Energy and environment (ocean energy is blue energy)

Kresnayana Yahya, M.Sc

Energy and Environment

2

PERPACUAN Food and Biofuel

3

Ocean energy

4

Pertumbuhan ekonomi dan lingkungan

• Peningkatan aktivitas ekonomi dan pendayagunaansumber alam menjadi kenyataan yang belumdiperhitungkan sisi perusakan dan penurunan dayalingkungan

• Integrasi seluruh perhitungan dan penghitunganpotensi sumber alam dan seluruh mata rantainyamemerlukan suatu strategy baru

• System National Account 2008 akan diperkenalkansecara bertahap untuk mengintegrasikan seluruhkegiatan dan perhitungan ekonomi denganpemanfaatan dan neraca sumber alam yang ada

5

6

Perencanaan Bisnis dan pembangunan

• Keyakinan masa lalu bahwa neraca sumber alam kitamasih sangat berlebih harus di imbangi denganpenghitungan berapa penurunan daya lingkungansecara faktual

• Kecepatan dan pemborosan pemanfaatan sumber alamjustru sedang menjadi ancaman dan kerugian masadepan

• Panduan untuk perilaku dan gagasan pembaharuankebijakan energy terpadu dengan seluruh proses pemanfaatan lingkungan harus menjadi upaya baru

• Perpacuan dan perebutan lahan untuk pangan danEnergy akan terjadi tanpa kendali kebijakan

7

8

IEA Sounding the Alarm on Global GHG Emissions• IEA Estimates* (May 29th 2011, Guardian Article)

§ 2008: 29.3 gigatonnes of CO2

§ 2009: 29.0 “§ 2010: 30.6 “ (highest ever)

• Small effect of the recession on emissions• 80% of current power stations will still be in use in

2020 locking in 11.2 Gt• Gap in scaling back on nuclear cannot be filled by

renewables à increase reliance on fossil fuels • Continued shift to unconventional resources

*Upcoming World Energy Outlook (2011) 8

9

The Unconventional Reality

Conventional 0il & Gas

Oil Shale

Tight Gas

CBM

Shale Gas

Gas Hydrate

Gas-to-liquids

Heavy Oil

Deep GasBiofuels

CostsEnergy IntensityGHG Emissions

Tight Oil

9

10

EES Technical Arm of CCEMC*A new approach for advancing transformative technology• 16 projects approved in

Round #1 and #2§ Energy Efficiency : 12 projects -

$33 M

§ Renewables: 5 projects - $38 M

§ Cleaner Energy Production and CCS: 5 projects - $28 M

• Round 3 – announcement shortly

• Round 4 - underway

*Climate Change & EmissionsManagement Corporation 10

11

EES’ Oil Sands Technology Framework - Room to Improve LCA* Emissions

• Efficiency improvements – thermal recovery, mining, upgrading§ Energy intensity of water treatment for

steam

• New wave - efficient oil sands production technologies

• Next generation upgrading technologies - integration with gasification and CCS § Partial upgrading

• Integration of renewables and nuclear

ØResearch & technology adaptation costsØLarge scale deploymentØTime horizonØCapacity – human, infrastructure

*Life Cycle Analysis 11

12

Impact of Increased Water Recycle on GHG Emissions

90 92 94 96 98 100

Ener

gy (G

HG)

Produced Water Recycle Rate (%)

High TDS

Low TDS

*zero liquid discharge

EES Study:• Assess Impact of ZLD* on energy

use

o Capital & operating costs

• New technology opportunities

• 9 Companies , ADOE, AENV, ERCB

13

Our Focus - Advanced Technologies to Decrease GHG Emissions and Water Use

Decrease Fresh water Use

Decr

easi

ng G

HG E

mis

sion

s

SAGD, CSS

Best-in-class SAGD

Energy EfficiencySAGD, CSS

Steam-solvent

Electrical heating

Combustion

Non-aqueousExtraction

Surface Minning

Energy Efficiencyrefining, mining

Current5 - 10 years10 - 20 years

CCS

In situ and Mining

14

Edmonton Waste Management Centre with MSW Biofuels Facility

BiofuelsFacility

AdvancedEnergy ResearchFacility

Courtesy: City of Edmonton14

15

MSW 100 million t/yr

Ethanol 35 millionlitres/year

Biofuel Plant

• 90% reduction of landfill • GHG reduction of more than • 3 t of CO2 per tonne of waste§ Eliminates methane emissions from land sites§ Replacement of fossil fuel/coal§ CO2 removal and recovery

• Meets renewable fuel mandates

Advantages of Biofuel Plant

15

16

Advanced Gasification & Syngas Plug-and-Play Pilot & Bench Scale R&D Facility

• R&D for Biofuels Industry, universities & other initiatives• Test biofuels, coal, coke and fossil-biomass blends• Evaluate advanced membrane processes- O2, CO2, H2• R&D on advanced syngas conversion processes• Unique facilities can attract global players

Gasifier

FeedSystem

SyngasCleanup

Syngas Reformer

Acid gasremoval

CO2Recovery

MethanolSynthesis

Bench-scaleResearch Facility

17

Long-Range Energy Alternatives Planning (LEAP) System

• Evaluation tool for integrated resource planning and assessing GHG mitigation impact based on set assessments/scenarios

