Green Energy Choices

Lead authors:Edgar Hertwich, Thomas Gibon, Sangwon Suh,Jacqueline Aloisi de Larderel, Joe Bergesen

Green Energy Choices The Benefits, Risks and Trade‐offs of Low‐Carbon Technologies for Electricity Production

Background

2


IPCC: A near‐complete shift to low‐carbon energy sources is required for any stabilization target

2.6°C 2.2°C 1.9°C 1.6°C

Importance of electricity increases

Source: IPCC AR5 (2014)

3


Challenge

Which technologies for electricity generation can reduce both GHG emissions and avoid impacts on human health and ecosystems?

Source: IEA Energy Technology Perspectives 2015

4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2012 2020 2030 2040 2050

GtCO2

Technologies Renewables 30%CCS 13%Power generation efficiency and fuel switching 1%End‐use fuel switching 10%End‐use fuel and electricity efficiency 38%Nuclear 8%

Baseline emissions 56 Gt

BLUE Map emissions 14 Gt

Renewables 30%

CCS 13%


What are environmental, health and resource use implications of a massive expansion of low‐carbon electricity?

5

©Richie Chan/Shutterstock

A 5MW offshore wind turbine requires 1200 tons of steel

350 000 such wind turbines would be required to provide 12%

electricity in 2050.


What are environmental, health and resource use implications of a massive expansion of low‐carbon electricity?

6

© Ranglen/Shutterstock

3.2 million premature deaths from particulate matter.

Green Energy Choices The Benefits, Risks and Trade‐offs of Low‐Carbon Technologies for Electricity Production7

• Coal and gas with and without CO2 capture and storage (CCS),

• Photovoltaic power, • Concentrated solar power,

• Hydropower, • Geothermal,• Wind power.

Nine electricitytechnologies

• Damage on ecosystems• ecotoxicity,• eutrophication,• acidification…

• Damage on human health• particulate matter,• human toxicity…

• Resource use• iron, copper, aluminium, cement,

• energy, water and land

Impactcategories

• Extraction of rawmaterials,

• Fuel supply chain,• Production of powerplants,

• Transportation• Operation,• Maintenance,• Decommissioning.

Life cycleperspective

Assessment Approach and Method


Results

8


Human Health(DALY/TWh)

Ecosystems(species‐year/TWh)

9

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Supercritical Offshore,gravity

foundation

Offshore,steel

foundation

Onshore

Coal Wind

Human toxicityIonising radiationParticulate matterSummer smog

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Supercritical Offshore,gravity

foundation

Offshore,steel

foundation

Onshore

Coal Wind

freshwater ecotoxicityfreshwater eutrophicationmarine ecotoxicityterrestrial acidificationterrestrial ecotoxicity

Wind power

Excluding effects of climate change and land use


Wind power

•Very low GHG emissions (++)

Climate change

•Reduced exposure to particulate matter(++)•Reduced human toxicity (‐‐)

Human Health

•Collision fatalities of birds and bats (+=)•Reduced ecotoxicity and eutrophication (=‐)

Ecosystems

• Increased consumption of bulk metals ( +=)• Low water use (==)• Low direct land use (==)

Resources

Key (##)First symbol(+) high agreement among studies (=) moderate agreement (‐) low agreementSecond symbol(+) robust evidence (many studies) (=) medium evidence (‐) limited evidence

10

©Jeff Adkins


Low‐impact projects:• Good wind conditions• Limit bird and bat collision

fatalities• Recycling

Wind power

11

©Jeff Adkins


Human Health(DALY*/TWh)

Ecosystems(species‐year/TWh)

12

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500S

uper

criti

cal w

CC

S

Sup

ercr

itica

l

IGC

C w

ith C

CS

IGC

C

Nat

ural

gas

w C

CS

Nat

ural

gas

Coal Natural gas

Human toxicityIonising radiationParticulate matterSummer smog

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Sup

ercr

itica

l w C

CS

Sup

ercr

itica

l

IGC

C w

ith C

CS

IGC

C

Nat

ural

gas

w C

CS

Nat

ural

gas

Coal Natural gas

freshwater ecotoxicityfreshwater eutrophicationmarine ecotoxicityterrestrial acidificationterrestrial ecotoxicity

Coal and natural gas power, with CO2 capture and storage

Excluding effects of climate change and land use



• Low GHG (++)• Substantial fugitive methane emissions (==)• Concern about CO2 leakage (‐=)

Climate

• Solvent related emissions (==)• High particulate matter (==)• High human toxicity (=‐)

Human health

• High eutrophication (mining, ++)• Ecotoxicity (+=)

Ecosystem health

• Increased fossil fuel consumption (++)• Limited CO2 storage (++)

Resources

Key (##)First symbol(+) high agreement among studies (=) moderate agreement (‐) low agreementSecond symbol(+) robust evidence (many studies) (=) medium evidence (‐) limited evidence

13

©Reuters


Low‐impact projects:• Reduced emissions infuel production andtransport

• Geology• Sourcing


14

©Reuters


Technology Comparison

15


Human Health ImpactDALY/TWh

400

300

200

100

0

Comparative Human Health Impacts


60

40

20

0

Damage to ecosystemsSpecies-year/1000 TWh

Comparative Ecological Impacts


Impacts from electricity generation under IEA Blue Map vsbusiness as usual scenarios

18

For more information please visit:www.unep.org/resourcepanel

Environment

Green Energy Choices