CCTP Strategic Plan 2006 DOE/PI-0005 - US Global Change ... · Strategic Plan • September 2006 Samuel W. Bodman Secretary of Energy Vice-Chair, Committee on Climate Change Science

.71875

September 2006

DO

E/PI-0005U

.S. Clim

ate Change Technology Program

U.S. C

limate C

hange Technology ProgramS

TR

AT

EG

IC P

LA

NS

TR

AT

EG

IC P

LA

N

September 2006

DOE/PI-0005

.71875

U . S C L I M A T E C H A N G E T E C H N O L O G Y P R O G R A M

U.S. Department of Energy (Lead-Agency)

U.S. Department of Agriculture

U.S. Department of Commerce, including

National Institute of Standards and Technology

U.S. Department of Defense

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, including

National Institutes of Health

U.S. Department of Interior

U.S. Department of State, including

U.S. Agency for International Development

U.S. Department of Transportation

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

National Science Foundation

Other Participating Research and Development Agencies

________________________

Executive Office of the President, including

Council on Environmental Quality

Office of Science and Technology Policy

Office of Management and Budget

U.S. Climate Change Technology Program1000 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20585

202-586-0070

http://www.climatetechnology.gov

Front cover photo credits:Wind farm: courtesy GE Energy, ©2005, General Electric International, Inc.;

City skyline: iStockphoto; Nuclear power plant: ©Royalty-free/CREATAS;

Contour strip farming: ©Royalty-free/CORBIS;

Transmission towers at sunset: DOE/NREL, credit: Warren Gretz;

Earth: NASA.

U.S. Climate Change Technology Program

STRATEGIC PLAN

September 2006

II


To the Reader:

We are pleased to be able to present this Strategic Plan for the Climate Change Technology Program(CCTP). The technology strategy detailed in this Plan is an essential element of a comprehensive

climate change strategy that includes undertaking short-term actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissionsintensity, advancing climate science, and promoting international cooperation.

CCTP was created by the President in 2002—and subsequently authorized in the Energy Policy Act of 2005—to coordinate and prioritize the Federal Government’s portfolio of investments in climate-related technologyresearch, development, demonstration, and deployment (RDD&D). The portfolio totaled about $3 billion inFiscal Year 2006.

The Plan expands on the themes presented in CCTP’s Vision and Framework for Strategy and Planning. Itprovides the underpinnings for a robust RDD&D effort that can make advanced technologies available soonerand at a lower cost. It takes a century-long look at the nature of the climate change challenge and the potentialfor technological solutions across a range of uncertainties. Most anthropogenic greenhouse gases emitted overthe course of the 21st century will come from equipment and infrastructure not yet built, a circumstance thatposes significant opportunities to reduce or eliminate these emissions. The technologies outlined in this Plan—hydrogen, biorefining, clean coal, carbon sequestration, nuclear fission and fusion, advanced concepts inbuildings, industry, transportation and electric energy storage and distribution, and others—have the potentialto transform our economy in fundamental ways that can address not just climate change, but energy security, airquality, and other pressing needs.

The Plan articulates a vision of the role for advanced technologies, defines a supporting mission for the CCTP,establishes guiding principles for Federal R&D agencies to use in formulating R&D portfolios, outlinesapproaches to attain CCTP’s strategic goals, and identifies a series of next steps toward implementation. Webelieve this Plan will strengthen the U.S. research enterprise and stimulate U.S. innovation and advancetechnology development in myriad ways. It is our hope that this Plan will inspire similar initiatives in othernations and enhance international collaboration on development and deployment of these technologies.

This document is the outcome of a long process involving governmental working groups, expert review, and apublic comment period that stimulated thoughtful and energetic dialogue. It is our hope that with publicationof the Plan, this dialogue will continue to inform and improve the Program.

The United States is working to ensure a bright and secure energy and economic future for our Nation and ahealthy planet for future generations. Through a combination of near-term actions, enhanced scientificunderstanding of climate change, advanced technology development, and international cooperation, this futurecan become a reality.

III

Strategic Plan • September 2006

Samuel W. BodmanSecretary of Energy

Vice-Chair, Committee on Climate Change

Science and Technology Integration

Carlos M. GutierrezSecretary of Commerce

Chair, Committee on Climate Change

Science and Technology Integration

John H. Marburger III, Ph.D.Director, Office of

Science and Technology Policy Executive Director, Committee on

Climate Change Science and Technology Integration

IV


Foreword

In February 2002, President George W. Bush reorganized the overarching management structure thatcoordinates and directs U.S. climate change research and development activities. Under this new structure,

climate change science and climate-related technology research programs are integrated to an extent not seenpreviously. The Climate Change Science Program (CCSP), led by the Department of Commerce, wasestablished to reduce the uncertainties in climate science and develop science-based resources to supportdecision makers. The Climate Change Technology Program (CCTP), the counterpart organization to CCSP,led by the Department of Energy, was formed to coordinate the Federal Government’s portfolio of climate-related technology research and development activities, including technology deployment and adoptionactivities, which were supported by nearly $3 billion in Fiscal Year 2006, and to focus efforts on the subset ofpriority activities that are part of the President’s National Climate Change Technology Initiative.

The CCTP’s Research and Current Activities and Technology Options for the Near and Long Term reports provideddetailed looks at, and introduced the public to, an array of technologies with the potential to reduce greenhousegas emissions. Our goal with this Strategic Plan is to provide a long-term planning context, taking into accountthe many uncertainties, in which the nature of both the challenges and the opportunities for advancedtechnologies are illuminated and balanced. Along with its short companion document, CCTP’s Vision andFramework for Strategy and Planning, the Plan provides an inspiring vision of what may be possible and a basisfor setting priorities for research through its technology strategies and investment criteria. It also highlightsthose opportunities that are ripe for advancement.

The Plan was guided by the leadership of the Cabinet-level Committee on Climate Change Science andTechnology Integration and its Interagency Working Group of agency deputies. It was prepared by aninteragency team of six working groups, under the direction of CCTP Deputy Director Dr. Robert C. Marlay.Experts from many different disciplines have made significant contributions to the Plan. Without their efforts,this document would not have been possible.

Further, the Plan has benefited greatly from hundreds of comments received during the public comment periodfollowing release of the draft Plan in September 2005. We have been gratified by the quantity and quality of thecomments we received, which reflect the importance of the Program. We were able to accommodate mostcomments, but even those we did not accept challenged our thinking and made the Plan stronger. We thank allof those individuals and groups who took time to make comments. As the Plan is forward-looking, we expectthat public input will be an aspect of future updates to the Plan.

Stephen D. EuleDirector


September 2006

Letter to the Reader ........................................................................................................page iiiForeword ..................................................................................................................................ivList of Figures ............................................................................................................................xiList of Tables ............................................................................................................................xiiiList of Boxes ....................................................................................................................xivList of Acronyms and Abbreviations ..............................................................................xiv

Introduction ......................................................................................................................1

1.1 U.S. Leadership and Presidential Commitment ........................................................31.2 U.S. Climate Change Science Program ......................................................................51.3 U.S. Climate Change Technology Program................................................................6

The Potential Role of Technology ................................................................................71.4 Continuing Process ..........................................................................................................71.5 References..........................................................................................................................8

Vision, Mission, Goals and Approaches ................................................................9

2.1 Vision and Mission ........................................................................................................102.2 Strategic Goals ................................................................................................................102.3 Core Approaches ............................................................................................................162.4 Prioritization Process ....................................................................................................20

Portfolio Planning Principles ......................................................................................20Portfolio Planning and Investment Criteria ..............................................................21Application of Criteria..................................................................................................22

2.5 Management ....................................................................................................................23Executive Direction ......................................................................................................23Interagency Planning and Integration ........................................................................23Agency Implementation ..............................................................................................24External Interactions ....................................................................................................24Program Support ..........................................................................................................24

2.6 Strategic Plan Outline ..................................................................................................24

Synthesis Assessment of Long-Term Climate Change Technology Scenarios............................................................................................25

3.1 The Greenhouse Gases ................................................................................................263.2 Factors Affecting Future GHG Emissions ................................................................27

CO2 Emissions from Energy Consumption ..............................................................28CO2 Emissions and Sequestration from Changes in Land Use ................................32Other Greenhouse Gases ............................................................................................33

3

2

1

V


Strategic Plan


TABLE OF CONTENTS

3.3 Analytical Context for CCTP Planning ............................................................page 333.4 Exploring the Role for Advanced Techology ............................................................37

Reference Case, Baseline, and Advanced Technology Scenarios ..............................38Economic Benefits of Advanced Technologies ..........................................................40Timing of Advanced Technology Market Penetration ..............................................43

3.5 CCTP Goals for Advanced Technology ....................................................................44Energy End-Use Efficiency and Infrastructure..........................................................44Low- and Zero-CO2 Energy Supply Technologies....................................................45Carbon Capture/Storage and Sequestration ..............................................................47

Capture and Storage of Carbon Dioxide ............................................................47Terrestrial Sequestration ......................................................................................48

Non-CO2 GHG Emissions ........................................................................................49Summary: Relative Contributions of the Four CCTP Goals ..................................50

3.6 Summary of Insights ......................................................................................................513.7 References........................................................................................................................53

Reducing Emissions from Energy End-Use and Infrastructure ..................57

4.1 Transportation ................................................................................................................58Potential Role of Technology ......................................................................................59Technology Strategy ....................................................................................................59Current Portfolio..........................................................................................................60Future Research Directions ........................................................................................62

4.2 Buildings ..........................................................................................................................62Potential Role of Technology ......................................................................................63Technology Strategy ....................................................................................................63Current Portfolio..........................................................................................................64Future Research Directions ........................................................................................66

4.3 Industry ............................................................................................................................67Potential Role of Technology ......................................................................................67Technology Strategy ....................................................................................................69Current Portfolio..........................................................................................................69Future Research Directions ........................................................................................71

4.4 Electric Grid and Infrastructure ..................................................................................72Potential Role of Technology ......................................................................................73Technology Strategy ....................................................................................................74Current Portfolio..........................................................................................................75Future Research Directions ........................................................................................77

4.5 Summary ..........................................................................................................................784.6 References........................................................................................................................80

Reducing Emissions from Energy Supply............................................................81

5.1 Low-Emission, Fossil-Based Fuels and Power ........................................................83Potential Role of Technology ......................................................................................83Technology Strategy ....................................................................................................84Current Portfolio..........................................................................................................84Future Research Directions ........................................................................................85

5

4

VI


5.2 Hydrogen ................................................................................................................page 86Potential Role of Technology ......................................................................................86Technology Strategy ....................................................................................................88Current Portfolio..........................................................................................................88Future Research Directions ........................................................................................91

5.3 Renewable Energy and Fuels ......................................................................................92Potential Role of Technology ......................................................................................95Technology Strategy ....................................................................................................96Current Portfolio..........................................................................................................98Future Research Directions ......................................................................................101

5.4 Nuclear Fission ............................................................................................................103Potential Role of Technology ....................................................................................103Technology Strategy ..................................................................................................104Current Portfolio........................................................................................................104Future Research Directions ......................................................................................106

5.5 Fusion Energy ..............................................................................................................107Potential Role of Technology ....................................................................................107Technology Strategy ..................................................................................................108Current Portfolio........................................................................................................109Future Research Directions ......................................................................................110

5.6 Summary ........................................................................................................................1105.7 References......................................................................................................................112

Capturing and Sequestering Carbon Dioxide..................................................113

6.1 Carbon Capture ............................................................................................................114Potential Role of Technology ....................................................................................115Technology Strategy ..................................................................................................115Current Portfolio........................................................................................................115Future Research Directions ......................................................................................116

6.2 Geologic Storage ..........................................................................................................117Potential Role of Technology ....................................................................................118Technology Strategy ..................................................................................................118Current Portfolio........................................................................................................119Future Research Directions ......................................................................................120

6.3 Terrestrial Sequestration ............................................................................................122Potential Role of Technology ....................................................................................122Technology Strategy ..................................................................................................123Current Portfolio........................................................................................................123Future Research Directions ......................................................................................126

6.4 Ocean Sequestration ....................................................................................................127Potential Role of Technology ....................................................................................128Technology Strategy ..................................................................................................128Current Portfolio........................................................................................................128Future Research Directions ......................................................................................128


6

VII


Reducing Emissions of Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gases ..........................page 135

7.1 Methane Emissions From Energy and Waste ........................................................139Landfills ......................................................................................................................139

Potential Role of Technology ............................................................................140Technology Strategy ............................................................................................140Current Portfolio ................................................................................................140Future Research Directions ................................................................................141

Coal Mines ..................................................................................................................141Potential Role of Technology ............................................................................142Technology Strategy ............................................................................................143Current Portfolio ................................................................................................143Future Research Directions ................................................................................144

Natural Gas and Petroleum Systems ........................................................................144Potential Role of Technology ............................................................................144Technology Strategy ............................................................................................144Current Portfolio ................................................................................................145Future Research Directions ................................................................................145

7.2 Methane and Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Agriculture ..................................146Advanced Agricultural Systems for Nitrous Oxide Emissions Reductions ............146


Methane and Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Livestock and Poultry Manure Management ..............................................................................................................148


Methane Emissions from Livestock Enteric Fermentation ....................................150Potential Role of Technology ............................................................................150Technology Strategy ............................................................................................150Current Portfolio ................................................................................................150Future Research Directions ................................................................................150

Methane Emissions from Rice Fields........................................................................1517.3 Emissions of High Global-Warming Potential Gases ..........................................152

Substitutes for Ozone Depleting Substances............................................................152Potential Role of Technology ............................................................................152Technology Strategy ............................................................................................152Current Portfolio ................................................................................................152Future Research Directions ................................................................................153

Industrial Use of High GWP Gases ........................................................................154Potential Role of Technology ............................................................................154Technology Strategy ............................................................................................154Current Portfolio ................................................................................................154Future Research Directions ................................................................................155

7

VIII


7.4 Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Combustion and Industrial Sources ........page 156Combustion ................................................................................................................157


Industrial Sources ......................................................................................................158Potential Role of Technology ............................................................................158Technology Strategy ............................................................................................158Current Portfolio ................................................................................................158Future Research Directions ................................................................................158

7.5 Emissions of Tropospheric Ozone Precursors and Black Carbon......................159Potential Role of Technology ....................................................................................159Technology Strategy ..................................................................................................159Current Portfolio........................................................................................................160Future Research Directions ......................................................................................160


Enhancing Capabilities to Measure and Monitor Greenhouse Gases ..165

8.1 Potential Role of Technology ....................................................................................1668.2 Energy Production and Efficiency Technologies ..................................................168

Technology Strategy ..................................................................................................168Current Portfolio........................................................................................................169Future Research Directions ......................................................................................169

8.3 CO2 Capture and Sequestration ................................................................................169Geologic Sequestration ..............................................................................................170

Technology Strategy ............................................................................................170Current Portfolio ................................................................................................170Future Research Directions ................................................................................171

Terrestrial Sequestration ............................................................................................171Technology Strategy ............................................................................................171Current Portfolio ................................................................................................172Future Research Directions ................................................................................173

Oceanic Sequestration................................................................................................174Technology Strategy ............................................................................................174Current Portfolio ................................................................................................174Future Research Directions ................................................................................174

8.4 Other Greenhouse Gases ..........................................................................................176Technology Strategy ..................................................................................................176Current Portfolio........................................................................................................176Future Research Directions ......................................................................................177

8

IX


8.5 Integrated Measurement and Monitoring System Architecture ................page 179Technology Strategy ..................................................................................................179Current Portfolio........................................................................................................180Future Research Directions ......................................................................................181

8.6 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................1828.7 References......................................................................................................................184

Bolster Basic Science Contributions to Technology Development ..........185

9.1 Strategic Research ........................................................................................................186Research Supporting Emissions Reductions from Energy End-Use and Infrastructure ......................................................................................................187Research Supporting Emissions Reductions from Energy Supply ........................190Research Supporting Capture and Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide....................193Research Supporting Emissions Reductions of Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gases......195Basic Research Supporting Enhanced Capabilities to Measure and Monitor Greenhouse Gases ......................................................................................................195Cross-cutting Strategic Research Areas ....................................................................196

9.2 Fundamental Science ..................................................................................................196Physical Sciences ........................................................................................................196Biological Sciences......................................................................................................198Environmental Sciences ............................................................................................199Advanced Scientific Computation ............................................................................200Fusion Sciences ..........................................................................................................200

9.3 Exploratory Research ..................................................................................................201Novel Concepts ..........................................................................................................201Advanced Concepts ....................................................................................................202Integrative Concepts ..................................................................................................202Enabling Concepts ....................................................................................................202Integrated Planning and Decision-Support Tools....................................................203

9.4 Toward Enhanced Integration in R&D Planning Processes ..............................2049.5 References......................................................................................................................206

Summary and Next Steps........................................................................................207

10.1 Summary ......................................................................................................................20710.2 Next Steps....................................................................................................................21310.3 Closing..........................................................................................................................216

Appendix A – Federal Research, Development, Demonstration, and DeploymentInvestment Portfolio for Fiscal Years 2005 and 2006, with Budget Request Information for Fiscal Year 2007, U.S. Climate Change Technology Program ..................217

A.1 Climate Change Technology Program Classification Criteria ..........................217A.2 Climate Change Technology Program Example Activities ................................218A.3 CCTP Participating Agencies, Budgets, and Requests ........................................218

Appendix B – National Climate Change Technology Initiative Priorities – FY 2007 Request ......................................................................................................................221

10

9

X


1-1 U.S. Goal is Sound Stewardship of the Earth’s Climate System ..........................................................................page 11-2 Cabinet-Level Committee on Climate Change Science and Technology Integration ................................................4

2-1 Series of CCTP Reports....................................................................................................................................................92-2 Transportation – A Major End-Use Source of GHG Emissions ................................................................................112-3 Electric Power – A Major Energy Supply Source of GHG Emissions........................................................................122-4 CO2 Capture and Storage – A Means for Reducing CO2 Emissions ..........................................................................132-5 Landfill Gas Capture – A Means for Reducing Emissions of Other GHGs ..............................................................142-6 Measuring and Monitoring Systems Inform GHG Mitigation Strategies ..................................................................152-7 Fundamental Discoveries Help Overcome Barriers to Technical Progress ................................................................162-8 CCTP-Sponsored Workshop Reviewing the Federal R&D Portfolio ........................................................................17

3-1 Emissions of GHGs in 2000 ..........................................................................................................................................263-2 Global Mean Radiative Forcing of the Climate System for the Year 2000, Relative to 1750 ....................................273-3 Primary Energy Use Projections Using Various Energy-Economic Models and Assumptions ................................283-4 CO2 Emissions Projections from Energy Use Using Various Energy-Economic Models

and Assumptions ..............................................................................................................................................................293-5 Net CO2 Emissions from Land Use Change ................................................................................................................323-6 Methane Emissions Projections from the EMF-21 Study, With No Explicit Initiatives

to Reduce GHG Emissions ............................................................................................................................................343-7 Nitrous Oxide Emissions Projections from the EMF-21 Study, With No Explicit

Initiatives to Reduce GHG Emissions............................................................................................................................343-8 Radiative Forcing in a Reference Case Scenario............................................................................................................353-9 Radiative Forcing Levels under Different Degrees of Constraint ..............................................................................35

3-10 Illustrative CO2 Emissions Profiles and Corresponding Concentrations ....................................................................363-11 Potential Scale of CO2 Emissions Reductions to Stabilize GHG Concentrations:

Hypothetical Unconstrained and Constrained Emissions Scenarios............................................................................373-12 World Primary Energy Demand for Three Advanced Technology Scenarios Under

a High GHG Emissions Constraint Case ......................................................................................................................413-13 World Carbon Dioxide Emissions for Three Advanced Technology Scenarios Under

a High GHG Emissions Constraint Case ......................................................................................................................413-14 Cost Reductions Associated with Three Advanced Technology Scenarios, Compared

to a Baseline Case without Advanced Technologies ......................................................................................................423-15 Global CO2 Emissions Intensity versus Global Energy Intensity ................................................................................453-16 Global CO2 Emissions Intensity versus Percentage of Renewable and Nuclear Energy

in the Energy Supply Mix................................................................................................................................................463-17 Carbon Dioxide Captured and Stored, as a Function of Primary Energy (PE) Supplied

from Fossil Fuels for Various IPCC Scenarios ..............................................................................................................483-18 World Non-CO2 GHG Emissions Under High Emissions Constraints ....................................................................503-19 Cumulative Contributions between 2000 and 2100 to the Reduction, Avoidance,

Capture and Sequestration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions for the Three Advanced Technology Scenarios, Under Varying Carbon Constraints ........................................................................................51

4-1 Transportation Sector Energy Use by Mode and Type ................................................................................................594-2 Hydrogen Fuel Cell Bus ..................................................................................................................................................614-3 Refrigerator Energy Efficiency ......................................................................................................................................644-4 Compact Fluorescent Light Bulb....................................................................................................................................654-5 Patriot House: Energy Efficient House..........................................................................................................................664-6 Four Possible Pathways to Increased Industrial Efficiency ..........................................................................................694-7 Oxy-fuel Firing for Glass Manufacturing ......................................................................................................................704-8 Superconducting Motor ..................................................................................................................................................724-9 HTS Wire ......................................................................................................................................................................74

XI


FIGURES

4-10 A Distributed Energy Future..................................................................................................................................page 754-11 Technologies for Goal #1: Reduce Emissions from End Use and Infrastructure........................................................79

5-1 World Electricity Generation..........................................................................................................................................825-2 World Primary Energy Supply........................................................................................................................................825-3 Coal-Based Energy Complex ..........................................................................................................................................845-4 Advanced Gas Turbine ....................................................................................................................................................855-5 Hydrogen Fuel Cell ........................................................................................................................................................875-6 Possible Hydrogen Pathways ..........................................................................................................................................895-7 H2 Dispenser ..................................................................................................................................................................905-8 Growth of Wind Capacity ..............................................................................................................................................935-9 U.S. Biomass Resources ..................................................................................................................................................94

5-10 U.S. Solar Resources ......................................................................................................................................................945-11 U.S. Wind Resources ......................................................................................................................................................955-12 U.S. Geothermal Resources ............................................................................................................................................955-13 Bioenergy Cycle ..............................................................................................................................................................965-14 Biomass as Feedstock for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry ................................................................................975-15 Photovoltaic Film ............................................................................................................................................................995-16 Offshore Wind Farm ....................................................................................................................................................1015-17 Nuclear Power Plant......................................................................................................................................................1035-18 Nuclear Reactors Under Active Construction Worldwide ........................................................................................1045-19 Future Nuclear Power Concepts ................................................................................................................................1065-20 National Compact Stellarator Experiment ..................................................................................................................1095-21 ITER International Magnetic Fusion Experiment ......................................................................................................1105-22 Technologies for Goal #2: Reducing Emissions from Energy Supply ......................................................................111

6-1 Terrestrial Sequestration: Woody Crops ......................................................................................................................1246-2 Role of the Ocean in the Carbon Cycle ......................................................................................................................1276-3 Technologies for Goal #3: CO2 Capture, Storage, and Sequestration ......................................................................131

7-1 Methane Piping..............................................................................................................................................................1417-2 Coal Mine Ventilation System ......................................................................................................................................1437-3 Advanced Airborne Natural Gas Leak Detection System ..........................................................................................1457-4 Precision Agriculture and No-till Planting ..................................................................................................................1477-5 Suring Ambico Manure Management System ............................................................................................................1497-6 Astron Remote Plasma Source for Reducing PFC Emissions from Semiconductor Manufacturing. ........................1537-7 Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) Cover Gas ..........................................................................................................................1557-8 Nitrogen Oxides from Combustion Sources................................................................................................................1587-9 Understanding Black Carbon from Combustion ........................................................................................................161

7-10 Technologies for Goal #4: Reduce Emissions of Other Gases ..................................................................................163

8-1 Earth Observation Satellites Such as CALIPSO ........................................................................................................1658-2 Measurement and Monitoring Technologies for Assessing the Efficacy, Durability,

and Environmental Effects of Emission Reduction and Stabilization Technologies................................................1668-3 NASA “A” Train Satellite Constellation System ........................................................................................................1768-4 Integrating System Architectural Linking Measurement and Monitoring Observation

Systems to Greenhouse Gas Reduction Actions..........................................................................................................1798-5 Hierarchical Layers of Spatial Observation Technologies and Capabilities ..............................................................1808-6 Technologies for Goal #5: Measure and Monitor Emissions......................................................................................183

XII


XIII


9-1 Fundamental Science Helps to Enable Technology Innovation ........................................................................page 1859-2 Laser-Assisted Welding Imaging System......................................................................................................................1879-3 Use of Synchrotron Radiation for Materials Research................................................................................................1899-4 Magnetic Fusion Energy Simulations ..........................................................................................................................1939-5 Laser-Based Surface Analysis to Measure Trace Impurities........................................................................................1959-6 Nanoscale Materials Science Enables New Molecular Functionality ........................................................................1989-7 Free-Air CO2 Enrichment Facility ..............................................................................................................................1999-8 Stable Enzymes Embedded in Biomimetic Nanomembrane......................................................................................203

10-1 Earth as Seen from Space ..............................................................................................................................................20710-2 Comparative Analysis of Estimated Cumulative Costs Over the 21st Century

of GHG Mitigation, With and Without Advanced Technologies, Across a Range of Hypothesized GHG Emissions Constraints............................................................................................................209

10-3 Climate Change Technology Development and Deployment for the 21st Century ................................................21110-4 Westinghouse AP1000 Advanced Nuclear Reactor ....................................................................................................21210-5 Coal-Based FutureGen Energy-Plex ............................................................................................................................21310-6 Switchgrass as Cellulosic Feedstock for Bio-Based Fuels............................................................................................21410-7 White Light From Inorganic, Multi-Color Light-Emitting Diodes as Advanced Lighting Concept ........................21510-8 Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate ..................................................................................216

1-1 Federal Agencies Participating in the U.S. Climate Change Technology Program ............................................page 6

3-1 Estimated Timing of the First GtC-eq./Year of Reduced or Avoided Emissions (Compared to the Reference Case) for Advanced Technology Scenarios....................................................................43

4-1 CO2 Emissions in the United States by End-Use Sector, 2003....................................................................................584-2 CO2 Emissions in the United States from Transportation, by Mode, in 2003............................................................594-3 Residential and Commercial CO2 Emissions in the United States, by Source, in 2003 ............................................634-4 CO2 Emissions in the United States from Industrial Sources in 2003 ........................................................................68

7-1 Target Areas for Reducing Emissions of Non-CO2 GHGs........................................................................................1387-2 U.S. and Global Methane Emissions from Energy and Waste ..................................................................................1397-3 Change in U.S. Methane Emissions from Energy and Waste....................................................................................1407-4 U.S. and Global CH4 and N2O Emissions from Agriculture ....................................................................................1467-5 U.S. and Global Emissions of High-GWP Gases ......................................................................................................1517-6 U.S. and Global N2O Emissions from Combustion and Industrial Sources ............................................................156

8-1 Proposed R&D Portfolio for Measurement and Monitoring of Energy Production and Use Technologies ....................................................................................................................................................168

8-2 Proposed R&D Portfolio for Measurement and Monitoring Systems for Geologic Sequestration..................................................................................................................................................170

9-1 Cross-Cutting Strategic Research Areas ......................................................................................................................197

10-1 Estimated Cumulative GHG Emissions Mitigation (GtC) from Accelerated Adoption of Advanced Technologies over the 21st Century, by Strategic Goal, Across a Range of Hypothesized GHG Emissions Constraints ................................................................................208

10-2 Estimated Timing of Advanced Technology Market Penetrations, as Indicated by the First GtC-Eq./Year of Incremental Emissions Mitigation5, by Strategic Goal, Across a Range of Hypothesized GHG Emissions Constraints ................................................................................210

TABLES

ABR Advanced Burner ReactorAFCI Advanced Fuel Cycle InitiativeAFV Alternative Fuel VehiclesAGAGE Advanced Global Atmospheric Gases

ExperimentANL Argonne National LaboratoryAPS Aerosol Polarimetery SensorAUV Autonomous Underwater Vehicles

BC Black CarbonBES Office of Basic Energy Sciences,

U.S. Department of EnergyBESAC Basic Energy Sciences Advisory

CommitteeBP British PetroleumBtu British Thermal Unit

CCCSTI Committee on Climate Change Scienceand Technology Integration

CCP Carbon Capture ProjectCCS Carbon Capture and SequestrationCCSP U.S. Climate Change Science ProgramCCTP U.S. Climate Change Technology

ProgramCDIAC Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis

CentreCEM Continuous Emissions MonitorCETC Natural Resources Canada CANMET

Energy Technology CenterCEQ Council on Environmental QualityCFC ChlorofluorocarbonCH4 MethaneCHP Combined Heat and Power (system)CMM Coal Mine Methane

XIV


2-1 CCTP Portfolio Planning and Investment Criteria ............................................................................................page 212-2 CCTP Working Groups..................................................................................................................................................22

3-1 The SRES Scenarios........................................................................................................................................................313-2 How Big is One Gigaton/Year of GHG Reduction? ..................................................................................................38

5-1 Renewable Energy and Fuels Technologies ..................................................................................................................92

6-1 Weyburn II CO2 Storage Project..................................................................................................................................1166-2 Metal Organic Frameworks ..........................................................................................................................................1176-3 Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum ....................................................................................................................1176-4 CO2 Storage in Stacked Formation ..............................................................................................................................1186-5 Future Gen ....................................................................................................................................................................1206-6 Coal Swelling..................................................................................................................................................................1216-7 Physiological Mechanisms of Growth, Response, and Adaptation in Forest Trees ..................................................125

7-1 What are the “Other” Greenhouse gases? ..................................................................................................................1357-2 Global Warming Potentials of Selected Greenhouse Gases ......................................................................................136 7-3 Methane to Markets ......................................................................................................................................................137

8-1 Geological Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide ..............................................................................................................1718-2 Agriflux............................................................................................................................................................................1728-3 Ameriflux ........................................................................................................................................................................1728-4 Diagnostic Technologies................................................................................................................................................1738-5 World Ocean Circulation Experiment ........................................................................................................................1758-6 Concepts for Global CO2 and Black Carbon Measurements ....................................................................................178 8-7 NOAA Regional Carbon Monitoring ..........................................................................................................................181

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

BOXES

CMOP Coalbed Methane Outreach ProgramCO2 Carbon DioxideCOL Construction and Operating LicenseCSLF Carbon Sequestration Leadership ForumCSP Competitive Solicitation ProgramCSRP Carbon Sequestration Regional

PartnershipsCT Computed TomographyCVD Chemical Vapor Deposition

DAI Dangerous Anthropogenic InterferenceDG Distributed GenerationDOC U.S. Department of CommerceDoD U.S. Department of DefenseDOE U.S. Department of EnergyDOI U.S. Department of the InteriorDOS U.S. Department of StateDOT U.S. Department of TransportationDPC Domestic Policy Council

ECBM Enhanced Coal-Bed MethaneEIA Energy Information AdministrationEJ Exajoule (1018 Joules)EMF Energy Modeling Forum, Stanford

UniversityEOR Enhanced Oil RecoveryEPA U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyESP Early Site PermitEuratom European Atomic Energy CommunityEU European UnionFACE Free-Air CO2 Enrichment FACTS Flexible Automated Control Transmission

SystemsFC Fuel CellFCT Fuel Cell TurbineFES Fusion Energy Sciences, U.S. Department

of Energy, Office of ScienceFFRDC Federally Funded Research and

Development CenterFHA Federal Highway AdministrationFTC Federal Trade CommissionFTIR Fourier Transform Infrared SpectroscopyFY Fiscal YearGDP Gross Domestic ProductGen IV Generation IVGEO Group on Earth Observations GEO-SEQ Geological Sequestration

(project) GEOSS Global Earth Observation System of

SystemsGHG Greenhouse GasGIF Generation IV International Forum

(nuclear power)GOSAT Greenhouse Gas Observing SATelliteGt Gigatonnes (109 tonnes or

metric tons)GtC Gigatonnes (109 tonnes or

metric tons) of Carbon

GtC-eq. Gigatonnes (109 tonnes or metric tons) of Carbon Equivalent (emissions)

GWP Global Warming Potential

H2 Molecular HydrogenH2S Hydrogen SulfideHAP Hazardous Air Pollutants HCFC Hydroclorofluorocarbon (refrigerant)HFC HydrofluorocarbonHHS U.S. Department of Health and Human

ServicesHNLC High Nutrient, Low ChlorophyllHSHL High Spectral Resolution LIDARHTS High-Temperature Superconductivity

(e.g. wire)HVACR Heating, Ventilation, Air Conditioning,

and RefrigerationHVDC High Voltage Direct Current

IAEA International Atomic Energy AgencyICF Inertial Confinement FusionIEA International Energy AgencyIEOS Integrated Earth Observation SystemIFE Inertial Fusion EnergyIGCC Integrated Gasification Combined CycleIMSS Image Multi-Spectral Sensor IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

ChangeIPHE International Partnership for the

Hydrogen EconomyITER International Thermonuclear

Experimental Reactor (Latin for “the way”)

ITS Intelligent Transportation SystemsIWG Interagency Working Group

kg KilogramkW KilowattkWe Kilowatt (electric)kWh Kilowatt-hour

LANL Los Alamos National LaboratoryLCCP Life-Cycle Climate PerformanceLED Light-Emitting DiodeLFG Landfill GasLH2 Liquefied HydrogenLIBS Laser Induced Breakdown SpectroscopyLIDAR Light Detection and RangingLNLC Low Nutrient, Low Chlorophyll

MEA Monoethanolamine MFE Magnetic Fusion EnergyMiniCAM Mini Climate Assessment Model (Pacific

Northwest National Laboratory)MM Measuring and MonitoringMOF Microporous Metal Organic Frameworksmpg miles per gallonmph miles per hour

XV


MSPI Multi-angle SpectroPolarimetric ImagerMtC Megatonnes CarbonMWe Megawatt electric

N2O Nitrous OxideNACP North American Carbon ProgramNAE National Academy of EngineeringNAS National Academy of SciencesNASA National Aeronautics and Space

AdministrationNEC National Economic CouncilNEPO Nuclear Energy Plant Optimization

(Program)NCCTI National Climate Change Technology

InitiativeNERAC Nuclear Energy Research Advisory

CommitteeNETL National Energy Technology LaboratoryNH3 AmmoniaNIF National Ignition FacilityNNSA National Nuclear Security

Administration, U.S Department ofEnergy

NOX Nitrogen OxidesNOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric

AdministrationNRC National Research Council or Nuclear

Regulatory CommissionNRCan Natural Resources CanadaNREL National Renewable Energy LaboratoryNSC National Security CouncilNSCR Non-Selective Catalytic ReductionNSF National Science FoundationNSTX National Spherical Torus ExperimentNVFEL National Vehicle and Fuels Emission

Laboratory

OC Organic CarbonOCO Orbiting Carbon ObservatoryODS Ozone-Depleting SubstanceOMB Office of Management and BudgetONR Office of Naval ResearchORNL Oak Ridge National LaboratoryOSTP Office of Science and Technology Policy

PEM Polymer Electrolyte MembranePFC PerfluorocarbonsPM Particulate MatterPNNL Pacific Northwest National LaboratoryPOU Point Of UsePPPL Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory PV Present Value

Quad Quadrillion Btus (1015 Btus)

R&D Research and Development. Also usedgenerically to mean RD&D and RDD&D

RD&D Research, Development, andDemonstration

RDD&D Research, Development, Demonstration,& Deployment

RFI Request for Information

SCR Selective Catalytic ReductionSF6 Sulfur HexafluorideSNAP Significant New Alternatives ProgramSOFeX Southern Ocean Iron Fertilization

ExperimentSOIREE Southern Ocean Iron Enrichment

ExperimentSOX Sulfur OxidesSQUIDS Superconducting Quantum Interference

DevicesSRES Special Report on Emissions Scenarios

(of the IPCC)

T&D Transmission and Distribution TgC Teragrams of CarbonTg CO2 Teragrams Carbon DioxideTg CO2-eq. Teragrams Carbon Dioxide Equivalent

(emissions)

UN United NationsUNDP United Nations Development ProgramUNEP United Nations Environmental ProgramUNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention

on Climate ChangeUSAID U.S. Agency for International

DevelopmentUSDA U.S. Department of AgricultureUSGEO United States Group on Earth

Observation

VAM Ventilation Air MethaneVOC Volatile Organic Compounds

W/m2 Watts per Square MeterWCRP World Climate Research ProgramWG Working GroupWMO World Meteorological OrganizationWOCE World Ocean Circulation ExperimentWRE T. Wigley, R. Richels, and J. Edmonds

XVI


1As a party to the United Nations FrameworkConvention on Climate Change (UNFCCC),1 theUnited States shares with many other countries theUNFCCC’s ultimate objective, that is, the“…stabilization of greenhouse gas2 concentrations inEarth’s atmosphere at a level that would preventdangerous anthropogenic interference with theclimate system . . . within a time-frame sufficient toallow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change,to ensure that food production is not threatened, andto enable economic development to proceed in asustainable manner.” Meeting this objective willrequire a sustained, long-term commitment by allnations over many generations.

1

The 21st century will see substantial changes in economic and social development aroundthe world, with accompanying transformations in the way the world uses energy and its

natural resources. The 20th century witnessed revolutionary innovations in technologies usedto produce goods and services, power homes and buildings, and transport people and goods.These innovations have contributed significantly to the prosperity that the United States andmany other countries currently enjoy. Continued innovations will be just as important inmaking possible a prosperous future for countries around the world as they are for enablingsound stewardship of the environment, including the Earth’s climate system (Figure 1-1).

Introduction

Chapter 1 • Strategic Plan • September 2006

I’ve asked my advisors to consider approaches to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, including those that tap

the power of markets, help realize the promise of technology and ensure the widest-possible global

participation….Our actions should be measured as we learn more from science and build on it. Our approach

must be flexible to adjust to new information and take advantage of new technology. We must always act to

ensure continued economic growth and prosperity for our citizens and for citizens throughout the world.

PRESIDENT BUSH (6/11/01)

1 The UNFCCC was adopted by 157 countries in 1992; as of May 24, 2004, 189 Parties, including the European Economic Community, had ratifiedthe UNFCCC.

2 Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are those gaseous constituents of the atmosphere, both natural and anthropogenic, that absorb and emit radiation atspecific wavelengths within the spectrum of infrared radiation emitted by the Earth’s surface, the atmosphere and clouds. This property causes thegreenhouse effect. Water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrous oxide (N2O) methane (CH4), and ozone (O3) are the primary GHGs in the Earth’satmosphere. Moreover, there are a number of entirely human-made GHGs in the atmosphere, such as the halocarbons and other chlorine- andbromine-containing substances, dealt with under the Montreal Protocol. Besides CO2, N2O, and CH4, the Kyoto Protocol deals with the GHGs sul-phur hexafluoride (SF6), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and perfluorocarbons (PFCs). Gases dealt with under the Montreal Protocol are excluded fromthe Climate Change Technology Program (CCTP) purview.

Figure 1-1. Courtesy: NASA, Hasler Laboratory for AtmospheresGoddard Space Flight Center, Credit: Nelson Stockli

Although scientific understanding of climate changecontinues to evolve, the potential ramifications ofincreasing accumulations of carbon dioxide (CO2) andother greenhouse gases (GHGs) in the Earth’satmosphere have heightened attention onanthropogenic sources of GHG emissions and variousmeans to mitigate them. Most long-term, prospectiveanalyses project significant increases of anthropogenicGHG emissions over the next century, stemmingprimarily from global population growth, economicexpansion, and a continuation of existing patterns andtrends in energy use (combustion of fossil fuels), landuse, and industrial and agricultural production.Energy is the biggest source of emissions. Over 80percent of current anthropogenic GHG emissions areenergy related, and although projections varyconsiderably, a tripling of global energy demand by2100 is not unimaginable. The International EnergyAgency (2004) estimates that 1.6 billion people lackaccess to electricity. Governments around the worldare working to ensure that their people have access toenergy to power economic development.

A realistic climate change policy, therefore, mustembrace these and other legitimate concerns. Indeed,the most effective way to meet this challenge is not tofocus solely on GHG emissions, but on a broaderagenda that promotes economic growth, providesenergy security, reduces pollution, and mitigatesGHG emissions. It is within this context that U.Sclimate change policy has been developed.Accordingly, the United States places special emphasison the fundamental importance of science andtechnology as a means of achieving climate goals inways that support these other societal goals. Morethan $25 billion has been so invested since 2001.Ultimately, meeting these complementary goals mayentail fundamental changes in the way the worldproduces and consumes energy, operates industrialenterprises, grows food and fiber, and manages anduses its land.

The United States has established and implemented arobust and flexible climate change policy thatharnesses the power of markets and technologicalinnovation, uses the best available science, maintainseconomic growth, and encourages globalparticipation. Major elements of this approach include

implementing policies and measures to slow thegrowth in GHG emissions, advancing climate changescience, accelerating technology development, andpromoting international collaboration.

For the near term, the President has set a nationalgoal to reduce the GHG emissions intensity of theU.S. economy by 18 percent between 2002 and 2012.3

To this end, the Administration has developed anarray of policy measures, including financialincentives, voluntary programs, and other Federalefforts. These include the Climate VISION,4 ClimateLeaders,5 ENERGY STAR®,6 and SmartWayTransport Partnership7 programs, all of which workwith industry to voluntarily reduce emissions. TheDepartment of Energy encourages entity-wideemissions reductions through its Voluntary Reportingof Greenhouse Gases program, which was authorizedunder section 1605 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992.The Department of Agriculture’s conservationprograms provide incentives for actions that increasecarbon sequestration8 in trees and soils. Energyefficiency, alternative fuels, renewable and nuclearenergy, methane capture, and other GHG reductionprograms and financial incentives are also underway.

The Energy Policy Act of 2005, which the Presidentsigned into law in August 2005, also promotes cleanenergy technologies. The Act authorizesapproximately $11 billion (net) in tax credits over 10years for a broad range of clean technologies,including those associated with energy efficiency andconservation, renewable energy, clean vehicles andalternative fuels, clean coal, nuclear power, and othertechnologies, all of which can potentially contributeto reducing GHG emissions. It also: authorizes loanguarantee programs that may help to accelerate thecommercialization of advanced energy technologieswith potential to reduce GHG emissions in thefuture; mandates the use of renewable fuels (such asethanol and biodiesel) in gasoline, increasing their usefrom 4.0 billion gallons in 2006 to 7.5 billion gallonsin 2012; authorizes standby support coverage forcertain regulatory delays for up to six new nuclearplants; and authorizes the setting of efficiencystandards for more than a dozen additional energy-using products.

2


3 Intensity means emissions per unit of economic output. See White House Fact Sheet on Climate Change, www.whitehouse.gov/news/releas-es/2003/09/20030930-11.html.

4 See http://www.climatevision.gov.5 See http://www.epa.gov/climateleaders.6 See http://www.energystar.gov. 7 See http://www.epa.gov/smartway.8 See http://www.usda.gov/news/releases/2003/06/fs-0194.htm.

Internationally, the Administration believes that well-designed multilateral collaborations focused onachieving practical results can accelerate developmentand commercialization of new technologies, and theUnited States has brought together key nations tojointly tackle some tough energy challenges. Thesemultilateral collaborations in hydrogen, carbonsequestration, nuclear power, methane recovery anduse, and fusion energy mirror the main strategicthrusts of our domestic technology researchprograms. They address a number of complementaryenergy concerns, such as energy security, climatechange, and environmental stewardship. Theseprograms are discussed in greater detail in Chapter 2.

The technology-focused approach that puts climatechange in the context of broader development goals isgaining adherents in many parts of the world. In July2005, the Group of Eight Leaders meeting atGleneagles, Scotland agreed to a Plan of Action onClimate Change, Clean Energy, and SustainableDevelopment9 that is based on over fifty specific,practical activities, mostly focused on technologydevelopment and deployment. Later that samemonth, the United States, Australia, China, India,Japan, and South Korea announced they were joiningtogether to accelerate clean development under thenew Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Developmentand Climate (APP).10 The focus of APP will be onhelping each country meet nationally-designedstrategies for improving energy security, reducingharmful pollution, promoting economic development,and addressing the long-term challenge of climatechange.

This integrated approach, which supports theUNFCCC objective, forms the long-term planningenvironment in which this Plan was developed.Significant progress toward meeting the climatechange goals can be facilitated over the course of the21st century by new and revolutionary technologiesthat can reduce, avoid, capture, or sequester GHGemissions, while also continuing to provide theenergy-related and other services needed to sustaineconomic growth. The U.S. strategy for developingthese technologies, both in the near and long term, isoutlined in this Plan, which builds on America’sstrengths in innovation and technology.11 The United

States is committed to leading the development ofthese new technologies.

The Plan takes a century-long look at the nature ofthis challenge, across a range of planninguncertainties, and explores an array of opportunitiesfor technological solutions.12 The Plan articulates avision for new and advanced technology in addressingclimate change concerns, defines a supportingplanning and coordination mission, and providesstrategic direction to the Federal agencies informulating a comprehensive portfolio of relatedtechnology research, development, demonstration,and deployment (R&D).13 The Plan establishes sixstrategic goals and seven approaches to be pursuedtoward their attainment and identifies a series of nextsteps toward implementation.

U.S. Leadership and PresidentialCommitment

Soon after assuming office, the President initiated acabinet-level climate change policy review anddirected that innovative approaches for addressingclimate change concerns be developed in accordancewith a number of basic principles. Specifically, theapproaches should: (1) be consistent with the long-term goal of stabilizing GHG concentrations in theatmosphere; (2) be measured as we learn more fromscience and build on it; (3) be flexible to adjust to newinformation and take advantage of new technology;(4) ensure continued economic growth andprosperity; (5) pursue market-based incentives andspur technological innovation; and (6) be based onglobal participation, including developing countries.

In June 2001, the Administration released an interimreport of the Cabinet-level climate change workinggroup, and President Bush unveiled, among otherinitiatives, the National Climate Change TechnologyInitiative (NCCTI).14 Backed by significant levels ofFederal investment in climate change R&D and

1.1

3


9 See http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/07/20050708-2.html. 10 See http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/07/20050727-9.html.11 See technology roadmaps as described in Chapters 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 10.12 To achieve GHG stabilization, emission reductions must continue beyond the 100-year CCTP planning horizon.13 Throughout this report, the use of the term “R&D” is meant generally to include research, development, demonstration, and technology adoption

programs. However, where relevant, the report distinguishes research and development from demonstration and deployment, as each activity hasdifferent rationales, different appropriate roles for the private sector, and different associated policy instruments.

related areas, this Presidential initiative signaled aU.S. intent to maintain the United States’ position asa world leader in the pursuit of advanced technologiesthat could, if successful, help meet this globalchallenge. The President said:

[W]e’re creating the National Climate Change TechnologyInitiative to strengthen research at universities andnational labs, to enhance partnerships in applied research,to develop improved technology for measuring andmonitoring gross and net greenhouse gas emissions, and tofund demonstration projects for cutting-edge technologies.

In February 2002, the President reorganized Federaloversight, management, and administrative control ofclimate-change-related activities. He established aCabinet-level Committee on Climate Change Scienceand Technology Integration (CCCSTI) and chargedit with coordinating and advancing, in an integratedfashion, climate change science and technologyresearch. This action directly engaged the heads of all

relevant departments and agencies in guiding anddirecting these activities. Directly under the CCCSTIis an Interagency Working Group (IWG) on ClimateChange Science and Technology composed of agencydeputies.

Under the auspices of the CCCSTI, two multi-agency programs were established to coordinateFederal activities in climate change scientific researchand advance the President’s vision under his ClimateChange Research Initiative and National ClimateChange Technology Initiative. These are known,respectively, as the U.S. Climate Change ScienceProgram (CCSP), led by the Department ofCommerce, and the U.S. Climate ChangeTechnology Program (CCTP), led by the Departmentof Energy (Figure 1-2).

4


Figure 1-2. Cabinet-Level Committee on Climate Change Science and Technology Integration

Cabinet-Level Committee on Climate Change Science and Technology Integration

14 White House Rose Garden speech: www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/06/20010611-2.html.

U.S. Climate ChangeScience Program

CCSP is an interagency research planning andcoordinating entity responsible for facilitating thedevelopment of a strategic approach to Federallysupported research, integrated across the participatingagencies. Collectively, the activities under CCSPconstitute a comprehensive research program chargedwith investigating natural and human-inducedchanges in the Earth’s global environmental system,monitoring important climate parameters, predictingglobal change, and providing a sound scientific basisfor national and international decision-making. Itsprincipal aim is to improve understanding of climatechange and its potential consequences. CCSPoperates under the direction of the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphereand reports through the IWG to the CCCSTI(Figure 1-2).

Regarding climate change science, on May 11, 2001,the President asked the National Academies NationalResearch Council (NRC) to examine the state ofknowledge and understanding of climate change.The resulting NRC report concluded that “thechanges observed over the last several decades aremost likely due to human activities, but we cannotrule out that some significant part of these changes isalso a reflection of natural variability.” The reportalso noted that there are still major gaps in our abilityto measure the impacts of GHGs on the climatesystem. Major advances in understanding andmodeling of the climate system, including its responseto natural and human-induced forcing, and modelingof the factors that influence atmosphericconcentrations of GHGs and aerosols, as well as thefeedbacks that govern climate sensitivity, are neededto predict future climate change with greaterconfidence.

In July 2003, CCSP released its strategic plan15 forguiding climate research. The plan is organizedaround five goals: (1) improving the knowledge ofclimate history and variability; (2) improving theability to quantify factors that affect climate; (3)reducing uncertainty in climate projections; (4)

improving the understanding of the sensitivity andadaptability of ecosystems and human systems toclimate change; and (5) exploring options to managerisks. In Fiscal Year 2005, the Federal Governmentspent about $2 billion on research related toadvancing climate change science.16

A subsequent NRC review17 of the CCSP strategicplan concluded that the Administration is on the righttrack, stating that the plan “articulates a guidingvision, is appropriately ambitious, and is broad inscope.” The NRC’s report also identified the needfor a broad global observation system to supportmeasurements of climate variables.

In June 2003, the United States hosted more than 30nations at the inaugural Earth Observation Summit,which resulted in a commitment to establish anintergovernmental, comprehensive, coordinated, andsustained Earth observation system.18 The datacollected by the system will be used for multiplesocietal benefit areas, including better climate models,improved knowledge of the behavior of CO2 andaerosols in the atmosphere, and the development ofstrategies for carbon sequestration.

Since that initial meeting, two additional ministerialsummits have been held, and the intergovernmentalpartnership has grown to nearly 60 nations. At themost recent meeting, Earth Observation Summit III

1.2

5


15 See http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/stratplan2003/final/default.htm. 16 See Appendix A and http://www.usgcrp.gov/usgcrp/Library/ocp2004-5/default.htm. 17 See http://books.nap.edu/catalog/10139.html. 18 See http://www.earthobservationsummit.gov.

6


AGENCY* SELECTED EXAMPLES OF CLIMATE CHANGE-RELATED TECHNOLOGY R&D ACTIVITIES

DOC Instrumentation, standards, ocean sequestration, decision support tools

DoD Aircraft, engines, fuels, trucks, equipment, power, fuel cells, lasers, energymanagement, basic research

DOEEnergy efficiency, renewable energy, nuclear fission and fusion, fossil fuels andpower, carbon sequestration, basic energy sciences, hydrogen, electric grid andinfrastructure

DOI Land, forest, and prairie management, mining, sequestration, geothermal,terrestrial sequestration technology development

DOS International science and technology cooperation, oceans, environment

DOT Aviation, highways, rail, freight, maritime, urban mass transit, transportationsystems, efficiency and safety

EPAMitigation of CO2 and non-CO2 GHG emissions through voluntary partnershipprograms, including ENERGY STAR®, Climate Leaders, Green Power, combinedheat and power, state and local clean energy, methane and high-GWP gases, andtransportation; GHG emissions inventory

HHS Environmental sciences, biotechnology, genome sequencing, health effects

NASA Earth observations, measuring, monitoring, aviation equipment, operations andinfrastructure efficiency

NSF Geosciences, oceans, nanoscale science and engineering, computational sciences

USAID International assistance, technology deployment, land use, human impacts

USDACarbon fluxes in soils, forests and other vegetation, carbon sequestration,nutrient management, cropping systems, forest and forest productsmanagement, livestock and waste management, biomass energy and bio-basedproducts development

* Agency titles for the acronyms above are shown in the list of Abbreviations and Acronyms

19 See http://iwgeo.ssc.nasa.gov.

in Brussels, a Ten-Year Implementation Plan for theGlobal Earth Observation System of Systems(GEOSS) was adopted, and the intergovernmentalGroup on Earth Observations was established tobegin implementation of the 2-, 6-, and 10-yeartargets identified in the plan. The U.S. contributionto GEOSS is the Integrated Earth ObservationSystem (IEOS). In April 2005, the USG Committeeon Environment and Natural Resources (CENR)released the Strategic Plan for the U.S. Integrated EarthObservation System19 that addresses the policy,technical, fiscal, and societal benefit components ofthis integrated system, and established the U.S.Group on Earth Observation (USGEO).

U.S. Climate ChangeTechnology Program

CCTP is the technology counterpart to CCSP. It is amulti-agency planning and coordinating entity, led bythe Department of Energy, aimed at accelerating thedevelopment of new and advanced technologies toaddress climate change. It works with participatingagencies (Table 1-1), provides strategic direction forthe CCTP-related elements of the overall FederalR&D portfolio, and facilitates the coordinated

1.3

Table 1-1. Federal AgenciesParticipating in theU.S. Climate ChangeTechnology Programand Examples ofRelated Activities.

Federal Agencies Participating in the U.S.Climate Change Technology Program and Examples of Related Activities

planning, programming, budgeting, andimplementation of the technology development anddeployment aspects of U.S. climate change strategy,including advancing the President’s NCCTI. TheCCTP operates under the direction of a senior-levelofficial at the Department of Energy and reportsthrough the IWG to the CCCSTI.

The Potential Role of Technology

Analyses documented in the literature (see Chapter 3)show that accelerated advances in technology have thepotential to facilitate progress towards meetingclimate change goals and, under certain assumptions,to significantly reduce the cost of such progress overthe course of the 21st century, compared to whatotherwise would be the case without acceleratedadvances in technology.20 Further, it is expected thatthe new technologies would create substantialopportunities for economic growth.

CCTP aims to achieve a balanced and diversifiedportfolio, including a broad range of deploymentactivities focusing on: energy-efficiencyenhancements; low-GHG-emission energy supplytechnologies; carbon capture, storage, andsequestration methods; and technologies to reduceemissions of non-CO2 gases. Conducting this R&Dwill help reduce technology risk and improve theprospects that such advanced technologies can beadapted to market realities, better positioning themfor eventual commercialization.

Together, CCSP and CCTP will help lay thefoundation for future progress. Advances in climatechange science under CCSP can be expected toimprove the knowledge of climate change and itspotential impacts. As a result, uncertainties about thecauses and effects of climate change and increasingconcentrations of GHGs will be better understood, aswill the potential benefits and risks of various coursesof action.

Similarly, advances in climate change technologyunder the CCTP can be expected to bring forth anexpanded array of advanced technology options, atreasonable costs, that can meet a range of societalneeds, including reducing GHG emissions. The paceand scope of needed technology change will be drivenpartially by future trends in GHG emissions that areuncertain. The complex relationships among

population growth; economic development; energydemand, mix, and intensity; resource availability;technology; and other variables make it difficult topredict with confidence future GHG emissions on a100-year time scale. Progress in the CCSP willprovide much of the information needed to guide andpace future decisions about climate change mitigation.CCTP will provide the means for enabling andfacilitating that progress.

Three publications issued by the CCTP provide moreinformation about CCTP and related technologies inthe CCTP R&D portfolio (see Appendix A). TheVision and Framework for Strategy and Planningprovides strategic direction and guidance to theFederal agencies developing new and advanced globalclimate change technologies. The Research andCurrent Activities report provides an overview of thescience, technology, and policy initiatives that makeup the Administration’s climate change technologystrategy. And the CCTP report, Technology Options forthe Near and Long Term, provides details on the 85technologies in the R&D portfolio.21 (Figure 2-1)

Continuing ProcessThe United States, in partnership with others, is nowembarked on a near- and long-term global challenge,guided by science and facilitated by advancedtechnology, to address concerns about climate changeand increasing concentrations of GHGs. This CCTPStrategic Plan is a first step toward guiding Federalinvestments in R&D to accelerate technologies thatwill address these concerns. It is hoped that this Planwill form the basis for continuing dialogue with thepublic and interested partners. The Plan will beupdated periodically, as needed. As noted earlier, thePlan is but one component of a comprehensiveapproach to climate change, which includes policymeasures, financial incentives, and voluntary andother Federal programs aimed at slowing the growthof U.S. GHG emissions and reducing GHG intensity.To the extent that technology development needs tobe complemented by additional and supportingpolicies and measures to spur adoption, CCTPintends to evaluate a number of options along theselines (see “Next Steps” in Chapter 10).

1.4

7


20 For example, see Battelle (2000) and IPCC (2000). 21 All three documents are available at www.climatetechnology.gov. The internet-based version of the report on Technology Options is updated periodically.

8


References1.5Battelle Memorial Institute. 2000. Global energy technology strategy: addressing climate change. Washington, DC: Battelle Memorial

Institute. http://www.pnl.gov/gtsp/docs/infind/cover.pdf

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2000. Special report on emissions scenarios. Cambridge, UK: University Press.http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/emission/index.htm.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001a. Climate change 2001: mitigation. Working Group III to the ThirdAssessment Report. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg3/index.htm.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001b. Climate change 2001: the scientific basis. Working Group I to theThird Assessment Report. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/index.htm.

International Energy Agency (IEA). 2004. World energy outlook 2004. Paris, France: Organization for Economic Cooperation andDevelopment.

National Research Council. 2004. Implementing climate and global change research: a review of the final U.S. Climate Change ScienceProgram Strategic Plan. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

National Research Council. 2001. Climate change science: an analysis of some key questions. Committee on the Science of ClimateChange. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

The White House. June 11, 2001. Climate change policy review – initial report.www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/06/climatechange.pdf.

2CCTP constitutes the technology component of acomprehensive U.S. approach to climate change thatincludes undertaking short-term actions to reducegreenhouse gas (GHG) emissions intensity, advancingclimate change science, and promoting internationalcooperation. CCTP’s purpose is to accelerate thedevelopment, and reduce the cost of, new andadvanced technologies, as well as promote thedeployment of advanced technologies and bestpractices that could avoid, reduce, or capture andstore GHG emissions. CCTP was established byPresident Bush to implement his National ClimateChange Technology Initiative (NCCTI) andcoordinate existing efforts. This initiative brings tobear America’s strengths in innovation andtechnology to address climate change concerns.

CCTP provides strategic direction and leadershipthrough interagency coordination of R&D planning,programming, and budgeting. To support thesefunctions, CCTP conducts analyses, technologyassessments, and progress reviews. CCTP’sinteragency working groups have representatives fromall participating agencies, and this Plan is animportant product of this interagency effort.

The focus of this Plan is technology research,development, demonstration, and deployment, and itprovides a broad roadmap to the future. It does not,however, provide detailed roadmaps for specifictechnologies. Such roadmaps are referenced in theappropriate sections throughout the document.Moreover, the Plan does not, nor is it intended to,provide a comprehensive mitigation strategy. It is nota policy document. It does not, for example, addresstechnology incentives (e.g., tax credits) or regulation(e.g., energy efficiency standards), but it does set acourse for evaluating such policies. Further, the Plan

makes no judgments as to what constitutes adangerous level of GHGs in the atmosphere. Forcentury-long planning, the technology portfolio mustbe designed to be robust in the face of a range ofplausible concentration target scenarios. Finally, thePlan is not a budget document, but provides aframework to set budget priorities.

The Plan was prepared by an interagency team andincludes the contributions of a broad range ofgovernment and non-government experts from manydifferent disciplines. It is a “first-of-its-kind”document that provides a comprehensive, long-termlook at the nature of the climate change challenge anddefines clear and promising roles for advancedtechnologies. CCTP has also published other reports(Figure 2-1).

This chapter outlines the vision, mission, strategicgoals, core approaches, R&D prioritization process,and management of the program.

9

The Climate Change Technology Program (CCTP) is a multi-agency planning andcoordination activity, led by the Department of Energy, which organizes and supports an

associated portfolio of Federal R&D.1 It was established under the Committee on ClimateChange Science and Technology Integration in 2002 and subsequently authorized in theEnergy Policy Act of 2005.

Vision, Mission, Goals, and Approaches

1 Throughout this report the use of the term “R&D” is meant generally to include research, development, demonstration, and technology adoption pro-grams. See also Footnote 14, Chapter 1.


Figure 2-1. CCTP has a number of publications that are availableat http://www.climatetechnology.gov.

Vision and MissionCCTP seeks to attain, in partnership with others, atechnological capability that could provide on a globalscale abundant, clean, secure, and affordable energyand other services needed to power economic growth,while simultaneously achieving substantial reductionsin emissions of GHGs (CCTP Vision). Withleadership in R&D and progress in technologydevelopment, CCTP aims to inspire broad interestinside and outside of government and internationally,in an expanded global effort to develop andcommercialize advanced technologies.

CCTP will strive to stimulate and strengthen thescientific and technological enterprise of the UnitedStates, through improved coordination andprioritization of multi-agency Federal climate changetechnology R&D programs and investments. CCTPwill provide support to decision-makers so that theycan address issues, make informed decisions, weighpriorities on related science and technology matters,and provide strategic direction. It will do thisthrough recommendations based on multi-agencyplanning, portfolio reviews, interagency coordination,technical assessments, and other analyses. CCTP willalso continue to work with and support theparticipating agencies in developing plans andcarrying out activities needed to achieve the CCTP’svision and strategic goals (CCTP Mission).

Strategic GoalsThe ultimate objective of the U.N. FrameworkConvention on Climate Change—stabilizing GHGconcentrations at a level that would preventdangerous anthropogenic interference—provides animportant (though not the only) planning context forCCTP’s Strategic Plan. Two considerations that arisefrom this are relevant to long-term technology R&Dplanning and guidance. First, the level of GHGs inthe Earth’s atmosphere implied by the UNFCCC isnot known and is likely to remain a key planninguncertainty for some time.2 Accordingly, CCTP’sstrategic goals are not based on any hypothesized levelof stabilized GHG concentrations, but ratherencompass a range of levels. Second, stabilizing theatmospheric GHG concentration at any level impliesthat global additions and withdrawals of GHGs toand from the atmosphere must achieve a net balance.This means that the growth in net GHG emissionswould need to slow, eventually stop, and then reverseand approach levels that are low or near zero. Thetechnological challenge is to develop new systems thatcould help achieve this goal affordably.

Set against this backdrop is the growing globalappetite for energy to power economic growth anddevelopment. Energy-related GHG emissionsaccount for over four-fifths of total anthropogenicemissions, and the technologies employed to produceand use energy will have a direct bearing on futureemissions. Different countries will approach climateobjectives in different ways and in the context of otherurgent needs. For most developing countries, the

2.2

2.1

10


2 Additional scientific research is required to determine the level of GHG concentrations that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interferencewith the climate system. The CCSP’s principal aim is to improve understanding of climate change and its potential impacts, which will inform CCTP.

is to attain on a global scale, inpartnership with others, atechnological capability that canprovide abundant, clean, secure, andaffordable energy and other servicesneeded to encourage and sustaineconomic growth, whilesimultaneously achieving substantialreductions in emissions of GHGs andmitigating the potential risks ofclimate change and increasing GHGconcentrations.

THE CCTP VISION

is to stimulate and strengthen thescientific and technological enterpriseof the United States, throughimproved coordination andprioritization of multi-agency Federalclimate change technology R&Dprograms and investments, and toprovide global leadership, inpartnership with others, aimed ataccelerating development andfacilitating adoption of technologiesthat can attain the CCTP vision.

THE CCTP MISSION

overriding goal will continue to be economicdevelopment to reduce poverty and advance humanwell-being. Increased global energy use is needed tohelp lift out of poverty the nearly two billion peoplewho lack even the most basic access to modern energyservices. Addressing this “energy poverty” is one ofthe world’s key development objectives, as lack ofenergy services is associated with high rates of diseaseand child mortality.

All countries can be expected to seek to ensure thatenergy sources are secure, affordable, and reliable,and to seek approaches that address otherenvironmental concerns, in addition to climatechange, such as air pollution and conservation.Opportunities for new and advanced technologies thatcan address multiple societal objectives, includingGHG reduction, present themselves in a number ofareas.

These opportunities form the basis for CCTP’s sixstrategic goals as follows:

1. Reduce emissions from energy end use andinfrastructure.

2. Reduce emissions from energy supply.

3. Capture and sequester carbon dioxide.

4. Reduce emissions of non-carbon dioxideGHGs.

5. Improve capabilities to measure and monitorGHG emissions.

6. Bolster basic science contributions totechnology development.

To the extent that agency missions and otherpriorities allow, each participating CCTP agency willalign the relevant components of its R&D portfolio inways that are consistent with and supportive of one ormore of these goals.

These six CCTP strategic goals focus primarily onmitigating GHG emissions to make progress towardstabilizing atmospheric GHG concentrations. Theyare not intended to encompass the broad array oftechnical challenges and opportunities that may arisefrom climate change. These may include suchresearch areas as: mitigating vulnerabilities andadaptation of natural and human systems to climatechange; addressing effects of acidification of theoceans; geoengineering to reduce radiative forcingthrough modification of the Earth’s surface albedo orstratospheric sunlight scattering; and others. Suchtopics are important, but they are beyond the scope ofthis Plan.

CCTP Goal 1Reduce Emissions fromEnergy End Use andInfrastructure

Major sources of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2)emissions are closely tied to the use of energy intransportation (Figure 2-2), residential andcommercial buildings, and industrial processes.Improving energy efficiency and reducing GHG-emissions intensity in these economic sectors througha variety of technical advances and process changespresent large opportunities to decrease overall GHGemissions.

In addition, application of advanced technology to theelectricity transmission and distribution (T&D)infrastructure (the “grid”) can have dual effects onreducing GHG emissions. First, there is a directcontribution to energy and CO2 reductions resultingfrom increased efficiency in the T&D system itself.Second, there can be an indirect contribution byenabling, through modernized systems, expanded useof low-emission electricity and distributed generatingtechnologies (such as wind, cogeneration of heat andpower, geothermal, and solar power), and byimproved management of system-wide energy supplyand demand. Emissions reduction from energyefficiency gains and reduced energy use could beamong the most important contributors to strategiesaimed at overall CO2 emissions reduction.

11


Figure 2-2. A major and growing source of GHG emissionsis closely tied to transportation.

Credit: iStockphoto

Types of technological advancements and deploymentactivities applicable to this goal include, but are notlimited to:

◆ Efficiency, Infrastructure, and Equipment.Development and increased use of highly efficientmotor vehicles and transportation systems,buildings equipment and envelopes, industrialcombustion and process technology, andcomponents of the electricity grid can significantlyreduce CO2 emissions, avoid other kinds ofenvironmental impacts, and reduce the life-cyclecosts of delivering the desired products andservices. Process technology includes non-energysources of CO2, such as the calcination ofcarbonates to produce cement and lime.

◆ Transition Technologies. So-called “transition”technologies, such as high-efficiency natural gas-fired power plants, are not completely free ofGHG emissions, but are capable of achievingsignificant reductions of GHG emissions in thenear and mid terms by significantly improving ordisplacing higher GHG-emitting technologies inuse today. Ideally, transition technologies wouldalso be compatible with more advanced GHG-freetechnologies that would follow in the future.

◆ Enabling Technologies. Enabling technologiescontribute indirectly to the reduction of GHGemissions by making possible the development anduse of other important technologies. The exampleof a modernized electricity grid, mentioned above,is seen as an essential step for enabling thedeployment of more advanced end-usetechnologies and distributed energy resources thatcan reduce GHG emissions. An intelligentelectricity grid integrated with smart end-useequipment would further raise system performance.Another example is storage technologies forelectricity or other energy carriers.

◆ Alternatives to Industrial Processes,Feedstocks, and Materials. Manufacturing,mining, agriculture, construction, services, andother commercial and industrial activities willrequire feedstocks and other material inputs toproduction.3 In addition to the energy efficiencyimprovements discussed above, opportunities forlowering CO2 and other GHG emissions fromindustrial and commercial activities include:replacing current feedstocks with those producedthrough processes (or complete resource cycles)that have low or net-zero GHG emissions (e.g.,bio-based feedstocks); reducing the average energy

intensity of material inputs; and developingalternatives to current industrial processes andproducts.

◆ Improved Land Use and ManagementPractices. Improved land use and managementpractices can reduce emissions of CO2 inagriculture through energy-efficient andconservation practices. Additionally, long-termlocal and regional planning can help integrate andoptimize residential, business, and transportationsystems.

CCTP Goal 2 Reduce Emissions fromEnergy Supply

Current global energy supplies are dominated byfossil fuels—coal, petroleum products, and naturalgas—that emit CO2 when burned. A transition to alow-carbon future would likely require the availabilityof multiple energy supply technology optionscharacterized by low or net-zero CO2 emissions.Many such energy supply technologies are availabletoday or are under development. When combinedwith improved energy carriers (e.g., electricity,hydrogen), they offer prospects for both reducing

12


3 Producing feedstocks and materials can and does result in net emissions of GHGs.

Figure 2-3. Earth’s city lights suggest where the world’s energyuse is concentrated. Advanced technologies in various formsof energy supply, including electricity generation, couldsignificantly reduce or avoid future GHG emissions.

Credit: Craig Mayhew and Robert Simmons, NASA GSFC

GHG emissions and improving overall economicefficiency. Examples include the following:

◆ Electricity. Electricity will remain an importantenergy carrier in the global economy in the future(Figure 2-3). While substantial improvements inefficiency can reduce the growth of electricityconsumption, the prospects of increasedelectrification and growing demand, especially inthe developing regions of the world, still implysignificant increases in electricity supply.Reducing GHG emissions from electricity supplycould be achieved through further improvementsin the efficiency of fossil-based electricitygeneration technologies, deployment of renewabletechnologies, increased use of fossil-fuel-basedpower systems in conjunction with CO2 captureand sequestration (see Goal 3), increased use ofnuclear energy, and the development of fusionenergy or other novel power sources.

◆ Hydrogen, Bio-Based, and Low-Carbon Fuels.The world economy will have a continuing needfor portable, storable energy carriers for heat,power, and transportation. A promising energycarrier is hydrogen, which can be produced in avariety of ways, including carbon-free or low-carbon methods using nuclear, wind,hydroelectric, solar energy, biomass, or fossil fuelscombined with carbon capture and sequestration.Hydrogen and other carriers, such as methanol,ethanol, and other biofuels, could serve both as ameans for energy storage and as energy carriers intransportation and other applications, if suchcarriers were to be produced by carbon-free orlow-carbon methods.

CCTP Goal 3Capture and SequesterCarbon Dioxide

Fossil fuels will likely remain a mainstay of globalenergy production well into the 21st century.Transforming fossil-fuel-based combustion systemsinto low-carbon or carbon-free energy processeswould enable the continued use of the world’splentiful coal and other fossil energy resources. Sucha transformation would require further developmentand application of technologies to capture CO2 andstore it using safe and acceptable means, removing itfrom the atmosphere for the long term. In addition,large amounts of CO2 could be removed from theatmosphere and sequestered on land or in oceans

through improved land, forest, and agriculturalmanagement practices, changes in products andmaterials, and other means. Focus areas include:

◆ Carbon Capture and Storage. Advancedtechniques are under development that couldcapture CO2 from such sources as coal-burningpower plants, oil refineries, hydrogen productionfacilities, and various high-emitting industrialprocesses. Carbon capture would be linked togeologic storage — long-term storage in geologicformations, such as depleted oil and gas reservoirs,deep coal seams, saline aquifers, other deepinjection reservoirs, and chemical or other formsof storage (Figure 2-4).

◆ CO2 Sequestration. Land-based, biologically-assisted means for removing CO2 from theatmosphere and sequestering it in trees, soils, orother organic materials have proven to berelatively low-cost means for long-term carbonstorage. Enhancing the ocean’s biological CO2

sink could also play a role. An understanding ofthe efficacy and environmental effects of thepreceding approaches is needed.

13


Figure 2-4. Capture, storage, and other forms of CO2 sequestrationcould significantly reduce emissions to the atmosphere and slow thegrowth of GHG concentrations.

Credit: DOE/NETL

CCTP Goal 4Reduce Emissions of Non-CO2 GHGs

GHGs other than carbon dioxide, including methane(CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)and others, are more potent per unit weight as radiantenergy absorbers than CO2.4 In addition, theatmospheric concentration of troposphere ozone (O3),another GHG, is increasing due to human activities.The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC) estimated that the cumulative effects of suchgases since pre-industrial times account for about 40percent of the anthropogenic radiative forcing5 fromGHGs. Reducing emissions of these other GHGs isan important climate change goal and key componentof a comprehensive climate change technology strategy.Many categories of technologies are relevant to theattainment of this CCTP goal. Highlights include:

◆ Methane Collection and Utilization.Improvements in methods and technologies tocollect methane and detect leaks from various

sources, such as landfills (Figure 2-5), coal mines,natural gas pipelines, and oil and gas explorationoperations, can prevent this GHG from escapingto the atmosphere. These methods are often cost-effective, because the collected methane is a fuelthat can be used directly or sold at natural gasmarket prices.

◆ Reducing N2O and Methane Emissions fromAgriculture. Improved agricultural managementpractices and technologies, including alteringapplication practices in the use of fertilizers forcrop production, dealing with livestock waste, andimproved management practices in riceproduction, are key components of the strategy toreduce other GHGs.

◆ Reducing Use of High Global-Warming-Potential (GWP) Gases. Hydrofluorocarbonsand perfluorocarbons have substituted for ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbons in a number ofindustries, including refrigeration, airconditioning, foam blowing, solvent cleaning, firesuppression, and aerosol propellants. These andother high-GWP synthetic gases are generallyused in applications where they are important tocomplex manufacturing processes or provide safetyand system reliability, such as in semiconductormanufacturing, electric power transmission anddistribution, and magnesium production andcasting. Because they have high GWPs, methodsto reduce leakage and use of these chemicals cancontribute to UNFCCC goal attainment andinclude the development of lower-GWPalternatives to achieve the same purposes.

◆ Black Carbon Aerosols. Programs aimed atreducing airborne particulate matter have led tosignificant advances in fuel combustion andemission control technologies in bothtransportation and power generation sectors.Further advances can continue to reduce futureblack carbon aerosol emissions. Reducedemissions of black carbon, soot, and otherchemical aerosols can have multiple benefits.Apart from improving public health and airquality, they can reduce radiative forcing in theatmosphere.

14


Figure 2-5. Emissions of gases other than CO2, such methane from landfills,coal mining operations, and natural gas pipelines, add to greenhouseconcentrations in the atmosphere. Their capture and return to marketableuses can reduce their contributions to global warming.

Credit: EPA

4 These calculations are made on the basis of instantaneous radiative forcing, not time-integrated radiative forcing (i.e., not accounting for differentatmospheric lifetimes).

5 Radiative forcing is a measure of the overall energy balance in the Earth’s atmosphere. It is zero when all energy flows in and out of the atmosphereare in balance, or equal. If there is a change in forcing, either positive or negative, the change is usually expressed in terms of watts per squaremeter (W/m2), averaged over the surface of the Earth. When it is positive, there is a net “force” toward warming, even if the warming itself may beslowed or delayed by other factors, such as the heat-absorbing capacity of the oceans or the energy absorption needed for the melting of naturalice sheets.

CCTP Goal 5Improve Capabilities to Measure and Monitor GHG Emissions

Improved technologies for measuring, estimating, andmonitoring GHG emissions and the flows of GHGsacross various media and boundaries will helpcharacterize emission levels and mark progress inreducing emissions. With enhanced means for GHGmeasuring and monitoring, future strategies toreduce, avoid, capture, or sequester CO2 and otherGHG emissions can be better supported, enabled,and evaluated (Figure 2-6). Key areas of technologyR&D related to this goal may be grouped into fourareas:

◆ Anthropogenic Emissions. Measurement andmonitoring technologies can enhance and providedirect and indirect emissions measurements forvarious types of emissions sources using datatransmission and archiving, along with inventory-based reporting systems and local-scaleatmospheric measurements or indicators.

◆ Carbon Capture, Storage, and Sequestration.Advances in measurement and monitoringtechnologies for geologic storage can assess theintegrity of subsurface reservoirs, transportationand pipeline systems, and potential leakage fromgeologic storage. Measurement and monitoringsystems for terrestrial sequestration are alsoneeded to integrate carbon sequestrationmeasurements of different components of thelandscape (e.g., soils versus vegetation) across arange of spatial scales.

◆ Non-CO2 GHGs. Monitoring the emissions ofmethane, nitrous oxide, black carbon aerosols,hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfurhexafluoride is important because of their highglobal warming potential (GWP) and, for some,their long atmospheric lifetimes. Advancedtechnologies can make an important contributionto direct and indirect measurement andmonitoring approaches for both point and diffusesources of these emissions.

◆ Integrated Measuring and Monitoring SystemArchitecture. An effective measurement andmonitoring capability is one that can collect,analyze, and integrate data across spatial andtemporal scales, and at many different levels of

resolution. This may require technologies such assensors and continuous emission monitors,protocols for data gathering and analysis,development of emissions accounting methods,and coordination of related basic science andresearch in collaboration with the Climate ChangeScience Program and the U.S. Integrated EarthObservation System.6

CCTP Goal 4Bolster Basic ScienceContributions to Technology Development

Advances arising from basic scientific research arefundamental to future progress in applied technologyresearch and development. The dual challenges—addressing global climate change and providing theenergy supply needed to meet future demand andsustain economic growth—will likely requirediscoveries and innovations well beyond what today’sscience and technology can offer (Figure 2-7).Science must not just inform decisions, but providethe underlying knowledge foundation upon whichnew technologies can be built. The CCTP

15


6 See http://ostp.gov/html/EOCStrategic_Plan.pdf.

Figure 2-6. Integrated systems of instruments formeasuring and monitoring GHG emissions andinventories can help to inform strategies for climatechange technology development and associatedemissions mitigating options.

Credit: NASA

framework aims to strengthen the basic researchenterprise so that it will be better prepared to findsolutions and create new opportunities, includingfostering new ideas and approaches that may beoutside current R&D thrusts. CCTP will focus onseveral ways to meet this goal:

◆ Fundamental Research. Fundamental researchprovides the underlying foundation of scientificknowledge necessary for carrying out appliedactivities of research and problem solving. It is thesystematic study of properties and natural behaviorthat can lead to greater knowledge andunderstanding of the fundamental aspects ofphenomena and observable facts, but withoutprior specification toward applications, processes,or products. It includes scientific study andexperimentation in the physical, biological, andenvironmental sciences, as well as interdisciplinaryareas, such as computational sciences.Fundamental research is the source of much ofunderlying knowledge that will enable futureprogress in CCTP.

◆ Strategic Research. Strategic research is basicresearch that is inspired by technical challenges inthe applied research and development programs.This is research that could lead to fundamentaldiscoveries (e.g., new properties, phenomena, ormaterials) or scientific understanding that could beapplied to solving specific problems or technicalbarriers impeding progress in advancingtechnologies in energy supply and end use; carboncapture, storage, and sequestration; other GHGs;and monitoring and measurement.

◆ Exploratory Research. Innovative concepts areoften too risky or multi-disciplinary for one

program mission to support. Sometimes they donot fit neatly within the constructs of othermission-specific program goals. Therefore, not allof the research on innovative concepts for climate-related technology is, or should be, aligneddirectly to one of the existing Federal R&Dmission-related programs. The climate changechallenge calls for new breakthroughs intechnology that could dramatically change the wayenergy is produced, transformed, and used in theglobal economy. Basic, exploratory research ofinnovative and novel concepts, not elsewherecovered, is one way to uncover such“breakthrough technology” and strengthen andbroaden the R&D portfolio.

◆ Integrated Planning. Effective integration offundamental research, strategic research,exploratory research, and applied technologydevelopment presents challenges to, andopportunities for, both the basic research andapplied research communities. These challengesand opportunities can be effectively addressedthrough innovative and integrative planningprocesses that place emphasis on communication,cooperation, and collaboration among the manyassociated communities, and on workforcedevelopment, to meet the long-term challenges.CCTP seeks to encourage broadened applicationof successful models and best practices in this area.

Core ApproachesConsistent with the principles established by thePresident, CCTP will employ seven core approachesto stimulate participation by others and ensureprogress towards attaining CCTP’s strategic goals:

1. Strengthen climate change technology R&D.

2. Strengthen basic research contributions.

3. Enhance opportunities for partnerships.

4. Increase international cooperation.

5. Support cutting-edge technologydemonstrations.

6. Ensure a viable technology workforce of thefuture.

7. Provide supporting technology policy.

Chapter 10 outlines next steps for CCTP for each ofthese core approaches.

2.3

16


Figure 2-7. Fundamental discoveries from basic research can helpovercome technical barriers to progress in applied climate changetechnology research programs and illuminate entirely new pathwaysto innovative solutions.

Courtesy: DOE, Office of Science

APPROACH 1: Strengthen Climate ChangeTechnology R&D

The Federal Government is engaged in manyresearch and technology development activities thatcontribute to meeting the President’s climate changegoals, investing about $3 billion in Fiscal Year 2006 inrelated technology R&D, including demonstrationand deployment activities (Appendix A).Strengthening these activities, however, does notnecessarily mean spending more money—it can alsomean spending available resources more wisely byappropriately prioritizing activities and reallocatingresources, or by leveraging them with the work of others.

To strengthen the current state of the U.S. climatechange technology R&D, the CCTP has made, andwill continue to make, recommendations (Figure 2-8)to the Cabinet-level Committee on Climate ChangeScience and Integration (CCCSTI) to sharpen thefocus of, and provide support for, climate changetechnology R&D in a manner consistent with the mixand level of R&D investment required by the natureof the technical challenge.

APPROACH 2:Strengthen Basic ResearchContributions

A base of supporting fundamental research is essentialto the applied research and development fortechnology development. The CCTP approachincludes strengthening basic research in Federalresearch facilities and academia by focusing efforts onkey areas needed to develop insights or breakthroughsrelevant to climate-related technology R&D. Astrong and creative science program is necessary tosupport and enable technical progress in CCTP’sportfolio of applied research and developmentprograms, explore novel approaches to newchallenges, and bolster the underlying knowledge basefor new discoveries.

Fundamental discoveries can reveal new propertiesand phenomena that can be applied to developmentof new energy technologies and other importantsystems. These can include breakthroughs in ourunderstanding of biological functions, properties andphenomena of nano-materials and structures,computing architectures and methods, plasma science,

environmental sciences, and other emerging areas ofscientific discovery.

APPROACH 3: Enhance Opportunities forPartnerships

Federal research is but one element of the overallstrategy for development and adoption of advancedclimate change technologies. Engagement in thisprocess by private entities, including business,industry, agriculture, construction, and other sectorsof the U.S. economy, as well as by non-Federalgovernmental entities, such as the States and non-governmental organizations, is essential to makeR&D investments wisely and to expedite innovativeand cost-effective approaches for reducing GHGemissions.

Public-private partnerships can facilitate the transferof technologies from Federal and national laboratoriesinto commercial application. Partnering can alsoadvise and improve the productivity of Federalresearch, and can promote the adoption of newtechnologies and best management practices. Privatepartners also benefit because those who are engagedin Federal R&D gain rights to intellectual propertyand gain access to world-class scientists, engineers,and laboratory facilities. This can help motivatefurther investment in the commercialization oftechnology.

17


Figure 2-8. CCTP is charged with reviewing the Federal portfolio of relatedR&D and making recommendations to strengthen it. For recent results of aseries of technical workshops that provided input to this process, seehttp://www.climatetechnology.gov.

Courtesy: Energetics, Inc., 2006

Today, partnering is a common mode of operation inmost Federal R&D programs, but it can be improved.Opportunities exist for private participation invirtually every aspect of Federal R&D. With respectto climate change technology R&D, the CCTP seeksto expand these opportunities in R&D planning,program execution, and technology demonstrations,leading ultimately to more efficient and timelycommercial deployment.

Another important aspect of this approach is non-research and development partnerships. Suchpartnerships arise when there are mutual benefits andaligned interests between governmental and non-governmental entities in promoting progress towardCCTP strategic goals. Examples include the ClimateVISION,7 Climate Leaders,8 ENERGY STAR®,9 andSmartWay Transport Partnership10 programs, all ofwhich encourage industry to undertake activities thatcan lead to reduced GHG emissions.

APPROACH 4: Increase International Cooperation

Given the global nature of climate change concerns,and in recognition of the contributions being madeabroad, the CCTP seeks to engage other nations—government to government—in large-scalecooperative technology research initiatives. Suchcooperation can prove beneficial to the success ofU.S. technology development initiatives, throughleveraging of resources, partitioning of researchactivities addressing large-scale and multi-facetedcomplex problems, and sharing of results andknowledge created. Indeed, in certain areas of climatechange technology research and development, such asadvanced wind turbine design and nuclear fission andfusion energy research, U.S. technical expertise can beaugmented by many advanced technical capabilitiesthat reside outside the United States. The U.S.Government has initiated or joined severalmultilateral cooperative agreements, such as theInternational Partnership for the Hydrogen Economy,Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum, GenerationIV International Forum, international Methane-to-Markets Partnership, and the ITER project todevelop fusion as a commercially viable power source.

Since June 2001, the United States has launchedbilateral partnerships with Australia, Brazil, Canada,

China, Central America, Germany, the EuropeanUnion, India, Italy, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand,Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, and SouthAfrica on issues such as climate change science,energy and sequestration technologies, and climatechange policy approaches. The countries covered bythese bilateral partnerships account for about threequarters of global GHG emissions. In addition, theUnited States is a leader in the 59-member countryGlobal Earth Observations System of Systems.

In related developments in July 2005, President Bushand the G-8 Leaders agreed on a far-reaching Plan ofAction to speed the development and deployment ofclean energy technologies to achieve the combinedgoals of addressing climate change, reducing harmfulair pollution, and improving energy security in theUnited States and throughout the world. The G-8will work globally to advance climate change policiesthat spur and sustain economic growth, and improvethe environment.

Also in July 2005, the United States joined withAustralia, China, India, Japan, and South Korea toaccelerate clean development under a new Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development andClimate. These countries together account forroughly half of the world’s population, economicgrowth, energy use, and GHG emissions. The focusof this Partnership is on voluntary practical measurestaken by these six countries in the Asia-Pacific regionto create new investment opportunities, build localcapacity, and remove barriers to the introduction ofclean, more efficient technologies. APP countries willwork in partnership to meet nationally-designedstrategies for improving energy security, reducing airpollution, and addressing the long-term challenge ofclimate change.

CCTP seeks to expand on these and otherinternational opportunities to stimulate internationalparticipation in the development of new and advancedclimate change technologies, foster capacity buildingin developing countries, encourage cooperativeplanning and joint ventures, and enable more rapiddevelopment, transfer, and deployment of advancedclimate change technology.

18


7 See http://www.climatevision.gov.8 See http://www.epa.gov/climateleaders.9 See http://www.energystar.gov. 10 See http://www.epa.gov/smartway.

APPROACH 5: Support Cutting-Edge TechnologyDemonstrations

While the government role is targeted primarilytoward long-term, high-risk research anddevelopment activities, demonstrations of cutting-edge climate change technologies also constitute animportant aspect of the goal to advance climatechange technologies. Demonstrations help advance acutting-edge technology from the laboratory to thecommercial market. After a concept has been provenin principle, pilot or full-scale demonstrations areneeded to identify real-world performance issues.Subsequently, demonstrations can prove the viabilityof the technology for deployment.

Technology demonstrations afford uniqueopportunities to reduce investment risks. They clarifythe parameters affecting a technology’s cost andoperational performance. They identify areasneeding further improvement or cost reduction.Federal leadership through technologydemonstrations can strongly influence decisions ofprivate-sector investors and other non-governmentparties.

Because technology demonstrations can be costly,which can reduce funds available for related research,it is often advantageous for demonstrations to be cost-shared with industry to the extent practical.Demonstrations are most beneficial when thetechnology is ready for demonstration and when theresults are shared with the public. Open andcompetitive processes will help to ensure fairness ofopportunity among all interested parties.

APPROACH 6: Ensure a Viable Technology Workforceof the Future

The development and deployment, on a global scale,of new and advanced climate change technologies willrequire a skilled workforce and an abundance ofintellectual talent, well versed in associated conceptsand disciplines of science and engineering.

Workforce development and education are an addedbenefit of Federal research funding, since portions ofresearch grants often support graduate andundergraduate research stipends.

CCTP-funded research provides an opportunity topromote education, and experience for students inscience, math, and engineering education, and toencourage talented individuals to focus their careerson this global endeavor.11 Such efforts could becoordinated with other countries, and particularly inemerging economies of the developing world, wheremuch of 21st century emissions are expected to occur.

APPROACH 7: Provide Supporting Technology Policy

While some advanced climate change technologiesmay be sufficiently attractive to penetrate themarketplace on a large scale without supportingpolicy or incentives, others may not. For example,technologies that capture or sequester CO2 or othersthat afford certain climate change-related advantagesare expected to remain more expensive thancompeting technologies, even considering furthertechnical progress. Widespread adoption of thesetechnologies would likely require support fromappropriate government policies, potentially includingmarket-based incentives.

