Energy FuturesHard Choices Ahead

Keith Tovey M.A., PhD, CEng, MICEEnergy Science Director: Low Carbon Innovation Centre

School of Environmental Sciences

CRed Seminar

8th March 2006

CRed

Future Global Warming RatesConcentration of C02 in Atmosphere

300

310

320

330

340

350

360

370

380

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

(ppm

)

Total winter precipitation Total summer precipitation

Source: Tim

Osborne, C

RU

Change in precipitation 1961-2001

1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.51860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000T

emp

erat

ure

Ris

e (o C

)

1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.51860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000

Tem

per

atu

re R

ise

(o C)

1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.51860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000

Tem

per

atu

re R

ise

(o C)

Source: Hadley Centre, The Met.Office

actual

actual

actual

predicted

predicted

predictedIs Global Warming man made?

Prediction: Anthropogenic only

Not a good match between 1920 and 1970

Prediction: Natural only

good match until 1960

Prediction: Natural and Anthropogenic

Generally a good match

Predictions include:

• Greenhouse Gas emissions

• Sulphates and ozone

• Solar and volcanic activity

19792003

Climate ChangeArctic meltdown 1979 - 2003

• Summer ice coverage of Arctic Polar Region– Nasa satellite

imagery

Source: Nasa http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2003/1023esuice.html

•20% reduction in 24 years

Options for Electricity Generation in 2020 - Non-Renewable Methods

Gas CCGT0 - 80% (currently 40% and rising)

available now, but UK gas will run out within current decade

~ 2p + but recent trends put figure

much higher

nuclear fission (long term)

0 - 60% (France 80%) - (currently 20 - 25% and falling)

new inherently safe designs - some practical development needed

2.5 - 3.5p

nuclear fusion unavailablenot available until 2040 at earliest

"Clean Coal"

Traditional Coal falling rapidly -

coal could supply 40 - 50% by 2020

Basic components available - not viable without Carbon Sequestration

2.5 - 3.5p - but will EU - ETS affect

this

potential contribution to

Electricity Supply in 2020

costs in 2020

Difficult Choices Ahead

Nuclear Generating Capacity

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005 2015 2025 2035

Ins

talle

d C

ap

ac

ity

(M

W)

Projection

Actual

Wholesale Price of Electricity

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

1 13 25

(p p

er k

Wh)

Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct

On Shore Wind ~25% available now for commercialexploitation

~ 2p

Hydro 5% technically mature, but limitedpotential

2.5 - 3p

Resource Potential contribution to electricity supply in2020 and drivers/barriers

Cost in2020

Options for Electricity Generation in 2020 - Renewable

Photovoltaic 50% available, but much research neededto bring down costs significantly

10+ p

Energy Crops 100% + available, but research needed insome areas

2.5 - 4

On Shore Wind ~25% available now for commercialexploitation

~ 2p

Hydro 5% technically mature, but limitedpotential

2.5 - 3p

Resource Potential contribution to electricity supply in2020 and drivers/barriers

Cost in2020

Options for Electricity Generation in 2020 - Renewable

Transport Fuels:

• Biodiesel?

• Bioethanol?

Photovoltaic 50% available, but much research neededto bring down costs significantly

10+ p

Energy Crops 100% + available, but research needed insome areas

2.5 - 4

Wave/TidalStream

100% + techology limited - extensivedevelopment unlikely before 2020

4 - 8p

Tidal Barrages 10 - 20% technology available but unlikelywithout Government intervention

notcosted

Geothermal unlikely for electricity generationbefore 2050 if then

On Shore Wind ~25% available now for commercialexploitation

~ 2p

Hydro 5% technically mature, but limitedpotential

2.5 - 3p

Resource Potential contribution to electricity supply in2020 and drivers/barriers

Cost in2020

Options for Electricity Generation in 2020 - Renewable

Solar Energy - The BroadSol Project

Annual Solar Gain 910 kWh

Solar Collectors installed 27th January 2004

House in Lerwick, Shetland Isles

- less than 15,000 people live north of this in UK!

It is all very well for South East, but what about the North?