Demand

House hold

Commercial

Industrial

Agricultural

Single detached

Single attached

Apartment

Mobile home

construction

Smelting and Refining

Petroleum refining

Cement

Chemical

Iron and Steel

Other Manufacturing

Forestry

Mining

Paper and pulp

Space heating

Water heating

Lighting-Electricity

Space cooling

Appliances

Space heating

Water heating

Lighting

Space cooling

Appliances

RefrigeratorFreezerDishwasherWasherDryerRangeothers

Transportation

Passenger

Freight

Pipeline

Demand

House hold

Commercial

Industrial

Agricultural

Single detached

Single attached

Apartment

Mobile home

construction

Smelting and Refining

Petroleum refining

Cement

Chemical

Iron and Steel

Other Manufacturing

Forestry

Mining

Paper and pulp

Space heating

Water heating

Lighting-Electricity

Space cooling

Appliances

Space heating

Water heating

Lighting

Space cooling

Appliances


Transportation

Passenger

Freight

Pipeline 17

18

Example – Household Sector

Space heatingWater heatingLightingAppliances

Electric furnaceNG furnaceHeating oil furnaceOthersWood furnace


Electricity

ElectricityNG

House hold

Single Detached

Single attached

Apartment

Mobile


Space heatingWater heatingLighting-ElectricitySpace cooling-Electricity

Appliances

Space heatingWater heatingLighting

Appliances RefrigeratorFreezerDishwasherWasherDryerRangeothers

Electric furnaceNG furnaceHeating oil furnaceOthersWood furnaceSteam

Electricity

Electricity

ElectricityNG





Electricity

ElectricityNG




Electricity

ElectricityNG





Electricity

ElectricityNG

Electricity

ElectricityNG

House holdHouse hold

Single Detached

Single attached

Apartment

Mobile




Appliances


Appliances


Appliances


Appliances RefrigeratorFreezerDishwasherWasherDryerRangeothers


Electricity

Electricity

ElectricityNG



Electricity


Electricity

Electricity

ElectricityNG

Electricity

ElectricityNG





Electricity

ElectricityNG



Electricity

ElectricityNG

ElectricityElectricity

ElectricityNGElectricityNG

18

Resource Availability & Environmental Implications

uNear Term Resources:“There are sufficient reserves of most types of energy resources to last at least several decades at current rates of use” … IPCC

uEnvironment: A major and growing issue

19

Energy TrendsuProjections are based on the scenarios of the

World Energy Council/IIASA and extend to 2100uDrivers are:

u Population – 10.06 Billion in 2050, 11.65 by 2100u Economic Activity - $75 to 100 B depending on

scenariou Technology choices - especially acceptability of coal

and nuclear

uThree broad scenarios – A, high growth; B, “business as usual”; C, ecologically driven

20

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Looking next at energy trends, we will again examine the amount of energy produced and the economic activity supported, the sources and supply and environmental aspects. I have used projections made by the World Energy Council and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Austria. This very detailed and thorough work postulates several scenarios and makes projections to 2100. The WEC studies were completed in the late 1998s, but the base year is 1990 The overall picture is quite hopeful – economic growth is strong, per capita income in what are today’s poorest countries grows faster than elsewhere and income disparities are somewhat less than at present To put some numbers on this picture, I have plotted the TPES historically since 1850 and shown the three WEC projections through 2100

Energy History and Projections

0

10.000

20.000

30.000

40.000

50.000

60.000

70.000

1850 1900 1950 2000 2050 2100Year

A

B

CGWth

21

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Note that the ecologically-driven scenario exhibits a shift in the trend after 1990. However, the data for the several years since these studies were published shows the path being followed is closer to the high growth scenario, Kyoto notwithstanding In addition to these three basic scenarios, WEC expanded them with three versions of A and two versions of C.

Representative Scenarios

uThree of the WEC/IIASA scenarios chosen to illustrate a range of possible energy futures:

B - BAUA2 - highest emissions scenarioC1 - least use of nuclear

22

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Of their 6 scenarios, I have chosen three for a more detailed look. These span a range of possible energy futures The next three charts will show the historic and projected share of energy provided by the various sources

Environmental OutlookuOnly the “Ecologically-Driven” scenarios

reduce emissions significantlyuNet emissions of energy-related Carbon are

reduced to tolerable levels by 2100uAtmospheric CO2 concentration by 2100

stabilizes in the range of 450 to 550 ppmuThis concentration should limit warming to

two to three degrees C uEach of these has its own particular makeup

of energy sources23

Presenter

Presentation Notes

The projected extent of emissions for the three scenarios are plotted in the following chart A caution, however: As noted before, energy use, for the several years since these projections were made, has followed the high growth track and no progress has been made toward the lower emissions track As a result, according to the Stern Report, stabilization at 450ppm CO2e is already almost out of reach, given that we are likely to reach this level within ten years and that there are real difficulties of making the sharp reductions required. [Stern Exec page xv]. As. In their analysis, Socolow and Pacala only consider what effort is required to maintain carbon dioxide levels below 550 ppm (roughly equivalent to 610 – 690 ppm CO2e when other gases are included) by implementing seven of their wedges. [Stern Part III, p 206] Pacala, S. and R. Socolow (2004): 'Stabilization wedges: Solving the climate problem for the next 50 years with current technologies', Science, 305: 968-972

Energy Share by Source - B

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1850 1900 1950 2000 2050 2100

Other

Biomass

Solar

Nuclear

Hydro

Gas

Oil

Coal

Traditional

Year24

Presenter

Presentation Notes

This projection shows the share each energy source contributes to TPES over the time span form 1850 to 2100. Traditional fuels are largely wood and animal waste and are still important in the developing world. The segment labeled “Other” includes wind and geothermal and biomass is what is called commercial biomass and its contribution will be largely via conversion to liquid fuels, such as we are beginning to see with ethanol and bio-diesel. Looking first at the Business as usual case, we see fossil fuels providing close to 50% of TPES by the end of the century, nuclear still strong, and only minor contributions from renewables.