As Federal efforts to advance technology go forward,broadened participation by the private sector in theseefforts is important both to the acceleration ofinnovation and to the adoption of technologies.Extending such participation beyond R&D partneringand demonstrations (Approaches 3 and 5 above) canbe encouraged by appropriate and supportingtechnology policy. This is evidenced today, in part,by a number of market-based incentives already inplace, by others proposed by the Administration12, andby still others soon to be implemented in accord withthe provisions of Title XIII of the Energy Policy Actof 2005.13

Finally, Title XVI of the Energy Policy Act of 2005sets the stage for future development of policies thatwould facilitate new technology adoption. This Titlerequires that the Administration identify barriers to

19


11 The CCTP approach is linked with the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI), which aims to build the technologically skilled workforce of thefuture. ACI will double the Federal commitment to the most critical research programs emphasizing the physical sciences, modernize and makepermanent the research and development tax credit, reform the job training system, and strengthen math and science education. Seehttp://www.whitehouse.gov/stateoftheunion/2006/aci/.

12 Federal Climate Change Expenditures Report to Congress, March 2005. http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/legislative/fy06_climate_change_rpt.pdf.13 Financial incentives in Title XIII for technologies related to climate change goals are scored at more than $11 billion over 10 years.

the commercialization and deployment of GHG-intensity-reducing technologies, and developrecommendations for the removal of these barriers tofacilitate the deployment of these technologies andpractices.14 This effort will be led by the Secretary ofEnergy.

Prioritization ProcessAn important role of the CCTP is to provide strategicdirection for, and to strengthen, the Federal portfolioof investments in climate change technology R&D.The CCTP continues to prioritize the portfolio ofFederally-funded climate change technology R&Dconsistent with the President’s NCCTI. The CCTPhas identified within its portfolio a subset of NCCTIpriority activities for Fiscal Year 2006 and Fiscal Year2007 (listed in Appendix B), defined as discreteresearch and development activities that addresstechnological challenges, which, if successful, couldadvance technologies with the potential to dramaticallyreduce, avoid, or sequester GHG emissions.

Prioritization of Federal technology R&D activitiesrelated to climate change is a dynamic process thathas evolved over time in response to emergingknowledge. This evolution is expected to continue.

Through coordinated interagency planning, theCCTP priorities will be reviewed periodically inconjunction with the Federal budget process, andrecommendations will be made through theInteragency Working Group (IWG) to the CCCSTI.

This CCTP Strategic Plan provides a government-wide basis for guiding the formulation of thecomprehensive Federal climate change technologyR&D portfolio, identifying high priority investments,gaps, and emerging opportunities, and organizingfuture CCTP-related research. The CCTP planningactivities are informed by results of studies, inputsfrom many and diverse sources, technical workshops,assessments of technology potentials, analysesregarding long-term energy and emissions outlooks,and modeling by a number of groups of a range oftechnology scenarios over the next 100 years (seeChapter 3). Additionally, these planning activities areguided by several important portfolio planningprinciples and investment criteria.15

Portfolio Planning Principles

The CCTP adheres to three broad principles. Thefirst principle, given the many attendant uncertaintiesabout the future, is that the whole of the individualR&D investments should constitute a balanced anddiversified portfolio. Considerations include therealizations that: (1) no single technology will likelymeet the challenge alone; (2) investing in R&D inadvanced technologies involves risk since the resultsof these investments are not known in advance (somemay fail, and others may not prove as successful ashoped); and (3) a diverse array of technology optionscan hedge against risk and provide flexibility in thefuture, which may be needed to respond to newinformation that could change strategy. The CCTPportfolio also strives to balance short- and long-termtechnology objectives.

A balanced and diversified portfolio must hedge risks,for example, by investing in projects that will pay offunder different states of the future world. For thispurpose, it is helpful to understand the major sourcesof uncertainty, such as the level of future GHGemissions, energy prices, technology costs andperformance, and other factors. CCTP’s tools in thisregard are partially addressed in Chapter 3, butfurther work in terms of portfolio analysis andexpected benefits and costs will be required.

The second principle is to ensure that factorsaffecting market acceptance are addressed. To enablewidespread deployment of advanced technologies,each technology must be integrated within a largertechnical system and infrastructure, not just as acomponent. Market acceptance of technologies isinfluenced by myriad social and economic factors.The CCTP’s portfolio planning process must beinformed by, and benefit from, private sector andother non-Federal inputs, examine the lessons ofhistorical analogues for technology acceptance, andapply them as a means to anticipate issues and informR&D planning.

Third and perhaps most importantly, the anticipatedtiming regarding the commercial readiness of theadvanced technology options is an important CCTPplanning consideration. Energy infrastructure has along lifetime, and change in the capital stock occursslowly. Once new technologies are available, theiradoption takes time. Some technologies with low ornear-net-zero GHG emissions may need to beavailable and moving into the marketplace decadesbefore their maximum market penetration is achieved.

2.4

20


14 See text of EPACT Title XVI at http://www.climatetechnology.gov.15 These criteria are consistent with the Better R&D Investment Criteria outlined in The President’s Management Agenda.

See http://www.whitehouse.gov/OMB/budget/fy2002/mgmt.pdf.

Portfolio Planning and Investment Criteria

Within the planning framework of vision, mission,goals, approaches, and portfolio investment principles,the CCTP’s prioritization process applies four criteria(Box 2-1). CCTP will evaluate the merits of

competing investments based on maximum expectedbenefits versus costs (Criterion #1), subject toconsideration of the distinct roles of the public andprivate sectors in R&D (Criterion #2).16 In addition,because of the risk of spreading resources across toomany areas, CCTP focuses on technologies with thepotential for large-scale application (Criterion #3).Nevertheless, technologies expected to have limited

21


1. Maximizing Expected Return on Investment.R&D investments that have the prospect togenerate maximum expected benefits per dollar ofinvestment receive priority in investment planning.Benefits are defined with respect to expectedcontributions to the attainment of CCTP goals,particularly GHG reductions, but also include otherconsiderations, such as cost-effectiveness,improved productivity, and reduction of otherpollutants. Climate change benefits are long-termpublic goods. Discount rates must be appropriateto the context, particularly when applied to verylong-term impacts. This criterion includesconsiderations of development and deploymentrisks, and the hedging of risks across multipleprojects. Projects with high risk, but lowemissions-reduction potential should be removedfrom the CCTP R&D portfolio.

2. Acknowledging the Proper and Distinct Roles forthe Public and Private Sectors. The CCTPportfolio recognizes that some R&D is the properpurview of the private sector; other R&D may bebest performed jointly through public-privatepartnerships; and still other R&D may be bestperformed by the Federal sector alone. In caseswhere public support of R&D is warranted,technology development and adoption requirecooperation and engagement with the privatesector. History demonstrates that earlyinvolvement in technology R&D by the businesscommunity increases the probability ofcommercialization. A key consideration in theinvestment process is the means for engaging thetalents of the private sector using innovative andeffective approaches.

3. Focusing on Technology with Large-ScalePotential. The scope, scale, and magnitude of theclimate change challenge suggest that relativelysmall, incremental improvements in existingtechnologies will not enable full achievement ofCCTP goals. Every technology option has limits ofvarious kinds. Such limits need to be identified,explored, and understood early in the planningprocess. Technology options should be adaptableon a global scale and have a clear path tocommercialization. High-priority investments,including exploratory research, will focus ontechnology options that could, if successful, resultin large mitigation contributions, accumulated overthe span of the 21st century. For technologies onthe lower end of this criterion, benefits should bedeliverable earlier in the century and/or beparticularly compelling from a marginal benefit/costperspective.

4. Sequencing R&D Investments in a Logical,Developmental Order. Investments must belogically sequenced over time. Supporting a robustand diversified portfolio does not mean that alltechnology options must be supportedsimultaneously, or that all must proceed at anaccelerated pace. Logical sequencing of R&Dinvestments takes into account (i) the expectedtimes when different technologies may need to bemade available and cost-effective, (ii) the need forearly resolution of critical uncertainties, and (iii) theneed to demonstrate early success or feasibility oftechnologies upon which other technologyadvancements may be based.

BOX 2-1

CCTP PORTFOLIO PLANNING AND INVESTMENT CRITERIA

16 In a market economy, commercially-orientated R&D is primarily a private sector matter. Government support of basic and applied R&D is warrantedwhen the social benefits of such R&D outweigh the benefits that can be captured by innovating businesses and their customers, leading to inade-quate investment in such R&D by the private sector.

impact on overall GHG emissions may still be givenpriority if they can deliver reductions earlier in thecentury and/or are particularly cost-compelling.Finally, the timing of investments is an importantconsideration in the decision process. The CCTPplanning process gives weight to the logicalsequencing of research (Criterion #4), where the valuein knowing whether a technological advance issuccessful can have a cascading effect on thesequencing of later investments.

Application of Criteria

The CCTP’s review, planning, and prioritizationprocess will rely on ongoing reviews of strategies fortechnology development, buttressed by analysis, andof the overall R&D portfolio’s adequacy to makeprogress toward attaining each CCTP strategic goal.There will be an emphasis on identifying gaps andkey opportunities for new initiatives that will beaccompanied by periodic realignments. The processis not easily reduced to quantitative analysis due, inpart, to the large number of variables anduncertainties associated with the nature of the climatechange technology challenge and, in part, to theCCTP’s century-long planning horizon.Nevertheless, the prioritization criteria discussedabove will be applied by the participating agencies tothe maximum extent practicable and augmented byinputs from various sources.

The first step in the prioritization process is toestablish a baseline, or inventory, of the existingportfolio of R&D activities across the participatingagencies. The criteria used to compile this portfoliobaseline, which closely track CCTP strategic goals,are listed in Appendix A. The resulting multi-agencybaseline inventory accounted for more than $3 billionin R&D activities in Fiscal Year 2006. This inventorywill be periodically updated.

The second step in the process is to use the insightsgained from the scenario modeling17 and otheranalyses to identify the more important elements of adiversified strategy and to assess the potentialcontributions of each activity within the CCTPportfolio. This assessment may affirm some elementsof the portfolio, challenge others, and identify gapsand promising opportunities. Once a full set ofcandidate investments is identified, the prioritizationcriteria can be applied to each proposed investmentactivity. This step will require continuing

22


Energy End Use – Led by DOE• Hydrogen End Use• Transportation• Buildings• Industry• Electric Grid and Infrastructure

Energy Supply – Led by DOE• Hydrogen Production• Renewable and Low-Carbon Fuels• Renewable Power• Nuclear Fission Power• Fusion Energy• Low Emissions Fossil-Based Power

CO2 Sequestration – Led by USDA• Carbon Capture • Geologic Storage• Terrestrial Sequestration• Ocean Storage• Products and Materials

Other (Non-CO2) Gases – Led by EPA• Energy & Waste – Methane• Agricultural Methane and Other Gases• High Global-Warming-Potential Gases• Nitrous Oxide• Ozone Precursors and Black Carbon

Measuring and Monitoring – Led by NASA• Application Areas• Integrated Systems

Basic Research – Led by DOE• Fundamental Research• Strategic Research• Exploratory Research• Integrative R&D Planning

BOX 2-2

CCTP WORKING GROUPS

17 See Chapter 3 for a discussion of the scenario analyses.

development of analytical tools and methods,including assessments of various technologies andtheir limitations.

The results of this process for Fiscal Year 2007, asevidenced in the Administration’s budget request, areshown in Appendix A. Within this overall CCTPportfolio, NCCTI priorities are identified inAppendix B. Finally, key initiatives that advancemultiple policy goals, while also addressing majorthrusts of CCTP strategic goals, are highlightedthroughout the Plan in their respective technologyareas.18 A current list of the key initiatives, with linksto current programmatic information, may be foundat the CCTP website.19

The current CCTP portfolio reflects a “snapshot” intime of an ongoing review and realignment that takesinto account new and changing emphases amongcompeting national priorities. In the years ahead,CCTP’s portfolio and planning emphasis is expectedto evolve as more studies and analyses are conducted,technology assessments are completed, additionalgaps and opportunities are identified, and newdevelopments and scientific knowledge emerge.

ManagementThe CCTP is a multi-agency R&D planning andcoordination activity. It accomplishes its work byengaging and assisting the Federal R&D agencies intheir respective efforts to plan, prioritize, andcoordinate research activities to meet CCTP goals.CCTP also works with the Administration to formulateoverall budget guidance and recommend adjustments,where appropriate, to the Federal R&D portfolio toalign it more closely with CCTP goals. CCTP alsohas a role in coordinating non-R&D-related activities,monitoring progress, and accounting for relatedinvestments. As discussed below, the CCTP’smanagement functions include executive direction,interagency planning and integration, agencyimplementation, external interactions, and program support.

Executive Direction

The CCTP exercises executive direction through theCCCSTI, and its associated IWG on Climate ChangeScience and Technology. The IWG is comprised of

agency deputies who can adopt and implement plansand actions coordinated by the Group. The IWGalso provides guidance on strategy and reviews, andapproves CCTP strategic planning documents.

A CCTP Steering Group, composed of senior-levelrepresentatives from each participating Federalagency, provides a venue for agencies to raise andresolve issues regarding CCTP and its functions as afacilitating and coordinating body. It also assists theCCTP Director in accessing needed information andresources within each agency. The Steering Groupassists in developing agency budget crosscuts andproposals, conveying information and actions back tothe agencies, and supporting the CCTP mission. Inaddition, it ensures that consistent guidance anddirection is given to the CCTP Working Groups, andit helps formulate recommendations and advice to theCCCSTI through the IWG.

Interagency Planning and Integration

Six multi-agency CCTP Working Groups (WGs),aligned with the six CCTP strategic goals (Box 2-2),are primarily responsible for carrying out the missionand staff functions of CCTP in a coordinated manner.The WGs are assisted by subgroups, as appropriate,and by technical staff drawn from participatingagencies, affiliated laboratories and facilities, andother available consulting staff. The WGs areexpected to:

◆ Serve as the principal means for interagencydeliberation and development of CCTP plans andpriorities, and for the formulation of guidance forsupporting analyses in their respective areas.

◆ Provide a forum for exchange of inputs andinformation relevant to planning processes,including workshops and other meetings.

◆ Engage, cooperate with, and coordinate inputsfrom relevant agencies.

◆ Identify ongoing R&D activities and gaps, needs,and opportunities for the near and long term.

◆ Support relevant interaction with CCSP sciencestudies and analyses.

◆ Formulate advice and recommendations to presentto the IWG and CCCSTI.

◆ Assist in preparing periodic reports to Cabinetmembers and the President.

2.5

23


18 See also CCTP Vision and Framework for Strategy and Planning (2005).19 See http://www.climatetechnology.gov.

Agency Implementation

CCTP relies on participating Federal agencies andtheir respective R&D portfolios to contribute toachieving CCTP goals. At the same time, the CCTPrecognizes that agencies must balance these prioritieswith other mission requirements. The Programdepends on these agencies to place appropriatepriority on implementing CCTP programs. Eachparticipating agency has representation in the groupsthat facilitate the setting of CCTP priorities andfollow-through on attaining these priorities. Agencyheads and deputies serve on the CCCSTI and IWG,and top agency officials make up the CCTP SteeringGroup. Agency executives and senior-level managersalso serve as chairs and members of the CCTPWorking Groups. Once CCTP plans, programs, andpriorities are set and approved, the agencies areexpected to contribute to their execution andcompletion.

External Interactions

The CCTP taps expert opinion and technical inputfrom various external parties through advisory groups,program peer review, conferences, internationalpartnerships, and other activities. In addition, CCTPstaff convenes technical workshops and meetings withexperts both inside and outside the FederalGovernment. CCTP activities are of interest to anumber of external parties, including State and localgovernments, regional planning organizations,academic institutions, national laboratories, and non-governmental organizations. They are of interest, aswell, to foreign governments and internationalorganizations, such as the Organization for EconomicCooperation and Development, the InternationalEnergy Agency, various global and regional compacts,and the IPCC. CCTP needs to communicate itsactivities to such entities and provide coordinatedsupport, through the relevant agency programs, forenhanced external and international cooperation byengaging with and supporting activities of mutualinterest.

Program Support

CCTP staff will provide technical and administrativesupport and day-to-day coordination of programintegration, strategic planning, product development,communication, and representation. CCTP staff will:(1) provide support for the Working Groups and theSteering Group; (2) foster integration of activities to

support CCTP goals; (3) conduct and supportstrategic planning activities that facilitate theprioritization of R&D activities and decision-makingon the composition of the CCTP R&D portfolio,including conducting analytical exercises that supportplanning (such as technology assessments andscenario analysis); (4) develop improved methods,tools, and decision-making processes for climatetechnology planning and management, R&Dplanning, and assessment; (5) develop products thatcommunicate CCTP’s plans as well as the progress ofthe Program toward meeting its goals; (6) coordinateinteragency budget planning and reporting; (7) assistand support the Administration in representing U.S.interests in the proceedings of the United Nations’IPCC Fourth Assessment Report; and (8) coordinateagency support of international cooperativeagreements.

Strategic PlanOutline

The chapters that follow provide a century-longplanning context, goal-oriented strategies fortechnology development, and a summary ofconclusions and next steps. Chapter 3 provides asynthesis assessment on energy-economic modelingand forecasting of future global GHG emissions,based on a number of representative works in theliterature. Chapter 3 also includes a number ofinsights regarding opportunities for advancedtechnologies drawn from scenarios analyses. Chapters4 through 9 focus in depth on each of CCTP’s sixstrategic goals. Each chapter outlines elements of atechnology development strategy, highlights ongoingwork, and suggests promising areas for futureresearch. Chapter 10 provides a summary ofconclusions regarding CCTP and its strategic goals,and identifies a series of next steps within the contextof each of CCTP’s seven approaches.

2.6

24


3Such assessments are complex and must considermany uncertainties, and hence they must include arange of assumptions about the future. Specifically,a technology strategy aimed at influencing globalGHG emissions over the course of the 21st centurywould need to consider population change, varyingrates of regional economic development, differingregional technological needs and interests, andavailability of natural resources. In addition, thelong-term costs of GHG emission reductions willdepend in part on future technological innovations,many of which are unknown, and on other factorsthat could either promote or discourage the use ofvarious technologies in the future. Finally, theuncertainties inherent in climate science and the factthat value judgments are involved make it difficultto determine a level at which atmospheric GHGconcentrations in the Earth’s atmosphere wouldmeet the stabilization objective of the UnitedNations Framework Convention on Climate Changenoted in Chapter 1.

Scenario analysis using various types of models is onevaluable tool that can be used to assist in planningunder uncertainty. Scenarios can present alternativeviews about the rate of future GHG emissions growthto help gauge the scope of the potential challenge bymethodically and consistently accounting for thecomplex interactions among economic anddemographic factors, energy supply and demand, theadvance of technology, and GHG emissions.Scenarios can also investigate various proposedpathways toward achieving different levels of GHG

emissions reductions. The results can provide relativeindications of the potential emissions reductions andeconomic benefits of particular classes of technologyunder a range of different assumptions, and a betterunderstanding of the factors and constraints thatmight affect their market penetration.

Many research organizations, university-based teams,government agencies, and other groups have engagedin scenario analyses to explore these topics. Thischapter reviews and synthesizes the results of suchefforts to gain insights, under a range of uncertainties,about the scale of the technological challenge, thepotential contributions of various advancedtechnologies to GHG emissions reductions or

25

If the Climate Change Technology Program (CCTP) is to develop plans, carry outactivities, and help shape an R&D portfolio that will advance its vision and mission and

make progress toward achieving its strategic goals, the Program needs a long-term planningcontext, one that is informed by analyses from many sources using a variety of models andother decision support tools. Useful information to help shape the portfolio can come fromassessments of the potential contributions that successful advancement of technologies couldmake to achieving CCTP’s strategic goals. Analysis can also help determine the technologyperformance requirements needed to achieve greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductiongoals and the costs.

Synthesis Assessment of Long-Term Climate Change Technology Scenarios


The synthesis assessment of global climate-change technologyscenarios examined anyalses based on a variety of models and tools.

Courtesy: DOE/PNNL

avoidances, the timing of technology deployment, andassociated economic benefits. These insights will beused to guide CCTP in developing an effectiveclimate change technology strategy and associatedportfolio of technology R&D.

The GreenhouseGases

GHGs are gases that absorb infrared radiation. In theEarth’s atmosphere, the GHGs cause what iscommonly known as the “greenhouse effect.” Asshown in Figure 3-1, the GHGs include1 carbondioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O),and substances with very high global warmingpotential (GWP),2 such as the halocarbons and otherchlorine and bromine containing substances.3 CO2

emissions from the burning of fossil fuels, otherindustrial activity, and land-use changes and forestry,account for the majority of GHG emissions. In 2000,the combined emissions of methane, nitrous oxide,and high-GWP gases accounted for about one-quarter of all GHG emissions (after converting thenon-CO2 gases to a CO2-equivalency basis, in termsof gigatons carbon equivalent, or GtC-eq.).

As a GHG resulting from human activities, methane’scontribution is second only to CO2. Methane, on akilogram-for-kilogram basis, is 23 times moreeffective than CO2 at trapping radiation in theatmosphere over a 100-year time period (although ithas a shorter lifetime in the atmosphere). Methane isemitted from various energy-related activities (e.g.,natural gas, oil and coal exploration, and coal mining),as well as from agricultural sources (e.g., emissionsfrom cattle digestion and rice cultivation; and wastedisposal facilities, landfills, and wastewater treatmentplants). Methane emissions have declined in theUnited States since the 1990s, due to voluntary

programs to reduce emissions and regulationrequiring the largest landfills to collect and combusttheir landfill gas.4

Another important gas is nitrous oxide (N2O), whichis emitted primarily by the agricultural sector throughdirect emissions from agricultural soils and indirectemissions from nitrogen fertilizers used in agriculture,as well as from fossil fuel combustion, especially fromfuel used in motor vehicles; adipic (nylon) and nitricacid production; wastewater treatment and wastecombustion; and biomass burning (EPA 2005).

3.1

26


Methane16%

CO2 - Land Use Change & Forestry

19%

High GWP Gases1.9%

Nitrous Oxide9%

CO2 - Cement2%

CO2 - Fuel53%

2000 Global Emissions(Carbon Equivalents)

1 Water vapor and ozone are also GHGs.2 Global warming potentials (GWPs) are used to compare the abilities of different GHGs to trap infared radiation in the atmosphere. GWPs are based

on the radiative efficiency (radiation-absorbing ability) of each gas relative to that of carbon dioxide (CO2), as well as the decay rate of each gas(the amount removed from the atmosphere over a given number of years) relative to that of CO2. The GWP provides a simplified construct for con-verting emissions of various gases into a common measure. However, it is important to note that GWPs are only an approximate metric for consid-ering the relative impacts of different gases on the radiative balance of the Earth’s atmosphere, because atmospheric lifetimes differ dramaticallyamong gases. For example, methane’s lifetime in the atmosphere is shorter than CO2, so the radiative impact of a ton of methane emitted today willattenuate more quickly over time with respect to the radiative impact of a ton of CO2 emitted today. Hence, the timeframe over which the GWP isdeveloped critically affects the relative magnitude of the contributions of various gases (typically a 100-year timeframe is used), and GWPs serve asan indication of the relative importance of different gases, not as a precise measurement of the relative long-term impacts on the Earth’s radiativebalance.

3 The ozone-depleting halocarbons and other chlorine- and bromine-containing substances are addressed by the Montreal Protocol and are notdirectly addressed by this Plan. Besides CO2, N2O, and CH4, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) definitions of GHGs includesulfur hexafluoride (SF6), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and perfluorocarbons (PFCs), often collectively called the “F-gases.”

4 See http://www.epa.gov/methane/voluntary.html.

Global Emissions of GHGs in 2000 (% of total GtC-eq. using GWPs)

Figure 3-1. Global Emissions of GHGs in 2000 (percentage of total GtC-eq. using GWPs)(Sources:http://www.epa.gov/methanetomarkets/docs/methanemarkets-factsheet.pdf and http://www.mnp.nl/edgar/model/)

Other non-CO2 GHGs, including certain fluorine-containing halogenated substances such as sulfurhexafluoride (SF6), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), andperfluorocarbons (PFCs), often collectively called the“F-gases,” are used or produced by a variety ofindustrial processes. In most cases, emissions of theseF-gases were relatively low in 1990 but have sincegrown rapidly. The sources of these non-CO2 GHGemissions are discussed in more detail in Chapter 7.

The radiation-trapping capacities of GHGs varyconsiderably. GHGs also have different lifetimes inthe atmosphere. In addition, some anthropogenicemissions (such as aerosols) can have cooling effects.Combining these effects, the Intergovernmental Panelon Climate Change (IPCC) estimated the keyanthropogenic and natural factors causing changes inwarming and cooling from year 1750 to year 2000,5 asshown in Figure 3-2. The figure shows warming andcooling in terms of radiative forcing—the change inthe balance of infrared radiation coming into andgoing out of the atmosphere. Positive radiativeforcing leads to warming, and negative radiativeforcing leads to cooling.

The differences in the characteristics of GHGs andother radiatively important substances, as well as the

potential differences in rates of the growth of theiremissions over time, influence the formulation ofstrategies to stabilize overall GHG concentrationsthrough emissions mitigation. In addition to theclimate implications of increasing atmospheric CO2,there are also concerns about chemical and biologicalimpacts to the ocean. As discussed in Chapter 6, anincrease in ocean CO2 concentrations and thepotential effect on ocean chemistry and biologyprovide additional motivation, apart from climatechange and considerations of global temperature, tomitigate emissions and stabilize atmospheric CO2

concentrations.

Factors AffectingFuture GHGEmissions

Most analyses of future GHG emissions indicate that,in the absence of actions taken to address climatechange, increases will occur in both emissions ofGHGs and their atmospheric concentrations. The

3.2

27


5 A large body of work has been undertaken to understand the influence of external factors on climate using the concept of changes in radiative“forcing” due to changes in the atmospheric composition, alteration of surface reflectance by land use, and variations in solar input. Some of theradiative forcing agents, such as CO2, are well mixed over the globe, thereby perturbing the global heat balance. Others, such as aeresols, repre-sent perturbations with stronger regional signatures because of their spatial distribution. For this and other reasons, a simple sum of the positiveand negative bars cannot be expected to yield the net effect on the climate system.

6 Available at http://www.ipcc.ch/present/graphics/2001syr/large/06.01.jpg.

Figure 3-2. GlobalMean RadiativeForcing of the ClimateSystem for the Year2000, Relative to 1750(Source: IPCC 6)

Global Mean Radiative Forcing of the Climate System for the Year 2000, Relative to 1750

projected rate of emissions growth is dependent onmany factors that cannot be predicted with certainty.Studies conducted by organizations, including theIPCC,7 the Stanford Energy Modeling Forum(EMF),8 and others,9 indicate that among the moresignificant factors expected to drive future GHGemissions growth are demographic changes (e.g.,regional population growth), social and economicdevelopment (e.g., gross world product and standardof living), fossil fuel use (i.e., coal, oil, and naturalgas), and land use changes. The most importantfactors limiting increases in future GHG emissionsinclude improvements in energy efficiency; increasesin nuclear, renewable, and non-CO2-emitting fossil

energy supply; decreases in GHG emissions fromindustry, agriculture, and forestry; and rapidtechnological change that results in reducing GHGemissions.

CO2 Emissions from EnergyConsumption

The International Energy Agency estimates that 1.6billion people lack access to electricity. The UnitedNations estimates that 2 billion people are withoutclean and safe cooking fuels, relying instead ontraditional biomass (UNDP 2000). Over the course

28


7 One study that examined emissions growth in the absence of special initiatives directed at climate change is the Special Report on EmissionsScenarios (SRES) by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC 2000), in which six leading energy-economic models were used toexplore a suite of scenarios that projected growth in global energy and GHG emissions.

8 See http://www.stanford.edu/group/EMF/publications/index.htm.

9 See for example, Direct and Indirect Human Contributions to Terrestrial Carbon Fluxes: A Workshop Summary (2004) and Human Interactions withthe Carbon Cycle: Summary of a Workshop (2002), both available from the National Academies Press (Coppock and Johnson 2004 and Stern2002).

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

A1 AIMA1 ASFA1 IMAGEA1 MESSAGEA1 MINICAMA1 MARIAA1C AIMA1C MESSAGEA1C MINICAMA1G AIMA1G MESSAGEA1G MINICAMA1V1 MINICAMA1V2 MINICAMA1T AIMA1T MESSAGEA1T MARIAA2 ASFA2 AIMA2 MESSAGEA2 MINICAMA2-A1 MINICAMB1 IMAGEB1 AIMB1 ASFB1 MESSAGEB1 MARIAB1 MINICAMB1T MESSAGEB1High MESSAGEB1High MINICAMB2 MESSAGEB2 AIMB2 ASFB2 MARIAB2 MINICAMB2High MINICAMB2C MARIA5%25%meanmedian75%95%

[Thousand of EJ/Year]

Figure 3-3. Primary Energy Use Projections Using Various Energy-Economic Models and AssumptionsNote: The mean, median, and percentile bands in the figure are based on the range of projections and do not representprobabilities of the projections. (Source: IPCC 2000)

Primary Energy Use Projections Using Various Energy-Economic Models and Assumptions

of the 21st century, a greater percentage of the world’spopulation is expected to gain access to electricity andcommercial fuels, as well as experience majorimprovements to quality of life. These changes areexpected to result in increased per capita energy use.In addition, world population is expected to grow,which will further increase overall demand for energy.

Estimates of projected energy demand varyconsiderably. The Energy InformationAdministration (EIA 2005) projects world primaryenergy demand will increase from about 411.5exajoules (EJ) in 2002 to 680 EJ in 2025. Most ofthat increase will come in demand from developingcountries. EIA forecasts primary energy use in thedeveloped world will rise just 1.1 percent annuallywhile that in the developing world will rise 3.2percent annually. Energy use in the emerging

economies of developing Asia, driven largely bydemand in China and India, is projected to more thandouble over the course of the quarter century.

In the IPCC’s Special Report on Emissions Scenarios(SRES) (IPCC 2000), projected world primary energyuse in 2100 fell within a range of 600 to 2800 EJ for90 percent of the scenarios explored (Figure 3-3).Among the scenarios surveyed in SRES, the averageannual growth rates for global energy demand overthe period from 2000 to 2100 ranged from 2.4percent per year to -0.1percent per year, with amedian value of 1.3 percent per year.10

As about four-fifths of GHG emissions are energyrelated, energy generation and consumption are keydeterminants of CO2 emissions. The scenarios withthe highest CO2 emissions are those that assume thehighest energy demand along with the highest

29


10 Scenarios that show low or negative energy consumption growth rates over time represent cases where technological improvement is projected tobe very rapid and where population and GDP growth rates lie at the lower bounds of the projections.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

A1 AIMA1 ASFA1 IMAGEA1 MESSAGEA1 MINICAMA1 MARIAA1C AIMA1C MESSAGEA1C MINICAMA1G AIMA1G MESSAGEA1G MINICAMA1V1 MINICAMA1V2 MINICAMA1T AIMA1T MESSAGEA1T MARIAA2 ASFA2 AIMA2G IMAGEA2 MESSAGEA2 MINICAMA2-A1 MINICAMB1 IMAGEB1 AIMB1 ASFB1 MESSAGEB1 MARIAB1 MINICAMB1T MESSAGEB1HIGH MESSAGEB1HIGH MINICAMB2 MESSAGEB2 AIMB2 ASFB2 IMAGEB2 MARIAB2 MINICAMB2HIGH MINICAMB2C MARIA5%25%meanmedian75%95%

[GtC]

Figure 3-4. CO2 Emissions Projections from Energy Use Using Various Energy-Economic Models and AssumptionsNote: The mean, median, and percentile bands in the figure are based on the range of projections, and do not represent probabilitiesof the projections. (Source: IPCC 2000)

CO2 Emissions Projections from Energy Use Using Various Energy-Economic Models and Assumptions

proportion of fossil fuel use unaccompanied by CO2

capture and storage. Since 1900, global primaryenergy consumption has, on average, increased atmore than two percent per year, similar to the 20-yeartrend from 1975 to 1995.

Without constraints, energy-related CO2 emissionsare expected to increase significantly over the next100 years at rates similar to those for the growth inenergy consumption. Specific projections varydepending on assumptions. According to EIA (2005),annual global CO2 emissions may increase by about60 percent between 2002 and 2025. Higher growthrates are expected in the developing regions of theworld, where CO2 emissions may increase by a factorof two or more by 2025.

In 2025, global use of petroleum products, primarilyin the transportation sector, is expected to continue toaccount for the largest share of global emissions ofCO2. This is followed in importance by the use ofcoal, primarily for electricity generation, and naturalgas. Natural gas is a versatile fuel, used for powergeneration, residential and commercial fuel, and manyother uses. CO2 emissions from fossil fuelcombustion by end-use sector for 2002 can be brokendown as follows: transportation, 24 percent; electricityand heat, 35 percent; and industrial and other enduses, 41 percent.

IPCC’s SRES examined projections of CO2 emissionsfrom energy use based on multiple reference scenariosfrom six long-term modeling efforts. It found thatdifferent assumptions about the driving forces led towidely divergent emissions trajectories (Figure 3-4).Ninety percent of the CO2 emissions projections fallwithin the upper and lower bounds shown in Figure

3-4. The mean, median, and percentage bands shownwere calculated based on the range of projectionsacross the full set of scenarios and do not representprobabilities associated with the projections.

The upper bounds in Figures 3-3 and 3-4 are formedby scenario results that assume very high worldeconomic growth, high per-capita energy use, andcontinued dominance of fossil fuels. At this upperbound, world CO2 emissions from energy use areprojected to grow from about 6 GtC/year in 2000 tomore than 30 GtC/year in 2100—a five-fold increase.

The lower bounds in Figures 3-3 and 3-4 are formedby scenarios that assume less population growth,changes in the composition of economic activity awayfrom energy-intensive output, lower per-capita energyuse, more energy efficiency, and considerably moreuse of carbon-neutral fuels, compared to the upperbound. At this lower bound, CO2 emissions areprojected to grow for the first half the century, butthen to decline to levels about equal to those in 2000,representing no net growth by 2100. Assumptions forthe various scenarios are described in Box 3-1.11 Themodels used in this study include AIM,12 ASF,13

IMAGE,14 MARIA,15 MESSAGE,16 and MiniCAM.17

Recent studies have explored the uncertainty in futureemissions using a probabilistic approach (see forexample, Webster et al. 2002).18 While there aresome differences in the upper and lower bounds ofthe emissions projections between the SRES scenariosand these more recent probabilistic-based analyses,the range of the SRES scenarios overlaps to a largedegree with the range of emissions estimated usingthese probabilistic approaches.

30


11 The range of CO2 emissions in the SRES has been compared to scenarios done later (post-SRES). In general, the ranges are not very different.The estimated CO2 emissions in post-SRES scenarios have a higher lower bound, a similar median, and a higher upper bound of the distribution.The post-SRES scenarios use lower population estimates, both in range and median. The post-SRES economic development projections (based onmarket exchange rates) have approximately the same lower bound and median but a lower upper bound of the distribution. A comprehensivedatabase of emissions scenarios is available at http://www-cger.nies.go.jp/cger-e/db/enterprise/scenario/scenario_index_e.html.

12 Asian Pacific Integrated Model (AIM) from the National Institute of Environmental Studies in Japan (Morita et al. 1994).13 Atmospheric Stabilization Framework Model (ASF) from ICF Consulting in the USA (Lashof and Tirpak 1990; Pepper et al. 1992, 1998; Sankovski et

al. 2000).14 Integrated Model to Assess the Greenhouse Effect (IMAGE) from the National Institute for Public Health and Environmental Hygiene (RIVM) (Alcamo

et al. 1998; de Vries, Olivier et al. 1994, de Vries, Janssen et al. 1999; de Vries, Bollen et al. 2000), used in connection with the Dutch Bureau forEconomic Policy Analysis (CPB) WorldScan model (de Jong and Zalm 1991), the Netherlands.

15 Multiregional Approach for Resource and Industry Allocation (MARIA) from the Science University of Tokyo in Japan (Mori and Takahashi 1999; Mori2000).

16 Model for Energy Supply Strategy Alternatives and their General Environmental Impact (MESSAGE) from the International Institute of AppliedSystems Analysis (IIASA) in Austria (Messner and Strubegger 1995; Riahi and Roehrl 2000).

17 Mini Climate Assessment Model (MiniCAM) from the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) in the USA (Edmonds et al. 1994, 1996a, 1996b).18 Use of uncertainty analysis and probabilistic forecasting can help identify and quantify critical but uncertain parameters (such as demographic or

technology trends over time). Multiple simulations are performed by sampling from those distributions to construct probability distributions of theoutcomes (such as GHG emissions). Distributions for factors, such as labor productivity growth, energy efficiency improvement, agricultural andindustrial emissions coefficients for various GHGs, etc., are quantified by expert elicitation or from a review of the literature. These distributions arethen used in assessment models to generate a distribution of results, such as GHG emissions and/or climate impacts (e.g., temperature change orsea-level rise).

31


The SRES scenarios are organized around four major storylines, which received the names A1, A2, B1, and B2. Each ofthese storylines represented different general conceptions of how the world might evolve over time, including theevolution of key drivers such as economic growth (including differences or convergence in regional economic activity),population growth, and technological change. Each driver was interpreted by the participating modeling teams in termsof quantitative assumptions about the evolution of specific model parameters. Some scenario drivers, such as economicgrowth, final energy, and population growth, were harmonized across many of the models, while others, such as thespecific technology assumptions, were developed by the individual modeling teams to be generally consistent with thestorylines. For the A1 Scenario, four basic assumptions about technology were also developed, so there are fourcategories of technology scenarios under the A1. The scenarios are described as follows:

A1. The A1 storyline and scenario family describe a future world of very rapid economic growth, global population thatpeaks in mid-century and declines thereafter, and the rapid introduction of new and more efficient technologies. Majorunderlying themes are convergence among regions, capacity building, and increased cultural and social interactions, witha substantial reduction in regional differences in per capita income. The A1 scenario family develops into three groupsthat describe alternative directions of technological change in the energy system. The four A1 groups are distinguishedby their technological emphasis: fossil intensive (A1C – coal- and A1G – gas), non-fossil energy sources (A1T), or abalance across all sources (A1B), where balanced is defined as not relying too heavily on one particular energy source,on the assumption that similar improvement rates apply to all energy supply and end-use technologies.

A2. The A2 storyline and scenario family describe a very heterogeneous world. The underlying theme is self-relianceand preservation of local identities. Fertility patterns across regions converge very slowly, which results in acontinuously increasing population. Economic development is primarily regionally oriented, and per capita economicgrowth and technological change more fragmented and slower than in other storylines.

B1. The B1 storyline and scenario family describe a convergent world with the same global population, which peaks inmid-century and declines thereafter, as in the A1 storyline, but with rapid change in economic structures toward aservice and information economy, with reductions in material intensity and the introduction of clean and resource-efficient technologies. The emphasis is on global solutions to economic, social, and environmental sustainability,including improved equity, but without additional climate initiatives.

B2. The B2 storyline and scenario family describe a world in which the emphasis is on local solutions to economic,social, and environmental sustainability. It is a world with continuously increasing global population, at a rate lower thanin A2, intermediate levels of economic development, and less rapid and more diverse technological change than in the B1and A1 storylines. While the scenario is also oriented towards environmental protection and social equity, it focuses onlocal and regional levels.

The set of harmonized drivers depended both on the scenario and the specific model. Key drivers that characterized thescenarios are summarized qualitatively in the table below. All scenarios assume energy intensity reductions over thecoming century at or greater than the historical average over the past few decades. Comparison of the emissionstrajectories in Figures 3-5 and 3-6 can be interpreted in terms of the relative evolution of these drivers and the discussionof these drivers above.

BOX 3-1 THE SRES SCENARIOS

DRIVERA1C A1G A1B A1T

A2 B1 B2

Population Growth low low low low high low medium

GDP Growth very high very high very high very high medium high medium

Energy Use very high very high very high high high low medium

Energy Intensity Improvement high high high high low very high medium

Land-use Changes low-medium low-medium low low medium-high high medium

Availability of ConventionalOil & Gas high high medium medium low low medium

Pace of Technological Change rapid rapid rapid rapid slow medium medium

A1

CO2 Emissions and Sequestration fromChanges in Land Use

CO2 emissions in the future will be influenced notonly by trends in CO2 emissions from energy use andindustrial sources, but also by trends in land use thatresult in either net CO2 sequestration or release. CO2

emissions and carbon sequestration associated withvarious land uses will be driven primarily byincreasing demand for food. Other important factorsinclude demand for wood products, land managementchanges, demand for biomass energy and bio-basedproducts, and technological change.

The role of land-use change has received relativelylimited consideration (compared to energy use) inprior modeling exercises aimed at developing long-run GHG emissions scenarios. To date, the mostcomprehensive treatment is contained in the scenariosdeveloped for the IPCC SRES (IPCC 2000). Indeveloping these scenarios, the IPCC assembled adata base of over 400 earlier emissions scenarios. Ofthese, 26 scenarios (all the work of three modelinggroups) explicitly considered the role of land-usechange on global CO2 emissions. The projectionsvary considerably in the near term, with some

scenarios showing increasing and some decreasing netglobal CO2 emissions from land-use change (Figure3-5). A key insight to emerge from the IPCCexercise was that the link between land-use changeand global CO2 emissions is more complex anduncertain than had been reflected in previousanalyses.

Across and within the four storylines described in Box3.1, the scenarios produced a wide range of land-usepaths that included large increases and decreases inthe global areas of cropland, grassland, and forest overthe course of the century. Differences in land-usepatterns resulted primarily from alternativeassumptions about population and income growth.Hence, the scenarios indicate that land-use changecould become either an important source or sink ofglobal CO2 emissions over the next 100 years,depending on the mix of goods and services theworld’s population demands from its land resources.

Further, future paths of technological change intoday’s land-intensive sectors—including agriculture,forestry, energy, construction, and environmentquality—will help to define the contribution land-usechange makes to net CO2 emissions. Many of theIPCC scenarios show that CO2 emissions from

32


-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

A1 AIM

A1 ASF

A1 IMAGE

A1 MESSAGE

A1 MINICAM

A1 MARIA

A1C AIM

A1CMESSAGEA1C MINICAM

A1G AIM

A1GMESSAGEA1G MINICAM

A1V1MINICAMA1V2MINICAMA1T AIM

A1TMESSAGEA1T MARIA

A2 ASF

A2 AIM

A2G IMAGE

A2 MESSAGE

A2 MINICAM

A2-A1MINICAMB1 IMAGE

[GtC]

B1 AIM

B1 ASF

B1 MESSAGE

B1 MARIA

B1 MINICAM

B1TMESSAGEB1HIGHMESSAGEB1HIGHMINICAMB2 MESSAGE

B2 AIM

B2 ASF

B2 IMAGE

B2 MARIA

B2 MINICAM

B2HIGHMINICAMB2C MARIA

5%

25%

mean

median

75%

95%

Figure 3-5. Net CO2 Emissions from Land-Use Change Note: The mean, median and percentile bands in the figure are based on the range of projections, and do not represent probabilities.(Source: IPCC 2000)19

Net CO2 Emissions from Land-Use Change

19 The structure of the underlying modeling exercise required harmonization in 2000. Such harmonization in the context of a modeling exercise doesnot necessarily reflect agreement.

deforestation are likely to peak after several decadesand then subsequently decline.20 Despite thedifferences among the scenarios’ assumptions, most ofthe scenarios show a net decrease to below currentlevels by the end of the century.

Sohngen and Mendelsohn (2003) linked a globalforestry model with the global optimization modelDICE to more explicitly explore the relationshipsbetween forestry management, land-use emissions,and global energy systems. They reported a netsequestration potential ranging from 32 to 102 GtCin the coming century, depending on carbon prices.Much of the sequestration occurs through avoideddeforestation.

Other Greenhouse Gases

The non-CO2 GHGs include a diverse group of gasessuch as methane, nitrous oxide, chlorofluorocarbons,and other gases with high global warming potential(see Chapter 7). Future growth in emissions of non-CO2 GHGs will depend on the future level of theactivities that emit these gases, as well as the amountof emissions control that occurs. The cost-effectiveness of emission controls for mitigating thevarious GHGs will depend on their relative estimatedcosts and anticipated climate-related benefits.

Integrated assessment models have only recentlybegun to project long-term trends in non-CO2

GHGs. In a recent international modeling exerciseconducted by the Stanford Energy Modeling Forum(EMF-21), non-CO2 emissions and mitigationpotential were projected by 18 models of variousforms (Weyant and de la Chesnaye 2005).21 Eachmodel ran a “reference case” scenario, in which non-CO2 GHGs were allowed to grow in the absence ofany constraints or incentives for GHG emissionsmitigation.

The results for methane and N2O are shown inFigures 3-6 and 3-7, respectively. The projectionsvary considerably among models. On average,emissions of non-CO2 GHGs were projected toincrease from 2.7 gigatons of carbon equivalentemissions (GtC-eq.) in 2000 to 5.1 GtC-eq. in 2100.On average, methane emissions were projected toincrease by 0.6 percent/year between 2000 and 2100;nitrous oxide by 0.4 percent/year; and the fluorinated

gases by 1.9 percent/year. (By comparison, in thesesame scenarios, CO2 emissions were projected togrow by 1.1 percent/year over the same time period.)

A recent modeling study conducted for CCTPprojected the contributions of CO2 and other GHGsto future radiative forcing (Clarke et al. 2006). In thereference case scenario (without actions specificallytargeted toward lowering GHGs), radiative forcingfrom pre-industrial levels was projected to increase to6.5 watts per square meter (W/m2), compared to alevel of about 2 W/m2 in 2000 (Figure 3-8). In thisprojection, CO2 contributed approximately 80 percentof the radiative forcing in 2100, with other GHGs(CH4, N2O, and the F-gases) contributing about 20percent.

Some other models show larger contributions fromnon-CO2 GHGs. The analysis for CCTP (whichused MiniCAM) projects a considerable amount ofcontrol of methane in the absence of mandatedcontrols.22 In results from other models, radiativeforcing was projected to increase to over 9 W/m2, duein part to growth in non-CO2 GHG emissions (vanVuuren et al. 2006). These studies indicate theimportance of non-CO2 GHGs, especially in thefuture, as their emissions rise as a result of increasedindustrial and agricultural activity and populationgrowth.

Analytical Contextfor CCTP Planning

For the purposes of CCTP planning and analysis, it isuseful to understand the potential contributions thatadvanced technologies could make to future GHGemissions reductions and to the potential stabilizationof atmospheric GHG concentrations and itsintegrated multi-gas metric, radiative forcing, over acentury-long planning horizon. No particular GHGstabilization level is assumed in this plan, nor is therean assumed “best path” for reaching stabilization.Accordingly, the synthesis assessment of variousanalyses of advanced technology scenarios explorestwo degrees of freedom (or uncertainty)—one isabout the hypothesized levels of GHG concentrations

3.3

33


20 This pattern is tied to declines in the rate of population growth toward the latter half of the century and increases in agricultural productivity.21 The models included a variety of model types, including integrated assessment models and general equilibrium models.22 Note that certain models (such as MiniCAM) project that some GHG-reducing technologies penetrate the market without incentives or policies. For

example, in MiniCAM, technologies for reducing methane emissions from coal and natural gas production would penetrate the market when it iscost-effective to do so, based on the value of the methane (natural gas) collected, which is marketable as a fuel.

34


0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

2000 2025 2050 2075 2100

AIMAMIGACOMBATEDGEEPPAFUNDGEMINI-E3GRAPEGTEMIMAGEIPACMERGEMESSAGEMiniCAMSGMMeanMedian

GtC-

eq.

Figure 3-6.Methane EmissionsProjections from theEMF-21 Study, WithNo ExplicitInitiatives toReduce GHGEmissions

Methane Emissions Projections from the EMF-21 Study, With No Explicit Initiatives to Reduce GHG Emissions

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

2000 2025 2050 2075 2100

AIMAMIGACOMBATEDGEEPPAFUNDGEMINI-E3GRAPEGTEMIMAGEIPACMERGEMESSAGEMiniCAMSGMMeanMedian

GtC-

eq.

Figure 3-7.Nitrous OxideEmissionsProjections fromthe EMF-21Study, With NoExplicitInitiatives toReduce GHGEmissions

Nitrous Oxide Emissions Projections from the EMF-21 Study, With No Explicit Initiatives to Reduce GHG Emissions

and the other is about the technologies. Usefulinsights may be gained by modeling the hypothesizedlevels across a range of assumptions about, and mixesof, advanced technologies.

Cost-effective means to stabilize radiative forcingwould include reductions in emissions of both CO2

and other GHGs. A recent analysis by PacificNorthwest National Laboratory (PNNL) examinedvarious GHG emissions reduction options associatedwith a range of radiative forcing levels in the year2100, each leading to long-run stabilization ofradiative forcing (Clarke et al. 20006). The results arepresented in Figure 3-9, which compares theestimated radiative forcing in 2000 to projectedradiative forcing in 2100 under an unconstrained

emissions scenario (Reference Case) and fouremissions-constrained scenarios that lead to lowerradiative forcing in 2100.

Other studies also examined integrated multi-gasstrategies for reducing radiative forcing, consideringpossible tradeoffs among CO2 and other GHGemissions. For example, using results from a varietyof different models, an analysis by Weyant and de laChesnaye (2005) showed that a multi-gas approachresults, on average, in CH4 emissions reductions ofalmost 50 percent, N2O reductions of about 40percent, and a reduction in F-gases of almost 75percent (on a GtC-eq. basis) by 2100, compared toreference case levels.

35


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

Year

W/m

2

CH4 N2O F-Gases CO2

Figure 3-8. RadiativeForcing in a ReferenceCase Scenario (Source: Clarke et al.2006)

Radiative Forcing in a Reference Case Scenario

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

ReferenceCase 2000

ReferenceCase 2100

LowConstraint

2100

Medium Constraint

2100

HighConstraint

2100

Very HighConstraint

2100

W/m

2

Radiative Forcing by Gas

CH4 N2OF-Gases CO2

Figure 3-9. RadiativeForcing Levels underDifferent Degrees ofConstraint(Source: Clarke et al.2006)

Radiative Forcing Levels under Different Degrees of Constraint

For any assumed constrained radiative forcingscenario, reductions in the non-CO2 gases lead to theneed for smaller reductions in CO2 emissions.Nevertheless, CO2 remains by far the most importantGHG. Accordingly, a range of potential CO2

stabilization levels have been explored, using differentmodels and assumptions. Figure 3-10 shows one setof relationships between CO2 emissions and CO2

concentrations over time, across a range of CO2

stabilization levels commonly found among theliterature on scenarios.23

The set of hypothetical CO2 emissions scenarios(Figure 3.10-A), shown here across a range of fivecorresponding CO2 concentration stabilization levels(Figure 3.10-B), illustrates a general pattern foundconsistently across the analyses. Emissions scenariosleading to CO2 stabilization typically show growth ofemissions in the near term, but with that growthslowing; the emissions eventually peak and then

gradually decline; and ultimately they approach levelsthat are low or near zero. In almost all stabilizationscenarios, emissions must continue to decline beyond2100 and into the 22nd century and beyond. Over thesame time period, as discussed earlier, the world’senergy needs can be expected to continue to grow.

An illustration of the scale of the overall emissionsreductions needed to achieve stabilization of CO2

concentrations is shown in Figure 3-11. To meet theCO2 stabilization level in this hypothetical example,by 2100 annual CO2 emissions would need to bereduced by almost 15 GtC-eq/year below the level inan otherwise “unconstrained” emissions scenariocase.24 For the example shown, the cumulativeemissions reduction would be approximately 600GtC-eq over the course of the 21st century. For otherscenarios (PNNL), the 100-year cumulative CO2

emissions reductions ranged from about 300 to about1,000 GtC-eq.25

36


23 Derived from Wigley et al. 1996. The emissions scenarios represent net emissions from fossil fuels (i.e., including emissions reductions from car-bon dioxide capture and storage) and industrial sources. They do not include emissions from land use and land-use change. The concentrationlevels are based on a range of specific assumptions regarding net emissions from land use and land-use change, and about the carbon cycle moregenerally, including assumptions regarding the rate of ocean uptake. Note that significant uncertainties remain about many aspects of the carboncycle; reducing these carbon cycle uncertainties is one of the goals of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP). Other estimated sce-narios showing relationships between emissions and concentrations can be found in the literature on scenarios.

24 The “unconstrained” case in this illustrative example is based on the reference scenario developed for CCTP by PNNL; see Clarke et al. (2006).Note that this reference scenario includes a considerable amount of energy efficiency as well as increased use of renewable and nuclear energyresulting from improvements in these technologies over time, increased prices for fossil fuels, and hence increased ability of renewable and nucleartechnologies to compete in the market. The lower curve represents a reduced-emissions scenario leading to stabilization; it is a slightly modifiedversion of the 550 ppmv trajectory shown in Figure 3-10A.

25 See Clarke et al. 2006 and IPCC 2001. Estimates of the emissions reductions required to stabilize concentrations are uncertain and vary based onassumptions. Key assumptions include: (1) estimates of future emissions to 2100 in the absence of actions aimed at GHG mitigation (i.e., the “refer-ence” scenario); (2) selection of the stabilization level or levels of atmospheric GHG concentrations; and (3) the nature of baseline and advancedtechnology scenarios and their associated time-specific emissions trajectories. Results for CCTP are shown as “mitigated emissions” on Figure 3-14.

WRE 750

WRE 650

WRE 550

WRE 450

WRE 350 WRE 750

WRE 650

WRE 550

WRE 450

WRE 350

PgC/

yr

ppm

v

1990

2015

2040

2065

2090

2115

2140

2165

2190

2215

2240

2265

2290

1990

2015

2040

2065

2090

2115

2140

2165

2190

2215

2240

2265

2290

-2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

750

800

Figure 3-10. Illustrative CO2 Emissions Profiles and Corresponding Concentrations

Illustrative CO2 Emissions Profiles and Corresponding Concentrations

A. Emissions Scenarios from Fossil Fuel Use and Industrial Activities

B. Corresponding Atmospheric ConcentrationLevels

Box 3-2 provides illustrations of technologicalmeasures that could achieve an annual reduction ofone GtC-eq./yr. As these illustrations suggest, GHG-reducing technologies would need to be implementedon a significant scale. The costs of achieving suchreductions using today’s technology options could behigh. Developing and deploying advanced technologywith significantly improved performance and costcharacteristics could substantially lower these costs,thereby facilitating their entry into the marketplace ortheir expanded adoption. The implication for CCTPand its associated science and technology R&Dprograms is that advanced technologies, includingnovel or breakthrough technologies, are important, ifnot essential, to the CCTP goals of significantlyreducing or avoiding GHG emissions, whilemaintaining economic growth and ensuring safety andoverall environmental quality.

Exploring the Rolefor AdvancedTechnology

Reducing or avoiding GHG emissions on the scalehypothesized in Section 3.3 could be facilitated by a

variety of advanced scenarios, each characterized by adifferent mix of technologies, estimated cost, andtiming of the emission reductions. Given thediversity of activities and processes that emit GHGs,achieving emissions reductions on such a scale willlikely require significant contributions from acombination of existing, improved or transitional, andadvanced technologies. At present, the “best”combination of technologies (and other means) isunknown, but insights about the role for technologycan be gained through analysis.

Estimating the potential contribution to CCTPstrategic goals of any technology is difficult anddepends in large part on assumptions about thesuccess of scientific and technical advancements andother factors. These assumptions may be explored inscenario analyses featuring advanced technology. Forexample, several studies have projected that lowercarbon fuels (e.g., natural gas) and lower GHG-intensity technologies (e.g., coal gasification) couldbridge the transition to zero- or very low-carbontechnologies.26 Two other themes common amongmany GHG mitigation technology scenarios aresteady improvement in energy efficiency (e.g.,lowering of GHG-intensity) and the emergence ofbio-based products as an important energy sourcethroughout the 21st century.

In addition to technological considerations, costconsiderations are major elements in the mitigation

3.4

37


0

5

10

15

20

25

2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

Year

~15 GtCAvoided Emissions~ 600 GtC

Cumulative Emissions ~ 900 GtC

Hypothetical Unconstrained-Emissions Scenario

Hypothetical Reduced-Emissions Scenario

1st GtC AvoidedFigure 3-11.PotentialScale of CO2 EmissionsReductions to StabilizeGHG Concentrations:HypotheticalUnconstrained andConstrained EmissionsScenarios (Source: Clarke et al.2006)

Potential Scale of CO2 Emissions Reductions to Stabilize GHG Concentrations: Hypothetical Unconstrained and Constrained Emissions Scenarios

26 See, for example, studies by van Vuuren et al. (2004) and Manne and Richels (2004), and the the mitigation scenarios studied in the IPCC WorkingGroup III (see http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg3/084.htm).

scenarios. When projected declines in the costs oflow-carbon-emitting technologies make themattractive economically, they play major roles in manyscenarios. Different technologies may mature andbecome cost-competitive at different times over thecourse of a 100-year planning horizon. For example,increased energy efficiency (using today’stechnologies), mitigation of non-CO2 GHGs such asmethane, and terrestrial sequestration may be cost-effective options in the near term. Transformativesupply-side and end-use technologies with greatlyreduced GHG emissions profiles could become morecost-effective later, as these technologies advance.

Several landmark multi-model studies,27 as well asvarious scenario analysis efforts based on individualmodels, have explored a range of emission reductionscenarios. In most of these analyses, advancedtechnology scenarios are modeled under a range ofhypothetical GHG emissions constraints (e.g., low,

medium, high, and very high). These advancedtechnology scenarios, in turn, can be comparedagainst baseline scenarios, where the given GHGemissions constraints are met, but with less optimisticassumptions about the advancement of technology.The results can suggest what roles varioustechnologies may play, if assumptions about theiradvancement could be realized. The results can also,by inference, provide insights about various R&Dprogrammatic goals, suggesting what technologicalprogress would be needed, and by when, in order toachieve the hypothesized results.

Reference Case, Baseline, and AdvancedTechnology Scenarios

A number of analytical approaches have been pursuedto explore the potential contributions of advanced

38


27 For example, the IPCC “Post-SRES” report on mitigation (IPCC 2001) and the EMF studies (Weyant 2004). 28 The low- or no-cost suite of technologies generally includes improvements to current systems and various cost-effective energy conservation strate-

gies. These are usually modeled as a general rate of energy-efficiency (or intensity) improvement, and are often included in the business-as-usual(or “reference case”) emissions projections.

• Coal-Fired Power Plants. Build 1,000 “zero-emission” 500-MW coal-fired power plants tosupplant coal-fired power plants without CO2

capture and storage. (Current global installedgenerating capacity is about 2 million MW.)

• Geologic Storage. Install 3,700 carbon storagesites like Norway’s Sleipner project (0.27 MtC/year).

• Nuclear. Build 500 new nuclear power plants, each1 GW in size, to supplant an equal capacity of coal-fired power plants without CO2 capture and storage.This would more than double the current number ofnuclear plants worldwide.

• Electricity from Landfill Gas Projects. Install 7,874“typical” landfill gas electricity projects (typical sizebeing 3 MW projects at non-regulated landfills) thatcollect landfill methane emissions and use them asfuel for electric generation.

• Efficiency. Deploy 1 billion new cars at 40 milesper gallon (mpg), instead of new cars at 20 mpg.

• Wind Energy. Install 650,000 wind turbines (1.5MW each, operating at 0.45 capacity factor) tosupplant coal-fired power plants without CO2

capture and storage.

• Solar Photovoltaics. Install 6 million acres of solarphotovoltaics to supplant coal-fired power plantswithout CO2 capture and storage (assuming 10%cell DC efficiency, 1700 kWhr/m2 solar radiance, and90% DC-AC conversion efficiency).

• Biomass Fuels from Plantations. Convert a barrenarea about 15 times the size of Iowa’s farmland(about 33 million acres) to biomass crop production.

• CO2 Storage in New Forest. Convert a barren areaabout 40 times the size of Iowa’s farmland to new forest.

BOX 3-2

HOW BIG IS ONE GIGATON PER YEAR OF GHG REDUCTION?

Actions that provide 1 gigaton per year of carbon-equivalent mitigation for the duration of their existence:

Note: SRES (IPCC 2000) scenarios assume that all of these technologies will be used extensively prior to 2100.

technologies. One approach is to focus on aparticular technology or genre of technology, one at atime, and estimate what could be achieved if it wereto be fully adopted by a certain time in the future.For example, Brown et al. (1996) estimated theamount of mitigation that could be achieved throughuse of a variety of individual technologies. Morerecently, Pacala and Socolow (2004) discussedtechnology “wedges,” each of which represents themitigation of one gigaton of carbon emissions in theyear 2050 (Box 3-2), some of the examples of whichwere inspired by Pacala and Socolow). Hoffert et al.(2002) examined technologies needed to deliver acertain amount of carbon-free energy by the end ofthe 21st century. Such approaches are useful forunderstanding the technical potential of varioustechnologies.

Other analytical approaches address importantunderlying factors that may influence a technology’sability, within a larger competitive context, to achieveits technical potential. In this context, advancedtechnologies would need to meet an array ofconditions before they could be successfully adopted.They would need to be cost-competitive, in thecontext of the future global economy and the worldenergy market, compared to other availabletechnologies. Other considerations include ease ofuse, reliability, public safety, and acceptance; and stillothers include policy, environmental, or regulatoryfactors. Taking these considerations into accountrequires an integrated assessment approach usingmodels, which typically require competition amongtechnologies to meet certain exogenously imposedemissions constraints, in conjunction with otheremissions-related factors and considerations.

Such models simulate, for each step in time, thecompetitive deployment of technologies andapproaches that would be needed to achieve a givenamount of emissions reductions at the lowest cost inthat time period. Depending on the level ofemissions constraint assumed, low- or no-costapproaches may supply a large portion of theemissions reduction.28 More costly advancedtechnologies may be adopted more widely inscenarios that require moderate to high levels ofemissions reduction. Expensive, undeveloped, orundemonstrated technologies, or technologies thatface difficult challenges to wide-scale deployment,

may enter the market later in the mitigation period.Hence, the mix of technologies in any given scenariodepends on assumptions about technical readiness,costs, and barriers to adoption for each technology, aswell as the level of emissions constraint assumed.

In a recent model-based integrated assessment,sponsored by CCTP and conducted by PNNL, a setof 17 scenarios was developed to explore and compareadvanced technology options for achieving significantGHG emission reductions. The 17 scenarios includea Reference Case and four sets of GHG-emissions-constrained scenarios (each set has four differentlevels of emission constraint). One set of emissions-constrained scenarios (the Baseline Scenarios) assumesreference case technologies are available to meet theemissions constraints, and three sets of emissions-constrained scenarios assume advanced technologiesbecome available.29 The scenarios are summarized asfollows:

◆ A Reference Case scenario represents ahypothetical technological future, where GHGemissions are not constrained, but wheresignificant technical improvements are achieved ina broad spectrum of currently known or availabletechnologies for supplying and using energy.30

This scenario results in improvements in globalGHG-intensity over time, but not in lower GHGemissions. It provides reference level energy andemissions projections to which the energy andemissions in the emissions-constrained scenarioscan be compared.

◆ A set of four Baseline Scenarios use the sameReference Case technology assumptions describedabove but applies four hypothesized GHGemissions constraints. Because these scenariosrequire emission reductions from the ReferenceCase, low- or zero-emission technologies andother means to reduce GHG gases are deployed athigher rates in these baseline emission-constrainedscenarios than in the Reference Case. Thesebaseline scenarios provide energy and mitigationcost projections to which the energy mix and costsin the advanced technology scenarios can becompared.

◆ Each of the three advanced technology scenariosincludes a distinct set of technology advancements,beyond those in the Reference Case. 31 Each of

39


29 The four hypothesized GHG emissions constraints (i.e., Very High, High, Medium, and Low) were designed to stabilize, over the long term, theaggregated radiative forcing of the following GHGs: CO2, CH4, N2O, and the so-called “F-gases” (hydrofluorocarbons [HFCs], perfluorocarbons[PFCs], and sulfur hexafluoride [SF6]). A range of additional substances, such as aerosols, also have important effects on radiative forcing. Thesesubstances are not included in this analysis.

30 The reference case assumes energy efficiency improvements occur, as well as cost decreases in renewable and nuclear technologies that bringtheir costs to below today’s levels.

31 In the PNNL analysis, Scenarios 1, 2, and 3 are given representative labels of “Closing the Loop on Carbon,” “A New Energy Backbone,” and“Beyond the Standard Suite,” respectively.

these, in turn, is also applied under the four GHGemissions constraints (for a total of twelveadvanced technology cases). The advancedtechnology scenarios include:

Scenario 1, which assumes successfuldevelopment of carbon capture and storagetechnologies for use in electricity, as well as inapplications such as hydrogen and cementproduction.

Scenario 2, which assumes additionaltechnological improvement and cost reductionfor carbon-free energy sources, such as windpower, solar energy systems, and nuclearpower.32

Scenario 3, which assumes major advances infusion energy and/or novel energy applicationsfor solar energy and biotechnology such thatthey can provide zero-carbon energy atcompetitive costs in the second half of thiscentury.33

A number of common features cut across all three ofthe advanced technology scenarios:

◆ Additional gains in energy efficiency beyond thereference case occur.

◆ Additional technologies for managing non-CO2

GHGs become available.

◆ Terrestrial carbon sequestration increases.

◆ The full potential of conventional oil and gas isrealized.

◆ Hydrogen production technology advances.

None of the advanced technology scenarios isintended to represent a preferred “path” to the future.Rather, each is designed with unique features, distinctfrom the others, so as to explore orthogonally a widerange of technology options. The current CCTPportfolio of technology R&D is diversified andincludes elements of all three of the advancedtechnology scenarios. The scenarios are notnecessarily intended to represent every component ofthe CCTP portfolio, however. Instead, they illustrateseveral possible pathways to lower emissions that

could be the outcome of successful technology R&D.

Figures 3-12 and 3-13 provide illustrative resultsacross the three advanced technology scenarios for ahigh emissions constraint case. Figure 3-12 shows themix of technologies and their associated contributionsto total global energy demand for the three advancedenergy scenarios. Figure 3-13 shows the CO2

emissions reduction contributions from the variousenergy sources and technologies, under the same setof assumptions.

Although each scenario assumes advances in particularclasses of technology, all scenarios result in a mix ofenergy efficiency and energy supply technologies.The overall results show the extent of the variationpossible in the mix of emissions-reducingtechnologies under a variety of assumptions andplanning uncertainties.

Economic Benefits of AdvancedTechnologies

The purpose of CCTP is to accelerate thedevelopment of promising technologies that canreduce, avoid, capture, or sequester emissions ofGHGs at greatly reduced cost compared to currenttechnologies. Providing advanced technology optionscan enable progress toward CCTP’s strategic goalsthrough greater choice and competition. Stated inother terms, the same amount of GHG emissionscould be reduced with advanced technology options atcosts significantly lower than would otherwise be thecase had they not been developed or made available.

In the PNNL analysis (Clarke et al. 2006), theestimated costs of achieving a range of emissionreductions were compared for cases with and withoutthe use of advanced technology.34 The scenariosdescribed above were supplemented by an additionalscenario in which the advanced technologies in allthree scenarios were combined in one model run.The resulting cost estimates (Figure 3-14) show thatthe cumulative cost for meeting the hypotheticalcarbon constraints is significantly lower in all threeadvanced technology scenarios than in the BaselineScenarios that use reference case technology

40


32 Note that renewables and nuclear energy increase over time in the reference case scenario, but increase more in Scenario 2 due to more significantdecreases in cost and performance.

33 Advanced biotechnologies (sometimes called “Bio-X”) are those that combine the biosciences with fields such as nanotechnology, chemistry, com-puters, medicine, and others to create novel solutions for technology challenges. This could lead to innovative concepts such as the use of“enzyme machines” or even new materials (e.g., bio-nano hybrids) that could replace traditional technology altogether.

34 The term “advanced technologies” is used to represent major improvement in current technologies, as well as novel technologies currently not inuse. In this study, technology advancement was assumed to lead to more efficient energy technologies with lower capital and operating costs.Details on the assumptions can be found in Clarke et al. (2006). The resulting cost reductions do not consider the cost associated with performingany R&D that might be necessary to achieve the improved technology performance.

41


01990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

EJ/y

r

Year

Energy Use ReductionCommercial BiomassRenewables

NuclearFossil w/ Capture & StorageFossil w/o Capture & Storage

1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

01990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

EJ/y

r

YearEnergy Use ReductionOther Advanced TechnologyCommercial BiomassRenewables


1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

01990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

EJ/y

r

Year

Energy Use ReductionCommercial BiomassRenewables


1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

Figure 3-12. World Primary Energy Demand for Three AdvancedTechnology Scenarios Under a High GHG-Emissions-Constraint CaseNote: “Energy Use Reduction” is the amount of energy conservedor saved through advanced energy-efficient end-use technologiescompared to a Reference Case, which also includes a considerableincrease in energy efficiency compared to today’s level.(Source: Clarke et al. 2006)

World Primary Energy Demand for Three Advanced Technology Scenarios Under a High GHG-Emissions-Constraint Case

SCENARIO 1

SCENARIO 2

SCENARIO 3

0

5

10

15

20

25

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

GtC/

yr

Year

Energy Use ReductionFuel Mix ChangesCommercial BiomassRenewables

NuclearFossil & Cement CCSAdditional Terrestrial SequestrationNet Vented Emissions

0

5

10

15

20

25

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

YearEnergy Use ReductionFuel Mix ChangesOther Advanced TechnologyCommercial BiomassRenewables


GtC/

yr

0

5

10

15

20

25

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

GtC/

yr

Year

Energy Use ReductionFuel Mix ChangesCommercial BiomassRenewables


Figure 3-13. World Carbon Dioxide Emissions for Three AdvancedTechnology Scenarios Under a High GHG-Emissions-Constraint CaseNote: “Energy Use Reduction” is the amount of energy conserved orsaved through advanced energy-efficient end-use technologiescompared to a Reference Case, which also includes a considerableincrease in energy efficiency compared to today’s level.(Source: Clarke et al. 2006)

World Carbon Dioxide Emissions for Three Advanced Technology Scenarios Under a High GHG-Emissions-Constraint Case

SCENARIO 1

SCENARIO 2

SCENARIO 3

assumptions. Accumulated over the course of the 21st

century, the potential economic benefits of anadvanced technology strategy are likely to besignificant, independent of which technologieseventually emerge as most successful. Furthermore,the cumulative cost for meeting the carbonconstraints was even lower in the case in which alltechnology advances were combined, implying thatbenefits will be greatest if many types of advancedtechnologies achieve success.

Numerous other studies reach similar conclusions.For example, Manne and Richels (2004) examinedlimiting global temperature rise using scenarios with“optimistic” technological assumptions. Theyassumed advanced technologies, such as fuel cells andintegrated gasification combined cycle with CO2

capture and storage, are available in the future. Theycompared these to more “pessimistic” scenarioswithout such advanced technologies. The costs35 wereestimated to be 2.5 times lower in the advancedtechnology cases than in the scenarios withoutadvanced technologies. In another study, Edmonds etal. (2004) report that when a suite of advancedtechnologies (such as carbon capture and storage,biotechnology, and hydrogen energy systems) areavailable to be deployed at a large scale, the inferredadded dollar value to GHG emissions that would be

required to achieve the assumed reduction was 60percent lower than when the advanced technologieswere not available.

The economic benefits of accelerated technicaladvances are also identified by a class of studies thatexplore the dynamics of technical change (e.g.,Edenhofer et al. (2005), Manne and Richels (2004),van Vuuren et al. (2004), Löschel (2002), Gerlaghand van der Zwaan (2003) and Goulder and Mathai(2000)). These analyses model technical changethrough mechanisms such as “technology learning” or“learning by doing,” where costs of technologiesdecline with experience as a function of investment inR&D or other mechanisms. The mechanisms arethen used to examine the effects of the technologicalchange on the costs of complying with various climatepolicy and emissions constraints.

Although these studies vary in design, modelplatform, and methodology, a common conclusioncan be drawn from all of them. That is, technologicalchange can significantly reduce the costs of emissionsreduction policies. In these studies, the costs weretypically reduced by over 50 percent whentechnological change was introduced in a portfolio ofmitigation options. One of the major conclusionsdrawn at the recent IPCC Expert Meeting on

42


35 In the study, costs included those associated with fuel switching (to fuels or technologies with lower emissions), changes in domestic and interna-tional fuel prices, and price-induced conservation activities.

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

Very HighConstraint

High

Mitigated Emmissions

Released Emmissions

ConstraintMedium

ConstraintLow

Constraint

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

$300

Cum

ulat

ive

Com

plia

nce

Cost

(Tril

lions

of 2

000

US$

)

Cum

ulat

ive

Carb

on E

mis

sion

s (G

tC):

R

elea

sed

and

Miti

gate

d

Released Emissions

Mitigated EmissionsCost: Baseline

Cost: Scenario 1Cost: Scenario 2Cost: Scenario 3

Cost: All Technologies Scenario

Figure 3-14. Cost ReductionsAssociated with AdvancedTechnology Scenarios,Compared to a Baseline Casewithout Advanced Technologies(Source: Clarke et al. 2006)

Note: Cumulative releasedemissions (shown in the bargraphs) are highest andmitigated emissions are lowestwhen the emissions constraintis least stringent (LowConstraint). Costs (linegraphs) are highest when theemissions constraint is moststringent (Very HighConstraint). Costs are lowerwhen advanced technologywas assumed to be available(purple, red, green, and bluelines), than when technologywas assumed to advance onlyincrementally (black line).

Cost Reductions Associated with Advanced Technology Scenarios, Compared to a Baseline Case without Advanced Technologies

Emission Scenarios was that technological change canhave a significant impact on reducing costs of GHGstabilization.36

In addition, the studies indicate that the benefits aregreatest when technology advancement is pervasive.A study conducted using the MESSAGE model(Roehrl and Riahi 2000) concluded that mitigationcosts are highest in scenarios with static technologiesand lowest in scenarios where technologyimprovements span both supply and end-use sectors.

A multi-gas, rather than a CO2-only, approach isanother important dimension to lowering the costs ofstabilizing radiative forcing from GHGs. Weyant andde la Chesnaye (2005) showed that using a multi-gasapproach results in a cost reduction of 30 to 50percent, compared to CO2-only approaches.

Timing of Advanced Technology MarketPenetration

CCTP’s planning activities must also consider thetiming of the commercial readiness of the advancedtechnologies included in its R&D portfolio.However, the time at which certain technologieswould need to be ready for large-scale deployment inthe marketplace is uncertain and would vary,

depending on the level of the GHG reductions to beachieved. Understanding how timing varies withvarying GHG concentration levels and with varyingassumptions about the technology mix providesinsights for R&D planning and related technologydevelopment strategies. Clearly, R&D programsmust complete their contributions well before thetime when large-scale deployment of the technologiesis expected.

As an illustration, in the PNNL scenario analysisunder a “high” emissions constraint, advancedtechnologies for reducing emissions for energy enduse and infrastructure begin achieving emissionsreductions at a significant level (one GtC/year)between 2030 and 2040. Under a similar constraint,technologies effecting capture, storage, andsequestration of CO2 begin making significantcontributions (one GtC/year) around 2040 or later.Variations among these dates result from varyingassumptions about technologies. A summary of theinsights about timing, shown for each CCTP strategicgoal, is presented in Table 3-1, across a wide range ofhypothesized GHG emissions constraints. In general,the higher the emissions constraint, the sooner theadvanced technologies are needed and deployed.

43


36 Meeting Report of the IPCC Expert Meeting on Emission Scenarios, 12-14 January 2005, Washington D.C. http://www.ipcc.ch/meet/washington.pdf.

CCTP STRATEGIC GOALVERY HIGH

CONSTRAINTHIGH

CONSTRAINTMEDIUM

CONSTRAINTLOW

CONSTRAINT

Goal #1. Reduce Emissions fromEnergy End Use & Infrastructure

2010 - 2020 2030 - 2040 2030 - 2050 2040 - 2060

Goal #2. Reduce Emissions fromEnergy Supply

2020 - 2040 2040 - 2060 2050 - 2070 2060 - 2100

Goal #3. Capture and Store orSequester Carbon Dioxide

2020 - 2050 2040 or Later 2060 or Later Beyond 2100

Goal #4. Reduce Emissions of Non-CO2 GHGs 2020 - 2030 2050 - 2060 2050 - 2060 2070 - 2080

Note: The years shown in the table represent the period in which the first GtC (or GtC-eq.) of incremental emissions reduction (compared to the Reference Case) is projected to occur due to penetration of each classof advanced technology in any one of the advanced technology scenarios. The Reference Class includes significant penetration of energy-efficient end use technologies, nuclear, renewable, and biomass energy, terrestrial sequestration, and non-CO2 emission reductions.

Estimated Timing of the First GtC-eq./Year of Reduced or Avoided Emissions (Compared to the Reference Case) for Advanced Technology Scenarios

Table 3-1. EstimatedTiming of the FirstGtC-eq./Year ofReduced or AvoidedEmissions(Compared to theReference Case) forAdvancedTechnologyScenarios(Source: Clarke et al.2006)

CCTP Goals forAdvanced Technology Review of scenario analyses indicates that, given thescale of the challenge, no single technology or class oftechnology would be likely to provide, by itself, thequantity of GHG emissions reductions needed toachieve stabilization of GHG concentrations, or itsintegrated multi-gas metric, radiative forcing, at mostof the levels typically hypothesized and examined inthe technology literature on scenarios. Instead, thesestudies show that, under a wide range of differingassumptions and planning uncertainties, technologicaladvances aimed at the following four broad areas arelikely to be needed in combination in order tocontribute to the needed GHG emissions reductions:37

1. Energy End-Use Efficiency and Infrastructure

2. Low- and Zero-CO2 Emissions Energy Supply

3. CO2 Capture/Storage and Sequestration

4. Non-CO2 GHGs

Energy End-Use Efficiency and Infrastructure

Ultimately, global GHG emissions are driven by thedemand for services (heating, cooling, transportation,agriculture, industrial process activities, etc.) thatrequire energy or other services and consumableswith embodied GHG emissions. Technologicaladvances that can reduce the energy and servicesrequired to meet these needs are one of the keymeans for reducing GHG emissions from energyend-use and infrastructure. Scenario analyses suggestthat increased use of highly energy-efficienttechnologies and other means of reducing energy end

use could play a major role in contributing to cost-effective emissions reduction.

In published scenarios, increasing demand for energyservices, driven by population and economic growth,drives growth in GHG emissions over the 21st century.If gross world product were to grow by 2.0 percentper year over the span of the 21st century, and thedemand for energy services were to grow at acommensurate 2.0 percent per year, then energydemand would grow seven-fold by 2100. Manypublished scenarios assume gross world productgrowth above these rates. For example, at the top ofthe range of the IPCC’s Special Report on EmissionsScenarios (SRES) scenarios, gross world product growsat more than 3.0 percent per year from 1990 through2100.

In virtually all published scenarios, however, thedemand for final energy38 and associated emissions ofCO2 grows at rates lower than the growth rates ofgross world product. This is because improvementsin end-use efficiency, along with structural changes ineconomic activity, tend to drive up economic value-added and drive down energy inputs associated withincreasing global prosperity.39 In 1990, global finalenergy intensity (energy used per constant dollar ofgross world product) was roughly 17 million joulesper dollar. In the IPCC’s SRES scenarios, finalenergy intensities in 2100 ranged from 1.4 million to5.9 million joules per dollar of gross world product.40

Without these reductions in energy intensity, whichare significant, energy demand growth and associatedGHG emissions would be significantly higher. Thispoint is illustrated in Figure 3-15, which shows therelationship between global CO2 emissions andenergy intensities in 2100 in various publishedscenarios. Although Figure 3-15 shows variationacross multiple scenarios due to differences in energymix and the levels of deployment of low or zero-emitting technologies, the general pattern indicatesthat lower energy use per unit of economic outputleads to lower CO2 emissions per unit of economicoutput.

3.5

44


37 CCTP also includes two supporting technology areas. These are measuring and monitoring technologies, and application of basic science toapplied technology R&D. These supporting areas are not discussed in this chapter, although they are integral elements of the overall CCTP tech-nology strategic plan.

38 Final energy refers to energy delivered to the point of end use (e.g., to buildings or gas stations) as opposed to energy used as an input to, forexample, electricity generation. However, final energy does not represent the actual energy ultimately delivered in the way of services to end-users(e.g., building cooling or vehicle miles traveled) because final energy must be converted to these final services by equipment such as air condition-ers and automobiles. Hence, changes in final energy should be interpreted as combining changes both in the level of services demanded and inthe efficiency at which final energy is used to supply those services.

39 See the GHG Emissions Scenario Database at http://www-cger.nies.go.jp/cgere/db/enterprise/scenario/scenario_index_e.html.40 Range based on the illustrative scenarios from IPCC (2000). Changes in final energy intensity incorporate both changes in end-use efficiency and

changes in the relationship between economic output and the demand for services such as transportation and air conditioning (see footnote 39).Hence, improvements in energy intensity should not be interpreted strictly as improvements in end-use efficiency.

This relationship suggests the significance of theemissions reduction benefits that would accrue fromincreasing the efficiency of end-use technologies. IfR&D efforts were to increase the rate of final energyintensity improvement by one-quarter of one percentper year over the span of the 21st century (leading toan increase in energy efficiency by the end of thecentury of roughly 25 percent), scenario analysesindicate that CO2 emissions would be reduced by 3.5GtC/year by 2100. For perspective, this is roughlyhalf of the total global CO2 emissions in 2006.42

This point is further illustrated by the advancedtechnology scenarios in the PNNL report on climatechange technology strategies (Clarke et al. 2006). Inthis study, advanced energy-efficiency technologieswere assumed to lower final energy requirements by17 to 32 percent globally in 2100. These reductionswere responsible for a cumulative decrease of between130 to 270 GtC of CO2 emissions over the course ofthe 21st century. Energy-efficiency improvements alsocontributed to the lowering of the costs for achievingstabilization of GHG concentrations across a range ofvaried assumptions.

Similarly, one of the IPCC’s SRES scenarios featuring

advanced end-use technologies (A1T) indicates thatreductions from end-use efficiency (through reducedfinal energy intensity) could be responsible forroughly 4.0 GtC/yr by 2100.43 In addition, Hansonand Laitner (2004) developed an advanced technologyscenario and projected that approximately one-thirdof the U.S. carbon emissions reductions in 2050—roughly one GtC/yr—were attributable to thedeployment of more efficient end-use technologies.44

Providing technological options to improve energyend-use efficiency can provide a fundamental way toachieve GHG emissions reductions and lower theneed for CO2-free energy supply. This insight isrobust across a full spectrum of varied technologyfutures—whether these futures emphasize fossil fuelscombined with CO2 capture and storage, renewableor nuclear power, or novel technologies such as fusionand advanced bio-technology.

Low- and Zero-CO2-Emissions EnergySupply Technologies

Supplying the world’s energy needs while achievingsubstantial reductions in GHG emissions may also

45


41 See http://www-cger.nies.go.jp/cger-e/db/enterprise/scenario/scenario_index_e.html.42 This calculation is based on the illustrative B2 scenario from IPCC (2000). It assumes that lower final energy requirements would not alter the rela-

tive proportions of energy provided from different sources.43 Result based on the illustrative scenarios for the A1 set. It was calculated based on a comparison of the illustrative A1T scenario with the illustrative

A1B scenario, assuming no change in the primary energy mix between the two. While not identical to A1T, A1B is similar in terms of the emissionsper unit of primary energy and therefore serves as an effective reference. The particular scenario cited above used the AIM (model).

44 Note that many of the assumptions in this study followed from the study, Scenarios for a Clean Energy Future (Brown et al. 2000).

-

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Energy Intensity (Terajoules per Dollar of Gross World Product)

CO2

Emis

sion

s(T

onne

s pe

r $1

000

dolla

rs o

f Gro

ss W

orld

Pro

duct

)

Global CO2 Emissions Intensity versus Global Energy Intensity

Figure 3-15. Global CO2Emissions Intensity versusGlobal Energy Intensity

(Source: Data from theGreenhouse Gas EmissionsScenario Database41)

require large contributions from energy supplytechnologies with low or near-zero emissions profiles.These include renewable energy sources forelectricity, such as wind, solar, and hydroelectricpower; biomass-based energy systems; nuclear power;and the use of these and other technologies toproduce the energy carrier, hydrogen. These couldalso include other advanced technologies such asfusion energy, solar energy from space or remotedesert locations, and novel biotechnologies.

In integrated assessment models, low- and near-zero-emissions energy supply technologies are modeled atvarying levels of technological detail. While somemodels explicitly model various low- and near-zero-emissions energy supply technologies, others use oneor more generic technology classes to represent thesetechnologies. In either case, the low- and near-zero-emissions technologies prove to be importantcomponents to technology strategies aimed atstabilizing GHG concentrations. Figure 3-16 showsthe strong correlation between the CO2 emissionsintensity (tonnes of CO2 emissions per constant dollarof GWP) of the global economy and the percentage

of renewable and nuclear energy found in the energysupply mix, as projected in a wide number ofscenarios.

A number of scenario analyses give quantitativesignificance to the importance of low- and near-zero-emissions energy supply technologies in reducingemissions. For example, Akimoto et al. (2004)46 showthat for a hypothetical climate policy where emissionsare constrained, the share of the world’s primaryenergy in 2100 met by biomass and wind energyincreased by more than 70 percent from theirreference case contributions of 10 percent and 4percent, respectively. In addition, solar powersupplied almost 5 percent of the world’s primaryenergy demand by 2100.47 Growth in nuclear energy(fission), biomass, and renewable energy accountedfor about 30 percent of the emissions reduction in2100, in about equal shares. Similarly, Edmonds et al.(2004) reported that contributions from solar andnuclear energy grew under CO2 emissions constraints,especially when no technological advancement wasassumed for fossil-based generation technologies andCO2 capture and storage (CCS) technologies.48

46


45 See http://www-cger.nies.go.jp/cger-e/db/enterprise/scenario/scenario_index_e.html.46 The study used an updated version of the DNE21 model, an integrated assessment model which hard-links macroeconomic, energy systems, and

climate change models, and seeks optimal development of the world’s energy system for a given climate policy based on maximizing macroeco-nomic consumption.

47 The upper limit of the world total nuclear production assumed in this scenario was 920 GW in 2050 and 1450 GW in 2100, so nuclear energy wasnot a major contributor in this analysis.

48 This study used the MiniCAM model and the IPCC SRES B2 Scenario to examine the role of advanced technologies under a climate policy aimed atstabilizing atmospheric CO2 concentrations at 550 ppmv.

CO2

Emis

sion

s(T

onne

s pe

r $1

000

dolla

rs o

f Gro

ss W

orld

Pro

duct

)

-

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Percent of Primary Energy from Nuclear and Renewables, Combined

Figure 3-16. Global CO2Emissions Intensity versusPercentage of Renewableand Nuclear Energy in theEnergy Supply Mix

(Source: Data from theGreenhouse GasEmissions ScenarioDatabase45)

Global CO2 Emissions Intensity versus Percentageof Renewable and Nuclear Energy in the Energy Supply Mix

As discussed in previous sections, Clarke et al. (2006)examined several advanced technology scenarios toachieve a range of emissions reductions. Low- andnear-zero-emissions energy technologies (includingsolar, wind, biomass, nuclear fission, and advancedconcepts such as nuclear fusion and novelbiotechnology) contribute between 23 percent and 34percent of world primary energy demand by 2100.These technologies were projected to contributebetween 30 and 340 GtC of CO2 emissionsreductions (cumulative) over the course of the 21st

century, under a variety of scenarios aimed atstabilizing GHG concentrations (Clarke et al. 2006).

Finally, in several scenarios that explored the use ofhydrogen as a fuel or energy carrier, renewable energysources were found to be important means forgenerating hydrogen and other fuels. Edmonds et al.(2004) showed that, under a medium carbonconstraint, the preferred feedstock for hydrogenproduction shifts from fossil fuels to biomass, becausethe application of CCS to biomass-based H2

production can result favorably in net negativeemissions. Alternatively, Mori and Saito (2004) reportthat H2 production from fast breeder reactors can,under certain emissions constraints, cost-effectivelysupply nearly all of the final energy demand forhydrogen.49

Carbon Capture/Storage andSequestration

Several physical, chemical, geochemical, andbiological mechanisms can remove CO2 from theatmosphere or from point sources, and store or usethe resulting CO2 or chemical derivatives (see e.g.,Halmann 1993, Kojima 1997, Inui et al. 1998,Lackner 2002). The CCTP technology thrustsrelated to capturing/storing and sequestering CO2

(see Chapter 6) include: (1) engineered capture andstorage of CO2 from power plants and otherindustrial sources of CO2 emissions; (2) terrestrialsequestration of CO2 in trees, soils, and otherterrestrial systems; and (3) ocean sequestration viadirect injection or other means.

