1. News http://www.boston.com/news/world/australia/articles/2009/12/02/winds_ drive_icebergs_away_from_new_zealand/ http://www.boston.com/news/world/australia/articles/2009/12/02/winds_ drive_icebergs_away_from_new_zealand/ http://www.boston.com/news/world/australia/articles/2009/12/02/winds_ drive_icebergs_away_from_new_zealand/ http://www.boston.com/news/world/australia/articles/2009/12/02/winds_ drive_icebergs_away_from_new_zealand/ http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/12/02/cape_wind_national _grid_enter_pact/ http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/12/02/cape_wind_national _grid_enter_pact/ http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/12/02/cape_wind_national _grid_enter_pact/ http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2009/12/02/cape_wind_national _grid_enter_pact/ http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/ 2009/12/02/cape_wind_obstructionism___a_bad_legacy_for_kirk/ http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/ 2009/12/02/cape_wind_obstructionism___a_bad_legacy_for_kirk/ http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/ 2009/12/02/cape_wind_obstructionism___a_bad_legacy_for_kirk/ http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/ 2009/12/02/cape_wind_obstructionism___a_bad_legacy_for_kirk/ http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009 /12/02/its_not_waste_its_energy/ http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009 /12/02/its_not_waste_its_energy/ http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009 /12/02/its_not_waste_its_energy/ http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009 /12/02/its_not_waste_its_energy/ http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2009/12/03/invasion_of_wint er_moths_has_scientists_residents_looking_for_answers/ http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2009/12/03/invasion_of_wint er_moths_has_scientists_residents_looking_for_answers/ http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2009/12/03/invasion_of_wint er_moths_has_scientists_residents_looking_for_answers/ http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2009/12/03/invasion_of_wint er_moths_has_scientists_residents_looking_for_answers/ http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2009/12/03/as_clim ate_summit_nears_denmark_wearing_its_green_on_its_sleeve/ http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2009/12/03/as_clim ate_summit_nears_denmark_wearing_its_green_on_its_sleeve/

2. What is the most common source of energy in the United States? A) Oil A) Oil B) Natural Gas B) Natural Gas C) Coal C) Coal D) Nuclear D) Nuclear E) Hydroelectric E) Hydroelectric

3. What is the most common source of energy in the World? A) Oil A) Oil B) Natural Gas B) Natural Gas C) Coal C) Coal D) Nuclear D) Nuclear E) Hydroelectric E) Hydroelectric

4. Energy Sources United States: Nonrenewable 93% Nuclear Power 8% Natural gas 23% Coal 23% Oil 39% Renewable Energy 8% Biomass 4% Hydropower Geothermal, solar, wind 3% World: Nonrenewable 82% Nuclear Power 6% Natural Gas 21% Coal 22% Oil 33% Renewable Energy 18% Biomass 11% Hydropower Geothermal, solar, wind 7%

5. Powering the Planet Nathan S. Lewis, California Institute of Technology

6. Power Units: The Terawatt Challenge Power 1 10 3 10 6 10 9 10 12 1 W 1 kW 1 MW 1 GW 1 TW Energy 1 J = 1 W for 1 s

7. Global Energy Consumption, 2001 Gas Hydro Renew Total: 13.2 TW U.S.: 3.2 TW (96 Quads)

8. Global Energy Sources

9. Image courtesy of Ren21 under public domain

10. (in the U.S. in 2002) 1-4 ¢ 2.3-5.0 ¢ 6-8 ¢ 5-7 ¢ Today: Production Cost of Electricity 6-7 ¢ 25-50 ¢ Cost, ¢/kW-hr

11. Energy Costs Brazil Europe $0.05/kW-hr www.undp.org/seed/eap/activities/wea

12. How long will it be before all the petroleum on earth is used up? A) 0-5 years A) 0-5 years B) 5-20 years B) 5-20 years C) 20-40 years C) 20-40 years D) 40-100 years D) 40-100 years E) more than 100 years E) more than 100 years

13. Petroleum US Reserves: 10-48 years Global: 42-93 years Trade-Offs Conventional Oil AdvantagesDisadvantages Ample supply for 42-93 years Need to find substitute within 50 years Low cost (with huge subsidies Artificially low price encourages waste and discourages search for alternatives High net energy yieldAir pollution when burned Easily transported within and between countries Releases CO2 when burned Low land useModerate water pollution Technology is well developed Efficient distribution system Figure by UMB OpenCourseWare Image removed due to copyright restrictions.

14. Oil Resources Figure by UMB OpenCourseWare

15. 36 Estimates of the Time of the Peak of World Oil Production (There are More) EIA’s short answer to “When will oil production peak?” is “Not soon, but within the present century.” The most probable scenarios put the peak at about mid century.

