Transcript Slide 1

Technological Options for Reducing NonCO2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Jeff Kuo, Ph.D., P.E.
Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering
College of Engineering and Computer Science, CSUF
What are the Greenhouse Gases?
What are the Greenhouse Gases?
Properties of Greenhouse Gases
Gas
Conc. 1998
Lifetime
(yrs)
GWP
CO2
Conc.
1750
278 ppmv
365 ppmv
50-200
1
CH4
700 ppbv
1745 ppbv
10
23
N2 O
270 ppbv
314 ppbv
120
296
CFC-11 0
268 pptv
50
4600
CFC-12 0
533 pptv
102
5200
CFC-13 0
4 pptv
400
14,000
What Have We Done?
Kyoto Agreement – A legally binding Protocol:
industrialized countries to reduce their collective
GHG emissions by 5.2% by 2012.
Cuts to most important gases: CO2, methane (CH4),
and nitrous oxide (N2O) - measured against 1990
baseline.
Cuts in high global warming potential (GWP) gases
- hydrofluoro-carbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons
(PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) - measured
against 1990 or 1995 baseline.
What Have We Done?
USA ???
CA - On June 1, 2005 the California
Governor signed Executive Order S-3-05 that
established the GHG targets. The targets
call for a reduction of GHG emissions to
2000 levels by 2010; a reduction to 1990
levels by 2020; and a reduction to 80%
below 1990 levels by 2050.
The Project
Clearinghouse of Technological Options for
Reducing Anthropogenic Non-CO2 GHG
Emissions from All Sectors.
Funded by California Air Resources Board.
A one-year project by CSUF.
Background
Climate mitigation studies have been focused
on CO2, especially energy-related sources.
NCGGs have gained attention recently
– Higher global warming potentials (GWPs)
– Abundance of cost-effective and readilyimplementable technological options
– A more rapid response in avoiding climate
impacts by focusing on short-lived gases
Project Objectives
To develop a clearinghouse of technological
options for reducing anthropogenic, NCGG
emissions from sectors that are relevant to
CA.
To provide better characterization of costeffective opportunities for emission reductions
of NCGGs from all sectors.
The findings can serve as a basis for a
website to disseminate information on NCGG
emission control technologies.
Project Tasks
Identification of sources of NCGG emissions
from various sectors in California
Identification of available technological options
for NCGG emission reductions through a
comprehensive literature search
Evaluation of the identified technological
options for their applicability in CA
Report preparation
Methods and Approaches –
Comparison of GHG Emissions
USA (2004)
CA (2004)
Gas
MMTCO2-Eq.
(%)
MMTCO2-Eq.
(%)
CA/USA
Carbon Dioxide
5,988
84.6%
364
82.8%
6.1%
Methane
557
7.9%
28
6.4%
5.0%
Nitrous Oxide
387
5.5%
33
7.6%
8.6%
HFCs, PFCs, SF6
143
2.0%
14
3.2%
9.9%
Total
7,074
100%
439
100%
6.2%
Methods and Approaches –
Evaluation of Technological Options
Status of technological options are quite
different.
Data on reduction efficiency (RE), market
penetration (MP), technical applicability (TA),
service lifetime, and costs were collected, if
available, and presented.
Data specific to CA were used first, followed
by those specific to the USA, and then those
developed for global perspectives or for
other countries.
Methods and Approaches –
Evaluation of Technological Options
Lifetime
(yrs)
MP
(%)
RE
(%)
TA
(%)
Capital
cost
Installation of plunger lift
systems in gas wells1
10
100
4
1
$3,986
$159
$8.21
Surge vessels for
station/well venting1
10
100
50
<1
$11,216
$224
$8.53
Replace high-bleed with
low-bleed pneumatic
devices1
5
50
86
8
$14
$0
$8.21
Technology
Annual
Benefits
cost
MP: market penetration; RE: reduction efficiency; TA: technical applicability;
costs are in year 2000 US$/MTCO2-Eq.
1: USEPA (2004) & CEC (2005); 2: IEA (2003) & USEPA (2004)
Sources of Methane Emissions in CA
Methane Emission Reduction –
Gas and Petroleum Systems
Prevention – improved process efficiencies
and leakage reduction
Recovery and re-injection – recovery of offgases and re-injection into the subsystems
Recovery and utilization – recovery and
utilization for energy production
Recovery and incineration – recovery,
followed by incineration (flaring)
(Many in EPA Natural Gas STAR program)
Sources of Methane Emissions from
Agriculture Sector in CA
Methane Emission Reduction –
Enteric Fermentation
Increase of feed conversion efficiency by
adjusting animal diets
Increase of animal production through the
use of growth hormones
Increase of animal production by improved
genetic characteristics
Improve nutrition through strategic
supplementation
Improved reproduction
Methane Emission Reduction –
Manure Management
Livestock reduction
Prevention of anaerobic decomposition of
manure during stabling of livestock
Anaerobic digestion (covered lagoons; onfarm mesophilic digestion; on-farm
thermophilic; centralized, off-farm mesophilic
or thermophilic)
Composting of animal manure
Aerobic digestion
Sources of N2O Emissions in CA
N2O Emission Reduction –
Agricultural Soil Management
Most of the N2O emissions from
agricultural activities are from soils, but
the emission flux of N2O per unit surface
area of soil is small.
Two types of technological options:
– Improve efficiencies in nitrogen
utilization
– Inhibit the formation of nitrous oxide
N2O Emission Reduction –
Manure Management
Reducing the number of animals by
increasing their productivity
Optimizing the crude protein/energy ratio in
animal diets
Nitrification and urease inhibitors
Waste storage
Use of cattle feed-pads during winter months
Optimizing manure management
N2O Emission Reduction –
Mobile Combustion
Improve catalyst performance
Use of N2O-decomposition catalyst
Use of alternative technologies for NOxemission reduction
Alternative fuel
Sources of High-GWP Gases Emissions in CA
High-GWP Gases Emission Reduction –
Substitution of Ozone-depleting Substances
Refrigeration and air conditioning
equipment
Solvents
Foam production
Sterilization
Fire extinguishing
Technical aerosols
High-GWP Gases Emission Reduction –
Foam Production
HFC-134a is commonly used
Alternative blowing agents
Lower-GWP HFC substitution
Alternative insulation materials and
technologies
Direct emission reduction
High-GWP Gases Emission Reduction –
Electrical Transmission and Distribution
SF6 is commonly used as the insulator
Use of recycling equipment
Leak detection and repair (LDAR)
Equipment replacement/refurbishment
Others
– gas mixtures, such as SF6/N2 or SF6/CF4
– 145kV interrupters
– solid-state current limiter
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/non-co2clearinghouse/non-co2-clearinghouse.htm
Acknowledgement
Funded by California Air Resources Board
(CARB 05-328).
Supports from college, department, and
school.
Special thanks to professionals all over the
world who have spent efforts in developing
technologies and measures toward emission
reductions of NCGGs.