Our Choices: They are difficult

If our answer is NO

Do we want to return to using coal? • then carbon dioxide emissions will rise significantly• unless we can develop carbon sequestration within 10 years which is unlikely

If our answer to coal is NO

Do we want to leave things are they are and see continued exploitation of gas for both heating and electricity generation? >>>>>>

Do we want to exploit available renewables i.e onshore/offshore wind and biomass. Photovoltaics, tidal, wave are not options for next 20 years.

If our answer is NO

Do we want to see a renewal of nuclear power

• Are we happy on this and the other attendant risks?

Our Choices: They are difficult

If our answer is YES

By 2020

• we will be dependent on around 70% of our heating and electricity from GAS

• imported from countries like Russia, Iran, Iraq, Libya, AlgeriaAre we happy with this prospect? >>>>>>

If not:

We need even more substantial cuts in energy use.

Or are we prepared to sacrifice our future to effects of Global Warming? - the North Norfolk Coal Field?

Do we wish to reconsider our stance on renewables?

Inaction or delays in decision making will lead us down the GAS option route

and all the attendant Security issues that raises.

Our Choices: They are difficult

A diverse renewable supply will be local, and will be less prone to cascade power cuts such as those recently in US, London, Italy, Denmark.

Conventional generation is based on large units: 500 – 660 MW enough to supply over 1 million homes. These do fail from time to time, and require much greater backup than required for the failure of a few wind turbines. A reactor trip at Sizewell B has an even larger effect ~1188 MW.

Renewable generation is less prone to major interruption

We must not get drawn into a single issue debate

– a rational debate covering all the alternatives is needed.

Available Renewables: Nuclear: Conservation

Local Small Scale generation saves 8.5% from losses in transmission

An important advantage over conventional generation or far Offshore Wind

Our Choices: They are difficult

• BETTA has to cope with the loss of Sizewell B through a reactor trip. This loss amounts to around 1.5 times the total installed capacity of wind at present.

• BETTA also has to cope with sudden changes in demand (up to 2.5 times Sizewell B) in a matter of minutes e.g. from TV scheduling.

• Experience from Denmark shows that the normal maximum change in any one hour from Wind Output is no more than 18% on one occasion in a year. With a larger country area the figures for diverse wind generation will be less in UK.

One will not save Carbon Dioxide because power stations are running in case they are needed.

• There is very little truth in this. The amount of carbon dioxide emitted is dependant on the output of a fossil fuel power station. If it is running under low load it will emit only a very small amount of extra CO2.

• Allowing for this, the effect of standby reserve will amount to a maximum of 15 – 20 gms per kWh of Wind Energy compared to 430 for gas or 1000 for coal.

• A substantial saving is made.

Renewable Energy: The Issues

Isn’t Energy from Renewables unreliable? – we need secure supply

Historic and Future Demand for Electricity

Number of households will rise by 17.5% by 2025 and consumption per household must fall by this amount just to remain static

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Ele

ctri

city

Co

nsu

mp

tio

n (

TW

h)

Electricity Options for the FutureLow Growth Scenario

Capped at 420 TWh• 33% CO2 reduction (Gas) cf 1990

• 62% CO2 reduction (Nuclear) cf 1990

• 68 % increase in gas consumption

( Gas Scenario) cf 2002• Mix option: 6 new nuclear plant by 2025• Mix option: 11% increase in gas

consumption (cf 2002)

High Growth Scenario

Business as Usual• 0.3 % CO2 reduction (Gas) cf 1990

• 54% CO2 reduction (Nuclear) cf 1990

• 257% increase in gas consumption

( Gas Scenario) cf 2002

Carbon Dioxide Emissions

0

50

100

150

200

250

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

MT

on

ne

s C

O2

ActualGasNuclearCoal40:20:40 Mix

Carbon Dioxide Emissions

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Mto

nn

es C

O2

ActualGasNuclearCoal40:20:40 Mix

25% Renewables by 2025

• 20000 MW Wind

• 16000 MW Other Renewables inc. Tidal, hydro, biomass etc.

Government Response

• Energy White Paper – aspiration for 60% cut in CO2 emissions by 2050

• Will require unprecedented partnership activity in

local communities to ensure on track by 2020s

• (– but no indication of how this will be

undertaken)

“There will be much more local generation, in part from medium to small local/community power plant, fuelled by locally grown biomass, from locally generated waste, and from local wind sources. These will feed local distributed networks, which can sell excess capacity into the grid.’’

