Strategies for a sustainable,

CO2 neutral energy economy

Daniel M. Kammen

Director, Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory

Energy and Resources Group & Goldman School of Public Policy

University of California, Berkeley

Solar to Fuel – Future Challenges and Solutions

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, March 28, 2005

Mobilizing for a Low-Carbon Economy

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/total.html#IntlCarbon

The time-scale of the Greenhouse problem (and opportunity) is ~ 5 decades. Doubling the pre-industrial CO2 level in the atmosphere is roughly the boundary between altered and unsafe; without action this be crossed within roughly 50-75 years. (This is not a prescription to wait, but a call for dramatic action now.)

Unconventional oil and gas, and coal, are abundant. With 15 times or more of these resources than oil, action on climate won’t be initiated significantly by resource depletion (i.e. I disagree with Hubbert’s Peak)

A portfolio approach is essential. The most basic lesson of our energy past is that diversity is our greatest ally (and the one we abandon most rapidly in a crisis). Basic research and policy analysis leading to action are both needed to open new opportunities for a low-carbon economy.

Bottom line: Despite some important successes, a seed change is needed

World Annual Carbon Dioxide Emissions from the Consumption of Fossil Fuels, 1980-2000

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/total.html#IntlCarbon

4,500

5,000

5,500

6,000

6,500

1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000

Million Metric Tons Carbon Equivalent2.15

2.39

2.63

2.87

3.11

Concentration Increment (ppmv)Climate-carbon connection:2.1 Gt(C) = 1 ppm(v)

Modeled Response to Natural & Anthropogenic Climate Forcings

Global Circulation Model (GCM) results; summarized in IPCC 2001

GCM: Natural forcings only GCM: human + natural forcings

Philosophical changes require Philosophical changes require motivation:motivation:

Yet we have both local and globalYet we have both local and global ‘ ‘smoking guns’smoking guns’

The ‘slice’ heuristic:

Ecological CO2 ‘target’

Doubled CO2 ‘target’Expected path (BAU)

18

Gt(C)/yr

12

6

02000 2050 2100

Socolow and Pacala (2004)

15 “slices”

18

12

6

0

Gt(C)/yr

2000 2050 2100

50 year pathways to evolve 1.0 Gt(C)/yr carbon offsets

Socolow and Pacala (2004)

A. Capturing Solar

Energy in space(Peter Glaser et al.,

1970s)

B. Global Superconducting

Transmission Grid (Buckminster Fuller,

1970s)

A View of our energy system as unlikely to make sufficient progress

toward a low-carbon future without revolutions

Hoffert et al. (2003)

Between you and Between you and me, I am rather me, I am rather dismayed by the dismayed by the

responses.responses.

We have done too We have done too little to move little to move

beyond ‘solving’ beyond ‘solving’ the (easy) the (easy)

boundary value boundary value problems… which problems… which are the ones we are the ones we wantwant to hear to hear

Energy Star HomeAverage

Dane

Average in Berkeley Residential Electricity Use

(kWh/capita, 1960 - 2000)

Savings Wedge

25

35

45

55

19901995200020052010201520202025Year

Primary Energy, Quads

Space HeatingSpace CoolingWater HeatingLightingRefrigeratorsPCTVOther

Business-As-Usual

Moderate Scenario

1990 Emissions Levels1500

2100

2700

3300

Carbon Dioxide Emissions, MMTCE

A

25

35

45

55

19901995200020052010201520202025Year

Primary Energy, Quads

Space HeatingSpace CoolingWater HeatingLightingRefrigeratorsPCTVOther

Business-As-Usual

Aggressive Scenario1990 Emissions Levels

1500

2100

2700

3300

Carbon Dioxide Emissions, MMTCE

B

Source: Kammen & Ling, in press

EnergyEfficiencyFutures

Conclusions:

A) Moderate path:1.5% annual improvementEmissions growth halted at a savings

B) Aggressive path:2.9% annual improvement Meet Kyoto levels by efficiency alone & facilitate clean energy market development