Capture and Storage of Carbon Dioxide

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) refers to thecapture, purification, and concentration of molecularcarbon dioxide resulting from combustion or otherindustrial processes, and the subsequent transport toand storage of CO2 in suitable geologic or oceanreservoirs. CCS has the potential to lower the carbonemissions intensity of fossil energy systems. CCScould also be applied to bio-based electricity-generation systems or to other non-fossil-fuel wastestreams, such as those from calcining operations(cement or lime production, for example).

Figure 3-17 shows the amount of carbon dioxidecaptured and stored, as a function of the amount ofprimary energy supplied by fossil fuels for variousscenarios from the Center for Global EnvironmentalResearch data base50 in the years 2050 and 2100. Bothparts of the figure show a relationship between theamount of carbon sequestered and the amount offossil fuel used. The plots show that by the middle ofthe century, the deployment of CCS technologies inconjunction with fossil fuel use is occurring in manyscenarios, even though lower-carbon fuels (such asnatural gas) are still available. By the end of thecentury, when such fuels are less abundant and/orexpensive, CCS is almost always deployed in scenarioswith high fossil fuel consumption.

A number of recent studies using integratedassessment models have examined the potential ofCCS to lower future CO2 emissions. Edmonds et al.(2004) report that fossil energy technologies withCCS can supply approximately 55 percent of theglobal electricity generation by the end of the centuryin an advanced technology scenario with highemissions reductions.51 This was more than twice thecontribution than in a case where CCS (and otheradvanced energy technologies) was not assumed toadvance. McFarland et al. (2004) find that fossil-based power systems with CCS account forapproximately 70 percent of global electricityproduction by 2100 under a high GHG emissionsconstraint, where CCS systems and other advancedfossil energy systems are allowed to deploy to theirfull market potential.52 Clarke et al. (2006) show fossilsystems with CCS contributing up to 50 percent

47


49 This study used the MARIA integrated assessment model to examine the role of nuclear technology and hydrogen use under different climate poli-cies, and different technology advancement assumptions.

50 Center for Global Environmental Research, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan. See http://www-cger.nies.go.jp/cger-e/db/enterprise/scenario/scenario_index_e.html.

51 This analysis employed the PNNL MiniCAM model, using the IPCC SRES B2 scenario as the reference case, and compared that case to anadvanced technology case that incorporates more efficient and economical CCS, higher efficiency fossil generation, and hydrogen energy systems.

52 This study used the MIT EPPA model, a recursive dynamic multi-regional general equilibrium model of the world economy. Bottom-up informationabout coal- and natural gas-based generation systems with CCS were used in a top-down energy economics model to examine the effect of CCSon different climate policies.

more of the world’s total primary energy consumptionin 2100 in scenarios featuring technologyadvancement in CCS, compared to other advancedtechnology scenarios.53

Recent studies have also examined the economicbenefits of using CCS in isolation or along with othertechnological advancements. By allowing fossilenergy resources to be used while simultaneouslydelivering reductions in CO2 emissions, CCStechnologies help to constrain the rate of increase andultimate peak of carbon prices (an indication of theoverall cost of achieving the emission reductions).54

For example, Edmonds et al. (2004) show thatthrough the large-scale adoption of CCS and otheradvanced fossil energy technologies, peak carbonpermit prices were 62 percent lower than if thosetechnologies were not deployed to their full marketpotential. In the study by McFarland et al. (2004),CCS reduces carbon prices by 33 percent at the endof the century.

While many studies employ different modelingapproaches, technology representations, and assumedclimate policies, the synthesis assessment of scenariosshows that CCS has the potential to play a significant

role in emissions mitigation during the 21st century.The advancement of CCS-related technologiesmagnifies this contribution, delivering substantialeconomic savings. Early technical resolution of theviability of various CCS options could have significantimplications for subsequent R&D investmentstrategies.

Terrestrial SequestrationLand-use change that results in net CO2 release to theatmosphere accounts for about 22 percent of today’sglobal CO2 emissions (IPCC 1996). At the sametime, terrestrial systems in many parts of the worldare being managed in ways that remove CO2 (alsoreferred to here simply as “carbon”) from theatmosphere and sequester it in soils and biomass.Over the next several decades, the potential exists tooffset a significant portion of global CO2 emissions bymanaging the world’s terrestrial systems toaccumulate and store additional carbon. How muchof this potential can be realized is uncertain, however,and will depend on the development and diffusion ofadvanced technologies in a variety of economicsectors.

48


53 This study used the PNNL MiniCAM model to examine energy and economic implications of different technology futures and different levels of emissions reductions. One future assumes that CCS technologies meet aggressive technical, economic, and environmental goals for application onfossil and biomass-based energy systems, along with higher-efficiency fossil generation and greater end-use efficiency gains.

54 Since the cost of compliance is the total area under the marginal abatement curve, the last two metrics are strongly correlated, i.e., the greater thereduction in the carbon price, the greater the reduction in the cost of compliance.

-- 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400

2050

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Primary Energy from Fossil Fuels (EJ)

and

Stor

age

(GtC

)Ca

rbon

Dio

xide

Cap

ture

-5

10

15

20

25

30

35

- 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

Primary Energy from Fossil Fuels (EJ)

and

Stor

age

(GtC

)Ca

rbon

Dio

xide

Cap

ture

2100

Figure 3-17. Carbon Dioxide Captured and Stored, as a Function of Primary Energy Supplied from Fossil Fuels for Various IPCC Scenarios.Note: The dashed lines in the figures reflect the correlation between fossil energy and CCS deployment.(Source: Various scenario results were extracted from the database maintained by the Center for Global Environmental Research,National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan. See http://www-cger.nies.go.jp/cger-e/db/enterprise/scenario/scenario_index_e.html.)

Carbon Dioxide Captured and Stored, as a Function of Primary Energy Supplied from Fossil Fuels for Various IPCC Scenarios

Globally, the goods and services derived from landresources—including food, water, shelter, energy, andrecreation—are basic to human existence and qualityof life. Future changes in cropland, grassland, andforest land areas—regionally and globally—will bedriven by the ability of land resources to provide thesebasic goods and services. Hence, the potential to useterrestrial systems to sequester carbon and mitigateglobal GHG emissions will be directly affected by thedevelopment of advanced technologies that reducehuman pressures on land by increasing landproductivity across a range of economic sectors—including (but not limited to) agriculture, forestry,and energy.

In agriculture, advanced technologies could enhanceterrestrial carbon sequestration by enabling thedevelopment of new food and fiber products,production processes, and distribution systems thatreduce the amount of land needed to feed and clothethe world’s population. In forestry, advancedtechnologies could accelerate the processes ofreforestation and afforestation, as well as increase thequantity of wood products that could be obtainedfrom a unit of forest land. Advanced energytechnologies could increase terrestrial sequestrationby reducing deforestation pressures in developingcountries and shifting cropland to bioenergy cropsystems that not only increase soil carbon levels butalso shift energy production toward technologies thatrecycle atmospheric CO2.

Sohngen and Mendelsohn (2003) suggest that globalforests have a net sequestration potential rangingfrom 32 to 102 GtC in the coming century,depending on carbon prices (see Section 3.2.1.2). In amore recent study performed as part of EMF-21, thenet sequestration was projected to increase fromtoday’s level by 48 to 148 GtC by 2100 underdifferent climate policies (Sohngen and Sedjo, 2006).The cost of land-use and forest sequestration has beenestimated to range between $10 and $200 per ton ofcarbon stored (Richards and Stokes 2004).

Non-CO2 GHG Emissions

Non-CO2 GHGs play an important role in theCCTP analytical framework because of their highpotential to reduce overall radiative forcing, both inthe near term and over the next 100 years, and toreduce the overall cost of GHG stabilization. Asshown in Figure 3-1, combined emissions from non-CO2 gases accounted for about one-quarter of allGHG emissions (in terms of global warming

potential) in the year 2000. These gases areparticularly important because a variety of scenarioanalyses show that a significant level of reduction isachievable in the first half of the 21st century.

Potential reductions and cost savings are illustrated inthe Energy Modeling Forum multi-gas scenario study—EMF-21 (Weyant and de la Chesnaye 2005)—and other long-term multi-gas studies (e.g., Manneand Richels 2000, 2001; Reilly et al. 2002). Thevarious models exercised in the EMF-21 study used arange of assumptions about technology development,leading to a range of reductions of non-CO2 GHGs.The studies suggest that, between 2000 and 2100,emissions of non-CO2 “well mixed” gases (methane,nitrous oxide, and the F-gases) in a moderatelyconstrained emissions case55 could be reduced by asmuch as 48 percent, and the cost of GHGstabilization could be lowered by 30 to 60 percentcompared to a CO2-only scenario.

In addition to the long-term EMF-21 multi-gasscenarios, two other studies illustrate maximumtechnology potential of non-CO2 mitigation optionsover the medium term. Delhotal and Gallaher (2005)projected the reduction potential of technologicalimprovements out to 2030 in the three majormethane emitting sectors—landfills, natural gas, andcoal—for selected countries. By 2030, cost-effectivetechnologies could reduce methane emission to lessthan 50 percent of current levels in the United States,and could potentially reduce emissions by a factor oftwo in countries such as China, Mexico, and Russia inthe same time frame. Another study by theInternational Institute for Applied Systems Analysis(IIASA) (Cofala et al. 2005) shows the “maximumpotential reductions” to 2030. This study concludedthat if all currently available technologies wereapplied to landfills, agriculture, the natural gas sector,the coal sector, and oil and gas extraction, withoutconsideration of cost, global CH4 emissions wouldstop increasing and remain constant through 2030.

The scenarios described above do not explicitlyinclude new or highly advanced mitigationtechnologies for non-CO2 GHGs. An analysisconducted by PNNL in cooperation with the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency assumed thedevelopment of advanced technologies in areas suchas methane emissions from waste and energy sectors,methane and nitrous oxide emissions fromagriculture, and high-GWP emissions from theindustrial sector (Clarke et al. 2006). Compared to areference scenario with no emissions constraints andno new non-CO2 mitigation technologies, the

49


55 The constrained case was defined as 4.5 W/m2 stabilization target by 2100.

advanced technology scenarios showed thatreductions in emissions of non-CO2 GHGs couldpotentially contribute 91 to 165 GtC-eq. incumulative emissions reductions over the 21st century.The assumptions underlying the advanced technologyscenario are based on the currently known methods toachieve emissions reduction, as well as detailed“bottom-up” analyses of the technical potential toreduce non-CO2 GHGs further. Results from thisanalysis for a high GHG-constrained case are shownin Figure 3-18.

Summary of Relative Contributions ofFour CCTP Goals

As described in the sections above, a variety ofscenario analyses conducted by different researchgroups show the importance of technologyadvancement consistent with each of the four coreCCTP emissions-reduction goals:

1. Reduce emissions from energy end-use andinfrastructure.

2. Reduce emissions from energy supply.

3. Capture and sequester CO2.

4. Reduce emissions of non-CO2 GHGs.

In general, scenario analyses indicate that no singletechnology option, as presently envisioned, is able toprovide sufficient emissions reductions to meet

stabilization objectives. Rather, even whenassumptions vary, the analyses strongly indicate that aportfolio of technologies is required, with eachtechnology contributing significantly to the GHGemission reductions required.

This point is illustrated by the results of a recentPNNL study (Clarke et al. 2006) in which each of thefour technology areas was shown to makecontributions toward stabilizing concentrations.Based on the assumptions used in this set of scenarios,no one area was markedly more or less importantthan others. Figure 3-19 shows the contributions offour technology categories (directly linked to the fourCCTP goals stated above) to cumulative GHGemissions reductions between 2000 and 2100. Thefigure represents one set of possible outcomes fromscenarios that are based on a particular set ofassumptions about advanced technologies over thenext century. It offers a glimpse of the range ofemissions reductions new technologies might makepossible through reduced energy end use; low- orzero-emission energy supply; carbon capture, storage,and sequestration; and reduction of other GHGs—ona 100-year scale and across a range of uncertainties.Given the magnitude of the CO2 challenge and theuncertainties in cost, efficacy, impacts, and ultimatedesign of the mitigation technologies beingconsidered, pursuit of new technological advances andalternative approaches may prove beneficial to theformulation of GHG stabilization strategies.

50


0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100

Year

Emis

sion

s (G

tC-e

q./y

r)

CH4N2OF-Gases

56 This figure was based on the A New Energy Backbone scenario (Scenario 2).

Figure 3-18. World Non-CO2 GHGEmissions UnderHigh EmissionsConstraints 56

(Source: Clarke et al.2006)

World Non-CO2 GHG Emissions Under High Emissions Constraints56

Summary of InsightsMany studies have examined long-term GHGemissions trends under a range of assumptions aboutthe rate of change of population, economic growth,and technology change; and the potential role foradvanced technology in mitigating emissions growth.Although the rate of GHG emissions growth over the21st century is uncertain and dependent on manyvariables, the scenarios presented in this chaptersuggest that significant increases in GHG emissionsare projected through the end of the 21st century ifthere are no constraints on emissions.

Further scientific study is required to understand thequantities and timing of GHG emissions reductionsthat would be needed to stabilize GHGconcentrations at a level that would preventdangerous anthropogenic interference (DAI) with theclimate system. In the approach adopted by CCTP

to explore the potential roles for and benefits ofadvanced technologies, four levels of GHGconcentrations were assumed, with results presentedfor each.

Regarding the scale of the challenge, the scenariosanalysis conducted for CCTP suggests that mid-rangeestimates of the cumulative global emissionsreductions needed to result in progress over thecourse of the 21st century toward eventualstabilization, across a range of GHG concentrations,would be on the order of 300 to 1,000 GtC-eq.58

Analyses using different assumptions may result indifferent values, but a number of mid-range analysesindicate 100-year cumulative reductions of similarmagnitude.59 These reductions (or avoidances) wouldbe in addition to the GHG emissions avoided by thesubstantial energy-efficiency improvements and CO2-emission-free energy sources already assumed(embedded) in their respective reference casescenarios. Technology advancements could make suchreductions much more feasible in the context ofeconomic growth.

3.6

51


57 The figure shows the cumulative contributions between 2000 and 2100 to the reduction, avoidance, capture/storage, and sequestration of GHGemissions under the three Advanced Technology Scenarios, based on varying emissions constrained cases. The thick bars show the contributionunder the high emission constraint and the thinner, semi-transparent bars show the variation in the contribution between the very high emissionsconstraint and the low emissions constraint. “Energy End-Use” includes emission reductions due to energy-efficiency measures. “Energy Supply”includes emissions reductions from the substitution of non-fossil energy supply technologies with low or zero CO2 emissions for fossil-based powergeneration without capture and storage of CO2. “Sequestration” includes carbon capture and storage from fossil-based technologies, as well as ter-restrial sequestration.

Figure 3-19. CumulativeContributions Between 2000and 2100 to the Reduction,Avoidance, Capture, andSequestration of GreenhouseGas Emissions for the ThreeAdvanced TechnologyScenarios, Under VaryingCarbon Constraints57

Note: The thick bars show thecontribution in the highemission reduction case andthe thinner bars show thevariation in the contributionbetween the very highemission reduction case andthe low emission reductioncase.

Cumulative Contributions Between 2000 and 2100 to the Reduction, Avoidance, Capture, and Sequestration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions for the Three Advanced Technology Scenarios, Under Varying Carbon Constraints57

The synthesis assessment of a large number ofscenario analyses conducted by different researchgroups indicates that emissions reductions of the scaleneeded to achieve stabilization of GHGconcentrations can be achieved through variouscombinations of many different technologies. Animportant insight that can be drawn from thesestudies is that, under a wide range of differingassumptions, advanced technologies associated withCCTP Strategic Goals 1 through 4 could allcontribute significantly to overall GHG emissionreductions.

While many technologies may reduce or avoid GHGemissions, scenario analyses can suggest roles foradvanced technologies that could result in potentiallylarge relative economic benefits. When the costs ofachieving different levels of emissions reductions werecompared for cases with and without advancedtechnologies, the cumulative cost savings of theformer were projected to be 60 percent or more overthe course of the 21st century. Further, by includingthe non-CO2 gases in a multi-gas GHG reductionstrategy aimed at stabilizing at various DAI levels ofradiative forcing, overall costs of goal attainment werereduced, potentially by 30 to 50 percent whencompared to CO2-only approaches.

Finally, scenario analyses indicate that the timing ofthe commercial readiness of advanced technologyoptions is an important R&D planning consideration,

and particularly so for R&D planning under scenarioswith the higher GHG emissions constraints. Table 3-1 is one set of representative results in this regard,showing when the first GtC/year of reduced oravoided emissions would be needed, depending on therange of GHG emissions constraints. Looking over a100-year planning horizon, and allowing for capitalstock turnover and other inertias, inherent in theglobal energy system and infrastructure, technologieswith low or near-zero net emissions characteristicswould need to be available and moving into themarketplace years before the periods shown on Table 3-1.

The following chapters focus in depth on varioustechnological means for making progress toward, andeventually achieving, each CCTP strategic goal.Guided in part by the insights gained through thereview and synthesis of the scenario analyses, eachchapter’s discussion addresses the rationale andtechnology strategy that would guide investments inthe current technology portfolio, explains potentialR&D progress, and identifies candidate areas forfuture research directions that could enrich andbroaden the overall portfolio.

52


58 Estimates of emissions reductions required to stabilize GHG concentrations are uncertain and vary based on assumptions. See Section 3.3 andfootnote 25. See also “mitigated emissions” in Figure 3-14.

59 Manne and Richels 2004, Weyant 2004, and Roehrl and Riahi 2000.

53


Akimoto, K., T. Tomoda, Y. Fujii, and K. Yamaji. 2004. Assessment of global warming mitigation options with integratedassessment model DNE21. Energy Economics 26(4):635-653. Special Issue EMF 19 Alternative technology strategies forclimate change policy, John P. Weyant, ed.

Alcamo, J., R. Leemans, and E. Kreileman, eds. 1998. Global change scenarios of the 21st century. Results from the IMAGE 2.1 model.London: Elsevier Science.

Ausubel, J.H., A. Grübler, and N. Nakicenovic. 1988. Carbon dioxide emissions in a methane economy. Climatic Change 12:245-263.

Brown, M.A., M.D. Levine, and W.D. Short. 2000. Scenarios for a clean energy future. Interlaboratory Working Group. Publishedby Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN; and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA;ORNL/CON-476 and LBNL-44029. http://www.ornl.gov/sci/eere/cef/

Brown, S., J. Sathaye, M. Cannell, and P.E. Kauppi. 1996. Mitigation of carbon emissions to the atmosphere by forestmanagement. Commonwealth Forestry Review 75:80-91.

Clarke, L., M. Wise, M. Placet, C. Izaurralde, J. Lurz, S. Kim, S. Smith, and A. Thomson. 2006. Climate Change Mitigation: AnAnalysis of Advanced Technology Scenarios. Richland, WA: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.

Cofala, J. Markus Amann, and Reinhard Mechler. 2005. Scenarios of world anthropogenic emissions of air pollutants and methaneup to 2030. Laxenburg, Austria: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.http://www.iiasa.ac.at/rains/global_emiss/Global%20emissions%20of%20air%20pollutants%20.pdf

Coppock, R. and S. Johnson. 2004. Direct and indirect human contributions to terrestrial carbon fluxes: a workshop summary. Washington,DC: National Academies Press.

Delhotal, K.C., and M. Gallaher. 2005. Estimating technical change and potential diffusion of methane abatement technologies for the coal-mining, natural gas, and landfill sectors. Conference proceedings, IPCC Expert Meeting on Industrial Technology Development,Transfer and Diffusion.http://arch.rivm.nl/env/int/ipcc/docs/ITDT/ITDT%20Meeting%20Report%20Open%20website%20version.pdf

De Jong, A., and G. Zalm. 1991. Scanning the future: a long-term scenario study of the world economy 1990-2015. In Long-termprospects of the world economy, 27-74. Paris: OECD.

De Vries, H.J.M., J.G.J. Olivier, R.A. van den Wijngaart, G.J.J. Kreileman, and A.M.C. Toet. 1994. Model for calculating regionalenergy use, industrial production and greenhouse gas emissions for evaluating global climate scenarios. Water, Air Soil Pollution76:79-131.

De Vries, B., M. Janssen, and A. Beusen. 1999. Perspectives on global energy futures—simulations with the TIME model. EnergyPolicy 27:477-494.

De Vries, B., J. Bollen, L. Bouwman, M. den Elzen, M. Janssen, and E. Kreileman. 2000. Greenhouse gas emissions in an equity-,environment- and service-oriented world: An IMAGE-based scenario for the next century. Technological Forecasting & SocialChange 63(2-3).

Edenhofer, O., N. Bauer, and E. Kriegler. 2005. The impact of technological change on climate protection and welfare: Insightsfrom the model MIND. Ecological Economics 54:277– 292.

Edmonds, J., J. Clarke, J. Dooley, S.H. Kim, and S.J. Smith. 2004. Stabilization of CO2 in a B2 world: insights on the roles ofcarbon capture and disposal, hydrogen, and transportation technologies. Energy Economics 26(4):517-537. Special Issue EMF19 Alternative technology strategies for climate change policy, John P. Weyant, ed.

References3.7

54


Edmonds, J., M. Wise, and C. MacCracken. 1994. Advanced energy technologies and climate change. an analysis using the GlobalChange Assessment Model (GCAM). PNL-9798, UC-402. Richland, WA: Pacific Northwest Laboratory.http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/mva/MCPAPER/mcpaper.html

Edmonds, J., M. Wise, H. Pitcher, R. Richels, T. Wigley, and C. MacCracken. 1996a. An integrated assessment of climate changeand the accelerated introduction of advanced energy technologies: an application of MiniCAM 1.0. Mitigation and AdaptationStrategies for Global Change 1(4):311-339.

Edmonds, J., M. Wise, R. Sands, R. Brown, and H. Kheshgi. 1996b. Agriculture, land-use, and commercial biomass energy: a preliminary integrated analysis of the potential role of biomass energy for reducing future greenhouse related emissions. PNNL-11155.Washington, DC: Pacific Northwest National Laboratories.

Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2005. International energy outlook 2005. DOE/EIA-0484 (2005). Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Energy. http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/index.html

EPA (See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency)

Gerlagh, R. and B. van der Zwaan. 2003. Gross world product and consumption in a global warming model with endogenoustechnological change. Resource and Energy Economics 25:35–57.

Goulder, L.H., and K. Mathai. 2000. Optimal CO Abatement in the Presence of Induced Technological Change. Journal ofEnvironmental Economics and Management 39:1-38.

Grübler, A., and N. Nakicenovic. 1996. Decarbonizing the global energy system. Technological Forecasting and Social Change53(1):97-110.

Halmann, H.M. 1993. Chemical fixation of carbon dioxide. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press.

Hanson, D., and J. Laitner. 2004. An integrated analysis of policies that increase investments in advanced energy-efficient/low-carbon technologies, Energy Economics 26(4):739-755. Special Issue EMF 19 Alternative technology strategies for climatechange policy, John P. Weyant, ed.

Hoffert, Martin L. et al. 2002. Advanced technology paths to global climate stability: energy for a greenhouse planet. Science298:981-987.

IIASA-WEC (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis-World Energy Council). 1995. Global energy perspectives to 2050and beyond. London: WEC.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 1996. Climate change 1995: the science of climate change. Contribution ofWorking Group I to the Second Assessment Report. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2000. Special report on emissions scenarios. Cambridge, UK: CambridgeUniversity Press. http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/emission/index.htm

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001. Climate Change 2001. Mitigation: a report of Working Group III of theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Bert Metz, Ogunlade Davidson, Rob Swart and Jiahua Pan, eds. Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press. http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg3/index.htm

Inui, T., M. Anpo, K. Izui, S. Yanagida, and S. Yamaguchi. 1998. Advances in chemical conversions for mitigating carbon dioxide.Amsterdam: Elsevier.

IPCC (See Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change).

Kojima, T. 1997. The carbon dioxide problem: Integrated energy and environmental policies for the 21st century. Amsterdam: Gordonand Breach.

Lackner, K.S. 2002. Carbonate chemistry for sequestering fossil carbon. Annual Review of Energy and Environment 27:193-232.

Lashof, D., and D.A. Tirpak. 1990. Policy options for stabilizing global climate. 21P-2003. Washington, DC: U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency.

55


Löschel, A. 2002. Technological change in economic models of environmental policy: a survey. Ecological Economics 43:105-126.

Manne, A., and R. Richels. 2000. A multi-gas approach to climate policy—with and without GWPs.http://www.stanford.edu/group/MERGE/multigas.pdf

Manne, A., and R. Richels. 2001. An alternative approach to establishing trade-offs among greenhouse gases. Nature 410:675-677.

Manne, A., and R. Richels. 2004. The impact of learning-by-doing on the timing and costs of CO2 abatement. Energy Economics26(4):603-619. Special Issue EMF 19 Alternative technology strategies for climate change policy, John P. Weyant, ed.

McFarland, J.R., J.M. Reilly, and H.J. Herzog. 2004. Representing energy technologies in top-down economic models usingbottom-up information. Energy Economics 26(4):685-707. Special Issue EMF 19 Alternative technology strategies for climatechange policy, John P. Weyant, ed.

Messner, S., and M. Strubegger. 1995. User’s guide for MESSAGE III. WP-95-69. Laxenburg, Austria: International Institute forApplied Systems Analysis.

Mori, S. 2000. The development of greenhouse gas emissions scenarios using an extension of the MARIA model for theassessment of resource and energy technologies. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 63(2-3).

Mori, S., and M. Takahashi. 1999. An integrated assessment model for the evaluation of new energy technologies and foodproductivity. International Journal of Global Energy Issues 11(1-4):1-18.

Mori, S., and T. Saito. 2004. Potentials of hydrogen and nuclear towards global warming mitigation—expansion of an integratedassessment model MARIA and simulations. Energy Economics 26(4):565-578. Special Issue EMF 19 Alternative technologystrategies for climate change policy, John P. Weyant, ed.

Morita, T., Y. Matsuoka, I. Penna, and M. Kainuma. 1994. Global carbon dioxide emission scenarios and their basic assumptions: 1994survey. CGER-1011-94. Tsukuba, Japan: Center for Global Environmental Research, National Institute for EnvironmentalStudies.

Pacala, S., and R. Socolow. 2004. Stabilization wedges: solving the climate problem for the next 50 years with currenttechnologies. Science 305:968-972.

Pepper, W.J., J. Leggett, R. Swart, J. Wasson, J. Edmonds, and I. Mintzer. 1992. Emissions scenarios for the IPCC. An update:assumptions, methodology, and results. Support document for Chapter A3. In Climate change 1992: supplementary report to theIPCC scientific assessment, J.T. Houghton, B.A. Callandar, and S.K. Varney, eds. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Reilly, J., M. Mayer, and J. Harnisch. 2002. The Kyoto Protocol and non-CO2 greenhouse gases and carbon sinks. EnvironmentalModeling and Assessment 7(4):217-229.

Riahi, K., and R.A. Roehrl. 2000. Greenhouse gas emissions in a dynamics-as-usual scenarios of economic and energydevelopment. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 63:175-206.

Richards, K. and C. Stokes. 2004. A review of forest carbon sequestration cost studies: A dozen years of research. ClimaticChange. 63 (1-2): 1-48.

Richels, R.G., A.S. Manne, and T.M.L. Wigley. 2004. Moving beyond concentrations: the challenge of limiting temperature change.Working Paper 04-11. AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies. http://www.aei-brookings.org/admin/authorpdfs/page.php?id=937

Roehrl, R.A., and K. Riahi. 2000. Technology dynamics and greenhouse gas emissions mitigation: a cost assessment. TechnologicalForecasting and Social Change 63, 231–261

Sankovski, A., W. Barbour, and W. Pepper. 2000. Quantification of the IS99 emission scenario storylines using the atmosphericstabilization framework (ASF). Technological Forecasting & Social Change 63(2-3).

Sohngen, B., and R. Sedjo (2006). Carbon sequestration costs in global forests. Energy Policy. Special Edition on Multi-GasScenarios and Climate Change (to be published).

56


Sohngen, B. and R. Mendelsohn. 2003. An optimal control model of forest carbon sequestration. American Journal of AgriculturalEconomics, 85(2): 448-457.

Stern, P.C. 2002. Human interactions with the carbon cycle: summary of workshop. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

United Nations Development Program (UNDP). 2000. World Energy Assessment. New York.

U.S Climate Change Science Program. 2003. Strategic plan for the U.S. Climate Change Science Program.http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/stratplan2003.default.htm

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2005. U.S. emissions inventory: inventory of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and sinks: 1990-2003. EPA 430-R-05-003. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/ResourceCenterPublicationsGHGEmissionsUSEmissionsInventory2005.html

van Vuuren, D.P., B. de Vries, B. Eickhout, and T. Kram. 2004. Responses to technology and taxes in a simulated world. EnergyEconomics 26(4):579-601. Special Issue EMF 19 Alternative technology strategies for climate change policy, John P. Weyant, ed.

Webster, M.D., M. Babiker, M. Mayer, J.M. Reilly, J. Harnisch, R. Hyman, M.C. Sarofim, and C. Wang. 2002. Uncertainty inemissions projections for climate models. Atmospheric Environment 36 (2002) 3659–3670.

Wexler, L. 1996. Improving population assumptions in greenhouse emissions models. WP-96-099. Laxenburg, Austria: InternationalInstitute for Applied Systems Analysis. http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Publications/Documents/WP-96-099.pdf

Weyant, J.P., ed. 2004. Energy Economics 26(4): Special Issue EMF 19 Alternative technology strategies for climate change policy.

Weyant, J.P., and F. de la Chesnaye. 2005. Multigas scenarios to stabilize radiative forcing. Energy Journal. Special Edition onMulti-gas Scenarios and Climate Change.

Wigley T., R. Richels, and J. Edmonds. 1996. Economic and environmental choices in the stabilization of atmospheric CO2

concentrations. Nature 379(6562): 240-243.

57

4Historically, global energy productivity—

loosely measured in terms of economic output perunit of energy input—has shown steady increases,averaging gains of about 0.9 percent per year overthe period 1971 to 2002 (IEA 2004). Use of moreenergy-efficient processes and replacement of older,less-efficient capital stock are importantcontributors to these gains. Another factor inincreasing individual country measures of energyproductivity, especially in industrialized countries,has been a shift over the past several decades in thecomposition of economic output toward lessenergy-intensive goods and services.

In published scenarios of CO2 emissions over the21st century, increasing demand for energy services,driven by population and economic growth, resultsin growth of CO2 emissions. By contrast, almost allscenarios that explore various future paths towardsignificant emissions reductions show that energyend-use reduction2 plays a key role in achievingthose reductions. In one set of scenarios, as shownin Figure 3-19 and highlighted above, energy end-use reductions led to a cumulative decrease (over 100years) of between 7 and 22 thousand exajoules (EJ) inglobal energy use, and between 110 and 270 gigatonsof reduced or avoided global emissions of carbon(GtC), compared to a reference case used in thestudy (see Chapter 3). Although bracketed by

uncertainties, this figure suggests both the potentialrole for advanced technology and a long-term goalfor contributions from this sector of the globaleconomy.

In the United States, the largest end-use sources ofCO2 emissions (Table 4-1) are the following:

◆ Electricity and fuel use in buildings;

Reducing Emissions from Energy End Use and Infrastructure

Energy End-Use Potential Contributions to Emissions Reduction

Potential contributions of Energy End-Use reduction to cumulativeGHG emissions reductions to 2100, across a range of uncertainties,for three advanced technology scenarios. See Chapter 3 for details.

1 In this context, “conservation” refers to practices that conserve resources or reduce waste, such as in the case of energy, turning off lights, equipment, etc., when not in use.

2 End use reduction includes improvements in energy efficiency in the end-use sectors, as well as improvements in efficiency of energy conversion,e.g., increased efficiency in electricity generation.

The potential for advanced technology to enable and facilitate accelerated reductions ingreenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, mainly carbon dioxide (CO2), from energy end use

and infrastructure is believed to be significant—on a par with, or greater than, that of each ofthe other main elements of CCTP’s technology strategy. Emissions reductions can beachieved from all end-use sectors of the global economy, including industry, residential andcommercial buildings, and transportation, through conservation practices,1 technological andother economic productivity improvements that lead to increased energy efficiency, and shiftsin the composition of economic activity toward lower energy- and GHG-intensive outputs.


◆ Transportation fuels;

◆ Electricity and fuel use in industry; and

◆ A few industrial processes not related tocombustion.

This chapter explores energy end-use and carbonemission-reduction strategies and opportunitieswithin each of these end-use categories. Sections 4.1through 4.3 address transportation, buildings, andindustry, respectively. Section 4.4 deals withtechnology strategies for the electric grid andinfrastructure that can enable and facilitate CO2

emissions reductions in all sectors. Each sectionprovides information on its respective sector, exploresthe potential role for advanced technology inreducing emissions, outlines a strategy for technologydevelopment, describes the current portfolio, andidentifies potential directions for future research.This chapter focuses primarily on reducing andavoiding CO2 emissions. Many industrial processesand energy end uses produce significant quantities ofother non-CO2 GHGs. These other GHGs areaddressed in Chapter 7, “Reducing Emissions ofOther Greenhouse Gases.” The descriptions of thetechnologies and deployment programs in this sectioninclude active Internet links to an updated version ofthe CCTP report Technology Options in the Near andLong Term (CCTP 2005).3

TransportationThe transport of people, goods, and services accountsfor a significant share of global energy demand,mostly in the form of petroleum, and is among thefastest growing sources worldwide of emissions ofGHGs, mainly CO2. In the developing parts of Asiaand the Americas, emissions from transportation-related use of energy are expected to increasedramatically during the next 25 years. In the UnitedStates, from 1991 to 2000, vehicle miles traveled, ameasure of highway transportation demand, increasedat an average rate of 2.5 percent per year (DOT2002a), outpacing population growth. In 2003, theU.S. transportation sector accounted for 39 percent oftotal CO2 emissions, with the highway modesaccounting for more than 82 percent of these (Table4-2). Through 2025, future growth in U.S.transportation energy use and emissions is projectedto be strongly influenced by the growth in light-dutytrucks (pickup trucks, vans, and sport utility vehicles,under 8,500 lb gross vehicle weight rating) (Figure 4-1).According to the Federal Highway Administration’sFreight Analysis Framework, freight tonnage willgrow by 70 percent during the first two decades ofthe 21st century (DOT 2002b).

4.1

58


END-USE SECTOREMISSIONS

FROMELECTRICITY

EMISSIONS FROMCOMBUSTION OF

FUELSEMISSIONS, TOTAL % OF TOTAL

Transportation 0.009 0.485 0.493 31.1%

Residential andCommercial Buildings

0.410 0.169 0.579 36.5%

Industrial Energy Use 0.211 0.258 0.468 29.5%

Industrial Processes 0.040 2.5%

Waste Disposal Activities 0.005 0.005 0.3%

Total 0.630 0.957 1.586 100.0%

Source: EPA 2005, Tables 2-16, 3-44, and 4-1.

Note: Values may not sum to total due to independent rounding of values.

Table 4-1. CO2

Emissions in theUnited States byEnd-Use Sector,2003 (GtC)

CO2 Emissions in the United States by End-Use Sector, 2003 (GtC)

3 See http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/index.htm.

Potential Role of Technology

Advanced technologies can make significantcontributions to reducing CO2 emissions fromtransportation activity. In the near term, advancedhighway vehicle technologies, such as electric-fuel-engine hybrids (“hybrid-electric” vehicles) and cleandiesel engines, could improve vehicle efficiency and,hence, lower CO2 emissions. Other reductions mightresult from modal shifts (e.g., from cars to light rail)higher load factors, improved overall system-levelefficiency, or reduced transportation demand.Improved intermodal connections could allow forbetter mode-shifting and improved efficiency infreight transportation. Application of developingtechnology will reduce idling and the concomitantemissions from heavy-duty vehicles, including vessels,trains, and long-haul trucks. Intelligenttransportation systems can reduce congestion,resulting in decreases in fuel use. In the long term,technologies such as cars and trucks powered byhydrogen, bio-based fuels, and electricity showpromise for transportation with either no highwayCO2 emissions or no net-CO2 emissions.

The focus of CCTP is on technology developmentsthat may reduce or capture GHG emissions, but itshould be noted that, in the transportation sectorparticularly, there are non-technological options forpolicymakers to consider as well. They will not bediscussed in the rest of this chapter, but they areworth mentioning here. For instance, localinvestments in bicycle lanes and paths and inpedestrian-friendly development planning can helpreduce total vehicle-miles traveled. Urban andsuburban planning that is well integrated with publictransportation can similarly reduce fuel use perperson-mile of travel. In addition, newcommunications technologies may alter the conceptsabout individual mobility. Work locations may becentered near or in residential locations, and workprocesses and products may be more commonlycommunicated or delivered via digital media. Withglobal trends toward increasing urbanization in bothpopulation concentrations and opportunities foremployment, people may rely in the future onimproved modes of local, light-rail or intra-citypassenger transport, coupled with other advances inelectrified intercity transport that would curb thegrowth of fuel use and emissions from transportation.

Technology Strategy

Realizing these opportunities requires a researchportfolio that embraces a combination of advancedvehicle, fuel, and transportation system technologies.Within constraints of available resources, a balanced

59


Table 4-2. CO2 Emissions in the United States fromTransportation, by Mode, in 2003 (GtC)

EMISSIONS % OF TOTAL

Passenger Cars 0.173 35.6%

Light-Duty Trucks 0.131 26.9%

Other Trucks 0.093 19.2%

Aircraft (a) 0.047 9.6%

Other (b) 0.013 2.6%

Boats & Vessels 0.016 3.2%

Locomotives 0.012 2.4%

Buses 0.002 0.5%

Total (c) 0.477 100.0%

(a) Aircraft emissions consist of emissions from all jet fuel(less bunker fuels) and aviation gas consumption.

(b) “Other” CO2 emissions include motorcycles, pipelines,and lubricants.

(c) Percentages may not sum to 100 percent due to independent rounding of values.

Source: EPA 2005.

Transportation Sector Energy Use by Mode and Type

Figure 4-1. Projected Energy Consumption in U.S. Highway Vehicles.Source: EIA 2004

CO2 Emissions in the United States fromTransportation, by Mode, in 2003 (GtC)

portfolio needs to address major sources of CO2

emissions in this sector, including passenger cars, lighttrucks, and other trucks; key modes of transport,including highway, aviation, and urban transit;system-wide planning and enhancements; and bothnear- and long-term opportunities.

In the near term, CO2 emissions and transportationenergy use can be reduced through improved vehicleefficiency, clean diesel engines, hybrid propulsion, andthe use of hydrogenated low-sulfur gasoline. Otherfuels, such as ethanol, natural gas, electricity withstorage, and biodiesel, can also provide attractivemeans for reducing emissions of CO2. Theseefficiency gains and fuel alternatives also provideother benefits, such as improving urban and regionalair quality and enhancing energy security.

In aviation, emissions could be lowered through newtechnologies to improve air traffic management. Anexample is Reduced Vertical Separation Minimums(RVSM). RVSM has been used for transatlanticflights since 1997, and it became standard in U.S.airspace in January 2005. Full implementation ofRVSM may reduce fuel use by approximately 500million gallons each year.

In the long term, hydrogen may prove to be a low- orno-net-carbon energy carrier, if it can be cost-effectively produced with few or no GHG emissions,such as with renewable or nuclear energy, or withfossil fuels in conjunction with carbon capture andstorage. Hydrogen and biofuels as substitutes forpetroleum-based fuels in the transportation and othersectors also offer significant national security benefits.Hydrogen and alternative fuels are discussed in moredepth in Chapter 5, “Reducing Emissions fromEnergy Supply.” Hydrogen can be used in internalcombustion engines, but its use in highly efficientfuel-cell-powered vehicles is considered a veryimportant future option (Figure 4-2). In aviation,new engines and aircraft will feature enhanced enginecycles, more efficient aircraft aerodynamics, andreduced weight— thereby improving fuel efficiency.Research sponsored by the Federal Governmentthrough NASA, in collaboration with the NextGeneration Air Transportation System (NGATS)plan, could enable these enhancements. NGATS is amulti-agency-integrated effort to ensure that thefuture air transportation system meets airtransportation security, mobility, and capacity needs,while reducing environmental impacts.

Current Portfolio

Across the current Federal portfolio oftransportation-related R&D, activities are focused ona number of major programs.

◆ Research on light vehicles, organized primarily insupport of the FreedomCAR and FuelPartnership, focuses on materials; powerelectronics; hybrid vehicles operating on gasoline,diesel, or alternative fuels; high-efficiency, low-emission advanced combustion engines, enabledby improved fuels; and high-volume, cost-effectiveproduction of lightweight materials. Beginning inFiscal Year 2007, the Department of Energy isincreasing the funding for advanced batteries,power electronics, and systems analyses specificallyneeded to accelerate the introduction of “plug-in”hybrid vehicles, which provide their owners withthe option of operating as a normal hybrid vehicleor in all-electric mode, consuming no petroleumat all. With appropriate power-aggregationinfrastructure, these vehicles can potentially alsoact as grid-attached storage when they are parked,contributing to electric grid stability.

The vehicle technologies research programs havea number of specific goals: (a) electric propulsionsystems with a 15-year life capable of delivering at least 55 kW for 18 seconds and 30 kWcontinuous at a system cost of $12/kW peak; (b) internal combustion engine powertrain systemscosting $30/kW, having peak brake engineefficiency of 45 percent, and that meet or exceedemissions standards; (c) electric drivetrain energystorage with a 15-year life at 300 Wh withdischarge power of 25kW for 18 seconds and$20/kW; (d) material and manufacturingtechnologies for high-volume production vehicles,which enable/support the simultaneous attainmentof 50 percent reduction in the weight of vehiclestructure and subsystems, affordability, andincreased used of recyclable/renewable materials;and (e) internal combustion engine powertrainsystems, operating on hydrogen with a cost targetof $45/kW by 2010 and $30/kW in 2015, having apeak brake engine efficiency of 45 percent, andthat meet or exceed emissions standards.4

◆ Research areas for heavy vehicles, organizedprimarily under the 21st Century TruckPartnership, include lightweight materials,aerodynamic drag, tire rolling resistance,

60


4 For more information, see Section 1.1.1 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-111.pdf. See also:http://www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/fuelcells/transportation.html, and http://www.epa.gov/otaq/technology.

electrification of ancillary equipment, advancedhigh-efficiency combustion propulsion systems(including energy-efficient emissions reduction),fuel options (both petroleum- and non-petroleum-based), hybrid technologies for urban drivingapplications, and onboard power units forauxiliary power needs. The research objectivesare to: (1) reduce energy consumption in long-haul operations, (2) increase efficiency and reduceemissions during stop-and-go operations, and (3)develop more efficient and less-polluting energysources to meet truck stationary powerrequirements (i.e., anti-idling). By 2010, the goalsinclude a laboratory demonstration of anemissions-compliant engine system that iscommercially viable for Class 7-8 highway trucks,and an engine that improves the system efficiencyto 53 percent by 2010 and to 55 percent by 2013,from the 2002 baseline of 40 percent. By 2012,the goals include advanced technology conceptsthat reduce the aerodynamic drag of a Class 8tractor-trailer combination by 20 percent.5

◆ Fuels research encompasses the development ofnew fuel blend formulations that will enable moreefficient and cleaner combustion and thedevelopment of renewable and non-petroleum-based fuels that could displace 5 percent ofpetroleum used by commercial vehicles.6

◆ Research on intelligent transportation systemsinfrastructure includes sensors, informationtechnology, and communications to improveefficiency and ease congestion. Intelligenttransportation systems (ITS) goals includeimproved analysis capabilities that properly assessthe impact of ITS strategies and strategies thatwill improve travel efficiency resulting in lowerdelays, thereby reducing emissions.7

◆ Research on aviation fuel efficiency includesengine and airframe design improvements.Aviation fuel efficiency goals include improvedaviation fuel efficiency per revenue plane-mile by1 percent per year through 2008, and newtechnologies with the potential to reduce CO2

emissions from future aircraft by 25 percentwithin 10 years and by 50 percent within 25 years.8

◆ Best Workplaces for Commuters program is avoluntary employer-adopted program that

increases commuter flexibility by expandingtransportation mode options, using flexiblescheduling, and increasing work location choices.

◆ The Clean Cities program supports efforts todeploy alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) anddevelop the necessary supporting infrastructure.Clean Cities works through a network of morethan 80 volunteer, community-based coalitions,which develop public/private partnerships topromote the use of alternative fuels and vehicles,expand the use of fuel blends, encourage the use offuel economy practices, increase the acquisition ofhybrid vehicles by fleets and consumers, andadvance the use of idle reduction technologies inheavy-duty vehicles.

◆ Congestion Mitigation and Air QualityImprovement Program, administered by theU.S. Department of Transportation, inconsultation with the EPA, provides states withfunds to reduce congestion and to improve airquality through transportation control measuresand other strategies.

◆ Mobile Air Conditioning Climate ProtectionPartnership strives to reduce GHG emissionsfrom vehicle air conditioning systems throughvoluntary approaches. The program promotescost-effective designs and improved serviceprocedures that minimize emissions from mobileair conditioning systems.

61


Figure 4-2. In the longer term, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles may provide for atransportation future that has much lower CO2 emissions.

Courtesy: DOE/NREL, Credit: SunLine Transit Agency

5 See Section 1.1.2 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-112.pdf. See also: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/technology.

6 See Section 1.1.3 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-113.pdf.7 See Section 1.1.4 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-114.pdf.8 See Section 1.1.5 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-115.pdf.

◆ SmartWay Transport Partnership program isdesigned to reduce emissions from the freightsector through the implementation of innovativetechnology and advanced management practices.To date, 133 companies have joined thePartnership and have committed to reduce theCO2 emissions associated with their respectivefreight operations. Additionally, there are nowover 50 diesel truck and locomotive engine idlingreduction projects around the country.

Future Research Directions

The current portfolio supports the main componentsof the technology development strategy and addressesthe highest priority current investment opportunitiesin this technology area. For the future, CCTP seeksto consider a full array of promising technologyoptions. From diverse sources, suggestions for futureresearch have come to CCTP’s attention. Some ofthese, and others, are currently being explored andunder consideration for the future R&D portfolio.These include:

◆ Freight Transport. Strategies and technologiesto address congestion in urban areas and freightgateways by increasing freight transfer andmovement efficiency among ships, trucks and railin anticipation of large growth in freight volumes.

◆ Advanced Urban Concepts. Studies of advancedurban-engineering concepts for cities to evaluatealternatives to urban sprawl. Such engineeringanalysis would consider the co-location ofactivities with complementary needs for energy,water, and other resources; and would enableevaluation of alternative configurations that couldsignificantly reduce vehicle-miles traveled andGHG emissions.

◆ Integrated Urban Planning. Concept andengineering studies for large-scale institutionaland infrastructure changes required to manageCO2, electricity, and hydrogen systems reliablyand securely. Analysis of the infrastructurerequirements for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles isneeded. By being plugged into the power grid atnight, when electricity is cheapest and mostavailable, and by operating solely on battery powerfor the first 10-60 miles, this technology couldsignificantly reduce oil consumption.

◆ Large-Scale Hydrogen Storage. Technologiesfor large-scale hydrogen storage andtransportation and low-cost, lightweight electricitystorage including advanced batteries andultracapacitors.

In addition, supporting or crosscutting areas forfuture research include the following:

◆ Advanced Thermoelectric Concepts. Advancedthermoelectric concepts to convert temperaturedifferentials into electricity, made more affordablethrough nanoscale manufacturing.

◆ Battery and Fuel Cell Systems. Basicelectrochemistry to produce safe, reliable batteryand fuel cell systems with acceptable energy andpower density, cycle life, and performance undertemperature extremes.

◆ New Combustion Regimes. Advancedcombustion research on new combustion regimesin conventional vehicle propulsion technologies,using conventional fuels as well as alternativessuch as cellulosic ethanol and biodiesel wherenear-zero regulated emissions and lowered carbonemissions can be achieved.

BuildingsThe built environment—consisting of residential,commercial, and institutional buildings—accounts forabout one-third of primary global energy demand(IPCC 2000) and represents a major source ofenergy-related GHG emissions, mainly CO2.Growth in global energy demand in buildings hasaveraged 3.5 percent per year since 1970 (IPCC2001).

Over the long term, buildings are expected tocontinue to be a significant component of increasingglobal energy demand and a large source of CO2

emissions. Energy demand in this sector will bedriven by growth in population, by the economicexpansion that is expected to increase the demand forbuilding services (especially electric appliances,electronic equipment, and the amount of conditionedspace per person), and by the continuing trendstoward world urbanization. As urbanization occurs,energy consumption increases, because urbanbuildings usually have electricity access and have ahigher level of energy consumption per unit area thanbuildings in more primitive rural areas. According toa recent projection by the United Nations, thepercentage of the world’s population living in urbanareas will increase from 49 percent in 2005 to 61percent by 2030 (UN 2005).

In the United States, energy consumption inresidential buildings has been increasingproportionately with increases in population, whileenergy consumption in commercial buildings has

4.2

62


tended to follow the level of economic activity, or realGross Domestic Product (GDP).9 This trend maskssignificant increases in efficiency in some buildingcomponents that are being offset by new or increasedenergy uses in others. In the United States in 2003,CO2 emissions from this sector, including those fromboth fuel combustion and use of electricity derivedfrom CO2-emitting sources, accounted for nearly 37percent of total CO2 emissions (Table 4-1). Theseemissions have been increasing at 1.9 percent per yearsince 1990 (EIA 2005). Table 4-3 shows a breakdownof emissions from the buildings sector, by fuel type, inthe United States.


Many opportunities exist for advanced technologies tomake significant reductions to energy-related CO2

emissions in the buildings sector. In the near term,widespread adoption of advanced commerciallyavailable technologies, such as ENERGY STAR®

compliant equipment, can improve efficiency ofenergy-using equipment in the primary functionalareas of energy use. In residential buildings, thesefunctional areas include space heating, appliances,lighting, water heating, and air conditioning. Incommercial buildings, functional areas are lighting,space heating, cooling and ventilation, water heating,office equipment, and refrigeration. Throughconcerted research, major technical advances haveoccurred during the past 20 years, with manyapplication areas seeing efficiency gains of 15 percentto 75 percent. Figure 4-3 gives an example oftechnological improvements that have occurred inrefrigerators as an illustration of the kind of gains thathave been achieved. Over the longer term, moreadvances can be expected in these areas, andsignificant opportunities also lie ahead in the areas ofnew buildings design, retrofits of existing buildings,and the integration of whole building systems andmulti-building complexes through use of sensors,software, and automated maintenance and controls.

By 2025—with advances in building envelopes,equipment, and systems integration—it may bepossible to achieve up to a 70 percent reduction in abuilding’s energy use, compared to the average energyuse in an equivalent building today (DOE 2005). Ifaugmented by on-site energy technologies (such asphotovoltaics or distributed sources of combined heatand power), buildings could become net-zero GHG

emitters and net energy producers.

Technology Strategy

While the built environment is a complex mix ofheterogeneous building types (commercial, service,detached dwelling, apartment buildings) andfunctional uses, all have common features, each ofwhich may benefit from technological research, bothas individual components and as integrated systems.Within constraints of available resources, a balancedportfolio needs to address three important aspects ofbuildings that affect their CO2 emissions: (1)integrated building design, construction, andoperation, including the optimal integration ofcomponents; (2) advanced building envelopecomponents, including windows and walls; and (3) advanced, building equipment, appliances, andlights. The portfolio should look at both near- andlong-term opportunities.

63


EMISSIONS % OF TOTAL

RESIDENTIAL

Electricity 0.2121 66.9%

Natural Gas 0.0756 23.8%

Petroleum 0.0291 9.2%

Coal 0.0003 0.1%

Total Residential 0.3171 100.0%

COMMERCIAL

Electricity 0.2005 76.2%



Coal 0.0025 0.9%

Total Commercial 0.2643 100.0%

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100 percent, due toindependent rounding of values.

Source: EPA 2005, Tables 2-16 and 3.3.

Residential and Commercial CO2 Emissions in theUnited States, by Source, in 2003 (GtC)

9 According to the Annual Energy Review 2004, residential primary energy use increased 53 percent from 1970 to 2004, while the nation’s populationincreased 44 percent over the same period. Commercial energy use increased 111 percent over this period, driven (in part) by the nearly 200 per-cent increase in real Gross Domestic Production (GDP).

Table 4-3. Residential and Commercial CO2 Emissions in theUnited States, by Source, in 2003 (GtC)

In the near term, building energy use and CO2

emissions could be lowered in several ways. Especiallyin new construction, design strategies that incorporateenergy- and material-saving strategies from the verystart of the building process can result in significantavoided carbon. Intelligent building systems (such asload balancing and automated sensors and controls)can also be included to help ensure the comfort,health, and safety of residents, as well as aid in thereduction of CO2. In the building envelope,application of advanced materials such as high R-value insulation, foams, vacuum panels, and spectrallyselective windows can reduce space conditioning loadssignificantly. Choosing highly recyclable materialssuch as aluminum can reduce the end-of-life impactof building design and contribute to sustainablebuilding practices. Technologies to improve theefficiency of lighting, appliances, heating, cooling, andventilation are other options.

In the long term, more advanced research on thebuilding envelope—including dynamic switchablewindow glazings and dynamic walls, panelizedhousing construction, façade and roof integration ofphotovoltaics, and new storage technologies—candrive CO2 emissions even lower. Distributed powersystems, advanced refrigeration and coolingtechnologies, integrated heat pumps that serve spaceconditioning and water heating, and solid-statelighting technology are among some of the morepromising options for equipment. Among thealternatives, building integration should focus onincluding sensors and controls, community-scaleintegration tools, and urban engineering.

Current Portfolio

The current Federal portfolio focuses on four majorthrusts. In combination, these activities aim toachieve net-zero-energy residential buildings by 2020and commercial buildings by 2025.

◆ Research on the building envelope (the interfacebetween the interior of a building and the outdoorenvironment) focuses on systems that determineor provide control over the flow of heat, air,moisture, and light in and out of a building; andon materials that can affect energy use, includinginsulation, foams, vacuum panels, optical controlcoatings for windows and roofs, thermal storage,and related controls (such as electrochromicglazings). Research program goals in the buildingenvelope area include the following: (1) by 2008,demonstrate dynamic solar control windows(electrochromics) in commercial buildings, and by2010 demonstrate market-viable windows with R6insulation performance for homes; (2) by 2025,develop marketable and advanced energy systemscapable of achieving “net-zero” energy use in newresidential and commercial buildings; (3) for thelong term, and consistent with achieving net zeroenergy performance, achieve a 30 percent decreasein the average envelope thermal load of existingresidential buildings and a 66 percent decrease inthe average thermal load of new buildings.10

◆ Research on building equipment focuses onmeans to significantly improve efficiency ofheating, cooling, ventilating, thermal distribution,lighting (Figure 4-4), home appliances, and on-siteenergy and power devices. This area also includesa number of crosscutting elements, includingadvanced refrigerants and cycles, solid-state

64


Refrigerator Energy Efficiency

Note: The curve applies to 18-20 cu. ft. top-mountrefrigerator/freezers, which capture the largest market share inthe United States. The term,”1991 Best” stands for the 1991top-mount model with lowest energy use. “Golden CarrotTarget” was an EPA/electric utility program in the early 1990s todevelop a model that was 25 percent more efficient than thethen current technology. “Fridge of the Future” is a refrigeratorthat had a target energy use of 365 kWh/yr or 1 kWh/day for18-20 cu. ft. top-mount models based on an cooperativeresearch agreement between Oak Ridge National Laboratory(ORNL) and the Association of Home ApplianceManufacturers; this target was exceeded in a test unit (0.93kWh/day) in FY 1996.

Figure 4-3. Refrigerator Energy Efficiency(Source: Brown 2003)

10 See Section 1.2.2 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-122.pdf.

lighting, smart sensors and controls, small powersupplies, microturbines, heat recovery, and otherareas.

Specific goals include: (1) for distributed electricitygeneration technologies (including microturbines),by 2008, enable a portfolio of equipment thatshows an average 25 percent increase in efficiency;(2) for solid-state lighting in general illuminationapplications, by 2008, develop equipment withluminous efficacy of 79 lumens per watt (LPW);and, for laboratory devices by 2025, a luminousefficacy of 200 LPW. The long-term goals are:(1) by 2025, develop and demonstrate marketableand advanced energy systems that can achieve“net-zero” energy use in new residential andcommercial buildings through a 70 percentreduction in building energy use; and (2) by 2030,enable the integration of all aspects of the buildingenvelope, equipment, and appliances with on-sitemicro-cogeneration and zero-emissiontechnologies.11

◆ Research on residential systems integration,focuses on progressively higher levels of energyperformance over time, and follows a three-phaseapproach. Phase 1, systems evaluation, involvesthe design, construction and testing of subsystemsfor whole house designs (by climate zone) inresearch houses to evaluate how componentsperform. In Phase 2, prototype houses (Figure 4-5),the successful Phase 1 subsystems are designedand constructed by production builders to evaluatethe ability to implement the systems on aproduction basis. Phase 3, communityevaluations, provides technical support to builderpartners to advance from the productionprototypes to evaluation of production houses in asubdivision.

◆ Research on commercial buildings integrationincludes development of advanced design“packages” of system-integrated design strategiesand operational methodologies for high-performance buildings, which can be used byarchitects and others to design, build, and operatecommercial buildings in an integrated manner.This approach is targeted at new construction,because the opportunities for aggressiveperformance are much greater than in existingbuildings. In addition, R&D includes loadbalancing and automated sensors and controls,sometimes referred to as intelligent buildingsystems. Such systems continuously monitorbuilding performance, detect anomalies or

degradations, optimize operations across allbuilding systems, guide maintenance, anddocument and report results. They can also beextended to coordinate on-site energy generationand internal loads, with external power (grid)demands and circumstances, allowingresponsiveness to time-variant cost savings, systemefficiencies, and grid contingencies. They alsoensure occupant comfort, health, and safety, metat the lowest possible cost.

◆ Whole building integration goals include fully andseamlessly integrated building design tools, such asEnergyPlus, that support all aspects of design andprovide rapid analysis of different pathways toimproved energy performance. Also included arethe development of automatic operation ofbuildings systems that require little operatorattention; and highly efficient combined cooling,heating, and power systems that use waste heatfrom small-scale, on-site electricity generation toprovide heating and cooling for the buildings, aswell as export excess electricity to the grid.12

◆ The ENERGY STAR® is a joint program of EPAand DOE that enables businesses, organizations,and consumers to realize the cost savings andenvironmental benefits of energy efficiencyinvestments. Introduced in 1992, the ENERGY

65


11 See Section 1.2.1 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-121.pdf.12 See Section 1.2.3 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-123.pdf.

Figure 4-4. Many opportunities exist for advanced technologies, such as thesub-compact fluorescent coil light bulb, to make significant reductions ofCO2 emissions in the building sector.

Courtesy: DOE/NREL

66


STAR® program focuses on four areas of energyefficiency that include products, homeimprovement, new homes, and businessimprovement. By providing resources, workingwith local partners, and labeling ENERGYSTAR® qualified-products, the program makes iteasy for consumers and businesses to make smartenergy-efficient choices that can save about a thirdon energy bills with similar savings of GHGemissions, without sacrificing features, style orcomfort.

◆ Federal Energy Management Program aims toreduce energy use in Federal buildings, facilities,and operations by advancing energy efficiency andwater conservation, promoting the use ofrenewable energy, and managing utility choices ofFederal agencies. The program accomplishes itsmission by leveraging both Federal and privateresources to provide Federal agencies the technicaland financial assistance they need to achieve theirgoals.

◆ Rebuild America works with a network ofhundreds of community-based partnerships acrossthe nation that are saving energy, improvingbuilding performance, easing air pollution throughreduced energy demand, and enhancing thequality of life through energy efficiency andrenewable energy technologies.

◆ Residential Building Integration: BuildingAmerica is intended to design, build, and evaluateenergy-efficient homes that use from 30 to 40percent less total energy than comparabletraditional homes with little or no increase inconstruction costs; and to encourage industry toadopt these practices for new home construction.In addition, ongoing research focuses onintegrating onsite power systems, includingrenewable energy technologies. Through theBuilding America program, DOE and its morethan 470 industry partners are conductingresearch to develop advanced building energysystems to make homes and communities muchmore energy efficient.

◆ State Energy Program extends grants from DOEto states for a variety of energy-efficiency andrenewable-energy activities. Most states have astate energy office designated to help reduceenergy waste and increase the use of renewables inthe state.

◆ Weatherization Assistance Program providescost-effective energy-efficiency improvements tolow-income households through theweatherization of homes. Priority is given to theelderly, persons with disabilities, families withchildren, and households that spend adisproportionate amount of their income onenergy bills (utility bills make up 15 to 20 percentof household expenses for low income families,compared to five percent or less for all otherAmericans).


The current portfolio supports many of thecomponents of the technology development strategyand addresses the highest priority current investmentopportunities in this technology area. For the future,CCTP seeks to consider a full array of promisingtechnology options. From diverse sources,suggestions for future research have come to CCTP’sattention. Some of these, and others, are currentlybeing explored and under consideration for the futureR&D portfolio. These include:

◆ Building Envelope. Improved panelized housingconstruction; methods for integrating photovoltaicsystems in building components such as roofs,walls, skylights, and windows, and with buildingloads and utilities; and exploration of fundamentalproperties and behaviors of novel materials tomaximize moisture resistance and the storage and

Figure 4-5. Design strategies that incorporate energy- and material-savingstrategies can result in significant reduction of CO2 emissions.

Courtesy: DOE

release of energy. Through nanotechnologyadvances, research will develop smart roofs andwalls that reflect infrared solar radiation insummer and absorb it in winter, with substantialenergy savings.

◆ Building Equipment. Advances in on-site powerproduction (including fuel cells, microturbines,and reciprocating engines); ultra-efficient Heating,Ventilating, and Air-Conditioning-Residential(HVACR) (including magnetic or solid statecooling systems, advanced desiccants andabsorption chilling systems, integrated heat pumpsystems for space conditioning and water heating,and highly efficient geothermal heat pumps);improved hot water circulation systems; and solidstate lighting technology and improved lightingdistribution systems. Low-power ubiquitoussensors with wireless communications canoptimize building operations through anticipatoryand selective heating, cooling, and lighting thatmanage loads in response to occupantrequirements and real-time energy prices.

◆ Whole Building Integration. Furtherdevelopment and widespread implementation ofbuilding design tools for application in new andretrofit construction; tools and technologies forsystems integration in buildings, with a particularfocus on sensors and controls for supply and end-use system integration; development of pre-engineered, optimized net-zero energy buildings;community-scale design and system integrationtools; and urban engineering to reduce transportenergy use and congestion.

IndustryIndustrial activities were estimated to account forabout 41 percent of primary global energyconsumption in 1995 (IPCC 2000) and acommensurate share of global CO2 emissions.Certain activities are particularly energy-intensive,including metals industries, such as iron, steel, andaluminum; petroleum refining; basic chemicals andintermediate products; fertilizers; glass; pulp, paper,and other wood products; and mineral products,including cement, lime, limestone, and soda ash.Others are less energy-intensive, including themanufacture or assembly of automobiles, appliances,electronics, textiles, food and beverages, and others.Each regional or national economy varies in thestructure, composition, and growth rates of these

industries, shaped in part by its state of economicdevelopment and in part by regional advantages ininternational trade. The industrial sector worldwideis expected to expand in the future and will likelycontinue to account for a substantial portion of futureCO2 emissions. As competitive environments growand energy demand increases, industrial firmsincreasingly will have a financial incentive to invest inimproving their energy efficiency.

In the United States in 2003, industry accounted forabout one-third of total U.S. CO2 emissions (Table 4-1). These are attributed to combustion of fuels (51 percent), use of electricity derived from CO2-emitting sources (41 percent), and industrialprocesses, including non-combustion processes, thatemit CO2 (8 percent) (Table 4-4).13


The industrial sector presents numerousopportunities for advanced technologies to makesignificant contributions to the reductions of CO2

emissions to the Earth’s atmosphere. In the nearterm, advanced technologies can increase theefficiency with which process heat is generated,contained, transferred, and recovered. Process anddesign enhancements can improve quality, reducewaste, minimize reprocessing, reduce the intensity ofmaterial use (with no adverse impact on product orperformance), and increase in-process materialrecycling. Cutting-edge technologies can significantlyreduce the intensity with which energy and materials(containing embedded energy) are used. Industrialfacilities can implement direct manufacturingprocesses, which can eliminate some energy-intensivesteps, thus both avoiding emissions and enhancingproductivity. On the supply side, industry can self-generate clean, high-efficiency power and steam; andcreate products and byproducts that can serve asclean-burning fuels. The sector can also make greateruse of coordinated systems that more efficiently usedistributed energy generation, combined heat andpower, and cascaded heat.

In the long term, fundamental changes in energyinfrastructure could effect significant CO2 emissionsreductions. Revolutionary changes may include novelheat and power sources and systems, includingrenewable energy resources, hydrogen, and fuel cells.Innovative concepts for new products and high-efficiency processes may be introduced that can takefull advantage of recent and promising developmentsin nanotechnology, micro-manufacturing, sustainable

4.3

67


13 Emissions of GHGs other than CO2 from industry and agriculture are discussed in Chapter 7, “Reducing Emissions of Other Greenhouse Gases.”

biomass production, biofeedstocks, and bioprocessing.As global industry’s existing, capital-intensiveequipment stock nears the end of its useful service lifeand as industry expands in rapidly emergingeconomies in Asia and the Americas, this sector willhave an opportunity to adopt novel technologies thatcould revolutionize basic manufacturing. Advancedtechnologies will likely involve a mix of pathways,such as on-site energy generation, conversion, and

utilization; process efficiency improvements;innovative or enabling concepts, such as advancedsensors and controls, materials, and catalysts; andrecovery and reuse of materials and byproducts(Figure 4-6). In the United States, the developmentand adoption of advanced industrial technologies cannot only provide GHG benefits, but also help tomaintain U.S. competitiveness.

68


EMISSIONS 109 TONNES C

SHARE OF INDUSTRYTOTAL (%)

SHARE OF INDUSTRIALPROCESSES

(%)

Industrial Fuel Combustion 0.258 50.7%

Coal 0.034 6.6%



Industrial Electricity 0.211 41.4%

Industrial Processes (excluding fuel combustion emissions above) 0.040 7.9% (See Breakout

Below)

Total Industrial CO2 0.509 100.0%

Breakout of Emissions from Industrial Processes:

Iron and Steel Production 0.0147 36.5%

Cement Manufacture 0.0117 29.2%

Ammonia Manufacture & Urea Application 0.0043 10.6%

Lime Manufacture 0.0035 8.8%

Limestone and Dolomite Use 0.0013 3.2%

Aluminum Production 0.0011 2.9%

Soda Ash Manufacture and Consumption 0.0011 2.8%

Petrochemical Production 0.0008 1.9%

Titanium Dioxide Production 0.0005 1.4%

Phosphoric Acid Production 0.0004 1.0%

Ferroalloy Production 0.0004 1.0%

Carbon Dioxide Consumption 0.0004 0.9%

Total Industrial Process CO2 0.0402 100.0%

Source: EPA 2005, Tables 2-14, 2-16, 3-44, and 4-1.

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100 percent due to independent rounding of values.

Table 4-4. CO2 Emissionsin the United States fromIndustrial Sources in 2003(GtC) (Excludes IndirectEmissions from Industrial Use ofCentrally-Generated Electric Power)

CO2 Emissions in the United States from Industrial Sources in 2003 (GtC)

69


Technology Strategy

A research portfolio should address the moreimportant current and anticipated sources of CO2

emissions in this sector, with careful attention towhether there is an appropriate role for Federalinvestment. Some of the largest sources of CO2 emis-sions today, and expected in the future, arise fromenergy conversion to power industrial processes,inefficiencies in the processes themselves, andineffective reuse of materials or feedstocks; and, insome cases, the intensive use of fossil fuels, especiallynatural gas.

In the near term, industrial energy use and CO2

emissions could be lowered through improvements inthe industrial use of electricity and fuels to produceprocess heat and steam, including steam boilers,direct-fired process heaters, and motor-drivensystems, such as pumping and compressed air systems.Opportunities for reducing emissions in these areas liewith the adoption of best energy-managementpractices; adoption of more modern and efficientpower and steam generating systems; integratedapproaches that combine cooling, heating, and powerneeds; and capture and use of waste heat. Other areasof opportunity include improvements in specificenergy-intensive industrial processes, including hybriddistillation systems; process intensification bycombining or removing steps, or designing newprocesses altogether while producing the same or abetter product; the recovery and utilization of wasteand feedstocks, which can reduce energy and materialrequirements; and crosscutting opportunities, such asimproved operational capabilities and performance.

In the long term, highly efficient coal gasifierscoupled with CO2 sequestration technology couldprovide an alternative to natural gas, and even enablethe export of electricity and hydrogen to the utilitygrid and supply pipelines. Bioproducts could replacefossil feedstocks for manufacturing fuels, chemicals,and materials; while biorefineries could utilize fuelsfrom nonconventional feedstocks to jointly producematerials and value-added chemicals. For non-combustion sources of CO2, gas capture, separationand sequestration could be applied, or alternativeprocesses or materials could be developed assubstitutes. Further, integrated modeling offundamental physical and chemical properties, alongwith advanced methods to simulate processes, willstem from advances in computational technology.

Current Portfolio

The current Federal portfolio focuses on four majorthrusts.

◆ Research on energy conversion and utilizationfocuses on a diverse range of advanced andintegrated systems. These include advancedcombustion technologies, gasificationtechnologies, high-efficiency burners and boilers,thermoelectric technologies (Figure 4-7) toproduce electricity using industrial waste heatstreams, co-firing with low-GHG fuels, advancedwaste heat recovery heat exchangers, and heat-integrated furnace designs. Integrated approachesinclude combined-cycle power generation, andcogeneration of power and process heat orcooling.

The overall research program goal in this area isto contribute to a 20 percent reduction in theenergy intensity (energy per unit of industrialoutput, as compared to 2002) of energy-intensiveindustries by 2020. Several specific goals include:(1) by 2006, demonstrate a greater than 94percent efficient packaged boiler, and, by 2010,have commercially available packaged boilers withthermal efficiencies of 10-12 percent higher thanconventional technology; (2) by 2008, demonstratehigh-efficiency pulping technology in the pulp and

Four Possible Pathways to Increased Industrial Efficiency

Figure 4-6. Four Possible Pathways to Increased Industrial Efficiency (Source: DOE 1997)

paper industry that redirects green liquor topretreat pulp and reduce lime kiln load anddigester energy intensity; and (3) by 2011,demonstrate isothermal melting technology, whichcould improve efficiency significantly in thealuminum, steel, glass, and metal-castingindustries.14

◆ Research on specific, energy-intensive andhigh-CO2-emitting industrial processes focuseson identifying (compared to theoretical minimumenergy requirements) and removing processinefficiencies, lowering overall energyrequirements for heat and power, and reducingCO2 emissions. One process under developmentis a means to produce high-quality iron withoutthe use of metallurgical coke, which—undercurrent methods of steelmaking—is a significantsource of CO2 emissions. Other areas of researchfocus on processes that may also improve productyield, including oxidation catalysis, advancedprocesses, and alternative processes that take acompletely different route to the same endproduct, such as use of noncarbon inert anodes inaluminium production.

Industrial process efficiency goals are focused onindustry partnerships. The overall research

program goal in this area is to realize, before 2020,a 20 percent improvement in energy intensity bythe energy-intensive industries through thedevelopment and implementation of new andimproved processes, materials, and manufacturingpractices.15

◆ Research on enabling technologies includes anarray of advanced materials that resist corrosion,degradation, and deformation at hightemperatures and pressures; inferential sensors,controls, and automation, with real-timenondestructive sensing and monitoring; and newcomputational techniques for modeling andsimulating chemical pathways and advancedprocesses.

Research program goals for this area target newenabling technologies that meet a range of costgoals depending on the technologies and on theapplications where they are to be used. Specificgoals include: (1) by 2010, demonstrate productionand application of nano-structured diamondcoatings and composites and other ultra-hardmaterials for use in wear-intensive industrialapplications, and develop materials for use in awide array of severe industrial environments(corrosive, high temperature, and pressure); (2) by2012, demonstrate the generation of efficientpower from high-temperature waste heat usingsystems with thermoelectric materials; and (3) by2017, develop and demonstrate integration ofsensing technologies with information processingto control plant production.16

◆ Research on resource recovery and utilizationfocuses on separating, capturing, and reprocessingmaterials for feedstocks. Recovery technologiesinclude materials designed for recyclability,advanced separations, new and improved processchemistries, and sensors and controls. Reusetechnologies include recycling, closed-loopprocess and plant designs, catalysts for conversionto suitable feedstocks, and post-consumerprocessing.

Research program goals in this area target a rangeof improved recycling/recovery efficiencies. Forexample, in the chemicals industry the goal is toimprove recyclability of materials by as much as 30percent. Additional goals target new andimproved processes to use wastes or byproducts;

70


Figure 4-7. Industrial energy use and CO2 emissions could be loweredthrough the use of high-efficiency combustion processes, such as oxy-fuelfiring for glass manufacturing.

Courtesy of DOE/EERE


improve separations to capture and recyclematerials, byproducts, solvents, and process water;and identify new markets for recovered materials,including ash and other residuals such as scrubbersludges.17

◆ Climate Leaders is an EPA partnershipencouraging individual companies to developlong-term, comprehensive climate changestrategies. Under this program, partners setcorporate-wide GHG reduction goals andinventory their emissions to measure progress.The partnership now includes about 70 partners,38 of whom have already set GHG emissionsreduction goals. The US GHG emissions of thesepartners are equal to more than 7 percent of theU.S. total.

◆ Climate VISION assists industry efforts toaccelerate the transition to practices, improvedprocesses, and energy technologies that are cost-effective, cleaner, more efficient, and more capableof reducing, capturing, or sequestering GHGs.Already, business associations representing 14industry sectors and the Business Roundtable havebecome program partners with the FederalGovernment and have issued letters of intent tomeet specific targets for reducing GHG emissionsintensity. These partners represent a broad rangeof industry sectors: oil and gas production,transportation, and refining; electricity generation;coal and mineral production and mining;manufacturing; railroads; and forestry products.Partnering sectors account for about 90 percent ofindustrial emissions and 40 to 45 percent of totalU.S. emissions.

◆ Industries of the Future works in partnershipwith the nation’s most energy-intensive industries,enhancing their long-term competitiveness andaccelerating research, development, anddeployment of technologies that increase energyand resource efficiency. This program hascontributed to the development of hundreds ofcommercialized industrial technologies, resultingin a cumulative tracked energy savings of over3,500 trillion Btu.

◆ Voluntary GHG Emissions Reporting under1605(b) provides a means for organizations andindividuals that have reduced their emissions torecord their accomplishments and share their ideasfor action. The enhanced registry will boostmeasurement accuracy, reliability, and verifiability,working with and taking into account emerging

domestic and international approaches. Currentlyabout 230 U.S. companies and other organizationsfile GHG reports.


The current portfolio supports the main componentsof the technology development strategy and addressesthe highest priority current investment opportunitiesin this technology area. For the future, CCTP seeksto consider a full array of promising technologyoptions. From diverse sources, suggestions for futureresearch have come to CCTP’s attention. Some ofthese, and others, are currently being explored andconsidered for the future R&D portfolio. Theseinclude:

◆ Industrial Alternatives to Natural Gas.Research could be conducted to develop coalgasification systems for large industrial plants (e.g., 100 megawatts). The coal gasifiers would behighly integrated into complex manufacturingplants (e.g., chemical or glass plants). Theindustrial plant’s feedstock, process heat, andpower requirements could be accommodated fromthe coal gasifier, which could also exportelectricity, hydrogen, or other fuels to the utilitygrid and gas supply pipelines.

◆ Industrial Waste Heat Reduction. Energyconversion and utilization in industry creates largeamounts of waste heat. This waste heat could beminimized through beneficial electrification(including infrared drying and induction heating);novel materials that do not require drying orcuring; micro-CHP (combined heat and power)systems to convert waste heat to drive otherthermal processes; and new ways of boosting low-grade temperatures to more useful high-gradeheat.

◆ Advanced Industrial Materials. Research onadvanced materials can reduce energyrequirements and emissions in most industries.Characterization of materials at the nanoscale canlead to engineered materials with improvedfunctionality, including improved properties suchas strength, corrosion resistance, and powerconversion (e.g., thermoelectrics).

◆ Cement and Related Products. Research couldfocus on various means to reduce or eliminateCO2 emissions from non-combustion, high-emitting industrial processes, including the

71


17 For more information, see Section 1.4.2 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-142.pdf.

cement, lime, limestone, and soda ash industries.Worldwide infrastructure building over the 21st

century can be expected to create a high demandfor these mineral products, the production ofwhich releases CO2 as a consequence of thecalcining process. In the United States in 2003,CO2 emissions from these sources accounted for44 percent of the non-energy-related industrialemissions and about 1 percent of total U.S.emissions. Research could be focused on carboncapture and sequestration and on the explorationof substitutes for the end product. Carbonmatrixes for construction, for example, might belighter and stronger than concrete and wouldprovide a means for carbon sequestration.

◆ Advanced Applications of Biotechnology.Bioproducts soon could replace fossil feedstocks,such as oil, in current industrial processes formanufacturing fuels, chemicals, and materials.Advances in biosciences and engineering include abetter understanding of genomes, proteins, andtheir functions, including carbon dioxide capture,fixation, and storage; the effects of pre-treatmenton biomass feedstock properties; enzymes forhydrolyzing pre-treated biomass into fermentablesugars; micro-organisms used in fermentation; andnew tools of discovery such as bio-informatics,high-throughput screening of biodiversity,directed enzyme development and evolution, andgene shuffling. Biorefineries of the future could

produce transportation fuels, value-addedchemicals, materials, and/or power from non-conventional feedstocks such as agricultural andforest residues, energy crops, and other biomassmaterials.

◆ Water and Energy System Optimization.Energy used by water infrastructure and waterused in power and fuel supply systems providenumerous opportunities for improvement withGHG reduction benefits. Opportunities includebetter matching of water temperatures and purityto end-use requirements; revolutionizing thedesign of municipal water systems to reduce use,minimize conveyance, and maximize re-use; andintegrating water storage and treatment with theintermittency of renewable power supplies.

◆ Computational Technology. Process simulationenables more effective design and operation,leading to increased efficiency and improvedproductivity and product quality. Integratedmodeling of fundamental physical and chemicalproperties can enhance understanding of industrialmaterial properties and chemical processes. Forexample, modeling of counterflows throughstructured packings within distillation columns canimprove hydrodynamic efficiencies and save asignificant portion of the 3 quads of energy usedannually in distillation processes, about half inpetroleum refineries.

Electric Grid andInfrastructure

Large reductions in future CO2 emissions mayrequire that a significant amount of electricity begenerated from carbon-free or carbon-neutralsources, including nuclear power and renewableelectricity producers such as wind energy, geothermalenergy, and solar-based power generating systems.Some renewable energy resources are concentrated inregions of the country that are distant from largeurban markets. To accommodate such sources, thefuture electricity transmission infrastructure (the“grid”) would need to extend its capacity and evolveinto an intelligent and flexible system that enables theuse of a wide and varied set of baseload, peaking, andintermittent generation technologies. The cost ofexpanding the grid to provide transmission from

4.4

72


Figure 4-8. Advanced industrial materials, such as those used in high-temperature superconductive wires, can reduce energy losses andimprove performance in electric motors.

Courtesy: DOE/NREL, Credit: Reliance Electric Co.

remote areas to load centers, or to make very longinternational links between Alaska and Russia, assometimes proposed, is potentially very expensive,and proper allocation of the investment costs wouldneed to be considered, as well as the overall cost-effectiveness of such projects.

In recent years, the demand for electricity in theUnited States has increased at a rate such that it couldeventually exceed current transmission capacity.Demand is projected to increase by 19 percent from2003-2012 (EIA 2005); only a 6 percent increase intransmission is planned for 2002-2012 (DOE 2002).There have been few major new investments intransmission during the past 15 years. Outagesexperienced in parts of the country—including theAugust 2003 blackout in the Midwest andNortheast—highlight the need to enhance gridreliability.

Enhancements for grid reliability will likely go handin hand with improved efficiency of electricitytransmission. Energy losses in the U.S. transmissionand distribution (T&D) system were 5.5 percent in2003, accounting for 201 billion kilowatt hours ofelectricity generation and 133 million metric tons ofCO2 emissions (EIA 2005, Table A8; EPA 2005 Table2-14). About 10 percent of GHG emissions resultingfrom transmission and distribution are SF6 emissionsfrom certain high-voltage transmission equipment.The remainder of GHG emissions is from increasedoperations needed to compensate for energy losses.

Notwithstanding these improvements, the extent towhich transmission and distribution losses could bereduced is uncertain, and energy losses on thetransmission system could even increase as morelong-distance transmission lines are brought intoservice to transmit power from remote generationsources.

The current portfolio supports the main componentsof the technology development strategy. Withinconstrained Federal resources, this portfolio addressesthe highest priority current investment opportuni-ties. For the future, CCTP seeks to consider a fullarray of promising technology options. From diversesources, suggestions for future research have come toCCTP’s attention and others are currently beingexplored. These include:

◆ High-Temperature Superconducting Cablesand Equipment. The manufacture of promisingHTS materials in long lengths at low cost remainsa key program challenge. New, continuouslyscanning analytical systems are necessary to ensureuniformly high superconductor characteristics

over kilometer lengths of wire. Research anddevelopment could help develop highly reliable,high-efficiency cryogenic systems to economicallycool the superconducting components, includingmaterials for cryogenic insulation and standardizedhigh-efficiency refrigerators and motors (Figure4-8). Scale-up of national laboratory discoveriesfor “coated conductors” could be anotherpromising area for the laboratories and theirindustry partners.

◆ Materials Science for Energy Conversion. Thedigital economy is demanding more low-voltageDC power, which underscores the need for moreefficient AC-DC conversion. In addition, on-sitesources of photovoltaic (PV) and wind energywould be more efficiently utilized by supplyingelectricity to DC appliances, which will necessitatea new generation of smart wiring in homes andoffices to allow both AC and DC power and end uses.

◆ Energy Storage. Energy storage that respondsover timescales from milliseconds to hours andoutputs that range from watts to megawatts is acritical enabling technology for enhancingcustomer reliability and power quality, moreeffective use of renewable resources, integration ofdistributed resources, and more reliabletransmission system operation.

◆ Real-Time Monitoring and Control.Introduction of low-cost sensors throughout thepower system is needed for real-time monitoringof system conditions. New analytical tools andsoftware must be developed to enhance systemobservability and power flow control over wide areas.


There are many T&D technologies that can improveefficiency and reduce GHG emissions. In the nearterm, these include high-voltage DC (HVDC)transmission, high-strength composite overheadconductors, solid-state transmission controls such asFlexible AC Transmission System (FACTS) devicesthat include fault current limiters, switches andconverters, and information technologies coupledwith automated controls (i.e., a “Smart Grid”). High-efficiency conventional transformers—commerciallyavailable although not widely used—also could haveimpacts on distribution system losses.

Advanced conductors integrate new materials withexisting materials and other components and

73


subsystems to achieve better technical, environmental,and financial performance—e.g., higher currentcarrying capacity, more lightweight, greater durability,lower line losses, and lower installation andoperations and maintenance costs. Improved sensorsand controls, as part of the next-generation electricityT&D system, could significantly increase theefficiency of electricity generation and delivery,thereby reducing the GHG emissions intensityassociated with the electric grid. Outfitting thesystem with digital sensors, information technologies,and controls could further increase system efficiency,and allow greater use of more efficient and low-GHGend-use and other distributed technologies. High-temperature superconductors may be able to beutilized in key parts of the T&D system to reduce oreliminate line losses and increase efficiency. Energystorage allows intermittent renewable resources, suchas photovoltaics and wind, to be dispatchable.

Advanced storage concepts and particularly high-temperature superconducting wires and equipmentrepresent longer-term solutions with great promise.Digital sensors, information technologies, andcontrols may eventually enable real-time responses tosystem loads. HTS electrical wires might be able tocarry 150 times the amount of electricity compared tothe same-size conventional copper wires (Figure 4-9).Such possibilities may create totally new ways tooperate and configure the grid. Power electronicswill be able to provide significant advantages inprocessing power from distributed energy sourcesusing fast response and autonomous control.

Technology Strategy

Realizing these opportunities requires a researchportfolio that focuses on a balance between advancedtransmission grid and distributed-generationtechnologies. Within the constraints of availableresources, a balanced portfolio needs to addressconductor technology, systems and controls, energystorage, and power electronics to help reduce CO2

emissions in this sector.

Early research is likely to focus on ensuring reliability,e.g., establishing “self-healing” capabilities for thegrid, including intelligent, autonomous deviceinteractions, and advanced communicationcapabilities. Additional technologies would be neededfor wide-area sensing and control, including sensors,secure communication and data management; and forimproved grid-state estimation and simulation.Simulation linked to intelligent controllers can lead toimproved protection and discrete-event control.Digitally enabled load-management technologies,wireless communications architecture and algorithmsfor system automation, and advanced power storagetechnologies will allow intermittent and distributedenergy resources to be efficiently integrated.

Longer-term research is likely to focus on thedevelopment of fully operational, pre-commercialprototypes of energy-intensive power equipment that,by incorporating HTS wires, will have greatercapacity with lower energy losses and half the size ofconventional units. Over the long term, the T&Dsystem would also be enhanced by integrating storageand power electronics.

74


Figure 4-9.Superconductor wireshave the ability toconduct more than 150times the electricalcurrent of copper wire ofthe same dimension.

Courtesy: American Superconductor.

75


Current Portfolio

Across the current Federal portfolio of electricinfrastructure-related R&D, multi-agency activitiesare focused on a number of major thrusts in high-temperature superconductivity, T&D technologies,distributed generation and combined heat and power,energy storage, sensors, controls and communications,and power electronics. For example:

◆ Research on high-temperaturesuperconductivity (HTS) is focused onimproving the current carrying capability of long-distance cables; its manufacturability; and cost-effective ways to use the cable in equipment suchas motors, transformers, and compensators. More reliable and robust HTS transmission cablesthat have three to five times the capacity ofconventional copper cables and higherefficiency—which is especially useful in congestedurban areas—are being developed and built as pre-commercial prototypes. Through years of Federalresearch in partnership with companiesthroughout the nation, technology has developedto bond these HTS materials to various metals,providing the flexibility to fashion these ceramicsinto wires for use in transmission cables; bearings

for flywheels; and coils for power transformers,motors, generators, and the like.

Research program goals in this area include HTSwires with 100 times the capacity of conventionalcopper/aluminum wires. More broadly, theprogram aims to develop and demonstrate adiverse portfolio of electric equipment based onHTS, such that the equipment can achieve a 50percent reduction in energy losses, compared toconventional equipment, and a 50 percent sizereduction, compared to conventional equipmentwith the same rating. Low-cost, high-performance, second-generation coatedconductors are expected to become available in2008 in kilometer-scale lengths. Cost goalsinclude: (1) in 1,000 meter lengths, a wire-costgoal of $50 or less per ampere of current carriedby superconducting wire used in power linescooled to liquid nitrogen temperatures; (2) by2015, the cost performance ratio forsuperconducting wires improved by at least afactor of 2.18

◆ Research on transmission and distributiontechnologies is focused on real-time informationand control technologies; and systems thatincrease transmission capability, allow economic


Figure 4-10. A Distributed Energy Future (Source: ORNL, Oak Ridge, Tennessee)

A Distributed Energy Future

and efficient electricity markets, and improve gridreliability. Examples include high-strengthcomposite overhead conductors, grid-statusmeasurement systems that improve reliability bygiving early warning of unstable conditions overmajor geographic regions, and technologies andregulations that enable the customer to participatemore in electric markets through a demandresponse.19

Research program goals in this area include, by2010, demonstrated reliability of energy-storagesystems; reduced cost of advanced conductorssystems by 30 percent; and operation of aprototype smart, switchable grid in a region withinthe U.S. transmission grid.

◆ Research on distributed generation (DG)includes renewable resources (e.g., photovoltaics),natural gas engines and turbines, energy-storagedevices, and price-responsive loads. Thesetechnologies can meet a variety of consumerenergy needs, including continuous power, backuppower, remote power, and peak shaving. They canbe installed directly on the consumer’s premises orlocated nearby in district energy systems, powerparks, and mini-grids (Figure 4-10).

Current research focuses on technologies that arepowered by natural gas combustion and arelocated near the building or facility where theelectricity is being used. These systems includemicroturbines, reciprocating engines and largerindustrial gas turbines that generate from 25 kWto 10 MW of electricity that is appropriate forhotels, apartment buildings, schools, officebuildings, hospitals, etc. Combined cooling,heating, and power (CHP) systems recover anduse waste heat from distributed generators toefficiently cool, heat, or dehumidify buildings ormake more power.

