climate change and transformation of the energy system · 2018. 9. 18. · climate change and...

Climate change and

transformation of the

energy system

Sustainability Opportunities, September 12, 2018

Filip Johnsson

Chalmers University of Technology

Department of Space, Earth and Environment, Division of Energy Technology

Sweden

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

• https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg13

• https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg7

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg13

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg7

Global emissions from fossil fuel and industry: 36.2 ± 2 GtCO2 in 2016, 62% over 1990

Projection for 2017: 36.8 ± 2 GtCO2, 2.0% higher than 2016

Estimates for 2015 and 2016 are preliminary. Growth rate is adjusted for the leap year in 2016.Source: CDIAC; Le Quéré et al 2017; Global Carbon Budget 2017

Emissions from fossil fuel use and industry

Uncertainty is ±5% for one standard deviation

(IPCC “likely” range)

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/emis/meth_reg.html

https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2017-123

http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/carbonbudget/

Options towards Sustainable Energy SystemsTowards zero CO2 emissions by Year 2050 to limit temperature

increase to well below 2C

• To use less energy– Population

– Technology

– Affluence and life style

– Efficiency measures

• To shift fuel/technology– Renewable energy

– Nuclear

– Coal to gas

• To Capture and Store CO2

– From large point sources (power plants, industry, hydrogen from fossil fuels)

– Carbon sequestration (Land Use Change and Forestation-LUCF)

Global trends - renewable energy

Strong growth in RES investments

Global RES

Investments

(Billion US$)

NHRES (% of

TPED)

Fossil fuels (%

of TPED)

0

20

40

60

80

100

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Glo

bal R

ES

Invest

men

ts (

Bil

lio

n U

S$)

Sh

are o

f T

ota

l P

rim

ary

Ener

gy D

em

and (

%)

11.0%

11.7%

80.5%81.0%

Strong growth in RES investments – zero reduction in fossil fuel share!

TPED = Total Primary Energy Demand

NHRES = Non Hydro Renewable Energy Sources

Global RES Investments

(Billion US$)

NHRES (% of TPED)

Fossil fuels (% of TPED)

0

20

40

60

80

100

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Glo

bal R

ES

Invest

men

ts (

Bil

lion U

S$)

Sh

are o

f T

ota

l P

rim

ary

Ener

gy D

em

and (

%)

11.0% 11.2%

80.5% 81.4%

Johnsson, F., Kjärstad, J., Rootzén, J. (2018): The threat to

climate change mitigation posed by the abundance of fossil

fuels, Climate Policy, DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2018.1483885

Global trends – fossil fuelsDisruptive transformation required!







Increased RES electrification

reduces conversion losses





Increased RES electrification

reduces conversion losses

…but requires more capacity

(thermal base-load replaced by

non-dispathable RES electricity)


Example of transformative/disruptive transition –

New York Year 1900. Can you see the car?

Tony Seba, Clean Disruption - Why Energy & Transportation will be Obsolete by 2030

- Oslo, March 2016

New York Year 1913. Can you see the horse?

Large investments in the energy system

over the next decades

The objectives of the energy system (sustainability dimensions)

• Preserve environment (environmental)

• Access and Security of Supply (social)

• Competitiveness and affordability (economical)

Energy system investments to mitigate climate

change influence and depend on other

sustainability issues

To use less energy

Renovation of existing building stock

Cost for energy efficiency measures – Swedish buildingsSFD= Single Family Dwelling, MFD= Multi-Family Dwelling.

Mata et al., 2010

Life-style changes

“Didn´t we agree

to save fuel”

SUV to fuel-efficient car

Filip Johnsson

To shift fuel/technology- focus on renewable energy

Renewable energy

• Energy from resources, which are naturally replenished

on a human timescale

• Sunlight, wind, rain, tides, waves, and geothermal heat

• Applied in: electricity generation, heating/cooling,

transportation, and rural (off-grid) energy services

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy

Potential for renewable energy is high

– scarcity is not the challenge

European Renewable Energy Council, Re-thinking 2050

Generally high acceptance for RES energy“The following technologies have been proposed to address global warming. If you were responsible for

designing a plan to address global warming, which of the following technologies would you use?”

