Current status and future prospects of low carbon technology and

power system

2017. 7.5 Koichi Yamada

Center for Low Carbon Society StrategyJapan Science and Technology Agency

1

Contents

• Global warming temperature• Design & evaluation platform for low carbon technology• Evaluation result of renewable energy system• Evaluation result of carbon free hydrogen• Evaluation result of low carbon power supply system • Value of R&D result for reducing electricity cost

2

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1850 1870 1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990 2010

World CO2/GDP（t /k＄）

Year

Historical change of CO2/GDP in the world

1913y 0.93

2014y0.45

World annual 1870-2014 1950-2014 1981-1990 1991-2000 2000-2007 2008-2014

economic 2.7 3.6 3.2 3.0 3.4 2.2growth rate （％）

Population（B）

1.41.26.0

China ：1.14

India ：0.94Non-OECD : 0.78

Pop.(B) CO2/GDP (2014)

0.31.30.13

USA ：0.32OECD30：0.25

Japan ：0.21

Calculated using GDP data of Angus Maddison, “Monitoring the World Economy 1820-1992” before 1950

Decreasing rate by change of industrial structure and new technologies

Increasing rate by expanding industry which emits CO2

CO2/GDP (2014)

3

Global temperature rise

ADR : Annual decreasing rate of Ct / GWP （t-CO2/M$/y）

Ct : CO2 emissions （Mt-CO2/y）

GWPt : Gross world product after 2015 （ B$/y）

ΔT can be calculated by using global economic growth rate and ADR

※ H.D.Matthews et al. Nature 459 （June 09）

Ct / GWPt = 0.45 – ADR（t – 2014） （t = AD）

ΔT = 0.64（1.4 + 10-6 Ct） （ΔT: Temperature rise after 1870,℃）

GWPt = 73,000（1+ annual growth rate of GWP）t - 2014

※

2015

tΣ

4

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

2015 2025 2035 2045 2055 2065 2075 2085 2095

0.0047, 1.0％, 2.3

0.0047, 2.0％, 2.9

0.0047, 3.0％, 4.0

0.0024, 1.0％, 3.0

0.0024, 2.0％, 4.3

0.0024, 3.0％, 6.6

Effects of technology progress and economic growthon global warming

Tem

pera

ture

ris

e（℃

）

Year

－0.0047 1.0%/y 2.3℃－0.0047 2.0 2.9－0.0047 3.0 4.0－0.0024 1.0 3.0－0.0024 2.0 4.3－0.0024 3.0 6.6

Decrease rateof CO2/GWP※

Economicgrowth rate

Temperaturerise

※ ・kg-CO2/$-GWP/y

・Av.Value of past100y = 0.0047

6.6℃

4.34.0

2.93.0

2.3

5

Items for designing low carbon power supply system

1 Low environmental impact 2 Low cost3 Stable supply system

Time scale: From 0.1 second to minutes (GF), 10 minutes (LFC), hour to year (storage)

4 Amount of renewable energy available in each region5 Power transmission system6 Flexibility of demand system7 Power supply construction scenario towards CO2

emissions of 0

6

Platform for Design & Evaluation of LCT(“Modeling Tool”)

Automated process design support system developed by LCS.

PFD

Equipmentsizing

Equipment cost & weight

Raw materials, utilities cost

Environmentalload

PFD with mass & energy balance

Equipment selection & sizing

Equipment cost & weight

Production cost & CO2 emissions

・PV・Battery・FC・Wind Power・Med-sized hydraulic・Geothermal・Woody biomass・Biogas・CCS

7

0

50

100

150

200

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

（Yen/W）

PV in

stal

led

cost

s

（20%, 150μm）

（18%）

Compound tandem（30%）

Future

Org. mat. tandem

（22%）（25%）

mono-crystalline Silicon solar cell（module efficiency 17%, wafer thickness 180μm）

（13%）

（20%,100μm）

（20-25%, 50μm）

Important R & D itemｓ forfuture bright system

Thinner Si-wafer by new slicing tech

CIGS tandem by high speed process

Organic compound tandem

(20-30%)

Mod

ule

Cost

Thin-film compound semiconductorsolar cell（CIGS）

New thin filmOrganic, Perovskite etc.

