1 4. potential of energy resources 5. conservation – barriers 6. conservation possibilities 7. uk...

1

4. POTENTIAL OF ENERGY RESOURCES

5. CONSERVATION – BARRIERS

6. Conservation Possibilities

7. UK Energy Consumption

N.K. Tovey (杜伟贤 ) M.A, PhD, CEng, MICE, CEnv

Н.К.Тови М.А., д-р технических наук

Energy Science Director CRed Project

HSBC Director of Low Carbon Innovation

NBSLM01E Climate Change and Energy: Past, Present and Future

2010

2


4.1. CURRENT AND PROJECTED USAGE

Projected Saturation Population in 2050 -- 10000 M consumption averages current UK value Requirement in 2050 = 50 TW i.e. 5 x 1013 W.consumption reaches current USA value Requirement in 2050 = 100 TW

i.e. 10 times current demand

Range of forecasts 20 - 100 TW with a likely valuein range 30 - 50 TW (say 40 TW).

Country Energy Requirement

Population Per Capita

World 12.0 TW 6000 M 2.0 kW

USA 3.0 TW 300 M 10.0 kW

Europe 2.0 TW 350 M 5.7 kW

UK 0.3 TW 60 M 5.0 kW

3

4.2 PROJECTED LIFESPAN OF RESOURCES

decades:- centuries: millennia:

projected average consumption of 40 TW annual consumption will be:- 1.25 x 1021 J

Compare this to the Current World Proven Reserves:-

Oil Reserves:- 5 x 1021 J Gas Reserves:- 4 x 1021 J Uranium:- 1 x 1021 J Coal Reserves:- 2.6 x 1022 J Uranium (Fast Breeder):- 1 x 1023 J Fusion (Deuterium):- 1 x 1030 J

D – D fusionCoal,Geothermal, D – T fusion, 232Th

235U, Tar sands,238U,

Oil ShalesOil, Gas,

4

4.3 "RENEWABLE ENERGY RESOURCES"

Orders of magnitude only

Practically Achievable:-

1010 - Tidal (i.e. 1 x 1010 to 1 x 1011)

1011 - Geothermal; OTEC; Biomass; Wastes

1012 - Hydro; Wind; Waves

1013 – Solar

Projected demand is 40 TW – 4 x 1013 W

5


Theoretical Practical Realised to date

TW GW GW

NON-SOLAR

Tidal 3 50 1 France, Russia, China

6


GWGWTW

Realised to date

PracticalTheoretical

France, Russia, China

1503Tidal

NON-SOLAR

Italy, Iceland, USA, New Zealand

1060+30Geothermal

7


GWGWTW

Realised to date


France, Russia, China

0.25503Tidal

NON-SOLAR

Italy, Iceland, USA, New Zealand

10.5 (Electrical)

0.5 Heat

60+30Geothermal

USA, Israel, Spain, Germany: third world

3.6 electrical 0.2 Active Solar

3000030000(on land)

SOLAR Direct

8


Normal hot water circuit

Solar Circuit

Solar Pump

9

Solar Gain (kWh/day)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10 20 30 9 19 29 8 18 28 10 20 30 9 19 29 9 19 29 8 18 28 8 18 28 7 17 27 6 16 26 6 16 26 5 15 25 5 15 1 11 21 31 10

Day of Month

Solar

Gain

(kW

h)

December JanuaryFebruary MarchApril MayJune JulyAugust SeptemberOctober NovemberDecember

Solar Hot Water

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov

kWh

/ d

ay

2006 - 07

2007 - 08


10

4. POTENTIAL OF ENERGY RESOURCES - Solar

House in Lerwick, Shetland Isles

- less than 15,000 people live north of this in UK!

It is all very well for South East, but what about the North?

11



TW GW GW

SOLAR Indirect

Wind 30 1000 80 and rising rapidly

USA, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Spain ~ 4100 MW in UK

12


13


GWGWTW

Realised to date


USA, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Spain ~ 4100MW in UK

80 and rising rapidly

100030Wind

SOLAR Indirect

14


GWGWTW

Realised to date


USA, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Spain ~ 3000 MW in UK

63 and rising rapidly

100030Wind

SOLAR Indirect

UK, Norway, Japan

0.01303Waves

USA0.00130030OTEC

15



TW GW GW

Hydro 30+ 2000 800 USA, Brazil, Canada, Scandinavia, Switzerland, Malaysia etc.

Biomass/ Wastes

300 1000 43 Electrical28 Heat

Various

Brazil - Bioethanol

SOLAR Indirect

Hydrogen????

