Transcript Slide 1

Natural
Gas &
Climate Change
Forum
Octo
October 4, 2007
Ronald Reagan Building
Washington, D.C.
American Gas Foundation
Natural Gas and Climate Change Forum
October 4, 2007
May XX, 2006
Many Different Bills to Reduce GHG Emissions
One Source, Innovative Solutions
3
Economy-Wide Proposals in 110th Congress
Bill
Scope
Emissions Cap
2010-2012
Emissions Cap
2020
Emissions Cap 2050
4
Allocation v. Auction
Offsets
Bingaman-Specter
(S. 1766) Com. on
EPW, 7/11/07.
Economy-wide,
upstream
2012 level in 2012.
2006 levels by 2020.
1990 levels by 2030.
President may set longterm target >60% below
2006 levels by 2050.
Increasing auction.
Some sector
allocations.
5% set-aside for ag.
Sequestration
$12/ton safety valve
starting 2012;
increasing 5%/year.
Lieberman-Warner
(Not introduced)
Discussion principles,
8/2/07
Economy-wide
“hybrid”
Up: oil refineries
Down: electric
utilities, large
sources
2005 by 2011
10% < 2005 in 2020
30% <2005 in 2030
50% <2005 in 2040
70% <2005 in 2050
Increasing auction.
Some sector
allocations.
Borrowing up to
15%/company (on
domestic and
international credits
and offsets)
Kerry-Snowe
(S. 485)
Finance Com., 2/1/07.
Economy-wide,
downstream
1.5% <2009 in 2010
1.5%/yr reduction
2010-2019
2.5%/yr reduction 20202029
3.5%/yr reduction 20302050
Determined by the
President
Potential for borrowing
and/or increased int’l
offsets.
McCain-Lieberman
(S. 280)
Hearings 7/24/07.
Economy-wide,
“hybrid”
Up: transport
Down: electric
utilities, large
sources
2004 by 2012
1990 level in 2020
20% <1990 in 2030
60% <1990 in 2050
Administrator
determines
30% limit on use of int’l
credits and domestic
reduction or CCS
Sanders-Boxer (S.
309)
Intro Remarks, EPW,
6/13/06.
Economy-wide,
downstream
N/A
1990 level in 2020
27% <1990 in 2030
53% <1990 in 2040
80% <1990 in 2050
Cap and trade not
required
N/A
One Source, Innovative Solutions
One Source, Innovative Solutions
Please contact us to discuss how
SAIC’s energy and climate change
teams can help you:
Steve Messner
Contact Us
Ph: 858 220-6079
Email: [email protected]
Michael Mondshine
Ph: 703 676-4835
Email: [email protected]
Jette Findsen
Ph: 202 488-6624
Email: [email protected]
One Source, Innovative Solutions
5
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Atmospheric Programs
EPA Analysis of
The Climate Stewardship and
Innovation Act of 2007
S. 280 in 110th Congress
Presentation for the Natural Gas & Climate Change Forum
October 4, 2007
Allen A. Fawcett
The full analysis is available at:
www.epa.gov/climatechange/economicanalyses.html
6
Results: S. 280 Senate Scenario
Sources of GHG Abatement (ADAGE)
6,000
% of Abatement from Offsets & International Credits
2015
2030
2050
International Credits
45%
18%
3%
Domestic Offsets
12%
21%
15%
5,000
Total
56%
39%
19%
•
S. 280 allows offsets
and international
credits to make up
30% of the total
allowance
submissions
requirement.
•
The quantity of
offsets allowed
decreases as
allowance
submissions
decrease.
•
Since the quantity of
offsets allowed is
decreasing over time
and the quantity of
abatement is
increasing over time,
offsets make up a
large fraction of
abatement in the
early years of the
policy, and there
contribution to total
abatement decreases
over time.
Credits - International
Offsets - CH4 - Oil Sector
Offsets - CH4 - Natural Gas Sector
Offsets - CH4 - Landfills
Offsets - Agriculture and Forestry
SF6 - Energy-Int Man
SF6 - Electricity
PFC - Energy-Int Man
4,000
PFC - Other Manuf
MMtCO2e
HFC - Other Manuf
N2O - Petroleum
3,000
CH4 - Coal
CO2 - Agriculture
CO2 - Coal
CO2 - Natural Gas
2,000
CO2 - Services
CO2 - Crude Oil
CO2 - Petroleum
CO2 - Other Manuf
1,000
CO2 - Energy-Int Man