Annual Rate of Change in Energy/GDP for the United States

-6%

-5%

-4%

-3%

-2%

-1%

0%

1%

2%

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

IEA data EIA data

- 2.7%Average = - 0.7%- 3.4%

Rosenfeld, CEC, LBL

Efficiency (%)

Cu(In,Ga)Se2

Amorphous Si:H(stabilized)CdTe

Universityof Maine

Boeing

Boeing

Boeing

BoeingARCO

NREL

Boeing

Euro-CIS

12

8

4

0200019951990198519801975

United Solar

16

20

24

28

32 t

s

s

s

s

s

st Three-junction (2-terminal, monolithic)

Two-junction (2-terminal, monolithic)

NREL/Spectrolab

NRELNREL

JapanEnergy

Spire

NorthCarolinaStateUniversity

Multijunction Concentrators

Thin Film Technologies

Best Research-Cell Efficiencies

sVarian

RCA

Solarex

UNSW

UNSW

ARCO

UNSWUNSW

UNSWSpire

Stanford

Westing-house

Crystalline Si CellsSingle CrystalMulticrystallineThin Si

UNSWGeorgia Tech

Georgia Tech

Sharp

Solarex Astro-Power

NREL

AstroPower

tSpectrolab

NREL

•

Emerging PV

• ••• •

•••

•

••

•••

•

Masushita

Monosolar

Kodak

Kodak

AMETEK

PhotonEnergy

Univ.S.Florida

NREL

NREL

NREL

Princeton

U. Konstanz

U.CaliforniaBerkeleyOrganic Cells

NREL

NRELCu(In,Ga )Se 214x Concentration

t

Source: T. J. Berniard, NREL

World PV Module Shipments (Megawatts)(25% annual growth for 10+ years)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Rest of World 1 2 3 3 4 5 5 5 4 6 6 10 9 19 28 44 68 80 104

Europe 3 4 5 7 8 10 13 16 17 22 20 19 30 30 41 52 77 120 185

Japan 10 12 19 13 14 17 20 19 17 17 16 21 35 49 75 100 165 180 219

United States 8 7 9 11 14 15 17 18 22 26 35 39 51 54 58 61 63 65 66

Total 23 26 30 34 40 47 55 58 60 70 78 89 126 151 202 257 373 445 574

1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

2003 Annual growth: 34%; 50% in 2004 (to 1200 MW)

Today: global PV production is equivalent (MW) to one large fossil-fuel power plant/year

6 Boxes at 3.3 TW Each = 20 TWe6 Boxes at 3.3 TW Each = 20 TWe

A useful (?) heuristic, or an example of stagnant thinkingA useful (?) heuristic, or an example of stagnant thinking

Solar Across Scales

Moscone Center: 675,000 W

Kenyan PV market:

Average system: 18W

Kammen home: 2400 W

Performance Results for a-Si PV Modules

0

20

40

60

80

100

Koncar(12 Wp)

Free EnergyEurope

(12 Wp)

IntersolarPhoenix Gold

(14 Wp)

CrystallinePV (various

brands)

Maximum Power Output(% of Rated Power)

Module Brand

Learning Curve for PV Modules (crystalline silicon)

2000

1980

1990

1

10

100

1 1010-110-210-310-4 102 103

Cumulative installed PV Peak Power [GWp]

[€/Wp]

20202010

Today PV electricity costs about $0.20 - 0.25/kWh, Which can be compared with $0.32/kWh PG&E charges for TOU customers during peak time (noon-6pm)

Biomass – in Sub Saharan Africa(500 million tons/yr)

Biomass accounts for :

• 70% of total energy use

• 90% of household use• Compared with 3% for OECD countries

Of harvested wood :• ~ 75% used for cooking• ~ 15% used to make charcoal

Charcoal use is:• Growing faster than woodfuel• Mainly commercial urban fuel• Attributed main blame for

unsustainable forest use

Bailis, Ezzati and Kammen (2005)

World Wind Electricity Capacity (Megawatts)(20%+ annual growth for over a decade!)