25

LEDAKAN PENDUDUK

1800

1930

1959

1974

1987

1999

130 th

30 th

15 th

13 th

12 th

250 JT

Perkembangan Penduduk Dunia

SEB. MASEHI MASEHI

201112 th

26

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

1600 1700 1800 1900 2000

205 JT

18.314.210.840.2

250

275

300

285 jtKELAHIRANTERCEGAH

80 JUTA

PERKEMBANGAN PENDUDUK INDONESIA(JUTA)

KELAHIRANTERCEGAH

100 JUTA

330 jt

237.8 JT

2010

248.6 JT

20135 x lipat2 x lipat

JUTA JIWA

TAHUN27

Penduduk Indonesia : Young population

Sumber: http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart?page=1&fsrc=scn/fb/wl/bl/dailychartjan10 (20101120_WOC951)

Indonesia Kondisi kependudukan Indonesia

Kelompok usia produktif15-64 tahun mencapai 66 % atau 165 jutaMerupakan kesempatandan peluang konsumsi yang luar biasa besar dan lajupertumbuhannya cukuptinggiKelompok dibawah 15 tahun yang cukup besar : 70 juta

66%

28%

6%

28

http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart?page=1&fsrc=scn/fb/wl/bl/dailychartjan10




LingkupKomoditi “Policy Paper” Undang-undang “Blueprints”

Program

5 THN 1 THN

Energi

Batubara

Minyak Bumi

Gas Bumi

Energi Terbarukan

Panas Bumi

Nuklir

Listrik

MATRIKS KEBIJAKAN, REGULASI DAN PROGRAM ENERGI

Kebijakan Batubara Nasional

Kebijakan Migas Nasional

Policy on Ren. Energy & Energy Conserv.

2 Januari 2004

Kebijakan Panasbumi

Power SectorRestructuring Policy

25 Agustus 1998

RUU Mineraldan Batubara

UU 22/2001ttg MIGAS

23 November 2001

Masuk dalam RUU (Pemanfaatan) Energi

UU 27/200322 Oktober 2003ttg Panas Bumi

RUU Ketenagalistrikan(menggantikan UU

No.20/2002)

Roadmap Mineral dan Batubara

Blueprint Pengembangan IndustriMinyak dan Gas Bumi

Nasional

Roadmap Energi Hijau

BlueprintPengembangan dan Pemanfaatan Energi

Panas Bumi

RUKN danRevisi Blueprint

yang berdasarkan UU No.20/2002

Kebijakan Energi Nasional(Makro)

RUU EnergiBlueprint

Pengembangan Industri Energi Nasional

Kebijakan Ketenaganukliran

UU 10/1997 ttg Ketenaganukliran

RoadmapKetenaganukliran

DIPA

DAFTAR

ISIAN

PELAKSANAAN

ANGGARAN

RENSTRA

(RENCANASTRATEGIS)

SEKTOR ESDM

29

Kondisi IndustriEnergiSaat Ini

2005

SUBJEK (S) OBJEK (O) METODA (M)

DPRMenko PerekonomianDepartemen ESDM

Departemen Perhubungan

Departemen PerindustrianDepartemen Keuangan

Kementerian Ristek

Departemen Kehutanan

Kementerian LHPerusahaan Energi• Perusahaan Migas• Perusahaan Listrik• Perusahaan Tambang

BB• Perusahaan Jasa

Konservasi EnergiPemerintah Daerah Masyarakat

• Hak Budget• Koordinasi• Regulasi Energi

• Regulasi Moda Angkutan

• Regulasi Industri• Regulasi Fiskal

• Kebijakan Teknologi

• Regulasi Kehutanan

• Kebijakan Lingkungan

• Ketersediaan Migas• Energi Primer• Ketersediaan

Batubara• Jasa Konservasi

Energi

• Regulasi• Kesadaran

• Pengetatan Anggaran Subsidi• Pengembangan Infrastruktur• Perencanaan dan Pengembangan Infrastruktur

Energi• Intensifikasi Eksplorasi Sumber Energi• Diversifikasi dan Konservasi Energi• Pengawasan Biaya Pokok Penyediaan Energi• Rasionalisasi Harga Energi• Kebijakan Domestic Market Obligation (DMO)• Perencanaan Umum Energi Nasional• Elektrifikasi Kereta Api• Penggunaan Bahan Bakar Gas untuk

Transportasi• Pengembangan Transportasi Massa

• Efisiensi Penggunaan Energi• Insentif Fiskal untuk EBT dan Peralatan Hemat

Energi• Pengembangan Teknologi Produksi dan

pemanfaatan energi yang efisien• Sinkronisasi Peruntukan Wilayah Hutan Lindung

dan Pertambangan• Rasionalisasi Baku mutu Lingkungan

• Penyediaan dan Distribusi Migas• Penggunaan Pembangkit Listrik Non–Minyak• Peningkatan Produksi• Penyediaan Jasa

• Kendaraan Umum (Non–BBM)• Hemat Energi (BBM)

PARADIGMA NASIONAL

• PANCASILA• UUD 1945• UU No. 22/2001 ttg Minyak dan Gas Bumi• UU No. 27/2003 ttg Panas Bumi• UU No. 15/1985 ttg Ketenagalistrikan• UU No. 36/2004 ttg APBN 2005

