One need only consider that Enrico Fermi's “atomic pile” is more distant in time than the Year 2050, whereas nuclear power today represents less than 5% of primary power (17% of electricity) globally.Ĭan we produce enough emission-free power in time? We assess a broad range of advanced technologies for this job, along with pathways to their commercialization. These do not exist operationally or at the pilot plant stage today. Technologies capable of producing 100–300% of current total primary power levels, but CO 2 emission free, could be needed by midcentury ( Fig. Projected to pass mean geothermal heating this century, heat dissipated by humankind's primary power consumption is approximately 1/100 the radiative forcing from the fossil fuel greenhouse. The main concern is CO 2, not heat dissipated by energy use. All scenarios assume aggressive continuing energy efficiency improvements and lifestyle changes such that global energy intensity ( E/GDP) declines 1.0% per year during the entire 21st century. Emission-free primary power required by midcentury increased to 15 TW to stabilize at 550 ppm and to ≥30 TW to recover recent concentrations of 350 ppm (including energy to remove CO 2 previously emitted).
KAYA PEAK INSIDIA FREE
Even business as usual (incorporating no policy incentives to limit emissions) ramps to 10 TW emission free by 2050. Note the massive transition of the global energy system implied by all scenarios. Curves prior to 2000 are historical curves from 2000 onward are business as usual and CO 2-stabilization projections run through a carbon cycle/energy model. Figure 1C also shows the power needed from CO 2 emission-free sources to stabilize atmospheric CO 2 at a range of concentrations. Stabilizing CO 2 with 2 or 3% per year global GDP growth requires comparable or greater reductions in the last two terms of the equation: the energy intensity and the carbon emission factor.įigure 1C shows primary power required to run the global economy projected out 100 years for continued economic growth assuming a “business as usual” economic scenario. No nation advocates reducing its GDP to reduce carbon emissions. įew governments intervene in their nation's population growth, whereas continued economic growth is policy in virtually every country on Earth thus, the first two terms of the equation are normally off limits to climate change policy. = N × ( GDP / N ) × ( E / GDP ) × ( C / E ). Limiting factors might only stem from the global desire to reduce CO 2 emissions to mitigate climate change, or local and regional environmental impacts that occur because of coal production and usage.Ĭ. It is therefore likely that these reserves will be used to underscore much of the ongoing economic development in China, as well as India. The world's economically recoverable coal reserves represent 120 years' supply at current consumption rates. China has absorbed 70% of that growth because of its rapid economic development ( International Energy Agency, 2015a).
In 2013, coal use accounted for 44% of global CO 2 emissions and since 2000, global coal consumption has grown by 73%. It is therefore a massive challenge to decarbonize an energy system that is essentially based on carbon.
Despite these advances, many available energy conversion systems, such those for power generation and transportation of goods and people, are still largely based on fossil fuels. We have also witnessed continued development of hydropower and nuclear energy conversion, both of which are considered low-cost electricity sources. Over the past 25 years, great strides have been made in the development of renewable energy conversion processes, such as large-scale wind turbines and photovoltaic cells.
KAYA PEAK INSIDIA DRIVERS
The lack of inherent commercial drivers forms the essence of the challenges we face when attempting to decarbonize industry and the energy system. Additional measures are therefore required to facilitate the introduction of energy carriers with lower carbon footprints, unless they provide a cheaper alternative. In regular economic activities, investments in higher energy efficiency processes will result in a return on investment however, reducing the carbon intensity of energy production does not provide such benefits directly. Improving the energy efficiency of production processes will not only reduce their energy intensity, but also financially benefit companies by cutting resource use. With a growing global population and increasing economic production, the Kaya identity reveals that overall emissions will increase unless the energy intensity and/or carbon intensity are reduced. In which F, global CO 2 emissions P, global population growth G, global gross domestic product E, global energy consumption.Ĭhanges in CO 2 emissions can be traced to population growth ( P), the per capita economic activity ( G/ P), the energy intensity ( E/ G), and the carbon intensity of energy consumption ( F/ E). F = P ∗ ( G / P ) ∗ ( E / G ) ∗ ( F / E )
0 kommentar(er)