Research is needed to increase the efficiency andreduce the emissions from microturbines,reciprocating engines, and industrial gas turbinesto allow them to be sited anywhere, even innonattainment areas. These technologies canmeet a variety of consumer energy needs,including continuous power, backup power,remote power, and peak shaving. Microturbinesand reciprocating engines can also be utilized toburn opportunity fuels such as landfill gases orbiogases from wastewater-treatment facilities orother volatile species from industrial processes that

would otherwise be an environmental hazard.20

CHP technologies have the potential to take theDG technologies one step further in GHGreduction by utilizing the waste heat from thegeneration of electricity for making steam, heatingwater, or producing cooling energy. The averagepower plant in the United States convertsapproximately one-third of the input energy intooutput electricity and then discards the remainingtwo-thirds of the energy as waste heat. IntegratedDG systems with CHP similarly produceelectricity at 30 percent to 45 percent efficiency,but then capture much of the waste heat to makesteam or heat, to cool water, or to meet otherthermal needs and increase the overall efficiencyof the system to greater than 70 percent.Research is needed to increase the efficiency ofwaste-heat-driven absorption chillers anddesiccant systems to overall efficiencies well above80 percent.

The overall research goal of the DistributedEnergy Program is to develop and make available,by 2015, a diverse array of high-efficiency,integrated distributed generation and thermalenergy technologies, at market-competitive prices,so to enable and facilitate widespread adoptionand use by homes, businesses, industry,communities, and electricity companies that mayelect to use them. If successful, these technologieswill enable the achievement of a 20 percentincrease in a building's energy utilization, whencompared to a building built to ASHRAE 90.1standards, using load management, CHP, andenergy-storage technologies that are replicable toother localities.

◆ Research on energy storage is focused in twogeneral areas. First, research is striving to developstorage technologies that reduce power-qualitydisturbances and peak electricity demand, andimprove system flexibility to reduce adverse effectsto industrial and other users. Second, research isseeking to improve electrical energy storage forstationary (utility, customer-side, and renewable)applications. This work is being done incollaboration with a number of universities andindustrial partners. This work is set within aninternational context, where others are investingin high-temperature, sodium-sulfur batteries forutility load-leveling applications and pursuinglarge-scale vanadium reduction-oxidation batterychemistries.

76



77


The research program goals in this area focus onenergy-storage technologies with high reliabilityand affordable costs. For capital cost, this isinterpreted to mean less than or equal to those ofsome of lower-cost new power generation options($400-$600/kW). Battery storage systems rangefrom $300-$2,000/kW. For operating cost, thisfigure would range from compressed gas energystorage (which can cost as little as $1 to $5/kWh)to pumped hydro storage (which can rangebetween $10 and $45/kWh).21

◆ Research on sensors, controls, andcommunications focuses on developingdistributed intelligent systems to diagnose localfaults and coordinate with power electronics andother existing, conventional protection schemesthat will provide autonomous control andprotection at the local level. This hierarchy willenable isolation and mitigation of faults beforethey cascade through the system. The work willalso help users and electric-power-systemoperators achieve optimized control of a large,complex network of systems; and will provideremote detection, protection, control, andcontingency measures for the electric system.

The initial research program goals for sensors,controls, and communications are to develop,validate, and test computer simulation models ofthe distribution system to assess the alternativesituations. Once the models have been validatedon a sufficiently large scale, the functionalrequirements and architecture specifications canbe completed. Then more specific technologysolutions can be explored that would conform tothe established architecture.22

◆ Research on power electronics is focused onmegawatt-level inverters, fast semiconductorswitches, sensors, and devices for FlexibleAutomated Control Transmission Systems(FACTS). The Office of Naval Research andDOE have a joint program to develop powerelectronic building blocks. The military isdeveloping more electricity-intensive aircraft,ships, and land vehicles, which are providingpower electronic spinoff technology forinfrastructure applications.

The research program goal in this area is to builda power electronic system on a base of modules.Each module or block would be a subsystem

containing several components, and each one hascommon power terminals and communicationconnections.23



◆ High-Temperature Superconducting Cablesand Equipment. The manufacture of promisingHTS materials in long lengths at low cost remainsa key program challenge. New, continuously-scanning analytical systems are necessary to ensureuniformly high superconductor characteristicsover kilometer lengths of wire. Research anddevelopment could help develop highly reliable,high-efficiency cryogenic systems to economicallycool the superconducting components includingmaterials for cryogenic insulation and standardizedhigh-efficiency refrigerators. Scale-up of nationallaboratory discoveries for “coated conductors”could be another promising area for thelaboratories and their industry partners.

◆ Energy Storage. Energy storage that respondsover timescales from milliseconds to hours—andoutputs that range from watts to megawatts—is acritical enabling technology for enhancingcustomer reliability and power quality, moreeffective use of renewable resources, integration ofdistributed resources, and more reliabletransmission system operation.

◆ Real-Time Monitoring and Control.Introduction of low-cost sensors throughout thepower system is needed for real-time monitoringof system conditions. New analytical tools andsoftware must be developed to enhance systemobservability and power flow control over wide areas.


78


SummaryThis chapter reviews various forms of advancedtechnology, their potential for reducing emissionsfrom end use and infrastructure, and the R&Dstrategies intended to accelerate their development.Although uncertainties exist about both the level atwhich GHG concentrations might need to bestabilized in the future and the nature of thetechnologies that may come to the fore, the long-term potential of advanced end-use and infrastructuretechnologies is estimated to be significant, both inreducing emissions (as shown in the figure at thebeginning of this chapter) and in reducing the costsfor achieving those reductions, as suggested by Figure3-14. Further, the advances in technologydevelopment needed to realize this potential, asmodeled in the associated analyses, animate the R&Dgoals for each end-use and infrastructure technologyarea. It will remain important to continue tocoordinate research closely with industrial firms, sincein many cases they will have the financial incentiveand expertise to make technology advancementswithout Federal support.

As one illustration among the many hypothetical casesanalyzed,24 when a high-emissions constraint wasplaced on GHG emissions over the course of the 21st

century, the lowest-cost arrays of advancedtechnology in end use and infrastructure, whencompared to a reference case, resulted in 100-yearcumulative reductions of emissions of roughlybetween 190 and 210 GtC. This amounted, roughly,to between 30 and 35 percent of all GHG emissionsreduced, avoided, captured and stored, or otherwisewithdrawn and sequestered, as needed to attain thislevel of constrained emission. Similarly, the costs forachieving such emissions reductions, when comparedto the reference case, were reduced by roughly afactor of 3. See Chapter 3 for other cases and otherscenarios.

As described in this chapter, CCTP’s technologydevelopment strategy supports potential achievementsin this range. The overall strategy is summarizedschematically below in Figure 4-11. Advancedtechnologies are seen entering the marketplace in thenear, mid, and long terms, where the long term issustained indefinitely. Such a progression, ifsuccessfully realized worldwide, would be consistentwith attaining the end use and infrastructure potentialportrayed in Figure 3-19.

The timing and the pace of technology adoption areuncertain and must be guided by science. In the caseof the illustration above, the first GtC per year(1GtC/year) of reduced or avoided emissions, ascompared to a reference case, would need to be inplace and operating, roughly, between 2030 and 2050.For this to happen, a number of new or advancedend-use and infrastructure technologies would needto penetrate the market at significant scale beforethese dates. Other cases would suggest faster orslower rates of deployment, depending onassumptions. See Chapter 3 for other cases and otherscenarios.

Throughout Chapter 4, the discussions of the currentactivities in each area support the main componentsof this approach to technology development. Theactivities outlined in the current portfolio sectionsaddress the highest-priority investment opportunitiesfor this point in time. Beyond these activities, thechapter identifies promising directions for futureresearch, identified in part by the end-use andinfrastructure technical working group andassessments and inputs from non-Federal experts.CCTP remains open to a full array of promisingtechnology options as current work is completed andchanges in the overall portfolio are considered.

4.5

24 In Chapter 3, various advanced technology scenarios were analyzed for cases where global emissions of GHGs were hypothetically constrained.Over the course of the 21st century, growth in emissions was assumed to slow, then stop, and eventually reverse in order to ultimately stabilize GHGconcentrations in the Earth’s atmosphere at levels ranging from 450 to 750 ppm. In each case, technologies competed within the emissions-con-strained market, and the results were compared in terms of energy (or other metric), emissions, and costs.

79


Technologies for Goal #1: Reduce Emissions from End Use and Infrastructure

Figure 4-11. Technologies for Goal #1: Reduce Emissions from End Use and Infrastructure(Note: Technologies shown are representations of larger suites. With some overlap, “near-term” envisions significant technologyadoption by 10 to 20 years from present, “mid-term” in a following period of 20-40 years, and “long-term” in a following period of 40-60 years. See also List of Acronyms and Abbreviations.)

• Hybrid & Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles• Clean Diesel Vehicles• Alternative and Fuel-Flexible Vehicles• Improved Batteries, Energy Storage• Power Electronics• Engineered Urban Designs• Reduction of Vehicle Miles Traveled• Improved Air Space Operations

• Fuel Cell Vehicles and H2 Fuels• Efficient, Clean Heavy Trucks• Cellulosic Ethanol Vehicles• Intelligent Transport Systems• Integrated Regional Planning• Low-Emission Aircraft• Intercity Transport Systems

• Zero-Emission Vehicle Systems• Optimized Multi-Modal Intercity

& Freight Transport• Widespread Use of Engineered Urban

Designs & Regional Planning• Very Low Aviation Emissions (all GHGs)

Transportation

• High-Performance, Integrated Homes• Energy-Efficient Building Materials• High-Efficiency Appliances• Solar Control Windows

• “Smart” Buildings• Solid-State Lighting• Ultra-Efficient HVACR• Intelligent Building Systems• Neural Net Building Controls

• Energy Managed Communities• Low-Power Sensors with Wireless

CommunicationsBuildings

• Improved Processes in Energy-IntensiveIndustries

• High-Efficiency Boilers and CombustionSystems

• Greater Waste Heat Utilization• Improved Recyclability and Greater Use of

Byproducts• Bio-Based Feedstocks

• Transformational Technologies for Energy-Intensive Industries

• C&CO2 Managed Industries• Superconducting Electric Motors• Efficient Thermoelectric Systems• Advanced Separation Technologies• Low-Emission Cement Alternatives• Water and Energy System Optimization

• Integration of Industrial Heat, Power,Processes and Techniques

• High-Efficiency, All-Electric Manufacturing• Widespread Use of Bio-Feedstocks• Closed-Cycle Products & Materials

Industry

• Distributed Generation• Smart Metering & Controls for Peak

Shaving• Long-Distance DC Transmission• High-Temperature Superconductivity

Demonstrations• Power Electronics• Composite Conductor Cables

• Energy Storage for Load Leveling• Neural Net Grid Systems• Advanced Controls and Power Electronics

• Superconducting Transmission andEquipment

• Standardized Power Electronics• Wireless Transmission

Electric Grid &Infrastructure

NEAR-TERM MID-TERM LONG-TERM

80


Brown, M.A. 2003. What are the administration priorities for climate change technology? November 6, 2003.http://www.house.gov/science/hearings/energy03/nov06/brown.pdf

Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2004. Annual energy outlook 2004: with projections to 2025, DOE/EIA-0383(2004).Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.

Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2005. Annual energy outlook 2005: with projections to 2025, DOE/EIA-0383(2005).Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2000. Special report on emissions scenarios. Cambridge, UK: CambridgeUniversity Press. http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/emission/

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001. Climate change 2001: mitigation. Working Group III to the ThirdAssessment Report. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg3/index.htm

International Energy Agency (IEA). 2004. World energy outlook. Paris: International Energy Agency.

United Nations (UN) Population Division. 2005. World population prospects: the 2004 revision population database.http://esa.un.org/unpp/

U.S. Climate Change Technology Program (CCTP). 2005. Technology options for the near and long term. Washington, DC: U.S.Department of Energy. http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/index.htm

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 1997. Technology opportunities to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Washington, DC: U.S.Department of Energy. http://www.ornl.gov/~webworks//cppr/y2003/rpt/110512.pdf

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 2002. National transmission grid study. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.http://www.pi.energy.gov/pdf/library/TransmissionGrid.pdf

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 2005. Hydrogen fuel cells and infrastructure technologies multi- year research, development anddemonstration plan: 2003-2010 (Draft). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.http://www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/mypp/

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE). 2005. FY 2006: budget-in-brief.http://www.eere.energy.gov/office_eere/pdfs/fy05_budget_brief.pdf

U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). 2002a. Highway statistics 2001. Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration.

U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). 2002b. Freight analysis framework. Washington, DC: Federal HighwayAdministration.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2005. Inventory of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and sinks: 1990-2003. EPA 430-R-05-003. http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/UniqueKeyLookup/RAMR69V4ZS/$File/05_complete_report.pdf

References4.6

5Some projections show energy demand over thecourse of the 21st century growing by a factor ofmore than 6 (from about 400 exajoules [EJ] in 2000to more than 2400 EJ in 2100). Mid-rangescenarios project an increase of about a factor of 3or more from today’s level, even under scenarios inwhich energy efficiency is assumed to advancesteadily over time. Of this growth, global demandfor electricity is projected to increase faster thandirect use of fuels in end-use applications. Mostinfrastructure needed to meet this demand,including the replacement of the facilities to beretired, has yet to be built—a circumstance thatposes significant opportunities for new andadvanced technology to reduce or eliminate muchof these future emissions.

In published scenarios of CO2 emissions to 2100,increasing demand for energy results in concomitantgrowth in CO2 emissions. By contrast, almost allscenarios that explore various future paths towardsignificant emissions reductions show that variousforms of low or near net-zero emissions energy supplyplay a key role in achieving those reductions. In oneset of scenarios, as shown in Figure 3-19 andhighlighted above, advanced energy supplytechnologies contribute an additional 20 to 35thousand EJ toward global energy demand and resultin reductions of global carbon emissions betweenabout 30 and 330 gigatons of carbon (GtC),compared to a reference case used in the study (seeChapter 3). Although bracketed by largeuncertainties, these figures suggest both the potentialrole for advanced technology and a long-term goal forcontributions from this sector of the global economy.

Today, a range of technologies using fossil fuels,nuclear power, hydroelectric power, and a relativelysmall (but fast-growing) amount of renewable energy,

supplies the world’s electricity demand. Most ofglobal transportation demand is met with petroleumproducts (see Figures 5-1 and 5-2).

The development of advanced technologies that cansignificantly reduce emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2)from energy supply is a central component of theoverall climate change technology strategy. Manyopportunities exist for pursuing technological optionsfor energy supply that are characterized by low ornear-net-zero emissions and whose development canbe facilitated by a coordinated Federal R&Dinvestment plan.

Some advanced energy supply technologies build onthe existing energy infrastructure, which is currentlydominated by coal and other fossil fuels. One set oftechnologies that would allow continued use of coal

81

Reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from energy supply is an important elementof CCTP’s technology strategy. In part, this is because global energy demand is

projected to grow significantly by the year 2100 and, in part, because the infrastructure that will be built to meet this demand will have long-lasting consequences for future GHG emissions.

Reducing Emissions from Energy Supply

Energy Supply Potential Contributions to Emissions Reduction

Potential contributions of Energy Supply reduction to cumulativeGHG emissions reductions to 2100, across a range ofuncertainties, for three advanced technology scenarios. SeeChapter 3 for details.


and other fossil fuels—even under scenarios callingfor substantial CO2 emission limitations—is containedin an advanced coal-based production facility. It isbased on coal gasification and production of syngas,which can generate electricity, hydrogen, and othervalued fuels and chemicals. The facility would becombined with CO2 capture and storage, and havevery low emissions of other pollutants. Some of theemissions-reduction scenarios examined (see Chapter3) project that if CO2 capture and storage andimprovements in fossil energy conversion efficienciesare achieved, fossil-based energy could continue tosupply a large percentage of total energy andelectricity in the future (e.g., up to 70 percent ofglobal electricity demand in some scenarios), evenunder a high carbon constraint. In addition to thismid- to long-term opportunity, lowering CO2

emissions from fossil fuel combustion in the nearterm can be achieved by increasing the energyefficiency of combustion technology and by increasingthe use of combined heat and power.

Advances in low- and zero-emission technologies havealso been identified in a number of scenario analysesas important for reducing GHG emissions. Thesetechnologies include advanced forms of renewableenergy, such as wind, photovoltaics, solar thermal

applications, and others; biologically based open andclosed energy cycles, such as enhanced systems forbiomass combustion, biomass conversion to biofuelsand other forms of bioenergy; refuse-derived fuelsand energy; and various types of nuclear energy,including technologies that employ spent fuelrecycling. Variations of these advanced technologiescan also be deployed in the production of hydrogen,which may play a big role in reducing emissions fromthe transportation sector, as well as potentially beingused to supply fuel cells for electricity production.Several studies showed that biomass, nuclear, andrenewable (solar and wind) energy, combined, wouldcontribute approximately 30 percent of the totalreduction in GHG emissions from a “reference case” 1

(see Chapter 3).

Advances in novel or visionary energy supplytechnologies may also make important contributionstoward reduced GHG emissions, including fusionenergy; advanced fuel cycles based on combinations ofnanotechnology and new forms of bio-assisted energyproduction, using bioengineered molecules for moreefficient photosynthesis; and hydrogen production orphoton-water splitting. Other possibilities includeadvanced technologies for capturing solar energy inEarth orbit, on the moon, or in the vast desert areas

82


World Primary Energy Supply

Figure 5-2. World Primary Energy Supply(Source: IEA 2004)

World Electricity Generation

Figure 5-1. World Electricity Generation(Source: IEA 2004)

1 In Chapter 3, the 30 percent value is associated with a hypothesized high emissions constraint.

of Earth—enabled, in part, by new energy carriersand/or low-resistance power transmission over longdistances. In one scenario (see Chapter 3), thesenovel forms of energy were projected to lowercumulative CO2 emissions by more than 100 GtCover the course of a 100-year period, under a veryhigh emission-constraint scenario.

Because outcomes of various ongoing and plannedtechnology development efforts are not known, aprudent path for science and technology policies inthe face of uncertainty is to maintain a diverse R&Dportfolio. The current Federal portfolio supportsR&D activities important to all three of the generaltechnology areas discussed above. The analysis of theadvanced technology scenarios suggests that, throughsuccessful development and implementation of thesetechnologies, stabilization trajectories could be metacross a wide range of hypothesized concentrationlevels—and the goal could be accomplished bothsooner and at significant cost savings, compared tothe case without such dramatic technologicaladvances.

This chapter explores energy supply technologies.For each technology area, the chapter examines thepotential role for advanced technology; outlines atechnology-development strategy for realizing thatpotential; highlights the current research portfolio,replete with selected technical goals and milestones;and invites public input on considerations for futureresearch directions. The chapter is organized aroundthe following five energy supply technology areas:

◆ Low-Emission, Fossil-Based Fuels and Power.

◆ Hydrogen as an Energy Carrier.

◆ Renewable Energy and Fuels.

◆ Nuclear Fission.

◆ Fusion Energy.

Each of these technology sections contains a sub-section describing the current portfolio, where thetechnology descriptions include an Internet link tothe updated version of the CCTP report, TechnologyOptions for the Near and Long Term (CCTP 2005).2

Low-Emission, Fossil-Based Fuelsand Power

Today, fossil fuels are an integral part of the U.S. andglobal energy mix. Because of its abundance andcurrent relatively low cost, coal now accounts forabout half of the electricity generated in the UnitedStates, and it is projected to continue to supply one-half of U.S. electricity demands through the year2030 (EIA 2006). EIA also projects that natural gaswill continue to be the “bridge” energy resource, as itoffers significant efficiency improvements (andemissions reductions) in both central and distributedelectricity generation and combined heat and power(CHP) applications.


Because coal is America’s most plentiful and readilyavailable energy resource, the U.S. Department ofEnergy has directed a portion of its research anddevelopment resources toward finding ways to usecoal in a more efficient, cost-effective, andenvironmentally benign manner, ultimately leading tonear-zero atmospheric emissions. Even smallimprovements in efficiency of the installed base ofcoal-fueled power stations can result in a significantreduction of carbon emissions. For example,increasing the efficiency of all coal-fired electric-generation capacity in the United States by 1percentage point would avoid the emission of 14million tons of carbon per year.3 That reduction isequivalent to replacing 170 million incandescent lightbulbs with fluorescent lights or weatherizing 140million homes. New U.S. government-industrycollaborative efforts are expected to continue to findways to improve the ability to decrease emissionsfrom coal power generation at lower costs. Theobjective for future power plant designs is to bothincrease efficiency and reduce environmental impacts.The focus is on designs that are compatible withcarbon sequestration technology, including thedevelopment of coal-based, near-zero atmosphericemission power plants.

5.1

83


2 The report is available at http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/index.htm.3 Avoided carbon emissions were calculated based on current coal consumption and power plant efficiencies from the Energy Information

Administration’s Annual Energy Outlook 2002. Using the published efficiencies, 0.574 quads of energy were saved with a 1 percent improved efficiency, which would result in 14.8 MMT of carbon avoided.

Technology Strategy

The current U.S fossil research portfolio is a fullyintegrated program with mid- and long-term market-entry offerings. The principal objective is a near-zeroatmospheric emission, coal-based electricitygeneration plant that has the ability to co-producelow-cost hydrogen. In the mid term, that goal isexpected to be accomplished through the FutureGenproject. This $1 billion venture, cost-shared withindustry, will combine electricity and hydrogenproduction from a single facility with the eliminationof virtually all emissions of air pollutants, includingsulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, mercury, andparticulates—as well as 90 percent reduction ofatmospheric CO2 emissions, through a combinationof efficiency improvements and carbon capture andstorage (called “sequestration” in Figure 5-3). Thisprototype power plant will serve to demonstrate themost advanced technologies, such as hydrogen fuel cells.4

Current Portfolio

The low-emissions, fossil-based power systemportfolio has three focus areas:

◆ Advanced Power Systems: Advanced coal-fired,power-generation technologies can achievesignificant reductions in CO2 emissions, whileproviding a reliable, efficient supply of electricity.

Significant reductions in atmospheric CO2

emissions have been demonstrated via efficiency

improvements. Current Integrated GasificationCombined Cycle (IGCC) systems average powerplant efficiencies are about 40-42 percent;increasing efficiencies to 48-52 percent in the midterm and 60 percent by 2020 (with the integrationof fuel cell technology), will nearly halve emissionsof CO2 per unit of electricity, relative topulverized-coal-based power plants which haveefficiencies of 30-35 percent (Figure 5-4).Development and deployment of CO2 capture andstorage technology could reduce atmosphericemissions to near-zero levels through 2100.Recent R&D activities have focused on IGCCplants, with two U.S. IGCC demonstration plantsnow in operation.

The research program goal in the AdvancedPower Systems area is to increase efficiency ofnew systems to levels ranging from 48-52 percentby 2010, and 60 percent by 2020, while alsoachieving an overall electricity production costthat is between 75 percent and 90 percent ofcurrent pulverized-coal-based power generation.In addition, emissions of criteria pollutants aretargeted to be much less than one-tenth of currentnew source performance standards.5

◆ Distributed Generation/Stationary Fuel Cells:The stationary fuel cell (FC) program is focusedon reducing the cost of fuel cell technology fordistributed generation applications (as opposed totransportation applications) by an order ofmagnitude.

84


Coal-Based Energy Complex

Figure 5-3. A fully integratedcoal-based energycomplex will havethe ability to co-produce electricity,hydrogen, fuels andchemicals with littleor no CO2

emissions.(Source: DOE2004)

4 See http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/powersystems/futuregen/futuregen_report_march_04.pdf.5 See Section 2.1.2 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-212.pdf.

In the near and mid terms, fuel cell costreductions could enable the widespreaddeployment of natural-gas-fueled distributedgeneration in gas-only, CHP, and fuel cellapplications. In the mid- to long-term, thistechnology, along with others being developed aspart of the Distributed Generation effort, will alsosupport coal-based FutureGen/central-stationapplications. The goal is to develop a modularpower system with lower cost and significantlylower carbon dioxide emissions than currentplants. Examples of current R&D projects in thisarea include: (1) low-cost fuel cell systemsdevelopment; (2) high-temperature fuel cell scale-up and aggregation for fuel cell turbine (FCT)hybrid application; and (3) hybrid systems andcomponent demonstration.

Research program goals in the natural gas fuel celland hybrid power systems include demonstrating agas aggregated fuel cell module larger than 250kW that can run on coal synthetic gas (syngas),while also reducing the costs of the Solid-StateEnergy Conversion Alliance fuel cell powersystem to $400/kW by 2010. In addition, by2012-2015, the program aims to: (1) demonstratea megawatt-class hybrid system at FutureGen withan overall system efficiency of 50 percent on coalsyngas; and (2) integrate optimized turbinesystems into zero-emission power plants.6

◆ Co-production/Hydrogen: This research areafocuses on developing technology to co-produceelectricity and hydrogen from coal, which couldalso be relevant to applications using coal andbiomass blends, potentially achieving very largereductions in CO2 emissions when compared topresent technologies. This technology will usesyngas generated from coal gasification to producehydrogen.

Near-Zero Atmospheric Emission Power andhydrogen coproduction research goals target a 10-year demonstration project (FutureGen) to createthe world’s first coal-based, near-zero atmosphericemissions electricity and hydrogen power plant.The near-term goals of the program are to: (1)design, by 2010, a near-term coproduction plant,configured at a size of 275-MW, which would besuitable for commercial deployment; (2)demonstrate pilot-scale reactors using ceramicmembranes for oxygen separation and hydrogenrecovery; and (3) demonstrate a $400/kW solid-oxide fuel cell.7

Carbon emissions from fossil-fuel-based powersystems can be reduced in the near termprincipally by improving process efficiency and, inthe longer term, via more advanced systemcomponents, such as high-efficiency fuel cells. Inboth the near and long terms, incorporating CO2

capture into the systems’ processes, accompaniedby long-term CO2 storage, will be required toachieve low or near-zero atmospheric emissionsfrom these energy sources. Current researchactivities focus on: (1) ion transport oxygenseparation membranes; (2) hydrogen separationmembranes; and (3) early-entrance coproductionplant designs. These activities are discussed inmore detail in Chapter 6.



◆ Advanced membranes for gas phaseseparations. Separations such as oxygenseparation from air, which is required for

85



Figure 5-4. Advanced Gas Turbines can increase efficiencies in combined-cycle systems to 60 percent, while also reducing the cost of electricityproduction.

Courtesy: DOE/NETL

oxycombustion technology and hydrogenseparation from gasified coal streams, are energyintensive and reduce the overall efficiency ofadvanced combustion and gasification plants.Near-term technologies are under developmentfor improving these gas separations, but in thelonger term it is desirable to develop advanced iontransport membranes for oxygen separation andceramic membranes for hydrogen recovery.

◆ Solid-oxide fuel cells. Coal gasification plantsthat produce hydrogen streams as feed to solid-oxide fuel cells for improving electricityproduction efficiency are being studied. Futureresearch could examine approaches scaling up low-cost solid oxide fuels cells to multi-hundredmegawatt sizes for use as power blocks in near-zero atmospheric emissions systems.

◆ High-temperature materials and heat transfertechnology. Future generation systems will needto maintain relatively high temperatures betweenthe combustion/gasification stage and the turbinestage to achieve high generation efficiency goals.A primary technology development interest is forhigh-temperature materials that are stable andresistant to corrosion, erosion, and decrepitation.Advanced materials could improve performance offuture heat exchangers, turbine components,particulate filters, and SO2 removal. Otherpossible research directions include the use ofalternate working fluids and heat-exchange cycles.

◆ Unconventional combustion systems. Apromising research direction involves use ofchemical cycling for CO2 enrichment. In thisconcept, CO2 is continually looped and enrichedwithin the combustion plant and the enrichedCO2/O2 gas stream is substituted for air in themain combustion chamber.

◆ Hydrogen co-production. Technology forhydrogen capture and purification in a coalgasification plant for electricity production mayenable hydrogen production for a futurehydrogen-powered vehicle economy.

◆ Advanced hybrid gasification/combustionsystems. These systems appear to offer analternative path to achieve many of the programgoals and may warrant additional study.

◆ Reduction of N2O emissions. Existing post-combustion emissions technology that reduces theemissions of the controlled pollutant NOX alsotends to increase the emissions of N2O gas, whichis a GHG. Post-combustion processes couldsimultaneously minimize the emissions of bothNOX and N2O.

HydrogenAs discussed above, in a long-term futurecharacterized by low or near-net-zero emissions ofGHGs, global energy primary supply can continue itsreliance on fossil fuels, provided there are suitablemeans for capturing and storing the resultingemissions of CO2. Alternatively, the world couldincrease reliance on low-carbon and nonfossil energysources. These approaches share a need forcarbonless energy carriers, such as electricity or somealternative, to store and deliver energy on demand toend users. Electricity is increasingly the carbonlessenergy carrier of choice for stationary energyconsumers, but hydrogen could prove to be anattractive carrier for the transportation sector (e.g.,highway vehicles and aircraft), as well as stationaryapplications. If successful, hydrogen could enablereductions in petroleum use and potentially eliminateconcomitant air pollutants and CO2 emissions on aglobal scale.

Today, hydrogen is used in various chemical processesand is made largely from natural gas, producing CO2

emissions. However, hydrogen can be produced in avariety of ways that do not emit CO2, includingrenewable energy-based electrolysis; various biologicaland chemical processes; water shift reactions with coaland natural gas, accompanied by CO2 capture andstorage; thermal and electrolytic processes usingnuclear energy; and direct photoconversion.Hydrogen can be stored as a pressurized gas orcryogenic liquid, or absorbed within metal hydridepowders or physically adsorbed onto carbon-basednanostructures. If progress can be made on a numberof technical fronts, so that costs of producinghydrogen are reduced, hydrogen could play a valuableenabling and synergistic role in heat and powergeneration, transportation, and energy end use.


As a major constituent of the world’s water, biomass,and fossil hydrocarbons, the element hydrogen isubiquitous. It accounts for 30 percent of the fuel-energy in petroleum, and more than 50 percent of thefuel-energy in natural gas. A fundamental distinctionbetween hydrogen and fossil fuels, however, is thatthe production of hydrogen, whether from water,methane or other hydrocarbons, is a net-energyconsumer. This makes hydrogen not an energysource, per se, but a carrier of energy, similar toelectricity.

5.2

86


Like electricity, the life-cycle GHG emissionsassociated with hydrogen use would vary dependingon the method to produce, store, and distribute it.Hydrogen can be generated at various scales,including central plants, fuel stations, businesses,homes, and perhaps onboard vehicles. In principle,the diversity of scales, methods, and sources ofproduction make hydrogen a highly versatile energycarrier, capable of transforming transportation (andpotentially other energy services) by enablingcompatibility with many primary energy sources.This versatility opens up possibilities for long-termdynamic optimization of CO2 emissions, technologydevelopment lead times, economics, and other factors.In a future “hydrogen economy,” hydrogen mayultimately serve as a means of linking energy sourcesto energy uses in ways that are more flexible, secure,reliable, and responsive to consumer demands thantoday, while also integrating the transportation andelectricity markets.

While its simple molecular structure makes hydrogenan efficient synthetic fuel to produce, use, and/orconvert to electricity, the storage and delivery ofhydrogen are more challenging than for most fuels.Consequently, most hydrogen today is produced at ornear its point of use, consuming other fuels (e.g.,natural gas) that are easier to handle and distribute.

Large hydrogen demands at petroleum refineries orammonia (NH3) synthesis plants can justifyinvestment in dedicated hydrogen pipelines, butsmaller or variable demands for hydrogen are usuallymet more economically by truck transport ofcompressed gaseous hydrogen or cryogenic andliquefied hydrogen produced by steam methanereforming. These methods have evolved over decadesof industrial experience, with hydrogen as a nichechemical commodity, produced in amounts (8 billionkg hydrogen/yr) equivalent to about 1 percent(approximately 1 EJ per year) of current primaryenergy use in the United States. For hydrogen use toscale up from its current position to a globalcarbonless energy carrier (alongside electricity), newenergetically and economically efficient technicalapproaches would be required for hydrogen delivery,storage, and production.

Hydrogen production can be a value-addedcomplement to other advanced climate changetechnologies, such as those aimed at the use of fossilfuels or biomass with CO2 capture and storage. Assuch, hydrogen may be a key and enabling componentfor full deployment of carbonless electricitytechnologies (advanced fission, fusion, and/orintermittent renewables).

In the near term, initial deployment of hydrogen fleetvehicles and distributed power systems may provideearly adoption opportunities and demonstrate thecapabilities of the existing hydrogen delivery and on-site production infrastructure. This will alsocontribute in other ways, such as improving urban airquality and strengthening electricity supply reliability.This phase of hydrogen use may also serve as acommercial proving ground for advanced distributedhydrogen production and conversion technologiesusing existing storage technology, both stationary andvehicular.

In the mid term, light-duty vehicles likely will be thefirst large mass market (10-15 EJ per year in theUnited States) for hydrogen. Fuel cells may beparticularly attractive in automobiles, given theirefficiency versus load characteristics and typicaldriving patterns (Figure 5-5). Hydrogen productionfor this application could occur either in largecentralized plants or using distributed productiontechnologies on a more localized level—mostprobably the latter.

In the long term, production technologies must beable to produce hydrogen at a price competitive withgasoline for bulk commercial fuel use in automobiles,freight trucks, aircraft, rail, and ships. This wouldrequire efficient production means and largequantities of reasonable-cost energy supplies, perhapsfrom coal with CO2 sequestration, advanced nuclear

87


Figure 5-5. Fuel cells use the chemical energy of hydrogen and oxygenfrom air to produce electricity without combustion.

Courtesy: DOE/NREL, Credit – Matt Stiveson

power (high-efficiency electrolysis andthermochemical decomposition of water), fusionenergy, renewables (wind-powered electrolysis, directconversion of water via sunlight, and high-temperature conversion of water using concentratedsolar power), or a variety of methods using biomass.Other important factors in the long term include thecost of hydrogen storage and transportation. Finally,advances in basic science associated with direct water-splitting and solid-state hydrogen storage couldpossibly permit even lower-cost hydrogen productionand safer storage, delivery, and utilization in thecontext of low or near-net-zero emission futures fortransportation and electricity generation.

Technology Strategy

Introducing hydrogen into the mix of competitive fueloptions and building the foundation for a globalhydrogen economy will require a balanced technicalapproach that not only envisions a plausiblecommercialization path, but also respects a triad oflong-run uncertainties on a global scale: (1) the scale,composition, and energy intensity of future worldwidetransportation demand, and potential substitutes; (2)the viability and endurance of CO2 sequestration; and(3) the long-term economics of carbonless energysources. The influences of these factors shape theurgency, relative importance, economic status, andideal end state of a future hydrogen infrastructure.

The International Partnership for the HydrogenEconomy (IPHE) was formed in November 2003among 15 countries (Australia, India, Brazil, Italy,Canada, Japan, China, Republic of Korea, Norway,France, Russia, Germany, United Kingdom, UnitedStates, and Iceland) and the European Commission.The IPHE provides a mechanism to organize,evaluate, and coordinate multinational research,development, and deployment programs that advancethe transition to a global hydrogen economy. Thepartnership leverages national resources, bringstogether the world’s best intellectual skills and talents,and develops interoperable technology standards.

The IPHE has reviewed actions being pursued jointlyby participating countries and is identifying additionalactions to advance research, development, anddeployment of hydrogen production, storage,transport, and distribution technologies; fuel celltechnologies; common codes and standards forhydrogen fuel utilization; and coordination ofinternational efforts to develop a global hydrogeneconomy. More about the IPHE is available athttp://www.iphe.net.

The Department of Energy’s Hydrogen Fuel Cellsand Infrastructure Technologies Program plans toresearch, develop, and demonstrate the criticaltechnologies (and implement codes and standards forsafe use) needed for hydrogen light-duty vehicles(Figure 5-6). The program operates in cooperationwith automakers and related parties experienced inrefueling infrastructure to develop technologynecessary to enable a commercialization decision by2015 (DOE 2005). Current research program goalscall for validation by 2015 of technology for:

◆ Hydrogen storage systems enabling minimum300-mile vehicle range while meeting identifiedpackaging, cost, and performance requirements;

◆ Hydrogen production to safely and efficientlydeliver hydrogen to consumers at pricescompetitive with gasoline and without adverseenvironmental impacts; and

◆ Transportation fuel cell power system costs of lessthan $50/kW (in high-volume production) whilemeeting performance and durability requirements.

DOE requested a study by the National ResearchCouncil (NRC) and the National Academy ofEngineering (NAE) to assess the current state oftechnology for hydrogen production and use, and toreview and provide feedback on the DOE RD&Dhydrogen program, including recommendations forpriorities and strategies to develop a hydrogeneconomy. The resulting report (NRC/NAE 2004)addressed implications for national goals, R&Dpriorities, and criteria for transition to a hydrogeneconomy. It provided recommendations in the areasof systems analysis, fuel cell vehicle technology,infrastructure, transition, safety, CO2-free hydrogen,carbon capture and storage, and DOE’s hydrogenRD&D program. In addition to research beingconducted within DOE’s Hydrogen, Fuel Cells andInfrastructure Program, the NRC report alsoaddressed DOE’s programs for hydrogen productionfrom nuclear and fossil energy sources.

Current Portfolio

Within the constraints of available resources, thecurrent Federal hydrogen technology researchportfolio balances the emphasis on near-termtechnologies that will enable a commercializationdecision for hydrogen automobiles by 2015, with thelonger-term ultimate development of a maturehydrogen economy founded on advanced hydrogenproduction, storage, and delivery technologies.Elements of the portfolio include:

88


◆ Hydrogen Production from Nuclear Fission.High-efficiency, high-temperature fission powerplants may one day produce hydrogen economicallywithout producing CO2 as a byproduct. Hydrogenwould be produced by cyclic thermochemicaldecomposition of water or high-efficiencyelectrolysis of high-temperature steam.

Hydrogen production from nuclear powerRDD&D goals target high-temperature, high-efficiency fission to produce electricity to generatehydrogen from water. Major research areasinclude support for the development of high-temperature materials, separation membranes,advanced heat exchangers, and supporting systemsrelating to hydrogen production using the sulfur-iodine (S-I) thermochemical cycle and high-temperature electrolysis. Alternative processeshaving significantly more technical risk (becauseless is known about them) continue to beevaluated because their expected lowertemperature requirements and, in some cases,reduced complexity could render them moreeconomical in the longer term.8

◆ Hydrogen Production and Distribution UsingElectricity and Fossil/Alternative Energy.Research and development of small-scale steam

reformers, alternative reactor technologies, andhydrogen membrane/separation technologies areaimed at improving the economics of hydrogenproduction from fossil fuels. Demonstration ofon-site electrolysis integrated with renewableelectricity and laboratory-scale direct water-splitting by photoelectrochemical andphotobiological methods are planned.

Near-term research program goals in this areainclude, by 2006: (1) completion of research ofsmall-scale steam methane reformers with aprojected cost of $3.00/kg hydrogen at the pump;and (2) development of alternative reactors,including auto-thermal reactors; and, by 2007,evaluation of whether renewable energy—whenintegrated with hydrogen production by waterelectrolysis—can achieve 64 percent net energyefficiency at a projected cost of $5.50/kg, deliveredat 5,000 psi. Midterm goals call for demonstrating,by 2010, at the pilot-plant scale: (1) membraneseparation and reactive membrane separationtechnology for hydrogen production from coal;and (2) distributed hydrogen production fromnatural gas with a projected cost of $2.50/kghydrogen at the pump. Longer-term goals call fordemonstrating, at laboratory-bench scale: (1) aphoto-electrochemical water-splitting system; and

89


Possible Hydrogen Pathways

Figure 5-6. Possible Hydrogen Pathways (Source: U.S. Department of Energy Hydrogen Program )


• Security• Air Quality• Climate• H2 safety

Public confidence in hydrogenas an energy carrier

• Distributed reformingof natural gas

• Gasification of biomass and coal• Electrolysis Electrolysis with renewable and nuclear power• Distributed reforming of renewable liquid fuels

• Carbon sequestration

• Gaseous tube trailers• Cryogenic liquid trucks

• On-site distributed production• Novel carriers

• Pipeline transmission Pipeline distribution

• Pressurized tanks(gaseous and cryogenic)

• Solid state (hydrides) • Chemical hydrogen storage

• Advanced solid stateor chemical storage

• Fuel refining• Space shuttle• Portable power• Government stationary

and fleet systems

• Stationary distributed power• Bus fleets• Vehicle fleets• Military

• Commercial fleets• Distributed CHP• Market introduction of

personal vehicles

• Utility systems• Integrated fuel/power

systems

• Photolytic water splitting

• Biological processes• Nuclear thermochemical water splitting

Outreach and acceptance}

}

Production

Delivery

PUBLIC POLICYFRAMEWORK

HY

DR

OG

EN

IN

DU

ST

RY

SE

GM

EN

TS

Storage

Conversion

Validations/Applications

2000 2040

• Combustion• Fuel cells• Advanced combustion

Mature technologies for mass production

(2) a biological system for water-splitting (or othersubstrates) that shows potential to achieve long-term costs that are competitive with conventionalfuels.9

◆ Hydrogen Storage. Four methods of high-density, energy-efficient storage of hydrogen arebeing researched: (1) composite pressure vessels,which will contain the hydrogen as a compressedgas or cryogenic vapor; (2) physical adsorption onhigh-surface-area lightweight carbon structures;(3) reversible metal hydrides; and (4) chemicalhydrides. Improving hydrogen compressionand/or liquefaction equipment—as well asevaluating the compatibility of the existing naturalgas pipeline infrastructure for hydrogendistribution—is also planned.

The research program goals of hydrogen storageare: (1) by 2010, develop and verify hydrogenstorage systems with 6 weight-percent, 1,500 watt-hrs/liter energy density, and at a cost of $4/kWhof stored energy; and (2) by 2015, developassociated technologies and verify hydrogenstorage systems with 9 weight-percent, 2,700 watt-hrs/liter energy density, and at a cost of $2/kWhof stored energy.10

• Hydrogen Use. DOE aims to demonstrate high-efficiency, solid-oxide fuel cell/turbine hybrid-electric generation systems operating on gasifiedcoal with carbon capture and storage, and to

develop efficient and durable polymer electrolytemembrane (PEM) fuel cells appropriate forautomotive and stationary applications. Additionalresearch is underway to use hydrogen in auxiliarypower units in heavy vehicles to supplant dieselengine power use for refrigeration andhousekeeping tasks.

The research program goals in this area are: (1) by2010, develop a 60 percent peak-efficient, durable,PEM fuel cell power system for transportation at acost of $45/kW; and a distributed generation (50-250 kW) PEM fuel cell system operating onnatural gas or propane that achieves 40 percentelectrical efficiency and 40,000 hours durability at$400-750/kW; and (2) by 2015, reduce the cost ofPEM fuel cell power systems to $30/kW fortransportation systems.11

◆ Hydrogen Systems Technology Validation.A systems approach is needed to demonstrateintegrated hydrogen production, delivery, andstorage, as well as refueling of hydrogen vehiclesand use in stationary fuel cells (Figure 5-7). Thiscould involve providing hydrogen in gaseous andliquid form.

The overall goal in this area is to validate, by2015, integrated hydrogen and fuel celltechnologies for transportation, infrastructure, andelectric generation in a systems context underreal-world operating conditions. Specific goalsinclude the following: (1) by 2006, completedevelopment of a laboratory-scale distributednatural-gas-to-hydrogen production anddispensing system that can produce 5,000 psihydrogen for $3.00/gge; (2) by 2008, demonstratestationary fuel cells with a durability of 20,000hours and 32 percent efficiency; (3) by 2009,demonstrate vehicles with greater than 250-milerange and 2,000-hour fuel cell durability; and (4)by 2009, demonstrate hydrogen production at$3/gge. By 2015, the research program aims toprovide critical statistical data that demonstratethat fuel cell vehicles can meet targets of 5,000-hour fuel cell durability, storage systems canefficiently meet 300+ mile range requirements,and hydrogen fuel costs between $2.00 and$3.00/gge. The technology-validation effort alsoprovides information in support of technical codesand standards development of infrastructure safetyprocedures.12

90


9 See Section 2.2.3 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-223.pdf.10 See Section 2.2.4 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-224.pdf.11 See Section 2.2.5 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-225.pdf.12 See Section 2.2.2 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-222.pdf.

Figure 5-7. A systemsapproach is neededfor integratedhydrogen production,delivery, and storage,as well as for refuelinghydrogen vehicles.

Courtesy: DOE/NREL, Credit:Warren Gretz

◆ Hydrogen Infrastructure Safety. Ensuring thesafety of hydrogen infrastructure technologieslargely depends on the development of sound,internationally agreed upon codes and standards.DOE will study the flammability and explosive,reactive, and dispersion properties of hydrogenand will subject components, subsystems, andsystems to environmental conditions that couldresult in failure in order to verify design practiceand to develop failure-mode models and risk-analysis methodologies. DOE is also compiling ahydrogen safety-incident database, and willdevelop potential accident scenarios, and draft ahandbook on Best Management Practices forSafety to be published in 2008. These technicaldata and models will be provided to theappropriate organizations (i.e., International CodeCouncil, National Fire Protection Association) towrite and publish applicable codes and standardsfor hydrogen production and delivery processes aswell as for hydrogen storage and fuel cell systems.The goal is to have all data and testing completedby 2010 to finalize U.S. technical standards forpreparation of a Global Technical Regulation.The Department of Transportation (DOT) hasregulatory or codes-and-standards responsibilities,including future Federal Motor Vehicle SafetyStandards for fuel cell vehicles. The Federalgovernment will facilitate the development ofother necessary standards by standardsorganizations through R&D and support forappropriate technical representation in workinggroups. In support of on-vehicle safety, DOE willdevelop hydrogen safety sensor technology thatcan meet technical targets for response time andaccuracy.13



◆ Commercial Transportation Modes. If efficienthydrogen-fueled or hybrid-electric vehicles beginto dominate the light-duty passenger vehiclemarket (beyond 2025), commercial transportation

modes (freight trucks, aircraft, marine, and rail)may become the dominant sources oftransportation-related CO2 emissions later in the21st century. Therefore, the future CCTPportfolio should aim at reducing the cost ofhydrogen production and liquefaction of hydrogenfor these modes and explore the infrastructureimplications of hydrogen production and/orliquefaction on-site at airports, harbors, rail yards,etc. In the case of hydrogen-powered aircraft, theaverage length of future flights and whethersignificant demand for hypersonic passengeraircraft develops over the 21st century will beimportant factors in determining the relative fueleconomy advantages of hydrogen, if any, overconventional jet fuel. Scenarios that include aworldwide shift toward hydrogen-powered aircraftand like substitutes for shorter trips (high-speedrail) could be considered.

◆ Integration of Electricity and HydrogenTransportation Sectors. Eventual fulldeployment for optimal use of solar, wind,biomass, and nuclear electricity may requiresignificant hydrogen storage or increasedflexibility in electricity demand. Electrolyticcoproduction of hydrogen for transportation fuelwould provide such a demand profile. Thisimportant possibility needs to be examined todetermine the economic and technical parametersfor electricity demand, generation, and storage;and for hydrogen production, storage, and use toachieve a synergistic effect between hydrogenvehicles and carbonless electricity generation.

◆ Vehicle-to-Grid Options. Fuel cell vehiclesrepresent a potential new power generationsource, supplying electricity to homes and to thegrid in emergencies or periods of exceptionaldemand. In this scenario, fuel-cell vehicles wouldrepresent new installed peak or backup powergeneration capacity. Depending on the source ofthe fuel used, this could also reduce GHGemissions. Better understanding and modeling ofthe potential benefits of vehicle-to-grid optionscould inform integrative strategies regarding theenergy sector and climate change.

◆ Develop Fundamental Understanding of thePhysical Limits to Efficiency of the HydrogenEconomy. The fundamental electrochemistryand material science of electrolyzers, fuel cells, andreversible devices need to be fully explored. Forexample, the theoretical limits on electrolyteconductivity bound the power density andefficiency of both fuel cells and electrolyzers.

91



Advancing the knowledge of these limits shouldallow efficiency gains in the conversion ofelectricity to hydrogen (and reconversion toelectricity) to approach theoretical limits beforehydrogen technology is deployed on a global scale.

◆ Explore advanced concepts in hydrogenproduction. Current hydrogen R&D activitieshave focused much of the available funding forhydrogen production on near-term technologiesthat can be ready for commercialization to supportintroduction of hydrogen vehicles soon after a2015 industry decision-point. As available,funding has also supported advanced renewables-based production approaches such asphotoelectrochemical and photobiologicalpathways. Breakthroughs in these or otheradvanced production pathways will be necessary tomake a true hydrogen economy economicallyfeasible, and the CCTP will be exploring ways toensure sufficient funding for advanced, post-2015hydrogen production technologies.

Renewable Energy and Fuels

Renewable sources of energy include the energy ofthe sun, the kinetic energy of wind, the thermal

energy inside the Earth itself, the kinetic energy offlowing water, and the chemical energy of biomassand waste. These sources of energy, available in oneor more forms across the globe, can be convertedand/or delivered to end users as electricity, heat, fuels,hydrogen, and useful chemicals and materials. Box5-1 lists 12 renewable energy technologies, many ofwhich are discussed in Technology Options for the Nearand Long Term. In the United States in 2003, of the71.42 quads of net energy supply and disposition(98.22 quads total energy consumption), renewableresources contributed 5.89 quads (8 percent ofsupply, or 6 percent of the total). Of the renewableenergy, 2.78 quads came from hydropower, 2.72quads from burning biomass (wood and waste), 0.28quads from geothermal energy, and 0.12 quads fromsolar and wind energy combined. An additional 0.24quads of ethanol were produced from corn fortransportation (EIA 2005).

The technologies in the suite of renewable energytechnologies are in various states of marketpenetration or readiness. In many cases, industry hasthe financial incentive to make incrementalimprovements to commercialized renewable energytechnologies, or other policies exist to promoterenewable energy development and deployment(research and experimentation tax credit, Staterenewable portfolio standards). These and otherfactors are important to consider as CCTP helps toprioritize Federal investments.

Hydropower is well established, but improvements inthe technology could increase its efficiency and widenits applicability. Geothermal technologies areestablished in some areas and applications, butsignificant improvements are needed to tap broaderresources. The installation of wind energy has beenrapidly and steadily expanding during the past severalyears. In the past decade, the global wind energycapacity has increased tenfold—from 3.5 GW in 1994to almost 59 GW by the end of 2006. Technologyimprovements will continue to lower the cost of land-based wind energy and will enable access to theimmense wind resources in shallow and deep watersof U.S. coastal areas and the Great Lakes near largeenergy markets. The next generations of solar—withimproved performance and lower cost—are in variousstages of concept identification, laboratory research,engineering development, and process scale-up. Also,the development of integrated and advanced systemsinvolving solar photovoltaics, concentrating solarpower, and solar buildings are in early stages ofdevelopment; but advances in these technologies areexpected to make them competitive with conventionalsources in the future.

5.3

92


• Wind Energy• Solar Photovoltaic Power• Solar Buildings• Concentrating Solar Power• Biochemical Conversion of Biomass• Thermochemical Conversion of

Biomass• Biomass Residues• Energy Crops• Waste-to-Energy• Photoconversion• Advanced Hydropower• Geothermal Energy

BOX 5-1

RENEWABLE ENERGY AND FUELS TECHNOLOGIES

Biochemical and thermochemical conversiontechnologies also range broadly in their stages ofdevelopment, from some that need only to be provedat an industrial scale, to others that need moreresearch, and to others in early stages of scientificexploration. In the general category of photo-conversion, most technical ideas are at the earlieststages of concept development, theoretical modeling,and laboratory experiment. Waste-to-energyaccounts for more than 2.5 gigawatts of powerproduction.

The energy-production potential and siting of thevarious types of renewable energy facilities isdependent on availability of the applicable naturalresources. Figures 5-8 through 5-12 show globalwind capacity growth and availability of key U.S.renewable resources as estimated by the NationalRenewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at theRenewable Resource Data Center (seehttp://nrel.gov/rredc).


Renewable energy technologies are generally modularand can be used to help meet the energy needs of astand-alone application or building, an industrial plantor community, or the larger needs of a nationalelectrical grid or fuel network. Renewable energytechnologies can also be used in various

combinations—including hybrids with fossil-fuel-based energy sources and with advanced storagesystems—to improve renewable resource availability.Because of this flexibility, technologies and standardsto safely and reliably interconnect individualrenewable electric technologies, individual loads orbuildings, and the electric grid are very important.

In addition, the diversity of renewable energy sourcesoffers a broad array of technology choices that canreduce CO2 emissions. The generation of electricityfrom solar, wind, geothermal, or hydropower sourcescontributes no CO2 or other GHGs directly to theatmosphere. Increasing the contribution ofrenewables to the Nation’s energy portfolio willdirectly lower GHG intensity (GHGs emitted perunit of economic activity) in proportion to theamount of carbon-emitting energy sources displaced.

Analogous to crude oil, biomass can be converted toheat, electrical power, fuels, hydrogen, chemicals, andintermediates. Biomass refers to both biomassresidues (agricultural wastes such as corn stover andrice hulls, forest residues, pulp and paper wastes,animal wastes, etc.) and to fast-growing “energycrops,” chosen specifically for their efficiency in beingconverted to electricity, fuels, etc. The CO2

consumed when the biomass is grown essentiallyoffsets the CO2 released during combustion orprocessing. Biomass systems actually represent a netsink for GHG emissions when biomass residues are

93


Global Wind Capacity Growth

Figure 5-8. GlobalWind CapacityGrowth(Source: BTMConsult Aps,March 2003;WindpowerMonthly, January2005; NRELestimate for 2005)

MW

INST

ALLE

D

ACTUALRest of WorldNorth AmericaEurope

PROJECTEDRest of WorldNorth AmericaEurope

JAN 2005 CUMULATIVE MW = 46,048Rest of World = 5,147North America = 7,241Europe = 33,660

94


U.S. Solar Resources

Figure 5-10. U.S.Solar Resources(Source: DOEOffice of EnergyEfficiency andRenewableEnergy)

Produced by Electric & Hydrogen Technologies & Systems Center - May 2004

> 9.08.5 - 9.08.0 - 8.57.5 - 8.07.0 - 7.56.5 - 7.06.0 - 6.55.5 - 6.05.0 - 5.54.5 - 5.04.0 - 4.53.5 - 4.03.0 - 3.52.5 - 3.02.0 - 2.5< 2.0

kWh/m2/day

U.S. Biomass Resources

Figure 5-9. U.S. BiomassResources(Source: DOEOffice of EnergyEfficiency andRenewableEnergy)

Note: This Biomass Resources map is the “current” resource base (about 500 million dry tons) and does not reflect the potentialfuture resource base as outlined in the “Billion Ton Vision.” The map takes into account the resource required for soil conservation.More information can be found at: http://www.nrel.gov/gis/biomass.html.

Hawaii

September 2005

This study estimates the technical biomass resources currently available in the United States bycounty. It includes the following feedstock categories:- Agricultural residues (crops and animal manure);- Wood residues (forest, primary mill, secondary mill, and urban wood)- Municipal discards (methane emissions from landfills and domestic wastewater treatment);- Dedicated energy crops (switchgrass on Conservation Reserve Program lands).

Above 500

250-500

150-250

100-150

50-100

Less than 50

ThousandTonnes/Year

Alaska

95


U.S. Wind Resources

Figure 5-11. U.S. Land-Based Wind Resources(Source: DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy)

U.S. Geothermal Resources

Figure 5-12. U.S. GeothermalResources(Source: DOEOffice of EnergyEfficiency andRenewableEnergy)

a Wind speeds are based on Weibull k value of 2.0

Source: “Wind EnergyResource Atlas of the United States”, 1987

20-MAR-2000 1.1.5

Wind Power ClassificationWind Wind Power Wind Speed a Wind Speed a

Power Resource Density at 50m at 50m at 50mClass Potential W/m2 m/s mph

2 Marginal 200 - 300 5.6 - 6.4 12.5 - 14.33 Fair 300 - 400 6.4 - 7.0 14.3 - 15.74 Good 400 - 500 7.0 - 7.5 15.7 - 16.85 Excellent 500 - 600 7.5 - 8.0 16.8 - 17.96 Outstanding 600 - 800 8.0 - 8.8 17.9 - 19.77 Superb 800 - 1600 8.8 - 11.1 19.7 - 24.8

U.S. Department of EnergyNational Renewable Energy Laboratory

SMU Geothermal Lab, Geothermal Map of United States, 2004

Heat Flow(mW/m2)

Land Heat Flow(data averaged .06°)

Low Quality Land Heat Flow

Geothermal Power Plants

Geothermal Area WellsPleistocene and Holocene VolcanoSprings Hot Warm

Bottom Hole Temperature (BHT)

25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 54-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85-89 90-94 95-99 100-149 150+

(data averaged .06°)

used, because this avoids methane emissions thatresult from landfilling unused biomass (Figures5-13 and 5-14). Biorefineries of the future couldproduce value-added chemicals and materials togetherwith fuels and/or power from nonconventional,lower-cost feedstocks (such as agricultural and forestresidues and specially grown crops) with no net CO2

emissions.

Technology Strategy

Given the diversity of the stages of development ofthe technologies, impacts on different economicsectors, and geographic dispersion of renewableenergy sources, it is likely that a portfolio ofrenewable energy technologies—not just one—willcontribute to lowering CO2 emissions. Thecomposition of this portfolio will change as R&Dcontinues and markets change. Appropriatelybalancing investments in developing this portfolio willbe important to maximizing the effect of renewableenergy technologies on GHG emissions in the future.

Transitioning from today’s reliance on fossil fuels to aglobal energy portfolio that includes significantrenewable energy sources will require continuedimprovements in cost and performance of renewable

technologies. This transition would also require shiftsin the energy infrastructure to allow a more diversemix of technologies to be delivered efficiently toconsumers in forms they can readily use. Forexample, changes to the electricity infrastructure areneeded to accommodate greatly increased use ofrenewable electric generation. These changes includeadditional transmission lines to access thoserenewable resources that are located far from loadcenters; grid operating practices and storage toaccommodate renewables that are intermittent, suchas wind and solar; greater use of renewables in adistributed generation mode; and adapting currentfossil generation for biomass co-firing. Fortunately,there already is substantial progress in adapting theelectricity infrastructure to enable greater use ofrenewables generation, and additional changes thatwould be needed are relatively easy to make in adecade or so. With regard to renewable fuels used fortransportation, no significant changes to vehicles andrefueling infrastructure are needed until E10 ethanol(90 percent gasoline, 10 percent ethanol) in gasolineblends captures 10 percent of gasoline markets.When 85 percent ethanol/gasoline blends (E85)expand, which is expected if ethanol costs come downfurther, limited refueling infrastructure modificationswill be needed. However, refueling technologyneeded for E-85 is already well developed, and several

96


Bioenergy Cycle

Figure 5-13. Bioenergy CycleCourtesy: DOE/ORNL

automobile manufacturers are already selling E-85vehicles at low or no incremental costs.

In general, as performance continues to improve andcosts continue to decline, improved new generationsof technologies will replace today’s renewabletechnologies. Combinations of renewable andconventional technologies and systems—and,therefore, integration and interconnection issues—will grow in importance.

The transition from today’s energy mix to a state ofGHG stabilization can be projected as aninterweaving of individual renewable energytechnologies with other energy technologies, as wellas market developments through the upcomingdecades. Today, grid-connected wind energy,geothermal, solar energy, and biopower systems arewell established. Demand for these systems isgrowing in some parts of the world. Solar hot-watertechnologies are reasonably established, althoughimprovements continue. Markets are growing forsmall, high-value or remote applications of solarphotovoltaics; wind energy; biomass-based CHP;certain types of hydropower; and integrated systemsthat usually include natural gas or diesel generators.Other technologies and applications today are invarious stages of research, development, anddemonstration. Possible near-, mid-, and long-termpathways for renewable energy are discussed in thefollowing paragraphs.

In the near term, as system costs continue to decrease,the penetration of off-grid systems could continue toincrease rapidly, including integration of renewablesystems such as photovoltaics into buildings. Asinterconnection issues are resolved, the number ofgrid-connected renewable systems could increasequite rapidly, meeting local energy needs such asuninterruptible power, community power, or peakshaving. Wind energy may expand most rapidlyamong grid-connected applications, with solarexpanding as system costs are reduced. Environment-friendly hydropower systems could be furtherdeveloped. The use of utility-scale wind technology

is likely to continue to expand onshore and is targetedto become competitive in select offshore locationsbetween 5 and 50 nautical miles from shore and atwater depths of 30 meters or less. Small windturbines are on the verge of operating cost-effectivelyin most of the rural areas of the United States, andmore than 15 million homes have the potential togenerate electricity with small wind turbines.14 Witha further maturing of the market, costs will be loweredto compete directly with retail rates for homeowners,farmers, small businesses, and community-basedprojects.

The biomass near-term outlook includes industryinvestment to make the production of corn-basedethanol (already produced at nearly 4 billion gallons)more efficient by increasing the quantity of ethanolthrough residual starch conversion, and conversion offiber already collected and present at the operatingfacilities. The inclusion of biochemicals asbyproducts will further help to improve the industry’sprofitability. The Biofuels Initiative launched in FY2007 will accelerate demonstrations of biorefineryconcepts, producing one or more products(bioethanol, bioproducts, electricity, CHP, etc.) fromone plant using local waste and residues as thefeedstock. Biodiesel use may continue to grow,replacing fossil-fuel-derived diesel fuel. Thetechnology being developed to convert agriculturalresidues to ethanol is also partially applicable to theconversion of municipal solid waste to ethanol.

A recent assessment of potential biofuel resourcesconcluded that by mid-21st century it would betechnically possible to produce enough biomass todisplace about one-third of current petroleumconsumption. The study made no conclusions abouteconomic feasibility. This level of biofuel productionwould require economically-competitive technologiesto convert cellulosic biomass (rather than just thesugars and starches) into ethanol, and developingcellulosic ethanol technologies is a central aspect ofthe Biofuels Initiative and the President’s AdvancedEnergy Initiative.

97


Forest resources

Agricultural resources

Total resource potential

0 300 600 900 1200 1500

368

998

1366

Million dry tons per year

Biomass as Feedstock for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry

Figure 5-14.Biomass asFeedstock for aBioenergy andBioproductsIndustry(Source: ORNL2005)

14 U.S. Small Wind Turbine Industry Roadmap, NREL Report No. BK-500-31958; DOE/GO-102002-1598, 2002http://www.nrel.gov/docs/gen/fy02/31958.pdf.

In the mid term, offshore wind energy could begin toexpand significantly. Technology development mayfocus on turbine-support structures suitable fordeeper water depths, and reducing turbine system andbalance-of-plant costs to offset increased distancefrom shore, decreased accessibility, and morestringent environmental conditions. Land-based useof wind turbines is also likely to expand for large andsmall turbines as the costs for these systems continueto decrease. Small turbines may be used to harnesswind to provide pumping for farm irrigation, helpalleviate water-availability problems, and provide aviable source of clean and renewable hydrogenproduction.15

Reductions in cost could encourage penetration bysolar technologies into large-scale markets, first indistributed markets such as commercial buildings andcommunities, and later in utility-scale systems. Solarsystems could also become cost-effective in newconstruction for commercial buildings and homes.The first geothermal plants using engineeredgeothermal systems technology could come online,greatly extending access to geothermal resources.Hydropower may benefit from full acceptance of newturbines and operational improvements that enhanceenvironmental performance, lowering barriers to newdevelopment.

As a result of the Biofuels Initiative, biorefineriescould begin using agricultural and forest residues, andeventually energy crops as primary feedstocks.Assuming success in reducing production costs andexpanding the fuels distribution infrastructure,bioethanol and, to a lesser extent, biodiesel couldachieve substantial market penetration in the 2030-2040 timeframe. This would be an important step inlowering U.S. dependence on imported petroleum.

In the long term, hydrogen from solar, wind, andpossibly geothermal energy could be the backbone ofthe economy, powering vehicles and stationary fuelcells. Solar technologies could also be providingelectricity and heat for residential and commercialbuildings, industrial plants, and entire communities inmajor sections of the country. A major value for solaris that most residential and commercial buildingscould generate their own energy on-site. Windenergy could be the lowest-cost option for electricitygeneration in favorable wind areas for grid power, andoffshore systems could become prevalent in manycountries by achieving a commercially viable cost byusing floating platform technologies. Geothermalsystems could be a major source of baseload electricity

for large regions. Biorefineries could be providing awide range of cost-effective products as rural areasembrace the economic advantages of widespreaddemand for energy crops. Vehicle fuels could bepowered by a combination of hydrogen fuel cells, withsome bioethanol and biodiesel in significant markets.

Current Portfolio

The current Federal portfolio of renewable energysupply technologies encompasses the areas describedbelow:

◆ Wind Energy. Generating electricity from windenergy focuses on using aerodynamically designedblades to drive generators that produce electricpower in proportion to wind speed. Utility-scaleturbines can be several megawatts and produceenergy at between $0.04-0.06/kWh depending onthe wind resource. Smaller turbines (under 100kW) serve a range of distributed, remote, andstand-alone power applications, producing energybetween $0.12-0.17/kWh. While the focus in thelast several years has been on low-wind-speedtechnology R&D for onshore applications, R&Dfor reducing the cost of offshore systems, based onrecent emergence of U.S. land-based wind powerdevelopment and the assessment of potentialnational benefits, is also supported. Researchactivities include wind characteristics andforecasting, aerodynamics, structural dynamics andfatigue, control systems, design and testing of newonshore and offshore prototypes, component andsystem testing, power systems integration, andstandards development. Federal agencies are alsocollaborating with interested stakeholders onaddressing and minimizing siting concerns (i.e.,wildlife and acoustics).

Research program goals in this area vary byapplication. For distributed wind turbines under100 kW, the goal is to achieve a power productioncost of $0.10 to 0.15/kWh in Class 3 winds by2007. For larger systems greater than 100 kW,the goal is to achieve a power production cost of$0.036/kWh for land-based at sites with averagewind speeds of 13 mph (wind Class 4) by 2012,and $0.05/kWh at shallow (depths up to 30meters) offshore sites with average wind speeds of15 mph (wind Class 6) by 2014, and $0.05/kWhfor transitional (depths up to 60 meters) offshoresystems in Class 6 winds by 2016.16

98


15 National Academy of Science, The Hydrogen Economy: Opportunities, Costs, Barriers, and R&D Needshttp://www4.nationalacademies.org/news.nsf/isbn/0309091632?OpenDocument.


◆ Solar Photovoltaic Power. Generatingelectricity from solar energy focuses on usingsemiconductor devices to convert sunlight directlyto electricity. A variety of semiconductor materialscan be used, varying in conversion efficiency andcost. Today’s commercial modules are 11 percentto 13 percent efficient, and grid-tied photovoltaic(PV) systems generate electricity for about $0.18to 0.23/kWh under ideal siting and financingconditions for commercial (low end of range) andresidential (high end of range) systems. Actuallevelized cost of energy may be significantlygreater in parts of the United States where thesolar resource potential is less than ideal.Research activities, conducted with partnershipsbetween the Federal laboratories and the privatesector, include the fundamental understanding andoptimization of photovoltaic materials, process,and devices; module validation and testing; processresearch to lower costs and scale up production(Figure 5-15); and technical issues with invertersand batteries.

Research program goals in this area focusprimarily on a new initiative—the Solar AmericaInitiative (SAI)—which will accelerate R&Defforts designed to achieve market competitivenessfor PV solar electricity by 2015 (i.e., 5 to 10cents/kWh under ideal siting and financingconditions). The accelerated R&D effort willfocus on PV technology pathways that have thegreatest potential to lower costs and improveperformance. New industry-led R&Dpartnerships, known as “Technology PathwayPartnerships,” will be funded to address the issuesof cost, performance, and reliability associatedwith each technology pathway. Potential partnerswithin the Technology Pathway Partnershipsinclude industry, universities, laboratories, States,and other governmental entities. If the research issuccessful and if other policies remain in place topromote deployment (production tax credits, Staterenewable portfolio standards), then by 2015, 5-10GW of new solar power capacity could bedeployed, equivalent to the amount of electricityneeded to power 1-2 million homes. Thisdeployment level would result in 10 million metrictons of avoided carbon dioxide emissions in theUnited States. The interim cost goal is to reducethe 30-year user cost for PV electrical energy to arange of $0.11 to 0.18/kWh under idealconditions by 2010.17

◆ Solar Heating and Lighting. Solar heating andlighting technologies are being developed for usein buildings applications that include solar waterheating and hybrid solar lighting. Most of thegoals for these technologies have been sufficientlydeveloped for use in southern climates and nowcan be transferred to industry forcommercialization.18

◆ Concentrating Solar Power. Concentratingsolar power (CSP) technology utilizes the heatgenerated by concentrating and absorbing thesun’s energy to produce electric power. Theconcentrated sunlight produces thermal energy attemperatures ranging from 600 degrees F to over1500 degrees F to run heat, engines, or steamturbines for generating power or producing cleanfuels such as hydrogen. The long-term goal is toachieve a power cost of between $0.035/kWh and$0.062/kWh, compared to the cost of between$0.12-0.14/kWh in 2004.19

◆ Biochemical Conversion of Biomass.Biochemical technology can be used to convertthe cellulose and hemicellulose polymers inbiomass (agricultural crops and residues, woodresidues, trees and forest residues, grasses, andmunicipal waste) to their building blocks, such assugars and glycerides. Using either acid hydrolysis(well-established) or enzymatic hydrolysis (beingdeveloped), sugars can then be converted to liquidfuels, such as ethanol, chemical intermediates, andother products, such as lactic acid and hydrogen.

99


Figure 5-15. Research and development activities on solarphotovoltaic power, conducted at Federal laboratories and the privatesector, help to improve efficiencies, lower production costs, andresolve technical issues.

Courtesy: DOE/NREL, Credit: United Solar Systems Corp.


Glycerides can be converted to a bio-basedalternative for diesel fuel and other products.Producing multiple products from biomassfeedstocks in a biorefinery could ultimatelyresemble today’s oil refinery.

By FY 2007, the goal is to complete a preliminaryengineering design package, market analysis, andfinancial projections for two industrial-scaleprojects for near-term agricultural pathways (cornwet mill, corn dry mill, oilseed) to produce aminimum of five million gallons of biofuels peryear. The intent is to provide proof that theresultant industrial-scale biorefineries couldproduce and market biofuels at prices competitivewith petroleum fuels produced from $50-per-barrel oil. By 2009, develop a conceptual, novelharvesting system and test a wet storage system foragricultural residues. By 2012, the goal is toreduce the estimated cost for producing a mixed,dilute sugar stream suitable for fermentation toethanol, to $0.096/lb, compared to the cost of$0.15/lb in 2003. If successful, this cost goalwould correspond to $1.50 per gallon of ethanol,assuming a cost of $45 per dry ton of corn stover.20

◆ Thermochemical Conversion of Biomass.Thermochemical technology uses heat to convertbiomass into a wide variety of products. Pyrolysisor gasification of biomass produces an oil-richvapor or syngas, which can be used to generateheat, electricity, liquid fuels, and chemicals.Combustion of biomass (or combinations ofbiomass and coal) generates steam for electricityproduction and/or space, water, or process heat,occurring today in the wood products industry andbiomass power plants. Analogous to an oilrefinery, a biorefinery can use one or more ofthese methods to convert a variety of biomassfeedstocks into multiple products.21

◆ Biomass Residues. Biomass residues includeagricultural residues, wood residues, trees andforest residues, animal wastes, pulp, and paperwaste. These must be harvested, stored, andtransported on a large scale to be used in abiorefinery. Research activities include improvingand adapting the existing harvest collection,densification, storage, transportation, andinformation technologies to bioenergy supplysystems—and developing robust machines formultiple applications.

The mid- to long-term research program goal inthis area is to reduce biomass harvesting andstorage costs so that the delivered cost will bereduced from $53 per dry ton in 2003 to $45 perdry ton by 2012. The Biofuels Initiative of 2007proposes to establish three regional biomassdevelopment partnerships in conjunction withland grant universities to develop research-specificdata on feedstock availability, productivity,markets, and economics by 2008, and anadditional partnership by 2009. Engineeringdesigns and techno-economic assessments ofintegrated wet biomass storage and fieldpreprocessing will be completed by 2008. By2010, engineering design on multi-crop feedstockdepot systems that can receive a variety offeedstocks and preprocess will then becompleted.22

◆ Energy Crops. Energy crops are fast-growing,often genetically improved trees and grassesgrown under sustainable conditions to providefeedstocks that can be converted to heat,electricity, fuels such as ethanol, and chemicals andintermediates. Research activities include geneticimprovement, pest and disease management, andharvest equipment development to maximizeyields and sustainability.

The overall research goal of this program is toadvance the concept of energy crops contributingstrongly to meet biomass power and biofuelsproduction goals by 2020. Interim goals include:(1) by 2006, to develop feedstock crops withexperimentally demonstrated yield potential of 6-8dry ton/acre/year and accompanying cost-effective, energy-efficient, environmentally soundharvest methods; (2) by 2010, the goal is toidentify genes that control growth andcharacteristics important to conversion processesin few model energy crops and achieve low-cost,“no-touch” harvest/ processing/transport ofbiomass to the process facility; and (3) by 2020,the goal is to increase yield of useful biomass peracre by a factor of 2 or more compared with year2000 yields.23

◆ Photoconversion. Photoconversion processesuse solar photons to drive a variety of quantumconversion processes other than solid-statephotovoltaics. These processes can produceelectrical power or fuels, materials, and chemicalsdirectly from simple renewable substrates such as

100



water, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen.Photoconversion processes that mimic nature(termed “bio-inspired”) can also convert CO2 intoliquid and gaseous fuels. Most of thesetechnologies are at early stages of research wheretechnical feasibility must be demonstrated, but afew (such as dye-sensitized solar cells) are at thedevelopmental level.

The research program in this area is still in anexploratory stage. In the near term, research willfocus on applications related to electrical powerand high-value fuels and chemicals, wherecommercial potential may be expected during thenext 5 to 10 years. If successful, larger-scaleapplications of photoconversion technologies mayfollow in the period from 2010 to 2015, withmaterials and fuels production beginning in theperiod 2015 to 2020, and commodity chemicalsproduction in the period from 2020 to 2030.24

◆ Geothermal Energy. Geothermal sources ofenergy include hot rock masses, highly pressuredhot fluids, hot hydrothermal systems, and shallowwarm groundwater. Exploration techniques locateresources to drill; well fields and distributionsystems allow the hot fluids to move to the pointof use; and utilization systems apply the heatdirectly or convert it to electricity. Geothermalheat pumps use the shallow earth as a heat sourceand heat sink for heating and cooling applications.The U.S.-installed capacity for geothermalelectrical generation is currently about 2 gigawatts.Government geothermal research and developmentactivities are being transferred to the private sectorfor commercialization.25

◆ The Green Power Partnership facilitatespurchases of environmentally friendly electricityproducts generated from renewable energy sourcesby addressing the market barriers that may bestifling demand. It publishes information aboutlow-cost purchasing strategies, educates partnersabout features of different green power products,and reduces the transaction costs for organizationsinterested in making green power purchases.

◆ The Combined Heat and Power Partnershipprovides technical assistance designed to meetCHP project needs along each step of the projectdevelopment cycle in order to make investmentsin CHP more attractive. EPA educates industryabout the benefits of CHP and projectdevelopment strategies and provides networkingopportunities. EPA also works with State

governments to design air emissions standards andinterconnection requirements that recognize thebenefits of clean CHP.

◆ The Renewable Energy Systems and EnergyEfficiency Improvements Program supportsbiomass/renewable energy related ventures.

◆ The Renewable Energy and Energy EfficiencyPartnership seeks to accelerate and expand theglobal market for renewable energy and energyefficient technologies.



◆ Wind Energy. Research challenges includedeveloping wind technology that will beeconomically competitive at low-wind-speed siteswithout a production tax credit; developingoffshore wind technology to take advantage of theimmense wind resources in U.S. coastal areas and

101



Figure 5-16. The Department of Energy is working closely with industry toresearch and develop new, advanced wind turbine technology.

Courtesy: GE Energy, ©2005, General Electric International, Inc.

the Great Lakes (Figure 5-16); and exploring therole of wind turbines in emerging applicationssuch as electrolytic hydrogen production, waterpurification, and irrigation.

◆ Solar Photovoltaic Power. Research would berequired to lower the cost of solar electricityfurther. This can occur through developing“third-generation” materials such as quantum dotsand nanostructures for ultra-high efficiencies orlower-cost organic or polymer materials, solvingcomplex integrated processing problems to lowerthe cost of large-scale production of thin-filmpolycrystalline devices, optimizing cells and opticalsystems using concentrated sunlight, andimproving the reliability and lowering the cost ofinverters and batteries.

◆ Solar Buildings. Future research could includereducing cost and improving reliability ofcomponents and systems, optimizing andintegrating solar technologies into buildingdesigns, and incorporating solar technologies intobuilding codes and standards.

◆ Concentrating Solar Power. Future challengesrequiring RD&D include reducing cost andimproving reliability, demonstrating Stirlingengine performance in the field, and developingtechnology to produce hydrogen fromconcentrated sunlight and water.

◆ Solar Fuels. Research could focus on artificialphotosynthetic systems that operate at higher ratesand efficiencies than natural photosyntheticprocesses in plants. Such systems might either bephoto-biologically-based or electro-photo-chemistry-based and would consume CO2 andwater from the atmosphere and produce H2, O2,and (very) small photosynthetic electric currents.Research would include solar-powered photo-catalyzed production of liquid transportation fuelsfrom H2 and CO2

◆ Biochemical Conversion of Biomass. Researchis required to gain a better understanding ofgenomes, proteins, and their functions; theenzymes used for hydrolyzing pretreated biomassinto fermentable sugars; the micro-organisms usedin fermentation; and new tools of discovery suchas bio-informatics, high-throughput screening ofbiodiversity, directed enzyme development andevolution, and gene shuffling. Research mustfocus on improving the cost, yield, and equipmentreliability for harvesting, collecting, andtransporting biomass; pretreating biomass beforeconversion; lowering the cost of the geneticallyengineered cellulose enzymes needed to hydrolyze

biomass; developing and improving fermentationorganisms; and developing integrated processingapplicable to a large, continuous-productioncommercial facility.

◆ Thermochemical Conversion of Biomass.Research is needed to improve the production,preparation, and handling of biomass; improve theoperational reliability of thermochemicalbiorefineries; remove contaminants from syngas;and develop cost-competitive catalysts andprocesses for converting synthetic gases tochemicals, fuels, or electricity. All processes in theentire conversion system must be integrated tomaximize efficiency and reduce costs.

◆ Biomass Residues. Research challenges includedeveloping sustainable agriculture and forest-management systems that provide biomassresidues; developing cost-effective drying,densification, and transportation techniques tocreate more standard feedstock from variousresidues; developing whole-crop harvest andfractionation systems; and developing methods forpretreatment of residues at harvest locations.

◆ Energy Crops. Future crop research needsinclude identifying genes that control growth andcharacteristics important to conversion processes,developing gene maps, understanding functionalgenomics in model crops, and applying advancedmanagement systems and enhanced cultural practicesto optimize sustainable energy crop production.

◆ Waste-to-Energy. Waste-to-energy technologiescan produce valued energy, with low “net-emissions” of GHGs when the full fuel cycle isconsidered, by processing and combustingmunicipal solid waste and doing so in anenvironmentally acceptable manner with speciallydesigned and equipped modern equipment andpollution controls. Research challenges remain inthe areas of better understanding contaminants,pre-cleaning of waste streams, separations andrecycling, and overall environmental and safetyperformance.

◆ Photoconversion. Photoconversion researchrequires developing the fundamental scientificunderstanding of photolytic processes throughmultidisciplinary approaches involving theory,mechanisms, kinetics, biological pathways andmolecular genetics, natural photosynthesis,materials science, catalysts, and catalytic cycles.

◆ Bio-X. Combines advanced biological processingwith emerging advances in other fields such asnanotechnology, computer science, and physics todevelop new approaches for renewable technologies.

102


◆ Geothermal Energy. Future research areas thatindustry may pursue include developing improvedmethodologies for predicting reservoirperformance and lifetime; finding andcharacterizing underground fracture permeability;developing low-cost innovative drillingtechnologies; reducing the cost and improving theefficiency of conversion systems; and developingengineered geothermal systems that will allow theuse of geothermal areas that are deeper, lesspermeable, or drier than those currentlyconsidered as reserves.

◆ Advanced Solid State Thermoelectric Devices.If additional technical progress can be achieved,thermoelectric devices could allow conversion ofmid-grade and low-grade heat to electricity ateconomically attractive efficiencies. To the extentthat waste heat might otherwise be discarded, theconversion could add significantly to net energysupply. There could be multiple applications foradding a cogeneration “bottoming cycle” andimproving the overall efficiency of any processinvolving significant amounts of heat, includingconversion of solar heat.

Nuclear FissionCurrently, 443 nuclear power plants, operating in 31nations, generate 17 percent of the world’s electricity(Figure 5-1) and provide nearly 7 percent of totalworld energy (Figure 5-2). Twenty-three new plantsare under construction in ten countries. Because theyemit no GHGs, today’s nuclear power plants avoidthe CO2 emissions associated with combustion of coalor other fossil fuels (Figure 5-17).

During the past 30 years, operators of U.S. nuclearpower plants have steadily improved economicperformance through reduced costs for maintenanceand operations and improved power plant availability,while operating reliably and safely. In addition,science and technology for the safe storage andultimate disposal of nuclear waste have beenadvanced. Waste from nuclear energy must beisolated from the environment. High-level nuclearwastes from fission reactors (used fuel assemblies) arestored in contained, reinforced concrete steel-linedpools or in robust dry casks at limited-access reactorsites, until a deep geologic repository is ready toaccept and isolate the spent fuel from theenvironment. Used nuclear fuel contains a substantialquantity of fissionable materials, and advancedtechnologies may be able to recover energy from this

spent fuel and reduce required repository space andthe radiotoxicity of the disposed waste.

While the current application of nuclear energy is theproduction of electricity, other applications arepossible, such as cogeneration of process heat, thegeneration of hydrogen from water or from methane(with carbon capture or integration with othermaterials production or manufacturing), anddesalination.


The 103 currently operating U.S. nuclear-reactorunits are saving as much as 600 million metric tons ofcarbon dioxide emissions every year. Through thesummer of 2005, 39 of these units have receivedapproval to extend their operating licenses for anadditional 20 years; 12 others have applications underreview. All of the remaining units most likely willfollow suit. Such CO2 emission mitigation could beincreased if new nuclear capacity were to be broughtonline.

To the extent that the financial risks of new nuclearconstruction can be addressed and with improvementfrom new technologies in the longer term, the nuclearoption can continue to be an important, growing partof a GHG-emissions-free energy portfolio. Designand demonstration efforts on near-term advancedreactor concepts—in combination with Federalfinancial risk mitigation tools—will enable powercompanies to build and operate new reactors that areeconomical and competitive with other generationtechnologies, supporting energy security and diversityof supply.

5.4

103


Figure 5-17. More than 400 successfully operating civilian nuclear powerplants around the world avoid billions of tons of CO2 emissions for theatmosphere.

Credit: ©Royalty-Free/CREATAS

Evolutionary light-water reactors of standardizeddesign (having received U.S. Nuclear RegulatoryCommission design certification and having beenconstructed on schedule in Japan and South Korea)are demonstrated and available now for constructionin the United States. Other newer designs should bereviewed and certified over the next several years,making them also available. However, more advancednuclear energy systems for the longer term have thepotential to offer significant advances in the areas ofsustainability, proliferation resistance and physicalprotection, safety, and economics. These advancednuclear energy systems—described as Generation IVreactors—could replace or add to existing light-waterreactor capacity.

Technology Strategy

U.S. leadership is essential to the expansion of nuclearcapacity in markets other than Asia and EasternEurope (Figure 5-18), through deployment ofadvanced nuclear power plants in the relatively nearterm. The new Federal regulatory processes for thesiting, construction, and operation of new nuclearplants must be demonstrated. In addition, othermajor obstacles must be addressed, including theinitial high capital costs of the first few plants and thebusiness risks resulting from both the costs and theregulatory uncertainty.

In the longer term, advanced nuclear energy systemscould serve a vital role in both diversifying theNation’s energy supply and reducing GHG emissions.By successfully addressing the fundamental researchand development issues of system concepts that excelin safety, sustainability, cost-effectiveness, and

proliferation resistance, the systems could attractfuture private-sector sponsorship and ultimatecommercialization by the private sector. Advancednuclear fission-reactor systems aim to extract the fullenergy potential of the spent nuclear fuel fromcurrent fission reactors, while reducing or eliminatingthe potential for proliferation of nuclear materials andtechnologies, and reducing both the radiotoxicity andtotal amount of waste produced.

A key objective of nuclear energy research anddevelopment is to enhance the basic technology and,through advanced civilian technology research, chartthe way toward the next leap in technology. Fromthese efforts, and those of industry and overseaspartners, nuclear energy may continue to fulfill itspromise as a safe, advanced, inexpensive, andemission-free approach to providing reliable energythroughout the world.

Current Portfolio

The current Federal portfolio focuses on three areas:

◆ Research on Nuclear Power Plant Technologiesfor Near-Term Deployment is focused onadvanced fission reactor designs that are currentlyavailable or could be made available with limitedadditional work to complete design developmentand deployment in the 2010 time frame.

A Roadmap to Deploy New Nuclear Power Plants inthe United States by 2010, issued in October 2001(DOE 2001), advises DOE on actions andresource requirements needed to put the countryon a path to bringing new nuclear power plantson-line in the next decade. The primary purposes

104


IndiaRussiaChina

TaiwanRomaniaPakistan

JapanIran

FinlandArgentina

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Nuclear Reactors Under Active Construction Worldwide

Figure 5-18.Nuclear ReactorsUnder ActiveConstructionWorldwide(Source: World NuclearAssociation26)

26 See http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/printable_information_papers/reactorsprint.htm.

of the roadmap are to identify the generic anddesign-specific prerequisites to near-termdeployment, to identify those designs that bestpromise to meet the needs of the marketplace, andto propose recommended actions that wouldsupport deployment. These include, but are notlimited to, actions to achieve economiccompetitiveness and timely regulatory approvals.

The Nuclear Power 2010 Program is a jointgovernment/industry cost-shared effort. Theprogram is designed to pave the way for anindustry decision to order at least one new nuclearpower plant by the end of the decade. Activitiesunder this program support cost-shareddemonstration of the Early Site Permit (ESP) andcombined Construction and Operating License(COL) processes to reduce licensing uncertaintiesand minimize the attendant financial risks to thelicensee. In addition, the program includestechnology research and development to finalizeand license a standardized advanced reactordesign, which U.S. power-generation companieswill find to be more competitive in thederegulated electricity market. The economicsand business case for building new nuclear powerplants has been evaluated as part of the NuclearPower 2010 program to identify the necessaryfinancial conditions under which power-generationcompanies would add new nuclear capacity.

The research program goals in this area arefocused on successfully demonstrating theuntested regulatory processes for ESP andcombined COL, and on the regulatory acceptance(certification) and completion of first-of-a-kindengineering and design. Specific goals includeindustry decisions to build new nuclear powerplants by 2009 with commercial operation in thenext decade.27

◆ Research under the Generation IV NuclearEnergy Systems Initiative (Gen IV) willenhance the viability of advanced nuclear energysystems that offer significant advances in the areasof sustainability, proliferation-resistance, andphysical protection, safety, and economics. Thesenewer nuclear energy systems will replace or addto existing light-water reactor capacity and shouldbe available between 2020 and 2030. To develop theseadvanced reactor systems, DOE manages the Gen IV.

Development of next-generation nuclear energysystems is being pursued by the Generation IVInternational Forum (GIF) [www.gen-4.org], a

group of 10 leading nuclear nations (Argentina,Brazil, Canada, France, Japan, the Republic ofKorea, the Republic of South Africa, Switzerland,the United Kingdom, and the United States) plusthe European Atomic Energy Community(Euratom). The GIF has selected six promisingtechnologies as candidates for advanced nuclearenergy systems concepts. The Gen IV addressesthe fundamental research and development issuesnecessary to establish the viability of next-generation nuclear energy system concepts. Aftersuccessfully addressing the viability issues, thesystems are highly likely to attract future private-sector sponsorship and ultimate commercializationby the private sector.

The primary focus of these Gen IV systems willbe to generate electricity in a safe, economical,and secure manner; other possible benefits includethe production of hydrogen, desalinated water,and process heat (Figure 5-19). In particular,making nuclear power sustainable over the longterm requires developing and deployingproliferation-resistant fuel recycling technologyand fast reactors for breeding new fuel andtransmuting higher actinides. The GIF andDOE’s Nuclear Energy Research AdvisoryCommittee (NERAC) issued a report on its two-year effort to develop a technology roadmap forfuture nuclear energy systems (GIF-NERAC2002). The technology roadmap defines and plansthe necessary R&D to support the advancednuclear energy systems known as Gen IV. DOEalso prepared a report to the U.S. Congressregarding how it intends to carry out the results ofthe Gen IV Roadmap (DOE-NE 2003a).

Goals for next-generation fission energy systems(Gen IV) research are focused on the design ofreactors and fuel cycles that are safer, moreeconomically competitive, more resistant toproliferation, produce less waste, and make betteruse of the energy content in uranium, in accordwith the above-mentioned reports and roadmaps.28

◆ The Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative (AFCI),under the leadership of DOE, is focused ondeveloping advanced fuel-cycle technologies,which include spent fuel treatment, advancedfuels, and transmutation technologies, forapplication to current operating commercialreactors and next-generation reactors; and toinform a recommendation by the Secretary ofEnergy in the 2007-2010 time frame on the needfor a second geologic repository.