CO2 - Transport
CO2 - Residential - Autos
CO2 - Electricity
0
2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
2040
2045
2050
7
Results: S. 280 Senate Scenario
U.S. Electricity Generation, mid-term results (ADAGE)
S. 280
6,000
6,000
5,000
S.280 Case
4,000
7,000
6,000
3,000
5,000
4,000
2,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
1,000
0
02010
2010
Electricity Generation (billion kWh)
7,000
Electricity Generation (billion kWh)
Electricity Generation (billion kWh)
Reference
7,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
2015
2015
2020
2020
2025
Traditional Fossil
2025
2030
2030
2035
2040
2035
2040
2045
2050
Advanced Fossil with CCS
0 2045
2050
2010 2015 2020
Nuclear
2025
2030
Other Non-Fossil
2035
2040
2045
2050
Reference
Note: Other non-fossil includes hydro, geothermal, wind, solar, biomass and municipal solid waste.
8
Results: S. 280 Senate Scenario
Global CO2 Concentration (MiniCAM)
S. 280 Senate Scenario
• USA adopts S. 280.
• Group 1 countries (Kyoto group less Russia) follow an allowance path that is
falling gradually from the simulated Kyoto emissions levels in 2012 to 50%
below 1990 in 2050.
• Group 2 countries (rest of world) adopt a policy beginning in 2025 that returns
and holds them at year 2015 emissions levels through 2034, and then returns
and maintains them at 2000 emissions levels from 2035 to 2050.
• After 2050, all countries hold emissions caps constant at 2050 levels.
750
700
650
ppm
600
550
CO2 Concentration Results
• In the reference scenario, Global CO2 concentrations rise from historical levels
of 354 parts per million (ppm) in 1990 to 718 ppm in 2095
• In the Senate scenario, CO2 concentrations are 481 ppm in 2095. While CO2
concentrations are significantly reduced in the Senate scenario, they are not on
a stabilization trajectory.
500
450
400
350
300
1990
2010
2030
2050
2070
Reference
S.280 w/o International Action
International Action w/o S.280
S. 280 Senate Scenario
2090
Incremental Effect of S. 280
• If the U.S. adopts S. 280 and no other countries adopt emissions caps, then
CO2 concentrations in 2095 are 23 ppm lower than the reference scenario.
• If the U.S. does not cap emissions, and all other countries take on the targets
from the Senate scenario, then CO2 concentrations in 2095 are 25 ppm higher
than the Senate scenario.
• The larger incremental effect when the U.S. acts alone is, in part, due to the fact
that the U.S. is able to achieve more of its carbon-equivalent emissions
reductions through non-CO2 greenhouse gas abatement.
• This is counterbalanced by a smaller marginal effect on ocean uptake from the
U.S. emissions reductions when the U.S. acts alone.
9
Climate Change and Natural Gas:
A View From EIA
for
Natural Gas and Climate Change Forum
American Gas Foundation
October 4, 2007
Impact of a CO2 Value on Energy Prices
Impact of $10 per ton
CO2 value
Impact of $50 per ton
CO2 value
CO2 content
per million
Btu
Delivered Price
(2005, all sectors,
per million Btu)
Coal
0.094
1.57
0.94
59.9
4.70
299
Oil
0.074
18.6
0.74
4
3.70
19.9
Nat. Gas
0.053
9.65
0.53
5.5
2.65
27.5
Fuel
$
percent
$
percent
11
Energy-Related CO2 Emissions
(million metric tons)
Electric Power
Residential
10,000
Transportation
Commercial
Industrial
9,000
8,000
2005
2030
298
393
7,000
270
395
6,000
230
368
5,000
1,020
4,000
3,000
2020
1,114
1,250
271
389
1,078
303
383
2,612
1,122
2,288
1,953
2,246
2,495
2,000
1,000
2,375
2,811
3,334
2,133
1,217
0
2005 Actual
Reference
S.280
• The electric power sector dominates energy-related CO2 emission reductions.
Reference
S.280
• Although the S.280 GHG target for covered entity emissions in 2030 is 18 percent below the 1990 level (equivalent to 34 percent