05,000

10,00015,00020,00025,00030,00035,00040,000

China 0 1 1 1 4 4 5 8 12 25 36 59 143 217 267 344 401 468 525

USA 5 10 70 240 597 1039 1222 1356 1396 1403 1525 1575 1584 1617 1656 1697 1698 1706 1848 2511 2578 4275 4685 6,374

EU 439 629 844 1211 1683 2497 3476 4753 5453 9678 1288 1731 2305 2800

Annual Addition 5 15 65 120 390 420 250 180 130 150 200 240 250 500 180 1290 1290 1570 2510 3780 4520 6480 6720 8133

Total 10 25 90 210 600 1020 1270 1450 1580 1730 1,930 2170 2290 2990 3145 4780 6070 7640 1015 1393 1845 2493 31,65 3929

80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 '00 '01 '02 '03

Global leaders: Germany, Denmark, Spain, US, UK, China, India (> 85 of global market)US was a global leader, today we are a player, but not the leader.

Meg

awat

ts

State Renewables Portfolio Standards and Mandates – 16 States

• Renewable energy “goals” established in Illinois and Minnesota• RPS being considered in many other states (e.g., VT, WA); potentially revised in others

(ME, PA, WI); and national RPS is being discussed (by some)

HI: 20% by 2020

WI: 2.2% by 2011

NV: 15% by 2013

TX: 2880 MW by 2009

PA: varies by utilityNJ: 6.5% by 2008

CT: 10% by 2010

MA: 4% new by 2009

ME: 30% by 2000

NM: 10% by 2011

AZ: 1.1% by 2007

MN: 10% by 2015 for Xcel + >800 MW RE requirement

IA: 105 aMW

MD: 7.5% by 2019

RI: 16% by 2019

NY – in development: 7.5% new by 2013

CA: 20% by 2017

11/2/04

NY: 25% by 2020

R. Wiser, LBL

UNIV ERSIT Y O F CAL IF ORN IABERK ELE Y

REP ORT OF THERENEWAB LE AND APP ROPRIA TE EN ERGYLABORA TO RY

Putting Re newa bles t o Work:How Many J obs C an theClean Energy IndustryGenerate?

by

Daniel M. Ka mmenKa mal K apadiaMatthias Fripp

of theEnergy and Resource s Group &the Goldman Sc hool of Pu blic Po licy

APRIL 13, 2004

http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~rael/papers.html

Report availableat:

Study reviews:

• 13 studies of job creation

• Message: energy efficiency and renewables create large numbers of high quality jobs

New SUV Models Coming Soon

The Kenworth Grand Dominator - Extra high roof/cathedral ceilings - Power expandable sides - Full lavatory

The Peterbuilt CrusaderAll Sport Denali

The worlds first two story high performance sport brute

Crusader-E Edition: includes elevator

Source: http://poseur.4x4.org/futuresuv.html

Greenhouse Comparison:FCVs, ICEs and Hybrid Vehicles

Source: Bevilacqua-Knight, 2001

Carbon-Free Power by 2050(Berry and Lamont)

• U.S. Population 400 million people (up 40%)• Electricity Use 3 kWe/capita (up 37%)

• Wind 300,000 5 MW Turbines (All the wind-power available from the Dakotas)

• Solar PV 150 million 25 kW roofs (Every roof top in the United States)

• Biomass Not included, but could be > 10% of total• Advanced Fission 300 1 GWe nuclear plants (50% efficient)

• 100% H2 Vehicles “80 mpg” average for cars and SUV’s 3 million H2 trucks, 5000 LH2 airliners

So, What are We Doing About All This?

Well, ….

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

R&D (billion 2002$s)

DefenseSpaceHealthEnergyGeneral ScienceOther

Federal R&D Investments, 1955 - 2004

Private Sector R&D Investment in Health and Energy

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Private-sector R&D (2002 $m)

Energy

Drugs and Medicines

Kammen qnd Nemet, 2005

Figure 1. Total U.S. patents granted and total U.S. investments in R&D.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Year

0

50

100

150

200

250

Patents Granted

Funds for R&D

Federal R&D Policy Can be Very Effective(All sectors of the U. S. Economy)

Margolis and Kammen (1999)

Pat

e nts

Gr a

nte

d (

tho u

san

ds)

R&

D S

pen

din

g (b

illi

ons)

Figure 2. U.S. energy technology patents and total U.S. energy R&D.