105



The AFCI program will develop technologies toaddress intermediate and long-term issuesassociated with spent nuclear fuel. Theintermediate-term issues are the reduction of thevolume and heat generation of material requiringgeologic disposal. The program will developproliferation-resistant processes and fuels forapplication to current light-water reactor systemsand Gen IV reactor systems to enable the energyvalue of these materials to be recovered, whiledestroying significant quantities of plutonium.This work provides the opportunity to optimizeuse of the Nation’s first repository and reduce thetechnical need for an additional repository. Thelonger-term issues to be addressed by the AFCIprogram are the development of fuel-cycletechnologies to destroy minor actinides, whichwould greatly reduce the long-term radiotoxicityand heat load of high-level waste sent to ageologic repository. This will be accomplishedthrough the development of Gen IV fast reactorfuel-cycle technologies and possibly of accelerator-driven systems (DOE-NE 2003b).

Goals for advanced nuclear fuel-cycle researchfocus on proving design principles of spent-fueltreatment and transmutation technologies,demonstrating the fuel and separationtechnologies for waste transmutation, anddeploying Gen IV advanced fast spectrum reactorsthat can transmute nuclear waste.29



◆ Reducing the financial risks and costs ofadvanced nuclear power plants. Provide fordevelopment and demonstration of advancedtechnologies to reduce construction time for newnuclear power plants and to minimize scheduleuncertainties and associated costs for construction.

◆ Next Generation nuclear plants and advancedfuel cycles. Develop reactor designs that excel inoperational safety, sustainability, and proliferation-resistance, and achieve economy of both capitaland operation and maintenance (O&M), includingadvanced fuels that are more resistant to meltingand are operated to minimize wastes. Included inthese designs are small, exportable reactors, whichcan be used by reactor user nations under theGlobal Nuclear Energy Partnership that will notdevelop indigenous fuel cycle capabilities.Primary research needs are for development andcharacterization of fuel fabrication processes;testing of in-reactor fuel performance; power

106


Future Nuclear Power Concepts

Figure 5-19. FutureNuclear Power Concepts(Source: DOE, Office ofNuclear Energy InternalDocument).


conversion-system design and testing, includingresolution of uncertainties regarding materials,reliability, and maintainability; and fission-reactorinternal design and verification.

◆ High-temperature materials and heat transfertechnology. Develop and test high-temperaturematerials (central to future nuclear reactorsystems). Low-activation materials that resistcorrosion and embrittlement at high temperaturesare needed for structural materials within the coreand fuel assemblies and for reactor pressure vesselsystems. Advanced materials are needed for futureheat exchangers, turbine components,radiochemical particulate filters, and transport ofheat to hydrogen production plants. Otherresearch needs include the use of alternateworking fluids and heat-exchange cycles.

◆ Closing the fuel cycle. Investigate proliferation-resistant, closed fuel-cycle concepts that reducethe quantity and heat load of wastes requiringgeological emplacement. Compared to otherindustrial waste, the spent nuclear fuel generatedduring the production of electricity is relativelysmall in quantity. However, it is highly radioactivefor many thousands of years, and its disposalrequires resolution of many political, societal,technical, and regulatory issues. While theseissues are being addressed in the licenseapplication for the Yucca Mountain repository inNevada, several countries worldwide have pursuedadvanced technologies that could treat andtransmute spent nuclear fuel from nuclear powerplants, such as advanced burner reactors. Thesetechnologies have the potential to dramaticallyreduce the quantity and toxicity of waste requiringgeologic disposal. During the past four years, theUnited States has joined this international effortand found considerable merit in this area of jointadvanced research.

◆ Nuclear computations. Use the emerging DOEsupercomputer system capabilities to combine morerigorous computational models of 3-dimensionalradiation transport, thermal transport, fluid flowand more detailed accounting of energyresonances in nuclear cross-section data intopowerful new tools for exploring novel reactorconcepts. Although the current generation ofnuclear computational techniques is adequate fordesign and evaluation of current nuclear reactors,the computer models use many approximatetechniques that ultimately limit the ability to designinnovative nuclear fuels and core geometries.

Fusion EnergyFusion energy holds the possibility of an almostinexhaustible supply of zero-GHG electricity. Fusionis the power source of the sun and the stars. Lighterelements are “fused” together in the core of the sun,producing heavier elements and prodigious amountsof energy. On Earth, fusion energy has beendemonstrated in the laboratory at powers of 5 to 15million watts, with pulse lengths in the range of 1 to 5seconds. The goal is for fusion power to eventuallybe produced at much larger scales and in longer pulselengths.

Fusion power generation offers a number ofadvantageous features. The basic sources of fusionfuel, deuterium and tritium, are actually heavy formsof hydrogen. Deuterium is abundantly availablebecause it occurs naturally in water; and tritium canbe derived from lithium, a light metal found in theearth’s crust. Tritium is radioactive, but the quantitiesin use at any given time are quite modest and can besafely handled. There are no chemical pollutants orCO2 emissions from the fusion process. Withappropriate advances in materials, the radioactivity ofthe fusion byproducts would be relatively short-lived,thereby obviating the need for extensive wastemanagement measures.

From a safety perspective, the fusion process poseslittle radiation risk to anyone outside the facility.Also, since only a small quantity of fuel is in thefusion system at any given time, there is no risk of acritical accident or meltdown, and little after-heat tobe managed in the event of an accident. Thepotential usefulness of fusion systems is great, butsignificant scientific and technical challenges remain.


Fusion energy is an attractive option to consider forlong-term sustainable energy generation. It would beparticularly suited for baseload electricity supply, butcould also be used for hydrogen production. Withthe growth of the world’s population expected tooccur in cities and megacities, concentrated energysources (such as fusion energy) that can be locatednear population centers may be particularly attractive.In addition, the fusion process does not produceGHGs and has attractive inherent safety andenvironmental characteristics that could help gainpublic acceptance.

5.5

107


Energy scenarios imposing reasonable constraints onnonsustainable energy sources show that fusion energycould contribute significantly to large-scale electricityproduction during the second half of the 21st century.

Making fusion energy a part of the future energysolution is among the most ambitious scientific andengineering challenges of our era. The following aresome of the major technical questions that need to beanswered:

◆ Can burning plasma that shares the characteristicintensity and power of the sun be successfullyproduced and sustained?

◆ To what extent can models be used to simulate andpredict the behavior of the burning, self-sustainedfuel required for fusion applications?

◆ How can new materials that can survive the fusionenvironment (which are needed for fusion powerto be commercially viable) be developed?

Answering these questions requires understandingand control of complex and dynamic phenomenaoccurring across a broad range of temporal and spatialscales. The experiments required for a commerciallyviable fusion power technology constitute a complexscientific and engineering enterprise.

Technology Strategy

Given the substantial scientific and technologicaluncertainties that now exist, the U.S. FederalGovernment will continue to employ a portfoliostrategy that explores a variety of magneticconfinement approaches and leads to the mostpromising commercial fusion concept. Advancedcomputational modeling will be central to testing theagreement between theory and experiment,simulating experiments that cannot be readilyinvestigated in the laboratory, and exploringinnovative designs for fusion plants. To ensure thehighest possible scientific return, DOE’s FusionEnergy Sciences (FES) program will extensivelyengage with and leverage other DOE programs andinternational programs in areas such as magneticconfinement physics, materials science, ion beamphysics, and high-energy-density physics. Large-scaleexperimental facilities may be necessary, and therewards, risks, and costs of these major facilities willneed to be shared through internationalcollaborations. The target physics aspect of inertialfusion is being conducted now through the NationalNuclear Security Administration’s (NNSA) stockpilestewardship program. The overall FES effort will beorganized around a set of four broad goals.

FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES GOAL #1:Demonstrate with burning plasmas the scientific andtechnological feasibility of fusion energy. The goal isto demonstrate sustained, self-heated fusion plasma,in which the plasma is maintained at fusiontemperatures by the reaction products, a critical stepto practical fusion power. The strategy includes thefollowing area of emphasis:

◆ Participate in the international magnetic fusionexperiment, ITER (Latin for “the way”) project,with the European Union, Japan, Russia, China,South Korea, India, and perhaps others as partners.

FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES GOAL #2:Develop a fundamental understanding of plasmabehavior sufficient to provide a reliable predictivecapability for fusion energy systems. Basic research isrequired in turbulence and transport, nonlinearbehavior and overall stability of confined plasmas,interactions of waves and particles in plasmas, thephysics occurring at the wall-plasma interface, and thephysics of intense ion beam plasmas and high-energy-density plasmas. The strategy includes the followingareas of emphasis:

◆ Conduct fusion science research throughindividual-investigator and research-teamexperimental, computational, and theoreticalinvestigations

◆ Advance the state-of-the-art computationalmodeling and simulation of plasma behavior inpartnership with the Advanced Scientific ComputingResearch program in DOE’s Office of Science

◆ Support basic plasma science, partly with theNational Science Foundation, connecting bothexperiments and theory with related disciplinessuch as astrophysics.

FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES GOAL #3:Determine the most promising approaches andconfigurations to confining hot plasmas for practicalfusion energy systems. The strategy includesexperiments and advanced simulation and modeling;innovative magnetic confinement configurations, suchas the National Spherical Torus Experiment (NSTX);and a planned compact stellarator experiment, theNational Compact Stellarator Experiment (NCSX) atPrinceton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL); as wellas smaller experiments at multiple sites.

FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES GOAL #4:Develop the new materials, components, andtechnologies necessary to make fusion energy areality. The environment created in a fusion reactorposes great challenges to materials and components.Materials must be able to withstand high fluxes of

108


high-energy neutrons and endure high temperaturesand high thermal gradients, with minimaldegradation. The strategy includes the followingareas of emphasis:

◆ Design materials at the molecular scale to createnew materials that possess the necessary high-performance properties, leveraging investments infusion energy research with investments in basicmaterials research

◆ Explore “liquid first-wall” materials to amelioratefirst-wall requirements for advanced fusion energyconcepts.

Current Portfolio

The current FES program, within DOE’s Office ofScience, is a program of fundamental research intothe nature of fusion plasmas and the means forconfining plasma to yield energy. This includes: (1) exploring basic issues in plasma science; (2) developing the scientific basis and computationaltools to predict the behavior of magnetically confinedplasmas; (3) using the advances in tokamak30 researchto enable the initiation of the burning plasma physicsphase of the FES program; (4) exploring innovativeconfinement options that offer the potential of moreattractive fusion energy sources in the long term; (5) developing the cutting-edge technologies thatenable fusion facilities to achieve their scientific goals;and (6) advancing the science base for innovativematerials to establish the economic feasibility andenvironmental quality of fusion energy.

The overall effort requires operation of a set ofunique and diversified experimental facilities, rangingfrom smaller-scale university programs to severallarge national facilities that require extensivecollaboration. These facilities provide scientists withthe means to test and extend theoreticalunderstanding and computer models, leadingultimately to an improved predictive capability forfusion science.

The two major tokamak experiments, DIII-D atGeneral Atomics and the Alcator C-Mod at MIT, areextensively equipped with sophisticated diagnosticsthat allow for very detailed measurements in time andspatial dimensions as they continuously push thefrontiers of tokamak plasma confinement. They eachinvolve an array of national and internationalcollaborators on the scientific programs.

Similarly, the NSTX at PPPL is also a well-diagnosedand highly collaborative experiment on an innovativeconfinement approach that seems likely to lead toimproved understanding of toroidal31 confinementsystems.

An additional innovative concept, the NationalCompact Stellarator Experiment, is currently beingfabricated at PPPL with first operation scheduled for2009 (Figure 5-20). This machine is a product of newcomputational capabilities that have optimized the 3-dimensional toroidal magnetic geometry for improvedconfinement and stability in a compact form.

In addition to these major experiments, there are alarger number of smaller magnetic confinementexperiments with more specialized missions. Theseare generally located at universities and provide anopportunity for student training.

A modest-scale high-energy-density physics programis also underway, with an emphasis on using heavy iondrivers to explore plasma/beam dynamics and warmdense matter with potential applications to futureinertial fusion systems. This program also exploresinnovative approaches to improving inertial fusionsuch as the fast-ignition experiments. In addition, theFES program benefits from existing experimentalprograms conducted elsewhere for NNSA’s stockpile

109


30 Tokamak (Acronym created from the Russian words, “TOroidalnaya KAmera ee MAgnitnaya Katushka,” or “Toroidal Chamber and Magnetic Coil”):The tokamak is the most common research machine for magnetic confinement fusion today.

31 Toroidal: in the shape of a torus, or doughnut. Toroidal is a general term that refers to toruses as opposed to other geometries (e.g., tokamaks andstellarators are examples of toroidal devices).

Figure 5-20. Fusion energy affords the possibility of long-term,sustainable energy supply, with little or no emissions of GHGs.

Credit: National Compact Stellarator Experiment, DOE/PPPL

stewardship program and the Department of Defense(DoD). Both the “Z” experiment at Sandia NationalLaboratories and the OMEGA experiment at theUniversity of Rochester, for example, offeropportunities for improving understanding of high-energy-density physics.

Theory and computing are key parts of the presentprogram, as they provide the intellectual frameworkfor the overall approach to fusion energy, as well asthe computer codes, which attempt to systematicallyrationalize the understanding of fusion plasmas.32


For the future, CCTP seeks to consider a full array ofpromising technology options. From diverse sources,suggestions for future research have come to CCTP’sattention. Some of these, and others, are currentlybeing explored and under consideration for the futureR&D portfolio. These include:

◆ ITER. Burning plasmas represent the next majorscience and technology frontier for fusionresearch. In the major international effortmentioned above (ITER), the United States,Europe, Japan, China, Russia, the Republic ofKorea, and India plan to construct a magnetic

fusion burning plasma science and engineeringtest facility. The ITER international magneticfusion experiment is a key part of the U.S. strategyto investigate the underlying science for magneticconfinement fusion energy (MFE), (Figure 5-21).Additional investments in fusion materials,components, and technologies for MFE arecontingent upon favorable results from ITER.

◆ Plasma Confinement Systems. Prior to theanticipated operation of ITER around 2015,physics research experiments on a wide range ofplasma-confinement systems worldwide willcontinue in preparation for ITER operations.These experiments will include detailedsimulations of ITER behavior as well as innovativenew ways of operating fusion systems to optimizeefficiency. Because of the sophisticatedmeasurement techniques employed on modernfusion experiments, detailed data are alreadyavailable to validate computer models.33 Work willalso continue on confinement configurationoptimization that would allow betterunderstanding or improve the confinementapproach for future power systems.

◆ High-Energy-Density Physics and RelatedTechnology. In other efforts, the United States isproceeding with high-energy-density physics, thescience base for inertial fusion34, through thedevelopment of NNSA’s National Ignition Facility(NIF) and other work, including driver, targetfabrication, and chamber technologies. Thedrivers include lasers and pulsed power-driven z-pinches in the NNSA program and heavy ionaccelerators. Efforts to explore the understandingand predictability of high-energy-density plasmaphysics, including the ramifications for energy-producing applications, are also underway.35

However, any additional investment in the inertialfusion energy approach awaits successfuldemonstration of ignition and gain in the NIF.

SummaryThis chapter reviews various forms of advancedtechnology, their potential for reducing emissionsfrom energy supply, and the R&D strategies intendedto accelerate their development. Although

5.6

110


32 See Section 2.5.1 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-251.pdf.33 For additional information about ITER, see http://www.iter.org/.34 Inertial fusion is an alternative approach to creating the physical conditions necessary for light elements to fuse and release binding energy, in which

an array of intense x-rays, lasers, or heavy ion beams are used to contain, compress, and heat the fusible materials to fusion enabling conditions.35 For additional information about U.S. fusion energy research, see http://www.ofes.fusion.doe.gov/.

Figure 5-21. The United States is participating with othercountries in the building of ITER, a large-scale fusion processmachine, which will provide experimental data to inform futuretechnology directions. Credit: ITER

ITER International Magnetic Fusion Experiment

uncertainties exist about both the level at which GHGconcentrations might need to be stabilized and thenature of the technologies that may come to the fore,the long-term potential of advanced energy supplytechnologies is estimated to be significant, both inreducing emissions (as shown in Figure 3-19 andhighlighted in the figure at the beginning of thischapter) and in reducing the costs for achieving thosereductions, as suggested by Figure 3-14. Further, theadvances in technology development needed to realizethis potential, as modeled in the associated analyses,animate the research and development goals for eachenergy supply technology area.

As one illustration among the many hypothesizedcases analyzed,36 when GHG emissions wereconstrained to a high level over the course of the 21st

century the lowest-cost arrays of advanced technologyin energy supply, when compared to a reference case,resulted in reduced or avoided emissions of roughlybetween 110 and 210 GtC. This amounted to,roughly, between 20 and 35 percent of all GHGemissions reduced, avoided, captured and stored, orotherwise withdrawn and sequestered, needed toconstrain emissions at this level. Similarly, the costsfor achieving such emissions reductions, whencompared to the reference case, were reduced by

111


Technologies for Goal #2: Reducing Emissions from Energy Supply

Figure 5-22. Technologies for Goal #2: Reducing Emissions from Energy Supply (Note: Technologies shown are representations of largersuites. With some overlap, “near-term” envisions significant technology adoption by 10 to 20 years from present, “mid-term” in a following periodof 20-40 years, and “long-term” in a following period of 40-60 years. See also List of Acronyms and Abbreviations.)

• IGCC Commercialization• FutureGen Demonstration• Solid Oxide Fuel Cells• More Efficient, Lower-Cost, Cleaner Coal

Plants

• Pre-Combustion Technology for CleanerCoal-Based Electricity Generation

• Zero-Emission Coal Plants (FutureGen)• H2 Co-Production from Coal/Biomass

• Zero-Emission Fossil EnergyFossil Power

• Integrated Stationary Fuel Cell System• Codes & Standards• Demonstrations of Renewable Hydrogen

Production

• Low-Cost H2 Storage & Delivery• H2 Production from Nuclear• H2 Production from Renewables• Renewable-H2-Powered Fuel Cell Vehicles

• H2 & Electric EconomyHydrogen

• Lower-Cost Wind Power• Biodiesel, Demos of Cellulosic Ethanol• Photovoltaics on Buildings• Cost-Competitive Solar PV• 1st Generation Biorefinery• Distributed Generation Systems

• Low-Wind-Speed Turbines • Advanced Biorefineries • Cellulosic Biofuels• Community-Scale Solar• Photolytic Water Splitting• Energy Storage Options

• Widespread Renewable Energy• Bio-Engineered Biomass• Bio-inspired Energy & Fuels

Renewables

• Advanced Fission Reactor and Fuel Cycle Technology

• New Fuel Forms and Materials

• GenIV Nuclear Plants• Closed Proliferation-Resistant Fuel Cycles• Minimization of Wastes Requiring

Geological Disposal

• Widespread Nuclear Power• Advanced Concepts for Waste Reduction

NuclearFission


• Greater Understanding of Plasmas• Demonstration of Burning Plasmas (ITER)• Identification of Technology Options• Understand Potential of High-Energy-

Density Physics Research

• Fusion Pilot Plant Demonstration • Fusion Power PlantsFusion Power

36 In Chapter 3, various advanced technology scenarios were analyzed for cases where global emissions of GHGs were hypothetically constrained. Over thecourse of the 21st century, growth in emissions was assumed to slow, then stop, and eventually reverse in order to ultimately stabilize GHG concentrations inthe Earth’s atmosphere at levels ranging from 450 to 750 ppm. In each case, technologies competed within the emissions-constrained market, and theresults were compared in terms of energy (or other metric), emissions, and costs.

roughly a factor of 3. See Chapter 3 for other casesand other scenarios.

As described in this chapter, CCTP’s technologydevelopment strategy supports achievements in thisrange. The overall strategy is summarizedschematically in Figure 5-22. Advanced technologiesare seen entering the marketplace in the near, mid,and long terms, where the long term is sustainedindefinitely. Such a progression, if successfullyrealized worldwide, would be consistent with attainingthe energy supply potential portrayed at thebeginning of this chapter.

The timing and pace of technology adoption areuncertain and must be guided by science. In the caseof the illustration above, the first GtC per year(1GtC/year) of reduced or avoided emissions, ascompared to an unconstrained reference case, wouldneed to be in place and operating between 2040 and2060. For this to happen, a number of new oradvanced energy supply technologies would need topenetrate the market at significant scale before thisdate. Other cases would suggest faster or slower ratesof deployment, depending on assumptions. SeeChapter 3 for other cases and other scenarios.

112


References5.7Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2006. Annual Energy Outlook 2006, DOE/EIA-0383(2006). Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Energy.

Generation IV International Forum (GIF) and the U.S. Department of Energy’s Nuclear Energy Research Advisory Committee(NERAC). 2002. A Technology Roadmap for Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems. GIF-002-01, December. www.gen-4.org/Technology/roadmap.htm

International Energy Agency (IEA). 2004. Key World Energy Statistics 2004. http://library.iea.org/dbtw-wpd/Textbase/nppdf/free/2004/keyworld2004.pdf

National Research Council (NRC), National Academy of Engineering (NAE). 2004. The Hydrogen Economy: Opportunities, Costs,Barriers, and R&D Needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. http://www.nap.edu/books/0309091632/html/

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). 2005. Biomass as Feedstock for a Biorefinery and Bioproducts Industry: The Technical Feasibilityof a Billion-Ton Supply. http://feedstockreview.ornl.gov/pdf/billion_ton_vision.pdf

U.S. Climate Change Technology Program (CCTP). 2003. Technology Options for the Near and Long Term. DOE/PI-0002.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2003/tech-options/index.htmUpdate is at http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/index.htm

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 2005. Hydrogen Fuel Cells and infrastructure Technologies Multi-Year Research, Development andDemonstration Plan, 2003-2010. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.http://www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/mypp/

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 2004. Hydrogen Posture Plan, an Integrated Research, Development, and Demonstration Plan.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.http://www.eere.energy.gov/hydrogenandfuelcells/pdfs/hydrogen_posture_plan.pdf

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Nuclear Energy Science and Technology (NE). 2001. A Roadmap to Deploy NewNuclear Power Plants in the United States by 2010. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.http://nuclear.gov/nerac/ntdroadmapvolume1.pdf and http://nuclear.gov/nerac/NTDRoadmapVolII.PDF

U.S. Department of Energy, (DOE), Office of Nuclear Energy Science and Technology (NE). 2003a. The U.S. Generation IVImplementation Strategy. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. http://nuclear.gov/reports/Gen-IV_Implementation_Plan_9-9-03.pdf

U.S. Department of Energy, (DOE), Office of Nuclear Energy Science and Technology (NE). 2003b. Report to Congress onAdvanced Fuel Cycle Initiative: the Future Path for Advanced Spent Fuel Treatment and Transmutation Research. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. http://nuclear.gov/reports/AFCI_CongRpt2003.pdf

6Energy supply technologies incorporating carboncapture and storage were found capable ofcontributing significantly to future near-zero or verylow emissions energy supply. When combined withother sequestration technologies capable ofcapturing CO2 from the atmosphere, reduced,avoided, or sequestered global carbon emissions,compared to a reference case, and depending uponassumptions, ranged from low amounts up to nearly300 gigatons of carbon (GtC) over the course ofthe 21st century. Although bracketed by a numberof uncertainties, this range suggests both thepotential role for advanced technology and a long-term goal for contributions from this area in thefuture global economy.

The three main focus areas for R&D related tocarbon cycle management include: (1) the capture ofCO2 emissions from large point sources, such ascoal-based power plants, oil refineries, and industrialprocesses, coupled with storage in geologicformations or other storage media; (2) enhancedcarbon uptake and storage by terrestrial bioticsystems—terrestrial sequestration; and (3) improvedunderstanding of the potential for ocean storage andsequestration methodologies.1

If current world energy production and consumptionpatterns persist into the foreseeable future, fossil fuelswill remain the mainstay of global energy productionwell into the 21st century. The Energy InformationAdministration (EIA) projects that by 2025, about 88percent of global energy demand will be met by fossilfuels, because fossil fuels will likely continue to yieldcompetitive advantages relative to other alternatives(EIA 2004a). In the United States, the use of fossilfuels in the electric power industry accounted for 39

percent of total energy-related CO2 emissions in2003, and this share is expected to slightly increase to41 percent in 2025. In 2025, coal is projected toaccount for 50 percent of U.S. electricity generationand for an estimated 81 percent of electricity-generated CO2 emissions. Natural gas is projected toaccount for 24 percent of electricity generation andabout 15 percent of electricity-related CO2 emissionsin 2025 (EIA 2005).

Many scenarios of the future suggest that world coalmarkets will continue to grow steadily over the courseof the 21st century, in the absence of CO2 emissionsrestrictions. While increased energy efficiency, anduse of renewable and nuclear energy afford good

113

Technologies and improved management systems for carbon dioxide (CO2) capture,storage, and sequestration can potentially reduce CO2 emissions significantly and help

slow the growth in atmospheric CO2 concentrations. The relative significance of thispotential is suggested by Figure 3-19 and highlighted in the figure at right, which drawsinsights from one set of scenarios analyses that explored various ways to reduce emissionsthrough a suite of these kinds of technologies.

Capturing and Sequestering Carbon Dioxide

Sequestration Potential Contributions to Emissions Reduction

Potential contributions of Carbon Capture, Storage, andSequestration to cumulative GHG emissions reductions to 2100,across arange of uncertainties, for three advanced technologyscenarios. See Chapter 3 for details.

1 In this Plan, the three approaches are collectively referred to as “capturing and sequestering carbon dioxide” or “capturing and sequestering carbon.”


opportunities for reducing CO2 emissions, fossil fuelreserves are abundant and economical, making theircontinued use an attractive option. In variousadvanced technology scenarios where CO2 captureand storage technology were assumed to become acost-competitive technology strategy, fossil-basedenergy continued to supply a large portion of totalelectricity consumed into the future (e.g., variousstudies estimated a 55-70 percent share), even underhigh carbon management requirements.

Human activities related to land conversion andagricultural practices have also contributed to thebuildup of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Duringthe past 150 years, land use and land-use changeswere responsible for one-third of all human emissionsof CO2 (IPCC 2000). Over the next 100 years, globalland-use change and deforestation are likely toaccount for at least 10 percent of overall human-caused CO2 emissions. The dominant drivers ofcurrent and past land-use-related emissions of CO2

are the conversion of forest and grassland to crop andpastureland and the depletion of soil carbon throughagricultural and other land-management practices(IPCC 2000). Past CO2 emissions from land-useactivities are potentially reversible, and improvedland-management practices can actually restoredepleted carbon stocks. Therefore, there arepotentially large opportunities to increase terrestrialcarbon sequestration.

The potential storage and sequestration capacity forCO2 in various “sinks” is large. Some estimatesindicate that about 83 to 131 gigatons of carbon(GtC) could be sequestered in forests and agriculturalsoils by 2050 (IPCC 2001b), while others estimategeologic storage capacities within a broad range of300 to 3,200 GtC (IEA 1994a, 1994b, 2000). Theocean represents the largest potential sink foranthropogenic CO2. Analysis indicates that the oceanis currently absorbing passively some 7.3 Gt of excessatmospheric CO2 per year (Sabine et al. 2004),partially offsetting the impact on atmosphericconcentrations of CO2 from annual anthropogenicemissions of CO2 of about 25 Gt per year. Thepotential storage capacity of the ocean is largelyunknown, although some researchers estimate that itmight hold thousands of GtC or greater (Herzog2001, Smith and Sandwell 1997, Hoffert et al. 2002).

There are potential ancillary benefits associated withcarbon capture, storage, and sequestration. Manyland-management practices that sequester carbon canimprove water quality, reduce soil erosion, and benefitwildlife. The injection of CO2 into geologicstructures can be beneficially used to enhancerecovery of oil from depleted oil reservoirs and the

recovery of methane from unmineable coal seams.

Carbon capture, storage, and sequestrationtechnologies have become a high-priority R&D focusunder CCTP because they hold the potential toreduce CO2 emissions from point sources, as well asfrom the atmosphere, and to enable continued use ofcoal and other fossil fuels well into the future. Near-term R&D opportunities include optimizing carbonsequestration and management technologies andpractices in terrestrial systems, and accelerating thedevelopment of technologies for capturing andgeologically storing CO2 for enhanced oil recovery(EOR). Longer-term R&D opportunities includefurther development of other types of geologicstorage and terrestrial sequestration options, as well asfurthering the understanding of both the role oceansmight play in storing carbon and the potentialconsequences of using the oceans for carbonsequestration.

In 2005, the Intergovernmental Panel on ClimateChange (IPCC) released its Special Report on CarbonDioxide Capture and Storage (IPCC 2005). While thisreport is not focused on future R&D options, it servesas an authoritative reference on the state-of-the-artmethods in CO2 capture and storage.

The remaining sections in this chapter summarize thecurrent and potential future research activities andchallenges associated with developing carbonsequestration technology. In each section, thedescription of the current R&D activities includes ahyperlink to the CCTP report, Technology Options inthe Near and Long Term (CCTP 2005).

Carbon CapturePoint source CO2 emissions from power plants varydepending on the combustion fuel, technology, andoperational use. Concentrating and capturing CO2

from flue gas is a technological challenge. Flue gasfrom conventional coal-fired power plants contains 10to 12 percent of CO2 by volume, and flue gas fromintegrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) plantscontains between 5 and 15 percent CO2. For acombined cycle gas turbine system, the CO2

concentration is about 3 percent. The CO2 in fluegases must be concentrated to greater than 90 percentfor most storage, conversion, or reuse applications.Thus, R&D programs are targeted at capture systemsthat can produce a concentrated and pressurizedstream of CO2 at relatively low cost.

6.1

114



Large CO2 point sources, such as power plants, oilrefineries, cement plants, and other industrial facilitiesare considered the most viable sites for CO2 capture.The current technology for CO2 capture uses a classof chemical absorbents called amines that removeCO2 from the gas stream and produce byproductfood-grade CO2 often used in carbonated soft drinksand other foods. However, the current absorbentprocess is costly and energy intensive, increasing thecost of a coal-fired plant by 50 to 80 percent (Davisonet al. 2001) and energy reductions on the order of 30percent of the net power generation rate (DOE1999). Thus, several R&D opportunities are beingpursued to reduce CO2 capture costs and lessen theenergy reductions in power generation, or the “netenergy penalty.”

Technology Strategy

Realizing the possibilities for point source CO2

capture employs a research portfolio that covers awide range of technology areas, including post-combustion capture, oxy-fuel combustion, and pre-combustion decarbonization. R&D investments intechnologies that use pure oxygen during combustion,pre-combustion de-carbonization technologies,regenerable sorbents, advanced membranes, andhydrate formation can potentially reduce costs, as wellas the net energy penalty. After componentperformance evaluations are completed, the nextshort-term step would be to conduct pilot scale andslip stream (i.e., diversion of a small stream from thetotal emissions of an existing plant) level testing of themost promising capture technologies. Larger or full-scale tests might be appropriate within the next fewdecades to demonstrate and have a suite of capturetechnologies available for deployment. Fullyintegrated capture and storage system demonstration(i.e., FutureGen) helps to enable commercialdeployment to mitigate the financial and technicalperformance risks associated with any new technologythat must maintain a high availability, such as requiredby the power generation sector.

Current Portfolio

The metrics and goals for CO2 capture research arefocused on reducing the cost and energy penalty,because analysis shows that CO2 capture drives thecost of sequestration systems. Similarly, the goals and

metrics for carbon storage, measurement, andmonitoring are focused on ensuring permanence andsafety. All three research areas work toward theoverarching program goal of 90 percent CO2 capture,with 99 percent storage permanence at less than 20percent increase in the cost of energy services by2007, and less than 10 percent by 2012. A large-scaledemonstration (i.e., FutureGen) would still benecessary.

Across the current Federal portfolio, agency activitiesare focused on a wide range of technical issues.2

◆ For new construction or re-powering of existingcoal-fired power plants, there are pre-combustiondecarbonization technology options that provide apure stream of CO2 as well as hydrogen atrelatively low incremental cost. The mostpromising option, and the primary focus ofcurrent R&D, is gasification, in which thehydrocarbon is partially oxidized, causing it tobreak up into hydrogen (H2), carbon monoxide(CO), and CO2, and possibly some methane andother light hydrocarbons. The CO can be reactedwith water to form H2 and CO2, and the CO2 andH2 can be separated. The H2 used in acombustion turbine or fuel cell, and the CO2 canbe stored.

◆ New technologies to reduce the capital and energypenalty costs for post-combustion capture arealso currently under development and includeregenerable sorbents, advanced membranes, andnovel concepts. One such novel concept, formingCO2 hydrates to facilitate capture, could beespecially attractive for advanced coal conversionsystems like the IGCC. A challenge for post-combustion capture is the large amount of gas thatmust be processed per unit of CO2 captured. Thisis especially true for combustion turbines wherethe concentration of CO2 in the flue gas can be aslow as 3 percent. One area of research isdeveloping gas/liquid contactors where CO2 gas ischemically absorbed into a liquid, and theresulting mixture is then separated.

◆ Oxygen-fired combustion is also beingresearched for large CO2 point sources todetermine if CO2 can be recovered at reasonablecost. In oxygen-fired combustion, oxygen, insteadof air, is used in combustion of petroleum coke,coal, or biomass fuels. Oxygen-fired combustionmay also be implemented in power systems inwhich gaseous fuels are combusted with oxygen inthe presence of recycled water to produce asteam/CO2 turbine drive gas. Water is condensed

115



from the steam/CO2 exiting the turbine, leavingsequesterable CO2. Current R&D investmentsare focusing on both pulverized coal andcirculating fluidized bed designs, and both newplant and retrofit applications. Flue gas can berecycled to control operational characteristics suchas thermal flow and flame temperature. Reducingrecycle gas in the combustion process results in ahigher flame temperature and potentially higheroperating efficiency, but this can create otheroperational challenges. Oxygen is generallysupplied via air separation, but “chemical looping”options that extract oxygen from minerals, whichare subsequently recirculated and regenerated, arebeing considered. In addition, there is researchunderway on low-cost oxygen separationtechnologies, such as oxygen transportmembranes.

◆ A number of collaborative efforts are currentlyunderway that will contribute to this strategy.Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnershipshave been organized within the United States, andinclude networks of state agencies, universities,and private companies focused on determiningsuitable approaches for capturing and storing CO2.Four Canadian Provinces are also participating inthe effort. The Partnerships are developing aframework to identify, validate, and potentially testthe carbon capture and storage technologies bestsuited for each geographic region and its pointsources. During Phase II, beginning in 2005, thePartnerships will pursue technologies for small-scale sequestration validation testing.

◆ The DOE Carbon Sequestration Program isparticipating in collaborations with

international partners in developing new captureand storage technologies. Among these are acooperative agreement with Canada (WeyburnProject) (Box 6-1) and the Sleipner North SeaProject. The Carbon Sequestration LeadershipForum (CSLF) (Box 6-3) is an internationalcollaborative effort to focus international attentionon the development of carbon capture and storagetechnologies.


The current portfolio supports the main componentsof the technology development strategy andaddresses the highest priority current investmentopportunities in this technology area. For the future,CCTP seeks to consider a full array of promisingtechnology options. From diverse sources,suggestions for future research have come to CCTP’sattention. Some of these, and others, are currentlybeing explored and under consideration for the futureR&D portfolio. These include:

◆ Reduce the costs for sorbents, reducingregeneration energy requirements, and increasingsorbent life.

◆ Increase understanding of the CO2 purityrequirements to ensure that CO2 transportationand storage operations are not compromised. InCO2 transportation, small quantities of SO2 canlead to two-phase flow and pipeline pressure loss.The presence of water and other minutecontaminants might promote acid formation andlead to pipeline and wellbore integrity problems.The history of transporting CO2 in pipelines thatcontain substantial amounts of SOX and NOX islimited. These components can also impact theintegrity of reservoir caprock.

◆ Develop pre-and post-combustion CO2 capturetechnologies that reduce the economic impacts ofcontaminants in a gas stream. For example, thecorrosive nature of some of the contaminants cancomplicate CO2 separation processes. Too muchnitrogen in the CO2 can significantly increase thecost of compression prior to geologic storage.

◆ Develop pre- and post-combustion CO2 capturetechnologies that enable storage of criteriapollutants (SOX, NOX, H2S) with the CO2. In thisarea, the criteria pollutants are not separated fromthe CO2 stream, but rather stored along with theCO2.

116


DOE is participating in this commercial-scaleproject that is using CO2 for EOR. CO2 is beingsupplied to the oil field in southern Saskatchewan,Canada, via a 320 kilometer pipeline from a NorthDakota coal gasification facility. The goal is todetermine the performance and undertake athorough risk assessment of CO2 storage inconjunction with its use in EOR. The project willinclude extensive above and below ground CO2

monitoring.

BOX 6-1

WEYBURN II CO2 STORAGE PROJECT

◆ Continue to improve the cost-effectiveness of CO2

separation membranes. Performance is improvedby more cost-effective designs and materials withincreased selectivity to CO2 (increased CO2

concentration per single membrane pass),increased throughput (increased flow rate persingle membrane pass), and improved chemicalstability (a measure of how well the membraneresists chemical reaction with its environment).

◆ Continue to lower the costs of oxygen used bycoal-fueled power plants with separationtechnologies such as oxygen transport membranes.Success in this area could reduce the costs of oxy-combustion technologies (e.g., circulating fluidizedbed designs), as well as gasification technologies.

◆ Develop an integrated modeling framework forevaluating alternative CO2 capture technologiesfor existing and advanced electric power plants.

◆ Pursue innovative, potentially high-payoffconcepts that build on current approaches or thatoffer entirely new pathways. This wouldencompass areas such as advanced materials, andchemical and biological processes. Examplesinclude ionization of CO2, using CO2 solvents,novel microporous metal organic frameworks(MOFs) suitable for CO2 separation (Box 6-2), andmetabolic engineering to create strains ofmicrobes that feed off CO2 and produce usefulchemical byproducts.

◆ Continue system integration and advancements ofclassical MEA-based systems for near-term CO2

availability.

Geologic StorageDifferent types of geologic formations can store CO2,including depleted oil reservoirs, depleted gasreservoirs, unmineable coal seams, saline formations,shale formations with high organic content, andothers. Such formations have provided naturalstorage for crude oil, natural gas, brine, and CO2 overmillions of years. Each type of formation has its ownmechanism for storing CO2 and a resultant set ofresearch priorities and opportunities. Many powerplants and other large point sources of CO2 emissionsare located near geologic formations that areamenable to CO2 storage. For example, DOE, alongwith private and public sector partners, is conductingresearch on the suitability of geologic formations atthe Mountaineer Plant in West Virginia.

6.2

117


Established by the State Department and DOE inFebruary 2003, the CSLF coordinates data gathering,R&D, and joint projects to advance the developmentand deployment of geologic carbon sequestrationtechnologies worldwide. The CSLF is a particularlyattractive mechanism for achieving internationalcooperation for larger field tests. Seehttp://fossil.energy.gov/programs/sequestration/cslf

BOX 6-3

CARBON SEQUESTRATION LEADERSHIP FORUM (CSLF)

Scientists have recently developed improved capabilities to synthesize a class of chemical compounds calledmetal organic frameworks (MOFs), and “tune” their macromolecular properties. Through a project funded bythe DOE Sequestration Program, a team of researchers is measuring the CO2

adsorption isotherms of a set of MOFs to develop a better understandingof what MOF characteristics affect CO2 adsorption. There have beensome early promising results. For example, one particular MOFexhibited a CO2 sorption capacity that was significantly better thancommercially available zeolite sorbents. The increased storagecapacity can lower the size and cost of a CO2 capture system.

MOF 177, Yaghi et. al Nature 427, 523-527 (2004)

BOX 6-2

METAL ORGANIC FRAMEWORKS


Geologic formations offer an attractive option forcarbon storage. The formations are foundthroughout the United States, and there is extensiveknowledge about many of them from the experienceof exploration and operation of oil and gas production(Box 6-4). Opportunities exist in the near-term tocombine CO2 storage with EOR and enhanced coal-bed methane (ECBM) recovery using injected CO2.In 2000, 34 million tons of CO2, roughly equivalentto annual emissions from 6 million cars, were injectedas part of EOR activities in the United States.

Coal-bed methane has been one of the fastestgrowing sources of domestic natural gas supply. Pilotprojects have demonstrated the value of CO2 ECBMrecovery as a way to increase production of thisresource.

In the long-term, CO2 storage in saline and depletedgas formations is being explored. One project iscurrently in commercial operation, where one milliontons of CO2 per year are being injected in a salineformation at the Sleipner natural gas production fieldin the North Sea. The Frio Brine Pilot experimentnear Houston, Texas, is the first U.S. field test toinvestigate the ability of saline formations to storegreenhouse gases (GHGs). In October 2004, 1,600tons of CO2 were injected into a mile-deep well.Extensive methods were used to characterize theformation and monitor the movement of the CO2.The site is representative of a very large volume ofthe subsurface from coastal Alabama to Mexico andwill provide experience useful in planning CO2

storage in high-permeability sediments worldwide.

The overall estimated capacity of geologic formationsappears to be large enough to store decades tocenturies worth of CO2 emissions, although the CO2

storage potential of geologic reservoirs depends onmany factors that are, as yet, poorly understood. Forexample, characteristics of reservoir integrity, volume,porosity, permeability, and pressure vary widely evenwithin the same reservoir, making it difficult toestablish a reservoir’s storage potential with certainty.Assessments of storage capacity could help to betterunderstand the potential of geologic formations forCO2 storage.

Technology Strategy

Potential CO2 sources and sinks vary widely acrossthe United States, and the challenge is to understandthe economic, health, safety, and environmentalimplications of potential large-scale geologic storageprojects. The geologic storage program was initiatedin 1997 and initially focused on smaller projects.However, field testing is the next step to verify theresults of smaller-scale R&D, and the program istaking on larger projects, as knowledge grows andopportunities become available.

In the near-term, activities will focus on addressingimportant carbon storage-related issues consistentwith the Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmapand Program Plan (DOE 2005). Among theseactivities are developing an understanding of thebehavior of CO2 when stored in geologic formations.Long-term activities could include understanding andreducing potential health, safety, environmental, andeconomic risks associated with geologic sequestration.

118


In a project under the DOE Sequestration program,researchers have pioneered a novel “stacked” approach toCO2 storage field tests in saline formations. CO2 is injectedinto a target formation that underlies a proven oil-bearingseal. The oil-bearing caprock serves as a second barrieragainst CO2 migration to the surface and affords scientistsan opportunity to learn about the fate and transport of CO2

injected into a saline formation with negligible risk ofadverse environmental consequences.

BOX 6-4

CO2 STORAGE IN STACKED FORMATION CO2 InjectionWell

Oil-bearingformationcaprock

Salineformationcaprock

Targetformation

Courtesy of DOE/NETL

Regional domestic partnerships and internationalcooperation are viewed as key to deploying carbonstorage technologies. Field validation activities testthe large-scale viability of point-source capture andstorage systems and demonstrate to interested partiesthe potential of these systems.

Current Portfolio

The goal of geologic storage R&D portfolio is toadvance technologies that would enable developmentof domestic CO2 underground storage repositoriescapable of accepting around one billion tons of CO2

per year. Toward this goal, there is a need todemonstrate that CO2 storage underground is safeand environmentally acceptable, and an acceptableGHG mitigation approach. Another need is todemonstrate an effective business model for CO2

EOR and ECBM, where significantly more CO2 isstored for the long-term than under current practices.

The Federal portfolio for geologic storage activitiesincludes several major thrusts designed to movetechnologies from early R&D to deployment.3

Core RD&D focuses on understanding the behaviorof CO2 when stored in geologic formations. Forexample, studies are being conducted to determinethe extent to which CO2 moves within the geologicformation, and what physical and chemical changesoccur to the formation when CO2 is injected. Thisinformation is needed to ensure that CO2 storage willnot impair the geologic integrity of an undergroundformation and that CO2 storage is secure andenvironmentally acceptable. There are three majorresearch thrusts:

◆ Knowledge Base and Technology for CO2Storage Reservoirs. These activities seek toincrease the knowledge base and technologyoptions. The petroleum industry has builtsignificant experience over the past few decades onhow to inject carbon dioxide into oil reservoirs forEOR. Many of the issues related to injectiontechnologies and gas compression have alreadybeen solved. Because oil and gas reservoirs havebeen able to store gases and other hydrocarbonsfor geologically significant periods of time(hundreds of thousands to millions of years), theylikely have caprocks that will be good seals forCO2 as well. Furthermore, CO2 can potentiallyenhance oil and gas production, which can helpmitigate carbon storage costs. However, becausethe petroleum industry understandably has been

focused on resource recovery and not on CO2

storage, it has not developed procedures tomaximize the amount of CO2 that is stored or totrack the CO2 once it is has been injected toensure that it remains in the ground. In addition,most well-developed oil fields, by definition,contain many wells that have pierced the caprockfor the field, creating potential leakage pathwaysfor CO2. Research is currently underway todevelop technologies to locate abandoned wells, totrack the movement of CO2 in the ground, and toensure long-term storage, as well as to optimizecosts, assess performance, and reduce uncertaintiesin capacity estimates.

Another attractive option is carbon storage indeep, unmineable coal seams. Not only do theseformations have high potential for adsorbing CO2

on coal surfaces, but the injected CO2 can displaceadsorbed methane, thus producing a valuablebyproduct and decreasing the overall storage cost.One potential barrier is the tendency of coal toswell in volume when adsorbing CO2. This cancause a sharp drop in permeability, therebyimpeding the flow of CO2 and the recovery ofmethane. Laboratory research, modeling, and fieldstudies are currently being implemented andproposed to gain a better understanding of theprocesses behind coal swelling and determine if itwill be a significant barrier to sequestration in coalseams.

Another option is the use of large salineformations for CO2 storage, a relatively newconcept. About two-thirds of the United States isunderlain by deep saline formations that havesignificant sequestration potential. Since thewater in the saline formations is typically notsuitable for irrigation or consumption, manyopportunities exist for CO2 to be injected withoutadverse impacts. The storage capacity of salineformations is enhanced because of the ability ofCO2 to dissolve in the aqueous phase. But, thereare uncertainties associated with theheterogeneous reactions that may occur betweenCO2, brine, and minerals in the surroundingstrata, especially with respect to reaction kinetics.For example, saline formations contain mineralsthat could react with injected CO2 to form solidcarbonates, which would eliminate potentialmigration out of the reservoir. On the negativeside, the carbonates could plug the formation inthe immediate vicinity of the injection well.Researchers are looking into multiphase behaviorof CO2 in saline aquifers and the volume, fate, and

119



transport of the stored CO2. New technologiesand techniques are being developed to reduce costand inefficiency due to leaks and to better definethe geology of the saline aquifers. A recent reviewarticle addresses the technological challenges ofsequestering carbon dioxide in saline formationsand coal seams (White et al. 2003).4

◆ Measurement and Monitoring. These activitiesare described more fully in Chapter 8. Animportant R&D need is to develop acomprehensive monitoring and modelingcapability that not only focuses on technical issues,but also can help ensure that geologic storage ofCO2 is safe. Long-term geologic storage issues,such as leakage of CO2 through old well bores,faults, seals, or diffusion out of the formation,need to be addressed. Many tools exist or arebeing developed for monitoring geologic storageof CO2, including well testing and pressuremonitoring; tracers and chemical sampling; surfaceand borehole seismic monitoring; andelectromagnetic/geomechanical meters, such astiltmeters. However, the spatial and temporalresolution of these methods may not be sufficientfor performance confirmation and leak detection.

◆ Health, Safety, and Environmental RiskAssessment. Assessing the risks of CO2 releasefrom geologic storage sites is fundamentallydifferent from assessing risks associated withhazardous materials, for which best practicemanuals are often available. In some cases,geologic storage sites may exist near populatedareas. Although CO2 is not toxic or flammable, itcan cause suffocation if present at highconcentrations. Therefore, the mechanism forpotential leaks must be better understood. The

assessment of risks includes identifying potentialsubsurface leakage modes, the likelihood of anactual leak, leak rate over time, and the long-termimplications for safe carbon storage. Diagnosticoptions need to be developed for assessing leakagepotential on a quantitative basis.

Two activities cited in Section cited in Section 6.1.3will continue to play an important role in encouragingthe deployment of technologies developed under thecore RD&D program. The Regional PartnershipsProgram5 is building a nationwide network ofFederal, State, and private sector partnerships todetermine the most suitable technologies, regulations,and infrastructure for future point source carboncapture, storage, and geologic sequestration indifferent areas of the country. The CarbonSequestration Leadership Forum is facilitating thedevelopment and worldwide deployment oftechnologies for separation, capture, transportation,and long-term storage of CO2.

In addition, the FutureGen project (Box 6-5) isexpected to be the world’s first coal-fueled prototypepower plant that will incorporate geological storage.It will provide a way to demonstrate some of the keytechnologies developed with Federal support, anddemonstrate to the public and regulators the viabilityof large-scale carbon storage.


The current portfolio supports the main componentsof the technology development strategy and addressesthe highest priority current investment opportunitiesin this technology area. For the future, CCTP seeksto consider a full array of promising technologyoptions. From diverse sources, suggestions for future

120


FutureGen is a public-private initiative to build the world’s firstintegrated carbon capture/storage and hydrogen productionpower plant. When in operation, the prototype will be thecleanest fossil fuel power plant in the world. An industrialconsortium representing the U.S. coal and power industry willwork closely with DOE to implement this project. Othercountries, including India and South Korea, have recently agreedto participate in the Program. See http://www.netl.doe.gov/coalpower/sequestration/futureGen/main.html.

BOX 6-5

FUTUREGEN

4 See Section 3.1.2 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-312.pdf. 5 For more information on the Regional Partnerships Program, see http://fossil.energy.gov/programs/sequestration/partnerships.


research have come to CCTP’s attention. Some ofthese, and others, are currently being explored andunder consideration for the future R&D portfolio.These include:

◆ Defining the factors that determine the optimumconditions for sequestration in geologicalformations, such as depleting oil and gasreservoirs, saline formations, and coal seams, aswell as unconventional hydrocarbon bearingformations.

◆ Developing the ability to predict and optimizeCO2 storage capacity and resource recovery.

◆ New storage engineering practices that maximizepore volume utilization and accelerate capillary,solubility, and mineral trapping for long-termstorage.

◆ Developing the ability to continuously track thefate and transport of injected CO2 in differentformations. Areas of R&D include geophysicalarrays that provide real-time, low-cost, and high-resolution data; and surface and near-surfacemonitoring techniques such as surface CO2 fluxdetectors, injecting tracers in soil gas, andmeasuring changes in shallow aquifer chemistryfor CO2 leakage.

◆ Developing models to simulate the migration ofCO2 throughout the subsurface and the effects ofinjection on the integrity of caprock structures.

◆ Developing advanced subsurface imaging andalteration of fluid-rock interactions.

◆ Understanding geochemical reactions (Box 6-6)and harnessing them to enhance containment.

◆ Developing injection practices that preserve capintegrity, and practices to mitigate leakage to theatmosphere. These practices would include newmaterials and methods for sealing wells.

◆ Developing an understanding of CO2 reactionsand movement in shales and other unconventionalhydrocarbon-bearing formations that will permitthe economic recovery of these hydrocarbons.

◆ Developing technologies to conduct underground(in-situ) liquefaction and gasification of solidhydrocarbon deposits, such as oil shale and coal.

◆ Developing cost-effective systems to integrateenergy conversion with carbon capture, geologicstorage, and subsurface conversion of CO2 intobenign materials or useful byproducts (e.g.,through biogeochemical processes that can createmethane or carbonates).

◆ Developing improved methods and data forestimating the overall costs of geologicsequestration, including capture, compression, andtransportation.

◆ Improving the understanding of the key elementsfor effective risk management of geologic storage.Technical objectives are to (1) characterizeavailable storage formations in terms of size andlocation, (2) characterize leakage rates in order toestablish risk management approaches andpolicies, and (3) conduct large-scale testing onrepresentative formations.

◆ Reducing the cost of geologic sequestration.

◆ Improving CO2 transport systems to provide forpublic acceptance and regulatory approval,including providing for early leak detection andwarning, preventing major pipeline failures, andlinking to a national pipeline infrastructure.

◆ Pursuing breakthrough concepts to reach long-term program goals. Breakthrough concepts arerevolutionary and transformational approaches

121


Computed tomography (CT) scans were taken toimage the inside of a block of coal before and afterthe introduction of high pressure CO2. Comparisonof the two scans showed where CO2 - inducedswelling took place in the coal, shown in green. Theswelling phenomena is a research challenge, since itcan adversely impact the economics of enhancedcoal bed methane recovery by reducing the flow ofCO2 into the coal.

BOX 6-6

COAL SWELLING


with potential for low-cost, permanence, and largeglobal capacity. For example, some of the lowestcost estimates for capture/sequestration optionsare for systems where flue gas components fromcoal-fueled plants are not scrubbed but ratherstored in geologic formations with CO2. Thiseliminates the need for costly flue gas cleanupsystems, but the potential effects of this option areunknown. Technological innovations could comefrom concepts associated with areas not normallyrelated to traditional energy R&D fields.

In the long-term, CO2 capture can be integrated withgeologic storage and/or conversion. Many CO2

conversion reactions are attractive, but too slow foreconomic chemical processes. Use of impurities incaptured CO2 (e.g., SOX and NOX) or additives couldpossibly enhance geologic storage and provide anopportunity to combine CO2 emissions reductionwith criteria pollutant emissions reduction.

Field tests are the next step to verify R&D results. Itis possible that additional tests will eventually becarried out through the Regional PartnershipsProgram based on analysis of CO2 sources and sinksby participants to determine the highest benefitprojects.

TerrestrialSequestration

Terrestrial sequestration can play a significant role inaddressing the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. Awide range of technologies and practices, includingtree planting, forest management, and conservationtillage practices are available to increase thesequestration of carbon in plants and soils. Terrestrialsequestration activities can provide a positive force forimproving landscape-level land management andprovide significant additional benefits to society, suchas improvements in wildlife and fisheries habitat,enhanced soil productivity, reduction in soil erosion,and improved water quality. Terrestrial sequestrationrepresents a set of technically and commercially viabletechnologies that have the capability to reduce therate of CO2 increase in the atmosphere. Given thesize and productivity of the U.S. land base, terrestrialsequestration has distinct economic andenvironmental advantages. Globally, the potential forterrestrial sequestration is also significant, due in partto low-cost opportunities to reduce ongoing emissionsfrom current land-use practices and land conversion

and to enhance carbon stocks via afforestation, forestrestoration, and improved forest and agriculturalmanagement.

Terrestrial sequestration technologies refer broadly toequipment, processes, decision tools, managementsystems and practices, and techniques that canenhance carbon stocks in soils, biomass, and woodproducts, while reducing CO2 concentrations in theatmosphere. Extensions of terrestrial sequestrationcan use sustainably generated biomass to displacefossil fuels. Examples of terrestrial sequestrationtechnologies include conservation tillage,conservation set-asides, cover crops, buffer strips,biomass energy crops, active forest management,active wildlife habitat management, low-impactharvesting, precision use of advanced informationtechnologies, genetically improved stock, woodproducts life-cycle management, and advancedbioproducts.


Increasing terrestrial carbon stocks is attractivebecause it can potentially offset a major fraction ofemissions and serve as a bridge over an interimperiod, allowing for development of other low-CO2

or CO2-free technologies. Carbon stock managementtechnologies and practices that enhance soil and forestcarbon sinks need to be maintained once the carbonstock reaches higher levels. Although the benefits canbe temporarily reversed by fire, plowing of croplandsoils, and other disturbances, the potentialimprovements in carbon stocks are of such magnitudethat they can play a significant overall role inaddressing the increase in atmospheric CO2 emissionsfrom the United States and globally throughout the21st century.

Other opportunities described in this section canprovide benefits essentially indefinitely. For example,changes in crop management practices can reduceannual emissions of trace GHGs; sustainable biomassenergy systems can displace fossil fuels and provideindefinite net CO2 emissions reductions; andenhanced forest management and conversion todurable wood products provide a mechanism to allowforests to continually sequester carbon.

Estimates of the global potential for terrestrialsequestration activities remain uncertain. Suchestimates are generally of the technical potential (i.e.,the biophysical potential of managed ecosystems tosequester carbon), and disregard market and policyconsiderations. The IPCC (IPCC 2001c) estimates

6.3

122


such technical potential of biological mitigationoptions (i.e., forest, agricultural, and other land-management activities) to be on the order of 100 GtCcumulative by 2050, at costs ranging from about$0.10 to about $20/t carbon in tropical countries, andfrom $20/t carbon to $100/t in non-tropicalcountries. Technical potential estimates for theUnited States range widely, depending onassumptions about biophysical sequestration rates perhectare, the land area available for different activities,and other factors.

Widely cited estimates of U.S. technical potential forcarbon sequestration include about 55–164 teragramsof carbon (TgC) per year for potential sequestrationon croplands (Lal et al. 1998); 29–110 TgC per yearon grazing lands (Follett et al. 2001); 210 TgC peryear on forest land (Joyce and Birdsey 2000); and91–152 TgC per year on dedicated bioenergycroplands (Tuskan and Walsh 2001). In addition,dedicated bioenergy crops would substitute for fossilfuels, leading to an estimated 450 TgC reduction ofCO2 emissions (Tuskan and Walsh 2001).

These estimates generally represent technicalpotential that does not reflect barriers toimplementation, competition across land uses andsectors, or landowner response to public policies andeconomic incentives. A recent study of cropland (Eveet al. 2002) indicates a potential of about 66 TgC peryear on croplands, toward the lower end of the Lal etal. (1998) range. With regard to bioenergy, a recentDOE/USDA analysis estimates that U.S. forest andagricultural lands could sustainably supply up to 1,300Tg of biomass/year for bioenergy, similar to thefindings of Tuskan and Walsh, but without majorshifts in land use or food or fiber production (Perlacket al. 2005). Such a quantity of biomass coulddisplace over 30 percent of current U.S. petroleumconsumption.

Technology Strategy

Realizing the opportunities to sequester carbon interrestrial systems will require managing resources innew ways that integrate crosscutting technologies andpractices. A balanced portfolio is needed thatsupports basic science, technological development,emerging technology demonstrations, innovativepartnerships with the private sector, and techniquesand metrics for measuring success.

An array of actual and potential technologies can befound in the short-, mid-, and long-terms. In theshort-term, some technologies and practices being

routinely used can be expanded to increase carbonsequestration. In addition, improvements to manycurrent systems are needed to enable them to enhanceabove- and below-ground carbon stocks, and managewood products pools. In the mid to long-term,research can focus on options that take advantage ofentirely new technologies and practices.

In the near- and long-term, the R&D portfolio isbased on the following:

◆ Design, develop and demonstrate carbonmanagement strategies consistent with economicand environmental goals for terrestrial ecosystems.

◆ Improve the understanding of the relationship ofcarbon management and ecosystem goods andservices.

◆ Determine how terrestrial systems’ capacities canbe manipulated to enhance carbon sequestrationby increasing pool sizes, areal extent, rates ofcarbon accumulation, and/or longevity of carbonstorage in pools.

◆ Analyze the relationship between natural resourceand agricultural policy, and terrestrialsequestration technologies and identifying ways tomaximize synergies and avoid potential conflictsbetween the two.

◆ Analyze the relationship between energy policyand terrestrial sequestration technologies toenhance understanding of the potential carbonbenefits associated with different biofuels.

◆ Evaluate existing and new market-based adoptionand diffusion strategies for terrestrial sequestrationtechnologies.

◆ Optimize management practices and techniques,informed by analyses of and accounting for allassociated GHG emissions and removals,including, to the extent practicable, associatedclimate-related impacts (such as changes in albedoor surface roughness).

◆ Improve methods of measuring changes in carbonpools and verifying sequestration rates.

◆ Develop and analyze incentives forimplementation.

Current Portfolio

Much of the research currently underway that couldhave applications for increasing terrestrial carbon

123


sequestration is being undertaken for multiplereasons, often unrelated to climate change.Significant investments are being made in developingsustainable natural resource management systems thatprovide economic and environmental benefits. Inparticular, advances have been made in increasingforest productivity, developing effective andenvironmentally sound uses of crop fertilizers,enhancing soil quality, and in producing biomassfeedstocks (Figure 6-1).

Across the current Federal portfolio of terrestrialsequestration-related RD&D, multi-agency activitiesare focused on a wide range of issues, including thefollowing:

◆ Cropland management practices can increase theamount of carbon stored in agricultural soils byincreasing plant biomass inputs or reducing therate of loss of soil organic matter to theatmosphere as CO2. Precision agriculture is aform of site-specific management that can beadapted for improving soil carbon sequestrationthrough a customized carbon sequesteringmanagement plan. The goals of this activity are toquantify the carbon sequestration potential of eachtechnology and management practice for variouscrop production systems, climates, and soils; forvarious crop production systems, soil types, andgeographical areas develop the combinations of

practices that optimize soil carbon sequestration,crop production, and profits; develop decisionsupport tools for farmers, other land managers,and policy makers that provide guidance for land-management decisions. For example, createdatabases that answer questions about howchanging from one land-use practice to anotherwill affect carbon sequestration, production, andprofits.6

◆ Conversion of marginal croplands to other less-intensive land uses to conservation reserve andbuffer areas. The goals of this activity are toquantify the carbon sequestration potential ofcropland conservation programs for variousclimates and soils; develop the combination ofpractices (e.g., plant species, siting, establishmentpractices) that optimize carbon sequestration andminimize production losses for various types ofcropland conservation practices; and developdecision support tools for farmers, other landmanagers, and policy makers to inform croplandconservation policies and the relative costs andbenefits of different cropland conservationapproaches, both in terms of carbon sequestrationand production.7

◆ Evaluation of advanced forest and wood productsmanagement that may offer significant carbonsequestration opportunities. The goals andmilestones of this activity are to increase energyefficiency of forest operations; develop and applymodels to better understand the economics ofachieving certain GHG mitigation goals throughimproved forest management; sensors/monitorsand information management systems; advancedfertilizers, technologies, and application strategiesto improve fertilizer efficiency and reducenitrogen fertilizer inputs; integrated managementstrategies and systems to increase nutrient andwater use efficiency, increase CO2 uptake andsequestration and reduce emissions; and woodproduct management and substitution strategies.The milestones are to have initial systems modelsand prototype operation on major plantation typesin place by 2007 and to deploy first-generationintegrated system models and technology by2010.8

◆ Grazing management to increase amount ofcarbon in soils. The goals of this activity are toconstruct quantitative models that describe site-specific interactions among grazing systems,vegetation, soil and climate, and the effects on

124


Figure 6-1. Growing short rotation woody crops, shown above, providesopportunities to sequester carbon in the soil and biomass feedstocks.

Courtesy of DOE/NREL, Credit: Warren Gretz

6 See Section 3.2.1.1 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-3211.pdf.7 See Section 3.2.1.2 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-3212.pdf.8 See Section 3.2.1.3 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-3213.pdf.

Terrestrial Sequestration: Woody Crops

GHG dynamics; and to develop decision supporttools to inform the relative costs and benefits ofdifferent grassland management scenarios forcarbon sequestration and other conservationbenefits.9

◆ Restoration of degraded rangelands using low-cost, reliable technologies. The goals of thisactivity are to develop low-cost, reliabletechnologies for the restoration of vegetation ondegraded arid and semi-arid rangelands; improvedecision support for the application of low-costtechnologies, such as fire, to control invasivespecies and to reduce GHG emissions from mesicrangelands; and to develop seed productiontechnology to produce low-cost seeds forreestablishing desired rangeland species.Currently costs are high and seed supply is limitedfor many cultivars.10

◆ Wetland restoration and management for carbonsequestration and GHG offsets. The goals of thisactivity are to evaluate various management

practices on restored wetlands; delineate andquantify carbon stocks in U.S. wetlands by regionand type; develop and demonstrate integratedmanagement strategies for wetland carbonsequestration; and identify wetland areas mostlikely to be impacted by climate change andprioritize areas for protection.11

◆ Use of biotechnology for modifying the chemicalcomposition of plants and micro-organisms toenhance carbon sequestration (Box 6-7). Thegoals of this activity are to identify the traitsneeded in plants and micro-organisms to increasesoil carbon sequestration capacity; determine thefeasibility of using biotechnology to modify thetraits of plants and micro-organisms that can affectsoil carbon sequestration; develop systems formonitoring non-target environmental affectsassociated with plant modifications; developmethods to incorporate genetically modified plantand micro-organisms into cropland andconservation reserve and buffers systems.12

125


Enhancing the natural capacity of terrestrial ecosystems to store carbon is aviable strategy for stabilizing rising CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere.However, gains in improving the sequestration potential of croplands,grasslands, and forest lands could be enhanced by major scientificadvancements in understanding the processes that control the initial uptake,ultimate chemical forms, and subsequent carbon transfer in plants and soils.

Research carried out by the USDA and DOE is underway to determine themechanisms that control the quantity and quality of carbon allocated tostems, branches, leaves, and roots of trees as a means of understandingthe biological processes that underlie carbon sequestration in trees andsoils; understanding controlling genetic mechanisms; and selecting, testing, and demonstrating usefulgenotypes. Research is focused on several species, including hybrid poplar, willow, and loblolly pine. Thestudies are designed to determine the interaction of physiological and biogeochemical processes and water andnutrient management on carbon fixation, allocation, storage, and dynamics in forest systems. Field andlaboratory studies are being used to quantify and understand carbon dynamics, both above and below ground.Forest researchers hope that these and similar studies will provide the scientific foundation for managing forestsystems to enhance carbon sequestration, and improve environmental quality and productivity.

BOX 6-7

PHYSIOLOGICAL MECHANISMS OF GROWTH, RESPONSE,AND ADAPTATION IN FOREST TREES

9 See Section 3.2.1.4 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-3214.pdf. 10 See Section 3.2.1.5 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-3215.pdf.11 See Section 3.2.1.6 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-3216.pdf.12 See Section 3.2.2.1 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-3221.pdf.

Courtesy of DOE/Office of Science

◆ Development of terrestrial sensors, measurements,and modeling. The goals of this activity are todevelop a new generation of sensors, probes, andother instruments to measure soil carbon, GHGflux in situ across a wide variety of agriculturalecosystems.13

◆ Measuring, monitoring, and verification forforests. The goals of this activity are to developtechnologies for remote sensing data collectionand analysis, in situ instrumentation andmonitoring systems, and other measuring andmonitoring technologies.14

◆ USDA is providing incentives and supportingvoluntary actions by private landowners to reduceGHG emissions and increase carbon sequestrationthrough the portfolio of conservation programsadministered by the Department. USDA’s actionsinclude financial incentives, technical assistance,demonstrations, pilot programs, education, andcapacity building, along with measurements toassess the success of these efforts.


The current portfolio supports the main componentsof the technology development strategy and addressesthe highest priority current investment opportunitiesin this technology area. For the future, CCTP seeksto consider a full array of promising technologyoptions. From diverse sources, suggestions for futureresearch have come to CCTP’s attention. Some ofthese, and others, are currently being explored andunder consideration for the future R&D portfolio.These iclude:

◆ Quantifying the carbon sequestration potential formanagement practices and techniques across allmajor land uses, including cropland, forests,grasslands, rangelands, and wetlands; across cultivationand management systems; and across regions.

◆ Designing, developing, and testing managementsystems to increase carbon sequestration, maintainstorage, and minimize net GHG emissions whilemeeting economic (i.e., forest and agriculturalproduction) and environmental goals. Using asystems approach across sectors and gases willimprove the understanding of how technologiesare configured to work in a synergistic manner.An example of this approach is in the productionof biofuel crops that enhance carbon sequestration,and reduce nitrogen releases to the atmosphere.

◆ Developing bioenergy and additional durable usesof bio-based products and improve managementof residues and wood products.

◆ Improving biomass supply technologies(harvesting, handling, onsite separation andprocessing, transportation) to reduce costs andimpacts; and enhancing techniques that improveyields, transport, and efficiency of conversion tofuels.

◆ Exploring the use of trees and other vegetativecover in urban environments to both sequestercarbon and reduce the urban heat island effect

◆ Evaluating terrestrial carbon stock vulnerabilitiesand stability.

◆ Improving the understanding of the implicationsof potential sequestration options on the emissionsof other GHGs through comprehensiveaccounting of all GHG emissions and sinks asland-based carbon sequestration technologies areimplemented.

◆ Improving the performance of technologies andpractices to provide additional benefits, includingimprovements in wildlife habitat; water and airquality; soil characteristics such as stability, waterinfiltration and retention; and nutrient retention.

◆ Enhancing sequestration potential through the useof advanced technologies, including bio-based andbiotechnology techniques to enhance seed stockqualities, precision water and nutrient application,land management using geographic informationsystem and other tools, and alternative tillage,harvest and fertilizing (e.g., char-based fertilizer)techniques.

◆ Developing novel alternative technologies such ashigh-lignin trees for combustion and low-lignintrees to reduce paper processing costs andimproved digestibility of fodder and forage.

◆ Researching biotechnology (genomics, genetics,proteomics), related to biological and ecologicalprocesses affecting carbon allocation, storage, andsystem capacity. Improved understanding of thefunctional genomics of high-potential biomass cropscan increase yields and provide a more effective basisfor increasing the conversion efficiency of biomass offuels, chemicals, and other bioproducts.

◆ Improving observation and quantification ofdeforestation, and cost and benefit analysis ofoptions to reduce deforestation.

126


13 See Section 3.2.3.1 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-3231.pdf.14 See Section 3.2.3.2 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-3232.pdf.

Ocean Sequestration

Because of the large CO2 storage capacity of theocean, increasing the carbon uptake and storage ofcarbon in the oceans cannot be ignored (Figure 6-2).Indeed, the ocean is currently playing an importantrole in consuming significant amounts ofanthropogenic CO2 via passive air-sea exchange,biological uptake, and ocean mixing (e.g., Sabine et al.2004). This natural rate of CO2 uptake (about 7.3GtCO2/yr), however, is not keeping pace with the rate ofcurrent anthropogenic emissions. Also, there areconsequences. Ocean acidification that isaccompanying the air-sea flux, for example, couldhave undesirable environmental consequences, ifallowed to continue (e.g., Caldeira and Wickett 2003,Feely et al. 2004, Orr et al. 2005).

To understand the additional role the ocean couldplay in mitigating the effects CO2 emissions onatmospheric concentrations, several issues must beaddressed, including the capacity of the ocean tosequester CO2, its effectiveness at reducingatmospheric CO2 concentration levels, the depth andform (e.g., molecular or chemically bound, gas, liquid,or solid) for introduction of the carbon, and thepotential for adverse environmental consequences.Ocean storage has not yet been deployed orthoroughly tested, but there have been small-scalefield experiments and 25 years of theoretical,laboratory, and modeling studies of intentional oceanstorage of CO2. Nevertheless, there is still much thatis unknown and more needs to be learned about thepotential environmental consequences to oceanecosystems and natural biogeochemical cycles.

Although there are a variety of potential ocean carbonsequestration options (see Future ResearchDirections), two strategies have received the mostattention: (1) direct injection of a relatively purestream of CO2 into the ocean’s deep interior, and (2)iron fertilization to stimulate the growth of nutrient-constrained biota and enhance the ocean’s naturalbiological pump. It is generally thought that directinjection of CO2 may be technically feasible andeffectively isolate CO2 from the atmosphere for atleast several centuries. The primary concerns relateto possible adverse environmental effects. In contrast,the technical feasibility and effectiveness of oceanfertilization remain open to question. Further,whereas direct injection approaches seek to minimizeecosystem impacts, ocean fertilization depends upon

the manipulation of ecosystem function over largeareas of the ocean’s surface.

Over the period of centuries, it is estimated, theoceans will passively take up about 70 percent ofglobal fossil carbon emissions, as CO2 diffuses intothe ocean, is transported across the oceanthermocline, and mixed into deep ocean waters(IPCC 2001a). Direct injection of captured CO2

would seek to augment to this natural CO2 flux to thedeep sea and, thus, more rapidly slow or reverse theincrease in atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Thepotential for the ocean to absorb CO2 over the long-term is large relative to that which would begenerated by fossil-fuel resources. But several factorsmay affect the capacity and desirability of directinjection. Unless consumed by biological or chemicalprocesses, excess CO2 placed in the deep sea willeventually, via diffusion and ocean circulation, interactwith the atmosphere, adding some part of the injectedCO2 to the atmospheric burden. For example,injection of about 8,000 Gt CO2 to the deep oceanwill eventually produce atmospheric CO2

concentrations of about 750 ppm, even in the absenceof additional CO2 release to the atmosphere.Experiments and models have shown that highconcentrations of CO2 depress ocean pH (i.e.,acidification), and thus may harm marine organismsand biogeochemical processes (e.g., Portner et al.2004, TRS 2005). The true scope and magnitude ofsuch effects could be the subject of further study.Alternatives to direct injection and fertilization have

6.4

127


Figure 6-2. While the oceans play an important role in taking up large amountsof CO2, there is a need for a better understanding of the potential role of oceansequestration as a mitigation strategy and its environmental consequences.

Credit: iStockphoto

been proposed for CO2 mitigation strategies. Whilethey may avoid the preceding concerns, they mayhave environmental, capacity, and cost limitations oftheir own (see Future Research Directions).


Ocean sequestration offers the potential tosignificantly reduce the level of CO2 concentrations inthe atmosphere. There are many technologicaloptions envisioned for accomplishing this. Under thedirect injection approach, for example, CO2 could becaptured from large point sources, (e.g., fossil-firedpower plants, industrial processes, etc.), and thenpressurized to liquid form (a supercritical liquid) andinjected at depths of 2,000 to 3,000 meters below thesurface. Once there, because its density as a liquid isgreater than that of sea water, it would be expected toremain for centuries. However, this option has yet tobe tested or deployed in a continuous mode atindustrial concentrations.

Technology Strategy

The key to any successful technology strategy in thisarea is to assess adequately (a) the potential of ocean-based options as mitigation strategies; (b) thepotential adverse impacts on the ocean biosphere; andthe (c) potential effectiveness as evaluated againstspecific R&D criteria. This includes a researchportfolio that seeks to determine, via experimentationand computer simulations, the potential for storinganthropogenic CO2 in the world’s oceans whileminimizing negative environmental consequences.

Various studies based on models and oceanobservations indicate that the isolation of CO2 fromthe atmosphere generally increases with the depth ofinjection. In the near-term, the key researchquestions that are related to direct injection involveevaluating the impact of added CO2 and/or nutrientson marine ecosystems and the biogeochemical cyclesto which they contribute. This is being investigatedthrough both observations and modeling of marineorganisms and ecosystems, as is now being funded byDOE and the National Science Foundation (NSF),among others. In the long-term, R&D activitiescould focus on improving an understanding of theeffects of elevated concentrations of CO2 on marineorganisms and ecosystems.

Another potential area of study is the effectivenessand environmental and ecological consequences ofiron fertilization. Alternative ocean CO2 mitigationstrategies (see “Future Research Directions”) pose adifferent set of environmental and efficacy concernsthat need to be evaluated should the effects of directinjection prove to be unacceptable.

Current Portfolio

Ongoing research activities target ocean carbonsequestration using direct injection and ironfertilization. These activities are summarized below:

◆ Direct Injection. Currently, the technologyexists for the direct injection of CO2. Previouslaboratory experiments concentrated onestablishing an understanding of the processes thatoccur when CO2 comes into contact with highpressure seawater. As a result, a much betterunderstanding of the influence of CO2 hydrates(or clathrates, “solids” in which gas molecules areheld in place) on the dissolution processes exists.Additional research conducted by DOE’s OakRidge National Laboratory simulated a negativelybuoyant clathrate. In addition, the Monterey BayAquarium Research Institute demonstrated thatCO2 clathrates tend to be negatively buoyant atdepths below 3,000 meters. This property ofclathrates would presumably reduce the potentialecological impact of CO2 on the shallow layers ofthe ocean, where most marine life occurs. Itwould also increase the length of time thatinjected CO2 would remain in the ocean, thusenhancing the effectiveness of CO2 sequestrationby injection. The goal of this R&D activity is todemonstrate that CO2 direct injection is safe andenvironmentally acceptable.15



128



◆ Direct Injection. R&D related to directinjection involves improving our understanding ofthe long-term effects of elevated concentration ofCO2 on marine organisms and ecosystems, as wellas mitigation strategies. This could include bothin situ and laboratory experiments combined witha program of process modeling aimed at apredictive capability for both biological andphysico-chemical parameters.

◆ Iron Fertilization. There are a multitude ofR&D opportunities regarding the effectivenessand environmental consequences of oceanfertilization. One question is whether ironenrichment increases the downward transport ofcarbon from the surface waters to the deep sea.This would help in predicting whetherfertilization is an effective carbon sequestrationmechanism. Other important questions could beexplored: What are the long-term ecologicalconsequences of iron enrichment on surface watercommunity structure, and on mid-water andbenthic processes? How can carbon export bestbe verified?

◆ Enhanced Chemical CO2 Uptake. The uptakeof CO2 by an aqueous solution can be enhancedby the addition of OH- and/or CO3- ions. Thus,Kheshgi (1995) pointed out that this could bedone on a large scale by adding lime (CaO orCaOH) to the ocean to facilitate its abiotic CO2

uptake from the atmosphere via the reaction:Ca(OH)2 + 2CO2 ➜ Ca2+ + 2HCO3

-.Importantly, this form of CO2 mitigation would(1) avoid the need for point-source CO2 capture,separation, and purification (unlike directinjection, but similar to ocean fertilization); (2)prevent increased ocean acidity because the addedCO2 is neutralized to calcium bicarbonatedissolved in seawater; and (3) permanently storethe added carbon in an ionic form that is alreadyabundant in the ocean and not easily degassedback to the atmosphere. The concerns with thisapproach include the cost and carbon intensity ofproducing lime from the calcination of limestone,its transport to and dispersal in the ocean, and theenvironmental consequences of doing so.

◆ Enhanced Carbonate Weathering. CO2 inpower plant flue gases or other industrial gasemissions streams can be brought in contact withcalcium carbonate and water, as in weatheringprocesses, and a spontaneous chemical reactiontakes place [CO2 + H2O + CaCO3 ➜ Ca2+ +2(HCO3

-)]. The resulting dissolved calciumbicarbonate ions can be injected into the ocean

(Rau and Caldeira 1999, 2002). This would avoidthe need for molecular CO2 capture andpurification and would convert most of the CO2 torelatively benign, ionic species. Modeling studiesshowed that such carbon storage would beeffective for thousands of years and with lessimpact to ocean pH than directly injecting acomparable quantity of carbon as molecular CO2

in the ocean (Caldeira and Rau 2000). Initial costestimates have shown that for treatment of coastalCO2 point sources this form of CO2 mitigationwould be less expensive than more conventionalmolecular CO2 capture and geologic storage (Sarvand Downs 2002, Rau et al. 2004). However, thetrue cost, capacity, effectiveness, andenvironmental impact of this approach needfurther evaluation.

◆ Ocean Burial of Crop Residue. It has beensuggested that organic waste from agriculture beactively buried on the ocean floor, thus enhancingthe natural air-to-land-to-ocean carbon sinkrepresented by plant production, soil formation,soil erosion, and river transport to the sea(Metzger and Benford 2001). This approachwould prevent some if not most of the oxidationof residue biomass on land and thus eliminate theresulting flux of CO2 back to the atmosphere.Ocean sites with existing permanent anoxia (e.g.offshore from major river deltas) could be used toslow or avoid oxidation of the biomass once on theocean floor prior to its permanent burial bynatural sedimentation. Concerns to be morethoroughly addressed include (1) the cost ofcollecting, bundling, transporting, and sinking theresidue; (2) the consequences to the fertility of theremaining cropland; and (3) the ultimate impactsto the marine environment.

◆ Ocean Disposal of CO2 Emulsions. Golomb etal. (2001, 2004) have shown that CO2 can form adense emulsion when combined CaCO3 (e.g.,limestone) particles under pressure. Suchemulsions could be formed prior to or duringocean CO2 injection, with the resulting CO2-richmass sinking to and stored on the ocean floor.Studies suggest that at deep ocean temperaturesand pressures, the CO2 might be sequesteredindefinitely by this approach. The method andcost of (1) initial CO2 capture and purification, (2)limestone/carbonate preparation, and (3)transporting reactants to ocean sites, as well as themarine environmental consequences of thisapproach are among the issues that remain to beaddressed in detail.

129


◆ Other Methods. The preceding list of CO2

mitigation options involving the ocean may not beexhaustive, and any future research portfolioshould be open to the possibility of newapproaches or mix of approaches.

In summary, the ocean is currently playing animportant role in mitigating significant amounts ofanthropogenic CO2 via passive air-to-sea transfer.The chemical impacts accompanying this flux,including ocean acidification, may have seriousenvironmental consequences. Any scheme thatintroduces additional molecular CO2 (unreacted oruncombined) to the ocean will contribute to theseimpacts. There are alternative, potentially promisingways for ocean carbon addition that lessen or avoidthese impacts. However, such approaches are likely tobe attended by other unresolved issues of their own,and the economic and environmental costs andbenefits of such schemes could be the subject offurther research. All options for safely using theocean’s potential for carbon uptake need to beseriously and carefully considered.

SummaryThe development of the technical, economic, andenvironmental feasibility and acceptability of CO2

sequestration strategies has important implications formeeting the needs for food, fiber, and energy whileminimizing GHG emissions. As the current energyinfrastructure evolves around fossil fuels, the viabilityof sequestration could provide many options for afuture of near-net-zero GHG emissions. Carbonsequestration has the potential to reduce the cost ofstabilizing GHG concentrations in the atmosphere,conceivably at lower costs than other alternatives, ifsuccessful, and further support domestic and globaleconomic growth. If carbon sequestration were toprove technically and economically viable, fossil fuelscould continue to play an important role as a primaryenergy supply.

This chapter reviews various forms of advancedtechnology, their potential for reducing emissions bycapturing, storing, and sequestering carbon dioxide,and the R&D strategies intended to accelerate thedevelopment of these technologies. Althoughuncertainties exist about both the level at which GHG

concentrations might need to be stabilized and thenature of the technologies that may come to the fore,the long-term potential of advanced technologies tocapture, store, and sequester carbon dioxide isestimated to be significant, both in reducing emissions(as shown in the figure at the beginning of thischapter) and in reducing the costs for achieving thosereductions, as suggested by Figure 3-14. Further, theadvances in technology development needed to realizethis potential, as modeled in the associated analyses,animate the R&D goals for each carbon dioxidecapture and sequestration technology area.

As one illustration among the many hypothetical casesanalyzed,16 GHG emissions were constrained to a highlevel over the course of the 21st century in such a waythat a stabilized GHG concentration levels couldultimately be attained. The lowest-cost arrays ofadvanced technology in capturing, storing, andsequestering carbon dioxide, when compared to areference case, resulted in reduced or avoidedemissions of between 10 and 110 GtC over 100 years.The breadth of this range is due to a large degree ofuncertainty at this point in time in the cost andviability of some sequestration technologies. Forperspective, these quantities amounted to, roughly,between 2 and 20 percent of all GHG emissionsreduced, avoided, captured and stored, or otherwisewithdrawn and sequestered needed to attain this levelover the same period. Similarly, the costs forachieving such emissions reductions, when comparedto the reference case, were reduced by roughly afactor of 3. See Chapter 3 for other cases and otherscenarios.

As described in this chapter, CCTP’s technologydevelopment strategy supports achievements in thisrange. The overall strategy is summarizedschematically in Figure 6-3. Advanced technologiesare seen entering the marketplace in the near-, mid-,and long-terms, where the long-term is sustainedindefinitely. Such a progression, if successfullyrealized worldwide, would be consistent with attainingthe potential for carbon dioxide capture andsequestration portrayed at the beginning of thischapter.

The timing and pace of technology adoption areuncertain and must be guided by science andsupported by appropriate policies (see Approach 7,Chapters 2 and 10). In the case of the illustrationabove, the first GtC per year (1GtC/year) of reduced

6.5

130



or avoided emissions, as compared to anunconstrained reference case, would need to be inplace and operating, roughly, as early as 2040. Forthis to happen, a number of new or advancedtechnologies to capture, store, and sequester carbondioxide would need to penetrate the market atsignificant scale before this date. Other cases wouldsuggest faster or slower rates of deployment. SeeChapter 3 for other cases and other scenarios.

Throughout Chapter 6, the discussions of the currentactivities in each area support the main components

of this approach to technology development. Theactivities outlined in the current portfolio sectionsaddress the highest-priority investment opportunitiesfor this point in time. Beyond these activities, thechapter identifies promising directions for futureresearch, identified in part by the technical workinggroup and assessments and inputs from non-Federalexperts. CCTP remains open to a full array ofpromising technology options as current work iscompleted and changes in the overall portfolio areconsidered.

131


Technologies for Goal #3: CO2 Capture, Storage, and Sequestration

Figure 6-3. Technologies for Goal #3: CO2 Capture, Storage, and Sequestration(Note: Technologies shown are representations of larger suites. With some overlap, “near-term” envisions significant technologyadoption by 10–20 years from present, “mid-term” in a following period of 20–40 years, and “long-term” in a following period of40–60 years. See also List of Acronyms and Abbreviations.)

• CSLF and CSRP• Post Combustion Capture• Pre-Combustion Technologies• Oxy-Fuel Combustion• Oxygen Separation Technologies

• Capability to Capture Most CO2 Emissions• Novel Capture Technologies• Low-Cost Oxygen• Biomass Coupled with CCS

• Novel In-Situ CO2 Conversion• Capture CO2 Directly from AtmosphereCarbon

Capture

• Reservoir Characterization• Safety, Health, and Environmental Risk

Assessment• Understand Underground CO2 Reactions

& Microbial Processes• Enhanced Hydrocarbon Recovery• Enhanced Coal-Bed Methane• Large-Scale Demonstration• CO2 Transport Network Design

• Geologic Storage Proven Safe • Well Sealing Techniques Demonstrated• Mineralization: Solid Carbonates• Reliable and Accurate Inventory

Monitoring• Well-Established CO2 Transport

Infrastructure

• Sufficient CO2 Storage Capacity• Track Record of Successful CO2 Storage

ExperienceGeologic

• Reforestation• Soils Conservation• Vegetation in Urban Settings

• Soils Uptake & Land Use• Inter-relationship among CO2, CH4 & N2O• Sequestration Decision Support Tools• M&M Tools to Validate Terrestrial

Sequestration• Bio-Based & Recycled Products

• Biological Sequestration• Large-Scale Sequestration• Minimal Deforestation• Carbon & CO2 Based Products & Materials

Terrestrial

• Effective Dilution of Direct Injected CO2 • Ocean CO2 Biological Impacts Addressed• Carbonate Dissolution / Alkalinity Addition

• Safe Long-Term Ocean Storage

Ocean


132


Boyd, P.W., A.J. Watson, C.S. Law, E.R. Abraham, T. Trull, R. Murdoch, D.C.E. Bakker, A.R. Bowie, K.O. Buessler, H. Chang,M.A. Charette, P. Croot, K. Downing, R.D. Frew, M. Gall, M. Hadfield, J.A. Hall, M. Harvey, G. Jameson, J. La Roche, M.I.Liddicoat, R. Ling, M. Maldonado, R.M. McKay, S.D. Nodder, S. Pickmere, R. Pridmore, S. Rintoul, K. Safi, P. Sutton, R.Strzepek, K. Tanneberger, S.M. Turner, A. Waite, and J. Zeldis. 2000. A mesoscale phytoplankton bloom in the polar southernocean stimulated by iron fertilization. Nature 407:695-702.

Caldeira K, Rau, GH. 2000. Accelerating carbonate dissolution to sequester carbon dioxide in the ocean: geochemicalimplications. Geophysical Research Letters 27 (2): 225-228.

Caldeira K, Wickett ME. 2003. Anthropogenic carbon and ocean pH. Nature 425 (6956): 365-365.

CCTP (See U.S. Climate Change Technology Program)

Coale K.H., K.S. Johnson, S.E. Fitzwater, R.M. Gordon, S. Tanner, F.P. Chavez, L. Ferioli, C. Sakamoto, P. Rogers, F. Millero, P.Steinberg, P. Nightingale, D. Cooper, W.P. Cochran, M.R. Landry, J. Constantinou, R. Rollwagen, A. Trasvina, and R. Kudela.1996. A massive phytoplankton bloom induced by an ecosystem-scale iron fertilization experiment in the equatorial PacificOcean. Nature 383:495-501.

Coale, K.H., K.S. Johnson, S.E. Fitzwater, S.P.G. Blain, T.P. Stanton, and T.L. Coley. 1998. IronEx-I, an in situ iron-enrichmentexperiment: experimental design, implementation and results. Deep-Sea Research, Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography45:6 919-945.

Davison, J., P. Freund, and A. Smith. 2001. Putting carbon back into the ground. Technical Report. Paris: International EnergyAgency (IEA) Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme. http://www.ieagreen.org.uk/putcback.pdf

DOE (See U.S. Department of Energy)

Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2004. International energy outlook 2004. Washington, D.C: U.S. Department ofEnergy. http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/pdf/0484(2004).pdf

Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2005. Annual energy outlook 2005. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/0383(2005).pdf

Eve, M.D., M. Sperow, K. Paustian, and R. Follett. 2002. National-scale estimation of changes in soil carbon stocks onagricultural lands. Environmental Pollution 116: 431-438.