（15%） Current statusImproved existing tech.Future product

Stand

Power conditioner

BOS

Prospects of PV System Cost

（15%）

8

PV module and system cost breakdown

2015 2020 2030 Future

Type of PV（generation efficiency）

Singlecrystal Si

150μm th.(20％)

CIGS(15％)

CIGS(18％)

New thinfilm

(15％)

Singlecrystal Si50μm th.

(25％)

CIGStandem(30％)

Organictandem(30％)

V. C Material 56 51 40 34 35 29 17

Utility 4 2 1 2 1 1 1

F. C

Equipment , Labor 14 14 9 12 6 7 6

Subtotal 74 67 50 48 42 37 24

BO

S Stand 22 29 27 32 12 10 10

Inverter 30 30 15 15 10 10 10

Subtotal 52 59 42 47 22 20 20

Total Cost 126 126 92 95 64 57 44

（Yen/W）

9

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

PV module and system costP

V c

ost

(￥/W

）

12％

14％

17％20％

23％

Dotted line: System costSolid line: Module cost

: Calculated in 1991: Calculated in 2013: Japanese Mod.price: Chinese Mod. price

10

2015 Year 2020 Year 2030Production scale [GWhST/y] 1（10） 10 10

Yield [%] 66（90） 90 90Specific energy [WhST/kg] 250 340 500

Cathode/AnodeLiNi0.85Co0.12Al0.03O2

/GraphiteLiNi0.85Co0.12Al0.03O2

/GraphiteLi2S-C/

LiCathode/Anode capacity[mAh/g] 200/300 270/380 880/3300

Ratio of actual to theoretical capacity (Cathode/Anode) 0.71/0.78 0.97/0.99 0.75/0.85

Production cost [JPY/WhST]

Variable cost

Material 10.2（7.5） 4.8

Utilities 0.5（0.4） 0.3

Fixed cost 3.2（1.7） 1.4

Total 13.9（9.6） 6.5 4

Current and future scenarios of LiBs

11

Geothermal power generation (Hot dry rock)

2～3km

Injection

Resevoir300℃

Rock

Heat source

Production

FlasherRiver

Water usage = 2.3 Gm3/y for 200TWh(30GW) by HDR, water eff. of 98%

Rainfall 640 Gm3/yRiver 240 Gm3/yWater demand

80 Gm3/y

HydrothermalPotential：150TWh/y

550TWh/y

well well0.04- 5.0% of injection energyis converted toearthquake

Global earthquakeenergy is 1.2EJ/y , it is 0.1% of earth interior energy

12

Electricity Cost Estimation of Hot Dry Rock System

Plant Site Kakkonda MinaseWater from River 1,400t/h 5,600t/hWater Recovery Rate 50% 98% 98%Reservoir Temp. 280℃ 280℃ 280℃Generation Output 38MW 157MW 650MWEfficiency 16% 16% 16%No. of Injection Well 1 7 19No. of Production Well 4 14 57Total Investment Cost 19B¥ 57B¥ 180B¥Variable Cost 1.2¥/kWh 0.3¥/kWh 0.3¥/kWhFixed Cost 9.1¥/kWh 6.6¥/kWh 5.0¥/kWhElectricity Cost 10.2¥/kWh 6.8¥/kWh 5.3¥/kWh

Annual expense rate 10%, Operating factor 80%, Variable cost = Water cost (20¥/m3)13

Electricity generation cost & potential of renewable energy （Japan）

Cost（￥/kWh）Potential（TWh/y）

Present 2030

Photo voltaic 24 6 >400

WP（ land） 16 8 >500

Geothermal 25 8 500

Hydro（small/medium） 30 15 70

Biogas 25（13） 13（5） 15 ※

Biomass 25（18） 12（4） 40

Biogas※： 20％ of Fermentation potential（5×109㎥/y）

（ ）： Fuel cost Power consumption = 1000TWh/y

14

Carbon Free Hydrogen for Fuel

H2

ProductionDelivery Power

Plant

Compression,Liquefaction,Hydrogenationto MCH,NH3 synthesis,・・・・・

H2

H2

BiomassPV,WPEtc.