16

5. CONSERVATION - BARRIERS






2010

17

5. CONSERVATION - BARRIERS

5.1 GOVERNMENTAL • preference to support supply rather than conservation;

• long term historic memories, • consequential political overtones if they under

estimate future supply requirements.

• where grants have been made available, they have often been too late, and too restrictive - and deterred those who have made an investment in the past from doing so in the future. • situation now changing - although somewhat

restrictive

• Is the method adopted in US during the Carter Administration a preferential one?

18

5.1 GOVERNMENTAL BARRIERS

• lack of / or inadequate legislation to promote conservation (2006

Building Regulations do address some issues, but they are too late and there are still loop holes - so encourages minimum compliance rather than promoting conservation.)

• delays in decision making favour supply rather than conservation

• reluctance in past at Local Government Level to implement tougher measures - e.g. Building Industry who argue against such measures - Exceptions:- Southampton City Council; Milton Keynes. The Merton Rule is a step in the right direction

• reluctance to promote strategies which could cost Government votes at next election (e.g. higher taxation on petrol etc.) - many measures take a period longer than lifetime of Government to become effective.

• enactment of legislation which is has loose or incorrect wording:- 1947 Electricity Act in UK. Conservation Bill in US in 1979.

19

5.2 VESTED INTERESTS

• manufacturing industries continuing to promote out of date products and/or energy wasteful products - or to give Pseudo-Conservation Information.

• retailers promoting products on the capital outlay, or other attributes, and not energy consumption.

• scheduling of TV programs

• cowboy firms making unsubstantiated claims.

• preference to view Energy Conservation in terms of MONETARY saving rather than Resource saving.

20

5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

Incorporation of retrospective pollution controls usually INCREASES energy consumption.

e.g. Removal of SO2 leads to:-

a) reduced efficiency at power stations, hence increased CO2

b) as SO2 is converted even more CO2 is produced

c) Limestone required from Peak District etc.

d) Disposal of waste Gypsum

e) Additional Transport needed to power stations

FGD plant are large - comparable to size of power station (excluding cooling towers).

21

5. CONSERVATION - DIFFICULTIES

5.4 PHYSICAL LIMITATIONS

• laws of thermodynamics limit efficiency of energy conversion.• climate affects energy consumption• geological resources in a country will affect utilisation of energy. e.g. it makes sense to use electricity for heating in Norway which has abundant hydro-electricity, but not in UK.

5.5 TECHNICAL PROBLEMS

• old buildings/appliances which have a long life so improvements in energy efficiency will take time to become effective.

• difficulty in making perfect machine

• difficulty in achieving high insulation standards in brick built buildings

22

5.6 SOCIAL ATTITUDES

• desire for greater thermal comfort. Comfort temperatures have risen over last 30 years.

• desire for greater mobility.

• desire for smaller households in larger and individual buildings (unlike many other European Countries).

• come to depend on reliability of energy supply (contrast situation in late 50's).

• While Energy labelling on appliances is helpful it can give misleading information – e.g. A rated American style freezers often consume more than “C” rated European models. Energy rating of frost free appliances conveys wrong message.

• disregarding notices/adverts designed to promote energy conservation.

• short memories - previous high costs of energy are forgotten when energy becomes cheap.

• sliding back into old habits.• energy conservation not often seen as important as direct

investment even when the returns are much greater. • decisions made on impulse with little regard to energy used.

23

5.7 ECONOMIC BARRIERS

• We expect a pay back for any investment in a short period

• Assessment of an Energy project depends not only on the rate of return we expect (allowing for inflation etc.) which is related to the Discount Rate, but on how fuel prices are seen to change in the future.

• In the mid 1970's, it was predicted by many that the REAL price of energy would at least double by the end of the century.

• In practice energy is now cheaper in real terms than in 1970's

• Widely fluctuating fuel prices, and expectations on return can create a STOP GO attitude towards rational spending on Energy saving projects.

• In Industry, Energy Saving has to compete with increased productivity.

• A new process which takes half the space of an old equivalent one, produces the same number of items in half the time would be favoured EVEN if it consumed 50-100% more in Energy (as labour costs would be reduced and profits increased because the price of Energy is TOO LOW).

24

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

kW

h in

per

iod

No of people in household

Electricity Consumption

1 person

2 people

3 people

4 people

5 people

6 people

Social Attitudes towards energy consumption have a profound effect on actual consumption

Data collected from 114 houses in Norwich

For a given size of household electricity consumption for appliances [NOT HEATING or HOT WATER] can vary by as much as 9 times.