Feely R.A., C.L. Sabine, K. Lee, W. Berelson, J. Kleypas, V.J. Fabry, and F.J. Millero. 2004. Impact of anthropogenic CO2 on theCaCO3 system in the oceans. Science 305 (5682): 362-366.

Follett R.F., J.M. Kimble, and R. Lal. 2001. The potential of US grazing lands to sequester carbon and mitigate the greenhouseeffect. New York: Lewis Publishers.

Golomb, D., and A. Angelopoulos. 2001. A benign form of CO2 sequestration in the ocean. Greenhouse gas controltechnologies, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies. Victoria, Australia: CSIROPublishing: Collingwood.

Golomb, D, E. Barry, D. Ryan, C. Lawton, and P. Swett. 2004. Limestone-particle-stabilized macroemulsion of liquid andsupercritical carbon dioxide in water for ocean sequestration. Environmental Science and Technology 38: 4445-4450

Herzog H. 2001. What future for carbon capture and sequestration? Environmental Science and Technology 35(7):148A-153A.

Hoffert, et al. 2002. Advanced technology paths to global climate stability: energy for a greenhouse planet. Science 298:981-7.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2000. Land use, land-use change, and forestry. Cambridge, UK: CambridgeUniversity Press.

References6.6

133


Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001a. Chapter 3: the carbon cycle and atmospheric carbon dioxide. InClimate change 2001: Working Group I: the scientific basis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/095.htm

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001b. Summary for policymakers to climate change 2001: synthesis report of theIPCC third assessment report. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/un/syreng/spm.pdf

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001c. Chapter 4: technological and economic potential of options toenhance, maintain, and manage biological carbon reservoirs and geo-engineering. In Climate change 2001: mitigation:contribution of working group iii to the third assessment report. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg3/155.htm

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2005. Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage. Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.

International Energy Agency (IEA) Greenhouse Gas Programme (GHG). 1994a. Carbon dioxide utilisation. Cheltenham, UK.

International Energy Agency (IEA) Greenhouse Gas Programme (GHG). 1994b. Carbon dioxide disposal from power stations.Cheltenham, UK.

International Energy Agency (IEA) Greenhouse Gas Programme (GHG). 2000. Barriers to overcome in implementation of CO2

capture and storage. Report PH3/22. Cheltenham, UK.

Joyce, L.A., and R. Birdsey, eds. 2000. The impact of climate change on American’s forests: a technical document supporting the2000 USDA Forest Service RPA assessment, 133. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-59. Fort Collins, Colorado: U.S.Department of Agriculture. http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs/rmrs_gtr059.pdf

Kheshgi Hs. 1995. Sequestering atmospheric carbon-dioxide by increasing ocean alkalinity. Energy 20 (9): 915-922.

Lal et al. 1998. The potential of U.S. cropland to sequester carbon and mitigate the greenhouse effect. Chelsea, MI: Ann ArborPress.

Martin, J.H., K.H. Coale, K.S. Johnson, S.E. Fitzwater, R.M. Gordon, and 39 others. 1994. Testing the iron hypothesis inecosystems of the equatorial Pacific Ocean. Nature 371.

Metzger, R.A., and G. Benford. 2001. Sequestering of atmospheric carbon through permanent disposal of crop residue. ClimaticChange 49 (1-2): 11-19.

Orr, J.C., V.J. Fabry, O. Aumont, L. Bopp, S.C. Doney, R.A. Feely, A. Gnanadesikan, N. Gruber, A. Ishida, F. Joos, R.M. Key, K.Lindsay, E. Maier-Reimer, R. Matear, P. Monfray, A. Mouchet, R.G. Najjar, G.K. Plattner, K.B. Rodgers, C.L. Sabine, J. L.Sarmiento, R. Schlitzer, R.D. Slater, I.J. Totterdell, M.F. Weirig, Y. Yamanaka, and A. Yool. 2005. Anthropogenic oceanacidification over the twenty-first century and its impact on calcifying organisms. Nature 437 (7059): 681-686.

Perlack, R.D., L.L. Wright, A. Turhollow, R.L. Graham, B. Stokes, and D. Erbach. 2005. Biomass as feedstock for a bioenergy andbioproducts industry: the technical feasibility of a billion-ton annual supply. ORNL/TM-2005/66. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak RidgeNational Laboratory. http://feedstockreview.ornl.gov/pdf/billion_ton_vision.pdf

Portner, H.O., M. Langenbuch, and A. Reipschlager. 2004. Biological impact of elevated ocean CO2 concentrations: Lessonsfrom animal physiology and earth history. Journal of Oceanography 60: 705-718.

Post, W.M., C. Izaurralde, J.D. Jastrow, B.A. McCarl, J.E. Amonette, V.L. Bailey, P.M. Jardine, T.O. West, and J. Zhou. 2004.Enhancement of carbon sequestration in US soils. Bioscience 54:895-908.

G.H. Rau, and K. Caldeira. 1999. Enhanced carbonate dissolution: a means of sequestering waste CO2 as ocean bicarbonate.Energy Conversion and Management 40 (17): 1803-1813.

G.H. Rau, and K. Caldeira. 2002. Minimizing effects of CO2 storage in oceans. Science 295 (5553): 275-276.

134


G.H. Rau, K.G. Knauss, W.H. Langer, and K. Caldeira. 2004. CO2 mitigation via accelerated limestone weathering. AmericanChemical Society, Division of Fuel Chemistry Preprints 49 (1): 376.

Sabine C.L., R.A. Feely, N. Gruber, R.M. Key, K. Lee, J.L. Bullister, R. Wanninkhof, C.S. Wong, D.W.R. Wallace, B. Tilbrook,F.J. Millero, T.H. Peng, A. Kozyr, T. Ono, and A.F, Rios. 2004. The oceanic sink for anthropogenic CO2. Science 305 (5682):367-371.

Sarv H., and W. Downs. 2002. CO2 capture and sequestration using a novel limestone lagoon scrubber - A white paper. Alliance,OH: McDermott Technology, Inc.

Smith, W.H.F., and D.T. Sandwell. 1997. “Global seafloor topography from satellite altimetry and ship depth soundings.” Science277:1957-62.

The Royal Society. 2005. “Ocean acidification due to increasing carbon dioxide”. The Royal Society, London. ISBN 0 85403617 2 http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/document.asp?id=3249

Tuskan, G.A., and M.E. Walsh. 2001. “Short-rotation woody crop systems, atmospheric carbon dioxide and carbon management:a U.S. case study.” The Forestry Chronicle 77:259-264.

U.S. Climate Change Technology Program (CCTP). 2005. Technology options for the near and long term. Washington, DC: U.S.Department of Energy. http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/index.htm

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 1999. Carbon sequestration research and development. DOE/SC/FE-1. Washington, DC: U.S.Department of Energy. http://fossil.energy.gov/programs/sequestration/publications/1999_rdreport/index.html

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 2005. Carbon sequestration technology roadmap and program plan 2005. Washington, DC:Office of Fossil Energy.http://fossil.energy.gov/programs/sequestration/publications/programplans/2005/sequestration_roadmap_2005.pdf

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). 2004. A sea floor gravity survey of theSleipner Field to monitor CO2 migration. Project Facts. http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/factsheets/project/Proj247.pdf

White, C.M., B.R. Strazisar, E.J. Granite, J.S. Hoffman, and H.W. Pennline. 2003. “Separation and capture of CO2 from largestationary sources and sequestration in geological formations—coalbeds and deep saline aquifers.” Journal of Air & WasteManagement 53:645-715.

7(N2O) from industrial and agricultural activities; andcertain fluorine-containing substances, such ashydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons(PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) from industrialsources (Box 7-1).

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s(IPCC) Third Assessment Report (IPCC 2001) statesthat “well-mixed” non-CO2 gases, includingmethane, nitrous oxide, chlorofluorocarbons, andother gases with high global warming potentials(GWPs) may be responsible for as much as 40percent of the estimated increase in radiative climateforcing between the years 1750 and 2000.1 Inaddition, emissions of black carbon (soot), organiccarbon and other aerosols, as well as troposphericozone and ozone precursors, have important effectson the Earth’s overall energy balance.

Developing technologies for commercial readinessthat can reduce emissions of these non-CO2 GHGs

135

Several gases other than carbon dioxide (CO2) are known to have greenhouse gas (GHG)warming effects. When concentrated in the Earth’s atmosphere, these “non-CO2”

GHGs can contribute to climate change. The more significant of these are methane (CH4),which can arise from natural gas production, transportation and distribution systems, bio-degradation of waste in landfills, coal mining, and agricultural production; nitrous oxide

Reducing Emissions of Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gases

Other Greenhouse Gases Potential Contributions to Emissions Reduction

Potential contributions of Other Greenhouse Gases to cumulativeGHG emissions reductions to 2100, across a range ofuncertainties, for three advanced technology scenarios. SeeChapter 3 for details.

1 The radiative forcing due to increases in the well-mixed GHGs between the years 1750 and 2000 is estimated to be 2.43 Wm-2: 1.46 Wm-2 fromCO2; 0.48 Wm-2 from CH4; 0.34 Wm-2 from the halocarbons (CFC and HCFC); and 0.15 Wm-2 from N2O.


The term “non-CO2 GHGs” covers a broad category of gases and aerosols, but usually refers to methane,nitrous oxide, and the high global warming potential (GWP) gases hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons(PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Tropospheric ozone, tropospheric ozone precursors, and black carbon(soot) also have important climatic effects. Of these, only ozone is a GHG. Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) andother related chemicals contribute to both global warming and stratospheric ozone depletion. Because thesechemicals are already being phased out under the Montreal Protocol, they are not addressed in this plan. Tostreamline terminology for purposes of readability, and unless otherwise noted, the terms “non-CO2 GHGs” and“other GHGs”, include methane, nitrous oxide, high-GWP gases, tropospheric ozone, tropospheric ozoneprecursors, and black and organic carbon aerosols.

BOX 7-1

WHAT ARE THE “OTHER” GHGs?

is an important component of a comprehensivestrategy to address concerns about climate change. Arecent modeling study (Placet et al. 2004) showed thatthere is a considerable amount of uncertainty aboutfuture rate of growth of non-CO2 emissions, but mostmodels project that emissions will increase over timein the absence of constraints (see Chapter 3). Oneset of scenarios that included a wide range ofadvanced technologies2 for reducing emissions of non-CO2 gases showed that emissions could potentially bereduced by a range of between 125 and 160 gigatons(Gt) of carbon-equivalent emissions (cumulatively)over a 100-year planning horizon, as shown in Figure3-19 and highlighted on the figure above. Althoughbracketed by a range of uncertainties, this figuresuggests both the potential role for advancedtechnology and a long-term goal for contributionsfrom other GHGs in the future global economy.

In the context of global warming, emissions of the

non-CO2 GHGs are usually converted to a commonand roughly comparable measure of the “equivalentCO2 emissions.” This conversion is performed basedon physical emissions, weighted by each gas’ globalwarming potential (GWP). The GWP is the relativeability of a gas to trap heat in the atmosphere over agiven timeframe, compared to the CO2 reference gas(per unit weight). GWP values allow for acomparison of the impacts of emissions andreductions of different gases, although they typicallyhave an uncertainty of ±35 percent (EPA 2005). Thechoice of timeframe is significant and can changerelative GWPs by orders of magnitude. All non-CO2

gases are compared to CO2, which has a GWP ofone. The GWPs of other GHGs, using a 100-yeartime horizon, range from 23 for methane to 22,200for SF6, as shown in Box 7-2.

Non-CO2 gases have different GWPs due todifferences in atmospheric lifetimes and effectivenessin trapping heat. Methane and some HFCs haverelatively short atmospheric lifetimes as compared toother non-CO2 gases. Thus, emissions reductionsamong these gases manifest themselves as loweratmospheric concentrations in a matter of a fewdecades. PFCs and SF6, in contrast, can remain in theatmosphere for thousands of years. Emissions ofthese GHGs essentially become permanent additionsto the Earth’s atmosphere, with concomitant increasesin the atmosphere’s ability to capture and retainradiant heat. Finally, tropospheric ozone and blackcarbon aerosols (soot) are very short-lived in theatmosphere (i.e., remaining airborne for a period ofdays to weeks) and therefore do not become well-mixed in the atmosphere. Primarily for this reason,GWP metrics have not been assigned to these gasesand aerosols, but they are nonetheless recognized assignificant contributors to climate change.

There is a strong record of successful collaborationbetween industry and government to reduceemissions of non-CO2 gases, and these partnershipsprovide a solid foundation from which to pursueadditional technological developments and moresubstantial future emission reductions. Somehighlights of the current activities include:

◆ Industry and the U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA) have developed nine successfulpublic/private partnerships to reduce emissions ofmethane and high-GWP gases.3 These programshave led to substantial emission reductions; withU.S. methane emissions in 2003 10 percent below

136


GAS GWPCarbon dioxide (CO2) 1Methane (CH4) 23Nitrous oxide (N2O) 296

Hydrofluorcarbons:

HFC-23 12000HFC-125 3400HFC-134a 1300HFC-143a 4300HFC-152a 120HFC-227ea 3500HFC-236fa 9400HFC-43-10mee 1500

Fully Fluorinated Species:

CF4 5700C2F6 11900C4F10 8600C6F14 9000SF6 22200(Source: IPCC 2001)

BOX 7-2

GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIALS OF SELECTED GHGs(100-Year Time Horizon)

2 The technologies discussed in this chapter were included in this set of scenarios. 3 The Landfill Methane Outreach Program, Natural Gas STAR Program, AgSTAR Program, Coalbed Methane Outreach Program, SF6 Emission

Reduction Partnership for Electric Power Systems, Voluntary Aluminum Industrial Partnership, SF6 Emission Reduction Partnership for theMagnesium Industry, PFC Reduction/Climate Partnership with the Semiconductor Industry, and HCFC-22 Partnership Program.

1990 levels and emissions of many sources ofhigh-GWP gases also declining (EPA 2005).They also provide excellent forums fortransferring technical information in an efficientand cost-effective manner. The partnershipprograms host or participate in annual technicalconferences with the respective industries. Public-private partnerships help facilitate effective use ofthe technologies that are or will soon becomeavailable.

◆ The Federal Government is currently addressingagricultural sources of methane and nitrous oxidethrough a combination of voluntary partnershipsand research, development, and demonstration(RD&D) efforts. Cooperative efforts betweenGovernment and the agriculture industry areneeded to evaluate and develop technologies forlowering N2O emissions from soils and methaneemissions from livestock enteric fermentation.

◆ The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and EPAhave teamed to co-fund the development of thefirst ventilation air methane (VAM) project in theUnited States utilizing a thermal flow reversalreactor to oxidize mine ventilation air, whichcontains low concentrations of methane. Theprocess generates thermal energy that can havemany uses. EPA is also working cooperativelywith Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) todeploy a similar technology developed byNRCan’s CANMET Energy Technology Centre(CETC).

◆ An international network of those involved inresearch on non-CO2 GHGs has been formed by

the International Energy Agency (IEA)Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme, EPA, and theEuropean Commission Directorate GeneralEnvironment. The experts involved in thisnetwork cover emissions, abatement options, andsystems modeling for policy advice. The networkprovides an international forum for identificationof needed research, as well as creatingopportunities for international deployment ofnon-CO2 emission reduction technologies.

◆ An international analytical effort has beenundertaken by the Stanford Energy ModelingForum (EMF) to better characterize the role ofnon-CO2 mitigation in addressing climate change.4

This multi-year effort has led to the developmentof data on the cost and performance of currentlyavailable and near-to-market technologies toreduce non-CO2 emissions. In addition, the 19international modeling teams participating in theproject have incorporated data on non-CO2 gasesinto their economic and integrated assessmentmodels and are improving the capabilities neededto analyze comprehensive climate strategiesfocusing on both CO2 and non-CO2 options.

◆ Established in November 2004, the Methane toMarkets Partnership (Box 7-3) is a new globalinitiative to advance international cooperation onthe recovery and use of methane as a valuableclean energy source. The partnership will increaseenergy security, enhance economic growth,improve air quality, improve industrial safety, andreduce GHG emissions throughout the world.Methane to Markets has the potential to reducenet methane emissions by up to 50 million metric

137


4 Results from this study, EMF 21, are to be published in a special issue of the Energy Journal in 2005. Seehttp://www.stanford.edu/group/EMF/research/index.htm.

The United States is collaborating with 17 countries (Argentina, Australia,Brazil, Canada, China, Colombia, Ecuador, Germany, India, Italy, Japan,Mexico, Nigeria, Russia, South Korea, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom) andover 220 organizations from the private sector, financial community, and other governmental and non-governmental institutions to undertake activities to capture and use methane at landfills, coal mines, oil and gassystems, and agricultural operations.

The United States is committing up to $53 million over the next five years to facilitate the development andimplementation of methane projects in developing countries and countries with economies in transition. EPAplays a lead role in the partnership and coordinates efforts with several other departments, including theDepartments of State and Energy, the U.S. Trade and Development Agency and the U.S. Agency for InternationalDevelopment. See http://www.methanetomarkets.org.

BOX 7-3

tons of carbon equivalent annually by 2015 andcontinue at that level or higher in the future.

These partnerships and others that are discussed inthis chapter demonstrate the potential for significantnear-term emission reductions from currentlyavailable technologies. In addition, longer-termanalyses have identified the potential for current andfuture technologies to lead to even more significantemission reductions. Historically, non-CO2 gaseswere either not included or were treated in a cursorymanner in climate change modeling and scenariostudies. This situation is changing, however, andmany modelers are incorporating the non-CO2 gasesinto their models and are developing the capability toassess the role of the non-CO2 gases in addressingclimate change. Studies published to date indicatethat substantial mitigation of future increases inradiative forcing could be achieved by reducingemissions of these other GHGs. It is possible thatsuch reductions could contribute as much as one-halfof the abatement levels needed to stay within a totalradiative forcing gain that would be consistent withcommonly discussed stabilization ranges of CO2

concentrations.5

Achieving significant reductions in the emissions ofthe non-CO2 gases is possible, taking into account thecurrent achievements in reducing emissions as well asthe results of detailed analyses of the technical andeconomic potential to reduce emissions fromparticular sources and sectors. Based on theinformation presented in this chapter, it is possible toachieve CH4 emissions reductions of 40 to 60 percentby 2050, and 45 to 70 percent by 2100. Emissions ofN2O can be reduced by 25 to 30 percent by 2050, and50 percent by 2100 (DeAngelo et al. forthcoming,Delhotal et al. forthcoming). In addition, it ispossible to reduce emissions of high-GWP gases by55 to 75 percent by 2050, and 60 to 80 percent by2100 (Schaefer 2006).

There are a number of potentially fruitful areas fortechnologies to mitigate growth in emissions of non-CO2 GHGs and strong promise that over timeemissions could be reduced substantially. Thestrategy for addressing non-CO2 GHGs has two keyelements. First, it focuses on the key emission sourcesof these GHGs and identifies specific mitigationoptions and research needs by gas, sector, and source.Given the diversity of emission sources, a generalizedtechnology approach is not practical. Second, thestrategy emphasizes both the expedited development

138


TARGET AREAU.S.

EMISSIONS% OF TOTAL U.S.

NON-CO2

GLOBALEMISSIONS

% OF GLOBALNON-CO2

CH4 Emissions from Energy and Waste

371 34 2836 31

CH4 and N2O Emissions fromAgriculture

444 41 5428 60

Emissions of High Global WarmingPotential (GWP) Gases

139 13 368 4

N2O Emissions from Combustionand Industrial Sources

98 9 390 4

Emissions of Tropospheric OzonePrecursors and Black Carbon

N/A*

* Emissions estimates exist but they cannot be converted into CO2 equivalent units.Sources: EPA 2005, 2004

5 U.S. Climate Change Science Program, Prospectus for Synthesis and Assessment Product 2.1.http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/sap/default.htm.

6 For this chapter, the GWP-weighted emissions of methane (estimated at 21) are presented in terms of equivalent emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2),using units of teragrams of carbon dioxide equivalents (Tg CO2 equivalent). To convert the emission estimates included in this chapter to giga-tonnes of carbon (GtC), multiply the emissions estimate by .000272. For example, 200 Tg CO2 equivalent X (.000272) = .054 GtC.

Target Areas for Reducing Emissions of Non-CO2 GHGs (2000 Emissions in Tg CO2 Equivalent)

Table 7-1. Target Areas for ReducingEmissions of Non- CO2GHGs(2000Emissions in TgCO2 Equivalent) 6

and deployment of near-term and close-to-markettechnologies and expanded R&D into longer-termopportunities leading to large-scale emissionreductions. By stressing both near- and long-termoptions, the strategy offers maximum climateprotection in the near term and a roadmap to achievedramatic gains in later years.

The discussion of the key emission sources of otherGHGs is organized around five broad categories—or“target areas”—listed in Table 7-1. Following thetable, each target area is discussed in subsequenttechnology sections. Each of these technologysections includes a sub-section describing the currentportfolio. The technology descriptions include a linkto the CCTP Technology Options for the Near andLong Term (CCTP 2003).

Methane Emissions fromEnergy and Waste

In 2000, methane emissions from the energy andwaste sectors accounted for 31 percent of global non-CO2 GHG emissions (Table 7-2), and nearly 50percent of global methane emissions. The majoremission sources in these sectors include coal mining,natural gas and oil systems, landfills, and wastewatertreatment. As Table 7-2 shows, among the energyand waste-related methane emission sources, oil andgas systems, and landfills are the largest emissionsources, accounting for 9 and 11 percent, respectively,of global non-CO2 emissions.

The energy and waste sectors present some of themost promising and cost-effective near-termreduction opportunities. Reducing methaneemissions, the primary component of natural gas, canbe cost-effective in many cases due to the marketvalue of the recovered gas. Efforts in the UnitedStates to voluntarily encourage these economicallyattractive opportunities have already been successfulby focusing on the deployment of available, cost-effective technologies. As Table 7-3 shows, emissionsfrom the key sources in the United States havedeclined in absolute terms by about 16 percent since1990, equal to about 65 teragrams of carbon dioxideequivalent (Tg CO2 equivalent).

Despite this success, significant opportunities remainfor further emission reductions through the expandeddeployment of currently available technologies andthe development of promising new technologies.These longer-term technologies could lead tosubstantial additional methane reductions in thefuture. The remainder of this section discusses thesetechnical opportunities for the three major emissionsources in this category: landfills, oil and gas systems,and coal mines.

Landfills

Methane emissions from landfills result from thedecomposition of organic material (yard waste, foodwaste, etc.) by bacteria in an anaerobic environment.Emission levels are affected by site-specific factorssuch as waste composition, moisture, and landfill size.Landfills are the second largest anthropogenicmethane emission source in the United States,releasing an estimated 131 Tg CO2 equivalent to theatmosphere in 2003 (EPA 2005). Globally, landfills

7.1

139


SOURCEU.S.

EMISSIONS

% OF TOTAL U.S.NON-CO2 GHG

EMISSIONS

GLOBALEMISSIONS

% OF GLOBALNON-CO2 GHG

EMISSIONS

Landfills 130.7 12 814 9

Coal Mining 56.2 5 439 5

Natural Gas and Oil Systems 149.7 14 1013 11

Wastewater Treatment 34 3 569 6

Total 371 34 2836 31

* Emissions estimates exist but they cannot be converted into CO2 equivalent units. Sources: EPA 2005, 2004

U.S. and Global Methane (CH4) Emissions from Energy and Waste (2000 Emissions in Tg CO2 Equivalent)

Table 7-2. U.S.and GlobalMethane (CH4)Emissions fromEnergy and Waste(2000 Emissionsin Tg CO2Equivalent)

are also a significant emission source, accounting foran estimated 814 Tg CO2 equivalent in 2000 oralmost 10 percent of global non-CO2 emissions (Table7-2). The majority of emissions currently come fromdeveloped countries, where sanitary landfills facilitatethe anaerobic decomposition of waste. Emissionsfrom developing countries, however, are expected toincrease as solid waste will be increasingly diverted tomanaged landfills as a means of improving overallwaste management. By 2020, three regions areprojected to each account for more than 10 percent ofglobal methane emissions from landfills: Africa (16percent), Latin America (13 percent) and SoutheastAsia (12 percent) (EPA 2004).

Potential Role of TechnologyThe principal approach to reduce methane emissionsfrom landfills involves the collection and combustion(through use for energy or flaring) of landfill gas(LFG). LFG utilization technologies can be dividedinto two main categories: electricity generation anddirect gas use. About 75 percent of the projects in theUnited States involve electricity generation, usingreciprocating engines or combustion turbines. Directuse technologies account for about 25 percent of totalprojects, but their implementation has grown inrecent years. Some of these technologies use LFGdirectly as a medium-Btu fuel, while others requirethe gas to be upgraded and delivered to a natural gaspipeline.

Technology StrategyAdditional CH4 emission reductions at landfills can beachieved through RD&D efforts focused onimprovements in LFG collection efficiency, gas

utilization technologies, and alternatives to existingsolid waste management practices. In the near term,RD&D efforts focused on improving collectionefficiency and demonstrating promising emerging gasuse technologies can yield significant benefits. Theseapproaches could increase emission reductions fromthe waste currently contained in landfills, which willemit CH4 for 30 or more years. Longer-termreductions will result from research on advancedutilization technologies and development of solidwaste management alternatives, such as bioreactorlandfills.

Current PortfolioThe current Federal portfolio focuses on three areas:

◆ Research and development of anaerobic andaerobic bioreactor landfills that more quicklystabilize the readily decomposable organicconstituents of the waste stream through enhancedmicrobiological processes. The goal is to havethree to five commercial full-scale anaerobic andaerobic bioreactor landfill demonstration unitsoperational by the close of 2006 plus increasedmarket penetration 2007–2012. An additionalgoal is to further evaluate environmental andpublic-health impacts, and design and operationalissues.7

◆ R&D of emerging technologies that facilitate theconversion of LFG to readily usable forms, such ascompressed natural gas/liquefied natural gas, andmethanol/ethanol. Near-term goals to convertlandfill gas to alternative uses include verifyingperformance of LNG conversion technologyapplication on landfill gas and converted vehicle

140


SOURCE1990

EMISSIONS2000

EMISSIONS% CHANGE

Landfills 172 130.7 - 24

Coal Mining 82 56.2 - 32

Natural Gas & Oil 148 149.7 +1

Total 402 337 - 16

Source: EPA 2005.

Change in U.S. Methane (CH4) Emissions from Energy and Waste

Table 7-3.Change in U.S.Methane (CH4)Emissions fromEnergy and Waste


performance, development of additionalcommercially available LNG vehicles (e.g., solidwaste collection trucks), and development ofdistribution/fueling infrastructure. Mid-termgoals target research on cost-effective separationtechnology applications for pipeline quality gasproduction (Figure 7-1) and to evaluate anddemonstrate technologies for producingcommercial carbon dioxide.8

◆ R&D on improving LFG collection efficiency andenhancing electricity production from LFGthrough new and improved electricity generationtechnologies (fuel cells, microturbines, OrganicRankine Cycle, and Stirling-Cycle engines).9

Future Research DirectionsThe current portfolio supports the main componentsof the technology development strategy and addressesthe highest priority current investment opportunitiesin this technology area. For the future, CCTP seeksto consider a full array of promising technologyoptions. From diverse sources, suggestions for futureresearch have come to CCTP’s attention. Some ofthese, and others, are currently being explored andunder consideration for the future R&D portfolio.

Future applied research efforts in the near term couldfocus efforts to improve LFG collection efficiencies,including research on the design, construction, andoperational effectiveness of horizontal wells and othernew gas collection systems. Research could also betargeted on the development of additional economicalgas utilization technologies and optimizing methaneoxidation by cover soils or other advanced covermaterials. Development and deployment of near-term technologies to recover LFG from current wastedisposal sites could reduce emissions by 50 percent(Delhotal et al. forthcoming).

Over the long term, emissions could theoretically beeliminated through the commercialization anddeployment of advanced waste processing andtreatment systems such as integrated systemsapproaches for waste management that could reducethe magnitude of landfill waste and nearly eliminatenew landfill waste, such as:

◆ Source-separation of the solid waste stream intoprocessing categories (recyclables, organics, inerts,etc.) for complete recycling and reuse. This couldinclude (1) designing products to tag and identifywaste for recycling; (2) facilitating thedecomposition of organics through mechanical

biological treatment, followed by rapid andcontrolled aerobic composting of drier feedstocks,and anaerobic decomposition of wet organics indigesters along with enhanced methane gasrecovery; and (3) alternatively, using engineeredbacteria that process/break down organic wastewithout producing methane.

◆ Centralized or distributed waste managementsystems that include on-site conversion of waste tohydrogen, other fuels, or electricity. Thesesystems would include pyrolosis, whereby waste issignificantly reduced in volume to a glass-likecullet, and gasification, whereby waste is convertedto a liquid fuel.

◆ Potential technology options include sort/weightrecognition technology; tagging and trackingtechnology; large and small-scale waste conversionto fuels, power, and products; and geneticallyengineered bacteria.

Coal Mines

Coal mines are a significant methane emission sourcein the United States and worldwide, accounting for

141



Figure 7-1.Capturing andmarketingmethaneemissions fromenergy andwaste systemscan be aneconomicallyattractivemeans forreducing GHGemissions.

Courtesy: EPA

about 10 percent of total anthropogenic methaneemissions (EPA 2004). Methane trapped in coaldeposits and in the surrounding strata is releasedduring normal mining operations in bothunderground and surface mines. In addition,handling of the coal after mining (e.g., throughstorage, processing, and transportation) results inmethane emissions. Underground mines are thelargest source of coal mine methane (CMM)emissions.

Emissions of CMM in the United States in 2000 were56 Tg CO2 equivalent and are projected to increase to70 Tg CO2 equivalent by 2010 (EPA 2005).Worldwide emissions of methane from the coalindustry are estimated to be 432 Tg CO2 equivalentand are expected to rise to 495 Tg CO2 equivalent bythe year 2010 as coal production increases (EPA2004). Globally, almost all CMM emissions comefrom the major coal producing countries and regionsof China; India; the United States; the Confederationof Independent States; Australia; Central, Eastern,and Western Europe; the United Kingdom; andSouthern Africa.

Underground mines present the greatestopportunities for reducing emissions; however,emission reductions are also possible at surface mines.Emissions from both underground and surface minesvary, depending on the technology used to mine thecoal, the rate of coal production, the technologiesemployed to remove the methane from the mines,and the local geological conditions.

Potential Role of TechnologyUpstream and downstream technologies are integralto reducing methane emissions from coal mines. Themost important upstream technological contributionsare in the recovery of methane from minedegasification operations and in the oxidation of low-concentration methane in mine ventilation air.Degasification systems are used to remove methanefrom the coal seams to provide for a safe workingenvironment. These systems generally consist ofboreholes drilled into the coal seams and adjacentstrata, with in-mine and surface gathering systemsused to extract and collect methane. CMM can berecovered in advance of mining or after mining hasoccurred, and recovery may consist of surface wells,in-mine boreholes, or some combination of the two.

From a technical viewpoint, the most appropriatedrainage technology depends on the surfacetopography, subsurface geology, reservoircharacteristics, mine layout, and mine operations.Degasification technologies are used around the

world and are commonplace in most of theaforementioned countries. Surface gob wells are usedto extract methane after mining has occurred, and in-mine horizontal boreholes are standard at many gassymines. However, advanced degasification employinglong-hole in-mine directional drilling has only beensuccessful in a limited number of countries, includingthe United States, Australia, China, Japan, UnitedKingdom, Germany, and Mexico; it is currently beingtested in Ukraine. Only the United States andAustralia have had success with pre-mine drainageusing surface wells. Although gas drainage ispracticed primarily at underground mines, drainage isalso occurring at surface mines in some countries,including the United States, Australia, andKazakhstan. Horizontal boreholes can be drilled intothe coal seam ahead of mining and the methaneextracted.

In a number of countries, commercially appliedtechnologies have led to large reductions in CMMemissions through use of the captured methane.These technologies have included the use of CMM asfuel for power generation (primarily internalcombustion engines), injection into the natural gaspipeline system and local gas distribution networks,boiler fuel for use at the mine, local heating needs,thermal drying of coal, vehicle fuel, and as amanufacturing feedstock (e.g., methanol, carbonblack, and dimethyl ether production). Technologyadvances in gas processing over the past decade havealso resulted in projects to upgrade the quality ofCMM and liquefy the gas, which in turn providemore end-use options and improve access to markets.

Although considerable effort is still directed atimproving methane drainage recovery efficiencies andbroadening the application of end-use technologies,attention is also focused on the capture and use ofcoal mine ventilation air methane (VAM). Mineventilation air generally contains less than 1 percentmethane in accordance with regulatory standards.The low concentration greatly limits possible uses ofthe methane. However, VAM is the largest source ofunderground methane emissions, and presents asignificant opportunity to further mitigate GHGemissions from coal mines if capture and usetechnologies can be successfully applied. WorldwideVAM emissions in 2000 were 238 Tg CO2 equivalentand are expected to increase to 282 Tg CO2

equivalent by 2010 and 308 Tg CO2 equivalent by2020. Emissions of VAM in the United States in2000 were about 37 Tg CO2 equivalent and areanticipated to rise slightly to 40 Tg CO2 equivalentby 2010 and remain steady thereafter (EPA 2003a).

142


Technology StrategyRD&D efforts aimed at emerging methane reductiontechnologies for coal mines could target VAM andadvanced coalbed methane drilling techniques. Thedevelopment of technologies to use VAM will enableoverall emission reductions at underground mines toreach 90 percent, as compared to the currenttechnical recovery limit of 30 to 50 percent (EPA1999). The most promising approach for recoveringVAM emissions is through commercialization oftechnologies that convert the low-concentration(typically under 1 percent) methane directly into heatusing thermal or catalytic flow reversal reactionprocesses. The heat can then be employed for powerproduction or other heating. Demonstration projectsin Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom haveshown that these technologies can be technicallyviable. The world’s first commercial unit is expectedto be operative in Australia in 2006, generatingenough thermal energy to supply a 6-MW steamturbine. Future efforts will need to focus oncontinued testing and commercial deployment ofVAM combined with market development support toensure that it is seen by industry as an energyresource, rather than being vented to the atmosphere.

The other potentially important approach to reduceemissions is the development of advanced drillingtechnologies. Over the 1990s, advances in steerablemotors and stimulation techniques have increased theability to recover a higher percentage of the totalmethane in coal seams. This methane, much ofwhich is high quality, may then find a viable market.The most promising technologies include in-mineand surface directional drilling systems, which mayenable fewer wells to produce more gas, and advancedstimulation techniques, such as nitrogen injection,that increase the recovery efficiency of surface wells.There is also considerable interest in CO2 injection;however, this is currently not an option for minedegasification. Injecting the CO2 into the coal seamrenders the coal seams unmineable due to the hazardof releasing too much CO2 into the mine workings.Although it is difficult to characterize the potential forenhanced gas drainage, these technologies have beenshown to obtain drainage efficiencies of 70 to 90percent (EPA 1999). Future RD&D activities willneed to focus on the continued testing andcommercial deployment of directional drilling and useof other gases in coalbed methane recovery. Inaddition, market development support will be neededto ensure that increased drained emissions are put toproductive use, rather than vented to the atmosphere.

Current PortfolioThe current Federal portfolio focuses on two areas:

◆ Research on advances in coal mine ventilationair systems is focused on use of VAM in flowreversal reactors; concentrators to increase themethane concentration to levels that will supportoxidation; lean fuel turbines; and as combustionair in small-scale reciprocating engines or large-scale mine-mouth power plants, or as co-combustion medium with waste coal (Figure 7-2).The goal of coal mine ventilation air systems’research, development, demonstration, anddeployment (RDD&D) program is marketpenetration by 2005–2010, ultimately leading bythe end of the program to the majority ofventilation air methane emissions mitigated.10

◆ Research on advances in CMM recovery systemsis focused on improving mine drainage systemtechnology through improved directional drillingtechnologies, in-mine hydraulic fracturingtechniques, development of nitrogen and inert gasinjection techniques and improved drillingtechnologies.11

◆ The Coalbed Methane Outreach Program(CMOP) is working to demonstrate technologiesthat can eliminate the remaining emissions fromdegasification systems, and is addressing methane

143



Figure 7-2. Capturing and using methane from coal mine ventilation airrepresents an economic opportunity to reduce GHG emissions.

Courtesy: DOE

emissions in mine ventilation air. Due to enhancedmarket opportunities for natural gas and power,further refinement of technical options for thecapture and utilization of mine methane, agrowing reliance on methane degasification in theWestern United States, and CMOP’s anticipatedsuccess in reducing ventilation air methane overthe next few years.

Future Research Directions◆ The current portfolio supports the main

components of the technology developmentstrategy and addresses the highest priority currentinvestment opportunities in this technology area.For the future, CCTP seeks to consider a fullarray of promising technology options. RD&Defforts will be focused on achieving fullcommercialization and deployment of VAM andadvanced coalbed methane drilling techniques.These technologies alone could reduce emissionsfrom underground mining operations by 90percent (EPA 2003a).

◆ RD&D efforts will be focused on developing new,fully automated mining systems that will almosteliminate methane emissions. Since undergroundmining represents about 83 percent of U.S. coalmine methane emissions, this would represent thepotential for a 75 percent reduction in overall U.S.methane emissions from this source.

Natural Gas and Petroleum Systems

Methane emissions from the oil and gas industryaccounted for approximately 11 percent of globalnon-CO2 emissions in 2000 (EPA 2004). Russia andthe United States accounted for over 30 percent ofglobal methane emissions from oil and gas systems.Emissions occur throughout the production,processing, transmission, and distribution systems andare generally process related. Normal operations,routine maintenance, and system upsets are theprimary contributors. Emissions vary greatly fromfacility to facility and are largely a function ofoperation and maintenance procedures andequipment. However, over 90 percent of methaneemissions from oil and gas systems are associated withnatural gas rather than oil-related operations (EPA2005, 2004).

As demand for oil and gas increases, global methaneemissions are projected to increase by more than 72percent between 1990 and 2020 (EPA 2004).However, in many developed countries there is

increasing concern about the contribution of oil andgas facilities to deteriorating local air quality,particularly emissions of non-methane volatile organiccompounds (NMVOCs). Measures designed tomitigate NMVOC emissions, such as efforts to reduceleaks and venting, have the ancillary benefit ofreducing methane emissions. In addition, aseconomies in many Eastern European countriesundergo restructuring, efforts are underway tomodernize gas and oil facilities. For example,Germany expects to reduce emissions from theformer East German system through upgrades andmaintenance. Russia also plans to focus onopportunities to reduce emissions from its oil and gassystem as part of modernization.

Potential Role of TechnologyReducing methane emissions from the petroleum andnatural gas industries necessitates both procedural andtechnology improvements. Methane emissionreduction strategies generally fall into one of threecategories: (1) technologies or equipment upgradesthat reduce or eliminate equipment venting orfugitive emissions, (2) improvements in managementpractices and operational procedures, or (3) enhancedmanagement practices that take advantage ofimproved technology. Each of these technologies andmanagement practices requires a change frombusiness as usual in the schedule and conduct of dailyoperations. To date, over 90 emission reductionopportunities have been identified by corporatepartners in EPA’s Natural Gas STAR Program. Inmany cases, these actions are cost-effective and widelyapplicable across industry sectors.

Technology StrategyDespite the current availability of cost-effectivemethane emission reduction opportunities in thenatural gas and petroleum industry, RDD&D effortscould have an important impact on future methaneemissions. Both in the near and long terms,RDD&D efforts could focus on increasing marketpenetration of current emission reductiontechnologies, improving leak detection andmeasurement technologies, and developing advancedend-use technologies.

◆ Current Emission Reduction Technologies –Perhaps the greatest environmental benefits wouldbe associated with an enhanced demonstration anddeployment effort focused on currently availableemission reduction technologies. In 2000,deployment of these technologies in the UnitedStates reduced emissions by 15 Tg CO2

144


equivalent, approximately 12 percent of totalindustry emissions (EPA 2005). An enhancedeffort would encourage additional technologypenetration and emissions reductions.

◆ Leak Detection and Measurement – Additionalbenefits could be realized through improvementsin and deployment of leak detection andmeasurement technologies. Although potentialindustry-wide emission reductions are difficult toquantify, improved identification andquantification of methane losses and leaks wouldpromote mitigation activities. New technologieswill allow for quick, relatively inexpensivedetection of leaks that are cost-effective to repair.Some of the emerging leak detection andmeasurement technologies include the Hi-FlowTM

Sampler and hand-held optimal imaging camerasthat can visualize methane leaks (e.g., ImageMulti-Spectral Sensor [IMSS] camera).

◆ Advancing End-Use Technologies – Researchaimed at advancing fuel cell and microturbinetechnologies could reduce emissions at remotewell sites by enabling remote power generation atthese locations. For example, power generatedfrom the lower-quality gas can be used to supportinstrument air systems and eliminate the need forgas-driven pneumatic devices and pumps.

Current PortfolioThe current Federal R&D portfolio primarily focuseson leak detection measurement and monitoringtechnologies for natural gas systems. Advanced leakdetection and measurement technologies enable quickand cost-effective detection and quantification offugitive methane leaks (Figure 7-3). Natural gassystems’ RDD&D goals related to measurement andmonitoring technologies are focused on completing ofthe development and deployment of advancedmeasurement technologies like the Hi-FlowTM and onadvancing the development of imaging technology formethane leak measurement and facilitatedemonstration and deployment.12

Future Research DirectionsThe current portfolio supports the main componentsof the technology development strategy and addressesthe highest priority current investment opportunitiesin this technology area. For the future, CCTP seeksto consider a full array of promising technologyoptions. From diverse sources, suggestions for futureresearch have come to CCTP’s attention. Some of

these, and others, are currently being explored andunder consideration for the future R&D portfolio.

Pipelines carrying natural gas as well as facilitieswhere natural gas is liquefied are a source of fugitiveemissions of methane. Advances in materials, seals,and valve technology could eliminate or reduce theseemissions at the source. Possible research mayinclude:

◆ Development of more accurate and cost-effectiveleak detection and measurement equipment, whichcould be effective in reducing fugitive and ventedemissions from gas production, processing,transmission, and distribution operations.

◆ Long-term research to explore revolutionaryequipment designs. This might focus on “smartequipment,” such as smart pipes or seals, thatcould alert operators to leaks or self-repairingpipelines made of material that can regenerate andautomatically seal leaks. Development ofadditional technologies could enable emissionreductions of 50 percent by the middle of thecentury.

Enhanced leak-detection and measurement efforts canyield significant methane emission reductions.Demonstration of improved technologies hasindicated that emissions at compressor stations andgas-processing plants can be reduced cost effectivelyby as much as 80 to 90 percent. More importantly, anenhanced demonstration and deployment effortfocused on currently available emission reductiontechnologies would encourage additional technology

145


Figure 7-3.Advances in leakdetection andmeasurementsystems fornatural gaspipelines areenablingsignificantreductions inmethaneemissions.

Courtesy: ITTCorporation


penetration. In the United States alone, this effortcould reduce emissions by an estimated 37 Tg CO2

equivalent in 2010.

Methane and NitrousOxide Emissions from Agriculture

Over 40 percent of total U.S. non-CO2 GHGs comefrom methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O)emissions from agriculture (EPA 2005). Globally,agricultural sources of methane and nitrous oxidecontribute an estimated 5,428 Tg CO2 equivalent,nearly 60 percent of global non-CO2 emissions (EPA2004). These emissions result from natural biologicalprocesses inherent to crop and livestock productionand cannot be realistically eliminated, although theycan be reduced. For example, emissions of oxides ofnitrogen (NOX) can likely be decreased by 15 to 35percent through programs that improve crop nitrogenuse efficiency, through plant fertilizer technology,precision agriculture, and plant genetics (DeAngelo2006). Table 7-4 shows N2O and methane emissionsfrom agricultural sources (Tg CO2 equivalent).

Key research efforts have focused on the largestagriculture GHG emission sources:

◆ Nitrous oxide emissions from agricultural soilmanagement.

◆ Methane and nitrous oxide emissions frommanure management.

◆ Methane emissions from livestock entericfermentation.

Advanced Agricultural Systems forNitrous Oxide Emissions Reductions

Low efficiency of nitrogen use in agriculture isprimarily caused by large nitrogen losses due toleaching and gaseous emissions (ammonia, nitrousoxide, nitric oxide, and nitrogen). In general, N2Oemissions from mineral and organic nitrogen can bedecreased by nutrient and water managementpractices that optimize a crop’s natural ability tocompete with processes that result in plant-availablenitrogen being lost from the soil-plant system.

Potential Role of TechnologyKey technologies in the area of nutrient managementcan be applicable to N2O mitigation. They focus onthe following areas:

◆ Precision agriculture – targeted application offertilizers, water, and pesticides.

◆ Cropping system models – tools to assist farmermanagement decisions.

◆ Control release fertilizers and pesticides –delivery of nutrients and chemicals to match cropdemand and timing of pest infestation.

◆ Soil microbial processes – use of biological and

7.2

146


SOURCEU.S.

EMISSIONS


EMISSIONS

GLOBALEMISSIONS


EMISSIONS

N2O Emissions from Agriculture 282 26% 2875 32%

Enteric Methane Emissions 116 11% 1712 19%

Methane Emissions from Manure 38 3% 199 2%

Methane Emissions from Rice Production

8 < 1% 643 7%

Total 443 40% 5429 60%

Sources: EPA 2005, 2004.

U.S. and Global CH4 and N2O Emissions from Agriculture (2000 Emissions in Tg CO2 Equivalent)

Table 7-4. U.S.and Global CH4and N2OEmissions fromAgriculture (2000Emissions in TgCO2 Equivalent)

chemical methods, such as liming, to manipulatemicrobial processes to increase efficiency ofnutrient uptake, suppress N2O emissions, andreduce leaching.

◆ Agricultural best management practices –limiting N-gas emissions, soil erosion, andleaching.

◆ Soil conservation practices – utilizing buffersand conservation reserves.

◆ Livestock manure utilization – development ofmechanisms to more effectively use livestockmanure in crop production.

◆ Plant breeding – to increase nutrient useefficiency and decrease demand for pesticides.

Technology StrategyTechnologies and practices that increase the overallnitrogen efficiency while maintaining crop yieldsrepresent viable options to decrease N2O emissions.Focused RDD&D efforts are needed in a number ofareas to develop new technologies and expandeddeployment of commercially available technologiesand management practices (Figure 7-4).

◆ Further development of precision agriculturetechnologies to meet the fertilizer and energyreduction goals could lead to increased adoptionof these technologies and improved performance.

◆ “Smart materials” for prescription release ofnutrients and chemicals for major crops currentlyrequire modest breakthroughs in materialstechnology to reach fruition.

◆ Soil microbial processes could also be manipulatedto increase N-use efficiency; however, furtherdevelopment is needed to ensure full efficacy andavoid the introduction of environmental risks.

◆ First-generation integrated system models,technology, and supporting education andextension infrastructure need to be implemented,and research on using these techniques to improvemanagement expanded.

◆ Genetically designed major crop plants couldutilize fertilizer more efficiently.

◆ Increased extension efforts are needed to fullyutilize best management practices.

◆ Basic research on process controls and fieldmonitoring programs are needed to ensure thattheoretical understanding exists as technology

evolves and that changes in management practicesto mitigate GHG emissions actually function astheorized.

◆ Accurate measurement technologies and protocolsare needed for assessment and verification.

Current PortfolioAlthough many mitigation options for N2O emissionscan be readily identified, their implementation has notbeen carried out on a large scale. Other thanprograms to limit nitrogen losses, programs thatdirectly address the issue of N2O emissions fromagricultural soil management are very limited. Thecurrent Federal portfolio focuses on N2O emissionsfrom agricultural soil management; precisionagriculture; understanding and manipulation of soilmicrobial processes; expert system management; andthe development of inexpensive, robust measurementand monitoring technologies. Research forreductions in N2O emissions focus on improvedproduction efficiencies and reduced energyconsumption by developing and deploying precisionagriculture technologies, sensors/monitors andinformation-management systems, and smartmaterials for prescription release utilized in majorcrops. An additional goal is to improve fertilizerefficiency and reduce nitrogen inputs by developingadvanced fertilizers and technologies, methods ofmanipulating soil microbial processes, and geneticallydesigned major crop plants.13

147



Figure 7-4. Technologies and farming practices, such as precisionagriculture and no-till planting, can increase the overall nitrogen efficiencywhile maintaining crop yields, resulting in reduced nitrous oxide emissions.

Photo: Tim McCabe, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service

Future Research DirectionsThe current portfolio supports the main componentsof the technology development strategy and addressesthe highest priority current investment opportunitiesin this technology area. For the future, CCTP seeksto consider a full array of promising technologyoptions. The current portfolio supports the maincomponents of the technology development strategyand addresses the highest priority current investmentopportunities in this technology area. For the future,CCTP seeks to consider a full array of promisingtechnology options. From diverse sources,suggestions for future research have come to CCTP’sattention. Some of these, and others, are currentlybeing explored and under consideration for the futureR&D portfolio.

In general, an improved understanding of theinteraction and interrelationship among methane,carbon dioxide, and nitrous oxide emissions inagricultural environments is needed. This shouldinvolve a systems approach across gases andagricultural systems to synergize related technologies.Other possible further research activities include:

◆ Precision agriculture in general requires advancesin rapid, low-cost, and accurate soil nutrient andphysical property characterization; real-timecharacterization of crop water need; real-time cropyield and quality characterization; real-time insectand pest infestation characterization; autonomouscontrol systems; and integrated physiologicalmodel and massive data/information managementsystems.

◆ Improved understanding of specific soil microbialprocesses is required to support development ofmethods for manipulation of these processes andto identify how manipulation impacts GHGemissions.

◆ To continue to improve systems management,models that represent an accurate understandingof plant physiology must be coupled with soilprocess models, including decomposition, nutrientcycling, gaseous diffusion, water flow, and storageon a mass balance basis, to understand howecosystems respond to environmental andmanagement change.

Other options could include improved utilization ofthe nitrogen in manure on croplands/pasturelands tooffset use of synthetic nitrogen and decrease thequantity of nitrogen excreted from livestock by bettermatching the intake of nitrogen (e.g., protein) with

the actual dietary requirements of the animals. Alarge portion of the N2O emissions from soils comesfrom livestock waste directly deposited on pastures,and this has significant mitigation potential both inthe United States and globally.

Wide-scale implementation of these technologies andimproved management systems in the United Statescould lead to reductions in nitrous oxide emissionsfrom agriculture of 15 to 35 percent. In somedeveloping countries, where greater inefficiencies areidentified and where potential use of nitrogen is likelyto increase greatly in the future as the demand formore crop and pasture production increases, thepotential is even greater.

Methane and Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Livestock and Poultry Manure Management

Globally, nitrous oxide and methane emissions fromlivestock and poultry manure management totaledapproximately 400 Tg CO2 equivalent in 2000 (EPA2004). Livestock and poultry manure has thepotential to produce significant quantities of methaneand nitrous oxide, depending on the wastemanagement practices. When manure is stored ortreated in systems that promote anaerobic conditions,such as lagoons and tanks, the decomposition of thebiodegradable fraction of the waste tends to producemethane. When manure is handled as a solid, such asin stacks or deposits on pastures, the biodegradablefraction tends to decompose aerobically, greatlyreducing methane emissions; however, this practiceincreases emissions of nitrous oxide, which has agreater global warming potential. Practices areneeded that minimize both GHGs simultaneously.

Potential Role of TechnologyMethane reduction and other environmental benefitscan be achieved by utilizing a variety of technologiesand processes. Aeration processes, such as aerobicdigestion, auto-heated aerobic digestion, andcomposting, remove and stabilize some pollutantconstituents from the waste stream. Thesetechnologies facilitate the aerobic decomposition ofwaste and prevent methane emissions. Anaerobicdigestion systems, in contrast, encourage methanegeneration, and the collection and transfer of manure-generated off-gases to energy-producing combustiondevices (such as engine generators, boilers, or odorcontrol flares). Solids separation processes remove

148


some pollutant constituents from the waste streamthrough gravity, mechanical, or chemical methods.These processes create a second waste stream thatmust be managed using techniques different fromthose already in use to manage liquids or slurries.Separation processes offer the opportunity to stabilizesolids aerobically (i.e., to control odor and verminpropagation).

Technology StrategyMethane collection from anaerobic digestion systemsplays an important role in reducing emissions fromlivestock manure management (Figure 7-5). Inaddition, these systems can provide additional odor-control and energy benefits by collecting andproducing electricity from the combustion ofmethane-using devices, such as engine generators andboilers. Although the use of commercial farm-scaleanaerobic digesters has increased over the past fiveyears due to private sector activities, significantopportunity remains. Currently there are only 12companies that provide proven commercial-scaleanaerobic digestion systems and gas utilizationoptions for farm applications in the United States. Asof 2003, an estimated 40 anaerobic digester systems,which produce about 1 million kWh/year, were in useat commercial swine and dairy farms in the UnitedStates (EPA 2003b).

Expanded technology research and extension effortscould include commercial-scale demonstrationprojects and evaluation of emerging technologies todetermine their effectiveness in reducing emissions,overall environmental benefits, and cost-effectiveness.For example, a number of emerging anaerobicdigester systems adopted from the sewage industry arecurrently under evaluation for farm-scale applications.In addition, it is important to encourage research onodor and nitrogen emission control and ensure that itis coordinated with research on methane productionand emission technology development.

Current PortfolioMethane reduction and other environmental benefitscan be achieved by utilizing a variety of technologiesand processes, including aeration processes to removeand stabilize some pollutant constituents from thewaste stream; anaerobic digestion systems that collectand transfer manure-generated off-gases to energy-producing combustion devises (such as enginegenerators, boilers, or odor control flares); and solidsseparation processes to remove some pollutantconstituents from the waste stream. The goals of this

research activity are to reduce costs and improvebiological efficiencies of methane and nitrous oxideemissions by developing new types of digesters;developing separation processes for solid and liquidfractions; and on developing, applying, and evaluatingprocess performance of aeration systems for manurewaste streams. The current Federal portfolio focusesthese technologies.14


◆ Future research could address technologies toreduce carbon in waste lagoons by solidsseparation and increase aeration of lagoon wastesystems. Additional research could facilitate theshift from anaerobic lagoons to solid wastemanagement systems.

◆ Future research can lead to improved separationprocesses that remove solids from liquids forimproved waste management and stabilizationdevelopment of new types of digestors withreduced costs and improved biological efficiencies,development of centralized anaerobic digestion

149



Figure 7-5. Methane collection from anaerobic digestion systems plays animportant role in reducing emissions from livestock manure management.

Courtesy: EPA

systems for multiple farm operations, anddevelopment of aeration processes and pollutioncontrol methods for manure waste streams.

Expanded extension efforts to the livestock,agricultural, energy, and regulatory communities in anumber of key livestock-producing states (forexample, by expanding the activities currentlyconducted through the AgSTAR Program15), couldlead to additional emissions reductions in the UnitedStates. In addition, research that utilizes newtechnological developments in analyticalinstrumentation and molecular biology related to acommercial farm’s operational ability would be useful.If such activities were undertaken globally, theemission reductions could be substantial.

Methane Emissions from LivestockEnteric Fermentation

Methane emissions from enteric fermentation are thesecond largest global agricultural GHG source,contributing an estimated 1712 Tg CO2 of emissionsin 2000 (EPA 2004). Methane emissions occurthrough microbial fermentation in the digestivesystem of livestock. The amount of methane emitteddepends primarily on the animal’s digestive system,and the amount and type of feed. Ruminant livestocksuch as dairy cattle, beef cattle, and buffalo emit themost methane per animal, while non-ruminantlivestock such as swine, horses, and mules emit less.Because methane emissions represent an economicloss to the farmer—where feed is converted tomethane rather than to product output—viablemitigation options can entail efficiency improvementsto reduce methane emissions per unit of beef or milk.

Potential Role of TechnologyReductions in this energy loss can be achievedthrough increased nutritional efficiency. The goal ofmuch livestock nutrition research has been to enhanceproduction efficiency in order to indirectly reducemethane per unit of product through breedimprovements, increased feeding efficiency throughdiet management, and strategic feed selection.Without reductions in national herds, however, thisapproach will not result in net decreases of entericmethane. Historic and near-term projected trendsshow both a decreasing herd size and reducedmethane emissions on a per unit product basis.

Technology StrategyTechnologies that would likely reduce methaneemissions in addition to enhancing productionefficiency include precision nutrition; andimprovements in grazing management, feedefficiency, and livestock production efficiency.Research includes but is not limited to investigatingbetween-animal differences to determine if traits forreduced methane production can be inherited, anddietary manipulation of grains, oils, and fats thatreduce methane production. Key technologiesinclude the following:

◆ Precision nutrition can minimize excess nutrients,particularly nitrogen, while meeting thenutritional needs of the ruminal microflora andthose of the animal for growth, milk production,and digestion.

◆ Improved grazing management can increaseforage yield and digestibility.

◆ Using ionophores to improve feed efficiency caninhibit the formation of CH4 by rumen bacteria.

◆ Improving livestock production efficiency withnatural or synthetic hormone feed additives orimplants can increase milk production and growthefficiency and reduce feed requirements.

Current PortfolioThe current Federal research portfolio focuses onimproved feed and forage management and treatmentpractices to increase the digestibility and reduceresidence digestion time in the rumen, best-management practices to increase animalreproduction efficiency, and use of growthpromotants and other agents to improve animalefficiency. Enteric emissions reduction goals focus onimproved production efficiencies for forage andfeedstuffs; increased digestibility; means to reachthese goals include genetically designed forages;manipulation of ruminal microbial processes tosequester hydrogen, making it unavailable tomethanogens; and genetically designed bacteria thatcan compete with natural microbes.16

Future Research DirectionsThe current portfolio supports the main componentsof the technology development strategy and addressesthe highest priority current investment opportunitiesin this technology area. For the future, CCTP seeksto consider a full array of promising technology

150


15 For additional information on the AgSTAR Program, see http://www.epa.gov/agstar/.16 See Section 4.2.3 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-423.pdf.

options. The current portfolio supports the maincomponents of the technology development strategyand addresses the highest priority current investmentopportunities in this technology area. For the future,CCTP seeks to consider a full array of promisingtechnology options. From diverse sources,suggestions for future research have come to CCTP’sattention. Some of these, and others, are currentlybeing explored and under consideration for the futureR&D portfolio.

In general, an improved understanding of theinteraction and interrelationship among methane,carbon dioxide, and nitrous oxide emissions inagricultural environments is needed. This shouldinvolve a systems approach across gases andagricultural systems to synergize related technologies.Possible research activities include:

◆ Further research is needed with precisionagriculture technologies such as geneticengineering of plants to enhance digestibility offeeds, reduce fertilizer requirements, and provideappropriate nutrients to enhance beneficialmicrobial competitiveness; development oflivestock with increased productivity and dietaryenergy use efficiency that can be productive invarious environments and use reduced feedresources; and development of models thatrepresent accurate understanding of animalnutrient needs.

◆ Longer-term research is needed to improveunderstanding of specific rumen microbialprocesses to support development of methods formaking desirable engineered microbes competitivewith natural rumen microbes and development ofvaccinations that can reduce methane productionin the rumen.

It is estimated that an increase in productionefficiency of approximately 25 percent could berealized if maximum implementation were to occur.A large potential exists as well in developingcountries, where the livestock population is expectedto increase significantly over the next few decades andwhere production efficiency is currently low (i.e., highmethane per unit product).

Methane Emissions from Rice Fields

Another significant source of global anthropogenicmethane is rice production. Rice is the dietary stapleof a large proportion of the world’s population. It isgenerally grown in flooded paddy fields, wheremethane is generated by the anaerobic decompositionof organic matter in the soil. Traditional wetcultivation emits an estimated 642 Tg CO2 equivalentof methane (EPA 2004). Emissions from this sourcehave leveled off in the past two decades.

Although water management, fertilizer selection,cultivar selection, and nutrient management arepotential options for limiting methane emissions fromrice fields, further research and development isneeded to determine their cost-effectiveness andfeasibility. Currently, there is no research ongoing inthis area.

A number of opportunities for future research exist inthis area, some of which include plant genetics, watermanagement, and nutrient management. In general,the greatest challenges for mitigating methaneemissions from rice fields arise from uncertainties ineffecting changes in cultivation management, whichaffects rice yields; and developing feasiblemanagement practices that reduce methane emissionswithout increasing nitrogen losses and reducingyields. In addition, reduction of methane emissions

151


SOURCEU.S.

EMISSIONS


EMISSIONS

GLOBALEMISSIONS


EMISSIONS

Substitutes for Ozone-DepletingSubstances

75 7 126 1

Industrial Use of High-GWP Gases 64 6 242 3

Total 139 13 368 4

Sources: EPA 2005, EPA 2004.

U.S. and Global Emissions of High-GWP Gases (2000 Emissions in Tg CO2 Equivalent)

Table 7-5. U.S.and GlobalEmissions ofHigh-GWP Gases(2000 Emissionsin Tg CO2Equivalent)

could be difficult to implement because, in manycases, the necessary actions could involve significantchanges in agricultural practices (e.g., shifting todifferent water management regimes). In principle,application of known techniques could reduce methaneemissions by 30 to 40 percent by the year 2020.Achieving these large emission reductions would,however, require finding suitable incentives and deliverymechanisms to induce changes in current practices.

Emissions of HighGlobal-WarmingPotential Gases

In 2000, high-GWP gases represented 13 percent oftotal U.S. non-CO2 GHG emissions and 4 percent ofglobal non-CO2 emissions (Table 7-5). There are twodifferent types of emission sources in this category,and each has different R&D priorities. As discussedbelow, emissions of high-GWP gases used assubstitutes for ozone-depleting substances (ODSs)that are being phased out under the MontrealProtocol are currently increasing. High-GWP gasesare also used or emitted by several other industries,and in many cases these emissions can be readilymanaged or eliminated. Table 7-5 shows emissions ofsubstitutes for ODSs and high-GWP gases (Tg CO2

equivalent).

Substitutes for Ozone DepletingSubstances

High-GWP gases used as substitutes for ODSs are agrowing emissions source in the United States andglobally. These high-GWP gases are being used asreplacements for chemicals (like CFCs) that depletethe stratospheric ozone layer (Box 7-2). ODSs, whichare also GHGs, are being phased out under theMontreal Protocol and, thus, are not counted innational inventories. To address ozone depletion, therefrigeration, air conditioning, fire suppression, foamblowing, solvent cleaning, and other industries are inthe midst of the ODS phaseout.

Potential Role of TechnologyFor many industries, the ODS phaseout isaccomplished by switching to alternative chemicals.For most industries, the most popular and highestperforming alternatives are chemicals like HFCs,

which do not deplete the ozone layer but are potentGHGs. At the same time, the phaseout is providingindustries with an opportunity to improve processesand practices related to chemical use, management,and disposal in ways that reduce the emissions ofHFCs and PFCs, where those chemicals are used asalternatives. As the ODS phaseout continues,opportunities exist to find better life-cycle climateperformance alternatives and/or continue reducingemissions.

Technology StrategyTo reduce emissions of GHGs used as ODSsubstitutes, focus might be given to the following: (1)finding alternative gases with lower or no GWP toperform, safely and efficiently, the same functioncurrently served by the HFCs and PFCs; (2)exploring technologies that can reduce the use ofthese chemicals and/or the rate at which they areemitted; and (3) supporting responsible handlingpractices and principles that reduce unintended andunnecessary emissions.

Current PortfolioThe Federal R&D portfolio is focused on the twolargest sources of hydrofluorocarbon emissions.These emissions arise from the supermarketrefrigeration and motor vehicle air conditioningsectors.

◆ Motor Vehicle Air Conditioning:Hydrofluorocarbon Emissions – The motorvehicle industry phased out the use of CFC-12(with a GWP of about 10,000) in new car airconditioners between 1992 and 1994, and sincethen has used exclusively HFC-134a (with a GWPof 1300). R&D is underway to commercializeeven lower-GWP refrigerants, mainly CO2

(GWP=1) and HFC-152a (GWP=120). Due tothe high-pressure and toxic effects of CO2, and theflammability of HFC-152a, additional safetyengineering and risk mitigation technologies arebeing developed. Furthermore, research andtesting are needed to maintain or improve theenergy efficiency (and hence gas usage and CO2

emissions) of the new air conditioners. In theUnited States, direct refrigerant GWP emissionscan be reduced by more than 95 percent andindirect fuel use emissions reduced by 30 percentor more, for a total reduction of total vehicle fuelemissions (in vehicles with air conditioning) by upto 2 percent.

◆ Supermarket Refrigeration:Hydrofluorocarbon Emissions – Supermarketsare phasing out the use of ozone-depleting

7.3

152


refrigerants and substituting HFCs, which arepotent GHGs. Technologies under developmentinclude distributed refrigeration, which reducesthe need for excessive refrigerant piping (andhence emissions), and secondary-looprefrigeration, which segregates refrigerant-containing equipment to a separate, centralizedlocation while using a benign fluid to transfer heatfrom the food display cases. The RDD&D goalsfor reducing HFC emissions from supermarketrefrigeration include improving costs and energy-use performance of these new technologies andeducating store designers and builders regardingnew technologies and how these technologies canbe integrated into new or retrofitted stores at a netsavings.17

◆ The Significant New Alternatives Program(SNAP) has continued its progress in phasingdown the use of global warming, ODSs like CFCsand hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs). SNAPhas worked closely with industry to research,identify and implement climate and ozone friendlyalternatives, supporting a smooth transition tothese new technologies. In addition, SNAP hasinitiated programs with different industry sectorsto monitor and minimize emissions of globalwarming gases like HFCs and perfluorocarbons(PFCs) used as substitutes to ozone-depletingchemicals.


◆ Continuation of the responsible-use practicesdeveloped to control emissions of ODSs has hadand will continue to have a substantial effect onHFC and PFC emissions. Research indicates thatapproximately 80 percent of previous ODS useshave been replaced through conservation methods

and use of non-fluorocarbon technologies.Continued emphasis on this success is needed, forexample, by using equipment and technologies toreduce emissions during service and maintenance.

◆ Long-term research could focus on technologiesthat hold the most potential for reducing oreliminating total GHG emissions, includingassociated energy production emissions, and arepractical for their applications. Key areas forconsideration over the long term are theinvestigation of new technologies and processes toreplace current uses of ODSs and avoid or reduceemissions of high-GWP gases. This includesresearch to find alternative refrigerant/ACworking fluids that are not high-GWP gases.Another approach is research on solid staterefrigeration and AC systems that not onlyeliminates the working fluid, but reduces theoverall energy use.

◆ A focused RD&D program to develop and deploysafe, high-performing, cost-effective climateprotection technologies could result in U.S.emission reductions of 50 percent or more by2020. However, due to the long lifetimes of manyof the products that use these gases, efforts needto be taken in the near term to realize the stockturnover necessary to achieve these reductions in acost-effective manner.

153



Figure 7-6. AstronRemote PlasmaSource (for NF3CVD chambercleaning) , animportanttechnology forreducing PFCemissions fromsemiconductormanufacturing.

Courtesy: EPA

Industrial Use of High-GWP Gases

High-GWP synthetic gases are generally used inapplications where they are critical to highly complexmanufacturing processes and provide safety andsystem reliability, such as in semiconductormanufacturing, electric power transmission anddistribution, and magnesium production and casting.High-GWP gases are also emitted as byproducts fromthe manufacture of refrigerants (HCFC-22) and fromthe production of primary aluminum.

Potential Role of TechnologyIncremental improvements to current technologyhave been made through the initiation of voluntarypublic-private industry partnerships. EPA’spartnerships with industries, including the U.S.primary aluminum producers, HCFC-22manufacturing, electric utility industry, magnesiumproducers, and semiconductor industry, areidentifying new technologies and processimprovements that not only reduce emissions of high-GWP gases but also improve production efficiency,thereby saving money. With continued support,production technologies are expected to furtherimprove, allowing these industrial sectors to costeffectively reduce and possibly eliminate emissions ofhigh-GWP gases.

Technology StrategyHigh-GWP gas-emitting industries are implementingan RDD&D strategy focused on pollution prevention.The industries have established long-term goals ofreducing, and in some cases eliminating high-GWPemissions, and are pursuing these goals byinvestigating and implementing source reduction,alternative process chemicals, high-GWP gas captureand reuse, and abatement.

While the U.S. sources of high-GWP emissions arewell defined, they are also very diverse, and thus acustomized approach for each industry is required.New and enhanced R&D will accelerate and expandoptions to stabilize and reduce emissions.Opportunities exist for both near- and long-termRD&D on technologies, including alternativechemicals for plasma etching for semiconductors andmagnesium melt protection, as well as continueddemonstration of advanced plasma abatement devicesfor the semiconductor industry.

Current PortfolioThe current Federal portfolio for reducing industrialemissions of high-GWP gases focuses on five areas:

◆ Research on the Semiconductor Industry:Abatement Technologies – Abatement of high-GWP gases from the exhaust gas stream insemiconductor processing facilities may beachieved by two mechanisms: (1) thermaldestruction and (2) plasma destruction. TheRDD&D goals for the thermal-destructionmechanism target lowering high-GWP emissionsfrom waste streams by more than 99 percent,while minimizing (1) NOX emissions to levels at orbelow emissions standards, (2) water use andburdens on industrial wastewater-treatmentsystems, (3) fabrication floor space, (4)unscheduled outages, and (5) maintenance costs.Plasma-destruction mechanism goals focus on theapplication of plasma technology (Figure 7-6) todevelop a cost-effective POU abatement devicethat lowers exhaust stream concentrations of high-GWP gases by two to three orders of magnitudefrom etchers and plasma-enhanced chemical vapordeposition chambers; and transforms those gasesinto molecules that can be readily removed fromair emissions using known scrubbingtechnologies.18

◆ Research on the Semiconductor Industry:Substitutes for High-GWP Gases – Onemethod of reducing high-GWP gas emissionsfrom the semiconductor industry is to use analternative chemical or production process.Identifying and replacing high-GWP gases withmore environmentally friendly substitutes forchemical vapor deposition clean and dielectricetch processes is a preferred option when viewedfrom the perspective of EPA’s pollution preventionframework. The goal of reducing high-GWPgases in the semiconductor industry is to identifythe chemical and physical mechanisms that governchemical vapor deposition chamber cleaning andetching with perfluorocarbons and non-perfluorocarbons as well as govern processperformance so that emissions of high-GWP gasesmay be significantly reduced without eitheradversely affecting process productivity orincreasing health and safety hazards.19

◆ Semiconductors and Magnesium: Recoveryand Recycle – Three recovery-and-recycletechnologies are being investigated and evaluated:

154



membrane separation, cryogenic capture, andpressure swing absorption. The goal in this area isto develop and demonstrate a cost-effective,universally applicable recovery-and-recycletechnology (all fabrication facilities and all high-GWP gases) that can yield “virgin”-grade high-GWP gases for semiconductor fabrication ormagnesium plant reuse or sufficiently pure high-GWP gases for further use or purificationelsewhere.20

◆ Aluminum Industry: PerfluorocarbonEmissions – Current efforts to reduceperfluorocarbon emissions from primaryaluminum production focus on using moreefficient smelting processes to reduce thefrequency and duration of anode effects, whichcreate the PFC. Another concept, now in theresearch and development phase, involvesreplacing the carbon anode with an inert anode.Doing so would completely eliminate process-related PFC emissions. The goal to reduce PFCemissions in the aluminum industry is to develop acommercially viable inert anode technology designby 2007, with commercialization expected by2010–2015. If successful, the nonconsumable,inert anode technology would have clearadvantages over conventional carbon anodetechnology, including energy efficiency increases,operating cost reductions, elimination of PFCemissions, and productivity gains.21

◆ Research for Electric Power Systems andMagnesium: Substitutes for SF6 – Thechallenge is to identify substitutes to SF6 with lowor no global-warming potential that satisfy themagnesium industry’s melt protectionrequirements and meet the electric powerindustry’s high-voltage insulating needs (Figure 7-7).22

Future Research DirectionsThe current portfolio supports the main componentsof the technology development strategy and addressesthe highest priority current investment opportunitiesin this technology area. For the future, CCTP seeksto consider a full array of promising technologyoptions. The current portfolio supports the maincomponents of the technology development strategyand addresses the highest priority current investment

opportunities in this technology area. For the future,CCTP seeks to consider a full array of promisingtechnology options. From diverse sources,suggestions for future research have come to CCTP’sattention. Some of these, and others, are currentlybeing explored and under consideration for the futureR&D portfolio.

Long-term research might focus on technologies thathold the most potential for reducing or eliminatingtotal GHG emissions, including associated energyproduction emissions, and that are practical for theirapplications. Many of these research efforts mayprove to be high risk due to unknown commercialviability, and thus are unlikely to be pursued by theindustry without significant government funding.Possible research activities include:

◆ Research to identify environmentally friendlyalternative cover gases to replace SF6 for

155



Figure 7-7. Improvements to production technologies, such as alternativecover gases, can cost-effectively reduce, and possibly eliminate,emissions of high global warming potential gases, in this case sulfurhexafluoride (SF6).

Credit: 3M TM Performance Materials Division

magnesium melt protection. Another possibleoption is to develop and deploy manufacturingprocesses that eliminate the need for a cover gassuch as injection molding of thixotropic metalalloys (i.e., semi-solid metal casting).

◆ Research focused on improved process controlsand computer-based operator-training tools tofurther reduce PFC emissions from aluminumsmelting.

◆ Research on the potential to use pure fluorine toreplace SF6 and PFCs in chemical vapordeposition (CVD) chamber cleaning and plasmaetching processes in numerous electronicsmanufacturing processes. Although fluorine is nota GHG, it is a toxic and corrosive substance anddesigning systems to use it would be a challenge.

◆ Research could focus on finding alternatives to theuse of SF6 in high-voltage electric transformers,switchgear and circuit breakers, and in airbornemilitary radar systems. Alternatives include newelectric equipment designs that do not requireGHG dielectric gases and solid state technologiesand materials that do not require dielectric gases.

Significant opportunities exist to reduce emissions. Afocused RD&D program to develop safe, high-performing, cost-effective climate protectiontechnologies could result in emission reductions of 40percent or more over the near term and a dramaticreduction and, in some cases, elimination of emissionsby key industries within a few decades.

Nitrous OxideEmissions fromCombustion andIndustrial Sources

Stationary and mobile source combustion and theproduction of various industrial acids account forabout eight percent of non-CO2 emissions in theUnited States and four percent globally (EPA 2005,2004). U.S. emissions of N2O associated withindustrial acid production declined significantly after1996 due to voluntary industry action and couldremain relatively stable. Although generally notaccounted for in N2O emission inventories, significantemissions of NOX from combustion sources arechemically transformed in the atmosphere and areeventually deposited as nitrogen compounds, whichsubsequently result in emissions of N2O in a mannersimilar to emissions from fertilizer application (Figure7-8). In 2000, the U.S. N2O emissions fromcombustion and industry accounted for nearly 10percent of total non-CO2 GHG emissions, with thecombustion sources accounting for over 70 percent ofthese (EPA 2005). Table 7-6 shows N2O emissionsfrom combustion and industrial sources. R&Dpriorities differ between N2O combustion andindustrial sources. The priorities for reducing N2Oemissions for each of the sources are discussed below.

7.4

156


SOURCEU.S.

EMISSIONS


EMISSIONS

GLOBALEMISSIONS


EMISSIONS

Combustion 68 6 230 2

Industrial Sources 26 2 160 2

Total 93 9 390 4

Sources: EPA 2005, 2004.

U.S. and Global N2O Emissions from Combustion and Industrial Sources (2000 Emissions in Tg CO2 Equivalent)

Table 7-6. U.S.and Global N2OEmissions fromCombustion andIndustrial Sources(2000 Emissionsin Tg CO2Equivalent)

Combustion

Combustion of fossil fuels by mobile and stationarysources is the largest non-agricultural contributor toN2O emissions. Nitrous oxide can be formed undercertain conditions during the combustion process andduring treatment of exhaust or stack gases by catalyticconverters. Since N2O emissions do not contributesignificantly to ozone formation or other publichealth problems, N2O has not been regulated as an airpollutant and has historically not been a focus ofemission control research.

Potential Role of TechnologyA better understanding is needed of how and whenN2O forms and how N2O emissions can best beprevented and reduced. For both stationary andmobile combustion sources, N2O emissions appear tovary greatly with different technologies and underdifferent operating conditions, and the phenomenainvolved are poorly understood. For stationarysources, catalytic NOX reduction technologies canreduce N2O emissions. Other NOX controltechnologies either have no impact or can increaseN2O.

Technology StrategyA key to identifying the most promising approachesand technologies for reducing N2O emissions isunderstanding how N2O is formed duringcombustion and under what circumstances catalytictechnologies contribute to N2O emissions. The mainresearch thrust in the near term is to improvescientific understanding of these basic questions.

Current PortfolioThe current Federal research portfolio on N2Oemissions from combustion is focused on betterunderstanding the formation and magnitude of N2Oemissions from fuel combustion and catalytic-converter operation; evaluating the climate-forcingpotential of atmospheric nitrogen deposition,especially from combustion; and developing emissionmodels to assess the potential climate benefits fromchanges in emissions from nitrogen oxide. The goalin this area is to determine linkages of NOX emissionsfrom transportation combustion and catalytic-converter operation to climate-change impacts due tonitrogen deposition and develop enhanced modelingcapabilities.23

In addition, Federal research on advancedengine/combustion technologies and alternative fuelvehicles will contribute to a reduction in N2Oemissions. Research in these areas is described in theTransportation section of Chapter 4 (ReducingEmissions from Energy End-Use and Infrastructure).


Limited but recent additional collection of nitrousoxide test data have provided statistically reliableemissions estimates for most gasoline-poweredpassenger cars and light duty trucks. It will beimportant to develop vehicle- and engine-testingprograms to generate nitrous oxide emissions data fora variety of vehicles and engines equipped with arange of current and advanced emission-controltechnologies and operated over a range of real-worldoperating conditions, particularly for diesel engines.In addition, future research could determine the effectof catalyst formulation including noble metal loadingsand compositions for alternative catalysts that resultin less nitrous oxide formation. Also, an intensifiedresearch effort is needed to assess the role of airbornenitrogen compounds emitted from combustion anddeposited onto the ground, and how they interactwith soil-generated nitrous oxide emissions.

The development of new combustion technologiesand catalyst formulations that reduce or eliminatenitrous oxide emissions will require new Federalefforts to facilitate joint public-private RD&Dactivities that can effectively address the reduction ofnitrous oxide emissions from combustion andindustrial sources. This could include research thatwould form the basis for identification of newtechnologies in the future. Some areas for near-termstudy are outlined below:

157



◆ Characterizing nitrous oxide from diesel andadvanced technology engines throughcollaborative research between the EPA NationalVehicle and Fuels Emission Laboratory (NVFEL),state air agencies and manufacturers ofvehicles/engines. This research may include avariety of vehicles and engines equipped with arange of current and advanced emission controltechnologies and operated over a range of real-world operating conditions.

◆ Characterizing nitrous oxide from heavy-dutydiesel vehicles that meet future (2007/2010)emission standards. Research is now being startedin this area. As these vehicles will most likely usecatalytic after-treatment, they may be anadditional source of nitrous oxide that previouslyhad not existed. Research on how to minimizethese emissions is also needed. Emissions ofnitrous oxide from combustion sources could besignificantly reduced with improved catalysttechnologies and other advances.

Industrial Sources

Nitric acid is an inorganic compound used primarilyto make synthetic commercial fertilizer. As a rawmaterial, it also is used for the production of adipicacid and explosives, for metal etching, and in theprocessing of ferrous metals. Facilities making adipicacid used to be high emitters of nitrous oxide, but

now that adipic acid plants in the United States haveimplemented nitrous oxide abatement technologies,nitric acid production is the largest industrial sourceof nitrous oxide emissions.

Potential Role of TechnologyThe nitric acid industry currently controls NOX

emissions using both non-selective catalytic reduction(NSCR) and selective catalytic reduction (SCR)technologies. NSCR is very effective at controllingnitrous oxide while SCR can actually increase nitrousoxide emissions. NSCR units, however, are generallynot preferred in modern plants because of highenergy costs and associated high gas temperatures. Acatalyst to reduce nitrous oxide emissions from SCRplant is being developed in the Netherlands, and amanufacturer of nitric acid is testing a catalyst for usein the ammonia burners in nitric acid plants. Bothresearch groups claim to be capable of reducingnitrous oxide emissions by up to 90 percent and theirtechnology can be easily installed on existing plants.These technologies could be available for commercialapplication by 2010. Another manufacturer hasdeveloped an integrated destruction process; however,this process is only considered suitable for use on newplants because of the high capital costs and longoperational down times needed to retrofit existingplants.

Technology StrategyAdditional research is needed to develop new catalyststhat reduce nitrous oxide with greater efficiency, andto improve NSCR technology to make it a preferablealternative to SCR and other control options.

Current PortfolioThe current Federal portfolio focuses on developingcatalysts that reduce nitrous oxide to elementalnitrogen with greater efficiency and promoting theuse of NSCR over other NOX control options such asSCR and extended absorption. The goal in this areais to focus on development of catalysts that reducenitrous oxide to elemental nitrogen with greaterefficiency and to promote the use of NSCR overother NOX control options such as SCR and extendedabsorption.24

Future Research DirectionsThe current portfolio supports the main componentsof the technology development strategy and addressesthe highest priority current investment opportunitiesin this technology area. For the future, CCTP seeks

158



Figure 7-8. Nitrogen oxides from combustion sources are chemicallytransformed in the troposphere, resulting in the formation of nitrogencompounds that are deposited on the ground. These compounds, in turn,give rise to emissions of nitrous oxide, a GHG.

Courtesy EPA

to consider a full array of promising technologyoptions. The current portfolio supports the maincomponents of the technology development strategyand addresses the highest priority current investmentopportunities in this technology area. For the future,CCTP seeks to consider a full array of promisingtechnology options. From diverse sources,suggestions for future research have come to CCTP’sattention. Some of these, and others, are currentlybeing explored and under consideration for the futureR&D portfolio.

The use of a catalyst that can reduce a higherpercentage of nitrous oxide emissions might be apromising avenue for future research. Currenttechnology is primarily implemented to reduce NOX

emissions, not to reduce nitrous oxide. In the longerterm, in order to achieve further reductions in nitrousoxide emissions from nitric acid production, anadvanced NSCR technology that is not energyintensive will likely need to be developed andimplemented at most nitric acid production facilities.

Emissions ofTropospheric OzonePrecursors and Black Carbon

Understanding of the role of black carbon (BC) andtropospheric ozone in climate change is still evolving.Large uncertainties remain with regard to emissionlevels, atmospheric concentrations, net climaticeffects, and mitigation potential. However, researchto date indicates that these substances influence theglobal radiation budget, particularly at regional scales.Complicating our understanding is that BC, whichtends to have a warming effect, is co-emitted withorganic carbon (OC), which tends to have a coolingeffect on climate, much like sulfate aerosols.

Mitigation options for BC and tropospheric ozonecan already be identified in various sectors. However,for particular emission sources it is often difficult toprecisely quantify the emission implications ofdifferent mitigation scenarios for these substances,and even more difficult to quantify the climaticimplications of such scenarios. Activities to reducetropospheric ozone precursors and BC will have largepublic health and local air quality benefits, in additionto their role in mitigating climate change. In fact, it is

expected that even in the absence of climate-change-driven mitigation actions, reductions in troposphericozone and BC will be achieved as local and regionalair quality concerns are addressed, in the UnitedStates and many other countries.

Potential Role of TechnologyOzone and particulate matter (PM), of which BC is acomponent, have been key targets of air pollutioncontrol efforts in the United States for many years.National, State, and local regulations have aimed atreducing the significant human health andenvironmental impacts from high levels oftropospheric ozone and particulate matter. Emissioncontrol programs directed toward reducing ozonehave focused on the primary precursors thatcontribute to formation of 1-hour peak ozoneconcentrations in and near urban centers, such as i.e.,emissions of NOX and volatile organic compounds(VOC).

Programs aimed at reducing PM have led tosignificant advances in emission control technologiesin the transportation, power generation, andindustrial sectors, which have and will continue toreduce emissions of BC in the United States. Powerplants and other large combustion sources use controltechnologies such as high-efficiency electrostaticprecipitators, fabric filters, and scrubbers to reduceparticulate matter, including BC. Regulatory effortsfor other stationary sources have addressed biomassburning and include new source performancestandards for residential wood heaters and limits onopen and agricultural burning.

Technology StrategyThe approach to address the most significant sourcesof tropospheric ozone precursors and BC involve thefollowing abatement technology areas:

◆ Transportation control technologies: PMemissions smaller than 2.5 microns (PM 2.5) fromon- and off-road diesel vehicles (the largest sourceof BC emissions in the United States) are beingtargeted by stricter vehicle emission standards,where per-vehicle PM emissions are expected tobe reduced by 90 percent over the next decade.Total national mobile source PM 2.5 emissions areexpected, by 2020, to decline by 53 percentcompared to 1996 levels and by 24 percentcompared to projected 2020 baseline levels.

◆ Temperature reduction in cities: Heat islandsform as cities replace natural vegetation withpavement for roads, buildings, and other

7.5

159


structures. There are several measures available toreduce the urban heat island effect that candecrease ambient air temperatures, energy use forcooling purposes, GHG emissions, and thechemical formation of smog (ozone andprecursors). (See Urban Heat IslandTechnologies in the Buildings subsection ofChapter 4.)

◆ Biomass burning: Important sources of BCaerosols in the United States include combustionof not only fossil fuels but also biomass. Availableoptions to reduce open biomass burning includechanging the frequency and conditions ofprescribed burning and reducing open wasteburning. However, open biomass burning emitsgreater amounts of OC relative to BC, meaningthat, from a strictly climate-carbonaceous aerosolperspective, reducing these emissions could lead tonet warming.

Current PortfolioThe current Federal portfolio focuses on therepresentative technologies listed below.Transportation goals are focused on developing cost-effective NOX and PM (black carbon) engine andvehicle controls, especially for diesel engines, hybrid-diesel, and gasoline drive trains for medium- andheavy-duty vehicles (Figure 7-9). Goals fortemperature reduction in cities are focused onunderstand and quantifying the impacts that heatisland reduction measures have on local meteorology,energy use, GHG emissions, and air quality. Basicresearch goals are focused on better understanding ofthe joint role of BC and OC in climate change,including establishing linkages between air pollutionand climate change by enhancing modelingcapabilities; designing integrated emissions controlstrategies to benefit climate, regional and local airquality simultaneously.25

◆ Transportation control technologies includeadvanced tailpipe NOX controls (including NOX

adsorbers), particulate matter filters (traps) fordiesel engines (including catalyzed traps capable ofpassive regeneration), and hybrid and fuel cellvehicles.

◆ Representative technologies for temperaturereduction in cities include the following:

• Strategically planted shade trees.

• Reflective roofs: There are over 200 ENERGYSTAR® roof products, including coatings and

single-ply materials, tiles, shingles andmembranes. Energy savings with reflectiveroofs range as high as 32 percent during periodsof peak electricity demand (and average 15percent for the summer season).

• Reflective paving materials: There are severalreflective pavement applications beingdeveloped, including new pavement andresurfacing applications, asphalt, concrete, andother material types.

◆ Alternatives to biomass burning include prescribedburning programs (which are directed atminimizing wildfires) and regulation or banning ofopen burning (such as in land clearing).


Basic research is needed to both better understand therole of black and organic carbon and troposphericozone precursors in climate change, and to achieveemission reductions in the near and long terms.Much of this research is a focus of theAdministration’s Climate Change Science Program.Some of the areas where basic research is neededinclude the following:

◆ The study of the roles of tropospheric ozone andBC and OC in global warming has begun onlyrelatively recently. Although there are strongindications that these pollutants are importantactors in climate change, much more research isneeded to address the complex optical, chemical,and meteorological factors involved. For BC, thisnew research would be aimed at establishing moreclearly how these pollutants affect solar radiationand cloud formation. For BC and troposphericozone, new research could focus on how

160



atmospheric concentrations vary with geography,time, and the presence of other compounds in theatmosphere.

◆ Greater understanding of the use of differentdefinitions of and measurement protocols for BC(and its differentiation from elemental carbon andorganic carbon), and the implications of suchdifferences for climate assessments, is also needed.Much of this work is underway.

◆ Advanced, real-time measurement techniques forfine PM and carbonaceous soot are needed. It isdifficult to measure the composition, number,volume, and mass densities of nanometer-sizeparticles at combustion sources and in theatmosphere.

◆ Quantification of the synergies and potentialtradeoffs among GHGs, BC, OC, troposphericozone, and other criteria air pollutants fordifferent mitigation options, whether theseoptions are targeted for climate, air quality, orboth issues.

◆ Regarding BC emissions from open biomassburning, potential mitigation options includewildfire suppression and altering prescribedburning practices. However, it remains difficult toquantify emission reduction benefits due to largeuncertainties in the time dynamics of wildfires anduncertainties in emissions factors resulting fromdifferent kinds of fires. Furthermore, the climatebenefits are difficult to quantify because greateramounts of OC relative to BC are emitted frombiomass burning. Further research into this areacould support practices that reduce both BC andOC emissions for health and regional hazeconcerns, while at the same time understandingthe net climatic effects. This type of effort couldalso enhance carbon sequestration on forestlands.

