1 / 35

The role of biomass resources in a 100 percent renewable energy system in Denmark

The role of biomass resources in a 100 percent renewable energy system in Denmark. Henrik Wenzel University of Southern Denmark Seminar at Center for Environmental Strategy University of Surrey , UK January 19 th , 2012.

opal
Download Presentation

The role of biomass resources in a 100 percent renewable energy system in Denmark

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The role of biomass resources in a 100 percent renewable energy system in Denmark Henrik Wenzel University of Southern Denmark Seminar at Center for EnvironmentalStrategy University of Surrey, UK January 19th, 2012

  2. How do wecreate a structurethatwill last a thousand years?The Cathedral in Seville- built 1402 – 1506- still as good as new

  3. How do wecreate a structurethatwill last a thousand years? Keystone

  4. Overview • What characterizes Denmark? • Sustainability criteria • Framework conditions of the fossil free society: constraints on land, biomass and carbon • The global view • Some key issues of the fossil free system • The Danish case • Closing the carbon gap by upgrading biomass and recycling carbon • Hydrogenation and CCR • Five-doubling the benefit of biomass • A back-of-the-envelope look at cost • Discussion Det Tekniske Fakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- og Miljøteknologi

  5. What characterizes Denmark- in a renewable energy supply context? Det Tekniske Fakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- og Miljøteknologi

  6. What characterizes Denmark- in a renewable energy supply context? High wind power potential: 300% of DK energy consumption High agricultural production: 3-5 times more manure and straw than average Low forest area/set-aside/natural land area: 15 % of DK Low solar radiation input Share electricity grid with Norway and Sweden: hydropower buffer High CHP and extended district heating systems: 400 DH grids Full implementation of waste incineration with CHP and district heating grid connection An extended natural gas grid Det Tekniske Fakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- og Miljøteknologi

  7. Sustainability criteria • Sustainability = long term viability/survival • Assess the long term viability/survival (of e.g. an energy technology) in multiple dimensions: • Technical: functionality, credibility, robustness, sufficiency, flexibility, safety, etc. • Economic • Environmental: climate, nature preservation, biodiversity, acid rain, waste, etc. • Resource supply: energy, food, area, water, protein, phosphorus, metals, carbon • Social/ethical: health, nutrition, education, human rights, etc. • Any sustainability assessment is comparative. There is always an alternative and always a prioritization and trade-off • Which criteria will dominate will be determined by future framework conditions • The fossil free society may run into severe sustainability problems – even more severe than the fossil society? • What are the sustainability issues of the fossil-based and the bio-based society respectively? DetTekniskeFakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- ogMiljøteknologi

  8. Sustainability criteria Now Fossil-based society Bio-based society • Technical • Economic • Environmental: climate, nature preservation, biodiversity • Resource supply: • energy, food, • water, protein, phosphorus, • land, biomass, carbon • metals • Social/ethical • Technical • Economic • Environmental: climate • Resource supply: energy • Social/ethical

  9. Global land constraints • 13 Gha land area on Earth • 4.88 Gha used for agriculture: • 1.52 Gha used for crops (arable land and permanent crops) • 3.36 Gha used for permanent meadows and pasture • 8 Gha still “nature” • 4.0 Gha is still wooded (forest) • 2.5 Gha is ice, tundra & dessert • 1.5 Gha natural grassland, savannah, etc. (FAOSTAT. Retrieved in 2011)

  10. The carbon, biomass and land constraints- the global view Comparison of food and energy World average food intake: 2700 kcal/pers/day ≈ 25 EJ/year Agricultural biomass today ≈ 100-150 EJ/year Fossil energy consumption today ≈ 450 EJ/year Biomass for full fossil substitution today ≈ 500-600 EJ/year → we need ≈ 5 times more biomass on top of today’s agricultural output for full fossil substitution Can agricultural yield increases reduce the gap? Yield increase in agriculture ≈ 1% per year → 0.8 % Consumption growth (GDP/capita) ≈ 3% per year → ?? % Land use increase from trend towards more meat on the menu ≈ ??% per year DetTekniskeFakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- ogMiljøteknologi