When income levels are accounted for, variation is still 6 times

The Behavioural Dimension

25


• The choice of a particular Discount Rate will load the dice in favour of a particular option if only Economics is used in decision making EVEN IF EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS ARE INCLUDED.

Fig. 5.1 Effect of Discount Rate on Economic Viability of Energy Projects

High Discount Rates favour Coal

Medium Discount Rates favour Nuclear

Low/zero/negative Discount Rates favour Conservation and Renewables

Discount Rate

Present Value

+ve-ve Ca

pit

al C

ost

s

coal

coal

nuclear

nuclear

Renewables/conservation

26


Time

Energy Demand

Projection

1973

2004

Low growth

Technical fix

Business as Usual

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

kW per Head

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

GD

P p

er

he

ad

(U

S$

(95)

USA

Russia

Canada

China

India

UK

Japan

Germany

Poland

France

Qatar

Other EU Countries

Nordic EU New EU

Mediterranean EU

The wealth of a country and energy requirements are related

Energy – GDP Relationships

Energy – GDP relationships• As an exercise in unit conversion download the energy-

GDP relationships file from the Web Page.• Convert the units of thousand tonnes of oil equivalent into

PetaJoules.• Work out the energy requirement associated with £1 of

GDP.• Plot the relationship with time - How has this changed

over the last 60 years?• Noting the energy requirement for £1 wealth, estimate

what the price of petrol and diesel should be if society valued energy at the same level as wealth generally if the energy content of a litre of petrol is 32.9 MJ/litre and that of diesel is 35.7 MJ/litre

• As an exercise in your own time – repeat the analysis for each of the fuels Coal, Gas, Oil, Electricity separately.

29

6. Conservation Possibilities






2010

30

7. CONSERVATION POSSIBILITIES.

Technical Education Energy Management

Technical Measures will have limited impact on energy consumption if people are not educated to use energy wisely.

Energy Management is a key aspect in energy conservation

A good Energy Manager will:- Assess Energy Demand - record keeping Analyse Energy Demand - examine trends relating to physical

factors Advise on technical and other methods to promote energy

conservation Advertise and publicise ways to save energy Account for energy consumed

31

Significant saving are possible by reducing waste in conversion of energy to secondary fuels.

Significant savings are possible in some area in end use appliance efficiency - e.g. low energy light bulbs. [but do not get confused between low voltage and low energy!]

Effective Energy Conservation and Environmental Legislation may well see a rise in electricity consumption in the short term.

promotion of heat pumps - require electricity industry switching to more efficient electrically driven

processes. e.g. Case Hardening move towards electric cars.????? Hydrogen???????


32

• Energy Conservation requires innovative “joined-up” thinking.

• Some of the best ideas come from individuals.

• What do you see as possibilities?• Would a move to Hydrogen powered vehicles be

viable in foreseeable future?

• What are the problems?

• Work in pairs and answer the questions at the end of the handout


33


Maxine Narburgh

CSERGE






2010

34

Per Capita Consumption in Watts ~ 5 kW


The recent reductions are not as dramatic as appear above as total population has increased by 2.1 million since 2000

1970 1980 1990 2000 2002 2004 2006 2007 2008

Domestic 816 882 902 1056 1060 1078 998 958 987

Transport 623 786 1076 1250 1207 1282 1310 1302 1272

Industry 1379 1069 855 797 769 735 713 690 662

Other 411 414 425 486 442 450 436 421 390

Conversion 1712 1565 1745 1680 1844 1635 1629 1549 1503

Total 4942 4716 5004 5270 5321 5180 5086 4921 4814

Non-Energy 240 165 249 277 241 270 261 212 220

35

8. UK Energy Consumption (Watts/capita)

• Consumption is roughly 5 kW per capita• Industrial Consumption has declined• Transport Consumption has increased• Despite much improved insulation standards