Solar energy

Energy efficient appliances

Energy efficient cars

Wind energy

Carbon sequestration

Biomass/bioenergy

Nuclear energy

Carbon capture and storage

Reiner et al., (2006)

Env. Sci. Techn. 40, NO. 7, 2006 Definitely use Probably use Not sure Probably not use Definitely not use

Renewable energy

• I will not go through all renewable energy technologies

– See several journals such as Renewable and

Sustainable Energy Reviews, Renewable Energy,

Wind Energy, …

–See internet

• I will try to discuss some of the challenges and

opportunities related to renewable energy (RES) –

towards 100% RES based energy system

Renewable electricity

27

Wind, solar, hydro, wave, tidal, geothermal,…

• Opportunities

– Near zero emissions

– Increased Security of Supply (SoS)

– Reduced fuel cost

– Positive influence on several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

– Rural areas – distributed generation, leapfrogging “old” centralized

system

• Challenges

– Non-dispatchable (e.g. wind and solar)

– Variation management (e.g. storage) required (flexible demand)

– Costs

– New infrastructure

– Public attitudes

– ….

Renewable transport

28

Electrification, hydrogen, biomass fuels (+modal shift) – strongly

linked to sustainable cities

• Opportunities

– Near zero emissions


– Reduced fuel cost

– Positive influence on several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

– Can contribute to variation management of vRE

• Challenges

– Costs, including costs for new infrastructure

– Life Cycle emissions, material scarcity (e.g. Lithium)

– Mind-set – not only technology shift but also modal shift required

– Biomass sustainability

Renewable heating & coolingCombustion plants (heat only, CHP), heat pumps, geothermal,

gasification (in CHP schemes)

• Opportunities


– Reduced fuel cost – if using waste heat or waste derived fuels

– Environment - agricultural, forest, urban and industrial residues and

waste can be utilized in large scale centralized plants (CHP)

– Offering variation management of vRE from heat pumps

• Challenges

– Environment – small scale combustion units may yield harmful

emissions (NOx, VOCs, Black carbon/particles)

– Variation management (e.g. heat storage) required

– Costs

– New infrastructure

Heat pump

District heating/cooling

from RES fuels

Distributed heating

Rural off-grid electricitySolar PV, small hydro, small-scale biomass,….

• Opportunities


– Reduced fuel cost – if using waste heat or waste derived fuels

– Leap-frogging the centralized system, lower cost for infrastructure

– Using smart systems

• Challenges

– Costs and financing

– Storage required (e.g. for Solar PV systems)

– Lack of clear policies in some rural/developing regions, “natural

resource curse”

Conventional

System

Prosumer

System

Decentralized system – New markets

Sectoral integration is a challenge but a

necessity to increase the value of RES

Important to consider existing energy infrastructure

Towards 100% RES system– example: Scenario analysis Europe

Scenarios are carefully constructed snapshots of the future and the possible ways a sector might

develop. Scenarios help focus thinking on the most important factors driving change in any

particular field. By considering the complex interactions between these factors, we can improve

our understanding of how change works, and what we can do to guide it.

OECD, 2016 (www.oecd.org/site/schoolingfortomorrowknowledgebase/futuresthinking/scenarios/whatarescenarios.htm )

Scenarios: Purpose is not to predict future

Important to make clear when communicating results to

policymakers and stakeholders!

• Very ambitious renewables policy

• EC “High renewable”

• Climate , RES and efficiency polices

• EC “High energy efficiency”

• International carbon trade

• EC “Diversified supply techn.”, “High GDP”

• Existing policy measures

• EC ”Current policy”

Refe-rence

Climate market

Green policy

Regional policy

Technologicaldimension

Policy dimension

Scenarios – Not to predict future!

0

20

40

60

80

100

An

nu

al c

apac

ity

inst

alla

tio

ns

(GW

)

Thermal (fuel) power plants Hydro power plants Other

Wind & solar

Europe (EU-27+NO+CH): Annual investments in electricity

generation from 1960

ThermalThermal

An

nu

al c

apac

ity

inst

alla

tio

ns

[GW

]

0

20

40

60

80

100

An

nu

al c

apac

ity

inst

alla

tio

ns

(GW

)


Green Policy 99% CO2 reduction

Wind & solar


generation required to comply with emission reduction targets

Historical vs up to 2050

ThermalThermal

An

nu

al c

apac

ity

inst

alla

tio

ns

[GW

]

0

20

40

60

80

100

An

nu

al c

apac

ity

inst

alla

tio

ns

(GW

)


0

20

40

60

80

100

An

nu

al c

apac

ity

inst

alla

tio

ns

(GW

)


Green Policy 99% CO2 reduction

Wind & solar


generation required to comply with emission reduction targets

Historical vs up to 2050

Thermal

Wind & solar

Thermal

Climate Market 93% CO2 reduction

An

nu

al c

apac

ity

inst

alla

tio

ns

[GW

]

