1

The emerging hydrogen fuel cell and CCS systems of innovation: towards a permanent variety of systems?

Philip J. VergragtTellus Institute and MITZurich, April 16, 2007

2

overview

1. Context: need for decarbonization of energy; transportation as tough case.

2. US strategies: wedges strategies: increasing variety

3. Case: hydrogen fuel cells for transportation

4. CCS: lock-in of fossil fuel system vs. opportunity for hydrogen

5. Reflections

3

1. Context: need for decarbonization of energy

Big challenges are climate change, high oil prices, and energy security

CO2 emissions could be reduced with 60 % by 2050 by technological innovations and diffusion (ASES, NRDC)

Most of it should come through energy conservation and efficiency

Transportation currently emits about 1/3 of all CO2 emissions; most of it by passenger cars

4

Warming Won’t Wait

PHOTO NASA © NRDC 2005

5

challenges

How to agree on a CO2 reduction path for transportation?

How to balance variety of options with path dependency and economies of scale?

How to balance between technological innovations, changes in infrastructures and city planning, and life style changes?

6

2. US strategies: wedges strategies: increasing variety

In 2004 Pacala and Socolow introduced the concept of CO2 stabilization wedges

For a stabilization and later reduction of CO2 emissions, 7-10 “wedges” of 1 GtC/y are sufficient.

They identified 15 wedges, most but not all technological

In essence wedges represent diversification or “variation”

7

The wedge concept is further developed for the USA by NRDC, an environmental NGO

For a reduction of -60 % in 2050, which is -80 % as compared to BAU, they developed 6 wedges

More than 50 % comes from energy end-use efficiency

The other 50 % or less is by renewables and CCS

The most important issue appears to be the urgency of bending the curve

8

9

Prompt Start Allows Smooth Transition

Source: Doniger, Herzog, & Lashof, Science, 3 November 2006

10

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Passenger

Other

Other

Passenger

Efficiency

Fuels

Increase vehicle efficiency

Reduce VMT

Substitute lower carbon fuels

Reducing Emissions from Transport

Emissions Reductions

VMT

2050 BaU 2050 Stab

Mil

lio

n t

on

nes

C

11

3. Case: hydrogen fuel cells for transportation

Hydrogen is often touted as the fuel of the future It can be burned like petrol, with the emissions of

only water In an electrochemical reaction it combines with

O2 to H2O and generates electricity Advantages are: higher efficiency, less noise,

nearly no NOx emissions However, hydrogen is explosive, difficult to

handle, and has low density. Moreover, hydrogen needs to be generated

sustainably, without CO2 emissions

12

Sustainable options for transportation

Fuel efficiency; hybrids; plug-in hybrids Biofuels All-electric cars Hydrogen fuel cell cars. Less car transportation; transit-oriented

development; city planning etc Changes in life styles and values:

walking, biking, and local tourism

13

World Petroleum Use for Transportation and Other Purposes, 1980 – 2020

Source: EIA, International Energy Outlook 1999

14

15

How does it work? (2) It is the reversal of electrolysis:

2 H20 + electricity---2 H2 + O2 It is invented in 1843 by Robert Groves It has been applied in Apollo and Gemini

space programs (1960 and 70-ies) The reaction works only in the presence

of a catalyst: Platinum Hydrogen needs to be stored, which is

quite difficult

16

Sustainable hydrogen generation

Hydrogen can be generated by electrolysis, thus by using electricity from the grid, from renewable energy sources, or by steam reforming of natural gas.

Each of these methods has its disadvantages Electrolysis from renewables: less efficient use of

electricity; better used for direct use Electrolysis from the grid: increase in coal/oil/gas

fired electricity generation Natural gas steam reforming: fossil fuel use The latter two could be combined with CCS in

order to mitigate CO2 emissions

17

Hydrogen scenarios: Tellus study Tellus Institute, Boston, has developed

scenarios for a transition to 95% hydrogen fuel cell cars in 2050

They investigated all possible routes for hydrogen generation (centrally and decentrally; transportation, and delivery, and looked at the costs

They found that energy efficiency saves more greenhouse gas emissions than hydrogen

18

Figure 6‑3 Carbon emissions - hydrogen-consuming end uses, USA

0

500

1,000

1,500

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

mill

ion

to

nn

es C

-eq

uiv

BAU GHG

BAU+H2 GHG+H2

BAU+Shock H2

19

Figure 6‑4 Carbon emissions - all end uses, USA

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

mill

ion

to

nn

es C

-eq

uiv

BAU GHG

BAU+H2 GHG+H2

BAU+Shock H2

20

The emerging hydrogen and fuel cell system of innovation

California: Hydrogen highway; H filling stations, California fuel cell partnership; mainly car companies.