0

50

100

150

200

250

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Year

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

PatentsGranted

Funds forEnergy R&D

The Same Funding-Patent Correlation …But Now for Energy Only

Pat

e nts

Gr a

nte

d (

tho u

san

ds)

R&

D S

pen

din

g (b

illi

ons)

Margolis and Kammen (1999)

Kammen and Nemet (2005) in review

Citations Received per Patent"Energy Sector" vs. All Patents

0

2

4

6

8

1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995Average citations received per

patent Power Plants

All Patents

• Low cost photovoltaics (< $1/Watt)• Drivers: funding; technology diversity; markets

• Low cost energy storage•H2, flywheels, compressed air, pumped hydro, …

• Biomass gassification across scales of application• Power electronics for mini-grids, distributed systems • Carbon sequestration• Nano energy and wireless systems to initiate a second ‘wave’ of energy efficiency increases• Understanding and action on the economics of carbon (and pollutants generally)

Some Critical Needs for Research

• Expand state renewable energy portfolio standards

• Support Solar Home bills (build clean energy markets)• & renewable energy/energy efficient mortgages

• Accelerate the CA Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard

• Enact carbon cap & trade: work with western states, northeast US (RGGI), UK

• Get serious about Kyoto and a carbon tax

Opportunities for Policy Action

To Address Climate Change, we must utilize renewable energy

Carbon Emissions for Various Electricity Generation Options

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

Coal Steam Coal IGCC Coal AIGCC Gas CC Nuclear Renewables

550450

Carbon/kWh for atmospheric stabilization

at 450, 550 ppm

kg (

carb

on)/

kWh

of E

lect

rici

ty

Advanced coal technologies

Atmospheric CO2 concentration in 1850: 265 ppmAtmospheric CO2 concentration in 2000: 370 ppm

Carbon Emissions for Various Electricity Generation Options

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

Coal Steam Coal IGCC Coal AIGCC Gas CC Nuclear Renewables

550450

Carbon/kWh for atmospheric stabilization

at 450, 550 ppm

kg (

carb

on)/

kWh

of E

lect

rici

ty

Advanced coal technologies

Atmospheric CO2 concentration in 1850: 265 ppmAtmospheric CO2 concentration in 2000: 370 ppm

= -1%/yr

To Address Climate Change, we must utilize renewable energy

Potential 1 Gt Carbon Industries in 2050 (p.1 of 2)View of energy system as available solutions (Socolow & Pacala, 2004)

MitigationMeasure

1 Gt(C)/yr Global Business Risk, Impact

Coal plant: CO2 stored, not vented

700 1GW plants CO2 leakage

Nuclear displaces average plant

1500 1 GW plants (5 x current) Nuclear proliferation and terrorism, nuclear waste

Wind displaces average plant

150 x current NIMBY, new transmission needed

Solar PV displaces average plant

2000 x current; 5x106 ha Minimal impact, cost

Hydrogen fuel 1 billion H2 cars (CO2-emission-free H2) displace 1 billion 30 mpg gasoline/diesel

H2 infrastructure; cost, H2 storage

Efficiency, overall 8% of 2050 “expected” fossil C extraction Minimal

Efficiency, vehicles only

2 billion gasoline and diesel cars at 60 mpg instead of 30 mpg (or, at 30 mpg, going 6,000 rather than 12,000 miles per year).

Lifestyle (car size and power)

Urban design

MitigationMeasure

1 Gt(C)/yr Global Business Risk, Impact

Geological seq’n 3500 Sleipners, at 1 Mt( CO2)/year Global and local leakage

Land sink Now 1.5 Gt(C)/yr, sink becomes 2.0 Gt(C)/yr, rather than 1.0 Gt(C)/yr

Current estimate for 2050 sink is several times more uncertain

Biomass fuels from plantations

100x106 ha, growing @ 10 t(C)/ha-yr Biodiversity, competing land use

(200x106 ha = US agricultural area)

Storage in new forest 500x106 ha, growing @ 2 t(C)/ha-yr Biodiversity, competing land use

Achieving stabilization, slice by slice (p.2 of 2)