0

100

200

300

400

GW

Existing New

REFRP

CM

GP

European electricity-generation (EU-27+NO+CH)

Interconnector investments up to Year 2050 in four scenarios

Odenberger et al. (2015)

Europe Electricity-generation scenario, ”Climate market”

- One overarching CO2-reduction goal post 2020, -95% by 2050

- Common EU effort- All technologies optional- CCS available- Increased electrification-

EU-27, NO and CH→ Increasing ETS and wholesale electricity prices after 2020

Today (2013): 33% RES, 42% fossil and 25% nuclear

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

GW

Year

vRES

Other RES

Other thermal

Nuclear

CCS

Installed capacity

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

TW

h

Year

Other

Solar (and other RES-E)

Wind

Biomass cofire CCS

Biomass and waste

Natural gas CCS

Natural gas

Oil

Coal CCS

Coal convent

Nuclear

Hydro

Total demand

Europe: Number of existing and new thermal power plants(“Non-peak”)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

No

of

inst

alla

tio

ns

Existing fossil Existing nuclear Existing renewable

New fossil New nuclear New renewable

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

No

of in

stal

lati

ons

Existing fossil Existing nuclear Existing renewable

New fossil New nuclear New renewable

”Green policy” ”Climate market”

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

TWh

Year

Other

Other renew

Wind

Biomass cofire CCS

Biomass and waste

Natural gas CCS

Natural gas

Oil

Coal CCS

Coal convent

Nuclear

Hydro

Total demand 0

100

200

300

400

500

600

TW

h

Year

Other

Other renew

Wind

Biomass cofire CCS

Biomass and waste

Natural gas CCS

Natural gas

Oil

Coal CCS

Coal convent

Nuclear

Hydro

Total demand

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

TW

h

Year

Other

Other renew

Wind

Biomass cofire CCS

Biomass and waste

Natural gas CCS

Natural gas

Oil

Coal CCS

Coal convent

Nuclear

Hydro

Total demand 0

100

200

300

400

500

600

TWh

Year

Other

Other renew

Wind

Biomass cofire CCS

Biomass and waste

Natural gas CCS

Natural gas

Oil

Coal CCS

Coal convent

Nuclear

Hydro

Total demand

Regional Policy

Reference

Green Policy

Climate Market

The Nordic countries

0

20

40

60

80

100

An

nu

al c

apac

ity

inst

alla

tio

ns

(GW

)

Thermal (fuel) power plants Hydro power plants Wind, solar and other

• Land-use/number of sites

• Public acceptance

• Financial resources

• Lead times

• Electricity price fluctuations

• Regional differences

• Security of supply

• Job opportunities

”Regional Policy”

Implications from investment needs…

Europe (EU-27+NO+CH): Green Policy scenario 2050

Penetration: annual electricity generation divided by total annual demand

ThermalThermal

Odenberger et al. (forthcoming)

Large variations in solar and PV generationExample: Germany (DE4) Net metering scenario (in future)

Goop et al. (submitted)

Load followinggeneration

Congestion in the European transmission grid(a) during a time-step with peak load and low wind

(b) during a time-step with high wind power generation

Goop, J., “Modelling interaction between distributed energy technologies and the centralized electricity supply system” (2017), PhD Thesis

Variation management strategies required for maximizing

the value of wind and solar PV

Shifting Absorbing Complementing

Electricity Electricity• Reduce curtailment

and peak power• More even costs on

diurnal basis

Electricity Fuel and heat• Reduce curtailment• Fewer low cost events

Fuel Electricity• Reduce peak power• More even costs on

yearly basis

Batteries Power-to-heat Flexible thermal generation

Load shifting Electrofuels Reservoir hydropower

Pumped hydro Power to gas (hydrogen)

Göransson, L., Johnsson, F. Wind Energy. 2018;1–18.

Hydrogen steel making – value of wind

Variation management strategies required for maximizing

the value of wind and solar PV

Shifting Absorbing Complementing

Electricity Electricity• Reduce curtailment

and peak power• More even costs on

diurnal basis

Electricity Fuel and heat• Reduce curtailment• Fewer low cost events

Fuel Electricity• Reduce peak power• More even costs on

yearly basis

Batteries Power-to-heat Flexible thermal generation

Load shifting Electrofuels Reservoir hydropower

Pumped hydro Power to gas (hydrogen)

Göransson, L., Johnsson, F. Wind Energy. 2018;1–18.

