Copenhagen 29 June Energy and climate outlook: Renewables in a world and European perspective Peter Russ

Copenhagen 29 June Energy and Climate Change Aim: To support policy-making to mitigate conflicts between energy consumption and environmental and resource management issues –Security of supply, preservation of competitiveness –Kyoto Protocol: Legally binding commitments for the EU as a whole –Focus on EU but “problems” of global scale – =>POLES model

Copenhagen 29 June WETO: Energy outlook Climate policy impact Gas/oil case Technology cases World energy, technology and climate policy outlook 2030

Copenhagen 29 June Climate Change: Can Technology solve the problem? How much can emissions be reduced applying modern energy technology? Is nuclear power the solution? Or renewables ?  Technology Cases Disregarding any carbon abatement target: What is the role of autonomous technology development in carbon emission reduction? n World baseline energy projection + n plausible assumptions on energy technology development including hypothesis on capital costs, fuel costs, availability factors, fuel conversion efficiencies, etc.

Copenhagen 29 June Renewables Case

Copenhagen 29 June Impacts of the Technology Stories on electricity generation and CO2 emissions (Scenario as compared to Reference in % by 2030) World baseline projection by 2030 are MtC/year, to be compared with 6052 MtC/year in The most favorable scenario would yield MtC/year instead!

Copenhagen 29 June Summary Conclusions of the Technology Scenarios The Technology Stories offer NO PANACEAS for the CO2 problem mainly because: n They have been defined in terms of clusters affecting only a part of emerging energy markets. n Breaktroughs in demand technologies would produce more straightforward results but clusters are harder to identify. n Scenarios involving fossil fuel technologies while implying efficiency improvements also imply higher competitiveness via-a-vis less polluting or non-fossil technologies. n The magnitude of the world wide CO2 is such that is hard to see how technology could make a major impact if unassisted by more general policy measures

Copenhagen 29 June Scenario assumptions and implementation n Renewable premium on output n Different schemes and targets: n EU15, EU25, OECD n Electricity generation, primary energy n Combination with CO2 reduction target

Copenhagen 29 June Renewable Target for Primary Energy 4.7 cents/kWh

Copenhagen 29 June Renewable Technologies

Copenhagen 29 June Renewable Technologies 1.3 cents/kWh

Copenhagen 29 June Summary n Renewable penetration rates as discussed can be achieved at a cost of appr. 5 cents/kWh (OECD) n At this level of a subsidy, the Kyoto protocol targets for CO2 emission would be met. The cost is however much higher than in a scenario including all options. n Potential as subject to uncertainty, eg. Biomass competes with agriculture n Wind energy (onshore) at it’s limit

Copenhagen 29 June Technology Stories n The NUCLEAR Case assumes a breakthough in nuclear technology in terms of cost and safety n The COAL case involves major improvements in solid fuel burning technologies and especially affects the technico-economic characteristics of Supercritical Coal plants, Integrated Gasification Combined Cycles n The GAS case assumes availability of natural gas and introduces major technico-economic improvements for gas-turbine combined cycles and combined heat and power plants. Some improvements assumed for all gas turbine-related technologies. Additionally involves a breakthrough in fuel cell technologies n The RENEWABLE case implies a major effort and breakthroughs in Renewable Technologies, notably wind power, biomass gasification, solar thermal power plants, small hydro and photovoltaics

Copenhagen 29 June Energy and industrial GHG emissions scenarios v Global energy/carbon emission scenarios v World-wide assessment of carbon abatement flexible mechanisms, and carbon-equivalence among greenhouse gases v Techno-economic assessment of mitigation policies v Long term prospects for climate-protection policies. Integrated assessment applied to post-Kyoto negotiation processes. v Intra-European analysis of the carbon emission permit markets: flows and prices within the Kyoto timeframe. v Regional forecasts and analyses (technology options, emission abatement potential etc): Mediterranean, Latin America, Energy-exporter countries. v Participation in multilateral energy forecasts comparative exercises (IEA, US DoE, Canada, IIASA, Japan).

Copenhagen 29 June Energy Technology Modelling Scenarios v Energy technology data bases (costs, emissions, efficiencies, market share). v Monitoring and harmonization of external costs estimates. v World energy technology outlook Identify main trends in energy markets and the changes in energy technology portfolio. v Dynamics of energy technology development (RTD effect, learning curves, etc) in order to setup energy RTD priorities. v Prospective analyses of specific energy technology clusters (hydrogen, renewables, alternative fuels, etc) v Maintenance of a legal and administrative database concerning renewable energy v Economic prospectives of energy provision (Security of supply and energy technology, impact of supply shocks)