◆ A thorough study of life-cycle GHG andparticulate matter emissions is needed to resolvequestions of the overall climate impacts of vehicleemissions (including CO2 and organic carbonparticles) of vehicles operating on gasoline ascompared to diesel fuel (taking into account thefuture schedule of diesel vehicle PM standards).

◆ Jet fuel additives could be found that minimizeemission of carbonaceous particles (e.g., blackcarbon/soot) from aircraft engines during take-off,landing, and cruising.

◆ Computational models of soot formation areneeded to enable inexpensive design ofcombustion devices and their optimumoperational conditions.

Research and development of alternative, non-carbonbased fuels could lead to significant reductions inemissions of tropospheric ozone precursors and BC inthe longer term. Additional longer-term researchneeds include the following:

◆ Efforts to develop technologies to reduce NOX

emissions from on-road heavy-duty diesel enginesare moving beyond engine-based technologies toexhaust after-treatment technologies.

◆ For both NOX and particulate controltechnologies for diesel engines, designs capable ofbeing retrofitted onto engines in the existing fleetcould significantly accelerate the heath and climatebenefits of these technologies by reducing thetime that is otherwise required for engines to beretired and replaced by new models.

Improved understanding is necessary to translatethese measures into quantifiable reductions in ozoneprecursors, BC, OC, and the associated climateeffects.

161


Figure 7-9. Research is needed to better understand the role of particulatematter (e.g., black carbon) emissions from combustion in climate changemitigation.

Courtesy: EPA

SummaryThis chapter reviews various forms of advancedtechnology, their potential for reducing emissions ofnon-CO2 GHGs, and the R&D strategies intended toaccelerate the development of these technologies.Although uncertainties exist about both the level atwhich GHG concentrations might need to bestabilized and the nature of the technologies that maycome to the fore, the long-term potential of advancedtechnologies to reduce emissions of non-CO2 GHGsis estimated to be significant, both in reducingemissions (as shown in the figure at the beginning ofthis chapter) and in reducing the costs for achievingthose reductions, as suggested by Figure 3-21.Further, the advances in technology developmentneeded to realize this potential, as modeled in theassociated analyses, animate the R&D goals for eachtechnology area focused on reducing emissions ofnon-CO2 GHGs.

As one illustration among many hypothetical casesanalyzed,26 GHG emissions were constrained to a highlevel over the course of the 21st century in such a waythat a stabilized GHG concentration levels couldultimately be attained. The lowest-cost arrays ofadvanced technology to reduce emissions of non-CO2

GHGs, when compared to a reference case, resultedin reduced or avoided emissions of about 150 Gt ofcarbon equivalent over the 100-year planninghorizon. This amounted to roughly 25 percent of allGHG emissions reduced, avoided, captured andstored, or otherwise withdrawn and sequesteredneeded to attain this level. Similarly, the costs forachieving such emissions reductions were reduced byroughly a factor of 3. See Chapter 3 for other casesand other scenarios.

As described in this chapter, CCTP’s technologydevelopment strategy supports achievements in thisrange. The overall strategy is summarizedschematically in Figure 7-10. Advanced technologiesare seen entering the marketplace in the near-, mid-,and long-terms, where the long-term is sustainedindefinitely. Such a progression, if successfullyrealized worldwide, would be consistent with attainingthe potential for reducing emissions of non-CO2

GHGs portrayed at the beginning of this chapter.

The timing and pace of technology adoption areuncertain and must be guided by science andsupported by appropriate policies (see Approach 7,Chapters 2 and 10). In the case of the illustrationabove, the first GtC per year (1GtC/year) of reducedor avoided emissions, as compared to anunconstrained reference case, would need to be inplace and operating, roughly, around 2050. For thisto happen, a number of new or advanced technologiesto reduce emissions of non-CO2 GHGs would needto penetrate the market at significant scale before thisdate. Other cases would suggest faster or slower ratesof deployment. See Chapter 3 for other cases andother scenarios.

Throughout Chapter 7, the discussions of the currentactivities in each area support the main componentsof this approach to technology development. Theactivities outlined in the current portfolio sectionsaddress the highest-priority investment opportunitiesfor this point in time. Beyond these activities, thechapter identifies promising directions for futureresearch, identified in part by the technical workinggroup and assessments and inputs from non-Federalexperts. CCTP remains open to a full array ofpromising technology options as current work iscompleted and changes in the overall portfolio areconsidered.

7.6

162



163


Technologies for Goal #4: Reduce Emissions of Other Gases

Figure 7-10. Technologies for Goal #4: Reduce Emissions of Other Gases (Note: Technologies shown are representations of larger suites. With some overlap, “near-term” envisions significant technology adoption by10–20 years from present, “mid-term” in a following period of 20–40 years, and “long-term” in a following period of 40–60 years. See also List ofAcronyms and Abbreviations.)

• Bioreactor Landfill Technology• Methane to Markets• New Drilling Techniques for Recovery of

Coal bed Methane• Leak Detection, Measurement, and

Mitigation Technologies for Oil & NaturalGas Systems

• Advanced Landfill Gas Utilization (e.g., Fuel Cells, Microturbines), Cover,and Collection Technologies

• Ventilation Air Methane Technology • Advanced End-Use Technologies to Use

Methane at Remote Well Sites

• Integrated Waste Management Systemwith Automated Sorting, Processing &Recycle

• Automated Coal Mining to Eliminate Methane Emissions

• Smart Pipes and Self-Repairing Pipelines

Methane from Energy & Waste

• Anaerobic Digesters that Produce Heatand Electricity

• Precision Agriculture• Improved Livestock Production Efficiency

• Better Understand Relationship amongCH4, CO2, N2O, N2 & C in Agriculture

• Soil Microbial Processes• Prescription Release of Nutrients and

Chemicals for Crops• Genetically Designed Forages and Bacteria

to Improve Digestion Efficiency

• Zero-Emission Agriculture

Methane & N20 fromAgriculture

• Advanced Refrigeration Technologies(Distributed and Secondary-Loop)

• Advanced Abatement, Recovery, andRecycling Technologies

• Advanced Aluminum Smelting Processesto Reduce Anode Effect

• Alternative Refrigeration Fluids (Non-GHG)• Substitutes for SF6 in High-Voltage

Applications and Magnesium Production• Inert Anode to Eliminate PFC Emissions in

Aluminum Production

• Solid-State Refrigeration/AC Systems• New Equipment and Process Designs that

do not Require High-GWP Gases

High GWPGases

• Catalytic Reduction of N2O in Nitric OxidePlants

• Better Understand N2O Emissions fromVehicles

• Catalysts That Reduce N2O to ElementalNitrogen in Diesel Engines

• Understand Role of N Compounds fromCombustion with Soils and N2O

• Advanced Vehicles and Non-Carbon BasedFuels

N20 fromCombustion


• Particulate Matter Control Technologies for Vehicles

• Reflective Roofs to Reduce Heat Island Effects

• Better Understand Effects of OzonePrecursors & Black Carbon

• Model Linkages Between Air Pollution andClimate Change

• Jet Fuel Additives to Minimize BlackCarbon and Soot

OzonePrecursors &Black Carbon

164


DeAngelo, B., F. de la Chesnaye, R. Beach, A. Sommer, and B. Murray. Forthcoming. Methane and nitrous oxide mitigation inagriculture. Energy Journal.

Delhotal, K. Casey, F. C. de la Chesnaye, A. Gardiner, J. Bates, and A. Sankovski. 2006. Mitigation of methane and nitrous oxideemissions from waste, energy and industry. Energy Journal.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2001. Climate change 2001: the scientific basis. Cambridge, UK: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Placet, M., K.K. Humphreys, and N.M. Mahasenan. 2004. Climate change technology scenarios: energy, emissions and economicimplications. Richland, WA: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. http://www.pnl.gov/energy/climatetechnology.stm

Schaefer, D., D. Godwin, and J. Harnish, 2006. Estimating Future Emissions and Potential Reductions of HFCs, PFCs, and SF6.Energy Journal (forthcoming).

U.S. Climate Change Technology Program (CCTP). 2003. Technology options for the near and long term. DOE/PI-0002.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2003/tech-options/index.htm

Update is at http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/index.htm

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1999. U.S. methane emissions 1990 – 2020: inventories, projections, and opportunitiesfor reductions. #430-R-99-013. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.http://www.epa.gov/methane/reports/methaneintro.pdf

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2003a. Assessment of the worldwide market potential for oxidizing coal mine ventilationair. #430-R-03-002. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.http://www.epa.gov/coalbed/pdf/ventilation_air_methane.pdf

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2003b. Current status of farm-scale digesters. AgSTAR Digest. #430-F-02-028.Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/agstar/pdf/handbook/appendixa.pdf

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2004. Global emissions of non-CO2 greenhouse gases, 1990 – 2020. Washington, DC:Environmental Protection Agency.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2005. Inventory of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and sinks: 1990 – 2003. #430-R-05-003. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/UniqueKeyLookup/RAMR69V4ZS/$File/05_complete_report.pdf.

References7.7

8Development and application of such systems canprovide accurate characterizations of GHGemissions from both existing and advancedtechnologies, enable increased understanding ofperformance, guide further research, reduce costs,and improve effectiveness. Research on anddevelopment of these systems is required to increasetheir capabilities and facilitate and accelerate theiradoption (Figure 8-1).

Observations using M&M technologies can be usedto establish informational baselines necessary foranalytical comparisons, and to measure carbonstorage and GHG fluxes across a range of scales,from individual locations to large geographicregions. If such baselines are established, theeffectiveness of implemented GHG-reductiontechnologies can be assessed against a backgroundof prior or existing conditions and other naturalindicators. Many of the M&M technologies and thesystems they can enable benefit from the ongoingR&D under the aegis of the Climate Change ScienceProgram (CCSP), and from other Earth observationactivities that are underway. All such M&M systemsconstitute an important component of acomprehensive Climate Change Technology Program(CCTP) R&D portfolio and could be improvedthrough further development as outlined below.

On February 16, 2005, 55 countries endorsed a 10-year plan to develop and implement the Global EarthObservation System of Systems (GEOSS) for thepurpose of achieving comprehensive, coordinated, andsustained observations of the Earth system. The U.S.

contribution to GEOSS is the Integrated EarthObservation System (IEOS). IEOS will meet U.S.needs for high-quality, global, sustained informationon the state of the Earth as a basis for policy anddecision-making in every sector of society. A strategicplan for IEOS1 was developed by the United StatesGroup on Earth Observation (USGEO), aSubcommittee reporting to the National Science andTechnology Council’s Committee on Environmentand Natural Resources; the plan was released in April2005. Both the GEOSS and the IEOS are focused onsocietal benefits, including climate variability andchange, weather forecasting, energy resources, waterresources, land resources, and ocean resources—all ofwhich are relevant to CCSP and CCTP.

165

The sources of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are varied and complex, as are thepotential mitigation strategies afforded by advanced climate change technologies

presented through this Plan. Measurement and monitoring (M&M) systems will be neededto complement these technologies to assess their efficacy and sustainability and to guidefuture research and enhancements. Contributing M&M systems cover a wide array of GHGsensors, instrumentation, measurement platforms, monitoring and inventorying systems, andassociated analytical tools, includingdatabases, models, and inference methods.

Enhancing Capabilities to Measure and Monitor Greenhouse Gases

Figure 8-1. Earth observation activities benefit both CCSP andCCTP research. For example, satellites such as CALIPSO (picturedabove) take measurements of natural processes using advancedtechniques such as Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR). Thesemeasurements can be used in atmospheric research and, forCCTP, to help scientists estimte emissions reductions in energyend-use, energy supply, sequestration, and non-CO2 gases.

Credit: NASA

1 Accessible at http://iwgeo.ssc.nasa.gov



M&M systems are important to addressinguncertainties associated with cycling of GHGsthrough the land, atmosphere, and oceans, as well asin measuring and monitoring GHG-relatedperformance of various existing and advanced climatechange technologies. R&D in this area offers thepotential to:

◆ Characterize emissions, inventories,concentrations, and cross-boundary fluxes ofcarbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhousecompounds, including the size and variability ofthe fluxes.

◆ Characterize the efficacy and durability ofparticular mitigation technologies or other actions,and verify and validate claims for results.

◆ Measure (directly or indirectly through proxymeasurements) anthropogenic changes in sourcesand sinks of GHGs and relate them to causes, tobetter understand the role of various technologiesand strategies for mitigation.

◆ Identify opportunities and plans for guidingresearch investments in GHG M&M methods,technologies, and strategies.

◆ Explore relationships among changes in GHGemissions, fluxes, and inventories due to changesin surrounding environments.

◆ Optimize the efficiency, reliability, and quality ofM&M that maximizes support for understandingand decision-making while minimizing thetransaction costs of mitigation activities.

Ideally, an integrated observation system strategywould be employed to measure and monitor thesources and sinks of all gases that have an impact onclimate change, using the most cost-effective mix oftechniques ranging from local in situ sensors to global

8.1

166


Measurement and Monitoring Technologies for Assessing the Efficacy, Durability, and Environmental Effectsof Emission Reduction and Stabilization Technologies

Figure 8-2. Measurement and Monitoring Technologies for Assessing the Efficacy, Durability, and Environmental Effects of EmissionReduction and Stabilization Technologies

remote-sensing satellites. This would involvetechnologies aimed at a spectrum of applications,including CO2 from energy-related activities (such asend use, infrastructure, energy supply, and CO2

capture and storage) and GHGs other than CO2

(including CH4, N2O, fluorocarbons, ozone, andother GHG-related substances, such as black carbon[BC] aerosol). An integrating system architectureserves as a guide for many of the step-by-stepdevelopment activities required in these areas. Itestablishes a framework for R&D that places M&Mtechnologies in context with the Integrated EarthObservation System (IEOS) and other CCTPtechnologies (Figure 8-2). The integrated systemsapproach provides feedback through which demand-side actors (both in the public and private sectors)contribute to benchmarking results againstexpectations.

Such a framework facilitates coordinated progressevolving over time toward increasingly effectivesolutions and common interfaces of the gathered dataand assessment systems. An integrating architecturewould function within the context of, and incoordination with, other Federal programs (e.g.,CCSP and the U.S. Group on Earth Observations)and international programs (e.g., the WorldMeteorological Organization and theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) thatprovide or use complementary M&M capabilitiesacross a hierarchy of temporal and spatial scales. Itcould, therefore, take advantage of the synergybetween observations to measure and monitor GHGmitigation strategies and the research on observationsystems for the CCSP, as well as the operationalobservations systems for weather forecasting, asdescribed more fully in the CCTP report, TechnologyOptions for the Near and Long Term (CCTP 2003).

In the near term, opportunities for advancing GHGmeasuring and monitoring systems present themselvesas integral elements of the CCTP R&D programsand initiatives. Efforts must focus on the significantemission sources and sinks and on M&M of carbonsequestration and storage.

Technology can be developed to address knowledgegaps in GHG emissions and to improve inventories.In some cases, it is not necessary or cost-effective tomeasure emissions directly. In such cases, emissionscan be measured indirectly by measuring otherparameters as proxies, such as feedstock, fuel, orenergy flows (referred to as “parametric” or“accounting-based” estimates); or by measuring

changes in carbon stocks. Under CCTP, there is abenefit to undertaking research to test, validate,quantify uncertainties, and certify such uses of proxymeasurements.

The long-term approach is to evaluate data needs andpursue the development of an integrated andoverarching system architecture that focuses on themost critical and supplementary data needs.Common databases would provide measurements formodels that could estimate additions to and removalsfrom various GHG inventories, forecast the long-term fates of various GHGs, and integrate results intorelevant decision support tools and global-scalemonitoring systems. This approach would includeprotocols for calibrated and interoperable (easilyexchanged) data products, emissions accountingmethods development, and coordination of basicscience research in collaboration with CCSP. Toolswould be validated by experimentation to benchmarkprotocols (to quantify the improvements that the toolsprovide), so that they would be recognized andaccepted by the community-of-practice for emissions-related processes.

The M&M technologies that are emphasized in thefollowing sections are based on their capacity toaddress one or more of the following criteria:

◆ M&M technology that supports the successfulimplementation and validation of a technologicaloption that mitigates a substantial quantity of U.S.GHG emissions, on the order of a gigaton ofcarbon equivalent or more, over the course of adecade.

◆ M&M technology capacity to reduce a keyuncertainty associated with a mitigation option.

◆ M&M technology sufficiently differentiated from,or adequately integrated with, comparableresearch efforts in the CCSP, IEOS, or otheroperational Earth observation systems.

◆ M&M technology helping to assure that aproposed advanced climate change technologydoes not threaten either human health or theenvironment.

167


Energy Productionand EfficiencyTechnologies

M&M systems provide the capability to evaluate theefficacy of efforts to reduce GHG emissions throughthe use of (1) low-emission fossil-based powersystems; (2) potentially GHG-neutral energy supplytechnologies, such as biomass energy systems (seeChapter 6) and other renewable energy technologies,including geothermal energy; and (3) technologies tomore efficiently carry and/or transmit energy to thepoint of use. In this section, the M&M R&Dportfolio for energy production and efficiencytechnologies is presented. Each of these technologysections includes a sub-section describing the currentportfolio. The technology descriptions include a linkto an updated version of the CCTP report, TechnologyOptions for the Near and Long Term.2

Technology Strategy

M&M technologies can enhance and provide directand indirect emissions measurements at point andmobile sources of GHG emissions. “Point sources”range from electric generation plants to industrialfacilities. The term “mobile sources” typically refersto vehicles. Table 8.1 summarizes the nature of pointand mobile sources and the potential roles for M&Mtechnologies, which are broadly applicable across therange of emission sources and scales. The technologystrategy emphasizes the potential role of M&Mtechnologies in applications across a range of scales,from the individual vehicle to the larger power plantor industrial facility, as well as the balance betweenthose M&M technologies needed in both the near-and long-terms. Development of software and toolsthat facilitate further integration of measurement datawith emission modeling processes is a key dimensionof the overall technology strategy. In the near term,the strategy focuses on technologies that measuremultiple gases across spatial dimensions. In the long-term, the strategy focuses on development andevolution of a system of systems for remote,continuous, and global M&M that facilitates emissionsaccounting from the local to the global level.

8.2

168


GHG EMISSION SOURCE

NATURE OFEMISSIONS AND SCALE

R&D PORTFOLIO OF MEASUREMENTAND MONITORING TECHNOLOGY

Power Generation Large point

sources

Component and system-leveltechnologies to enable anddemonstrate direct measurements,continuous emission monitoring,on-board diagnostics, remotesensing, data transmission andarchiving, inventory-basedreporting, and decision-supportsystems.

Industrial Facility

Many differentprocesses, butmostly point

sources

As above.

TransportationMany mobile

sources widely distributed

As above.Table 8-1. Proposed R&D Portfoliofor Measurement and Monitoring ofEnergy Production and UseTechnologies

Proposed R&D Portfolio for Measurement and Monitoring of Energy Production and Use Technologies

2 The full report is available at http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/index.htm

Current Portfolio

R&D programs for M&M technologies spanning theFederal complex are focused on a number of areas,including the following:

◆ High-temperature sensors for NOX and ozone,ammonia, and other gas emissions, withapplication in caustic industrial environments (e.g.,steel mills, pulp and paper industries);

◆ Fast-response mass spectrometers and field-deployable isotope analysis systems;

◆ Continuous emissions monitors (CEMs) formeasuring multiple gases at point sources (linkedwith energy use statistics at a facility); and

◆ Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) for remotemonitoring of truck and aviation emissions.

The overall goals are to develop sensors and datatransmission systems that allow quantification ofemission reductions resulting from energy efficiencyimprovements.3


The current portfolio supports the main componentsof the technology development strategy and addressesthe highest priority current investment opportunitiesin this technology area. For the future, CCTP seeksto consider a full array of promising technologyoptions. From diverse sources, suggestions for futureresearch have come to CCTP’s attention. Some ofthese, and others, are currently being explored andunder consideration for the future R&D portfolio.

◆ Improvements in performance, longevity,autonomy, spatial resolution of measurements, anddata transmission of CEMs with the ability tomeasure multiple gases.

◆ More thorough process knowledge and life-cycleanalysis for the estimation of changes in emissionfactors as a function of time and process.

◆ Satellite-based sensors for direct measurement ofCO2 and other gases or indicators, tracers, andisotopic ratios.

◆ Inexpensive, large-area systems for monitoringCO2 leaks from energy production and end use.

◆ Low-cost, multiple wireless micro sensor networksto monitor migration, uptake, and distribution

patterns of CO2 and other GHGs in soil andforests.

◆ Data protocols and analytical methods forproducing and archiving specific types of data toenable interoperability and long-termmaintenance of data records, data productionmodels, and emission coefficients that are used inestimating emissions.

◆ Protocols and concurrent technologies formultiple assessments of the performance of end-uses of energy, including transportation, buildings,and industry. Assessments could ultimatelyprovide real-time feedback to the end user.

◆ Direct measurements to replace proxies andestimates when these measurements are morecost-effective to optimize emissions from sourcesand improve understanding of the processesbehind the formation of GHGs.

CO2 Capture and Sequestration

As discussed in Chapter 6, capture, storage, andsequestration of CO2 can be accomplished by variousapproaches, including capture from point sources,accompanied by geologic or oceanic storage; andterrestrial sequestration. Advanced technologies canmake significant contributions to measuring andmonitoring GHG emissions that are captured, stored,and sequestered.

Innovations to assess the integrity of geologicstructure, leakage from reservoirs, and accounting ofsequestered GHGs are useful. Also useful areintegrated carbon sequestration measurements ofdifferent components (geologic, oceanic, andterrestrial) across a range of scales and time, from thepoint of use at the present time to regional or largerscales over the future to provide a consistent netaccounting of GHG inventories, emissions, and sinks.Advanced M&M technologies can provide histories ofCO2 concentration profiles near the sites ofsequestration and track the potential release of CO2

into the atmosphere. The development of softwareand tools that facilitate further integration ofmeasurement data with emission modeling processesplay an important, ongoing role in the M&M ofsequestered CO2 in conjunction with othertechnologies. Different M&M strategies associated

8.3

169


3 For more details on the current R&D activities, see CCTP (2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/index.htm.

with the three alternative storage and sequestrationapproaches are described in the following sections.

Geologic Sequestration

M&M technologies are useful to assess theperformance and efficacy of geologic storage systems.They will be critically important in assessing theintegrity of geologic structures, transportation, andpipeline systems, the potential of leakage ofsequestered GHGs in geologic structures, and in fullyaccounting for GHG emissions.

Technology StrategyRealizing the possibilities of these technologies is thefocus of a research portfolio that embraces acombination of M&M technologies for separationand capture, transportation, and geologic storage. Inthe near term, technologies can be improved tomeasure efficacy of separation and capture, and the

integrity of geologic formations for long-termstorage. Within the constraints of available resources,a balanced portfolio addresses the objectives shown inTable 8-2.

Current PortfolioRecent progress has been made in developing M&Mtechnologies for geologic carbon sequestration. Manytechnologies for monitoring and measuring existtoday. However, they may need to be modified tomeet the requirements of CO2 storage. The goals areto develop the ability to assess the continuingintegrity of subsurface reservoirs using integratedsystem of sensors, indicators, and models; improveleak detection from separation and capture pipelinesystems; apply remote sensors to fugitive emissionsfrom reservoirs and capture facilities; improve,develop, and implement tracer addition andmonitoring programs; evaluate microbial mechanismsfor monitoring and mitigating diffuse GHG leakagefrom geologic formations; and more.4

Both surface and subsurface measurement systems forCO2 leak detection and reservoir integrity estimateshave been employed at sites currently storing CO2.Large M&M efforts have taken place at Weyburn,Alberta, and at Sleipner in the North Sea. Within themeasurement systems employed at these sites, seismicimaging using temporal analyses of 3-dimensional(3D) seismic structures (called 4D seismic analyses)have been commonly employed to characterize thereservoir, determine changes in reservoir structureand integrity, and to determine locations of CO2 thathave been pumped downhole. At the Sleipner site,for example, efforts to quantify the CO2 have beenundertaken through 4D seismic research. Othermethods of subsurface reservoir analyses are cross-well seismic tomography, passive and active doubletanalyses, microseismic analyses, and electromageneticanalyses.

Leak detection of CO2 from storage reservoirs hasbeen performed in the subsurface and surface regions.Within the subsurface, groundwater chemistry,precipitation of calcite, and subsurface CO2

concentration measurements have been used to detectsmall gas emissions from reservoirs. At the groundsurface, CO2 flux changes, isotopes of CO2 and othertracers, and vegetation changes have been monitoredto detect surface leaks of CO2 and identify the source.

Specific examples include four ongoing experiments:(1) Seismic methods are being used at the Sleipnertest site to map the location of CO2 storage;

170


4 For more information on the current R&D activities, see Section 5.3 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-53.pdf.

SYSTEM CONCEPTS R&D PORTFOLIO

Separation and Capture

• Monitors for CO2 emissionsusing process knowledge

• Sensors to monitor fugitiveemissions around facilities

Transportation

• Leak detection systems from pipelines and other transportation

• Pressure transducers

• Remote detectors

• Gaseous tracers enablingremote leakage detection

Geologic Storage

• Detectors for surface leakage

• Indicators of leakage based onnatural and induced tracers

• Seismic/electromagnetic/electrical resistivity/pressure monitoring networks

Table 8-2. Proposed R&D Portfolio for Measurement andMonitoring Systems for Geologic Sequestration

Proposed R&D Portfolio for Measurement andMonitoring Systems for Geologic Sequestration

(2) Models, geophysical methods, and tracerindicators are being developed through the GEO-SEQ project (Box 8-1); (3) Detection of CO2

emissions from natural reservoirs has beeninvestigated by researchers at the Colorado School ofMines, University of Utah, and the Utah GeologicalSurvey, including isotopic discrimination of biogenicCO2 from magmatic, oceanographic, atmospheric,and natural gas sources; and (4) Fundamentalresearch on high-resolution seismic andelectromagnetic imaging and on geochemicalreactivity of high partial-pressure CO2 fluids is beingconducted.


◆ Tying the experimental research to the processmodels for geological storage systems, where fateand transport of the stored CO2 are measured andverified with models. This contributes toverification of CO2 storage in geologic structuresin both the near- and long terms.

◆ The ability to assess the continuing integrity ofsubsurface reservoirs using an integrated system ofsensors, indicators, and models. Theheterogeneity of leakage pathways and probablechanges over time make detection andquantification difficult.

◆ Indicators such as seismic, electromagneticimaging, and tracers are needed for quantitativedetermination of CO2 stored and specific locationsof where the CO2 is located underground.

◆ Improvements in leak detection from separationand capture and pipeline systems. Low leakagerates occurring at spatially separated locationsmake full detection difficult.

Terrestrial Sequestration

Sequestering carbon in terrestrial ecosystems (forests,pastures, grasslands, croplands, etc.) increases the totalamount of carbon retained in biomass, soils, andwood products. Methods used to measure and

monitor terrestrial sequestration of carbon shouldaddress both the capture and retention of carbon inboth above- and below-ground components ofecosystems. Determining measures of the desiredlevels of net sequestration will depend on evaluationof GHG emissions as a function of managementpractices and naturally occurring environmentalfactors (Post et al. 2004).

Technology StrategyM&M systems employ an R&D portfolio thatprovides for integrated, hierarchical systems ofground-based and remote-sensing technologies ofdifferent system components over a range of scales. Asystem’s utility is based on its applicability to a widerange of potential activities and a very diverse landbase, an accuracy that satisfies reporting requirementsof the 1605(b) voluntary reporting program (EIA2004), and a cost of deployment such that M&M doesnot outweigh the value of the sequestered carbon. Abalanced portfolio should address (1) remote sensing and related technology for land-cover and land-cover change analysis, biomass andnet-productivity measurements, vegetation structure,etc.; (2) low-cost, portable, rapid analysis systems forin situ soil carbon measurements; (3) fluxmeasurement systems; (4) advanced biometrics fromcarbon inventories; and (5) carbon and nutrientsink/source tracing and movement, including using

171


(GEO-SEQ) is a comprehensive programexamining a range of issues that include costoptimization, monitoring, modeling, and capacityestimation, associated with CO2 sequestration ingeological formations. The GEO-SEQ Project isa public-private applied R&D partnership,formed with the goal of developing thetechnology and information needed to enablesafe and cost-effective geologic sequestration bythe year 2015. The effort, supported by DOEand involving several of its national laboratories,as well as universities and industry, conductsapplied research and development to reduce thecost and potential risk of sequestration, as wellas to decrease the time to implementation. SeeDOE-NETL (2004).

BOX 8-1

GEOLOGICAL SEQUESTRATION OF CARBON DIOXIDE

isotope markers; and (6) analysis systems that relatemanagement practices (e.g., life-cycle wood products,changes in agriculture rotations, energy use inecosystem management, and others) to net changes inemissions and sinks over time (e.g., changes inagriculture rotations, energy use in ecosystemmanagement, and others).

Current PortfolioCurrent research activities associated with terrestrialsequestration are found across a number of Federalagencies. The goals of the current activities are toprovide an integrated hierarchical system of ground-

based and remote sensing for carbon pools and CO2

and other GHG flux measurements; reduceuncertainty on regional-to-country scale inventoriesof carbon stocks; develop low-cost, portable, rapidanalysis systems for in situ soil carbon measurements;and develop standard estimates that relatemanagement practices to net changes inemissions/sinks over time.5

The current portfolio includes the following:

◆ The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),with assistance from the U.S. Department ofAgriculture’s (USDA) Forest Service, preparesnational inventories of emissions and sequestrationfrom managed lands. These inventories capturechanges in the characteristics and activities relatedto land uses, and are subject to ongoingimprovements and verification procedures.

◆ The USDA Forest Service Forest Inventory andAnalysis Program and the Natural ResourcesConservation Service’s National ResourcesInventory provide baseline information to assessthe management, structure, and condition of U.S.forests, croplands, pastures, and grasslands. Thisinformation is then converted to State, regional,and national carbon inventories. Hierarchical,integrated monitoring systems are being designedin pilot studies such as the Delaware River Basininteragency research initiative.

◆ Prototype soil carbon analysis systems have beendeveloped and are undergoing preliminary fieldtesting.

172


The Agriflux network is being developed by theUSDA to measure the effects of environmentalconditions and agricultural managementdecisions on carbon exchange between the landand the atmosphere. The network nowcomprises more than 125 sites in North andSouth America. Studies will identify cropmanagement practices to optimize crop yield,crop quality, and carbon sequestration and otherenvironmental conditions. Research will lead tonew ways for prediction and early detection ofdrought in agricultural systems based on weeklyand monthly climate forecasts.

BOX 8-2

AGRIFLUX

Flux towers such as the one pictured above are taking long-termmeasurements of CO2 and water vapor fluxes in over 250 sites throughoutthe world, including the United States. Data gathered from thesemeasurement sites are important to understanding interactions between theatmospheric and terrestrial systems. The network(http://public.ornl.gov/ameriflux/) is part of an international scientificprogram of flux measurement networks (e.g., FLUXNET-Canada,CarboEurope, and AsiaFlux) that seeks to better understand the role of theterrestrial biosphere carbon cycle. Seehttp://www.fluxnet.ornl.gov/fluxnet/index.cfm for a global listing of flux towers.

BOX 8-3

AMERIFLUX

5 For a detailed discussion on technologies and current research activities, see Section 5.4 http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-54.pdf, Section 3.2.3.1 http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-3231.pdf, and Section 3.2.3.2 http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-3232.pdf (CCTP 2005).

Courtesy of DOE

◆ Methods are being developed for the use ofSynthetic Aperture Radar in estimating forest bolevolume at landscape scale.

◆ Satellite and low-altitude remote sensing systemshave been developed that can quantify agriculturalland features at spatial resolution of approximately0.5 square meters and measure indicators of thecarbon sequestration capacity of land use.

◆ Prototype versions of web-based tools are beingdeveloped for estimating carbon budgets forregions (e.g. CASA/CQUEST, CENTURY)

◆ Multidisciplinary studies are providing increasedaccuracy of carbon sequestration estimates relatedto land management and full accounting ofland/atmosphere carbon exchange.

◆ The Agriflux and AmeriFlux programs (Boxes 8-2and 8-3) are being implemented to improve theunderstanding of carbon pools and fluxes in large-scale, long-term monitoring areas. The fluxmeasurements provide quantitative data forcalibrating/validating remote sensing and otherestimates of carbon sequestration. Approaches forscaling these results to regional estimates areunder development (DOE-ORNL 2003).

◆ Other aerospace research activities focusing onimaging and remote sensing methods includeLIDAR and RADAR, used for 3D imaging offorest structure for the estimation of carboncontent in standing forests.

◆ Isotopes are being used to assess sequestrationpotentials by monitoring fluxes and pools ofcarbon in natural ecosystems.

◆ Increased accuracy of carbon sequestrationestimates is being accomplished for use in landmanagement and full carbon accountingprocedures.

◆ Ongoing tillage and land conservation practicesoffer test beds for ground-based and remote-sensing methods, as well as verification of rules-of-thumb for emission factors.

◆ Many of the DOE National Laboratories areconducting research on in situ and remote-sensingtechnologies and laser-based diagnostics,supported by a variety of Federal agencies. Thesediagnostics include microbial indicators, LaserInduced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS),LIDAR, Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR)Spectroscopy, and a variety of satellite Earthobservation programs (Box 8-4).

Future Research DirectionsThe current portfolio supports the main componentsof the technology development strategy and addressesthe highest priority current investment opportunitiesin this technology area. For the future, CCTP seeksto consider a full array of promising technologyoptions. From diverse sources, suggestions for future

173


Laser Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy (LIBS) isa robust chemical analysis technique that hasfound application in a range of areas where rapid,remote, and semi-quantitative analysis of chemicalcomposition is needed. The technique in itsessential form is quite simple. Light is used toionize a small portion of the analyte and thespectral emission (characteristic of the electronicenergy levels) from the species in the resultingplasma is collected to determine the chemicalconstituents. Most often the light comes from alaser since high-photon fluxes can be obtainedreadily with this type of light source. By focusingthe light from the laser to a small spot, highlylocalized chemical analysis can be performed.

LIght Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) uses thesame principle as RADAR. The LIDAR instrumenttransmits light out to a target. The transmittedlight interacts with and is changed by the target.Some of this light is reflected/ scattered back tothe instrument where it is analyzed. The change inthe light properties enables some property of thetarget to be determined. The time for the light totravel out to the target and back to the LIDAR is usedto determine the distance to the target.

Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR)technology has the capability to measure morethan 100 of the 189 Hazardous Air Pollutants(HAPs) listed in Title III of the Clean Air ActAmendments of 1990. FTIR has the capability ofmeasuring multiple compounds simultaneously,thus providing an advantage over currentmeasurement methods, which measure only oneor several HAPs. FTIR provides a distinct costadvantage since it can be used to replace severaltraditional methods.

BOX 8-4

DIAGNOSTIC TECHNOLOGIES

research have come to CCTP’s attention. Some ofthese, and others, are currently being explored andunder consideration for the future R&D portfolio.

◆ Further development of imaging and volume-measurement sensors for land use/land cover andbiomass estimates.

◆ Development of low-cost, practical methods tomeasure net carbon gain by ecosystems, and lifecycle analysis of wood products, at multiple scalesof agriculture and forest carbon sequestration.

◆ Research on isotope markers to identify anddistinguish between natural and human sourcesand determine movement of GHGs in geological,terrestrial, and oceanic systems.

◆ Identification of new measurement technologyneeds that support novel sequestration conceptssuch as enhanced mechanisms for CO2 capturefrom free air, new sequestration products fromgenome sequencing, and modification of naturalbiogeochemical processes.

Oceanic Sequestration

Sequestering carbon in oceans generally refers to twotechniques: direct injection of CO2 to the deep oceanwaters, and fertilization of surface waters withnutrients. For direct injection, CO2 streams areseparated, captured, and transported using processessimilar to those for geologic sequestration, andinjected below the main oceanic thermocline (depthsof greater than 1,000 to 1,500 meters). Fertilizationof the oceans with iron, a nutrient required byphytoplankton, is a potential strategy to accelerate theocean’s biological carbon pump and thereby enhancethe draw down of CO2 from the atmosphere. For adescription of oceanic sequestration approaches, seeSection 6.4 in Chapter 6.

Measuring and monitoring technologies associatedwith CO2 injection are directed towards theperformance of the quantities of CO2 injected anddispersion of the concentrated CO2 plume. M&Mtechnologies associated with ocean fertilization arefocused on the quantity of carbon exported deeper inthe water column and the stability and endurance ofthe carbon sink. Carbon sequestration in oceans canbe enhanced significantly, but this has yet to bedemonstrated, and the environmental impact of suchan approach has not been fully evaluated.

Technology StrategyThese technologies could be advanced through R&Din direct measurement and model analysis, as well asindirect indicators that can be used across spatialscales for obtaining process information and forocean-wide observations. In the near term, possibleadvances include (1) measurement of comprehensivetrace gas parameters (total CO2, total alkalinity, partialpressure of CO2, and pH) to monitor the CO2

concentration in seawater; (2) development of indirectindicators of fertilization effectiveness using remote-sensing technology; and (3) development of CO2

sensors that “track” the dissolved CO2 plume frominjection locations. In the long term, advances couldinclude a system that monitors CO2 in the oceans,temporally and spatially, using integrated M&Mconcepts, satellite-based sensors, and other analysissystems that can avoid costly ship time.

Current PortfolioThe goal of the current research in support of M&Mtechnologies associated with ocean sequestration is todevelop integrated concepts that include directmeasurement, model analysis, and indirect indicatorsthat can be used across scales; data transmission andanalysis systems that avoid costly ship time;quantitative satellite-based sensors; and developmentof plume dispersion models for direct injection ofCO2. Research activities in support of M&Mtechnologies associated with ocean sequestration havebeen underway for several years.6

For example, for more than 13 years, DOE and theNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA) sponsored the ocean CO2 survey during theWorld Ocean Circulation Experiment, monitoringthe carbon concentration in the Indian, Pacific, andAtlantic Oceans from oceanographic ships (Box 8-5).

Another research and development effort underway isto develop low-cost, discrete measurement sensorsthat can be used in conjunction with the conductivity,temperature, depth, and oxygen sensors to measurethe ocean profile on oceanographic stations.

Future Research DirectionsThe current portfolio supports the main componentsof the technology development strategy and addressesthe highest priority current investment opportunitiesin this technology area. For the future, CCTP seeksto consider a full array of promising technologyoptions. From diverse sources, suggestions for future

174


6 See Section 5.5 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-55.pdf

research have come to CCTP’s attention. Some ofthese, and others, are currently being explored andunder consideration for the future R&D portfolio,including the following:

◆ Measurement of injected CO2, and the trackingand dispersion of the concentrated CO2 plume.

◆ Monitoring of the plume or pool to verify thetrajectory and lack of contact with the mixed layer.

◆ Monitoring of the local fauna for adverse effects ofenhanced acidity or alkalinity and/or pH changes.

With iron fertilization, it is not well understoodwhether the excess production stimulated thereby isexported out of the mixed layer, and on what timescale it remains out of contact with the atmosphere.To better understand this, the following R&Dinvestments in measurement technologies would help:

◆ Measurement of the amount of CO2 drawn downper unit of fertilization.

◆ Characterization of the fate and transport oforganic carbon exported deeper in the watercolumn and its longevity from using fertilization

technologies, including the spatial and temporalCO2 concentration histories.

◆ Technologies that can provide accuratemonitoring of local CO2 concentrations and pH.Monitoring of fauna most likely will involvesampling bacterial populations using advancedbiological techniques, but may also includemacrofauna as appropriate.

◆ In addition to the specific measurements notedabove, it will also be necessary to conduct oceancirculation studies and modeling support selectionof injection and fertilization site and estimatingstorage timescale. As in deep ocean injection, theimpact of fertilization on the ocean’s biota andchemistry can be monitored carefully to determinethe behavior and possible impacts (e.g., pHchanges, fish behavior) to deep ocean systems,including the effects of nutrient fluxes on planktonbiogeochemistry.

175


The World Ocean Circulation Experiment(WOCE) was a component of the WorldClimate Research Program (WCRP) designedto investigate the ocean’s role in decadalclimate change. NSF, NASA, NOAA, the Officeof Naval Research (ONR), and DOE supportedU.S. participation in WOCE. Scientists frommore than 30 countries collaborated during the WOCE field program to sample the ocean on a global scale withthe aim of describing its large-scale circulation patterns, its effect on gas storage, and how it interacts with theatmosphere. As the data are collected and archived, they are being used to construct improved models ofocean circulation and the combined ocean-atmosphere system that should improve global climate forecasts.

In 2004, as its final activity, the WOCE program published a series of four atlases, concentrating respectively onthe hydrograph of the Pacific, Indian, Atlantic, and Southern Oceans. The Southern Ocean is given a separatevolume because of the importance of the circumpolar flow on the transport of heat, freshwater, and dissolvedcomponents. The volumes each have three main components: full-depth sections, horizontal maps ofproperties on density surfaces and depth levels, and property-property plots. The vertical sections featurepotential temperature, salinity, potential density, neutral density, oxygen, nitrate, phosphate, silicate, CFC-11,3He, tritium, 14C, 13C, total alkalinity and total carbon dioxide (see image above), against depth along theWOCE Hydrographic Program one-time lines.

BOX 8-5

WORLD OCEAN CIRCULATION EXPERIMENT

Courtesy WOCE Southern Ocean Atlas

Other Greenhouse Gases

As discussed in Chapter 7, a wide variety ofsubstances other than CO2 contribute to theatmospheric burden of GHGs. Other GHGs includemethane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O),chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), perfluorocarbons(PFCs), sulfur hexaflourine (SF6), hydrofluorocarbons(HFCs), tropospheric ozone precursors, and BCaerosols. These gases are emitted from both pointsources (industrial plants) and diffuse sources (openpit coal mines, landfills, rice paddies, and others), andoffer unique challenges for M&M of emissions due totheir spatial and temporal variations. A robust R&Dprogram should consider direct measurements ofemissions and reporting methods that will becomepart of a larger integrated system. Moreover, theprogram should consider the needs for M&M bothfor point sources, and for the extensive and importantdiffuse sources, such as those associated withagriculture.

Technology Strategy

Advanced technologies can make importantcontributions to direct and indirect M&M approachesfor point and diffused sources of emissions. Realizingthe contributions of these technologies is the focus ofan R&D portfolio that combines a number of areas,across a number of agencies, including NASA’s A-Train (Figure 8-3).

In the near term, technical improvements tomeasurement equipment and sampling procedurescan improve extended period sampling capabilitiesthat would allow better spatial and temporalresolution of emissions estimates. Softwaredevelopment that allows further integration ofmeasurement data with emission modeling processescan lead to improved estimates. In addition,instruments can be developed to measure from stand-off distances (tower measurements), and fromairborne and space-borne sensors to address regional,continental, and global reductions of GHG emissions.

In the long term, development of inexpensive CEMs,satellite-based sensors, and improved accountingestimates of emissions offer promise. Integratingmodeling techniques, including inverse modelingprocedures that integrate bottom-up and top-downemissions data, regional data or global data are alsodesirable to identify data gaps or confirm sourcelevels. To facilitate the delivery of cost-effectivesolutions, the strategy will couple academic andnational laboratory R&D to benchmarking andtransfer to industry for production and deployment.

Current Portfolio

A wide range of R&D programs currently exists inthe area of M&M of emissions of other GHGs. Thegoals of these programs are to develop an integratedsystem that meshes observations (and estimations)from point sources, diffuse sources, regional sources,and national scales; inexpensive and easily-deployedsensors for a variety of applications, such as stackemissions, N2O emissions across agricultural systems,CO2 fluxes across forested regions, CO2 and other

8.4

176


Figure 8-3. NASA’s “A-Train” satellite constellation will consist of six satellites flying in formation around the globe. Each satellitewill have unique measurement capabilities that greatly complement each other. Near simultaneous measurements of aerosols,clouds, temperature, relative humidity, radiative fluxes, and atmospheric constituents will be obtained over the globe during allseasons. Courtesy: NASA

GHG emissions from transportation vehicles;accurate rules-of-thumb (reporting/accounting rules)for practices that reduce emissions or increase sinks; ahigh-resolution system that captures process-leveldetails of sources and sinks (e.g., CO2 or CO2

isotopes) and a methodology to scale it up reliably;and data archiving and analysis system-to-integrationobservations and reporting information.7

The following is a summary of some of theseprograms:

◆ Annual national inventories prepared by EPA relyon both indirect modeling techniques and directmeasurement data. These inventories capturechanges in the characteristics and activities relatedto each source, and are subject to ongoingimprovements and verification procedures. Theindirect modeling procedures developed for theseinventories are particularly important to captureemissions from diffuse area sources whereindividual measurements are not practical.

◆ Through the Advanced Global Atmospheric GasesExperiment (AGAGE) Network and otheruniversity-led measurement programs, NASAEarth science research includes measuring globaldistributions and temporal behavior of biogenicand anthropogenic gases important for bothstratospheric ozone and climate. These includeCFCs, HCFCs, HFCs, halons, N2O, CH4,hydrogen, and carbon monoxide. Measurementsmade at the sites in the NASA-sponsored AGAGEnetwork, along with sites in cooperativeinternational programs, are used in internationalassessments for updating global ozone-depletionand climate-forcing estimates and in NASA’striennial report to the Congress and the EPA onatmospheric abundances of chlorine and brominechemicals.

◆ NOAA monitors the global atmosphericconcentration of CH4, N2O, CFCs, HFCs, halonsand SF6, in addition to CO2, through its networkof observatories and global cooperative programs.Through these measurements, the global climateforcing by GHGs is updated annually.

◆ There are generally well-established measurementprocedures for energy and industrial point sources,as well as for diffuse sources that are involved withvoluntary programs of reduction (e.g., natural gas,coal mines) or are subject to monitoring throughregulatory programs for other gases (e.g.,landfills). Ongoing integration of these directmeasurement results with indirect modeling

procedures is part of the national inventoryprocess.

◆ Recent activities for sources such as agriculturalsoils, livestock, and manure waste focus onadvanced modeling of emissions with verificationand validation by direct measurements.Improvements to sampling and measurementtechniques are a current priority for these sources.

◆ A number of measurement technologies haveevolved to address the diffuse nature of many ofthe non-CO2 sources. These include advancedchamber techniques for in situ sensors, FTIR,tracer gas, micrometeorological methods, and leakdetection systems. The results of thesemeasurements are being used to verify and feedback to emission factor development.

◆ BC and tropospheric ozone precursor emissionsare an emerging area of importance. Althoughthere is long history of monitoring particulatematter and ozone precursor emissions for criteriapollutant inventories, investigations into theparticular sources, speciated forms, and fate ofthese gases and aerosols that are most applicableto climate forcing potential have become a priorityresearch area.

◆ EPA is conducting analysis and research toimprove GHG inventories and emissionsestimation methods, implementing formalizedquality control/quality assurance procedures anduncertainty estimation. This concentrated effortwill improve all emission estimates for all sourcecategories by identifying areas to target forimproved or expanded M&M efforts.

◆ EPA and the aluminum industry have developedcommon protocols for the measurement ofperfluorocarbon emissions from aluminumprimary production facilities to ensure comparableglobal data.


The current portfolio supports the main componentsof the technology development strategy and addressesthe highest priority current investment opportunitiesin this technology area. For the future, CCTP seeksto consider a full array of promising technologyoptions. From diverse sources, suggestions for futureresearch have come to CCTP’s attention. Some ofthese, and others, are currently being explored andunder consideration for the future R&D portfolio.

177


7 A detailed review of these R&D activities can be found in Section 5.6 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-56.pdf

These include:

◆ Further development of measurement,monitoring, and sampling techniques foragricultural sources, particularly in the area ofN2O from agricultural soils, and CH4 and N2Ofrom manure waste. These techniques wouldaddress the temporal and spatial variation that isinherent to these emission sources.

◆ Development of high quality and current emissionfactors for BC, and, to some extent, troposphericozone precursors where there is limitedmeasurement data available.

◆ CEMs that can measure multiple gases are welldeveloped, but improvements in performance,longevity, autonomy, spatial resolution ofmeasurements, and data transmission wouldimprove measurement of multiple gases. CEMshave particular application to industrial and pointsources; however, applying CEM technology tomore diffuse sources is also an area for furtherresearch.

◆ Modeling activities that increase the accuracy ofspatial and temporal estimates of CH4 and N2Ofrom area-type sources such as wetlands,wastewater treatment plants, livestock, andagricultural soils. These are sources that aretypically too numerous to measure and monitoron an individual basis, but can be addressedthrough indirect modeling techniques to accountfor global, national, and regional emissions. Moresophisticated modeling practices could improvethe accuracy of the estimates, particularly in termsof greater representation of changing conditionsof operation.

◆ Space-based technologies for long-termmonitoring of the global distribution andtransport of BC aerosols and other aerosol types(Box 8-6). The NASA Orbiting CarbonObservatory (OCO) will also serve as a proof ofconcept for the measurements needed to derivesurface sources and sinks of other GHGs,including CH4, on regional scales. Thismeasurement approach will have applications tofuture spaceborne measurements of GHGs.Planned collaborations with internationalpartners—e.g., the Japan Aerospace ExplorationAgency’s GOSAT mission—will lead to a morecomplete suite of global GHG observations.

◆ Sophisticated modeling procedures that canfingerprint large-scale measurements to uniquesources could help integrate continental andglobal measurements with regional and localemissions data.

◆ Collaborative research between EPA’s NationalVehicle and Fuels Emission Laboratory (NVFEL),manufacturers of vehicles/engines, emissioncontrol technology, and analytical equipmentmanufacturers on developing N2O measurementtechniques for emerging gasoline and dieselengines and their emission control systems.Measurement technology applies to bothlaboratory and field measurement.

Science questions driving future development oftechnologies for climate change M&M include:

◆ What effects do anthropogenic activities have onaerosol radiative forcing, at accuracies sufficient toestablish climate sensitivity, i.e., < 1 W/m2?

◆ What are the separate impacts of anthropogenicand natural processes, including urban activities,fuel-use changes, emission controls, forest fires,

178


As part of its scientific research missionsupporting the Climate Change ScienceProgram, NASA conducts R&D of aerospacescience and technology that is relevant to CCTPM&M needs. Several new measurementconcepts have been developed by NASA. TheOrbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO) conceptinvolves space-based observations ofatmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) and generatesthe knowledge needed.

An Aerosol Polarimetery Sensor (APS) for theNASA Glory space mission is being designed toprovide improvements in monitoring of BCaerosols compared to the legacy satelliteinstruments that only measure the intensity ofreflected sunlight.

Studies indicate that multi-angle spectro-polarimetric imager (MSPI) and a high spectralresolution LIDAR (HSRL) would have thecapacity to provide column average estimates ofaerosol optical depth, particle size distribution,single scattering albedo, size-resolved realrefractive index, and particle shape to distinguishnatural and anthropogenic aerosols and improveprojections of future atmospheric CO2.

BOX 8-6

CONCEPTS FOR GLOBAL CO2 AND BC MEASUREMENTS

and volcanoes, on trends in particulate pollutionnear the surface?

◆ What connections are there between cloudproperties and aerosol amount and type?

IntegratedMeasurement andMonitoring SystemArchitecture

The integrated system architecture established thecontext of a systems approach to delivering theinformation needed to plan, implement, and assessGHG reduction actions (Figure 8-4). Thisarchitecture provides a framework for assessingM&M technology developments in the context oftheir contribution to observation systems that supportintegrated system solutions for GHG reductionactions and helps in identifying more cost-effectivesolutions. It enables the benchmarking of plannedimprovements against current capabilities.

An integrated M&M capability has the ability tointegrate across spatial and temporal scales and atmany levels, ranging from carbon measurements insoils to emissions from vehicles, from large pointsources to diffused area sources, from landfills togeographic regions. This capability is graphicallydepicted in Figure 8-5. The integrated system buildson existing and planned observing and monitoring

technologies of the CCSP and includes newtechnologies emerging from the CCTP R&Dportfolio.

Advanced M&M technologies offer the potential tocollect and merge global and regional data fromsensors deployed on satellite and aircraft platformswith other data from ground networks, point-sourcesensors, and other in situ configurations. Wirelessmicrosensor networks can be used to gather relevantdata and send to compact, high-performancecomputing central ground stations that merge otherdata from aircraft and satellite platforms for analysisand decision-making. An integrated system providesthe benefits of compatibility, efficiency, and reliabilitywhile minimizing the total cost of M&M.

Technology Strategy

The strategy for developing an integrated system is tofocus on the most important measurement needs andapply the integrated concept design to ongoingtechnology opportunities as they arise. The nearterm focuses on development of observation systemsat various scales. The longer term focuses onmerging these spatial systems into an integratedapproach employing IEOS. IEOS will enable andfacilitate sharing, integration, and application ofglobal, regional, and local data from satellites, oceanbuoys, weather stations, and other surface andairborne Earth observing instruments (IEOS 2005).Although IEOS serves multiple purposes, oneoutcome will be the strengthening of U.S. capabilitiesto measure and monitor GHG emissions and fluxes.Development of software and tools to further

8.5

179


Figure 8-4. Integrating SystemArchitectural Linking Measurementand Monitoring ObservationSystems to Greenhouse GasReduction Actions

Courtesy NASA

Integrating System Architectural Linking Measurement and Monitoring Observation Systems to Greenhouse Gas Reduction Actions

On-going feedback to optimize value and reduce gaps

Earth System Analysis/Models

Atmosphere/GHGOceanicTerrestrialGeologic

Decision Support

Management Systems

AssessmentsDecision Support Systems

High PerformanceComputing,Communication,& Visualization

Standards &Interoperability

Predictions

GHG Reduction Actions

Observations

DATA

Observation Systems (across spatial scales)

Remotely-sensedIn situ

integrate measurement data with emission modelingprocesses will be an ongoing component of thetechnology strategy.

Current Portfolio

The current Federal R&D portfolio has been targetedat a number of developments, with the goal todevelop an integrated system that meshesobservations (and estimations) from point sources(e.g., power plant or geologic storage site), diffusesources (e.g., from commercial and agriculturalsystems), regional sources (e.g., city/county), andnational scales so that checks and balances up anddown these scales can be accomplished. The systemshould be able to attribute emissions/sinks to bothnational level activities and individual/corporateactivities and provide verification for reportingactivities. The system must be inexpensive and useeasily-deployed sensors for a variety of applications(stack emissions, N2O emissions across agriculturalsystems, CO2 fluxes across forested regions, CO2 andother GHG emissions from transportation vehicles).In addition, the integrated system should have dataarchiving and analysis capability for system-to-integration observations and reporting information.8

Some examples of the current R&D activities include:

◆ Global. R&D programs enabled by NASA’s EarthObservation System research satellites, NOAA’soperational weather and climate satellites, andNOAA’s distributed ground networks (includingthe Mauna Loa observatory) support improved

understanding and measurements and monitoringcapabilities relevant to CCSP and CCTP. Thetransition of NASA’s research to NOAAoperational use (referred to as “Research &Operations”) enhances program planning andbudget execution capabilities for the U.S. EarthObservation System.

◆ Continental. Recent research has tried todetermine the net emissions for the NorthAmerican continent using different approaches:inversion analysis based on CO2 monitoringequipment as currently arrayed, remote sensingcoupled with ecosystem modeling, andcompilation of land inventory information.European researchers have embarked on a similartrack by combining meteorological transportmodels with time-dependent emission inventoriesprovided by member states of the EuropeanUnion.

◆ Regional. Advanced technologies, such assatellites, are being developed to monitor and/orverify a country’s anthropogenic and naturalemissions. NOAA is building an atmosphericcarbon monitoring system under the CCSP usingsmall aircraft and tall communications towers thatwill be capable of determining emissions anduptake on a 1000-km scale (Box 8-7).

◆ Local (micro or individual). A number oftechniques are currently used to directly orindirectly estimate emissions from individual sitesand/or source sectors, such as mass-balancetechniques, eddy-covariance methods (i.e.,

180


Figure 8-5. Hierarchical Layers ofSpatial Observation Technologiesand Capabilities

Courtesy NASA

Hierarchical Layers of Spatial Observation Technologies and Capabilities

Global Atmosphere

Regional and Continental

Area Sources

Point Sources

Micro and In Situ

Spacecraft

CEMs, OBD

Micro, Robotics

Aircraft, autonomous submersibles, towers, flask networks, land measurements

FTIR, LIDAR, LIBS, Hyperspectral and Multispectral Imaging

FTIR:Fourier Infared Spectrometer

LIDAR: Light Detection And Ranging

LIBS: Laser Induced BreakdownSpectoscopy

CEM: Continuous Emmission Monitors

OBD: On-Board Diagnostics Vehicles

8 For a detailed analysis of the current research, see Section 5.1 (CCTP 2005): http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/tor2005-51.pdf.

AmeriFlux sites, source identification usingisotope signatures), application of emissionsfactors derived from experimentation, forestrysurvey methods, and CEMs in the utility sector.


The current portfolio supports the main componentsof the technology development strategy. Withinconstrained Federal resources, this portfolio addressesthe highest priority current investment opportunities.For the future, CCTP remains open to and seeks toconsider a full array of promising technology options.From diverse sources, including technical workshops,R&D program reviews, scientific advisory panels, andexpert inputs, a number of such ideas have beenbrought to CCTP’s attention.

◆ An overarching measurement-and-monitoringsystem architecture that integrates a diverseset of models and data from local pointsources. The integrated management systemwould function at multiple scales (local-regional-global) and have the ability to integrate acrossspatial and temporal scales and from manysources, ranging from carbon measurements insoils to emissions from vehicles, from large pointsources to diffused area sources, from landfills togeographic regions. Development would befacilitated via interagency planning andcoordination.

◆ Data fusion and integration technologies tosupport integration of information fromnumerous sources, such as satelliteobservations, real-time surface indicators, andreported emissions inventories. Advances areneeded in data handling and processing, anddevelopment of innovative sensors, platforms,advanced data protocols and mining algorithms,large storage systems (hardware and software), andcomputational models. Validation of dataelements requires coordination with national andinternational standards-setting bodies to developprotocols for interoperability of datasets.

◆ Platforms for all spatial scales andmeasurement layers, for example, from newtypes of global sensors on satellite platformsand from new airborne platforms (e.g.,remotely operated or autonomous) facilitatedby IEOS. Monitoring of GHG emission sourcesand geologic sequestration would be supported byportable platforms for sensors and autonomousunits that measure, analyze, and report emissions,

while ocean sequestration would be supported byautonomous submersible systems with appropriatesensors and reporting capabilities. An integratedsystem of sensors, indicators and models would becritical to platform development and use, as wellas data collection and integration.

◆ Capability for remote sensing of GHGs andaerosols from beyond low Earth orbit(geostationary L1). Features would includemulti-spectral spectrometers, “stare” capabilitywith high temporal resolution, spatial resolutionon the order of a few kilometers, and ability tomeasure a variety of constituents.

◆ Rapid prototyping and benchmarking ofexisting integrated system components(sensors, data handling, models, algorithms,decision support) and those evolving throughR&D. Laboratory capability will test and evaluatethe efficacy of the solutions to systems integration.

◆ Wide area networks (wireless mesh-communications with no towers or satellites

181


As part of the Climate Change Science Program(CCSP) and the North American Carbon Program(NACP), NOAA is building a Carbon CycleAtmospheric Observing System mainly acrossthe United States in order to reduce theuncertainty in the North American carbon sink.To measure carbon fluxes on a 1000-km scaleover land, vertical profiling is necessary. Fromabout 24 sites, small aircraft will, on a weeklybasis, carry automatic flask sampling systems.These systems will collect 12 samples foranalysis of carbon gases and isotopic carbonratios at predetermined altitudes from thesurface to about 8 km. In conjunction, tallcommunications towers (~ 500 m) will samplecarbon and other GHGs continuously from about12 U.S. sites. This technique will be capable ofdetermining regional carbon sources and sinksand may have applications in the Climate ChangeTechnology Program (CCTP) for monitoring theeffectiveness of, for example, sequestrationactivities.

BOX 8-7

NOAA REGIONAL CARBON MONITORING

connected sensors) that provide robustcommunications. These networks would employlow-cost point GHG sensors that collect data atan appropriate frequency and spatial resolution.

◆ Decision support tools to incorporate data andinformation from M&M systems (e.g., changein emissions, regional or continentalinformation, fate of sequestered gases), alongwith model sensitivities and model predictionsgenerated by CCSP activities into interactivetools for decision makers. These tools wouldprovide the basis for “what-if” scenarioassessments of alternative emission reductionstechnologies (e.g., sequestration, emission control,differential technology implementation timeschedules in key countries of the developingworld). There is also a critical need for tools thatcan measure and monitor or simulate functionalityin the design of climate change mitigationtechnologies.

ConclusionsMeeting the GHG measuring and monitoringchallenge is possible with a thoughtful system designthat includes near- and long-term technologyadvances. Figure 8-6 presents a set of representativeM&M technologies that are featured in thetechnology strategies of this chapter and could ariseover time from ongoing and future researchinvestments. The resulting timeline illustrates thetechnology advances that, if realized, would producecontinuing progress in GHG measuring andmonitoring systems. Such systems are needed tosupport the design and implementation of strategiesto ensure a future of near-net-zero GHG emissions.

Near-term opportunities for R&D include, but arenot limited to (1) incorporating transportation M&Msensors into the onboard diagnostic and controlsystems of production vehicles; (2) preparing geologicsequestration M&M technologies for deploymentwith planned demonstration projects; (3) exploitingobservations and measurements from current andplanned Earth observing systems to measureatmospheric concentrations and profiles of GHGs

from planned satellites; (4) undertaking designs anddeploying the foundation components for a national,multi-tiered monitoring system with optimizedmeasuring, monitoring, and verification systems; (5)deploying sounding instruments, biological andchemical markers (either isotopic or fluorescence),and ocean sensors on a global basis to monitorchanges in ocean chemistry; (6) maintaining in situobserving systems to characterize local-scale dynamicsof the carbon cycle under changing climaticconditions; and (7) maintaining in situ observingsystems to monitor the effectiveness and stability ofCO2 sequestration activities.

Through sustained R&D investments in monitoringand measurement capabilities, the United States can(1) enhance its ability to model emissions based on adynamic combination of human activity patterns,source procedures, energy sources, and chemicalprocessing; (2) develop process-based models thatreproduce the atmospheric physical and chemicalprocesses (including transport and transformationpathways) that lead to the observed vertical profiles ofGHG concentrations due to surface emissions; (3)determine to what degree natural exchanges with thesurface affect the net national emissions of GHGs; (4)develop a combination of space-borne, airborne, andsurface-based scanning and remote-sensingtechnologies to produce 3D, real-time mapping ofatmospheric GHG concentrations; (5) developspecific technologies for sensing of global methane“surface” emissions with resolution of 10 km; (6)develop remote-sensing methods to determinespatially resolved vertical GHG profiles, rather thancolumn-averaged profiles; and (7) develop space-borne and airborne monitoring for soil moisture atresolutions suitable for M&M activities.

8.6

182


183


Technologies for Goal #5: Measure and Monitor Emissions

Figure 8-6. Technologies for Goal #5: Measure and Monitor Emissions(Note: Technologies shown are representations of larger suites. With some overlap, “near-term” envisions significant technologyadoption by 10–20 years from present, “mid-term” in a following period of 20–40 years, and “long-term” in a following period of40–60 years. See also List of Acronyms and Abbreviations.)

• M&M Specifications and PerformanceStandards

• Low-Cost Sensors and Communications• Samplings, Inventories, & Estimates

• Sensor Networks• Remote Sensing Prototype• Direct Measurement to Replace Proxies

and Estimates

• Fully Operational Sensor and SatelliteNetworks that Feed the IntegratedArchitecture

EnergyProduction &EfficiencyTechnologies


• Low-Cost Sensors and Communications• Samplings, Inventories, & Estimates• Ability to Assess the Integrity of Geologic

Reservoirs• Improved Leak Detection from Capture

and Pipelines

• Sensor Networks• Remote Sensing Prototype


CarbonCapture,Storage, &Sequestration


• Low-Cost Sensors and Communications• Samplings, Inventories, & Estimates

• Sensor Networks• Remote Sensing Prototype• M&M Techniques for Agricultural Sources


Other GHGs

• Identification of Metrics, Criteria, Sources,and Requirements for Measurements

• Comprehensive Vision of IntegratedSystems Architecture and TechnologyNeeds

• Model and Data Specification• Large Scale, Secure Data Storage System• Data Visualization Tools• M&M Processes Incorporated into Design

of Climate Change Technologies

• Fully Operational Integrated MM SystemsArchitecture (Sensors, Indicators, DataVisualization and Storage, Models)

IntegratedM&M SystemsArchitecture


184


Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2004. Voluntary reporting of greenhouse gases 2002. DOE/EIA-0608(2002). Washington,DC: Energy Information Administration. January. http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/vrrpt/. For additional information onreporting requirements, see: EIA 1994. General guidelines for the voluntary reporting of greenhouse gases under Section 1605(b) ofthe Energy Act Policy of 1992. Washington, DC: Energy Information Administration.http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/1605b.html

Integrated Earth Observation System (IEOS). 2005. Strategic plan for the U.S. integrated earth observation system.http://usgeo.gov/docs/EOCStrategic_Plan.pdf

Post, W.M., R.C. Izaurralde, J.D. Jastrow, B.A. McCarl, J.E. Amonette, V.L. Bailey, P.M. Jardine, T.O. West, and J. Zhou. 2004.Enhancement of carbon sequestration in US soils. Bioscience 54:895-908.

U.S. Climate Change Technology Program (CCTP). 2003. Technology options for the near and long term. DOE/PI-0002.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2003/tech-options/index.htm Update is at http://www.climatetechnology.gov/library/2005/tech-options/index.htm

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). 2004. Geological sequestration of CO2: theGEO-SEQ project. http:/www.netl.doe.gov/publications/factsheets/project/Proj287.pdf

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). 2003. Ameriflux. http://public.ornl.gov/ameriflux/

References8.7

9One of CCTP’s core approaches (Approach #2)focuses on strengthening basic research in Federallaboratories, universities, and other researchorganizations. Basic research will give rise toknowledge and technical insights necessary toenable technical progress throughout CCTP’sportfolio of applied research and development,explore novel approaches to new challenges, andbolster the underlying knowledge base for newdiscoveries (Figure 9-1).

In considering the roles for basic research andrelated organizational planning in advancingclimate change technology development, CCTPcharacterizes opportunities for contributions asfollows:

◆ Fundamental Science: Fundamental science isbasic research that provides the underlyingfoundation of scientific knowledge that can lead tofundamental new discoveries. It is the systematicstudy of system properties and natural behaviorthat can lead to greater knowledge andunderstanding of the fundamental aspects ofphenomena, processes, and observable facts, butwithout prior specification toward applications todesign or develop specific processes or products.It includes scientific study and experimentation inthe physical, biological, and environmentalsciences and many interdisciplinary areas, such ascomputational sciences. Although not directlyrelated to CCTP, it is a source of underlying

knowledge that will enable future progress inCCTP.

◆ Strategic Research: Strategic research is basicresearch that is inspired by technical challenges inthe applied research and development programs.It is research that may lead to fundamentaldiscoveries (e.g., new properties, phenomena, ormaterials) or scientific understanding, but isprimarily aimed at providing better understandingof underlying phenomena that are believed to berelevant to specific problems, challenges, or

185

The challenge of encouraging and sustaining economic growth, while simultaneouslyreducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, calls for the development of an array of new

and advanced technologies. Such an undertaking depends on scientific knowledge gainedfrom basic research. Fundamental discoveries can reveal new properties and phenomena thatcan give rise to improved understanding of technical barriers and illuminate pathways towardinnovative solutions. Fundamental discoveries can include breakthroughs in understandingbiological functions, properties and phenomena of nano-materials and structures, improvedcomputing architectures, applications and methods, progress in plasma and environmentalsciences, and many more breakthrough developments now unfolding on the frontiers ofactive scientific and technical disciplines.

Bolster Basic Science Contributions to Technology Development


Figure 9-1. Fundamental science is critically important in thecreation of new knowledge and improved understanding oftechnological innovation.


technical barriers impeding progress in technologydevelopment. For CCTP, strategic research arebasic research endeavors relevant to R&D onenergy supply; end-use; CO2 capture, storage andsequestration; mitigation of emissions of non-CO2

GHGs; and means for enhancing measurementand monitoring (M&M) of GHGs. This“strategic” research builds on knowledge gainedfrom fundamental science and extends it to thetechnical challenges associated with technologyR&D.

◆ Exploratory Research: Exploratory research isbasic research, or early and exploratory study ofapplication-inspired concepts, undertaken in thepursuit of high-risk, novel, emergent, integrativeor enabling approaches, not elsewhere covered.Many such concepts may be pursued withinexisting applied research and developmentprograms, but often truly novel concepts do not fitwell within the established constructs of existingmission-directed or discipline-oriented programs.In addition, some early experimental research maybe too risky or multi-disciplinary for a particularresearch program to justify or support unilaterally.Therefore, not all of the research on innovativeconcepts for climate-related technology is, orshould be expected to be, aligned directly with anexisting Federal R&D mission-related program.This Plan calls for exploratory research that couldlead to new breakthroughs in technologydevelopment and thereby dramatically change theway energy is produced, transformed, and used inthe global economy. Exploratory research ofinnovative and novel concepts, not elsewherecovered, is one way to uncover such“breakthrough technology,” stimulate innovationacross the research community, and enrich theoverall R&D portfolio.

◆ Integrated Planning: Effective integration offundamental science, strategic research,exploratory research, and applied technologyresearch and development presents challenges toand opportunities for both the basic research andapplied research communities. These challengesand opportunities can be effectively addressedthrough innovative, integrative planning processes,augmented by analysis and decision-support tools.These processes emphasize communication,cooperation and collaboration among the manyassociated communities. CCTP encourages andexpects to build on the successful models and bestpractices in this area and plans to improve itsanalyses and tools.

This chapter discusses the potential researchcontributions to climate-related technologydevelopment of each of the above categories. Section9.1, “Strategic Research,” describes the basic,problem-inspired science underway, planned or underconsideration that explores key technical challengesassociated with CCTP’s five strategic goals, asdiscussed in Chapters 4 through 8. Section 9.2,“Fundamental Science,” describes the basic researchthat provides the underlying scientific foundation ofknowledge needed to enable breakthroughtechnology. Section 9.3, “Exploratory Research,”addresses research of high-risk, novel, emergent,integrative or enabling concepts, and others,important to climate change technology development,but not elsewhere covered. Finally, acknowledgingthat clarifying and communicating research needs ofthe applied technology research and developmentprograms can help inform and guide basic researchplans and programs, Section 9.4, “Toward EnhancedIntegration in R&D Planning Processes,” describes ageneralized approach to integrate better basicresearch with the applied research and developmentprograms related to climate change technologydevelopment.

Strategic ResearchScientific research enables both current and newgenerations of technologies that are needed to addressthe problem of GHG emissions. The outcomesexpected from scientific research are time-variant:

◆ In the near term, a significant role of research is toovercome bottlenecks and barriers that presentlylimit or constrain the development and applicationof technologies that are progressing towardcommercial status. Some of the barriers include alack of suitable materials, advanced processing andmanufacturing, the need for information on keyprocesses, and the need for new instrumentationand methods (Figure 9-2). Research willcontribute to studying the feasibility of newtechnologies, solving key materials and processissues, developing new instrumentation andmethods, and reducing costs. For example,science-based analyses will help to assess theviability of carbon storage and sequestration overthe next decade; to better understand theinteractions between engineered systems andnatural systems (e.g., in systems involvingbiotechnology); and to solve materials and

9.1

186


chemistry problems in advanced energy systems,such as hydrogen production and fuel cells. Thedevelopment of novel space-based monitoringsystems could enhance GHG M&M strategies.

◆ In the mid-term, science will take nascent ideasand develop them to the point they can enter thetechnology cycle. For example, innovationsachieved through the support of science programsmay result in new nanomaterials and devices forenergy transformation, the ability to capturebioenzymes in biomimetic membranes for variousenergy applications, advances in plasma science forthe development of fusion energy, andidentification of new materials and efficientprocesses for hydrogen production, storage, andconversion.

◆ In the long-term, the current wave of research “atthe frontier” may open up entirely new fieldsinvolving genomics and the molecular basis of life,computational simulations, advanced analyticaland synthetic technologies, and novel applicationsof nanoscience and nanotechnology. It is hard topredict discoveries that will open entirely newways of producing and using energy ordramatically alter industrial processes. However,the history of science and technology containsmany examples of such transformations.

Much of the research needed to address thechallenges of climate change technology developmentrequires cross-cutting strategic research approaches.These are discussed in the sections that follow,organized by the five CCTP strategic goals (Chapters4 through 8):

◆ Reduce Emissions from Energy End-Use andInfrastructure

◆ Reduce Emissions from Energy Supply

◆ Capture and Sequester Carbon Dioxide

◆ Reduce Emissions of Non-CO2 GHGs

◆ Enhance Capabilities to Measure and MonitorGHGs.

The section concludes with a description of cross-cutting strategic research areas that underpin the sixthCCTP goal: to strengthen the basic researchfoundations that enable climate technology advances.

Research Supporting EmissionsReductions from Energy End-Use andInfrastructure

A broad array of research underpins emissionsreductions from energy end-use and infrastructure,spanning the areas of transportation, buildings,industry, the electric grid, and infrastructure. Thepromising basic research directions for each of theseareas are discussed below, with illustrative examples.

TransportationStrategic research is needed to address major sourcesof CO2 emissions from vehicles and other keytransport modes. Research on reducing vehicleweight while maintaining strength and safety includesmaterials science that improves efficiency, economy,performance, environmental acceptability, and safetyin transportation. Foci are ceramics and otherdurable high-temperature, wear-resistant materialsand coatings; and strong and lightweight alloys,polymers, and composite materials for structuralcomponents. Joining, welding, and corrosionsciences will enable the application of new polymercomposites and bimetallic alloys, which also requirethe development of low-energy techniques formaterials processing.

187


Figure 9-2. Scientific research can help in overcoming barriers to thedevelopment of advanced process technology, such as the laser-assistedwelding imaging system shown above.

Courtesy: DOE Office of Science

The nanosciences can potentially contribute to manyaspects of energy efficient vehicles, engines, andengine processes. Research can build on basicresearch in materials, chemistry, and computation todevelop fundamentally new types of materials withspecific, tailored properties, including innovativeapplications such as highly conductive nanofluids forlubrication and cooling.

Materials and membrane research for fuel cellstacks and advanced fuel cell concepts for vehicles willimprove the efficiency of fuel cells along with theirperformance, durability, and cost. Nanostructuredcatalysts will reduce the need for noble metals andcan be operated at lower temperatures whileproducing fewer side products.

Electrochemistry, materials, and catalyst research,including research at the nanoscale, may lead toinnovations in onboard energy storage for electrichybrid and hydrogen-powered vehicles. Forconventional and novel sources of power in mobileapplications, energy conversion cycles can be mademore efficient and thermoelectric materials canenable more beneficial use of waste heat.

Research in thermo- and electro-chemistry andmaterials for advanced sensors that are robust andinexpensive could improve vehicle fuel economy bypredicting system failure and optimizing systemparameters.

For both combustion and other transportation energysources, research on the energetics of chemicalreactions and the interactions of chemistry atinterfaces may significantly improve or transform theefficiency of energy-producing reactions. The designand development of efficient, clean-burning designscan be accomplished more quickly and with a higherprobability of success if combustion models areimproved.

Research on intelligent transportation systems needsto include complex systems science for sustainabletransportation as well as computational science andimproved mathematical algorithms and models forimproved traffic handling/management and for designand performance simulation.

Genomics, biochemistry, and other biologicalsciences will lead to more productive biomassfeedstocks and more efficient conversion to biofuels.This strategic research is described in more detail inthe following section on “Renewable Energy andFuels.”

BuildingsThree aspects of buildings that could significantlyreduce CO2 emissions would benefit from strategicresearch: the building envelope, building equipment,and integrated building design.

In improving energy efficiency in the buildingenvelope, materials science will have a broad rangeof impacts, from a next generation of smart buildinginsulation with phase change materials to transparentfilms for energy-efficient adaptive windows to newclasses of lightweight structural materials. Robotics,along with the joining and welding sciences, willsupport the fabrication and construction of high-efficiency envelopes.

Building equipment will become more energyefficient through research in plasma science for arclighting and semiconductor alloys for solid-statelighting, as well as light-emitting polymers. Moreefficient heating and cooling systems will be possiblebecause of combustion, materials, heat transfer,and engineering research, and fundamentally newapproaches to heating and cooling will result fromresearch into thermoacoustics and thermoelectrics.Breakthroughs in magnetism will enable moreefficient motors.

Research in whole-building integration will draw onthe basic science research in condensed matterphysics that enables improvements in smarttransistors for energy-saving sensors and electronicdevices to optimize space conditioning, new andimproved self-powered smart windows throughresearch in constricted-plasma source thin filmapplications, electrochromics and dye-sensitizedsolar cells, as well as multilayer thin film materialsand deposition processes to control the interiorenvironment, and smart filters for water systemsbased on tailored pore sizes and pore chemistry.

IndustryStrategic research is needed to address current andanticipated sources of emissions of CO2 and otherGHGs from energy conversions and processinefficiencies. Strategic research is also needed tofacilitate improvements in energy efficiency andresource utilization.

Research on advanced materials with attributes suchas the ability to operate in varied hostileenvironments, such as high temperatures andpressures and corrosive environments, can enableimproved process efficiencies.

Advances in high-temperature materials research(Figure 9-3) will lead to increased energy efficiency in

188


industrial processes; for instance, increasedtemperature will improve the efficiency of industrialboilers (super-critical steam cycles) and IntegratedGas Combined Cycle (IGCC) systems for recycle ofbyproduct streams in the paper and pulp industry.Other areas of materials science include ionimplantation, thin films, carbon-based nanomaterials,ceramics, alloys, composites, and quasicrystals;welding, processing, and joining; and foundations fornanomechanics and nano-to-micro assembly.

Solid-state physics and related sciences will supportadvanced, energy-efficient computer chip conceptsand manufacturing.

Because of the very wide diversity of industrialapplications, environments, processes, and products,strategic research in nearly all basic researchdisciplines is needed for new and advanced industrialsensors. For example, superconducting quantuminterference devices (SQUIDS) that can measureextremely weak signals via tiny variations in amagnetic field will provide feedback to systems andreduce energy use as situations change.

Research on advanced separations, chemistry, andhigher-selective catalysts can increase resourcerecovery and utilization of industrial byproduct orwaste material. Advanced membranes andadsorption processes can lead to improved industrialprocess efficiencies and costs.

Research into the magneto-caloric effect will lead tonew, energy-efficient forms of industrial refrigeration.

Advances in electronics research, tailored to powerelectronics applications, will enable more efficientmotor and drive systems with improved ability to varymotor speed to enable higher efficiencies in loadssuch as fans, pumps, and compressors.

Research on key biotechnology platforms anddesigns for biorefineries will enable chemical productsto be derived from biomass rather than fossil fuels asdescribed in the section below on “Renewable Energyand Fuels.”

Electric Grid and InfrastructureA balanced portfolio of strategic research addressingconductor technology, systems and controls, energystorage, and power electronics is needed to meet theneed for secure and reliable power leading to reducedCO2 emissions from electric generation.

Materials that improve the transmission and storageof electricity will achieve highly improved energyefficiency. Solid-state physics and materials

science will enable high-performance semiconductorsand high-temperature superconductors for efficient,high-capacity transmission of electric power.Superconductivity research will also make possibleinnovative storage devices and efficient motors. The,2006 workshop report, Basic Research Needs forSuperconductivity, examined the prospects forsuperconducting grid technology and its potential forsignificantly increasing grid capacity, reliability, andefficiency to meet the growing demand for electricityover the next century (DOE-BES 2006).

Other tailored materials research can lead to highlyconductive high-strength nanowires; superlattices;high-strength, lightweight composites and corrosion-resistant materials; nanostructured materials forsemiconductors; and metallic glasses for vastlyimproved transformers and sensor implementation.

189


Figure 9-3. Advances in high-temperature materials research,facilitated by the use of synchrotron radiation, can make significantcontributions towards improving the energy efficiencies of industrialequipment and electricity generation.


Basic Research Needs for Superconductivity (DOE-BES 2006)

High-Temperature Materials Research

Silicon carbides and thin-film diamond switchingdevices will improve performance and energyefficiency of power electronics and controls. Sensorsand adaptive controls will enable optimization of thegrid; development of responsive loads for peakshaving; and accommodation of distributed solar andwind supply on the grid.

Electrochemistry research, including electrolytes,electrode materials, thin films, and interfaces, willimprove commercial batteries and other electricstorage devices so important to integratingintermittent renewable resources into electric gridoperations and for load leveling and optimized gridoperations.

Computational science and computer/networkscience will improve real-time control of the utilitytransmission infrastructure and, thus, its energyefficiency.

Research Supporting EmissionsReductions from Energy Supply

Strategic research underpinning emissions reductionsfrom energy supply targets low-emissions fossil-basedpower, hydrogen, renewable energy and fuels, nuclearfission, and fusion. Research in these areas includesthe following:

Low-Emissions Fossil-Based PowerStrategic research is needed to achieve the principalfossil energy objective of a zero-emission, coal-basedelectricity generation plant that has the ability to co-produce low-cost hydrogen.

Since high temperatures result in lower GHGemissions, combustion, materials research, andcondensed matter physics (crystalline structure)can contribute improved and new materials for hightemperature, pressure, and corrosive environments.The result will be more efficient gasification processesfor advanced coal plants and higher temperatureturbine blades and heat exchangers to allow moreefficient conversion of natural gas into electricity.

Research in thermo- and electro-chemistry andmaterials for advanced sensors will lead to improvedmonitoring and control of processes in fossil fuelcombustion. Separation sciences will enableimproved gas phase separations in coal liquefactionand reduced energy requirements for oxygenseparations in oxycombustion options.

Computational sciences will advance simulation anddesign, especially for improved models and codes forfluid dynamics, turbulence, and heat transfer modeling.

Catalysis research employing nanostructuredmaterials will find efficient pathways for the selectiveand efficient conversion of fossil fuels, including acatalyst for petroleum refining and chemicalmanufacturing and catalysis of carbon-hydrogenbonds. The 2002 Opportunities for Catalysis in the 21stCentury workshop report describes research directionsfor better understanding of how to design catalyststructures to control catalytic activity and selectivity(BESAC 2002).

Geosciences research for higher recovery rates offossil fuels with lower societal impact will be neededto provide feedstocks for higher efficiency, new low-emission power plants.

HydrogenThe development of energy-efficient andeconomically competitive technologies for H2

delivery, storage, and production will require a broadportfolio of strategic research.

Research will focus on understanding the atomic andmolecular processes that occur at the interface ofhydrogen with materials in order to develop newmaterials suitable for use in a hydrogen economy.New research is needed for tailored materials,membranes, and catalysts, leading to fuel cellassemblies that perform at much higher levels, atmuch lower cost, and with much longer lifetimes.

In the hydrogen production area, a key focus is oncatalysts and better understanding mechanisms forhydrogen production. Biological enzyme catalysis,nanoassemblies and bio-inspired materials and

190


Opportunities for Catalysis in the 21st Century (BESAC 2002)

processes are areas of basic research related tohydrogen production from biomass.Photoelectrochemisty and photocatalysis researchmay lead to breakthroughs in solar production ofhydrogen. Also, thermodynamic modeling, novelmaterials research and membranes, and catalystresearch may support nuclear hydrogen production.

Hydrogen storage is a major challenge. Basic scienceresearch related to storage includes the study ofhydrogen storage-hydrides and tailorednanostructures and the development of high-densityreversible membranes. For instance, research oncomplex metal and chemical hydrides may supporton-board recharging of fuel cell vehicles.

In the fuel cells area, electrochemical energyconversion mechanisms and materials research areimportant. In addition, there are identified needs forhigher temperature membranes and tailorednanostructures that basic science research couldsupport. The 2004 Basic Research Needs for theHydrogen Economy workshop report identifiesfundamental research needs and opportunities inhydrogen production, storage, and use, with a focuson new, emerging, and scientifically challenging areasthat have the potential to deliver significant impacts(BESAC 2004). An NSF (2004a) workshop on FutureDirections for Hydrogen Energy Research & Educationemphasized the promise that nanotechnology offersfor hydrogen and fuel cell development, and theimportance of developing a more interdisciplinaryapproach to future hydrogen research anddevelopment.

Renewable Energy and FuelsStrategic research is needed to enable a transitionfrom current reliance on fossil fuels to a portfolio thatincludes significant renewable energy sources, with ashift in infrastructure to allow for a more diverse mixof technologies.

Biochemistry, bioenergetics, genomics, andbiomimetics research will lead to new forms ofbiofuels and capabilities for microbial conversion offeedstocks to fuels. This includes research onstrategies for cellulose treatment, sugar transport,metabolism, regulation, and microbial systemsdesigned to optimize the use of microbes that areknown to break down different types of complexbiomass to sugars and ferment those sugars to ethanolor other fuels. The 2006 workshop report, Breakingthe Biological Barriers to Cellulosic Ethanol: A JointResearch Agenda, outlines a detailed research plan fordeveloping new technologies to transform cellulosicethanol—a renewable, cleaner-burning, and carbon-

neutral alternative to gasoline—into an economicallyviable transportation fuel (DOE-BER-EERE 2006).The research may lead to scientific breakthroughs inthe design of a single microbe for making ethanolfrom cellulose. Nanoscale hybrid assemblies willenable the photo-induced generation of fuels andchemicals. Plant genomic research and genefunction studies will make possible increased cropyields, disease resistance, drought resistance,improved nutrient-use efficiency, tissue chemistry thatenhances biofuel production and carbonsequestration. The NSF workshop report on Catalysisfor Biorenewables Conversion (2004) identifies the needfor a reinvigoration and redirection of U.S. catalysisresearch for the purpose of developing fuels andchemicals production from biorenewables.

Plant biology, metabolism, and enzymaticproperties research will support the development ofimproved biomass fuel feedstocks and will enable the

191


Basic Research Needs for the Hydrogen Economy (BESAC 2004)

Breaking the Biological Barriers to Cellulosic Ethanol: A JointResearch Agenda (DOE-BER-EERE 2006)

design of crops for bioconversion. For example,expression of thermostable cellulases directly in plantcell walls could facilitate enzymatic hydrolysis ofcellulose. Research on key biotechnology platformsincludes designs for biorefineries to produce biofuels,biopower, and commercial chemical products derivedfrom biomass rather than fossil fuels. The Roadmapfor Biomass Technologies in the United States prepared bythe Biomass Research and Development TechnicalAdvisory Committee (2002) itemizes a broadsupporting R&D agenda that spans feedstockproduction, processing and conversion, and productuses and distribution. Complementing this agenda,the 2005 Genomics: GTL Roadmap (DOE-SC 2005a)describes an aggressive systems microbiology plan toaccelerate the scientific discovery needed to supportsuch developments.

Basic research in photochemistry and photocatalysiswill provide foundations for future, alternativeprocesses for light-energy conversion, thin-film, andnanosciences research for photovoltaics. Bio-inspiredsystems offer the promise of engineered systems thatmimic photosynthesis at higher efficiencies and rates.The 2005 Basic Research Needs for Solar EnergyUtilization (DOE-SC 2005b) workshop reportexamines the challenges and opportunities for thedevelopment of solar energy as a competitive energysource and to identify the technical barriers to large-scale implementation of solar energy and the basicresearch directions showing promise to overcomethem.

Geosciences and hydrology research will support abroad range of siting issues related to hydro andgeothermal power sources as well as assessing theavailability of low-grade geothermal energy. Neededresearch includes mapping and monitoringgeothermal reservoirs, predicting heat flows andreservoir dynamics, mapping the natural distributionof porosity and permeability in deep geologic media,and developing new methods to enhance or reducepermeability.

Research in materials and composites will lead toimproved wind energy systems by enabling largerblades on wind turbine systems leading to lower unitcosts for wind power and the economic use of windturbines with low-speed wind resources. Research inelectro-chemistry, superconductivity, and solid-state physics can aid advances in electric storage tohelp deal with the problem of intermittency thatcurrently makes it difficult to integrate wind (andsolar) energy into large-scale power dispatch systems.Research in materials chemistry, electro-chemistryand solid-state physics can lead to advances indevelopment of power electronics, which will lead topower systems that can integrate with multi-levelphotovoltaics and inverters for solar and wind powersystems and can convert DC power into 60-hz ACpower.

Nuclear Fission EnergyThrough strategic research addressing issues of safety,sustainability, cost-effectiveness, and proliferationresistance, advanced nuclear fission-reactor systemscan play a vital role in diversifying the Nation’senergy supply and reducing GHG emissions.