below the 2005 level), total energy-related CO2 emissions in the S.280 Core Case are only about 7% below the 2005 level in 2030
due to the use of offsets and banked allowances, partial coverage and greater reduction of other GHGs. If more (less)
international offsets were available, projected 2030 energy-related emissions under S.280 would be higher (lower).
12
100
$ per megawatt-hour
Fuel Cost For Current Coal and CC Gas w/ Carbon Value
80
Existing CC w/ $ 8 gas
60
Existing CC w/ $ 6 gas
40
Existing P ulverized Coal
20
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Carbon Value ($ / ton CO2)
160
Total Le v e lize d Costs -- Ne w Plants in 2025 w/Carbon Value
$ per megawatt-hour
140
120
P ul Co al
IGCC
100
CC - $ 8 gas
CC - $ 6 gas
80
Wind
60
Nuclear , Bio mass
40
20
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Carbon Value ($/ton CO2) in 2025; 5% annual growth after 2025
70
www.eia.doe.gov
GHG Legislation and Implications
for the Natural Gas Industry
Natural Gas & Climate Change Forum
Joel Bluestein
October 4, 2007
U.S. GHG Emissions – 2004
Total = 7,074 MMTonnes
Total 2004 GHG Emissions=7,075 MMTonnes
CO2 from Electricity
Generation
34%
Oil
1%
Gas
4%
Coal
29%
HFC, PFC, SF6
2%
N2O (Soil Mgmt,
Combustion)
5%
CO2 from
Transportation
26%
Methane (Landfill, Ag,
Mining, Gas)
8%
CO2 from Process and
Non Energy Use
4%
CO2 from Industrial
Combustion
13%
16
CO2 from Residential
Combustion
5%
CO2 from Commercial
Combustion
3%
U.S. GHG Emissions by Fuel and Sector 2004
U.S. GHG Emissions by Fuel and Sector - 2004
2,500
2,000
Emissions related to electricity generation are shown
twice in this chart: once in the "Power" sector and once as
reallocated to the sector in which the electricity is used.
MMT CO2eq
1,500
Reallocated Electricity
HFC, PFC, SF6
Methane
N2O
Non-Energy CO2
CO2 from Coal
CO2 from Oil
CO2 From Gas
1,000
500
0
Residential
Commercial
Agriculture
Industrial
Sector
17
Transportation
Power
S. 280 Cap Compared to BAU
10,000
9,000
8,000
Non-Covered Other
GHG
Commercial
Residential
MMTonnes CO2
7,000
6,000
5,000
S. 280 Cap
Capped
Sectors
4,000
Electric Power
3,000
Transportation
2,000
Industrial
1,000
0
2004
Covered Other GHGs
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
18 Data source: EIA analysis of S. 280
– McCain/Lieberman Bill
2030
EIA Projection of S. 280 Response
19
EIA Projection of Offset Usage
1,200
International Offsets
1,000
MMTonnes CO2
800
600
400
Domestic Ag/Forestry Sequestration
200
Non-Covered Gases
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
20
2024
2026
2028
2030
CO2 Prices Shift New Technology Choices
EIA Case
21
Capital Costs Also Shift Technology
Choices
Capital Cost - $/kW
$110
PC
Gas CC
Nuclear
IGCC/CS
Wind
$2,400
$835
$4,000
$3,675
$1,900
$100
$/MWh
$90
$80
$70
PC
IGCC
IGCC/CS
Gas CC
Nuclear
Wind
$60
Current “High Cost” Case
$50
$40
$0
$20
$40
$60
$/metric ton CO2
22
$80
$100
$120
NGC Modeling of Gas Consumption
34
32
30
Quads
28
26
EIA Ref 280
EIA S 280
EIA No New Nuke
NGC 30% Offsets
NGC 15% Offsets
24
22
20
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
23
2020
2022
2024
2026
2028
2030
Contact Information
Joel Bluestein
ICF International
[email protected]
703-528-1900
24
U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions:
The Importance of Methane
Methane is potent greenhouse gas (GHG) with 100-year global warming
potential of 23; atmospheric lifetime of ~12 years
The 2nd most important GHG accounting for ~18% of total climate forcing
A primary constituent of natural gas and a valuable, clean-burning energy
source
Landfills
24%
CO2
84%
CH4
8%
N2O
6%
HFCs, PCs, & SF6
2%
Oil & Natural
Gas Systems
26%
Other