POLA PIKIR PENGELOLAAN INDUSTRI ENERGI NASIONAL

Pengaruh Lingkungan Strategis

Nasional Regional Global

• Otonomi Daerah •TAGP•ASEAN GRID

• Harga Energi Internasional• Liberalisasi Sektor Energi

Kondisi Industri

Energi yang Diinginkan

2020

Tujuan Nasional

Pengelolaan industri energi belum optimal

Pengelolaan industri energi optimal

30

Grissik Palembang

Semarang

CADANGAN DAN JARINGAN PIPA GAS

Pacific Ocean

AUSTRALIA

Indian Ocean

Bangkok

Phnom Penh

Ban Mabtapud

Ho Chi Minh

City

CAMBODIA

VIETNAM

THAILAND LAOS

Khanon

Songkhla

Erawan

Bangkot

LawitJerneh

WESTMALAYSIA

Penang

Kerteh

Kuala Lumpur

Manila

PhilipinesSouth

China

Sea

NatunaAlpha

Kota Kinibalu

BRUNEIBandara Seri Begawan

Bintulu

EASTMALAYSIA

Kuching

Banda Aceh

Lhokseumawe

Medan

Duri

Padang

Jambi

BintanSINGAPORE

Samarinda

Balikpapan

Bontang LNG Plant

& Export TerminalAttaka

TunuBekapai

KALIMANTAN

Banjarmasin

Manado

SULAWESI

Ujung Pandang

BURU SERAM

Ternate HALMAHERA

Sorong

IRIAN JAYA

Jakarta

J A V A Surabaya

Bangkalan

BALI SUMBAWA

Pagerungan

LOMBOK

Cirebon

FLORES

SUMBATIMOR

I N D O N E S I A

DuyongWest Natuna

Port Dickson

Port Klang

Mogpu

Dumai

Batam

Guntong

52,081

3,896

728

3,220

14,260

5,190

31,814

3,654

14,782

GAS RESERVE 2P (BSCF)

TOTAL RESERVES2P : 134,015.5 BSCF0,11

3,00Resources

Ardjuna Fields

MADURA4,289

Existing Pipeline

Planned Pipeline

Jayapura

Merauke

31

Grissik Palembang

Semarang

Pacific Ocean

AUSTRALIA

Indian Ocean

Bangkok

Phnom Penh

Ban Mabtapud

Ho Chi Minh

City

CAMBODIA

VIETNAM

THAILAND LAOS

Khanon

Songkhla

Erawan

Bangkot

LawitJerneh

WESTMALAYSIA

Penang

Kerteh

Kuala Lumpur

Manila

PhilipinesSouth

China

Sea

NatunaAlpha

Kota Kinibalu

BRUNEIBandara Seri Begawan

Bintulu

EASTMALAYSIA

Kuching

Banda Aceh

Lhokseumawe

Medan

Duri

Padang

Jambi

BintanSINGAPORE

Samarinda

Balikpapan

Bontang

Attaka

TunuBekapai

KALIMANTAN

Banjarmasin

Manado

SULAWESI

Ujung Pandang

BURU SERAM

Ternate HALMAHERA

Sorong

IRIAN JAYA

Jakarta

J A V ASurabaya

Bangkalan

BALI SUMBAWA

Pagerungan

LOMBOK

FLORES

SUMBATIMOR

I N D O N E S I A

DuyongWest Natuna

Port Dickson

Port Klang

Mogpu

Dumai

Batam

Guntong

MADURA

PEMBANGKIT DAN TRANSMISI UTAMA LISTRIK

TOTALCAPACITY24,000 MW

Total Jawa Bali : 18,500 MW

Total Sumatera : 3,200 MW

Total Kalimantan : 800 MW

Total Sulawesi : 650 MW

Existing Transmission

Planned Transmission

Power Plant

Jayapura

Merauke

32

PROYEKSI NERACA MINYAK BUMI

0.0

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

600.0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Juta

SB

M

Produksi-BAU Ekspor-BAU Impor-Skenario Gas & CoalImpor-BAU Impor-Skenario Efisiensi Produksi-Skenario FiskalEkspor-Skenario Fiskal 33

ENERGI MIX NASIONAL TAHUN 2020(SKENARIO OPTIMALISASI)

Panas bumi5%

PLTA4%

Batubara38%

Gas bumi 39%

Minyak bumi10%

Nuklir1.231%

Biomassa0.850%

Fuel cell0.000%

Tenaga angin0.000%

Tenaga surya0.003%

PLTMH0.308%

Biofuel1.516%

EBT Lainnya4%

SASARAN ENERGI MIX NASIONAL 2020ENERGI MIX NASIONAL TAHUN 2000

Batubara11%

Gas bumi31%

Minyak bumi53%

Tenaga air4%

Panas bumi1%

ENERGI MIX NASIONAL TAHUN 2020(SKENARIO BaU)

Batubara34%

Gas bumi26%

Minyak bumi35%

Tenaga air4%

Panas bumi1%

OPTIMALISASIPENGELOLAAN

ENERGI

34

-

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

%

SASARAN OPTIMALISASI PENGELOLAAN ENERGI NASIONAL

MINYAK BUMIGAS BUMIBATUBARA

EBT LAINNYAPANAS BUMITENAGA AIR

EKSPEKTASIBusiness as Usual

40%38%

10%

5%4%

Upaya IUpaya II

Upaya III

Upaya IV Upaya V

35

LAMPIRAN LUPAYA OPTIMALISASI

• Upaya I : Mengurangi Minyak Bumi– Coal liquefaction– Pricing policy BBM– Alternatif energi– Pajak BBM– Kebijakan Fiskal

