a vision for our energy future uh gemi energy advancement leadership conference karl r. rábago...
TRANSCRIPT
A Vision for our Energy Future
UH GEMI Energy Advancement Leadership Conference
Karl R. RábagoEnergy Group [email protected] Advanced Research Centerwww.harc.edu
November 18, 2004
Houston Advanced Research Center
◊ Mission focused independent contract research center
◊ Established 1982
◊ Sustainable development Clean / Renewable Energy
Sustainable Technologies
Life Sciences / Health
Environment
Social / Policy Analysis
◊ Lab and office space
◊ Around 50 employees
◊ Not-for-profitThe Woodlands, Texas
Clean & Renewable Energy at HARC
◊ Fuel Cell Evaluation Users Group Ten different modules/systems from five different
manufacturers (2001-2004)
◊ Combined Heat & Power (CHP) Production of multiple energy products from a single
source for maximum efficiency (e.g., cogeneration)
◊ Carbon Management & Markets Industrial Coalition Credit aggregation & marketing
◊ Energy Policy Member, TX Renewable Energy Industry Assc.
◊ Consulting
In the Future . . .
In the Future . . .
Our predictions will come out wrong
(unless)
US energy/GDP already cut 42%, to very nearly the 1976 “soft path”
Rocky Mountain Institute
renewablesnuclear
gas
0
50
100
150
200
250
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025
primary energy consumption
(quadrillion BTU/year)
"hard path" projected by industry and government
"soft path" proposed by Lovins
soft technologies(which do not include big hydro or nuclear)
oil and gas
coal
renewables
nuclear
coal
oil and gas
actual total consumptionreported actual total energy
consumption
government
In the Future . . .
Crisis will still be the strongest motivator
Precipitating Facts
TABLE 1: Benefits of Texas Energy Industry revenues shown are in millions of dollars
1982 1995 Change
School Fund $512 $124 - 76%
Severance Tax
$2,374 $848 -64%
Mining Jobs 292,000 147,800 -49%
Virtus Energy
End of a Legend
Virtus Energy
A New Vision
The Texas Sustainable Energy Development Council envisions a Texas responsibly powered by its sustainable energy resource base
and serving as a model to others in equitable prosperity, environmental
health, advanced technology, innovative government and respect
for future generations.
Texas: Clean Energy Giant?
TX SECO # 8
A Reminder
◊ “Resource” is a topic that embodies both economic and physical attributes
◊ We are NOT going to run out of the physical resource - Did a shortage of stones end the stone age?
◊ We ARE going to run out of willingness to pay (in $, frustration, and consequences) for some resources and in some locations
◊ So, at $10 billion dollars or 1 million cases of cancer or 1 million refugees per pound or per barrel or per bushel, we have an infinite supply . . . What are you willing to pay?
In the Future . . .
We will measure success against the Triple Bottom Line
Sustainable Development
Society Economy
Environment
In the Future . . .
We will learn Systems Thinking
Practical Electric Economics
Optimized industrial designOptimized industrial design
• Redesigning a standard (supposedly optimized) industrial pumping loop cut its power from 95 to 7 kW (–92%), cost less to build, and worked better in every way
• No new technologies — just two changes in the design mentality
• Many other examples are in Natural Capitalism, free at www.natcap.org
• Redesigning a standard (supposedly optimized) industrial pumping loop cut its power from 95 to 7 kW (–92%), cost less to build, and worked better in every way
• No new technologies — just two changes in the design mentality
• Many other examples are in Natural Capitalism, free at www.natcap.org
New design mentality example
1. Big pipes, small pumps (not the opposite)1. Big pipes, small pumps (not the opposite)
No new technology, except in the mind of the designer
2. Lay out the pipes first, then the equipment (not the reverse).
Optimize the WHOLE system,and for multiple benefits.
2. Lay out the pipes first, then the equipment (not the reverse).
Optimize the WHOLE system,and for multiple benefits.
No new technologies, just two design changes
◊ Fat, short, straight pipes — not skinny, long, crooked pipes!
◊ Benefits counted 92% less pumping energy Lower capital cost
◊ “Bonus” benefit also captured 70 kW lower heat loss from pipes
◊ Additional benefits not counted Less space, weight, and noise Clean layout for easy maintenance access But needs little maintenance—more reliable Longer equipment life
◊ Fat, short, straight pipes — not skinny, long, crooked pipes!
◊ Benefits counted 92% less pumping energy Lower capital cost
◊ “Bonus” benefit also captured 70 kW lower heat loss from pipes
◊ Additional benefits not counted Less space, weight, and noise Clean layout for easy maintenance access But needs little maintenance—more reliable Longer equipment life
In the Future . . .
We will look before we leap
It Takes a System
Finding Better Options
Some Systems are Better than Others
In the Future . . .
Energy solutions will be smaller and more
satisfying
A 5-year rolling average reveals that US fossil-fueled steam unit orders have been fading since the 1970s; their ordering rate, all ≤1/5 the former size, is now back to Victorian levels
Maximum and average sizes of new generating units (fossil-fueled steam, all utilities, 5-year rolling average) by year of entry into service
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 20000
50
100
150
200
Maximum new size Average new size Number of new units
Rocky Mountain Institute
Big steam units aged ungracefully
Fossil-fueled steam units: median Equivalent Availability Factor vs. age, by size range,
1982–93
70
75
80
85
90
95
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
age (years)
EA
F (
%)
1 MW100 MW200 MW300 MW600 MW1,000 MW
RMI analysis by André Lehmann, using Markovian smoothing of 29 July 1994 NERC raw data on all 1,347– 1,527 U.S. steam units in the years shown; raw data kindly provided by Resource Insight, Inc.
“Distributed Benefits”
◊ Small Is Profitable: The Hidden Economic Benefits of Making Electrical Resources the Right Size (RMI, 8/02) www.smallisprofitable.org One of The Economist’s top three
business/economics books of 2002
◊ Codifies and quantifies 207 “distributed benefits” that collectively increase the economic value of decentralized generation by typically ~10 (but site-specific)
In the Future . . .
The system will be smarter
Smarter & More Communicative
U.S. DOE
Why Make Just One Product?
Why Sell Only One Product?
Production of Renewable
Energy
Environmental & Other Benefits(from displacement)
Commodity Electricity
• Certificates represent the contractual right to claim the environmental and other non-electricity attributes associated with electricity generated from a renewable energy facility
• May be traded independently of energy markets
In the Future . . .
We will recognize that public goods can and should be well-
managed with public policy
US Transportation Oil Gap
US DOE Hydrogen Posture Plan
California: policy works
Per-Capita Electricity Consumption, 1960–2000
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
MW
h P
er P
erso
n-Y
ear Rest of US
California
(DOE and CEC data, compiled 1960–89 by Worldwatch Institute, 1990–2000 by Rocky Mountain Institute; 2000 data are preliminary; 1991–2000 population data not yet renormalized to 2000 Census findings)
Rocky Mountain Institute
A Variety of Policies
AWEA Wind Energy Outlook 2004
In the Future . . .
Materials will matter . . . even
more
World Demand for Stuff is Growing
Dematerialization
Principal Flows are Fossil Related
WRI
Hazards are Growing
WRI
As with Energy, So with Materials
No Materials Self-Sufficiency