  11. The carbon, biomass and land constraints- the global view • How much new land can be cultivated? • New cultivable land: Biophysical maximum ≈ 2,3 Ghamore • – most of which is in South America and Africa • (Ramancutty et al., 2002). • BUT: cultivating new land can imply a 2-9 times higher release of CO2 than energy crops can save over 30 years by substitution of fossil fuels (Righelato and Spracklen, Science 2007) – meaning pay back of 60 – 300 years. • Sustainable new land cultivation • 30-40% more (Danish Ministry for Food and Agriculture, 2008) DetTekniskeFakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- ogMiljøteknologi

  12. Biomassconstraints- a global viewon potentials Ref.: Hedegaard K, K Thyø and H Wenzel, EnvSci Tech, 2008

  13. Land constraints– predictions of developmentstowards 2020 *About 40 % of the total wood removals from forests are due to the demand for fuel, either as fuelwood or charcoal (Kampman et al., 2008)

  14. Land constraints– predictions of land demandincreasetowards 2020 • Potential for new cultivable land, based on geographical modelling: • 2.3Gha (Ramankutty et al., 2002) • 0.79 – 1.215 Gha (model from IIASA; in RFA, 2008) • Half of the biophysical maximal land potential to be used by 2020 ???? • ...and with only a few percent coverage of energy demand by bio-energy?

  15. Some key issues of the fossil free society • Balancing supply and demand of electricity, storable fuels • Energy dense fuels for mobility purposes • Carbon feedstock • => Constraints on carbon, biomass and land? DetTekniskeFakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- ogMiljøteknologi

  16. The carbon/biomassbottleneck- a breakdown of the global view (projected to 2030) * With present conversiontechnology DetTekniskeFakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- ogMiljøteknologi

  17. El demand & Wind power supply From 20 % to 50 % wind share – within 10-15 years. DK west. Balancingsupply and demand January 2008Januar 2008 + 3,000 MW wind Alternative drivmidler og www.energinet.dk

  18. Balancingsupply and demand 20000 18000 16000 14000 12000 El (MW) 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 1 61 121 181 241 301 361 421 481 541 601 661 721 781 841 901 961 1021 1081 1141 1201 1261 1321 Classic el use Wind-Wave-Solar Wind, solar & wave 60 daysJan-Feb Need to integrate (store) at max production Need to supplement at min. production Alternative drivmidler og www.energinet.dk

  19. The Danish case The carbon/biomass bottleneck - the Danish case (2050 projection), 3 different studies

  20. The Danish case- how do weclose the carbongap? Biomass Chemicals & materials • Transport: • Long distance road • Air • Sea Industry El-buffer Heat pumps El-driven transport Electrification DetTekniskeFakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- ogMiljøteknologi

  21. The Danish case- how do weclose the carbongap? Biomass Chemicals & materials Where do weget the keystone? • Transport: • Long distance road • Air • Sea Industry El-buffer Heat pumps El-driven transport Electrification DetTekniskeFakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- ogMiljøteknologi

  22. The Danish case- how do weclose the carbongap? Biomass Chemicals & materials Import? • Transport: • Long distance road • Air • Sea Industry El-buffer Heat pumps El-driven transport Electrification DetTekniskeFakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- ogMiljøteknologi

  23. The Danish case- how do weclose the carbongap? Biomass Chemicals & materials Danish agriculture? • Transport: • Long distance road • Air • Sea Industry El-buffer Heat pumps El-driven transport Electrification DetTekniskeFakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- ogMiljøteknologi

  24. The Danish case- how do weclose the carbongap? Biomass Chemicals & materials Danish nature? • Transport: • Long distance road • Air • Sea Industry El-buffer Heat pumps El-driven transport Electrification DetTekniskeFakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- ogMiljøteknologi

