Dr. David L. Greene & ORNL colleagues Reported by Bill Fulkerson August 19, 2009

1. ORNL Energy Assurance Study:Essential Technologies to Achieve US Energy Goals for Climate Change and Oil Independence Dr. David L. Greene & ORNL colleagues Reported by Bill Fulkerson August 19, 2009 Energy PMP meeting Erice Planitary Emergency Seminars

2. ORNL method focuses on the uncertainty of technological success and asks how the likelihood of achieving our energy goals is affected by the success of R&D. • CLIMATE CHANGE: 50% to 80% reduction over 2005 CO2 emissions by 2050. • OIL INDEPENDENCE: Decreased oil demand + Increased liquid fuels supply = 11 mmbd by 2030. • SUSTAINABLE ENERGY • SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC GROWTH • How can the implications of uncertain technological success be analyzed? http://lugar.senate.gov/energy/links/commentary/08_greene_summary.cfmGreene, D.L., “Measuring Energy Security: Can the United States Achieve Oil Independence?”, Energy Policy, 2009. Presentation_name

3. A measurable goal for oil independence is needed. • QUALITATIVE: • For all conceivable world oil market conditions, the costs of oil dependence to the economy will be so small that they have no effect on economic, military or foreign policy. • QUANTITATIVE: • The estimated total economic costs of oil dependence in any year will be less than 1% of GDP with 95% probability by 2030. Presentation_name

4. If these problems cannot be solved at an acceptable cost without advanced technology, what can advanced technologies accomplish? • Carbon capture and storage • Nuclear power • Wind • Solar • Biomass • Electric drive vehicles • Transportation energy efficiency • Buildings energy efficiency • Industrial energy efficiency • Efficient electricity generation and transmission • Advanced fossil liquid fuels Clearly many individual technologies comprise each of the 11 with much basic science R&D needed to support successful development. Presentation_name

5. The method of analysis is intended to be transparent, simple and easily replicated. • Technologies either succeed (1) or don’t (0). • Our reference scenario is the EIA 2008 Technology Case. • Deployment of existing technologies only • Continued structural change in economy • We deal with four energy sectors. • Electricity • Transportation • Industry • Buildings • And five forms of energy. • Coal • Petroleum • Natural Gas • Renewable • Nuclear • We account for 1st order interactions among technologies. Presentation_name

6. Premises matter. • We view ALL barriers to full implementation of the eleven energy technologies as potentially solvable by advancing technology. • We assume that before 2050 carbon will be priced in the NEIGHBORHOOD of $50-$100/tCO2. representing a substantial willingness to pay to avoid dangerous climate change. • We assume that a meaningful international agreement on GHG mitigation is in place. The US goal may be a 50% to 80% reduction over 2005. • Successful means no significant technical, economic, environmental or societal barriers to implementation. (at very roughly $50-$100/tCO2 and $25 - $50/bbl for oil). • We do not know which technologies will be successful. • We assume that cost-effective supporting policies to allow full market uptake of the improved technologies will be implemented. Presentation_name

7. Potential effects: 11 advanced energy technologies on GHGs in EIA 2008 Frozen Technology Case by 2050. Presentation_name

8. Potential effects of 11 advanced technologies on petroleum supply and demand in 2030. Presentation_name

9. We estimate the impacts of all possible combinations of technologies (2048) accounting for first order interactions. • Petroleum in 2030: • Dom. supply incr. + demand red. = 11 mmbd • CO2 in 2050: • 50%, 60%, 70%, reductions • Adding Nuclear & Renewable capacity to grid reduces other energy sources proportionately. • W-T-W GHG emissions of advanced fossil liquids depend on CCS. • No double counting of efficiency improvements or energy substitution. Presentation_name

10. Kaya Equation was used to build spreadsheets for both carbon emissions and oil use for each sector and technology • The Kaya identity expresses total carbon emissions (E) as the sum over end-use sectors (u) and energy forms (f) of the product of the carbon intensity of the type of energy (C), the energy type’s share of energy use in the sector (S), the energy intensity per unit of activity (I), the quantity of the activity per unit of GDP (Q), per capita GDP (G) and population (P). Presentation_name

11. ALL of the eleven technologies are uncertain. If successful, which combinations (out of 2,048) could achieve the energy goals? (7%) Presentation_name

12. Two technologies, CCS and Advanced Fossil Liquids, appear in every successful set. Presentation_name

13. If we want to be 95% sure of meeting both goals we must be 60% certain of successfully developing each technology. How is the 95% certainty affected by the failure of any particular technology? Presentation_name

14. Almost every successful case includes a majority of the technologies. There are no silver bullets. Presentation_name

15. Conclusions Meeting both goals with a 95% confidence level requires a high probability of success (>50%) for all eleven technology areas. Two technology areas CCS and Advanced Fossil appear almost indispensible. CCS appears in every successful set until CO2 reduction level is less than 50%. Advanced fossil is in every successful set until the sum of extra liquid fuels plus fuel savings required is less than 7 MBD. Buildings efficiency and transportation efficiency are almost as important. Results are robust under +/- 20% impact variation.