- Energy White Paper: February 2003

How many people know what 9 tonnes of CO2 looks like?

5 hot air balloons per person per year.

4 million for Norfolk

On average each person in UK causes the emission of 9 tonnes of CO2 each year.

"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he thought he could do only a little."

Edmund Burke (1727 – 1797)

CRed

Raising Awareness

• Computers do NOT switch off when using the soft “SHUT DOWN”. Typically they will waste 60 kg CO2 a year.

• A Toyota Corolla (1400cc): 1 party balloon every 60m.

• 10 gms of carbon dioxide has an equivalent volume of 1 party balloon.

• Standby on electrical appliances 60+ kWh a year - 3000 balloons.

• A Mobile Phone charger: > 20 kWh per year ~ 1000 balloons each year.

• Filling up with petrol (~£35 for a full tank – 40 litres) --------- 90 kg of CO2 (5% of one hot air balloon)

How far does one have to drive in a small family car (e.g. 1400 cc Toyota Corolla) to emit as much carbon dioxide as heating an old persons room for 1 hour?

1.6 miles

Responses to "How far do you have to drive"

0

5

10

15

20

25

< 5 5 - 9 10 - 19 20 - 29 30 - 49 50 - 69 70 - 99 100-199 > 200

Distance (miles)

Fre

qu

en

cy

General Population

Students 17 - 19

Average distance estimated by general population - 44 miles

Average distance estimated by students - 90 miles

Compared to actual value of 1.6 miles

Some Myths about energy• Showers save Energy and reduce Carbon Emissions???

• SHOWERS do NOT always save energy and MAY WASTE Energy

– A typical bath uses 80 litres of hot water and will consume around 2.6 kWh of electricity emitting 1.3 kg of carbon dioxide.

• A shower (not a power shower) has a flow rate of around 7 litres per minute

• A shower lasting more than 11 minutes consumes more energy than a bath.

• Two showers a day and the total time is more than 11 minutes then you will consume more than having a bath once a day.

• A power shower lasting more than 4 minutes will consume more energy than a bath.

• Fluorescent Lights• Switching on a fluorescent tube consumes as much energy as it uses in 15 minutes

so you should not switch them off.

• Absolute bunkum!!!!!

• How long does it take for a fluorescent tube to come on?

• If the statement were true then the fuse would blow every time you switched on a fluorescent tube.

• Many residents on island of Burray (Orkney) compaigned for a wind turbine.

• On average they are fully self-sufficient in electricity needs and indeed are a net exporter of electricity

Involve the local Community

Electricity Statistics: Each house in Norwich consumes, 3727 kWh per year.

Broadland 5057 kWh Breckland 5612 kWh

North Norfolk 5668 kWh South Norfolk 5797 kWh

Kings Lynn and West Norfolk 5908 kWh

Great Yarmouth 5144 kWh

A wind farm the size of Scroby Sands supplies ~ 66% of domestic needs for Norwich (or 22% of total demand)

Would save ~ 70 000 to 75 000 tonnes of carbon dioxide a year or 40 000 hot air balloons each year.

The alternative:

Persuade 30 000 motorists never to drive the car again

Or 300 000 motorists to drive 1000 miles less each year.

Conclusions• Global Warming will affect us all - in next few decades

• Energy Security will become increasingly important. Inaction over making difficult decisions now will make Energy Security more likely in future.

• Move towards energy conservation and LOCAL generation of energy

It is as much about the individual’s response to use of energy as any technical measures the Government may take.

• Wind (and possibly biomass) are the only real alternatives for renewable generation in next 5 – 10 years.

• Otherwise Nuclear??? – but Uranium resources are limited

• We need to have a multi-pronged approach – we need all available renewables, much more conservation, and possibly some nuclear.

• Even if we are not convinced about Global Warming – Energy Security issues will shortly start to affect us.

WEBSITE www.cred-uk.org

This presentation will be available from tomorrow:> Follow the Academic Resources Link

• Need to act now otherwise we might have to make choice of whether we drive 1.6 miles or heat an old person’s room

Conclusions

Are you up to the Challenge?: Will you make a pledge?

Lao Tzu (604-531 BC) Chinese Artist and Taoist philosopher

"If you do not change direction, you may end up where you are heading."