1 / 21

Simplified construction of an energetic world in 2050 Sandra Bouneau

Simplified construction of an energetic world in 2050 Sandra Bouneau Institut de Physique Nucléaire d’Orsay bouneau@ipno.in2p3.fr. « Programme Interdisciplinaire Energie » – CNRS Groupe « nucléaire du futur » Sandra Bouneau , Sylvain David – IPN Orsay

kjoseph
Download Presentation

Simplified construction of an energetic world in 2050 Sandra Bouneau

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. Simplified construction of an energetic world in 2050 Sandra Bouneau Institut de Physique Nucléaire d’Orsay bouneau@ipno.in2p3.fr « Programme Interdisciplinaire Energie » – CNRS Groupe « nucléaire du futur » Sandra Bouneau, Sylvain David – IPN Orsay Jean-Marie Loiseaux, Olivier Méplan – LPSC Grenoble Jacques Treiner – Sciences Po. & UPMC

  2. Whatthisworkis not • a predictive scenario giving • the path to follow to reach a given world energylandscape in 2050 • based on a continuousevolution • Initial motivations • quantitative description of whatcouldbe the world energylandscape in 2050 underspecificconstraints • a finiteamount of availableenergy • a reduction of GHG emissions • a reduction of inequalities of energyconsumption in the world • to determine the impacts of theseconstraints on • the energyconsumption of different types of population • the energy mix • the match betweenavailable sources and energyneeds The purpose of thispresentationis to show how thisworkcouldbetransposed as a tool for scenario analysis

  3. Workinghypothesis Inequalities of energyconsumptionstillexist in 2050 1 non homogeneousenergyconsumptionat a country scale  Co-existence of different populations accordingtheirlevel of energyconsumption • for emerging and poor countries •  3 types of population P1,country : highenergyconsumption per capita C1  P3,country = P3,World  P1,country = P1,World  P2,country = P2,World World countries World countries World countries P2,country : moderateenergyconsumption per capita C2 • total population of presentdeveloped countries P3,country : lowenergyconsumption per capita C3 P1,country : highenergyconsumption per capita C1 • whatever the country considered : C1, C2 and C3 are the same •  at the world scale : •  C1, C2 et C3 are stronglyconstrained by the sumrule P1,World C1 + P2,World C2 + P3,World C3 = EWorld

  4. a • choice to parametrize the consumptioninequalitiesbetween P1, P2 and P3 by a unique parameter « inequality ratio » • a = C1/C2 = C2/C3 sothat C1 = a2 C3 and C2 = a C3 • [a2 P1,World + a P2,World + P3,World]C3 = EWorld Inequalities of energyconsumptionstillexist in 2050 Pi’sparametrization 1 2 a • Set of parameters • EWorld • a • P1,World, P2,World, P3,World • Outcomes • C1, C2 and C3 • total energyconsumption/Pi,World’s • total energyconsumption/country Workinghypothesis • For emerging and poor countries • strongcorrelationsbetweenurbanization rate and economicaldevelopement and soenergyconsumption •  urban population in 2050/country : Purban = turbanizaion x Pcountry •  rural population in 2050/country : Prural = (1 – turbanizaion) x Pcountry

  5. Purban and Prural are distibutedinto P1, P2 and P3 Pi’sparametrization 2 • urban populations have mainlyhigh and moderateenergyconsumption • u3 = 0 ; (u1+u2) = 1  P1,country = u1Purban,country + r1Prural, country  P2,country = u2Purban,country + r2Prural,country  P3,country = u3Purban,country + r3Prural,country • rural populations have mainlylowenergyconsumption •  r1 = 0 ; (r2 + r3) = 1 •  parameters u1, u2, r2 and r3canbeadjustedaccording to the economicaldevelopment of the country poor countries P2,country= Purban emerging countries P3,country = Prural emerging countries P1,country = Purban/2 P2,country = Purban/2 richestemergent countries Prural = P2,country richestemergent countries P1,country= Purban

  6. Reference case • Set of parameters • Pcountry • turbanization, country • parametrization • emergent countries: u1 = u2 = 0,5 ; r3 = 1 • poor countries: u1 = 0 ; u2 = 1 ; r3 = 1 • Results • Pi,World’s distribution • P1,World = 3,6 Ginhab. • P2,World = 3,0 Ginhab. • P3,World = 2,7 Ginhab.

