Global Energy Perspective - University of California...
Transcript of Global Energy Perspective - University of California...
![Page 1: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Global Energy Perspective
• Present Primary Power Mix
• Future Constraints Imposed by Sustainability
• Theoretical and Practical Energy Potential of Various Renewables
• Challenges to Exploit Renewables Economically
on the Needed Scale
Nathan S. Lewis, California Institute of Technology
Division of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering
Pasadena, CA 91125
http://nsl.caltech.edu
KITP Public Lecture, Dec 4, 2007
![Page 2: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Mean Global Energy Consumption, 1998
4.52
2.7 2.96
0.286
1.21
0.2860.828
00.51
1.52
2.53
3.54
4.55
TW
Oil Coal Biomass NuclearGas Hydro Renew
Total: 12.8 TW U.S.: 3.3 TW (99 Quads)
N. Lewis 2
![Page 3: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Energy From Renewables, 1998
10-5
0.0001
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
Elect Heat EtOH Wind Solar PVSolar Th.Low T Sol HtHydro Geoth MarineElec Heat EtOH Wind Sol PV SolTh LowT Sol Hydro Geoth Marine
TW
Biomass
5E-5
1E-1
2E-3
1E-4
1.6E-3
3E-1
1E-2
7E-5
N. Lewis 3
![Page 4: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
(in the U.S. in 2002)
1-4 ¢2.3-5.0 ¢ 6-8 ¢ 5-7 ¢
Today: Production Cost of Electricity
0
5
10
15
20
25
Coal Gas Oil Wind Nuclear Solar
Cost6-7 ¢
25-50 ¢
Cost
, ¢
/kW
-hr
N. Lewis 4
![Page 5: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Energy Costs
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
$/GJ
Coal Oil Biomass Elect
Bra
zil E
uro
pe
$0.05/kW-hr
www.undp.org/seed/eap/activities/wea
N. Lewis 5
![Page 6: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Energy Reserves and Resources
020000400006000080000100000120000140000160000180000
(Exa)J
OilRsv
OilRes
GasRsv
GasRes
CoalRsv
CoalRes
UnconvConv
Reserves/(1998 Consumption/yr) Resource Base/(1998 Consumption/yr)
Oil 40-78 51-151
Gas 68-176 207-590
Coal 224 2160
Rsv=Reserves
Res=Resources
N. Lewis 6
![Page 7: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
• Abundant, Inexpensive Resource Base of Fossil Fuels
• Renewables will not play a large role in primary power generation unless/until:
–technological/cost breakthroughs are achieved, or
–unpriced externalities are introduced (e.g., environmentally
-driven carbon taxes)
Conclusions
N. Lewis 7
![Page 8: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
• “It s hard to make predictions, especially about the future”
• M. I. Hoffert et. al., Nature, 1998, 395, 881, “Energy Implications of Future Atmospheric Stabilization of CO2 Content
adapted from IPCC 92 Report: Leggett, J. et. al. in Climate Change, The Supplementary Report to theScientific IPCC Assessment, 69-95, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1992
Energy and Sustainability
N. Lewis 8
![Page 9: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Population Growth to10 - 11 BillionPeople in 2050
Per Capita GDP Growthat 1.6% yr-1
Energy consumption perUnit of GDP declinesat 1.0% yr -1
N. Lewis 9
![Page 10: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
1990: 12 TW 2050: 28 TW
Total Primary Power vs Year
N. Lewis 10
![Page 11: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
M. I. Hoffert et. al., Nature, 1998, 395, 881
Carbon Intensity of Energy Mix
N. Lewis 11
![Page 12: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
CO2Emissions for
vs CO2(atm)
Data from Vostok Ice Core
N. Lewis 12
![Page 13: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Observations of Climate Change
Evaporation & rainfall are increasing;
• More of the rainfall is occurring in downpours
• Corals are bleaching
• Glaciers are retreating
• Sea ice is shrinking
• Sea level is rising
• Wildfires are increasing
• Storm & flood damages are much larger
N. Lewis 13
![Page 14: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
N. Lewis 14
![Page 15: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Greenland Ice Sheet Coral Bleaching
N. Lewis 15
![Page 16: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Projected Carbon-Free Primary Power
N. Lewis 16
![Page 17: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
• “These results underscore the pitfalls of “wait and see”.”