• Upaya II : Meningkatkan Gas Bumi– Perubahan paradigma penggunaan cadangan sehingga baik cadangan besar ataupun

kecil dapat dimanfaatkan untuk kebutuhan domestik– Cadangan gas tidak ada masalah untuk memenuhi kebutuhan ekspor dan dalam

negeri (dalam UU Migas ada konsep mengenai DMO gas)– Pricing policy BBM– Pricing policy Gas– Pembangunan infrastruktur gas

• Upaya III : Meningkatkan Batubara– Cadangan batubara tidak ada masalah untuk memenuhi kebutuhan ekspor dan dalam

negeri– Penetapan DMO terhadap batubara, termasuk pemberian insentif untuk mendorong

penggunaan coal liquefaction• Upaya IV : Meningkatkan Panas Bumi

– Potensi panas bumi tidak ada masalah untuk memenuhi kebutuhan listrik• Upaya V : Meningkatkan EBT Lainnya

36

Energy Share by Source – C1

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1850 1900 1950 2000 2050 2100

Other

Biomass

Solar

Nuclear

Hydro

Gas

Oil

Coal

Traditional

Year37

Presenter

Presentation Notes

In this scenario we see fossil fuels dropping to less than 20% of TPES, nuclear phasing out entirely and renewables dominating, with solar and biomass the big swingers. I feel personally that biomass will not make the inroads shown and that the segment labeled “other”, mainly wind, will be larger.

Outlook for Resource Availability uWEC projects adequate resource availability

over the next 100 years, but foresees that a shift in sources will be driven by:u Environmental impactsu Economic recoverability of the resources

38

Presenter

Presentation Notes

As noted by John Browne, a former head of BP, at the World Energy Congress in Houston in 1998, the stone age did not end because of a shortage of stone, rather because newer and better technology became available. Similarly, I believe we will move from fossil fuels to an era of photovoltaics and electro-chemistry because of the advantage renewable energy sources offer over our present ones.

Net Carbon Emissions from Energy

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

1990 2010 2030 2050 2070 2090

MtC

Year

A2

B

C1

39

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Note that the high use of coal in the A2 scenario causes correspondingly high emissions Note also that emissions in 2006 were 7600 MtC so emissions are tracking close to the high growth scenario It is clear that energy-related emissions are not the only contributors to GHGs but they do account for around two thirds of such emissions and are often used as an indicator For the rest of this talk, I’ll focus on the C1 scenario which postulates a mix of energy sources that will achieve the desired emissions targets and provide the requisite total energy To implement this scenario an immense increase of renewables is required. This will be very challenging requiring strong policy action and international cooperation across many decades. Note also that the emissions trajectory of the C1 scenario is broadly similar to the “emissions abatement” scenario described in the Stern report [ part III, page 230]

Approaches To StabilizingGHG Emissions

uThere are two fundamental approaches on the energy front: u Reducing the impact of fossil fuels, i.e.,

“Decarbonizing” themu Expanding the use of renewables or nuclear

Note: there are other ways of influencing climate, including various forms of

Geo/Climate engineering

40

Presenter

Presentation Notes

The basic approaches are pretty obvious and I’ll hit the highlights in a moment. However, there are other means of influencing climate. One approach is to expand practices that remove CO2 from the air, for example promoting tree plantations, no-till cropping etc. More ambitious approaches, commonly lumped under the rubric of geo or climate engineering, should also be mentioned. Examples of these include: directly modulating the incident solar flux to the Earth, for example: placing mirrors in orbit to reflect part of the incident energy; increasing the uptake of CO2 by the oceans by adding iron to the surface of the water; and creating “mechanical trees”, devices that extract CO2 directly from the air for sequestration , Etc., etc. [parenthetically, Sir Richard Branson has issued the “Virgin Earth Challenge” with a 25 M$ prize to seek ideas for this latter approach ]. These ideas, while intriguing and meriting study, should not deter us from the mainstream approach of de-carbonizing the energy supply

Decarbonizing Fossil FuelsuApproaches include:

u Shifting to lower carbon fuels, e.g., gas vs. coalu Improving the efficiency of use of such fuelsu Capturing and sequestering the carbon (CCS):u“upstream” in the supply process, oru “downstream” in the utilization process

uThese measures are necessary but not sufficient – major expansion in the supply from renewable sources is vital

41

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Much effort is presently going into this decarbonizing – fuel shifting, for example, more efficient power generation and cars that get better mileage. Indeed the C1 scenario projects a continuing improvement in the use of energy, the so-called “energy intensity” measured by the amount of energy required to produce a unit of GDP. C1 estimates an improvement of 1.4% per year, substantially more than the historic progress of around 1% But we will have fossil fuels with us for a long time to come and Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is viewed by some as the great hope for allowing the continued extensive use of fossil fuels, especially coal – the energy equivalent of having our cake and eating it too. For example natural gas can be processed to extract hydrogen and the carbon, in the form of CO2, used for enhanced oil recovery (being done presently to some extent, for example at the Exxon Mobil plant at La Barge, Wyoming where the gas from the wells is an unusually high 65% CO2) or sequestered in an impermeable underground formation. Similarly, flue gases from fossil-fired power plants can be processed to capture the carbon dioxide and, again, the product sequestered in some permanent fashion. CSS, however, offers a major challenge. There are several approaches and some small scale projects exist. And returning CO2 into wells has long been a practice for enhancing oil recovery. But when and at what cost large scale CCS can be implemented is an open question. A recent report from MIT asserts that a price on CO2 of at least $30 per metric ton is necessary for any of the CCS technologies to become economically competitive. And the logistics of handling the massive amounts of CO2 involved will be a challenge Furthermore, finding storage sites in which to sequester the carbon may be more than a technical problem. Already one town in the Netherlands is resisting Shell’s efforts to sequester CO2 in their area, a case of not under my back yard! There are some who view CCS as not worth the effort and assert that money would be better spent on building capacity in renewables or improving efficiency in energy use. But in the developing world, particularly India and China, coal is going to be important for a long time and CCS may be the best hope despite its problems. But nothing very useful will happen in CCS unless a price is attached to carbon emissions and making it stick will be a major political challenge. For a very exhaustive, one might even say exhausting, treatment of CCS, consult the IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage from 2005 CCS is viewed by some as a ‘transitional technology’, with deployment anticipated from 2015 onwards, peaking after 2050 as existing heat and power plant stock is turned over, and declining thereafter as the decarbonization of energy sources progresses (IEA, 2006a). [See also IPCC e Supply ch 4, p 285] However, decarbonizing is only part of the solution. As we saw from the charts on the contribution of various sources, renewables use will have to be expanded greatly For the rest of this talk, I’ll focus on the C1 scenario which postulates a mix of energy sources that will achieve the desired emissions targets and provide the requisite total energy To implement this scenario an immense increase of renewables is required. This will be very challenging requiring strong policy action and international cooperation across many decades.