The value of wind power –without variation management

The value factor (0-1): ratio of the production weighted marginal cost of electricity to

the time-weighted average

wind power share of annual electricity demand

See also Göransson, L., Johnsson, F. Wind Energy. 2018;1–18.

The value of wind power – with variation management

The value factor (0-1): ratio of the production weighted marginal cost of electricity to

the time-weighted average

Hydrogen for 21 steel plants

with 7 days storage

wind power share of annual electricity demand

See also Göransson, L., Johnsson, F. Wind Energy. 2018;1–18.

EVs–Static charging

Electric road system (ERS) – dynamic charging

Electrofuels

It seems likely that there will be a significant electrification in both

the transportation and the industry sectors, possibly including the

use of electrofuels (e.g. hydrogen)

Renewable policy landscape (Electricity)

From Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st century

Renewable policy landscape (Heating & cooling)


Renewable policy landscape (Transport)


The role of carbon based fuels

without net (or negative)

emissions to atmosphere– example: Biomass

CHP

CCGT

Gasification

(GoBiGas)

Europe (EU-27+NO+CH): Generation up to 2050

Green Policy scenario

Solar PV

Wind power

Biomass& waste

NG


Europe (EU-27+NO+CH): Generation up to 2050

Green Policy scenario

Solar PV

Wind power

Biomass& waste

NG

Thermal generation is load following and zero emission

Thermal generation is base load


e.g. Biogas fired GT/CCGT

e.g. Lignite fired power plant

Biogas (GT & CCGT) facilitates high penetrationof wind and solar power

(but penetration also depends on transmission capacity)

More wind when biogas available at lower cost

Less wind in a high-cost biomass scenario

Biogas basedcapacity

WindWind

Göransson, L. et al.

Not obvious where biomass will be used towards a

net zero emission world

(there is also a debate on the climate benefit of

biomass in a carbon stock context, considering

LUC and iLUC)

Value of carbon based fuels ( “RES-fuels”)

without net-emissions to the atmosphere

The role of biomass towards net zero emissions

• Biomass important for supplying sectors where alternative

decarbonization is difficult or associated with high costs

• Due to likely limitation of biomass supply in most markets it is not

clear which sector will have the highest willingness to pay for the

biomass and what support mechanisms will possibly prioritize one

sector above another

– The aviation sector

– Thermal power generation for balancing variable renewable (non-

dispatchable) electricity generation from wind and solar (low full-load

hours)

– Materials/green chemicals

• Future will require the development of high efficient thermal

processes which can produce gaseous as well as liquid biomass

fuels in different mixes, preferable in the same plant

Challenge: Long lead times in development

Example - High efficient SNG productionGoBiGas 20 MW gasification

Chalmers lab reactor

Chalmers 2-4 MW

pilot plant

GoBiGas fas 1 Hisingen

20 MW SNG demonstration plant

Göteborg Energi

GoBiGas fas 2 Hisingen

80 MW SNG

Commercial plant

Göteborg Energi

2008 2012 2016

Combined heat and power

to multi energy carrier plant?

• Large units to reach high efficiency

• Professional operation, less number of units, high financial risk, long lead times in development and implementation – large demo projects

• Need for robust technology and risk assessment before R&D spending, demo projects should include market strategy

• Global market not obvious (lack of biomass supply markets)

• Obviously also room for national niche markets

• Compare PV, wind, batteries

• Modular system, automatic system, low financial risk

• Possible for transformative (”disruptive”) break through

• Global market

Reflection on challenge for development of thermal biomass processese.g. gasification

Summary renewable energyTowards 100% RES based energy system

• Sectorial links must be harvested

– electricity, transport and industry (offer variation management)

• The value of carbon based fuels (from renewables; biomass and hydrogen+cabon dioxide) will be increasingly valuable

– variation management (flexible demand)

– decarbonizing transportation sector, especially aviation sector

• Supply chain perspective is important – cross sectoral links

• International cooperation/markets required to maximize RES

utilization

To capture and store CO2

CCS

• I will not go through details on the different CCS

technologies (e.g. oxyfuel, post-combustion, pre-

combustion)

– See several journals such as Int. J Greenhouse Gas

Control, Energy Conversion Management, Applied

Energy,…

–See internet, e.g. Zero Emission Platform ZEP

(www.zeroemissionsplatform.eu ), The Global CCS

Institute (www.globalccsinstitute.com )

