Transcript Slide 1

"Smart, safe, and just: Goals for
the global energy system"
Robert Socolow
Princeton University
[email protected]
Dennis Anderson Memorial Lecture
November 23, 2010
Imperial College, London South Kensington
Campus, Lecture Theatre 220
Dennis Anderson 1937-2008
Source: Marsaleete Anderson
“A Sheffield lad”
Source: Marsaleete Anderson, photo from 2004. A model of a
butane-powered York-Bolton Mill Engine and Steam Plant
Dennis’ Preferences
•
•
•
•
Efficiency first
Nuclear power, as we know it, is a menace
Renewables are compelling
The poor get priority
I resonate with all four themes. I will be
showing at least a few slides on each.
There is a big new idea here.
I am a science teacher. A teacher’s
job is to prepare students for what
lies ahead of them. We want
especially to make our students
comfortable with ideas that were
not familiar to previous
generations.
There is a big new idea here.
Human beings are able to change
the small planet we live on
For the first time in history, for better or for
worse, human beings are powerful enough to
affect the whole planet. Forests have been
cleared and fisheries have been depleted on
a global scale. Most of the low-cost oil has
been found. The surface oceans are already
more acidic. These are quantitative
observations.
Our new assignment: “Fitting on the planet.”
Our exuberance is the problem
The Earth’s smallness is the result of
the dominance of democratic values,
consumer values, and the values of
self-realization.
The collision with environmental limits
was prominently foretold in the 1970s
(e.g., Limits to Growth), but we chose
to shoot the messenger rather than to
heed her.
Don’t shoot the messenger
Twice before, the messenger was shot.
Galileo argued that the earth wasn’t at the center
of the universe and was excommunicated.
Darwin argued that human beings were part of the
animal kingdom and was cruelly mocked.
This is a similar time. We can change the planet.
The idea that humans can’t change our planet is as
out-of-date and wrong as the earth-centered
universe.
We would much rather live on a
planet that was harder to change.
When the first doctor we consult
brings us a diagnosis we don’t like,
we should seek a second opinion.
But there’s a time to move on.
Grounds for optimism
•The world today has a terribly
inefficient energy system.
•Carbon emissions have just begun
to be priced.
•Most of the 2060 physical plant is
not yet built.
•Very smart scientists and engineers
now find energy problems exciting.
Many new infrastructures
Infrastructures for efficient energy
Carbon dioxide infrastructure
Nuclear fuel cycle infrastructure
Renewables and the electric grid
The past 50 years:
U.S. National Highway System
Efficient use of fuel
U.S. vehicle-miles traveled, two views
Sources: Left: U.S. PIRG Education Fund, 2007. The Carbon Boom: State and National Trends in Carbon Dioxide Emissions
Since 1990, April 2007 (44 pp.), p. 27. Right: American Physical Society, 2008. Energy Future: Think Efficiency.
Efficient Use of Electricity
Measure, learn, iterate. (Trust, but verify.)
U.S. electricity growth rate is falling
(3-year rolling average percent growth)
Projections
14
Period Annual Growth
12
Percent per year
10
8
6
1950s
9.0
1960s
7.3
1970s
4.2
1980s
3.1
1990s
2.4
2000-2006
1.2
2006-2030
1.1
4
2
0
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
Exponential curve (20 years for rate to fall by half): EIA
2030
U.S. electricity growth rate is falling
(3-year rolling average percent growth)
Projections
14
Period Annual Growth
12
Percent per year
10
8
6
1950s
9.0
1960s
7.3
1970s
4.2
1980s
3.1
1990s
2.4
2000-2006
1.2
2006-2030
1.1
4
2
0
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
Nothing in physics or economics forbids
negative values! Blue dashed line: RHS.
2020
2030
Is peak energy demand behind us?
If the OECD takes efficiency
seriously, annual consumption
from now on could be less than
in any past year – for both:
•oil consumption
•electric power consumption
China’s appliance standards
Business as Usual: CO2 emissions from air
conditioners in 2020 are 9x those in 2000.
New Air Conditioner Standard: Down
25% (45 MtCO2/yr) in 2020.