ProductH2

18.8MJ/kg-biomass, ¥10/kg, ¥0.53/MJ Delivery by truck, tank lorry, pipeline

15

16

Production cost of H2 from biomassH2 cost at power plant （¥/MJ）

Pipe

Biomass 1.6 1.9 2.5 2.9

Gasification 0.6 0.7 1.0 1.0

Transportation etc. 1.1 2.1 2.6 2.1

Total3.3

（4.1※）4.7

（6.6※）6.1

（6.9※）6.1

（6.9※）

Case

Details

The cost of H2 produced by PV and used for power plant is 6～13 ¥/MJ （Occupancy rate of electrolyser 10 ～ 30％）, Gasoline price= 4¥/MJ

1 H2Gas 2 H2GasCylinder-Truck

3 Liq. H2 4 MCH/

Tank-TruckTank

-Truck

Transportation: 100km （200km※ ）

Dehydration

17

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

TP operated

Importance of weather forecast

Daily electricity consumption, battery discharge and thermal power generation

（TWh/Day）Annual thermal power generation is 155 TWh

under 50% share of PV and 20 % of WP with B. discharge of 195TWh

Battery discharged（195 TWh/y）

Electricity consumption（1000 TWh/y）

Daily changeNot hourly

18

020406080

100120140160180

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23

Multi-regional power generation model

Baseload plant,>50%Coal, Nuclear, Hydro(ROR), Biomass,Geothermal

Load following power plantsLNG, Oil, Hydro(dams)

Power generation with fluctuationPV, Wind power

Storage systemBattery, Pumped hydro

Constraints forfluctuation

LFC10 min

GF Sec. to Min.

Unused electricity

Average output of Peak days(energy saving, low CO2 case)

※ Outputs of thermal power plant and storage system are calculated while that of other plants are given by scenarios.

Demand curve

GW

Coal

Other Base power

Gas, OilHydro（dams）

*ROR: Run-of-the-river hydroelectricityLFC: Load frequency control, GF: Governor-free control

PV

WP

StoredStored Supplied

Supplied

19

Case 1 2 3 4 5

Power demand （TWh） 700 800 1,000

Genera

tion P

ow

er（

TW

ｈ）

NP 0 0 0 100 0

HP 130 130 130 130 130

Coal 55 16 61 119 0

LNG 179 277 166 21 238

PV 284 327 306 291 528

WP 73 77 60 59 174

Geothermal 12 12 12 12 12

Geothermal（Hot dry rock） 0 0 100 100 100

Biomass 31 31 31 31 31

Total 764 870 866 863 1,213

H2 Generation （TWh） 0 0 0 0 46

Storage Battery （GWh） 367(109)451(135)400(120)362(110)827(234)

Generation Cost （¥/kWh） 11.4 11.5 10.8 10.3 12.3

Power Cost, 80％ reduction of CO2（565 →113Mt/y, 2050）

（TWh） Supplied electricity by battery（￥10/kWh = €85/MWｈ） 20

Case 6 7 8 9

Power demand （TWh） 700 800 1000 1200

Genera

tion P

ow

er（

TW

ｈ）

NP＋HDR 200 200 200 200HP 110 119 123 130LNG 2 31 124 241PV 474 519 570 603WP 219 240 256 290Geothermal 6 6 12 11Biomass 16 20 25 27

Total 1,028 1,135 1,310 1,503H2 Generation （TWh） 100 98 82 78

Storage Battery （GWh） 334(45) 322(76) 531(121) 744(166)

Generation Cost （¥/kWh） 26.3 22.9 20.3 19.1

CO2 reduction rate 100% 98% 92% 85%

Power cost & Power demand with high CO2 reduction rate

（TWh） Supplied electricity by battery（￥10/kWh = €85/MWｈ） 21

12.5

23.1

11.8 12.3 12.6

21.2

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1

Pow

er

cost

（¥/kW

h）

CO2 reduction rate

800 0

800 100

800 200

1000 0

800 100

（¥/kWh）

Demand（TWh/y）

22.9

12.311.5

23.6

14.5

21.7

12.8

10.710.510.3

（82%） （92%） （98%）

Power cost and CO2 reduction rate（2030 technology level）

（PV 2020 level)

Stable power（HDR＋NP）

（90%）

Technology stagnation at 2020:600B¥/y ,case 800-100

22

Conclusion

● Reduction of CO2 emissions from power generation by 80% in 2050 can be realized at almost the same current cost inJapan.

● Toward CO2 zero emissions electricity,stable power supply ( power generation with inertia ) by geothermal, H2 etc. becomes more important after 2050.

● The difference in technology level between 2020 and 2030 is a difference of about 600 billion yen in the electricity cost at the time of the CO2 emission reduction rate of 80% in 2050.

23