• I will try to discuss CCS in policy and geopolitical

contexts

http://www.zeroemissionsplatform.eu/

http://www.globalccsinstitute.com/

CO2 Capture, Transport & Storage (CCS)

A Nordic storage atlas

https://data.geus.dk/nordiccs/

Storage in the Nordic region

Conditions for CCS

• Cost for CCS is not prohibitive

• Large storage volume available

• Nothing points to that the CO2 will leak out

There is one important argument in favor of CCS…

Rogelj et al., Differences between carbon budget

estimates unravelled, Nature Climate Change, Vol 534, 631, 2016

1

1

Coal, oil and gas vs carbon budget for 2ºC warming

1

-560

250

745

4437

-500 500 1500 2500 3500 4500

Past emissions (Rogelj et al., 2016)

Remaining carbon budget (Rogelj et al., 2016)

Fossil reserves

Fossil reserves + 30% of resource base

Gt C

Strong growth in RES investments – zero reduction in fossil fuel share!

TPED = Total Primary Energy Demand

NHRES = Non Hydro Renewable Energy Sources

Global RES Investments

(Billion US$)

NHRES (% of TPED)

Fossil fuels (% of TPED)

0

20

40

60

80

100

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Glo

bal R

ES

Invest

men

ts (

Bil

lion U

S$)

Sh

are o

f T

ota

l P

rim

ary

Ener

gy D

em

and (

%)

11.0% 11.2%

80.5% 81.4%




The main argument in favor of CCS

• The abundant resources of fossil fuels

Example of power plant (base load)

Lignite-fired 2x933MWel

2x115MWheat

Commissioned in 2000

10 million tons CO2/year!

Long lead times in developmentExample: Oxyfuel combustion for CO2 capture

Research and development

Chalmers 100kW

research plant

Vattenfall 30MW

pilot plant

Jänschwalde 250 MW

demonstration plant

Commercial

plant

2010 2015 2020

Canada – the first large coal CCS project

Boundary dam, 1 million tons

CO2/yr (coal fired station)

110 MWe Post combustion capture

Put in operation October 8, 2014

Storage for EOR and in aquifer

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

MtC

O2/y

ear

Cement

Iron and steel

Refineries

Industry - BAU

Industry - Cap

Existing BAT technologies sufficient to meet EU year 2020

targets, but not the 2050 targets – CCS is required

Key energy intensive industries EU27Reduction potential with existing BAT technologies (i.e. without CCS) vs emission cap

Rootzén and Johnsson, (2013) Energy Policy, 59, pp443–458.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Reduced activity level in refineries

Biomass in iron and steel and

cement industries

Reduced fraction of clinker in

cement

BAT replacing existing process

technology

Without CCS Total potential -35% reduction in Year 2050 relative to Year 2010

MtC

O2/y

rKey energy intensive industries in the Nordic countries

Rootzén, J., Johnsson, F. (2015) Energy 80, 715-730

Fuel shift?

2014-11-19 86Kim Kärsrud

One month fuel consumption for SSABs blast furnaces

Timber storage at Byholma from the tree fell due to the ”Gudrun” storm

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

With CCS Total potential -85% reductions in Year 2050 relative Year 2010

MtC

O2/å


CCS


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050


Significant costs due to increased energy use

Large volumes of CO2

to handle

MtC

O2/å


CCS


1

1

Limit warming to well below 2ºC requires net-

negative emissions post Year 2050

1

In summary – fossil fuels

• The main obstacle to compliance with any reasonable warming target

is the abundance of fossil fuels, which has maintained and increased

momentum towards new fossil-fuelled processes.

• So far, there has been no increase in the share of NHRES in total

global primary energy demand, with a clear decline in the NHRES

share in India and China.

• There is an immediate need for the global community to develop fossil

fuel strategies and policies (The NDCs contains almost nothing on

strategies for fossil fuel reserves!).

• Policies must account for the global trade flow of products that

typically occurs from the newly industrialized fossil fuel-rich countries

to the developed countries.