• Without policy incentives to overcome socioeconomic inertia,
development of needed technologies will likely not occur soon
enough to allow capitalization on a 10-30 TW scale by 2050
• “Researching, developing, and commercializing carbon-free
primary power technologies capable of 10-30 TW by the mid-21st
century could require efforts, perhaps international, pursued with
the urgency of the Manhattan Project or the Apollo Space
Program.”
Hoffert et al. s Conclusions
N. Lewis 17
![Page 18: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
• If we need such large amounts of carbon-free power, then:
• current pricing is not the driver for year 2050 primary
energy supply
• Hence,
• Examine energy potential of various forms of renewable
energy
• Examine technologies and costs of various renewables
• Examine impact on secondary power infrastructure and
energy utilization
Lewis Conclusions
N. Lewis 18
![Page 19: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
• Nuclear (fission and fusion)
• 10 TW = 10,000 new 1 GW reactors
• i.e., a new reactor every other day for the next 50 years
2.3 million tonnes proven reserves;
1 TW-hr requires 22 tonnes of U
Hence at 10 TW provides 1 year of energy
Terrestrial resource base provides 10 years
of energy
Would need to mine U from seawater
(700 x terrestrial resource base)
• Carbon sequestration
• Renewables
Sources of Carbon-Free Power
N. Lewis 19
![Page 20: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Carbon Sequestration
N. Lewis 20
![Page 21: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
130 Gt total U.S. sequestration potential
Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration projects 2002-2004
CO2 Burial: Saline Reservoirs
Study Areas
One Formation
Studied
Two Formations
Studied
Power Plants (dot size proportional
to 1996 carbon emissions)
DOE Vision & Goal:
1 Gt storage by 2025, 4 Gt by 2050
• Near sources(power plants,refineries, coalfields)
• Distribute onlyH2 or electricity
• Must not leak
N. Lewis 21
![Page 22: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
• Hydroelectric
• Geothermal
• Ocean/Tides
• Wind
• Biomass
• Solar
Potential of Renewable Energy
N. Lewis 22
![Page 23: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Globally
• Gross theoretical potential 4.6 TW
• Technically feasible potential 1.5 TW
• Economically feasible potential 0.9 TW
• Installed capacity in 1997 0.6 TW
• Production in 1997 0.3 TW
(can get to 80% capacity in some cases)
Source: WEA 2000
Hydroelectric Energy Potential
N. Lewis 23
![Page 24: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Geothermal Energy
Hydrothermal systems
Hot dry rock (igneous systems)
Normal geothermal heat (200 C at 10 km depth)
1.3 GW capacity in 1985
N. Lewis 24
![Page 25: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Geothermal Energy Potential
N. Lewis 25
![Page 26: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Geothermal Energy Potential
• Mean terrestrial geothermal flux at earth’s surface 0.057 W/m2
• Total continental geothermal energy potential 11.6 TW
• Oceanic geothermal energy potential 30 TW
• Wells “run out of steam” in 5 years
• Power from a good geothermal well (pair) 5 MW
• Power from typical Saudi oil well 500 MW
• Needs drilling technology breakthrough
(from exponential $/m to linear $/m) to become economical)
N. Lewis 26
![Page 27: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Ocean Energy Potential
N. Lewis 27
![Page 28: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Electric Potential of Wind
http://www.nrel.gov/wind/potential.html
In 1999, U.S consumed
3.45 trillion kW-hr of
Electricity =
0.39 TW
N. Lewis 28
![Page 29: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
• Significant potential in US Great Plains, inner Mongolia andnorthwest China
• U.S.:Use 6% of land suitable for wind energy development;practical electrical generation potential of 0.5 TW