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020
50 million new, efficient air conditioners per year in 2020
Many new infrastructures
Infrastructures for efficient energy
Carbon dioxide infrastructure
Nuclear fuel cycle infrastructure
Renewables and the electric grid
The past 50 years: U.S. power plants
Source: Benchmarking Air Emissions, April 2006. The
report was co-sponsored by CERES, NRDC and PSEG.
U.S. Power Plant Capacity, by Vintage
80000
Capacity, total by source
70000
Other
Renewables
Water
Nuclear
Gas
Oil
Coal
megawatt
60000
50000
40000
Issues: Grandfathering, retirement,
relicensing, retrofit, repowering
30000
20000
10000
0
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
year of initial operation
Source: EIA. [email protected]
Zero minus zero equals zero
If there is no load growth* and there are no
retirements, then nothing new is needed.
*Demand can grow in some regions and fall in others.
The future coal power plant
Shown here: After 10 years
of operation of a 1000 MW
coal plant, 60 Mt (90 Mm3)
of CO2 have been injected,
filling a horizontal area of
40 km2 in each of two
formations.
Assumptions:
•10% porosity
•1/3 of pore space accessed
•60 m total vertical height for
the two formations.
•Note: Plant is still young.
Injection rate is 150,000 bbl(CO2)/day, or 300 million standard cubic feet/day (scfd).
3 billion barrels, or 6 trillion standard cubic feet, over 60 years.
U.S. CO2 pipeline infrastructure
Denbury proposes
to send Indiana CO2
to the Gulf states.
An Ohio Valley CO2 pipeline
network instead? Advantages:
More local jobs
Greater storage volume
Less climate change.
Source: "Reducing CO2 Emissions from Coal-Fired Power Plants," John Wheeldon, EPRI, presented at the CCTR
Advisory Panel Meeting, Vincennes University, Vincennes IN, September 10, 2009. Reproduced in Science Applications
International Corporation, Indiana and Coal: Keeping Indiana Energy Cost Competitive, June 2010, Fig. 2-15, submitted to
Indiana Center for Coal Technology Research
CO2 capture from Algerian gas
In Salah, Algeria,
natural gas purification
amine contactor towers
AEP Mountaineer Plant, 2009, WV
Mountaineer is the first power plant in the
world to capture and store carbon dioxide.
Source: Alstom via Yale 360, February 18, 2010
Many new infrastructures
Infrastructures for efficient energy
Carbon dioxide infrastructure
Nuclear fuel cycle infrastructure
Renewables and the electric grid
Fission power with dry-cask storage
Site: Surry station, James River, VA; 1625 MW since 1972-73,. Credit: Dominion.
Low-cost, concealable enrichment
Global Enrichment Capacity, 2008
1000 GW plant:
100-150 tSWU/yr
Unit: ton-SWU/yr
Source: Alex Glaser, MAE Seminar, 4-15-09
Separated civilian plutonium
World stock of separated
civilian plutonium:
30,000 Nagasakiequivalents and still
growing
(International Panel on Fissile Materials)
≈ 50 tons owned by
Germany & Japan
France’s reprocessing plant, La Hague
(1700 tons/yr)
Military- and Civilian-Separated Plutonium
Source: Robert H. Socolow & Alexander Glaser, “Balancing
risks: nuclear energy & climate change,” Daedalus, 2009.
Proliferation and the futility of a
two-tier, supplier-user world
A Story:
In May 2006, in Delhi, I asked several leaders of the
Indian nuclear enterprise to comment on the merits of a
supplier-user arrangement of the world. They refused to
do so until they knew in which category India would be.
If the U.S. had informed them that they were users,
would they have gone underground?
Wise global nuclear power
• Safety: Create counter-incentives to plant relicensing,
so that aging plants are retired.
• Storage: Revise the contract with society in favor of
retrievable storage. Deploy dry-cask storage.
• Proliferation, plutonium: Indefinitely postpone U.S.
reprocessing and end reprocessing elsewhere.
• Proliferation, uranium: Place all enrichment facilities,
including ours, under international governance.
• Governance: Establish a one-tier world.
Many new infrastructures
Infrastructures for efficient energy
Carbon dioxide infrastructure
Nuclear fuel cycle infrastructure
Renewables and the electric grid
Power Sector CO2 Emissions & Shares
of Nuclear Power & Renewables, 2004
Source: WEO 2006
Wind farms out of sight
Offshore New Jersey: 96 turbines, 346 MW, 16 to 20 miles
from coast. $1 billion project. Power “starting in 2013.”