NDC = National Determined Contributions

See: Johnsson, F., Kjärstad, J., Rootzén, J. (2018): The threat to

climate change mitigation posed by the abundance of fossil fuels,

Climate Policy, DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2018.1483885

Three arguments for CCS

• The abundant resources of fossil fuels (main argument)

• To stabilize climate to well below 2ºC warming (in line with COP21)

will require negative emissions post Year 2050 – Bio Energy CCS

(BECCS) makes this possible

• To facilitate carbon intensive industry (e.g. cement and iron and

steel) to meet stringent emission reductions

– The alternative is to agree on a global phase-out scheme of the

fossil fuels, in particular of coal

In summary – on CCS

• Only two options if limiting global warming to 2ºC: Leave fossil

fuels in the ground or apply CCS (and a combination of these)

• Failure of CCS: global community must agree to almost immediately

to start phasing out the use of fossil fuels – tremendous geopolitical

challenge, if the global community at the same time will limit warming

to well below 2C

• Success of CCS: fossil fuel-dependent economies will find it easier to comply with stringent greenhouse GHG reduction targets

• Challenge to establish transportation and storage infrastructure

• Challenge Cost for CCS chain >> Requires strong policy (e.g. the EU-

ETS allowance prices) or other driving force for reduced emissions

must be developed (e.g. procurement further down product value chain)

• Portfolio of technologies and measures required, CCS only one option

Policies and strategies

Examples of policies and strategies

• Pricing of carbon emissions

• Renewable supply schemes

• Fossil-fuel policies and strategies

• Corporate strategies

• Consumer driven (e.g. Green labeling of products)

www.mistracarbonexit.com

Fossil-fuel policies and strategies

Carbon emissions pricing

Fossil fuel taxation

Emissions performance standards (EPS)

Phasing out of fossil fuel subsidies

Divestments from fossil fuel industries

Procurement

Transition policies

Moratorium on fossil fuel supply projects

Funding for research and demonstration projects

Collective action along value chains

See: Johnsson, F., Kjärstad, J., Rootzén, J. (2018): The threat to climate change mitigation

posed by the abundance of fossil fuels, Climate Policy, DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2018.1483885

Supply chain analysisSteel to car

Metal goods

Construction

Industrial equipment

Vehicles

By-products

Steel slab

Steel slabs

HOT STRIP MILL

PLATE MILL

IRON & STEEL MAKING

Hot rolled coil/sheet

Heavy plate

Cold rolled coil/sheet

Coated coil/sheetCOLD ROLLING

FABRICATION

Fabrication scrap

Cars

Trucks

Other transport

Machinery

Electrical

Infrastructure

Buildings

Packaging

Appliances

Other

Supply chain analysisCement (and steel) to building

White clinker

Grey clinker CEM II

CONCRETE MANUFACTURING

Multi-dwelling houses

CEMENT PRODUCTION

CLINKER PRODUCTION

White cements

Blended

cements

RMC

CEM I

PCE

PCP

Civil engineering

Residential buildings

Non-residential buildings

Transport infrastructure

Hydraulic works

Other

Other

Public

Commercial

Single detached houses

Other

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050


100€/ton CO2MtC

O2/å


CCS


Cement industry Steel industry

Price

increase

cement

Price

increase

steel

Price

increase

building

Price

increase

car

Less than

+0.5%Less than

+0.5%

+70%

+25%

Example - Nordic basic material industry(Cement & Steel)Measures to comply with Year 2050 targets 100€/ton CO2

EU-ETS < 20 €/ton CO2

Cement industry Steel industry

Price

increase

cement

Price

increase

steel

Price

increase

building

Price

increase

car

Less than

+0.5%Less than

+0.5%

+70%

+25%

Example - Nordic basic material industry(Cement & Steel)Measures to comply with Year 2050 targets 100€/ton CO2

EU-ETS < 20 €/ton CO2

Rootzén and Johnsson

Energy Policy 98 (2016) 459–469

Climate Policy 17, 6, (2017) 781-800

See also (in Swedish)

http://www.dn.se/debatt/plan-saknas-for-att-

minska-basindustrins-klimatpaverkan/

http://www.dn.se/debatt/plan-saknas-for-att-minska-basindustrins-klimatpaverkan/


“citizens are able to

organize not just one but

multiple governing

authorities at differing

scales”

”Polycentric governance”

cf. Ostrom, E., Polycentric systems for coping

with collective action and global

environmental change, Global Environmental

Change 20 (2010) 550–557

• The cost to mitigate climate change is a small share of the entire economy and much lower than the likely cost of damage due to climate change (cf. e.g. the Stern report)

• If the world develops in line with the Paris agreement – warming limited to well below 2ºC very high demand for carbon neutral products and services

• https://www.mistracarbonexit.com/

Why take the lead in climate mitigation?

https://www.mistracarbonexit.com/

Important that R&D and business also focus on transformative

transitions toward Year 2045

MISTRA Carbon Exit

climate change and transformation of the energy system · 2018. 9. 18. · climate change and...

Documents