RenewablesuRenewable sources include: hydro, biomass,

solar, wind, geothermal and various forms of ocean/tidal/wave energy

uEach has its own peculiar advantages and drawbacks

uOnly some can be exploited at a scale and in a time frame that will make a significant contribution

42

Sources Viewed as LimiteduHydro – only modest scope for expansionuBiomass – important for fuels, but limited by

competition for landuGeothermal - locally important, but not a

large-scale source unless the “Engineered Geothermal Systems” approach can be developed successfully

uOcean/tidal/wave - resources are immense yet diffuse and expensive to exploit

43

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Looking at each of these briefly: Hydro will continue to make a modest contribution, but expansion possibilities are limited and major projects remain subject to much opposition. Just consider the furor over the 3 Gorges dam in China Biomass will be an important source, but mostly for fuels (and almost certainly not corn-based ethanol). But very extensive use of biomass will be limited because it is land-intensive and such land use will compete with food and fiber crops. One interesting twist on biomass, however, is that to the extent that it is used for fuel in a facility that facilitates CCS, and the carbon from biomass combustion is sequestered, biomass energy system becomes a negative carbon emissions system Geothermal is important in some very special locales. But unless the so-called “hot, dry rock” method can be developed successfully it is not a large-scale source. That approach involves making cavities deep in the earth and pumping water down to extract the heat of the earth. It is technologically challenging and requires large amounts of water and, to my knowledge, no R&D work is currently going on. Ocean and tidal resources are immense, yet diffuse. Furthermore, very large-scale infrastructure is needed to extract energy from these sources and these systems must operate in a hostile environment. I do not view these as likely to be significant contributors for many years This leaves solar and wind But first a word about nuclear

Nuclear OutlookuNuclear suffers from concerns over public

acceptance, final waste management and proliferation risk

uLittle capacity is being added in the OECD countries and some is being removed

uHowever, China, Russia and India have ambitious programs

uMore widespread use may be needed to meet emissions targets

44

Presenter

Presentation Notes

New technologies and mini-nukes may advance the cause of nuclear

Significant Renewables:Solar and Wind

uTotal energy available from these sources is immense, but the energy density is low

uProduct is largely electricity, the most useful form of energy

uThe C1 scenario projects that these sources, along with biomass for fuels, will be the dominant sources of the future

45

Presenter

Presentation Notes

The contributions of solar and wind in the C1 scenario are shown in the following chart and most of the rest of the discussion on energy trends will follow the projections of scenario C1 We will also focus on electricity and also shift units to TWhr Parenthetically, the capacity of solar is increasing rapidly. A recent article in the Economist (August 29, 2009) notes that sales of PV cells this year is expected to be 7000 GW and that this is about half the capacity of cell manufacture. I recall attending a UN conference in Paris around 1993 at which it was noted with great enthusiasm that PV cell manufacture had reached one Gigawatt!

Electricity from Solar and Wind

02000400060008000

1000012000140001600018000

1990 2010 2030 2050 2070 2090

Solar

Wind

Year

TWhr

46

Presenter

Presentation Notes

This projection, again for the WEC scenario C1, is probably a little optimistic on wind in which case the share of solar will be even more prominent At present, the contribution that wind makes to primary energy exceeds that of solar, the C1 scenario shows solar outstripping wind within the next few years.

47

The Matter of Intermittency

u It is critical to recognize that solar and wind are intermittent sources and can be used immediately by the power grid only to the extent of 20 - 25% of production

uSolar and wind can be more fully exploited to meet base load needs if storage can be provided or if the electricity is used to generate hydrogen

48

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Solar and wind provide power only while the sun is shining or the wind is blowing. Since modern societies need electricity at all times of the day and night, much of the so-called “base load” power must be provided from other sources such as hydro, nuclear or fossil-fueled plants. Studies by Michael Grubb and others have estimated that perhaps 20-25% of power from intermittent sources can be accommodated directly by the electric grid.