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/nyregion/04wind.html?ref=nyregion, New York Times,
October 3, 2008.
Offshore “transmission backbone”
Announced, Oct 12, 2010
$5 billion project. $200
million initially from
Google, Good Energy.
350-mile, 6000 MW
transmission line,
federal waters, 15-20 miles
offshore.
Source: October 12, 2010, NYT
Electric transmission
for the low-carbon future
Every “solution” can be implemented
well or poorly
Every “solution” has a dark side.
Conservation
Regimentation
Renewables
Competing uses of land
“Clean coal”
Unsafe mining, land impacts
Nuclear power
Nuclear war
Geoengineering
Technological hegemony
Risk management
We must trade the risks of disruption
from climate change against the risks
of disruption from mitigation…
…and search for an optimum pace.
Hippocratic oath
I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all
measures that are required, avoiding
those twin traps of overtreatment and
therapeutic nihilism.*
* Modern version, Louis Lasagna, 1964,
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/doctors/oath_modern.html
Safe vs. Fair
Safe vs. Fair
If “fair” is a per capita concept and the
unit of attention is the nation:
Safe is not fair.
Fair is not safe.
Including historical emissions, “fair”
is in even sharper conflict with “safe.”
Beyond per capita
We can’t solve the climate problem
without moving beyond “per capita”
– looking inside countries.
Where do the “high-emitters” live?
We project that in 2030, 1.2 billion
“high-emitters” will be responsible
for 60% of the world’s emissions…
… and half of these high-emitters will
live outside the OECD.
Four-way distribution of emitters
USA
other OECD
China
other nonOECD
2003
>10
2030
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
2003
2-10
2030
2003
<2
2030
Individual emissions above a cap
determine national reductions
+
Personal Emissions Cap
+
+
+
+
+
= Required
Reductions
National
= Emissions
Target
Source: Steve Pacala, private communication, 2008
What about the low emitters?
No. 1 health impact of energy
Population distribution across 4 regions
The poor need
not be denied fossil fuels
USA
other OECD
China
other nonOECD
2003
>10
2030
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
2003
2-10
2030
2003
<2
2030
Combine a global-emissions cap and
an individual-emissions floor
Individual cap:
without floor: 10.8 t CO2
with floor:
9.6 t CO2
1
The world’s poor do not need to be denied fossil fuels
What does 1 tCO2/person-yr allow?
Direct Energy Household rate of Individual
Use
use (4.5 people)
emissions
(kgCO2/yr)
Cooking
1 LPG canister
120
per month
Transport
70 km by bus, car, 220
motorbike per day
Electricity
800 kWh per year 160
Total
500
1 tCO2/yr: Double the “direct” emissions to account for “indirect” emissions.
Required: a multiplicity of empathies
Planetary and collective
Local and individual
Abstract
Vivid
Uncertain risks, havoc possible
Bounded outcomes
Entails a half-century of action
Produces benefits in days
The developing world will decide
what kind of planet we live on.
For a while longer, the industrialized
countries will lead.
Post-post-colonialism
The North-South relationship needs
marriage counseling. The two partners
are not listening to each other.
The UNFCCC, a post-colonial
institution, affirms a two-tier world.
Annex I expresses guilt. Non-Annex I
expresses entitlement.
Needed: post-post-colonial institutions.
Planetary identity
In the process of taking climate
change seriously, we develop a
planetary identity.
We augment our previous
loyalties to family, village, tribe,
and nation.
Do you have a planetary identity?
Prospicience
Prospicience: “The art [and science] of looking
ahead.”
In the past 50 years we have become aware of the
history of our Universe, our Earth, and life.
Can we achieve a comparable understanding of
human civilization at various future times: 50 years
ahead – vs. 500 years and vs. 5000 years?
We have scarcely begun to ask: What are we on
Earth to do?
Co-authors, recent papers
Wedges
Steve Pacala
Roberta Hotinski
Jeff Greenblatt (now, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory)
Nuclear power
Alex Glaser
One-billion high emitters
Shoibal Chakravarty
Massimo Tavoni (FEEM, Milan)
Steve Pacala
Ananth Chikkatur (then, Harvard; now ICF in D.C.)
Heleen de Coninck (ECN, Netherlands)