19%
Coal
Mining
10%
Enteric Fermentation
21%
Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990 – 2005, USEPA, April, 2007
25
Methane Emission Reduction
Technologies & Practices
Gas Production &
Processing
Reduced Emission Well
Completions
Install Plunger Lifts on
Gas Wells
Identify, Measure &
Fix Leaks in Processing
Plants
Install Flash Tank
Separators on
Dehydrators
Producing Wells
Gas Transmission
Transmission Lines
Gathering Lines
Processing Plant
Compressor
Stations
LNG or Propane/Air Plant
Identify, Measure &
Fix Leaks in
Compressor
Stations, Pipelines
Use Pipeline
Pumpdown
Replace High-Bleed
Pneumatics
Underground
Storage
City Gate
(Regulators/Meters)
Oil Production
Install VRUs on Crude Oil
Distribution Mains (Lines)
Storage Tanks
Route Casinghead Gas to Gas Distribution
VRU or Compressor for
Identify, Measure & Fix Leaks in
Recovery & Use or Sale
Pipelines & Surface Facilities
Use Pipeline Pumpdown
Techniques to Minimize Venting
Large Volume
Customer
Regulator/Meter
Residential
Customers
Commercial
Customer
Picture courtesy of American
Gas Association
26
Natural Gas STAR Partner
Accomplishments (1990 – 2005)
200
8,000
7,000
150
Total U.S.
greenhouse
gas emissions
(left axis)
6,000
100
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
5,000
1990
U.S. Oil & Natural Gas sector methane emissions
are 10% under the 1990 level emissions
Units in teragrams of CO2 equivalent (TgCO2E)
U.S. oil &
natural gas
sector
methane
Emissions
(right axis)
Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990 – 2005, USEPA, April, 2007
27
Natural Gas – a Premium Fuel
Goal is to meet our expanding energy needs while
preserving the environment
Natural gas is part of the solution
– Use it wisely
– Ensure adequate supplies
Over the long term, a bridge to a low carbon future….28
Super Boiler –
Breakthrough Technology
29
Revolutionary Melter
Helps Glass Industry Compete
> 40 bcf/yr of natural gas demand
> Improved capital cost, efficiency,
and productivity
> Supported by consortium of
glass manufacturers: Corning,
Johns Manville, Owens Corning,
PPG, Schott
30
Gasification – Pathway to
Secure, Clean Energy Supply
Liquefaction
Carbon Management
Opportunity
Transportation
Fuels
Gasification
Syngas
Pipeline Quality Gas
/ Chemical Feedstock
Pipeline / Chemical Plant
Excellent Environmental
Performance
Power Plant Fuel
Power Plant
31
Flex-Fuel Test Facility at GTI
for Next Generation Fuels
32
Bio-Methane (Bio-gas)
Renewable methane from biomass,
landfills, wastewater treatment
33
Congressman Peter Roskam
Fuels a Hydrogen Vehicle
34
Engineering Responses to Climate Change
- Carbon Management Natural Gas & Climate Change Forum
Ah-Hyung Alissa Park
Earth and Environmental Engineering
Columbia University
October 4, 2007
Research Clusters in Academia


Columbia University

Earth Institute

Lenfest Center for Sustainable Energy
MIT


Stanford


MIT Energy Initiative
The Global Climate and Energy Project
Berkeley

Berkeley Institute of the Environment
Carbon Management
CO2 Removal
Separation
Transportation
Sequestration
US DOE target: $10 per ton of carbon avoided

Necessary Characteristics

Capacity and price

Environmentally benign fate

Stability
Carbon Sequestration Technologies
Different Geological
Sequestration Options
[Source:
http://esd.lbl.gov/GEOSEQ]
Example: Statoil's Sleipner West gas
reservoir in the North Sea: 106 ton/year
CO2 are injected into a brine formation
[Source: “Demonstrating Carbon Sequestration” Geotimes,
March 2003]
Sources: DOE
Carbon Sequestration Technologies
Mineral sequestration
http://www.princeton.edu/~chm333/co_two/minerals/
Ocean sequestration
Air capture
Sources: DOE
Sources: DOE