Electricity from Solar and Wind:Extent of Immediate Use

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

1990 2040 2090

TWhr

Year

25% of Total

Stored

TotalElectricity

Electricity fromSolar + Wind

49

Presenter

Presentation Notes

To explore the impact of this intermittency, lets look at the share of power that solar and wind provide. We see that by around 2040, the needed contribution from solar and wind will exceed the 25% level The implications of this are that capacity additions after 2040 will need to provide for storage so that the additional power from solar and wind can serve base load needs

Cost Impact of IntermittencyuSolar and wind installations with storage (to

serve base load needs) will be more expensive than those providing peak power

uCapital costs, by mid-century, of such plants is estimated at ≈ $7000 per KWe

u Incremental investment to accommodate this intermittency is estimated at ≈ $1T per year beginning around 2040 (just over 1% of GWP)

50

Presenter

Presentation Notes

There is not a lot of data on how costly it would be to provide base load power from solar and wind and I have used an analysis made by John Strickland (who will be speaking later in the conference) and applied some learning factors to arrive at these numbers. They are likely optimistic. But to put these numbers in context, let’s look at the extent of global investment in energy, and indeed the numbers are big.

Energy Investments

uRecent capital expenditures ≈ 1% of GWP

u Implementing energy scenarios that reduce emissions significantly will be more costly

uStern Report documents cost estimates at 1% of GWP by 2050 to stabilize atmospheric concentration of CO2 at 500-550ppm

uWEC notes costs unlikely to exceed 2% of GWP

51

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Annual expenditures have historically been running 1% of GWP based on recent experience The additional costs for emissions-limiting scenarios reflect that capital costs for renewables are generally substantially higher than for fossil sources and that the carbon capture and sequestration that will be required for continued of fossil sources will also be expensive to implement The range of these estimates is from -2% (i.e., a net benefit) to +5% [Stern Exec summary xiv] Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change is a 700-page report released on October 30, 2006 by economist Lord Stern of Brentford for the British government [formerly Sir Nicholas Stern] “If we don’t act, the overall cost and risks of climate change will be equivalent to losing at least 5% of global GDP each year, now and forever. If a wider range of risk and impact is taken into account, the estimate of damage could rise to 20% of GDP or more. In contrast, the cost of action (reducing CO2 emissions in the next 10-20 years) can be limited to around 1% of global GDP each year” (Stern, 2006). WEC has also estimated the investment that will be necessary in coming years and deems it unlikely to exceed 2% of GWP Another data point on the extent of investment needed comes form the IEA stating a little under half a trillion a year between 2004 and 2030 for the power sector alone

Outlook for Space Solar Power

uCapital costs for Space Solar Power installations are estimated to be on the order of $4000 per KWe

u If terrestrial installations for solar and wind providing base load power run $7,000 per KWe and a Trillion dollars a year is needed to build the needed capacity, then Space Solar Power should be very competitive

52

Presenter

Presentation Notes

My data on the capital costs of Space Solar Power (admittedly some years old) is that installations should run under $4000 per KWe so SSP should be competitive with terrestrial installations for solar and wind that provide base load power

An Assessmentu Implementing an energy future such as C1 will

be extremely challenging, requiring:u Enormous investmentsu Strong environmental policiesu Continuing international cooperation for decades

uConsequences of failing to follow such a path:u Serious climate impacts oru Expansion of nuclear supply and/oru Resort to more use of fossil fuels

53

Presenter

Presentation Notes

We already see the world following a path that is closer to the high growth paths than C1 The investment aspects do not seem too formidable. The impacts of unmitigated climate change are so serious that an additional 1 or 2% of GWP seems not unreasonable Can we really count on political accord across the globe for a century? Note that for the forthcoming climate conference this fall, India is already on record as not willing to accept limits other than the same per person amount as the developed countries [Economist, July 11] One of WEC’s scenarios, C2, projects the continued use of nuclear and also meets the emissions constraints. In this scenario, nuclear provides about 20% of primary energy which reduces the burden on solar and wind

What Could Change This Picture?

uCheaper ways to store electricity

uPower grids of international scale

uEconomic means of exploiting geothermal or ocean energy

uSuccess in exploiting nuclear fusion

54

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Substantial work is going on in improving electricity storage, much of it driven by the thrust toward practical plug-in electric cars Power grids that could move solar and wind generated power over large distances has been promoted for years by the Global Energy Network Institute – GENI Note Stricklands refs to Sodium Sulphur batteries, claim $.43M per MWhr

Recommendations

uPromote a better general understanding of the world energy situation

uSupport all plausible sources of sustainable and clean energy, especially Space Solar Power

uSupport policy actions that reduce emissions, importantly, putting a price on carbon

uSupport policy actions that improve efficiencyuStart now

55

Presenter

Presentation Notes

There is little that we can do to change the situation within the next 20 years. But we can change the trend and widen the range of options so that 50 years hence there is a more robust energy situation

Take Away

uEnergy demand will continue to grow stronglyuAlternatives to “Business as Usual” can limit

emissions to acceptable levelsuRenewable sources will dominateu Investments need to be largeuStrong environmental policies will be requireduSpace Solar Power will be competitive

56

Presenter

Presentation Notes

I hope these messages look familiar since that’s where we started. Only the title has been changed to a more popular management buzz word

Reduction in World Oil Demand in the Alternative vs. Reference Scenario, 2030

Transport64%

Other4%

Industry13%

Power generation8%

Residential and services

11%

Oil savings = 12.8 mb/d

Oil savings in 2030 would be equivalent to the combined current production of Saudi Arabia, UAE and Nigeria

World Primary Energy Demand

Fossil fuels account for almost 90% of the growth in energy demand between now and 2030

Oil

Natural gas

Coal

Nuclear powerHydro power

Other renewables

0

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000

6 000

7 000

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

Mto

e

0

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000

6 000

7 000

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

Mto

e

Presenter

Presentation Notes

World primary energy demand projected in RS to expand by almost 60% from 2002 to 2030, average annual increase of 1.7% per year. Projected rate of growth is, nevertheless, slower than over the past three decades, when demand grew by 2% per year. Demand reaches 16.5 billion toe in 2030 up from 10.3 btoe in 2002. Oil will remain single largest fuel in the global primary energy mix, though its share will fall marginally. Demand for gas grows at 2.3% per year in 2002-2030 – fastest rate of any fossil fuel. By 2030, gas use will be 90% higher than now, and gas will have overtaken coal as world’s 2nd-largest energy source.