domestic energy use has remained almost static

36

UK Russia India Colombia Libya USA China

Production 4965 10748 566 2220 19377 7344 1564

Imports 187 -4796 129 -1414 -15248 3065 74

Total Supply 5152 5952 695 806 4129 10409 1638

Conversion/Distribution losses 1544 2007 206 136 1933 3245 581

Total Consumption 3608 3945 489 669 2196 7164 1057

Industry 721 1179 116 188 330 1344 436

Transport 1209 881 44 217 906 2861 106

Domestic 989 1250 279 122 403 1188 328

Commercial 416 296 9 42 n/a 962 54

Agriculture 20 90 9 51 27 76 41

Non-Energy 254 248 32 50 529 733 92

Imports/Exports 3.6% -80.6% 18.5% -175.4% -369.3% 29.4% 4.5%

% Conversion/Transmission Losses 30.0% 33.7% 29.6% 16.9% 46.8% 31.2% 35.5%

7. Comparative Energy Consumption (Watts/Capita)

Energy Security

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

bil

ion

bar

rels

per

an

nu

m

actual discoveries

projected discoveries

demand

38

Our Choices: They are difficult: Energy Security

self sufficiency

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

110%

120%

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Import Gap

Actual Nuclear

Projected Nuclear

Actual Coal with FGD

Opted Out Coal

Renewables

New Nuclear?

New Coal ???

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

MW

There is a looming capacity shortfall

Even with a full deployment of

renewables.

A 10% reduction in demand per

house will see a rise of 7% in total demand

- Increased population decreased

household size

Our Choices: They are difficult: Energy Security

4010/04/23

Carbon Dioxide Emissions

0

50

100

150

200

250

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

MT

on

ne

s C

O2

Actual

Business as Usual

Energy Efficiency

The Gas Scenario

Assumes all new non-renewable generation is from gas.

Replacements for ageing plant

Additions to deal with demand changes

Assumes 10.4% renewables by 2010

25% renewables by 2025

Energy Efficiency – consumption capped at 400 TWh by 2010

But 68% growth in gas demand (compared to 2002)

Business as Usual

257% increase in gas consumption

( compared to 2002)

Electricity Options for the Future

Gas Consumption

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

bil

lion

cu

bic

me

tre

s Actual

Business as Usual

Energy Efficiency

4110/04/23

Energy Efficiency Scenario

Other Options

Some New Nuclear needed by 2025 if CO2 levels are to fall significantly and

excessive gas demand is to be avoided

Business as Usual Scenario

New Nuclear is required even to reduce back to 1990 levels


0

50

100

150

200

250

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

MT

on

ne

s C

O2

ActualGasNuclearCoal40:20:40 Mix


0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

Mto

nn

es C

O2

ActualGasNuclearCoal40:20:40 Mix

25% Renewables by 2025

• 20000 MW Wind

• 16000 MW Other Renewables inc. Tidal, hydro, biomass etc.

Alternative Electricity Options for the Future

42

Do we want to exploit available renewables i.e onshore/offshore wind and biomass?.

Photovoltaics, tidal, wave are not options for next 20 years.

If our answer is NO

Do we want to see a renewal of nuclear power ?

Are we happy on this and the other attendant risks?

If our answer is NO

Do we want to return to using coal? •then carbon dioxide emissions will rise significantly

•unless we can develop carbon sequestration within 10 years UNLIKELY

If our answer to coal is NO

Do we want to leave things are they are and see continued exploitation of gas for both heating and electricity generation? >>>>>>

Our Choices: They are difficult

43

Our Choices: They are difficult

If our answer is YES

By 2020 • we will be dependent on GAS

for around 70% of our heating and electricity

imported from countries like Russia, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Algeria

Are we happy with this prospect? >>>>>>If not:

We need even more substantial cuts in energy use.

Or are we prepared to sacrifice our future to effects of Global Warming? - the North Norfolk Coal Field?

Do we wish to reconsider our stance on renewables?

Inaction or delays in decision making will lead us down the GAS option route and all the attendant Security issues that raises.

44

1.33 billion people

0.94 billion people

Raw materials

1.03 billion people

Products: 478 M

tonnes

CO 2 increase (2

002-05)

Aid

& E

du

cation

The Unbalanced Triangular Trade

Each person in Developed Countries has been responsible for an extra 463 kg of CO2 emissions in goods imported from China in just 3 years (2002 – 2005)

45

And Finally

Lao Tzu (604-531 BC) Chinese Artist and Taoist philosopher 老子（ 604-531BC ）中国古代思想家、哲学家

“If you do not change direction, you may end up where you are heading.” （直译）：“如果你不改变，你将止步于原地。”


47Per capita Carbon Emissions

UK

How does UK compare with other countries?

Why do some countries emit more CO2 than others?

What is the magnitude of the CO2 problem?

China

rElectricity Generation i n selected Countries

1 4. potential of energy resources 5. conservation – barriers 6. conservation possibilities 7. uk...

Documents

uk energy consumption

geothermal slide

otec slide

wind solar indirect

w slide

land solar direct slide

wind solar indirect

active solar