• Globally:Theoretical: 27% of earth’s land surface is class 3 (250-300W/m2 at 50 m) or greaterIf use entire area, electricity generation potential of 50 TWPractical: 2 TW electrical generation potential (4% utilizationof class 3 land area)
Off-shore potential is larger but must be close to grid to beinteresting; (no installation > 20 km offshore now)
Electric Potential of Wind
N. Lewis 29
![Page 30: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
• Relatively mature technology, not much impacted by chemical sciences
• Intermittent source; storage system could assist in converting to baseload power
• Distribution system not now suitable for balancing sources vs end use demand sites
• Inherently produces electricity, not heat; perhaps cheapeststored using compressed air ($0.01 kW-hr)
Electric Potential of Wind
N. Lewis 30
![Page 31: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Global: Top Down
• Requires Large Areas Because Inefficient (0.3%)
• 3 TW requires 600 million hectares = 6x1012 m2
• 20 TW requires 4x1013 m2
• Total land area of earth: 1.3x1014 m2
• Hence requires 4/13 = 31% of total land area
Biomass Energy Potential
N. Lewis 31
![Page 32: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
• Land with Crop Production Potential, 1990: 2.45x1013 m2
• Cultivated Land, 1990: 0.897 x1013 m2
• Additional Land needed to support 9 billion people in 2050:
0.416x1013 m2
• Remaining land available for biomass energy: 1.28x1013 m2
• At 8.5-15 oven dry tonnes/hectare/year and 20 GJ higher
heating value per dry tonne, energy potential is 7-12 TW
• Perhaps 5-7 TW by 2050 through biomass (recall: $1.5-4/GJ)
• Possible/likely that this is water resource limited
• Challenges for chemists: cellulose to ethanol; ethanol fuel cells
Biomass Energy PotentialGlobal: Bottom Up
N. Lewis 32
![Page 33: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
• Theoretical: 1.2x105 TW solar energy potential
(1.76 x105 TW striking Earth; 0.30 Global mean albedo)
•Energy in 1 hr of sunlight 14 TW for a year
• Practical: 600 TW solar energy potential
(50 TW - 1500 TW depending on land fraction etc.; WEA 2000)
Onshore electricity generation potential of 60 TW (10%
conversion efficiency):
• Photosynthesis: 90 TW
Solar Energy Potential
N. Lewis 33
![Page 34: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
• Roughly equal global energy use in each major sector:
transportation, residential, transformation, industrial
• World market: 1.6 TW space heating; 0.3 TW hot water; 1.3 TW
process heat (solar crop drying: 0.05 TW)
• Temporal mismatch between source and demand requires storage
• ( S) yields high heat production costs: ($0.03-$0.20)/kW-hr
• High-T solar thermal: currently lowest cost solar electric source
($0.12-0.18/kW-hr); potential to be competitive with fossil energy
in long term, but needs large areas in sunbelt
• Solar-to-electric efficiency 18-20% (research in thermochemical
fuels: hydrogen, syn gas, metals)
Solar Thermal, 2001
N. Lewis 34
![Page 35: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
• 1.2x105 TW of solar energy potential globally
• Generating 2x101 TW with 10% efficient solar farms requires
2x102/1.2x105 = 0.16% of Globe = 8x1011 m2 (i.e., 8.8 % of
U.S.A)
• Generating 1.2x101 TW (1998 Global Primary Power) requires
1.2x102/1.2x105= 0.10% of Globe = 5x1011 m2 (i.e., 5.5% of
U.S.A.)
Solar Land Area Requirements
N. Lewis 35
![Page 36: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Solar Land Area Requirements
3 TW
N. Lewis 36
![Page 37: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Solar Land Area Requirements
6 Boxes at 3.3 TW Each N. Lewis 37
![Page 38: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
• U.S. Land Area: 9.1x1012 m2 (incl. Alaska)
• Average Insolation: 200 W/m2
• 2000 U.S. Primary Power Consumption: 99 Quads=3.3 TW
• 1999 U.S. Electricity Consumption = 0.4 TW
• Hence:
3.3x1012 W/(2x102 W/m2 x 10% Efficiency) = 1.6x1011 m2
Requires 1.6x1011 m2/ 9.1x1012 m2 = 1.7% of Land
Solar Land Area Requirements
N. Lewis 38
![Page 39: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
• 7x107 detached single family homes in U.S.