Massachusetts: Hydrogen fuel cell partnership; more than 60 firms, 7 major universities, and State government; Road Map; job creation; mainly focused on stationary and portable power, not on transportation

Federal US government: $ 1.2b R&D; mostly aimed at nuclear and clean fossil

Main obstacles: technical; capital; lack of incentives and regulation

21

Conclusions for hydrogen for transportation Hydrogen is no panacea; other options

for transportation are possible (electric; biofuels; Fischer-Tropsch synthetic fuels)

Large-scale sustainable hydrogen until 2050 only possible with CCS

Renewable electricity better used for replacement of fossil fuel power plants

In the USA, no transition to hydrogen economy, but diversification strategy (conservation, efficiency, renewables, and CCS

22

4. Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)

CCS is capturing CO2 at a point source, compressing it, and storing it underground

It can be used at fossil fuel power plants, coal gasification plants, steam reforming of methane for producing hydrogen.

The technology is not yet proven; experiments and pilot projects are under way.

However, experience has been acquired by injecting CO2 underground for enhanced oil winning

23

24

Thus CCS is connected to hydrogen in the following ways:

Without CCS, hydrogen cannot be produced in sufficient quantities for at least 50 years from renewables and/or nuclear

CCS can also help to generate CO2-free electricity from coal by coal gasification and CGCC, which could be used for plug-in hybrids and electrical transportation

25

CCS (continued)

CCS cannot be considered as a sustainable technology, because it is essentially end-of pipe.

Several aspects as safety, storage time, are not yet sufficiently understood.

Experiments are under way to test the feasibility of large-scale CCS

Without CCS hydrogen for transportation may not be available in sufficient quantities

26

The emerging CCS system of innovation Oil companies (injection: Sleipner; Weyborn; In

Salah) Utilities and oil companies: capture technology;

IGCC (BP Scotland 350MW IGCC with possibly CCS)

Pipeline builders Ocean tanker dispatchers Local communities (siting; social acceptance) Banks (financing) Governments (CO2 policies; coal policies); US-DOE

regional sequestration partnership $ 100m /4 y FutureGen: large scale demo $ 1b Norway C tax $50/ton CO2

27

How to conceptualize CCS? On the one hand, CCS is a clear example of

increased entrenchment of fossil fuel industry; by CCS coal, oil, and gas can continue to be used with diminished CO2 emissions

It can even be compared to nuclear energy, with large-scale centralized CO2 capture and compression, a heavy infrastructure for transportation; and unknown risks for the long term (gradual or sudden CO2 emissions from the ground)

CCS under sea has even more scary risks

28

On the other hand, CCS can be conceptualized as a transition technology

It may pave the way for hydrogen as a sustainable energy carrier on the long term

It may buy time to develop enough conservation, efficiency, and renewables

It is an essential “wedge” especially if we want to avoid nuclear energy (another wedge in Pcala-Socolow)

29

5. Reflections What does it mean for transition management,

path dependency, and variety? Wedge approach is compatible with a transition

to a decarbonized energy system on the highest level of abstraction

However, on the level of energy systems it means the emergence of a portfolio of energy system innovations, including conservation and end-use efficiencies

For transportation it also means a range of options ranging from smart growth and car sharing to some mix of hybrids, biofuels, all-electric and fuel cell vehicles.

30

We thus can speak of a broad emerging portfolio of sustainable energy options

A lot of variety is being created, together with new infrastructure and thus new forms of lock-in (CCS)

Essential is to prevent lock-in into systems that cannot be part of the new system (old-style coal power plants)

Most pressing question is how to speed up the transition to the ‘new variety’, or how to implement the desired ‘wedges’. Do traditional transition management approaches deliver fast enough?

31

Some implications for government policies Governments should aim at ‘transition’ to a decarbonized

energy system, and within this to endorse an ‘continuous large variety’ of options; the market and specific circumstances will choose the mixture.

A mixture of policy instruments is needed, such as carbon tax or carbon trading; mandatory deployment of CCS at new coal plants; increasing renewable portfolio standards, etc

Most technologies are available; diffusion policies are urgently needed, including new infrastructure development and demo projects

R&D subsidies on specific technologies help, but should be aimed at the next generation sustainable energy technologies.

Entrenchment of present subsidies for fossil fuel companies should urgently be addressed.

32

Final reflection Both Pacala et al and NRDC (Lashof et al) assume

in their scenarios that the USA continues to emit more than its share of CO2 as compared to the world average

For global equity even much deeper CO2 reductions in USA and EU are necessary

Changes in life styles are probably unavoidable (Tellus Great Transition and Boston “deep change scenarios”)

There are trade-offs between pushing for diffusion of technologies, R&D for new technologies (beyond 2050), and life style changes

33

thanks