0

4 000

8 000

12 000

16 000

20 000

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

Mt o

f CO

2

OECD Transition economies Developing countries

Global emissions grow 62% between 2002 & 2030, and developing countries’ emissions will overtake OECD’s in the 2020s

World Energy-Related CO2 Emissions

Growth in World Energy Demandand CO2 Emissions

Average carbon content of primary energy increases slightly through 2030 – in contrast to past trends

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

1971-2002 2002-2030

aver

age

annu

al g

row

th ra

te

Primary energy demand CO2 Emissions

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Global energy-related emissions grow marginally faster than primary energy demand over the projection period. As result, average carbon content increase slightly. Over past three decades, emissions grew less rapidly than demand.

Net Natural Gas Imports, 2030

Net gas imports are lower in all major importing regions, except China

0

200

400

600

OECD NorthAmerica

OECD Europe OECD Asia China

bcm

Reference Scenario Alternative Scenario

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Global demand for natural gas in 2030 is 500 bcm or over 10% lower than in the RS. Lower demand, together with lower oil prices, would result in markedly lower gas prices – especially in North America. Imports are reduced significantly: -By 2030, gas imports in N. America are 80 bcm lower – equivalent to the output of 8 large LNG regas terminals. -Gas savings in OECD Europe amount to 70 bcm in 2030, also greatly reducing need to build LNG terminals (imports of Russian gas are not much affected). China, by contrast, sees a large increase in gas consumption and imports – the result of a switch from coal to gas in power generation & end-use sectors (to cut pollution). China’s gas-import dependence is more than twice as high as in the RS.

OECD CO2 Emissions in the Reference and Alternative Scenarios

OECD CO2 emissions peak around 2020 – 25% higher than in 1990

Alternative Scenario

11 000

12 000

13 000

14 000

15 000

16 000

1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

Mt o

f CO

2

Reference Scenario

Contributory Factors in CO2 Reduction 2002-2030

Improvements in end-use efficiency contribute for more than half of decrease in emissions, and renewables use for 20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

49%

10%

21%

12%

8%

OECD

63%

1%

21%

15%

Transition economies

67%

7%

17%

5%4%

Developing countries

58%

World

End-use efficiency gains

7%

Fuel switching in end uses

20%

Increased renewables in power generation

10%

Increased nuclear in power generation

5%

Changes in the fossil-fuel mix in power generation

Difference in Electricity Investment in the Alternative vs. Reference Scenario

2003-2030

Additional investments on the demand side are more than offset by lower investment on the supply side

-2 000

-1 500

-1 000

- 500

0

500

1 000bi

llion

dolla

rs (2

000) Difference

Additional demand-sideinvestment

Efficiency measures Avoided supply-side

investment

Generation

Transmission

Distribution

Ocean Energy

lPotensi luasan laut dan samuderabelum banyak dijadikan sumberenergy terbarukanlPerubahan ke Blue Economy :

memanfaatkan seluruh potensikelautan termasuk untuk food danenergylMendorong pemanfaatan terintegrasi

HIGH-TECH AQUACULTURE

OCEAN ENERGYROBOTICS

ADVANCED SEABED MAPPING

DEEP-SEA FRONTIER

SENSORS & REMOTE

Acknowledgement: Prof John DelaneyUniv Washington

A dynamic maritime economy, in harmonywith the environment; supported bysound science and technology, whichallows human beings to continue to reapthe rich harvest from the oceans in asustainable manner.

Integrated Maritime Policy for the EU (2007)

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Slide 2: Our Global Oceans The next decade(s) is poised to see the greatest advances in mans ability to understand the life support system of this planet and the ecosystem products and services provided by our seas and oceans and The ability to harness sustainably a vast array of marine resources through the application of new and emerging knowledge and technology.

Apa yang harus dimulai

l Renewable energy integrationl Transportation strategy restructuringl New strategy for product, process and

equipment utlising renewable energylWaste treatment and managementl Energy pedesaan dan energy pada agro

industryl Industri dan rumah tangga bermigrasi ke

gasl Peningkatan produktivitas secara

menyeluruh dalam berbagai sektor terkait

Basel: a city with a vision

44% of households car-free"2000 watt society – Basel pilot regio

Vauban District, Tram serviced, passive and net energy producing homes

Freiburg

Thermal solar for new and retrofitted buildings

Barcelona

OdensePopulation 185,000

35 milion cycle trips in 4 years (30%+)

Space Required to Transport Same Number of Passengers

Why Public Transit?

Source: GTZ (2009), Sustainable Urban Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in South Asian Cities

TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT IN SURABAYA

East - West

Visualisasi Monorail Jl. Hr Muhammad (patung Kuda)

North - South

Visualisasi Tram Jl. Raya Darmo

Kesadaran Lingkungan

• Pengembangan kesadaran lingkungan harusterintegrasi dengan proses pembelajaran, perubahan perilaku dan penghitungan cost secara terpadu

• Research and development to integrate energy and environment. Creative economy

• Pengembangan energy terbarukan harusdilakukan secara cepat, radikal, massiv danpunya pertimbangan komersial

END OF SLIDESTHANK YOU

Kresnayana YahyaEmail: [email protected]: http://www.kresnayana.com

82Enciety Business Consult

mailto:[email protected]