2000 sq ft/roof = 44ft x 44 ft = 13 m x 13 m = 180 m2/home
= 1.2x1010 m2 total roof area
• Hence can (only) supply 0.25 TW, or 1/10th of 2000 U.S.
Primary Energy Consumption
U.S. Single Family Housing Roof Area
N. Lewis 39
![Page 40: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
LightFuel
Electricity
Photosynthesis
Fuels Electricity
Photovoltaics
H O
O H
2
22
sc M
e
sc
e
M
CO
Sugar
H O
O
2
2
2
Energy Conversion Strategies
Semiconductor/LiquidJunctions
N. Lewis 40
![Page 41: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
•Production is Currently Capacity Limited (100 MW mean power
output manufactured in 2001)
•but, subsidized industry (Japan biggest market)
•High Growth
•but, off of a small base (0.01% of 1%)
•Cost-favorable/competitive in off-grid installations
•but, cost structures up-front vs amortization of grid-lines
disfavorable
•Demands a systems solution: Electricity, heat, storage
Solar Electricity, 2001
N. Lewis 41
![Page 42: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
5
10
15
20
25
Eff
icie
ncy (
%)
Year
crystalline Si
amorphous Si
nano TiO2
CIS/CIGS
CdTe
Efficiency of Photovoltaic Devices
N. Lewis 42
![Page 43: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Cost/Efficiency of Photovoltaic Technology
Costs are modules per peak W; installed is $5-10/W; $0.35-$1.5/kW-hrN. Lewis 43
![Page 44: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Cost vs. Efficiency Tradeoff
Efficiency 1/2
Long dHigh
High Cost
d
Long dLow
Lower Cost
d
decreases as grain size (and cost) decreases
Large Grain
Single
Crystals
Small Grain
And/or
Polycrystalline
Solids
N. Lewis 44
![Page 45: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Cost vs. Efficiency TradeoffEfficiency 1/2
Long dHigh
High Cost
dLong dLow
Lower Cost
d
decreases as material (and cost) decreases
Ordered
Crystalline
Solids
Disordered
Organic
Films
N. Lewis 45
![Page 46: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
SOLAR ELECTRICITY GENERATION
• Develop Disruptive Solar Technology: “Solar Paint”
• Grain Boundary Passivation
• Interpenetrating Networks while Minimizing Recombination Losses
Challenges for the Chemical Sciences
Increase
Lower d
N. Lewis 46
![Page 47: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Cost/Efficiency of Photovoltaic Technology
Costs are modules per peak W; installed is $5-10/W; $0.35-$1.5/kW-hrN. Lewis 47
![Page 48: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
The Need to Produce Fuel
“Power Park Concept”
Fuel Production
Distribution
Storage
N. Lewis 48
![Page 49: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Photovoltaic + Electrolyzer System
N. Lewis 49
![Page 50: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
O2AH2e-
cathodeanode
Fuel Cell vs Photoelectrolysis Cell
H2
anodecathode
O2
Fuel Cell
MEA
Photoelectrolysis
Cell MEA
membrane
membrane
MOxMSxe-
H+
H+
N. Lewis 50
![Page 51: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Photoelectrochemical Cell
metal
e-
e-
O2
H2O
H2
H2O
e -
h+
Light is Converted to Electrical+Chemical Energy
LiquidSolid
SrTiO3
KTaO3
TiO2
SnO2
Fe2O3
N. Lewis 51
![Page 52: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
• By essentially all measures, H2 is an inferior transportation fuelrelative to liquid hydrocarbons
•So, why?
• Local air quality: 90% of the benefits can be obtained fromclean diesel without a gross change in distribution and end-useinfrastructure; no compelling need for H2
• Large scale CO2 sequestration: Must distribute either electronsor protons; compels H2 be the distributed fuel-based energy carrier
• Renewable (sustainable) power: no compelling need for H2 toend user, e.g.: CO2+ H2 CH3OH DME other liquids
Hydrogen vs Hydrocarbons
N. Lewis 52
![Page 53: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
• Need for Additional Primary Energy is Apparent
• Case for Significant (Daunting?) Carbon-Free Energy Seems Plausible
Scientific/Technological Challenges
• Provide Disruptive Solar Technology: Cheap Solar Fuel
Inexpensive conversion systems, effective storage systems
• Provide the New Chemistry to Support an Evolving Mix in Fuels for Primary and Secondary Energy
• Policy Challenges
• Will there be the needed commitment? Is Failure an Option?