  7. Results • energyconsumption per capita • C1 = 3, 46 toe/cap/y • C2 = 1,73 toe/cap/y • C3 = 0,86 toe/cap/y • total energyconsumption/Pi’s • P1 = 12,5 Gtoe/y • P2 = 5,1 Gtoe/y • P3 = 2,4 Gtoe/y Reference case • Set of parameters • EWorld = 20 Gtoe/y • a = 2  C1/C3 = 4, C2/C3 = 2 • P1,World, P2,World, P3,World Inequalityreduced by a factor 2 between the richest and poorest populations comparedwithtoday Energyconsumption in 2050 -25% +25% x3 x2

  8. Reference case: C1, C2, C3evolutionwithEWorld presentmeanenergyconsumption of developed countries • a meanenergyconsumption of presentrich countries stabilized to 4,4 toe/cap/y in 2050 with a reduction of inequalitiesleads to a total energyconsumption of 25 Gtoe/y • a 15 Gtoe/y scenario does not allow to emerging and poor populations to increasetheirenergyconsumption by 2050 •  A total energy of 20 Gtoe/y israthersober and maybetoolow to be acceptable comparedwith the present world evolution

  9. Reference case: C1, C2, C3evolutionwithPi’satfixeda = 2 and EWorld = 20 Gtoe/y • rathersmallsensitivity of Ci’swithPi’s • strongest variations of Ci’swhen P1 moves to P3 (and inversely) presentmeanenergyconsumption of developed countries P1 P3 

  10. Reference case: C1, C2, C3evolutionwitha, atfixedEWorld = 20 Gtoe/y and Pi’s presentmeanenergyconsumption of developed countries presentinequalitiesbetweenrichest and poorest countries P1 25% reference towardhigherinequalities • the poorest populations are the more impacted by inequality • with a 20 Gtoe/y fixed, to stabilize a meanenergyconsumption of presentrich countries to 4,4 toe/cap/yin 2050 requiresbothinequality ratios higher and a reduction of population P1

  11. Workinghypothesis GHG emissions 3 to takeintoaccount the climateconstraint  limitation of fossil fuels consumptionleading to CO2emissions • amount of fossilsthateach group P1, P2 and P3can use •  As previuosly, choice of a unique parameter « fossilinequality ratio » between P1, P2 and P3: b = F1/F2 = F2/F3sothat •  [b2 P1,World + b P2,World + P3,World]F3 = Fworld

  12. Results • fossilconsumption per capita • F1 = 0,6 toe/cap/year • F2 = 0,42 toe/cap/year • F3 = 0,3 toe/cap/year • fossilconsumption/Pi’s • P1 = 2,15 Gtoe/y • P2 = 1,25 Gtoe/y • P3 = 0,8 Gtoe/y • CO2emissions/Pi’s Reference case • Set of parameters • Fworld = 4,2 Gtoe/y  reduction factor of GHG = 2 • b = √2 (< a = 2)  F1/F3 = 2, F2/F3 = √2 • P1,World, P2,World, P1,World Inequalityreduced by a factor 6 between the richest and poorest populations comparedwithtoday CO2emissions in 2050 /6 /4 x2

  13. Workinghypothesis match betweenavailable sources in 2050 and energyneeds 4 How to satisfyenergyneeds in the case of a reduction of fossil uses ?  quantify the differentenergyneeds  quantify the CO2-non emittingenergy sources available in 2050 • 4 consumptionsectors are considered • transport : fuel only • industry : high-temperatureheatonly • residential/services : low-temperatureheatonly • electricity • different profiles of consumptionaccording P1, P2 and P3based on the averageconsumption profiles of presentdeveloped, emerging and poor countries profile of presentrich countries  P1 profile of presentemerging countries  P2 profile of presentpoor countries  P3