  25. The Danish case- how do weclose the carbongap? Biomass Chemicals & materials Hydrogenation and CCR? • Transport: • Long distance road • Air • Sea Industry El-buffer Heat pumps El-driven transport Electrification DetTekniskeFakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- ogMiljøteknologi

  26. Closing the carbon gap- upgrading biomass and recycling carbon • Hydrogenation to methane: • biomass hydrogen methanewater C6(H2O)5 + 12 H2 6 CH4 + 5 H2O 2,8 MJ 2,9 MJ 4,8 MJ CCR to methane: carbondioxide hydrogen methanewater 6 CO2 + 24 H2 6 CH4 + 12 H2O 0 MJ 5,8 MJ 4,8 MJ Det Tekniske Fakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- og Miljøteknologi

  27. Closing the carbon gap- the CCR vision, carbon capture and recycling Wind or solar power El Biomassor CH4 from biomasshydrogenation Electrolysis O2 El Power plant Chemical synthesis CO2 + H2 Ashes El Fuels: methanol, methane, etc., Chemicals Upgrading Fertilizer DetTekniskeFakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- ogMiljøteknologi

  28. Closing the carbon gap- five-doubling the benefit og biomass by upgrading and recycling bio-C Det Tekniske Fakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- og Miljøteknologi

  29. Closing the carbon gap - letting wind power replace land use by upgrading and recycling bio-C • Off-shore wind turbines with a yearly production of 100 PJ can save 5000 km2 agricultural land with a crop production equivalent to the yearly calorific intake of 10 million world average citizens Det Tekniske Fakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- og Miljøteknologi

  30. Closing the carbon gap- the RE gas vision of Energinet.dk, the Danish TSO El-transmission El at ’lowprice’ Peak elGas-turbine,fuelcell, CC Gas- system/ storage El ’highprice/peak load’ H2 Electro- lysis District heating DH Biofuel Catalysis MethanolDME Biomass- gasification Biomass & waste District heating O2 DH Upgrading to Methane District heating Gas-transmission www.energinet.dk Det Tekniske Fakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- og Miljøteknologi

  31. The Danish case The ceesa 2050 scenario www.ceesa.dk, Brian Vad Mathiesen

  32. Electricitystorage – example 2035+ Storagecapacity (as input el) Investmentcosts in storage Storage as methane (exist. Gas storage) 0,07 €/kWh (methane) Storage as hydrogen (exist. Gas storage) Seasonal-storage Heatpump (HP) in DH 0.5 - 1€/kWh Indiv. HP Batteries: 30-80 €/kWh BEVs Seconds Minutes Hours Days Weeks Months =100 GWh Alternative drivmidler og www.energinet.dk

  33. Closing the carbon gap- a back-of-the-envelope look at the cost of recycling bio-C • Based on the following assumptions: • Off-shore wind power: 10 eurocents/kWh • Energy efficiency of electrolysis: 75 %, i.e. 44 kWh/kg H2 • Operation cost of hydrogen: 4.4 €/kg = 1.5 €/kg oil equivalent = 215 €/barrel oil equivalents • Total cost of hydrogen including amortized investment: 250 – 300 €/ barrel oil equivalents • Total cost of methane: max 350 €/barrel oil equivalents • Petrol reference: 75 €/barrel oil equivalent • we find an extra cost of CCR fuel = 350 – 75 = 275 €/barrel oil equivalent. • At 100 PJ CCR fuel/year this would imply and extra cost of 4.2 billion €/year, being equal to 2 % of Danish GDP today. Or 1% of Danish GDP in 2050? Kattegat bridge: 15 billion €. DetTekniskeFakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- ogMiljøteknologi

  34. Transport pose a veryhigh portion of the costscompared to otherenergyservices • Direct economicadvantagesin transition • In addition: • More stable costs • More jobs • More export • Lowerhealthcosts www.ceesa.dk, Brian Vad Mathiesen

  35. Discussion Future Road map diskussion CCS LUC CCR Fossil Bio Gasification Fermentation Youarehere Det Tekniske Fakultet, Institut for Kemi-, Bio- og Miljøteknologi

More Related