Summary
N. Lewis 53
![Page 54: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
Global Energy Consumption
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1850 1875 1900 1925 1950 1975 2000
year
alloilcoalgasbiomassnuclearHydrogeothermysun; wind & other
N. Lewis 54
![Page 55: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
Carbon Intensity vs GDP
N. Lewis 55
![Page 56: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
Matching Supply and Demand
Oil (liquid)
Gas (gas)
Coal (solid)
Transportation
Home/Light Industry
ManufacturingConv to e-
Pump it around
Move to user
Currently end use well-matched to physical properties of resources
N. Lewis 56
![Page 57: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
Matching Supply and Demand
Oil (liquid)
Gas (gas)
Coal (solid)
Transportation
Home/Light Industry
ManufacturingConv to e-
Pump it around
Move to user
If deplete oil (or national security issue for oil), then liquify gas,coal
N. Lewis 57
![Page 58: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
Matching Supply and Demand
Oil (liquid)
Gas (gas)
Coal (solid)
Transportation
Home/Light Industry
ManufacturingConv to e-
Pump it around
Move to user
If carbon constraint to 550 ppm and sequestration works
-CO2
N. Lewis 58
![Page 59: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
Matching Supply and Demand
Oil (liquid)
Gas (gas)
Coal (solid)
Transportation
Home/Light Industry
ManufacturingConv to e-
Pump it around
Move to user as H2
If carbon constraint to <550 ppm and sequestration works
-CO2
-CO2
N. Lewis 59
![Page 60: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
Matching Supply and Demand
Oil (liquid)
Gas (gas)
Coal (solid)
Transportation
Home/Light Industry
Manufacturing
Pump it around
If carbon constraint to 550 ppm and sequestration does not work
Nuclear
Solar?
?
N. Lewis 60
![Page 61: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
Quotes from PCAST, DOE, NAS
The principles are known, but the technology is not
Will our efforts be too little, too late?
Solar in 1 hour > Fossil in one year
1 hour $$$ gasoline > solar R&D in 6 years
Will we show the commitment to do this?
Is failure an option?
N. Lewis 61
![Page 62: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
US Energy Flow -1999Net Primary Resource Consumption 102 Exajoules
N. Lewis 62
![Page 63: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
Tropospheric Circulation Cross Section
N. Lewis 63
![Page 64: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
Primary vs. Secondary Power
• Hybrid
Gasoline/Electric
• Hybrid Direct Methanol
Fuel Cell/Electric
• Hydrogen Fuel
Cell/Electric?
• Wind, Solar, Nuclear; Bio.
• CH4 to CH3OH
• “Disruptive” Solar
• CO2 CH3OH + (1/2) O2
• H2O H2 + (1/2) O2
Transportation Power Primary Power
N. Lewis 64
![Page 65: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/65.jpg)
Challenges for the Chemical Sciences
CHEMICAL TRANSFORMATIONS
• Methane Activation to Methanol: CH4 + (1/2)O2 = CH3OH
• Direct Methanol Fuel Cell: CH3OH + H2O = CO2 + 6H+ + 6e-
• CO2 (Photo)reduction to Methanol: CO2 + 6H+ +6e- = CH3OH
• H2/O2 Fuel Cell: H2 = 2H+ + 2e-; O2 + 4 H+ + 4e- = 2H2O
• (Photo)chemical Water Splitting:2H+ + 2e- = H2; 2H2O = O2 + 4H+ + 4e-
• Improved Oxygen Cathode; O2 + 4H+ + 4e- = 2H2O
N. Lewis 65
![Page 66: Global Energy Perspective - University of California ...online.itp.ucsb.edu/plecture/lewis/pdf/Lewis_Energy_Public_KITP.pdf · Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022070611/5b26678b7f8b9afd378b48d2/html5/thumbnails/66.jpg)
N. Lewis 66