Heavy element chemistry, advanced actinide andfission product separations and extraction, and fuelsresearch will support better process controls innuclear fission cycles. The 2005 Workshop report on

192


Genomics: GTL Roadmap (DOE-SC 2005a)

Basic Research Needs for Solar Energy Utilization (DOE-SC2005b)

The Path to Sustainable Nuclear Energy identifies newbasic science that will be the foundation for advancesin nuclear fuel-cycle technology in the near term, andfor changing the nature of fuel cycles and of thenuclear energy industry in the long term (DOE-BES-NP 2005).

Fundamental research in heat transfer and fluid flowwill lead to improved efficiency and containment.

Basic research will meet the materials scienceschallenges of Gen IV reactor environments, withemphasis on the search for radiation-tolerant, ultra-strong alloy and composite materials. Increasedtemperatures enabled by high-temperature materialsallow higher thermal-to-electricity conversionefficiencies. Materials processing, welding, andjoining sciences will also play a critical role inreducing failure rates and ensuring system integrity,and research into basic defect physics in materials,equilibrium and radiation-modified thermodynamicsof alloys and ceramics will improve reactor design.Deformation and fracture studies and analyses ofhelium and hydrogen effects on materials willcontribute to safety and reliability of advanced nuclearenergy systems, as will atomistic and 3D dislocationdynamics studies.

Geophysical research and geological permeabilityengineering will support nuclear siting and wastedisposal in geologic repositories, potentiallyemploying remote sensing technologies similar to theapproaches used in siting renewable energy facilities.

Chemistry and corrosion research will improvedesign, operation, and predictability for performance.

Fusion EnergyStrategic research on magnetic confinementapproaches, materials science, plasma physics, and

high energy density physics is needed to define anddevelop the most promising fusion concept.

Research in burning plasmas will validate thescientific and technological feasibility of fusionenergy. Moreover, research aimed at a fundamentalunderstanding of plasma behavior will provide areliable predictive capability for fusion systems.Studies will identify the most promising approachesand configurations for confining hot plasmas forpractical fusion energy systems.

Research in materials tailored for a fusion energyenvironment leading to components and technologiesthat will be necessary to make fusion energy a reality.

A broad underpinning of computational sciences(Figure 9-4) will advance fusion research, includingcomputational modeling to test the agreementbetween theory and experiment, and simulatingexperiments that cannot readily be investigated in thelaboratory.

Research Supporting CO2Capture and Sequestration

Research supporting carbon capture and sequestrationunderpins the development of technologies andstrategies for CO2 capture and sequestration that aredescribed in Chapter 6.

193


The Path to Sustainable Nuclear Energy (DOE-BES-NP 2005)

Figure 9-4. Computational sciences applied toward fusion energyresearch will aid in testing agreement between theory and experiment,and simulate experiments that cannot be conducted in the laboratory.


Computational Sciences

Carbon Capture and Storage in Geologic RepositoriesRealizing the possibilities for point source CO2

capture requires a research portfolio coveringnumerous technology areas, including post-combustion capture, oxy-fuel combustion, and pre-combustion decarbonization to reduce costs andenergy penalties. Carbon storage in geologicrepositories will require comprehensive understandingof the economic, health, safety, and environmentalimplications of long-term, large-scale geologicstorage.

Membranes and chemistry research will enableseparating CO2 in post-combustion stack gases,capturing it, and if needed, transforming it to anotherform of carbon that may be more useful, or moresafely or permanently stored.

Geophysics, geochemistry, hydrology, andgeological permeability engineering research ofCO2 repositories in geological formations willincrease understanding of how CO2 injected into suchformations interacts with minerals and what the long-term fate of CO2 would be after injection. Thisresearch will probe the factors that determine theresidence time of carbon sequestered in soils, andways in which the quantity and residence time ofcarbon sequestered in soils can be increased. Suchresearch provides the scientific foundation forcredible calculation of sequestration by terrestrialecosystems.

Modeling, simulation, and assessment ofgeological repositories research are necessary toidentify sites that have been or could be selected foruse in storing CO2 removed from industrial fluegases. Such research will help meet the need for amore definitive understanding of geologic storagepotential.

Research is also needed on microbial processes thatact to metabolize CO2 in geologic structures.

Terrestrial and Ocean SequestrationRealizing the potential to sequester carbon interrestrial systems requires research on equipment,processes, management systems, and techniques thatcan enhance carbon stocks in soils, biomass, and woodproducts, while reducing CO2 concentrations in theatmosphere.

Basic biological and environmental research onterrestrial carbon sequestration could enhance the

natural carbon cycle—plants that store even moreCO2. For example, this could involve development oftechnologies for enhancing the ability of trees tosequester carbon by modifying their root systems.Another possibility is genomic research on blackcottonwood to characterize key biochemical functionsrelated to photosynthesis, tree growth, and carbonstorage. Environmental science research cananalyze how efforts to increase terrestrial carbonsequestration might influence other environmentalprocesses, such as nutrient cycling, the emissions ofother GHGs, and albedo effects on climate at allscales.

Genomic research will identify traits that wouldenable plant species to grow and persist inenvironments that are of marginal quality and, hence,may not be useful for purposes other than capturingcarbon in plant biomass. Genomic research onmicroalgae and photosynthetic bacteria may identifytraits that enable the organisms to efficiently captureand fix CO2 separated from other industrial flue gasesbefore it is released into the atmosphere. Researchrelated to modifying plants and soil micro-organisms can provide the basis for capturing andretaining nitrogen and other essential plant nutrientsand engineering the pathways for lipid synthesis totrap a larger fraction of photosynthate directly inhydrocarbon precursors.

Soil science research on the formation andtransformation of soil organic matter will enableefficient application of technologies to enhance soilcarbon sequestration, increase plant productivity, andreduce non-CO2 GHGs (e.g., nitrous oxide [N2O])from soil.

Materials research may enhance carbonsequestration by substituting carbon-based productsfor steel, cement, and other commodities. Examplesinclude carbon fiber from black liquor used in themanufacture of carbon composite lightweightmaterials and wood composites used in place of steelbeams.

Research will explore ways of injecting CO2 into thedeep ocean, how long the injected CO2 would remainisolated from the atmosphere, and what the potentialecological and chemical effects might be of injectingrelatively pure streams of CO2 into the deep ocean.Research on methods of enhancing the abiotic uptakeof CO2 by the ocean, and/or storing carbon in theocean in forms other than acid-producing, easilydegassible CO2 will also be considered.

194


A roadmap of various technology developmentapproaches to carbon sequestration is described inCarbon Sequestration Research and Development (DOE-SC-FE 1999).

Research Supporting EmissionsReductions of Non-CO2 GHGs

Basic and applied research is also supported byFederal agencies to develop ways of reducingemissions of non-CO2 GHGs. This includes researchin the physical sciences, biological, andenvironmental sciences, and in computationalsciences.

Work on materials and chemistry will lead toreplacements for high global warming potential non-CO2 GHGs, such as sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) andperfluorocarbons that are used in industrial processes.For example, research in materials chemistry, electro-chemistry, and solid-state physics can lead to advancesin development of power electronics needed tominimize SF6 emissions from transformers by leakreduction, replacement of SF6 with other dielectricmaterial, and development of new power transmissionequipment that does not require SF6 insulation.

Research on thin films and membranes will isolatenon-CO2 GHGs in industrial flue gases and otherwaste streams; combustion research will reduceemissions of N2O, ozone precursors, and soot; andcatalysis research will reduce emissions of non-CO2

GHGs.

Basic research in the biological and environmentalsciences, including microbial processes in the rumenof farm animals, animal metabolism, and animalgrazing will enable reductions in methane emissionsby livestock. Biological research will increaseunderstanding of soil microbes to reduce methaneemissions from livestock feedlots.

Basic biogeochemistry coupled with microbialecology and soil science research may enablereductions in N2O emissions from soils.

Basic Research Supporting Enhanced Capabilities to Measure and Monitor GHGs

There is a continuing need to enhance capabilities tomeasure and monitor GHG emissions andconcentrations across a range of scales andapplications so that carbon management strategies can

be designed and implemented consistent witheconomic and environmental goals. Basic research inthis area includes the following:

Various kinds of measurement for GHGs in theatmosphere are necessary. Observed vertical profilesof GHG concentrations are a result of surfaceemissions and atmospheric physical and chemicalprocesses. Remote sensing methods will determinespatially resolved vertical GHG profiles rather thancolumn-averaged profiles. Combined airborne andsurface-based scanning techniques for remote sensingwill yield 3D, real-time mapping of atmosphericGHG concentrations. Specific technologies forairborne remote sensing will measure methane surfaceemissions at a 10-km spatial resolution. Technologiesfor the long-term monitoring of global black carbon(BC) sources and transports, along with otheraerosols, will enable solutions tailored to emissionsources and their regional impacts.

Research in materials chemistry, electro-chemistryand solid-state physics can lead to advances indevelopment of high-fidelity sensors needed formaking precise and accurate measurements of GHGsin remote and hostile environments (Figure 9-5).Innovative technologies for non-invasivemeasurement of soil carbon will provide rapidmethods for monitoring the effectiveness of carbonmanagement approaches applied to terrestrialecosystems and agricultural practices. Microbial

195


Figure 9-5. Advances in material chemistry can support the development oftechnologies that reduce GHG emissions. Shown here, laser-based surfaceanalysis using resonant ionization of sputtered atoms identifies and accuratelymeasures trace impurities in solid materials.


genomics research will seek to identify or developeco-genomic sensors and sentinel organisms andcommunities for use in monitoring the effects ofsequestering CO2 in terrestrial soils and in the ocean.

Models will simulate and predict GHG emissionsbased on dynamic combinations of human activitypatterns, energy technologies and energy demand,and industrial activities. Environmental science andcomputational science can develop models that cansimulate and predict carbon flows resulting from, forexample, specific carbon management policy actionsthat provide a consistent picture of the effectiveness ofefforts to reduce GHG emissions.

Cross-cutting Strategic Research Areas

As the five previous sections illustrate, dissimilartechnologies often require similar scientific advancesto succeed. For example, degradation-resistantmaterials that perform well under high temperatureconditions are essential to improving the energyefficiency of industrial processes; they are also neededto advance to a next generation of fossil and nuclearpower plants, and are essential to realizing fusionenergy. Similarly, plant and microbial genomics arecentral to advancing biofuels and biobased chemicals,improving terrestrial sequestration of carbon dioxide,and reducing methane emissions from landfills andlivestock. Table 9-1 describes twenty cross-cuttingstrategic research areas and identifies the climatechange technology goals that depend on their success.

This broad agenda of strategic research is inspired bythe technical challenges of specific climate changetechnologies. If adequately funded, research willsuccessfully convert many of today’s emergingtechnologies into cost-competitive and attractiveproducts and practices. However, to address the

century-scale problem of climate change, scientificbreakthroughs will be needed to broaden the range oftoday’s options. The next section (9.2) describes therole of fundamental research, which enriches theunderlying foundation of scientific knowledgenecessary for problem-solving. Attention then turnsto the novel approaches, advanced, integrative, andenabling concepts that fall under the category of“exploratory research” (Section 9.3).

Fundamental ScienceAt the outset of the 21st century, science is in themidst of an information revolution that is bringing onthe rapid development of many new and promisingdiscoveries across a variety of fields. In addition, therapidly developing global infrastructure forcomputing, communications, and information isexpected to accelerate scientific processes throughcomputational modeling and simulation and to reducethe time and cost of bringing new discoveries to themarketplace. These potential discoveries andinfrastructure developments portend a rapidadvancing of capabilities to further the developmentof CCTP technologies. Fundamental research isneeded in the following areas, which arerepresentative of the opportunities afforded and serveas a reminder of the importance of sustainedleadership and continued support of the pursuit offundamental scientific knowledge.

Physical Sciences

Many of the advances in lowering energy intensitystem from developments in the materials andchemical sciences, such as new magnetic materials;high strength, lightweight alloys and composites;novel electronic materials; and new catalysts, with ahost of energy technology applications. Tworemarkable explorations—observing and manipulatingmatter at the molecular scale, and understanding thebehavior of large assemblies of interactingcomponents—may accelerate the development ofmore efficient, affordable, and cleaner energytechnologies. Nanoscale science research—the studyof matter at the atomic scale—will enable structures,composed of just a few atoms and molecules, to beengineered into useful devices for desiredcharacteristics such as super-lightweight and ultra-strong materials. The 2004 National NanotechnologyInitiative Workshop report describes many of theseopportunities (DOE-BES-NSET 2005).

9.2

196


Nanoscience Research for Energy Needs (DOE-BES-NSET 2005)

Underpinning these basic research explorations arethe powerful tools of science, including a suite ofspecialized nanoscience centers and the currentgeneration synchrotron x-ray and neutron scatteringsources, terascale computers, higher resolutionelectron microscopes, and other atomic probes.Fundamental research in the physical sciencesincludes research in material sciences, chemicalsciences, and geosciences, all of which are describedin more detail below.

◆ Materials sciences research helps in thedevelopment of energy generation, conversion,transmission, and use. Research currently beingconducted by the U.S. Department of Energy(DOE) and relevant to climate-related technologyinvolves fundamental research for thedevelopment of advanced materials for use in fuelcells, exploration of corrosion and high-temperature effects on materials with potentialcross-cutting impacts in both energy generationand energy use technologies, investigations of

197


Cross-Cutting Strategic Research Areas

Table 9-1.Cross-CuttingStrategicResearch Areas

radiation-induced effects relevant to nuclearfission and fusion technologies, fundamentalresearch in condensed matter physics and ceramicsthat might lead to high-temperaturesuperconductors and solid-state materials,chemical and metal hydrides research related tohydrogen storage, and nanoscale materials science(Figure 9-6) and technology that offer thepromise of designing materials and devices at theatomic and molecular level to achieve entirely newfunctionality.

◆ Chemical sciences research provides thefundamental understanding of the interactions ofatoms, molecules, and ions with photons andelectrons; the making and breaking of chemicalbonds in gas phase, in solutions, at interfaces, andon surfaces; and the energy transfer processeswithin and between molecules. The fundamentalunderstanding resulting from this research—anunderstanding of the chemistries associated withcombustion, catalysis, photochemical energyconversion, electrical energy storage,electrochemical interfaces, and molecular specificseparation from complex mixtures—could result inreductions in carbon dioxide emissions. Advancesin chemical sciences will enable the developmentof hydrogen as an energy carrier; new alternativefuels; low-cost, highly-active, durable cathodes forlow-temperature fuel cells; separations and captureof CO2; catalysts for new industrial and energyprocesses; and better energy storage devices.

Being at the interface of materials and biology,chemical sciences will also be key to bio-inspiredmaterials and processes.

◆ Geosciences research supports mineral-fluidinteractions; rock, fluid, and fracture physicalproperties; and new methods and techniques forgeosciences imaging from the atomic scale to thekilometer scale. The activity contributes to thesolution of problems in multiple Federal agencymission areas, including development of thescientific basis for evaluating methods forsequestration of CO2 in subsurface regions; for thediscovery of new fossil resources, such as oil andgas, and methane hydrates; and for techniques tolocate geothermal resources, to map and modelgeothermal reservoirs, and to predict heat flowsand reservoir dynamics. The nanosciencecapabilities of geochemistry are answeringfundamental questions involving the electricdouble layer, which occurs at the interface ofelectrolytes.

Biological Sciences

The revolution in genomics research has the potentialto provide entirely new ways of producing forms ofenergy, sequestering carbon, and generating materialsthat require less energy to produce. It includesresearch to investigate the underlying biologicalprocesses of plants and microorganisms, potentiallyleading to new processes and products for energyapplications, thereby enabling the harnessing ofnatural processes for GHG mitigation. Researchincludes:

◆ Genomic research on microbes focusing ontheir ability to generate, harvest, store, andmanipulate energy-supplying compounds inalmost any form to carry out life’s functions.Current genomic research is focused onsequencing microbes that either aid in carbonsequestration or produce fuels, particularly ethanolor hydrogen.

◆ Genomic research on plants—for example, onthe genome of Poplar, a common tree species—isidentifying genes that determine key biochemicalfunctions which could improve the ability of thesetrees to sequester carbon in their root systems orproduce biofuels more efficiently. Selecting,propagating, and modifying crops specifically forsoil carbon sequestration (i.e., below-groundstorage) would accelerate carbon fixation whileminimizing terrestrial impacts because harvestingwould not be necessary. Other crops could be

198


Figure 9-6. Nanoscale materials science contributes to the design ofmaterials and devices at the atomic and molecular level to achieve entirelynew functionality.


Nanoscale Materials Science

modified to produce more lipids and other usefulproducts. Fast-growing crops could be modifiedto improve bioconversion.

◆ Research on biological catalytic reactions aimsto improve the understanding of reactions inphotoconversion processes and advancedtechniques for screening and discovering newcatalysts and biomemitic approaches to materialssynthesis. This research could provide insightsinto biochemical regulatory interventions thatcould improve the rate or efficiency of theseprocesses.

◆ Research related to modified plants and soilmicro-organisms can provide a basis for usingand renewing marginal lands for bio-based energyfeedstocks, incorporating stress-resistant plantsand microbes, and developing advancedbioengineering approaches to capturing andretaining nitrogen and other essential plantnutrients. Sustainability could be ensured byengineering traits such as increased below-groundstorage of photosynthate.

◆ Biotechnology has the potential to provide thebasis for direct conversion of sunlight intohydrogen, lipids, sugars, and other fuel precursors.Work in this field can accelerate an understandingof fundamental aspects of microbial and plantproduction systems, including thermophilic, algal,and fermentative approaches.

◆ New bio-based industrial processes can bedeveloped, involving combining biologicalfunctionality with nano-engineered structures toachieve new functionalities and phenomena.Incorporating biological molecular machines (suchas elements of photosynthetic chromophores) intonanostructures has the potential to achieve theselectivity and efficacy of biological processes withthe high intensity and throughput of engineeredprocesses.

◆ Advanced structural biocomposites researchcould help replace high-energy-intensity materialsuch as concrete and steel with renewable carbon-based natural products.

◆ Research on key biotechnology platformsincludes designs for biorefineries to producebiofuels, biopower, and commercial chemicalproducts derived from biomass rather than fossilfuels; fuel cells powered by bio-based fuels or bio-generated hydrogen; engineered systems tosupport processes such as direct photo-conversionutilizing bio-based processes of water, CO2, and

nitrogen to produce useful fuels; and smallmodular biopower systems for incorporation ofbiological processes.

Environmental Sciences

Research in the environmental sciences is rapidlyevolving with the development and application of newtools for measuring and monitoring environmentalprocesses both in situ and remotely at scales neverbefore possible. These new tools will provide data onthe functioning of ecological systems, including theprovision of goods and services such as sequesteringcarbon and how they are affected by environmentalfactors. Genomics research is and will continue tocontribute to the advances in environmental sciencesby providing understanding of the fundamentalprocesses, structures, and mechanisms of complexliving systems, including ecological systems.Examples of such fundamental research include thefollowing:

◆ Carbon sequestration research could identifyhow efforts to increase terrestrial carbonsequestration might influence other environmentalprocesses, such as nutrient cycling, the emissionsof other GHGs, and local, regional, and globalclimate through impacts on heat balances andalbedo (Figure 9-7);

◆ In biological and ecological systems there is aneed to understand, quantify, predict, and managebiological and ecological processes affectingcarbon allocation, storage, and capacity interrestrial systems;

199


Figure 9-7. Carbon sequestration research, such as that being conducted atthe Free-Air CO2 Enrichment Facility, can help to identify how efforts toincrease terrestrial sequestration might influence other environmentalprocesses.

Courtesy of DOE, Office of Science

Free-Air CO2 Enrichment Facility

◆ Research can be focused on the development ofsensors that allow measuring and monitoring ofenvironmental carbon flows. Computationalmodels can be developed that can simulate andpredict carbon flows resulting from, for example,specific carbon management policy actions andthat provide a consistent picture of theeffectiveness of efforts to reduce anthropogenicemissions; and

◆ Research can be conducted on indoor air qualityand its inter-relationship with other buildings-related environmental factors, so as to understandthe possible ramifications of increasing the energyefficiency of buildings.

Advanced Scientific Computation

Computational science is increasingly central toprogress at the frontiers of almost every scientificdiscipline. The science of the future demandsadvances beyond the current computationalcapabilities. Accordingly, new advanced models,tools, and computing platforms are necessary todramatically increase the effective computationalcapability available for scientific discovery in suchareas as fusion, nanoscience, climate andenvironmental science, biology, and complex systems.With advances in computation, its role will becomeeven more central to a broad range of futurediscoveries and subsequent innovations in climatechange technologies. Examples of areas in whichexploratory modeling and simulation research arebeing employed to assist in the development ofadvanced energy systems include the following:

◆ Modeling and simulation of advanced fusionenergy systems to support ITER and the NationalIgnition Facility (NIF).

◆ Modeling of combustion for advanced dieselengines and other combustion systems; modelingof heat transfer in thermoelectric power systems.

◆ Modeling and simulation of nanoscale systems,including thin-film polymer-based photovoltaics.The computational effort required to simulatenanoscale systems far exceeds any computationalefforts in materials and molecular science to date.

◆ Improved models of the aerodynamics of windturbines and other fluid dynamics processes.

◆ 3D computational fluid dynamics modeling fornext-generation nuclear reactors. This shouldinclude coupling of neutronics physics to heattransfer and fluid dynamics, as well as 3D modelsfor critical heat flux or dry-out prediction.Significant validation will be required for suchpowerful models to be used in a regulatoryenvironment.

◆ Further development of tools to modelgasification accurately and reliably. This shouldinclude multiphase model development toimprove computational efficiency for the unsteadyflows found in gasification combustion systems.Ash, slagging, and fouling are some of the mostimportant technical challenges facing gasificationsystems, and the relevant computational fluiddynamics models need to be developed andvalidated to better understand these chemicalprocesses.

◆ Integrated assessment models of global climatechange.

The 2004 Advanced Computational Materials ScienceWorkshop report describes how an increased effort inmodeling and simulation could help bridge the gapbetween the data that is needed to support theimplementation of advanced nuclear technologies andthe data that can be obtained in available experimentalfacilities (DOE-SC-NEST 2004).

Fusion Sciences

The majority of fusion energy sciences research isaligned, generally, with the goal of providing theknowledge base for environmentally and economicallyattractive energy sources (summarized in Section9.1.2); the remainder of the basic research isfundamental in nature. This research includes generalplasma sciences, the study of ionized gases as the

200


Advanced Computerized Materials Science(DOE-SC-NEST 2004)

underpinning scientific discipline for fusion research,through university-based experimental research, theory,plasma astrophysics, and plasma processing and otherapplications. See also Section 5.5.

Exploratory ResearchTypically, applied R&D programs, as described inChapters 4 through 8, focus on well-defined researchprojects and deployment activities designed to achieveresults-oriented, specific metrics and meet deadlines.As described in Section 9.1, strategic research has along-term, basic research focus, yet it is still orientedtoward and inspired by the need to understand andcontribute to solving problems associated withcurrently supported technology development thrusts.To meet the challenges associated with the CCTPgoals, there is another need, that is, to augmentexisting applied R&D and strategic research programswith exploratory research. Such research wouldpursue novel, advanced or emergent, enabling andintegrative concepts that do not fit well within thedefined parameters of existing programs, and are notelsewhere covered.

Exploratory research would not duplicate, butcomplement, and potentially enrich, the existingR&D portfolio of climate-change-related strategicresearch and applied technology R&D. If theexplored concepts proved meritorious, it would beexpected that they would then become betterpositioned to be considered favorably in future plansamong the existing Federal R&D programs, or formthe basis for new R&D programs. This approachwould stimulate innovative, novel, or cross-cuttingtechnical approaches, not predisposed to onetechnology or another, and ensure that a full measureof the most promising technology options wasexplored.

CCTP plans to review agency experiences withexploratory research programs, including those of theDefense Advanced Research Projects Agency, andencourage the pursuit of exploratory approaches, asappropriate, within the Federal climate changetechnology portfolio. An exploratory researchprogram would be expected to support research toexplore novel “out-of-the-box” transformationaltechnologies. Projects would be selected throughwidely advertised competitive solicitations. Awardswould be made through merit-based grants,cooperative agreements, and contracts with bothpublic and private entities, including businesses,Federal research and development centers, and

institutes of higher education. Multi-agencycoordination might be required for integrative ideasthat span technical disciplines and economic sectors.Exploratory research conducted under such aprogram could add to scientific and engineeringknowledge and contribute to U.S. technologicalleadership, while addressing long-term challenges inglobal warming.

Some important generic areas for exploratoryresearch include novel, advanced, integrative, andenabling concepts, as elaborated upon below.Exploratory research also includes the development ofdecision-support tools to assess and better understandthe role, impacts, and potential limits of technology inmeeting CCTP goals.

Novel Concepts

Novel concepts, by definition, are “atypical” ideas.They often do not have funding support within theboundaries of traditional research and developmentorganizations or other means to demonstrate theirpotential applications and value. They may build onscientific disciplines outside the usual disciplines inthat field or attempt to apply previously unexploredmethods, and may offer approaches that compete withthe more traditional approaches already beingpursued. These novel approaches may lead to betterways to reduce GHG emissions, reduce GHGconcentrations, or otherwise address the effects ofclimate change.

Novel concepts might include, for example,innovative ways to produce or convert energy (e.g.,high-altitude wind kites, direct energy conversion,immiscible liquid/liquid heat exchangers). Novelconcepts might be used to mitigate the effects ofglobal warming in the stratosphere (e.g., geo-engineered solar insulation) or sequester carbon (e.g.,enhancement of the natural carbon cycle, or microbialfixation of carbon in geologic formations). Anotherapproach might be to combine the biosciences withfields such as nanotechnology, chemistry, computers,medicine, and others (e.g., Bio-X) to create novelsolutions for technology challenges. This could leadto innovative concepts such as the use of “enzymemachines” or even new materials (e.g., bio-nanohybrids) that could replace traditional technologyaltogether (Figure 9-8). Spaceborne measurements ofthe Earth system from the Lagrange points or othernon-traditional orbits are another novel concept thatcould advance our understanding of regional andglobal GHG distributions.

9.3

201


Advanced Concepts

Advanced concepts are high-risk, long-term ideas thatare often too risky or unconventional for appliedR&D programs to support, but are also often toopurposeful or applied for basic research programs tosupport. These ideas draw upon conventionalscientific disciplines and concepts but seek to takethem beyond the realm of current capabilities. Overthe long-term, the pursuit of advanced concepts insuch fields as solar energy, biotechnology, ocean andtidal energy, and other fields could lead to dramaticchanges in the way we produce and use energy.

For example, advanced concepts are emerging in thefield of biotechnology and could be applied to theproduction of bioenergy as well as methods forsequestering carbon. Plant metabolic engineeringcould be used to improve the properties of plants forconversion to bioenergy, or to increase the storage ofphotosynthates as hydrocarbons that could beextracted as energy. Advances in plant genomicscould be utilized to develop new crop species thatmaximize soil carbon storage in marginal lands, or toconvert annual crops to perennial crops to facilitatecarbon sequestration and provide more viablefeedstocks for bioenergy. Further, the naturalchemical reactivity of CO2 could be exploited toremove CO2 from the air or from waste streams,while forming stable, storable carbon compounds oruseful products.

Advances in other areas might include solar fuelsderived from carbon dioxide via artificialphotosynthetic systems. Alternatively, solar-poweredphoto-catalyzed systems could be developed toproduce liquid transportation fuels from hydrogenand carbon dioxide. Energy could potentially bederived from wave and tidal power conversionsystems using slow wave motion, or from tidal damsproducing energy based on ebb tides.

Integrative Concepts

Integrative concepts cut across traditional R&Dprogram boundaries and combine systems,technologies, disciplines, and in some cases, sectors ofthe economy. For example, a net-zero GHGemission building could integrate energy for heating,cooling, and lighting with on-site power productionfor an electric vehicle. Developing such integrativeconcepts is an interdisciplinary, complex undertakingand would involve coordination across multiple

agencies or across existing R&D program or missionareas. A more concerted effort might be needed toexplore these concepts and manage multi-missionR&D. The combing of multiple concepts intointegrated, more efficiently functioning systems could,however, have potentially large implications forclimate change and should be encouraged.

Integrative concepts might include, for example, thecombination of coal power and aquifer sequestration,or biochemical and thermochemical conversion ofbiomass. Also, an integrated process that convertsbiomass wastes into hydrogen fuel and a char-basedfertilizer (sequestering carbon), while scrubbing CO2

and other flue gases, may have potential. Anotherexample is engineered urban design, where land use isdesigned to reduce vehicle-mile requirements andallow co-location of activities with common needs forconserving energy, water, and other resources. Theintegration of transport, electricity, residential andcommercial buildings, and industrial complexes withincommunities is a potential way to optimize the use ofenergy and reduce GHGs through co-location ofenergy sources and sinks. A related concept is theintegration of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles withwind, solar, zero-energy buildings, and utility peak-saving, which could dramatically reduce GHGs fromvehicles and optimize use of intermittent energysources such as solar and wind.

Energy used to support the water infrastructure isanother area where integration of systems could bebeneficial. Technologies to minimize energyrequirements for water use could include, forexample, buildings designed to reduce use andconveyance of water; gray-water re-use; andintegration of water storage and treatment withintermittent renewable energy supplies.

Enabling Concepts

Enabling technologies contribute indirectly to thereduction of GHG emissions by facilitating thedevelopment, deployment, and use of other importanttechnologies that reduce GHG emissions. Enablingtechnologies often represent the scientific andengineering breakthroughs needed to move next-generation concepts forward along the developmentcycle. In addition, enabling technologies often cutacross multiple disciplines and can lead to thediffusion of new concepts in multiple areas.

202


Enabling technologies may span or be applicable tomany aspects of energy end-use, supply, and GHGmitigation and sequestration, from power generationto instrumentation to separations, new materials, andstorage. For example, enabling technology is neededto support a next-generation electricity grid andsupply a potential nationwide fleet of hybrid electricvehicles. Such research might encompass thedevelopment of electrochemical, kinetic, thermal, orelectromagnetic storage systems. Enablingtechnology (e.g., electron transmission via nanotubes)is also needed to make low-resistance powertransmission possible without the use of cryogenics.Similarly, wireless transmission of electrical energy—or power beaming—would enable large solar-basedenergy conversion systems to be located far distancesfrom population centers, such as in the Earth’sdeserts, in low-Earth orbit, outer space, or even onthe moon, and still supply large quantities of energyto where it would be needed on Earth. Twotechnologies that might be pursued under thiscategory of exploratory research suitable for powerbeaming involve microwave or laser energy.

Research to develop breakthrough processingtechnology will be needed to take advantage ofemerging fields with great promise, such asnanotechnology. Exploratory research might includethe integration of nanotechnology with engineeringand other disciplines, joining technologies for newnanomaterials, and advanced processing technologiesfor nanomaterials and nano-bioengineering systems.Advances in these areas could enable the greater useof nanomaterials in applications that could lead toreduction and/or mitigation of GHG emissions.

Integrated Planning and Decision-Support Tools

Decision-support tools include analytical, assessment,software, modeling, or other quantitative methods forbetter understanding and assessing the role oftechnology in long-term approaches to achievingstabilization of GHG concentrations in theatmosphere. While individual R&D programssponsor the development of such tools, the toolsdeveloped are applicable mainly within eachprogram’s respective areas of responsibility ortechnologies. Broader analytical tools can provideintelligence for integrated planning and makingresearch decisions that span disciplines, industries,and agencies.

An important evaluation tool is the analysis of the netenvironmental benefits of various climate changetechnologies (i.e., bringing science to the decisionprocess). Understanding the response of theenvironment and long-term impacts can influencehow the research portfolio will be structured toachieve the maximum benefits. Lifecycle analysis isanother important assessment tool. Guidelines andstandards are needed to develop lifecycle analysis thatexamines carbon flux, land use, energy use, economicsand other factors related to the adoption oftechnologies that could potentially impact climatechange. Along with lifecycle analysis, ecosystemmodels are needed to integrate improved genetics andmetabolic processes for land use, CO2 fixation, andsoil processes.

An integrated system architecture approach for GHGM&M across varying spatial and temporal scaleswould provide a framework for assessing andimplementing GHG reduction strategies.

203


Figure 9-8. Nanoscale research to develop breakthrough processingtechnology can lead to greater use of nanomaterials in advancedtechnologies that reduce or mitigate GHG emissions. One such example isshown above, where stable enzymes are embedded in a biomimeticnanomenbrane.

Credit: DOE/PNNL

Toward EnhancedIntegration in R&DPlanning Processes

Effective integration of fundamental science, strategicresearch, exploratory research, and applied technologyresearch and development presents challenges andopportunities for any mission-oriented researchcampaign. These challenges and opportunities can beaddressed by CCTP through enhanced andintegrative R&D planning processes that emphasizecommunication, cooperation, and collaborationamong the affected scientific and technical researchcommunities. Appropriate means for regularlyassessing the success of basic research in supportingthe technology development programs also need to beestablished, including criteria, to ensure that basicresearch is a productive, indeed, enabling componentof the larger CCTP R&D portfolio.1

Technology development programs are oftenhindered by incomplete knowledge and lack ofinnovative solutions to technical bottlenecks.Information can be shared and potential pathways tosolutions can be suggested by bringing togethermultidisciplinary research expertise and appliedtechnology developers. Increased discussion amongresearch personnel from various complementary fieldsand face-to-face exploration of ideas is a good way tofoster innovative ideas and create synergies. Thetraditional structure of research, operating mainlywithin the narrower confines of specific disciplinarygroups, will not be sufficient.

A model integrated planning process would includethe following:

◆ Systematic exploration of various technologyprogram issues, challenges and impediments toprogress.

◆ Mechanisms to communicate technology programneeds to the basic research community.

◆ Exploration of a wide range of potential researchavenues to address the identified issues, challengesand impediments; this can effectively beaccomplished through an R&D or technologyroadmapping activity.

◆ Design of strategic research program areas topursue the most promising avenues, includingclear articulation of research goals.

◆ Solicitations of research proposals to address theidentified areas.

◆ Funding of specific meritorious research projects,selected by a peer review process.

The first few steps in the model process describedabove could be accomplished using workshops andother multi-party planning mechanisms. Technicalworkshops can bring together the applied and basicresearch communities and focus on research strategiesand barriers impeding development in a particulartechnology area. The resulting report can form thebasis for a framework of high priority research needs,a solicitation for proposals, and awards.

For instance, in recognition of the growing challengesin the area of energy and related environmentalconcerns, the Department of Energy’s Office of BasicEnergy Sciences (DOE-BES) initiated a series ofworkshops in 2002 focusing on identification of theunderlying basic research needs related to energytechnologies. The first of these workshops, held inOctober 2002, undertook a broad assessment of basicresearch needs for energy technologies to ensure areliable, economical, and environmentally soundenergy supply for the future (BESAC 2003). Morethan 100 people from academia, industry, thenational laboratories, and Federal agenciesparticipated in this workshop.

More than a dozen such workshops have been heldsince 2002. Many apply directly to goals and

9.4

204


Basic Research Needs fto Assure a Secure Energy Future(BESAC 2003)

1 Criteria for “success” in basic research are well established, as are the multiple modes for evaluating related programs and projects. Such evalua-tions occur continuously in both pre-award and post-award settings.

technical challenges of CCTP. A number of these arecited throughout this chapter. More are scheduledfor the near future, including basic research needs forsuperconductivity (2006); solid-state lighting (2006);advanced nuclear energy systems (2006); and energystorage (2007).

CCTP seeks to encourage continued and broadenedapplication, across all agencies, of best practices inintegrated research planning. In its periodic reviewsof the adequacy of the CCTP R&D portfolio, CCTPidentified a number of topical areas for consideration,in addition to those already planned, for future basicresearch needs assessments in support of CCTPtechnology development. These areas include:architecture and control systems for the electric grid;thermoelectrics by application (e.g., refrigeration,power generation); “bio-x”, combining nanosciencesand genomics; plant genetic engineering; measuringand monitoring of climate change mitigation, with aninternational focus; sensors, controls, andcommunication technologies; batteries–power &energy (basic chemistry); heat transfer–materialinsulation, cryogenics, thermal conducting coolants;power electronics–conversion; and oceansequestration of carbon dioxide.

Based on the experiences of past and successfulworkshops held by the Office of Science, BasicEnergy Sciences, and Biological and EnvironmentalResearch, the following principles are identified tohelp guide future planning:

◆ Make Merit-Based Decisions: All decisionsshould be based on merit and need. Once thisprinciple is compromised, the process degeneratesquickly.

◆ Share Ownership: Long-term commitment andownership by those in positions of authority andresponsibility is a must for success.

◆ Understand and Formalize Relationships:Roles, responsibilities, rules of integration,allocation of resources, and terms of dissolutionshould be formalized at the start.

◆ Measure Performance: At the start, participantsmust agree on goals, objectives, operational

elements, and methodology for measuringprogress, outputs, and outcomes. (Avoidcollaboration for collaboration’s sake andintegration for integration’s sake.)

◆ Ensure Commitment and Stability: Teammembers must commit to work seamlessly, withthe goal of a stable operation for the timenecessary to achieve results.

◆ Provide Flexibility: Within general guidelines,flexibility ensures accountability and fostersinnovation and experimentation. The processmust allow for unanticipated results and empowerpeople to act on their own.

◆ Have a Customer Focus: A clear understandingof who the customer is, what the customer wants,and the customer’s complete involvement in allphases of the activity is critical to success.

Achieving the CCTP vision will likely requirediscoveries and innovations well beyond what today’sscience and technology can offer. Better integrationof basic scientific research with applied technologydevelopment may be key to achievement of CCTP’sother goals related to energy efficiency, energy supply,carbon capture and sequestration, M&M, andreducing emissions of non-CO2 gases. Basic scienceresearch is likely to provide the underlying knowledgefoundation on which new technologies are built.

The CCTP framework aims to strengthen the basicresearch enterprise so that it will be better preparedto find solutions and create new opportunities. TheCCTP approach includes strengthening basicresearch in national laboratories, academia, and otherresearch organizations by focusing efforts on key areasneeded to develop insights or breakthroughs relevantto climate-related technology R&D. Importantly, inthe process, these basic research activities will enabletraining and developing of the next-generation ofscientists who will be needed in the future to providecontinuity of such research to find solutions andcreate new opportunities.

205


206


Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (BESAC). 2002. Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee Subpanel workshop report:opportunities for catalysis in the twenty-first century. http://www.sc.doe.gov/bes/besac/CatalysisReport.pdf

Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (BESAC). 2003. Basic research needs to assure a secure energy future.http://www.sc.doe.gov/bes/besac/Basic_Research_Needs_To_Assure_A_Secure_Energy_Future_FEB2003.pdf

Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (BESAC). 2004. Basic research needs for the hydrogen economy: report on the basic energysciences workshop on hydrogen production, storage, and use. Argonne, IL: Argonne National Laboratory.http://www.sc.doe.gov/bes/hydrogen.pdf

Biomass Research and Development Technical Advisory Committee. 2002. Roadmap for biomass technologies in the United States.http://usms.nist.gov/roadmaps/object.cfm?ObjectID=61

DOE (See U.S. Department of Energy)

National Science Foundation (NSF). 2004a. Future directions for hydrogen energy research & education.www.getf.org/hydrogen/index.cfm

National Science Foundation (NSF). 2004b. Catalysis for biorenewables conversion, www.egr.msu.edu/apps/nsfworkshop

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Basic Energy Sciences (BES). 2006. Basic research needs for superconductivity.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science. http://www.sc.doe.gov/bes/reports/abstracts.html#SC

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Basic Energy Sciences (BES) and the Nanoscale Science, Engineering, andTechnology (NSET) Subcommittee of the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC). 2005. Nanoscience research forenergy needs. http://www.sc.doe.gov/bes/reports/files/NREN_rpt.pdf

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Basic Energy Sciences (BES) and Office of Nuclear Physics (NP). 2005. The path tosustainable nuclear energy, basic and applied research opportunities for advanced fuel cycles. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department ofEnergy, Office of Basic Energy Sciences and Office of Nuclear Physics. http://www.sc.doe.gov/bes/reports/files/PSNE_rpt.pdf

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Biological and Environmental Research (BER), and Office of Energy Efficiency andRenewable Energy (EERE). 2006. Breaking the biological barriers to cellulosic ethanol: a joint research agenda. Washington, D.C.:U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science. http://www.doegenomestolife.org/biofuels/b2bworkshop.shtml

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Science (SC). 2005a. DOE genomics: GTL Roadmap. Washington, D.C.: U.S.Department of Energy, Office of Science. http://doegenomestolife.org/roadmap/index.shtml

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Science (SC). 2005b. Basic research needs for solar energy utilization. Washington,D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science. http://www.sc.doe.gov/bes/reports/files/SEU_rpt.pdf

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Science (SC) and Office of Fossil Energy (FE). 1999. Carbon sequestration researchand development. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science and Office of Fossil Energy.http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/sequestration/publications/1999_rdreport/index.html

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Science (SC) and Office of Nuclear Energy, Science, and Technology (NEST).2004. Advanced computational materials science: application to fusion and Generation IV fission reactors. Washington, DC. U.S.Department of Energy Office of Science and Office of Nuclear Energy, Science, and Technology.http://www.sc.doe.gov/bes/reports/files/ACMS_rpt.pdf

U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP). 2003. Strategic plan for the U.S. Climate Change Science Program.http://www.climatescience.gov.

References9.5

10addressed in isolation from other pressing needs, suchas economic development, energy security, andpollution reduction, especially in developingeconomies. Successfully addressing thesecomplementary concerns will require thedevelopment and commercialization of advancedtechnologies, particularly, but not exclusively, thosethat have the potential to fundamentally alter the waywe produce and use energy. It will also require asustained, long-term commitment by all nations overmany generations and a substantial degree ofinternational cooperation.

It is within this broad context that the United States ispursuing a comprehensive strategy on climate change.This strategy includes implementing policies andmeasures to slow the growth of GHG emissions,investing in climate science to improve understandingof climate change and provide information todecision-makers, accelerating the development andadoption of energy and other technologies thatreduce, avoid, or capture and sequester GHGemissions, and promoting international collaboration.In this way, the United States is working to ensure abright and secure energy and economic future for theNation and a healthy planet for future genertions(Figure 10-1).

Under the auspices of the Cabinet-level Committeeon Climate Change Science and TechnologyIntegration (CCCSTI), the Climate ChangeTechnology Program (CCTP), led by the Departmentof Energy (DOE), represents the technologycomponent of this strategy. Authorized by the EnergyPolicy Act of 2005, CCTP functions as a multi-agency planning and coordination entity. CCTP ischarged with reviewing and prioritizing the FederalGovernment’s climate-related technology programs.Its activities are guided by the CCCSTI and carriedout by representatives of the participating R&Dagencies. CCTP provides strategic direction for andcoordinates an investment portfolio of climate-change

related technology research, development,demonstration and deployment (R&D) of nearly $3billion in Fiscal Year 2006.

SummaryThe CCTP Strategic Plan is an important milestoneon the road to accelerating the development andadoption of advanced climate change technologies.The Plan articulates a vision for the role for advancedtechnology in addressing climate change concerns,provides a supporting long-term planning contextwith insights from analysis, and establishes goals,approaches, and guiding principles for Federal R&Dagencies to use in formulating climate change-relatedtechnology components of their respective R&Dportfolios.

10.1

207

Climate change is a complex, long-term challenge. United States’ climate change goalsare consistent with and supportive of the United Nations Framework Convention on

Climate Change (UNFCCC), which set an ultimate goal of stabilizing greenhouse gases(GHGs) in the atmosphere at a level that avoids dangerous human interference with theclimate system. There is international recognition that climate change concerns cannot be

Summary and Next Steps


Figure 10-1. The United States is working to ensure a bright andsecure energy and economic future for the Nation and a healthyplanet for future generations.

Courtesy: NASA, Hasler Laboratory for Atmospheres Goddard Space Flight Center, Credit: Nelson Stockli

CCTP’s strategic vision is to attain, on a global scaleand in partnership with others, a technologicalcapability that can provide abundant, clean, secure,and affordable energy and other services needed toencourage and sustain economic growth, whilesimultaneously achieving substantial GHG emissionsreductions to mitigate the potential risks of climatechange from increasing GHG concentrations. Togive substance to this vision, CCTP’s portfoliopursues six complementary strategic goals: (1) reduceemissions from energy use and infrastructure; (2)reduce emissions from energy supply; (3) capture andsequester CO2; (4) reduce emissions of other GHGs;(5) measure and monitor emissions; and (6) bolsterthe contributions of basic science. The Plan outlinesseven approaches to attain those goals, including next steps.

Long-Term Planning Under Uncertainty

CCTP operates within a planning environmentcharacterized by uncertainty. First, the complexrelationships among population growth; economicdevelopment; energy demand, mix, and intensity;resource availability; technology advancement; andmany other societal variables make it difficult toestimate with confidence future global GHGemissions over CCTP’s long-term planning horizon.This creates uncertainty about the scope and scale of

the technological challenge. Second, evolving climatescience, as well as the uncertain nature of the (as yetundetermined) UNFCCC’s stabilization objective,adds uncertainty about the appropriate pace oftechnology development. Finally, research anddevelopment itself is risky, such that the futurereadiness, cost, and performance characteristics of themany advanced technologies envisioned to facilitateGHG emissions reductions are unknown. This addsuncertainty about deployment and which, if any,technologies will ultimately emerge as successful.

Goals for Technology Development

Uncertainties notwithstanding, CCTP sets ambitiousgoals for technology development in each of itsstrategic areas. By addressing uncertaintiessystematically through analyses of options, orscenarios, under a range of varying assumptions,CCTP can illuminate its technological challenges inthe form of bracketed insights regarding reductions oravoidances in GHG emissions, comparative costs, andthe timing of significant technology adoption. Theseinsights, in turn, can be used to guide R&D portfolioplanning, as well as inform specific near-, mid- andlong-term technological development objectives.

Regarding reductions or avoidances in GHGemissions, CCTP envisions significant contributions

208


CCTP STRATEGIC GOALVERY HIGH

CONSTRAINT1HIGH

CONSTRAINTMEDIUM

CONSTRAINTLOW

CONSTRAINT

GOAL #1. ReduceEmissions from Energy

End Use & Infrastructure 250 - 270 190 - 210 150 - 170 110 - 140

GOAL #2. Reduce Emissions from Energy Supply

180 - 330 110 - 210 80 - 140 30 - 80

GOAL #3. Capture and Sequester

Carbon Dioxide150 - 330 50 - 140 30 - 70 20 - 40

GOAL #4. ReduceEmissions of Non-CO2

GHGs160 - 170 140 - 150 120 - 130 90 - 100

Estimated Cumulative GHG Emissions Mitigation (GtC) from Accelerated Adoption of Advanced Technologiesover the 21st Century, by Strategic Goal, Across a Range of Hypothesized GHG Emissions Constraints

1 A “very high constraint” scenario is associated with low GHG emissions and low GHG concentrations. A “low constraint” scenario is associatedwith higher GHG emissions and concentrations.

2 Source: Clarke et al. 2006, as described in Chapter 3. The 100-year cumulative values shown are consistent with Figure 3-19. Values have beenrounded to the nearest 10 GtC.

Table 10-1.Estimated CumulativeGHG EmissionsMitigation (GtC) fromAccelerated Adoptionof AdvancedTechnologies over the21st Century, byStrategic Goal,Across a Range ofHypothesized GHGEmissionsConstraints 2.

from the accelerated adoption of advancedtechnologies in each of its four emissions-reductionstrategic goals.3 Across a wide range of atmosphericGHG concentration levels and hypothesizedemissions constraints (from “low” to “very high”),CCTP explored the potential contributions of threecontrasting technological futures over a 100-yearplanning horizon. Table 10-1 provides arepresentative sample of the range of GHG emissionsreductions, accumulated over this period, that may bepossible should the promise of advanced technologiesassociated with these goals be realized (see Chapter 3).

Across all four goals, as well as among the manytechnologies within each goal, the acceleratedadoption of advanced technologies is shown to bepotentially capable of contributing significantly toGHG emissions reductions and avoidances. Theunderlying assumptions for technology performancecan help inform long-term technology R&D planningand goal-setting. The significance of the potentialsacross all four goals suggests the importance ofpursuing a diversified R&D portfolio.

Potential to Reduce Mitigation Costs

CCTP analysis suggests that significant economicbenefits could accrue, if advanced technologies withhigh emission mitigation potentials were to besuccessfully deployed. Figure 10-2 presents theresults of a comparative analysis of the cumulativecosts over the 21st century of GHG mitigation, withand without the accelerated adoption of advancedtechnologies, across a range of advanced technologyscenarios and variously hypothesized GHG emissionsconstraints. The relative cost reductions aresignificant in all cases. As one would expect, theabsolute cost reductions are more significant underthe higher emissions constraints.4 The results ofmodeling these hypothetical scenarios suggest thepotential for advanced GHG-reducing technologiesto reduce mitigation costs.

Considerations of Timing

With regard to considerations of timing andcommercial readiness of the advanced technologyoptions, insights were gained by analysis of the lowest

209


$300

$250

$200

$150

$100

$50

$0

Baseline

Very High Constraint

100-

Year

Cum

ulat

ive

Glob

al M

itiga

tion

Cost

(Tril

lions

of 2

000

US$)

High Constraint

Medium Constraint

Low Constraint

Advanced Technology

65-78%

83-92% 97-100%

56-68%

Figure 10-2. ComparativeAnalysis of EstimatedCumulative Costs Over the21st Century of GHGMitigation, With and WithoutAdvanced Technology,Across a Range ofHypothesized GHGEmissions Constraints.

Comparative Analysis of Estimated Cumulative Costs Over the 21st Century of GHG Mitigation, With and Without Advanced Technology, Across a Range of Hypothesized GHG Emissions Constraints

3 Non-CO2 GHGs include a diverse group of gases, such as methane, nitrous oxide, and chlorofluorocarbons. They are expected to contribute asmuch as 20 percent to total radiative forcing throughout the 21st century.

4 In the associated analysis (Chapter 3), the cumulative costs over the 21st century are undiscounted. Accordingly, relative comparisons (percents)are likely to be more meaningful than those showing absolute costs. Variations among the advanced technology scenarios are shown by the shad-ed area in Figure 10-2.

cost solutions across a range of technology scenariosand hypothesized GHG concentration levels.Generally speaking, the lower the level of GHGconcentrations hypothesized, the earlier the need forthe commercial readiness of the advancedtechnologies.

Using the metric of when the first GtC per year ofreduced or avoided GHG emissions could beachieved by the accelerated adoption of advancedtechnologies, across a range of assumptions, scenarios,and GHG emissions constraints, the analysis indicatesthat, in relative terms, advanced technologies for end-use energy efficiency contribute first, followed soonthereafter by technologies for mitigation of non-CO2

GHGs, advanced energy supply technologies, andcarbon capture, storage, and sequestration. Thetiming of such contributions for each CCTP strategicgoal, however, may vary by decades depending on theGHG concentration level assumed, as shown in Table10-2. Allowing for capital stock turnover and otherinertia inherent in the global energy system andinfrastructure, it is noted that for advancedtechnologies to achieve one GtC per year, they wouldneed to be available in the commercial marketplaceand gaining market share years before the periodsindicated on Table 10-2.

Strategies for Technology Developmentand Deployment

In Chapters 4 through 7, the Plan lays out dozens oftechnology-specific strategies for research anddevelopment for key technologies including, whereappropriate, strategies for technology deploymentthat show promise for realizing such gains. InChapter 8, the Plan addresses the cross-cuttingtechnology area for measuring and monitoring GHGemissions. For each technology area, the Planexamines the role that advanced technologies can playin contributing to each CCTP strategic goal,establishes strategic direction for R&D, highlightscurrent R&D activities, and identifies promisingdirections for future research. A thematic timeline fortechnology development, evolution and adoption isprovided for each of these five CCTP strategic goals.

Figure 10-3 presents an integration of these fivetimelines, for the near-, mid-, and long-terms. Ingeneral, advanced technologies appear in the figure atthe point where commercialization is achieved and afavorable investment environment supports theiradoption. Although many technologies are shown,only those that offer cost-effective options, comparedto their competitors, would achieve significant marketrepresentation.

210


CCTP STRATEGIC GOAL VERY HIGHCONSTRAINT

HIGH CONSTRAINT

MEDIUMCONSTRAINT

LOWCONSTRAINT

GOAL #1. ReduceEmissions from Energy

End Use & Infrastructure 2010 - 2020 2030 - 2040 2030 - 2050 2040 - 2060

GOAL #2. Reduce Emissions from Energy Supply

2020 -2040 2040 - 2060 2050 - 2070 2060 - 2100

GOAL #3. Capture and Sequester

Carbon Dioxide2020 - 2050 2040 or Later 2060 or Later Beyond 2100

GOAL #4. ReduceEmissions of Non-CO2

GHGs2020 - 2030 2050 - 2060 2050 - 2060 2070 - 2080

Estimated Timing of Advanced Technology Market Penetrations, as Indicated by the First GtC-Eq./Year of Incremental Emissions Mitigation5, by Strategic Goal, Across a Range of Hypothesized GHG Emissions Constraints

Table 10-2.Estimated Timing ofAdvancedTechnology MarketPenetrations, asIndicated by the FirstGtC-Eq./Year ofIncrementalEmissions Mitigation5,by Strategic Goal,Across a Range ofHypothesized GHGEmissionsConstraints.

5 The years shown in the table represent the period, according to the analysis (Chapter 3), in which the first GtC (or GtC-eq.) of incremental emissionsreduction (below an assumed Reference Case) is projected to occur due to the lowest-cost, accelerated adoption of each class of advanced tech-nology in any one of the advanced technology scenarios. The Reference Case, without advanced technology, includes significant penetration ofenergy-efficient end-use technologies, nuclear, renewable, and biomass energy, terrestrial sequestration and non-CO2 emission reductions. Thetable shows ranges of values because results vary among the advanced technology scenarios. “Energy Supply” means net-zero or very low-emis-sions energy supply technologies.

In the near-term (in less than 20 years), the CCTPstrategy envisions commercial readiness, such thatsignificant market entry can occur, by hybrid cars,high-efficiency buildings and industrial processes,selected technologies to capture, store and sequesterCO2, coal-based integrated gasification-combinedcycle power plants, and methane capture and usetechnologies. In the mid-term (20 to 40 years later),the early technologies would be followed bysignificant market shares of hydrogen fuel cellvehicles, “smart” buildings, transformationaltechnologies for energy intensive industries, improved

CO2 capture, methane emission reductions, andadvanced nuclear energy In the long-term, suchtechnologies would be improved and extended morebroadly and more advanced technologies would enterthe marketplace. Ultimately, societies could seeextensive adoption of low emissions infrastructure andcommunities, low emissions intelligent transportsystems, wide-spread adoption of renewable energyand nuclear power, large scale adoption of zero-emission power plants with carbon sequestration,fusion power plants, and high levels of managementof emissions of non-CO2 GHGs.

211


Figure 10-3. Climate Change Technology Development and Deployment for the 21st Century 6.

6 Note: Technologies shown are representations of larger suites. With some overlap, “near-term” envisions significant technology adoption by 10–20years from present, “mid-term” in a following period of 20–40 years, and “long-term” in a following period of 40–60 years. See also List of Acronymsand Abbreviations.

Climate Change Technology Development and Deployment for the 21st Century 6

• Hybrid & Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles• Engineered Urban Designs• High-Performance Integrated Homes• High Efficiency Appliances• High Efficiency Boilers & Combustion

Systems• High-Temperature Superconductivity

Demonstrations

• Fuel Cell Vehicles and H2 Fuels• Low Emission Aircraft• Solid-State Lighting• Ultra-Efficient HVACR• “Smart” Buildings• Transformational Technologies

for Energy-Intensive Industries• Energy Storage for Load Leveling

• Widespread Use of Engineered UrbanDesigns & Regional Planning

• Energy Managed Communities• Integration of Industrial Heat, Power,

Process, and Techniques• Superconducting Transmission and

Equipment

GOAL #1Energy End-Use &Infrastructure

• IGCC Commercialization• Stationary H2 Fuel Cells • Cost-Competitive Solar PV• Demonstrations of Cellulosic Ethanol• Distributed Electric Generation • Advanced Fission Reactor and Fuel Cycle

Technology

• FutureGen Scale-Up• H2 Co-Production from Coal/Biomass• Low Wind Speed Turbines• Advanced Biorefineries• Community-Scale Solar• Gen IV Nuclear Plants• Fusion Pilot Plant Demonstration

• Zero-Emission Fossil Energy• H2 & Electric Economy• Widespread Renewable Energy• Bio-Inspired Energy & Fuels• Widespread Nuclear Power• Fusion Power Plants

GOAL #2Energy Supply

• CSLF & CSRP• Post Combustion Capture• Oxy-Fuel Combustion• Enhanced Hydrocarbon Recovery• Geologic Reservoir Characterization• Soils Conservation• Dilution of Direct Injected CO2

• Geologic Storage Proven Safe • CO2 Transport Infrastructure• Soils Uptake & Land Use• Ocean CO2 Biological Impacts Addressed

• Track Record of Successful CO2 StorageExperience

• Large-Scale Sequestration• Carbon & CO2 Based Products & Materials• Safe Long-Term Ocean Storage

GOAL #3Capture,Storage &Sequestration

• Methane to Markets• Precision Agriculture• Advanced Refrigeration Technologies• PM Control Technologies for Vehicles

• Advanced Landfill Gas Utilization• Soil Microbial Processes• Substitutes for SF6• Catalysts That Reduce N2O to Elemental

Nitrogen in Diesel Engines

• Integrated Waste Management Systemwith Automated Sorting, Processing &Recycle

• Zero-Emission Agriculture• Solid-State Refrigeration/AC Systems

GOAL #4Other Gases


• Low-Cost Sensors and Communications• Large Scale, Secure Data Storage System• Direct Measurement to Replace Proxies

and Estimators

• Fully Operational Integrated MM SystemsArchitecture (Sensors, Indicators, DataVisualization and Storage, Models)

GOAL #5Measure &Monitor

Key Initiatives

Since early 2002, when CCTP was first organized,there have been a number of portfolio realignments.Foremost among these has been the identification ofkey technology initiatives that advance multipletechnology goals, such as enhancing energy security,reducing air pollution, and promoting economicgrowth and productivity, while also addressingimportant thrusts of CCTP strategic goals. Thesekey initiatives complement a core portfolio oftechnologies in energy efficiency, renewable energy,nuclear power (Figure 10-4), and highly efficient andclean use of coal (Figure 10-5). Although many of thekey initiatives are not motivated exclusively by CCTPstrategic goals, each is an important contributor tothese goals. Collectively, they lend strategic focus andcoherence to the many underlying research activitiesacross programs within and among the agencies.They also give visibility to major technology thrustsand complement the regional and internationalpartnerships. Key initiatives are mentionedthroughout the Plan in their respective technologyareas.7 A current list of the key initiatives, with linksto current programmatic information, may be foundat the CCTP Web site.8

Contributions of Basic Science

Regarding CCTP’s Goal #6 to bolster basic sciencecontributions to technology development, the Planrecognizes the critical importance of new knowledgein enabling and accelerating progress in the appliedareas. Discoveries in biology, nanosciences,computational modeling and simulation, physicalprocesses, and environmental sciences could result inimportant breakthroughs for both emissions-relatedtechnologies and in measuring and monitoringcapabilities. Three strategic thrusts to be pursued byCCTP in basic science include: (1) conducting basicresearch in areas inspired by the technical challengesin applied climate change R&D; (2) carrying out anexploratory research on innovative concepts andenabling technologies that have great potential forbreakthroughs; and (3) improving R&D planning andintegrative R&D processes.

Emerging Priorities

The CCTP working groups plan to review regularlythe adequacy of the CCTP portfolio to attain CCTP’sstrategic goals and, where needed, makerecommendations to prioritize and strengthen theportfolio, as outlined in Chapter 2. Each goalencompasses many different technologies with varyingdegrees of GHG reduction potential, likelihood oftechnological and commercial success, and privatesector interest and incentive to invest. CCTP mustconsider these factors, along with criteria presented inSection 2.4, when recommending priorities forFederal investment.

In this way the CCTP portfolio is strengthened on anongoing basis. This has resulted in the realignmentof the portfolio in certain areas, evidenced by changesin investment levels over time. Climate changestrategy also has provided compelling rationales forentirely new or revamped programs. These aredescribed in Chapters 4 through 9 in the currentportfolio sections.

Within the overall CCTP portfolio, certain activitiesare identified as priorities associated with President’sNational Climate Change Technology Initiative(NCCTI). NCCTI priorities are defined as discreteresearch, development, demonstration, or deploymentactivities that address technological challenges that, ifsolved, could advance technologies with the potential

212


7 See also CCTP Vision and Framework for Strategy and Planning (2005).8 For CCTP-related Key Initiatives, see: http://www.climatetechnology.gov.

Figure 10-4. CCTP’s portfolio supports near-term deployment of civiliannuclear power, such as Westinghouse’s AP1000. Nuclear power safelyproduces electricity with little or no GHG emissions.

Courtesy: Westinghouse Electric Company, LLC

to dramatically reduce, avoid, orsequester greenhouse gasemissions. The NCCTIpriorities appearing in the FiscalYear 2007 budget requestinclude, as ordered by strategicgoal, the following:

1. Transportation fuel cellsystems; solid state lighting;and “Climate Leaders”(Strategic Goal 1).

2. Low wind speed technology,cellulosic biomass (Figure 10-6), biochemical platformR&D, hydrogen storage,nuclear hydrogen initiative,integrated gasificationcombined cycle (IGCC), andadvanced fuel cycle/advancedburner reactor (Strategic Goal 2).

3. Sequestration (Strategic Goal 3).

4. Methane partnership initiatives (Strategic Goal 4).

Also included among the NCCTI priorities is CCTPprogram support. Details on these activities can befound in Appendix B. Current and updatedprogrammatic information in this regard may befound at the CCTP Web site.9

Advances in climate change science under the ClimateChange Science Program (CCSP) are expected toimprove our knowledge of climate change so that itspotential impacts and uncertainties about the causesand effects of climate change will be betterunderstood. This will help to inform the potentialrisks and benefits of various courses of action.Similarly, advances in climate change technologyunder the CCTP are expected to bring forth anexpanded array of advanced technology options thatcan meet a range of societal needs, including reducingGHG emissions, with better performance and lowercosts. Improved options will enable and facilitateactions that may be called for and informed byscience.

Finally, should widespread adoption of advancedclimate change technologies be pursued, as guided byscience, it would likely need to be supported byappropriate technology policy, potentially includingmarket-based incentives. As Federal efforts to

advance technology go forward, broadenedparticipation by the private sector in these efforts willbe increasingly important to accelerate both theinnovation and the commercialization of advancedtechnologies.

Such participation can be encouraged by appropriateand supporting technology policy. This is evidencedtoday, in part, by a number of market-based incentivesalready in place, by others proposed by theAdministration,10 and by still others, as may beappropriate, to GHG-reducing technologyinvestments, soon to be implemented in accord withthe provisions of Title XIII of the Energy Policy Actof 2005.11 Title XVI of the Energy Policy Act of 2005sets the stage for future development of policies thatwould facilitate new technology adoption. CCTP willsupport CCCSTI in implementing the provisions ofTitle XVI. Additionally, CCTP will explore anumber of technology policy options, as listed in itsnext steps below.

Next StepsCCTP’s next steps focus on a number of broadthrusts. First, the CCTP will continue itscoordinating role and provide support to CCCSTIand its IWG. These activities are expected to includemulti-agency planning and analysis, portfolio reviews,

10.2

213


9 For NCCTI priorities, see: http://www.climatetechnology.gov. 10 Federal Climate Change Expenditures Report to Congress, April 2006. http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/legislative/fy07_climate_change.pdf11 Financial incentives in Title XIII for technologies related to climate change goals are scored at more than $11 billion over 10 years.

Figure 10-5. CCTP’s portfolio supports the development and demonstration of revolutionary coal-based technologies, such as FutureGen, that is expected to produce electricity, hydrogen, fuels, andchemicals with nearly zero emissions of GHGs.

Courtesy: DOE/FE

interagency communications and informationexchanges, technical assessments of research needs,and formulating and presenting recommendations.The CCTP will contribute its expertise and providesupport to the CCCSTI and IWG as they addressissues of climate change science and technology,weigh policies and priorities on related science andtechnology matters, make informed decisions, andmake recommendations to the President and theagencies. Second, the CCTP will continue to workwith and support the participating agencies indeveloping plans and carrying out activities needed toadvance CCTP’s vision, mission, and strategic goals.Third, CCTP anticipates opportunities to work withtechnical representatives of other countries to furtherinternational cooperation in related planning andprogram coordination, particularly on joint and multi-lateral technology initiatives.

CCTP intends to pursue specific activities to ensureprogress toward achieving CCTP’s strategic goals.These activities, organized by approach, are outlinedbelow. CCTP does not expect to pursue all activitiesimmediately, or simultaneously.

Strengthen Climate Change Technology R&D

◆ Continue to review, realign, reprioritize, andexpand, where appropriate, Federal support forclimate change technology research, development,demonstration, and deployment.

◆ Periodically assess the adequacy of the multi-agency portfolio with respect to its ability toachieve or make technical progress towardCCTP’s strategic goals, identify gaps andopportunities, and make recommendationssupported by analysis.

◆ In key technology areas, perform long-termassessments of technology potentials, includingmarket considerations and potentially limitingfactors.

◆ Improve methods, tools, and decision-makingprocesses for climate technology planning andmanagement, and R&D planning and assessment,including tools that allow portfolio planning toaddress risks through hedging strategies.

Strengthen Basic ResearchContributions

◆ Establish or improve within each of theparticipating Federal R&D agencies a process forthe integration with, and application of, basicresearch to help overcome barriers impedingtechnical progress on climate change technologydevelopment (Figure 10-7).

◆ Develop means for expanding participation inclimate change technology R&D, includingrelevant basic research, at universities and othernon-Federal research institutions.

◆ Review agencies’ experiences with basic andexploratory research programs aimed at novel,advanced, integrative or enabling concepts notcovered elsewhere as a means of stimulatinginnovation within the research community andenriching the technology R&D portfolio.

214


Figure 10-6. CCTP’s portfolio supports research to transform switchgrass(shown), other agricultural and forest products, cellulosic plant matter, andassociated detritus (e.g., residential waste) into bio-based fuels, which arelow in net emissions of GHGs.

Courtesy: USDA NRCS

Enhance Opportunities forPartnerships

◆ Review status and encourage further formation ofpublic-private partnerships as a common mode ofconducting R&D portfolio planning and programexecution.

◆ Encourage formation of non-R&D partnerships.

◆ Establish means for enabling and encouraging thesecure sharing of potentially sensitive partnerinformation regarding GHG emissions and relatedperformance of GHG-intensity reducingtechnologies.

Increase InternationalCooperation

◆ Expand international participation in key climatechange technology R&D activities and build onthe many cooperative international initiativesalready underway.

◆ Assist the Department of State and CCSP in thecoordination of U.S. input and support ofWorking Group III on Mitigation of the IPCC’speriodic Assessment Reports and othertechnology-related IPCC Special Reports, asmeans of stimulating international efforts todevelop advanced technologies.

◆ Support continued efforts to negotiate, execute,and support bilateral agreements12 that encourageinternational cooperation on climate changescience and technology research. Pursueopportunities for outreach and communication tobuild relationships and encourage other similarinitiatives by other countries.

◆ Pursue additional means to enhance the effectiveuse of existing international organizations, such asthe Organization of Economic Cooperation andDevelopment, International Energy Agency,Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,

Group of Eight (G8),13 Global EnvironmentalObserving System of Systems, and others, to shapeand encourage expanded R&D on climate changetechnology development worldwide.

◆ Develop globally integrated approaches, such asthe Asia-Pacific Partnership for CleanDevelopment and Climate (Figure 10-8),14 tofoster capacity building in developing countries,encourage cooperative planning and joint venturesand, enable the development, transfer, anddeployment of advanced climate changetechnology.

215


12 The current bilateral agreements are: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Central America, Germany, the EU, India, Italy, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand,Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, and South Africa. The countries included in the Central American agreement, apart from the UnitedStates, are: Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Panama.

13 The countries are, in alphabetical order, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, United Kingdom, and United States. The G8 meetingsoften include the European Commission.

14 The Asia Pacific Partnership for Clean Development and Climate was announced in July 2005. Six countries are participating, namely: Australia,China, India, Japan, South Korea, and the United States.

Figure 10-7. CCTP’s portfolio supports programs to promote efficiency inenergy use, such as advanced lighting concepts including Los AlamosNational Laboratory’s (LANL) research on white light from inorganic, multi-color light-emitting diodes (LEDs).

Courtesy: DOE/LANL

Support Cutting-EdgeTechnology Demonstrations

◆ As part of the agencies’ regular planning andbudgeting processes, consider additional cutting-edge technology demonstrations relevant toCCTP strategic goals.

Ensure a Viable TechnologyWorkforce of the Future

◆ Explore the establishment of graduate fellowshipsfor promising candidates who seek a career inclimate-change-related technology R&D.

◆ Explore possibilities of expanding internshipsrelated to climate change technology developmentin Federal agencies, national and otherlaboratories, and other Federally Funded Researchand Development Centers (FFRDCs).

◆ Explore possibilities for establishing CCTP-sponsored educational curricula in K–12 programsrelated to climate change and advancedtechnology options.

Provide SupportingTechnology Policy

◆ Evaluate technology policy options for stimulatingprivate sector investment in CCTP-relatedresearch, development, and experimentationactivities.

◆ Evaluate technology policy options for stimulatingprivate investment in and adoption of advancedclimate change technology and other GHG-intensity reducing practices.

◆ Support, as needed, policy-related activitiesundertaken by CCCSTI in furtherance of theEnergy Policy Act of 2005.

◆ Evaluate various technology policy options forstimulating land-use and land managementpractices that promote carbon sequestration andGHG emission reductions.

In carrying out these activities, and in accord with itsmanagement structure (Chapter 2), CCTP will beadvised by the CCTP Steering Group, assisted by itsmulti-agency CCTP Working Groups, informed byinputs from varied sources, and supported by CCTPstaff and resources. Results will be conveyed to theCCCSTI via the IWG. The CCTP also plans to issueperiodically reports on its current activities, futureplans, and research progress.

ClosingThe United States, in partnership with others, is nowembarked on a near- and long-term global challenge,guided by science and facilitated by advancedtechnology, to address concerns about climate changeand increasing concentrations of GHGs. This CCTPStrategic Plan is a first step toward guiding Federalinvestments in R&D to accelerate technologies thatwill address these concerns. The Plan will be updatedperiodically, as needed.

10.3

216


Figure 10-8. Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate;Second Policy and Implementation Committee and Task Force Meeting,Berkeley, California - April 18–21, 2006, http://www.asiapacificpartnership.org.

Courtesy: Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate

AIn order for the U.S. Climate Change Technology Program(CCTP) to carry out its mission, it is necessary to assess ona periodic and continuing basis the adequacy of Federalinvestments in the CCTP-relevant research portfolio andmake recommendations. A first step in this regard is toestablish and maintain a current inventory, or baseline, of allthe Federal research, development, demonstration anddeployment (R&D) activities among the participatingagencies relevant to the vision, mission, and goals of theCCTP. This baseline, and subsequent years of data, can beused to identify and track trends and other changes in theportfolio. It also serves as an index or guide to relevantFederal R&D investments and programs.

In 2003, the CCTP, Office of Management and Budget(OMB) and other agencies agreed on a set of classificationcriteria to identify R&D activities that would be included aspart of the CCTP. These criteria are provided on page A-2.

The baseline information for the Federal R&D budgetshown in this Appendix are for Budget Authority as Enactedfor Fiscal Years 2005 and 2006, and for the Administration’sBudget Request for Fiscal Year 2007. For each year,respectively, the participating Federal agencies submittedbudget data for R&D activities that meet the CCTP/OMBcriteria. Table A-1 is a summary table for all participatingagencies. This process is updated annually. Currentversions of Table A-1 may be found at the CCTP Web site.1

This baseline activity and resulting portfolio contribute toand are consistent with the Congressional requirement thatthe President report annually on Federal climate changeexpenditures. The multi-agency R&D baseline for CCTPconstitutes the technology component of OMB’s FederalClimate Change Expenditures Report to Congress.2

Climate Change TechnologyProgram Classification Criteria

Research, development, and deployment activities3 classifiedas part of the Climate Change Technology Program(CCTP) must be activities funded via discretionary accountsthat are relevant to providing opportunities for:

◆ Current and future reductions in or avoidances ofemissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs),4

◆ Greenhouse gas capture and/or long-term storage,including biological uptake and storage;

◆ Conversion of GHGs to beneficial use in ways thatavoid emissions to the atmosphere;

◆ Monitoring and/or measurement of GHG emissions,inventories and fluxes in a variety of settings;

◆ Technologies that improve or displace other GHGemitting technologies, such that the result would bereduced GHG emissions compared to technologies theydisplace;

◆ Technologies that could enable or facilitate thedevelopment, deployment and use of other GHG-emissions reduction technologies;

◆ Technologies that alter, substitute for, or otherwisereplace processes, materials, and/or feedstocks, resultingin lower net emission of GHGs;

◆ Technologies that mitigate the effects of climate change,enhance adaptation or resilience to climate changeimpacts, or potentially counterbalance the likelihood ofhuman-induced climate change;

A.1

217

Appendix AFederal Research, Development, Demonstration, and Deployment Investment Portfoliofor Fiscal Years 2005 and 2006, with Budget Request Information for Fiscal Year 2007,U.S. Climate Change Technology Program

Appendix A • Strategic Plan • September 2006

1 See http://www.climatetechnology.gov.2 Fiscal Year 2007 “Federal Climate Change Expenditures Report to Congress,” April 2006. This report is an account of Federal spending for climate

change programs and activities, both domestic and international. The report is provided annually to Congress.3 In this context, “research, development, demonstration, and deployment activities” is defined as: applied research; technology development and

demonstration, including prototypes, scale-ups, and full-scale plants; technical activities in support of research objectives, including instrumentation,observation and monitoring equipment and systems; research and other activities undertaken in support of technology deployment, includingresearch on codes and standards, safety, regulation, and on understanding factors affecting commercialization and deployment; supporting basicresearch addressing technical barriers to progress; activities associated with program direction; and related activities such as voluntary partner-ships, technical assistance/capacity building, and technology demonstration programs that directly reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the near-and long-term.

4 GHGs are gases in the Earth’s atmosphere that vary in concentration and may contribute to long-term climate change. The most important GHGthat arises from human activities is carbon dioxide (CO2), resulting mainly from the oxidation of carbon-containing fuels, materials or feedstocks;cement manufacture; or other chemical or industrial processes. Other GHGs include methane from landfills, mining, agricultural production, andnatural gas systems; nitrous oxide (N2O) from industrial and agricultural activities; fluorine-containing halogenated substances (e.g., HFCs, PFCs);sulfur hexafluoride (SF6); and other GHGs from industrial sources. Gases falling under the purview of the Montreal Protocol are excluded from thisdefinition of GHGs.

◆ Basic research activities undertaken explicitly to addressa technical barrier to progress of one of the aboveclimate change technologies; and

◆ GHG emission reductions resulting from clearimprovements in management practices or purchasingdecisions.

Climate Change TechnologyProgram Classification ExampleActivities

Specific examples of climate change technology activitiesinclude, but are not limited to:

◆ Electricity production technologies and associated fuelcycles with significantly reduced, little, or no net GHGemissions;

◆ High-quality fuels or other high-energy density andtransportable carriers of energy with significantlyreduced, little, or no net GHG emissions;

◆ Feedstocks, resources or material inputs to economicactivities, which may be produced through processes orcomplete resource cycles with significantly reduced,little or no net GHG emissions;

◆ Improved processes and infrastructure for using GHG-free fuels, power, materials, and feedstocks;

◆ CO2 capture, permanent storage (sometimes referred toas sequestration), and biological uptake;

◆ Technologies that reduce, control or eliminate emissionsof non-CO2 GHGs;

◆ Advances in sciences of remote sensing and othermonitoring, measurement and verification technologies,including data systems and inference methods;

◆ Technologies that substantially reduce GHG-intensity,and therefore limit GHG emissions;

◆ Voluntary government/industry programs designed todirectly reduce GHG emissions; and

◆ Programs that result in energy efficiency improvementsthrough grants or direct technical assistance.

Note: Programs and activities presented for consideration caninclude Congressionally mandated “earmarks,” but earmarkedactivities must be relevant to one or more of the CCTP criteria,and descriptions and funding levels must be clearly called outas such in the information provided. Programs and activitiesfunded by mandatory authorizations should not be included.

CCTP Participating Agencies,Budgets and Requests

In the following budget table, data are provided on CCTP-related activities, per the criteria above, for Fiscal Years2005 and 2006, and for the President’s Budget Request forFiscal Year 2007, across all CCTP participating agencies.In each FY, budget data includes activities for CCTP-related research, development and demonstration (R&D).

A.3

A.2

218


219

Appendix A • Strategic Plan • September 2006

DEPARTMENT AND ACCOUNT(S) FY 2005ENACTED

FY 2006ENACTED

FY 2007REQUEST

Department of AgricultureNatural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)

– Biomass R&D (Section 9008 Farm Bill) 13.0 12.0 12.0

– NRCS Carbon Cycle 0.5 0.5 0.5

Forest Service R&D – inventories of carbon biomass 0.0 0.5 0.5

Agricultural Research Service – Bioenergy Research 2.4 2.4 2.4

Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (CRSEES) – Biofuels/Biomass Research; formula funds, National Research Initiative 4.7 4.7 3.4

Forest Service – Biofuels/Biomass, Forest and Rangeland Research 2.4 2.4 2.8

Rural Business Service – Renewable Energy Program and Value Added Prducer Grants 24.8 25.3 12.7

Subtotal – USDA 48.2 47.8 34.2

Department of Commerce - ITAInternational Trade Administration (ITA) - Asia Pacific Partnership 0.0 0.0 2.0

Subtotal – DOC/ITA 0.0 0.0 2.0

Department of Commerce - NISTNational Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)Scientific and Technological Research and Services 7.7 7.2 7.2

Industrial Technical Services – Advanced Technology Program 18.1 10.3 0.0

Subtotal – DOC/NIST 25.8 17.4 7.2

Department of DefenseArmy 27.0 36.5 5.5

Navy 18.1 23.4 6.9

Air Force 1.0 0.0 0.0

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) 11.0 7.1 3.0

R&D, Office of Secretary of Defense 2.0 3.6 0.0

Subtotal – DOD 59.1 70.6 15.4

Department of EnergyEnergy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) 1,234.3 1,174.0 1,176.3

Fossil Energy 373.8 404.5 419.1

Nuclear Energy 291.4 332.5 463.3

Science 385.5 422.6 551.4

Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability 57.4 73.0 100.3

Climate Change Technology Program7 0.0 0.0 1.0

Subtotal – DOE 2,342.4 2,406.5 2,711.4

5 This table is consistent with the Fiscal Year 2007 “Federal Climate Change Expenditures Report to Congress” prepared by the Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB), http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/, and published in April 2006. Minor differences, if any, are due to arithmetic cor-rections after the OMB report was finalized and due to differences in rounding.

6 All agency data are current, as of April 2006. Totals may not add due to rounding. 7 In Fiscal Year 2005, $1.5M was enacted for CCTP Program Direction within DOE’s EERE Program Direction account.

Table A-1 CCTP Participating Agency – FY 2005 to FY 2007 Budgets and RequestsCategorization of RDD&D Funding To Climate Change Technology (Funding, $ Millions) 5,6

220


8 For Fiscal Year 2006 and Fiscal Year 2007, NASA is realigning its Aeronautics Research and is no longer pursuing previously reported activities incertain vehicle systems areas.

9 STATE and USAID activities are not included in the totals for CCTP, as they are associated expenditures promoting deployment and adoption of climate change technologies abroad. They are shown here for completeness to the extent that such activities are consistent with the criteria forinclusion in CCTP.

DEPARTMENT AND ACCOUNT(S) FY 2005ENACTED

FY 2006ENACTED

FY 2007REQUEST

Department of InteriorUS Geological Survey – Surveys, Investigations and Research - Geology Discipline, Energy Program 2.4 0.0 0.0

Subtotal – DOI 2.4 0.0 0.0

Department of TransportationOffice of the Secretary for Technology – Transportation, Policy, R&D 0.8 0.0 0.0

National Highway Traffic Safety Admin 0.0 0.9 0.9

Research and Innovative Technology Admin 0.5 0.5 0.5

Subtotal – DOT 1.3 1.4 1.4

Environmental Protection AgencyEnvironmental Programs and Management 90.5 90.0 91.9

Science and Technology 19.0 18.6 12.5

Subtotal – EPA 109.5 108.6 104.4

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 8

Exploration, Science & Aeronautics 207.8 104.4 85.8

Subtotal – NASA 207.8 104.4 85.8

National Science FoundationResearch and Related Activities 10.6 17.7 18.6

Subtotal – NSF 10.6 17.7 18.6

Total for CCTP 2,807.1 2,774.4 2,980.4

ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATED WITH CCTP 9

USAID Activities Associated with CCTP Clean

Energy Technology Development 80.1 92.0 57.3

Carbon Capture and Sequestration Measures 87.3 80.3 71.7

Subtotal – USAID 167.5 172.2 129.0

Department of State Activities Associated with CCTPAsia Pacific Partnership 0.0 0.0 30.0

Methane to Markets 0.8 6.0 6.0

Subtotal - STATE 0.8 6.0 36.0

Total CCTP and Associated Activities 2,975.3 2,952.6 3,145.4

221

Appendix B • Strategic Plan • September 2006

1 This table is consistent with the FY 2007 “Federal Climate Change Expenditures Report to Congress” prepared by the Office of Management andBudget http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ and published in April 2006. Minor differences are due to rounding.

AGENCY/PROGRAM/ACTIVITY

FY 2005 ACTUALBUDGET

AUTHORITY

FY 2006ENACTEDBUDGET

AUTHORITY

FY 2007PROPOSED

BUDGETAUTHORITY

NCCTI PRIORITY ACTIVITIES DESCRIPTION

Department of Energy

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Hydrogen Storage

22.4 26.6 34.6

Addresses key challenge to advancing a hydrogen-based transportation system, which could substitutefor oil and dramatically reduce GHG emissions. Amajor technological breakthrough is needed to beable to store enough hydrogen on board a fuel cellvehicle to provide a driving range comparable totoday’s vehicles.

Low Wind SpeedTechnology

9.9 5.0 19.1 Currently, wind power is only cost competitive inareas of high-wind speeds, which are relativelysparse and not near major load centers. Improvingtechnologies to make wind power competitive in low-wind speed areas could expand this GHG-free powerproducer and displace (or reduce future need for)coal- and gas-fired electricity generation. IncludesR&D on deepwater off-shore systems.

Solid State Lighting

13.8 19.3 19.3 Such lighting has the potential to double the efficien-cy of conventional lighting. Deployment could reduceGHG emissions and slow the growth of future baseload electricity generation capacity, which will largelyuse coal.

BCCTP continues to prioritize its multi-agency portfolio of Federally funded climate change technology R&D, consistentwith the goals and objectives of the President’s National Climate Change Technology Initiative (NCCTI). NCCTIpriorities are defined as discrete research, development, demonstration, or deployment activities that address technologicalchallenges, which, if solved, could advance technologies with the potential to dramatically reduce, avoid, or sequestergreenhouse gas emissions. Activities are identified from within the larger CCTP portfolio as shown on Table B-1, are forBudget Authority as Enacted for Fiscal Years 2005 and 2006, and for the Administration’s Budget Request for Fiscal Year2007 by agency.

Appendix BNational Climate Change Technology Initiative PrioritiesInvestment Portfolio for Fiscal Years 2005 and 2006, with Budget Request Informationfor Fiscal Year 2007, U.S. Climate Change Technology Program

Table B-1 National Climate Change Technology Initiative PrioritiesFY 2005 to FY 2007 Budgets and Requests(Funding, $ Millions)1

222




AUTHORITY


AUTHORITY

FY 2007PROPOSED

BUDGETAUTHORITY



Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Cellulosic Biomass(Biochemical Platform

R&D)

11.1 10.4 32.8

The research focuses on converting complex cellu-losic carbohydrates of biomass into simple sugars.Ultimately, this could lead to use of “waste” biomassto produce power, chemicals, and fuel, such asethanol. Cellulosic biofuels can displaces fossil fuelproducts and have the potential to be nearly “carbonneutral” by cyclically capturing and releasing carbondioxide, the main GHG, to the atmosphere.

Transportation FuelCell Systems

7.5 1.1 7.5 This activity works to incorporate fuel cells into vehicles—converting hydrogen into electricity andwater vapor—directly displacing the burning of fossilfuels in vehicles.

EERE Sub-total 64.7 62.4 113.3

Nuclear Energy

Nuclear HydrogenInitiative

8.7 24.8 18.7

This program aims to develop technologies that willapply heat available from advanced nuclear energysystems, in combination with power production, toproduce hydrogen at a cost that is competitive withother alternative transportation fuels. Although it isbut one of many hydrogen production methods,nuclear energy provides an emissions-free way toproduce large amounts of hydrogen.

Advanced FuelCycle/AdvancedBurner Reactor

0.0 5.0 25.0

Advances in nuclear fuel recycling can make nuclearpower, which emits no GHG emissions, more attrac-tive. The Advanced Burner Reactor (ABR) is a com-ponent of a multifaceted research program aimed atrecycling spent nuclear fuel; reducing waste; promot-ing non-proliferation; and enabling the expansion ofnuclear power—a GHG-free energy source. WithABR technology, the only waste to be placed in arepository is of a less challenging content, absentlong-lived radioactive isotopes and other transuran-ics. One Yucca Mountain size repository would beable to accommodate the waste from many reactor-years of operation—a content that would fill as manyas 21 equal repositories taking all that spent fueldirectly.

NE Sub-total 8.7 29.8 43.7

223

Appendix B • Strategic Plan • September 2006



AUTHORITY


AUTHORITY

FY 2007PROPOSED

BUDGETAUTHORITY



Fossil Energy

Sequestration44.3 66.3 78.2

The continued use of fossil fuels, particularly coal, togenerate electricity may be important to maintainboth a diversified fuel mix and ensure adequate ener-gy supplies at a reasonable price. A successful car-bon sequestration research and development effortcould allow the continued use of economical fossilfuels, while also limiting GHG emissions to theatmosphere.

Integrated GasificationCombined Cycle

(IGCC)

44.6 55.9 55.6 Instead of burning coal, IGCC technology gasifiescoal in such a way so as to enable the more efficientconversion of coal and other carbon-based feed-stocks into electricity and other useful products, pro-viding the potential for over 50 percent reduction inCO2 emissions, compared to today’s more conven-tional combustion technologies. It also facilitatescapture and sequestration processes.

FE Subtotal 89.0 122.2 133.8

Climate ChangeTechnology Program

Direction

– 2 0.0 1.0

The CCTP is the multi-agency planning and coordination activity, led by DOE, that carries out thePresident’s climate change technology initiative andimplements relevant climate change provisions of theEnergy Policy Act of 2005. CCTP provides strategicdirection, planning, analysis and multi-agency coordination for the participating Federal R&D agencies.

Total – DOE 162.4 214.4 291.8

2 In FY 2005, $1.5M was enacted for CCTP Program Direction within DOE’s EERE Program Direction account. 3 Totals may not add due to rounding. All Agency data are as of April 2006.

Environmental Protection Agency

Methane PartnershipInitiatives

9.0 10.0 13.0

Includes EPA’s domestic partnership programs withindustry, as well as the international Methane toMarkets Partnership. These programs encouragedevelopment and deployment of technologies toreduce methane emissions and make a substantialcontribution to achievement of the President’s GHG-intensity reduction goal.

Climate Leaders 2.0 2.0 2.0 Climate Leaders is a set of flagship voluntary indus-try-government partnerships that encourage privateentities to develop and implement long-term, com-prehensive climate strategies, and set GHG emissionreduction goals.

Total – EPA 11.0 12.0 15.0

TOTAL – NCCTI3 173.4 226.4 306.8

224


.71875

U . S C L I M A T E C H A N G E T E C H N O L O G Y P R O G R A M

U.S. Department of Energy (Lead-Agency)

U.S. Department of Agriculture

U.S. Department of Commerce, including

National Institute of Standards and Technology

U.S. Department of Defense

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, including

National Institutes of Health

U.S. Department of Interior

U.S. Department of State, including

U.S. Agency for International Development

U.S. Department of Transportation

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

National Science Foundation

Other Participating Research and Development Agencies

________________________

Executive Office of the President, including

Council on Environmental Quality

Office of Science and Technology Policy

Office of Management and Budget

U.S. Climate Change Technology Program1000 Independence Avenue, SW

Washington, DC 20585

202-586-0070

http://www.climatetechnology.gov

Front cover photo credits:Wind farm: courtesy GE Energy, ©2005, General Electric International, Inc.;

City skyline: iStockphoto; Nuclear power plant: ©Royalty-free/CREATAS;

Contour strip farming: ©Royalty-free/CORBIS;

Transmission towers at sunset: DOE/NREL, credit: Warren Gretz;

Earth: NASA.

.71875

September 2006

DO

E/PI-0005U

.S. Clim

ate Change Technology Program

U.S. C

limate C

hange Technology ProgramS

TR

AT

EG

IC P

LA

NS

TR

AT

EG

IC P

LA

N

September 2006

DOE/PI-0005