- from fossil fuels (9,963.6 Mtoe), hydro (731.4 (Mtoe) and nuclear (620.2 Mtoe). Thus, carbon neutral sources of energy consumption represented 13.9% of the 2008 total. Non-hydro and non-nuclear sources represented 1.9% of the total. (Biomass is neglected in these numbers.)
To achieve stabilization of carbon dioxide concentrations at a low level the proportion of primary energy consumption from conventional fossil alternatives will have to increase from 13.9% to above 90% (which in round numbers means the equivalent deployment of a nuclear plant per day of carbon-free energy). I suspect, but do not know, that 2010 will see this ratio decrease (i.e., go the wrong way) from 2008. Who is tracking this data?
3 comments:
The EIA has international energy statistics for electricity generation and consumption for Nuclear and Renewables along with the Total. Renewables is further broken down into hydro and non-hydro, including wind, solar, biomass, and geothermal.
Here is the link:
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/iedindex3.cfm?tid=2&pid=29&aid=2&cid=regions&syid=2005&eyid=2009&unit=BKWH
Hope this helps.
"I suspect, but do not know, that 2010 will see this ratio decrease (i.e., go the wrong way) from 2008."
From my anecdotal evidence view I think you are correct for at least 5, possibly 10 more years.
Energy is a bit lot population numbers. Even if we get the fertility rate under control population still climbs for another 40 years then someone tosses in some longevity increases to make the equations worse.
If we just take the case of the US as 'worst offender' in the industrialized world.
A link to some figures 'sourcewatch' put together which appear to be fairly accurate.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Existing_U.S._Coal_Plants
US Coal fired construction peaked between 1970 and 1974. So we've had the fertility rate under control since 1975.
Total operating US Coal Fired Capacity has been pretty close to stagnant since 1990. New builds has roughly equaled retirements.
So the birth-death ratio has been pretty close to 1-1 since 1990.
So far so good.
Then between 1990 and 2007, even thought the birth-death ratio for coal fired plants was flat they all decided to get fat. Capacity Factors rose from 60%-75%. So they ate more coal.
To add to the complication is that the younger plants are more efficient then the older plants,
so coal consumption in terms of BTU content has actually been dropping. So trying to figure out CO2 emissions by coal fired plants using a MW produced number is complicated.
Then to add insult to injury, the BTU content of coal is dropping as well. So trying to figure out CO2 emissions based on a simple tonnage calculation is also more complicated.
According to this EIA report
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/quarterly/co2_article/co2.html
I.E. Central Appalachian coal has a BTU content 25 MMBTU/ton. The emissions factor is 207 lbs of CO2/MMBtu. So western Appalachian coal emits 5,175 lbs per ton.
Podwer river basin coals has a heat content of 17,600 MMBTU/ton. The CO2 emissions per ton are 212 lbs of CO2/MMBTU, which yields an emission per ton of 3,715 lbs/ton of coal.
While US Coal production/consumption in terms of tons has been relatively flat for the last 10 years there has been a significant shift to Powder River Basin coal.
So to make a long convoluted story short.
In the US.
The birthrate of coal fired plants in the US peaked 40 years ago.
Birthrate and death-rate of coal fired plants roughly reached equilibrium 20 years ago.
The amount of coal being burned in coal fired plants has been roughly flat for 10 years.
The amount of electricity being produced by coal fired plants has roughly been flat for 5 years.
The amount of CO2 being emitted/ton of coal or MW produced by coal has been dropping for at least 5 years.
The median age of coal fired plants is rising with the leading edge of the 'baby boom' now 40 years old.
What we don't know is how long the 'baby boom' will live.
In the US, further substantial improvements in 'Carbon intensity' are really dependent on how long the 'baby boom' of coal fired generation lives.
Capacity factors however grew between 1990 and 2007 from 60-75%. So although we didn't have lots of new generating capacity, the plants we have are eating more coal.
In other news -
China is accelerating it's nuclear and hydro programs.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSBJI00251820110106
"China to add 38 GW nuclear, 140 GW hydro by 2015"
Post a Comment