  14. Reference case energyconsumption/sector population P1 match betweenavailable sources in 2050 and energyneeds 4 • Set of parameters • Pi’s total energyconsumption • Pi’s profile consumption population P2 population P3 • To count available sources • fossil fuels with CO2emissionsfixed by the GHG reduction factor • main renewableenergy sources • fossil fuels with CCS technology • nuclear power

  15. Reference case • Set of parameters • Fworld = 4,2 Gtoe/y • fossil fuels with CCS = 3,7 Gtoe/y •  12 GtCO2/y to store • potentials of renewable sources = 7,5 Gtoe/y • nuclear power : free parameter • Pi’senergyconsumption/sector • Outcomes • energy mix/Pi’s • energy mix/region • world energy mix

  16. Methodology Illustrated in the reference case population P1 energy mix construction 5 population P2 population P3 1 MWhelec = 0,22 tep  1 Gtoe = 4545,45 TWhelec • fossilswith CO2emissionsused first mainly for transport = 4,2 Gtoe/y • renewableenergy sources for transport (biofuel) and heat (wood, solar water heat and CSP, geothermal) = 3,7 Gtoe/y almost all the energyneeds of rural population P3 are provided • production of heatwithcogeneration and CCS = 2,5 Gtoe/y of fossils (8 GtCO2/y to store) • production of heatwithnuclearenergy for industryneeds of P1 and P2only = 0,8 Gtoe/y • energyisstillmissing for transport and heat  total transfer to electricity = 3 Gtoe/y

  17. population P1 electric mix construction 6 population P2 population P3 • transfer to electricityminimized by cogeneration and heatpump for res./serv. sector • fossilswith CO2emissions fromprevioussteps • biomass for P3 • fossilswith CCS and cogeneration • renewableenergy sources for electricitygeneration (hydropower, PV, solar CSP, wind, geothermal) = 4 Gtoe/y • fossilswith CCS for electricitygenerationonly = 1,2 Gtoe/y of fossils • ultimateelectricitymissingfilled by nuclearenergy for P1 & P2only = 4,6 Gtoe/y

  18. outcomes large differenciesbetween the energy mixes of P1, P2 and P3  reflect the hypothesis and the values of parameters energy mixes of differentregions world energy mix nuclear x9 = 5,4 Gtoe/y renewables for heat/electricity/transport = 7,5 Gtoe/y fossilswith CCS = 3,7 Gtoe/y  12 GtCO2/y

  19. outcomes • focus on electricity •  fraction: intermittent /(intermittent +flexible ) • storageatvery large scale • management of the intermittent electricitywithelectrical transport • makenuclear power flexible • …. • distribution of nuclear power in the World

  20. Conclusions (1/2) • Simple relations connectingkeyparamaters •  parameters and resultscanbeeasilyswitched •  flexible use to projectdifferent scenarios through the choosenparameters • interpretation of different scenarios in a commonframeworkbased on • inequality ratios on energyconsumption and CO2emissions • different types of population at a country scale and not anymorebetween countries/regionsviewed as homogeneous • whichcouldbeinteresting to analyse the issues on • climatenegociations • ressources sharing

  21. Conclusions (2/2) • match betweenenergy sources and energyneeds / mix energy construction • revealsomecriticalproblemswhichemergefrom the climateconstraint to meet the energyweneed as wegetused to consume ittoday • lack of energy sources for heat and transport needs, • increase of electricitygeneration due to massive transfer of theseneeds to electricity and not onlybecause of an increase of « classicalelectrical uses » • analyse the correlationsbetween initial hypothesisused in scenarios and emphasize possible contradictions betweenthem • Ex : development of poor/emerging countries + GHG reduction + no nuclear power • analyse how the energy sources used in different scenarios (fossil fuel, nuclear power and renewables) competewitheachother and impact somekey points as • - electrical transport • - intermittency management • - CO2storagecapacity

More Related