16. Fossil Fuel Reserves-to-Production (R/P) Ratios at End 2004  The world’s R/P ratio for coal is almost five times that for oil and almost three times that for gas. Coal’s dominance in R/P ratio is particularly pronounced in the OECD and the FSU.  R/P ratios for oil and gas have been approximately constant or slightly increasing during the past 20 years. Both reserves and production have increased during this period. See next chart. 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 YEARS OECDFSU Emerging Market Economies, excluding FSU World BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2005

17. 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

18. Projected World Energy Consumption in the Coming Century World Primary Energy Consumption (Quads) 826 1,286 2050 2100 Projections to 2025 are from the Energy Information Administration, International Energy Outlook, 2004. Projections for 2050 and 2100 are based on a scenario from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), an organization jointly established in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme. The IPCC provides comprehensive assessments of information relevant to human- induced climate change. The scenario chosen is based on “moderate” assumptions (Scenario B2) for population and economic growth and hence is neither overly conservative nor overly aggressive.

19. Projected World Energy Consumption by Region World Energy Consumption by Region (Quads) Overall, world energy consumption is predicted to increase faster than that of the U.S. and other industrialized countries, because between 2000 and 2025 energy demand in the developing countries nearly doubles. World Regions

20. Population Growth to 10 - 11 Billion People in 2050 Per Capita GDP Growth at 1.6% yr -1 Energy consumption per Unit of GDP declines at 1.0% yr -1 *Image removed due to copyright restrictions.

21. U.S. Energy Flow, 2003 (Quads) U.S. Energy Flow, 2003 (Quads) 21 Production 70.5 Imports 31.0 Consumption 98.2 Adjustments 0.7 Exports 4.0  About 30% of primary energy is imported. Energy Sources Energy Consumption Sectors

22. U.S. Energy Flow, 2003 (Quads) U.S. Energy Flow, 2003 (Quads) 22  85% of primary energy is from fossil fuels; 8% is from nuclear; 6% is from renewables.  Most imported energy is petroleum, which is used for transportation.  The end-use sectors (residential, commercial, industrial, transportation) all use comparable amounts of energy.

23. Alternative Energy Sources Name as many alternative energy sources as you can think of… Name as many alternative energy sources as you can think of… What are the advantages and disadvantages of each? What are the advantages and disadvantages of each?

24. Resources http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztFDqcu8 oJ4http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztFDqcu8 oJ4 http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/oxygen- 0731.html

26. 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; so needs 3000 Niagra Falls or breeders) Carbon sequestration Renewables Sources of Carbon-Free Power

27. Nuclear power 235 U readily absorbs neutrons to become 236 U 236 U then decays into lighter fission products 235 U + neutron  fragments + 2.4 neutrons + 192.9 MeV (remember 300K = 1/40 eV) 27 *Image removed due to copyright restrictions.

28. 130 Gt total U.S. sequestration potential Global emissions 6 Gt/yr in 2002 Test sequestration projects 2002-2004 CO 2 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, coal fields) Distribute only H 2 or electricity Must not leak At 2 Gt/yr sequestration rate, surface of U.S. would rise 10 cm by 2100

29. What is the most promising form of renewable energy? A) Wind A) Wind B) Solar B) Solar C) Geothermal D) Biofuels C) Geothermal D) Biofuels E) Tidal E) Tidal

30. Renewable Energy Consumption by Major Sources

31. Hydroelectric Geothermal Ocean/Tides Wind Biomass Solar Potential of Renewable Energy

32. Hydro-electric power Gravity drives the whole process! 32 Image courtesy of U.S. Geological Survey

33. 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

34. Three Gorges Dam Yangtze River 100 m high, 100 m thick 100 m high, 100 m thick 2.3 km long 2.3 km long 22,000 MW 22,000 MW $32 Billion $32 Billion 10 Year payback 10 Year payback Image courtesy of roberthuffstutter, flikr under Creative Common Licenseroberthuffstutter

35. Geothermal Energy Hydrothermal systems Hot dry rock (igneous systems) Normal geothermal heat (200 C at 10 km depth) 1.3 GW capacity in 1985 *Image removed due to copyright restrictions.

36. Geothermal Energy Potential

37. Mean terrestrial geothermal flux at earth’s surface 0.057 W/m 2 Mean terrestrial geothermal flux at earth’s surface 0.057 W/m 2 Total continental geothermal energy potential 11.6 TW Total continental geothermal energy potential 11.6 TW Oceanic geothermal energy potential 30 TW Oceanic geothermal energy potential 30 TW Wells “run out of steam” in 5 years Wells “run out of steam” in 5 years Power from a good geothermal well (pair) 5 MW Power from a good geothermal well (pair) 5 MW Power from typical Saudi oil well500 MW Power from typical Saudi oil well500 MW Needs drilling technology breakthrough Needs drilling technology breakthrough (from exponential $/m to linear $/m) to become economical) (from exponential $/m to linear $/m) to become economical)

38. Wind Power http://www.capewind.org/ http://www.capewind.org/ http://www.capewind.org/ 420 Megawatts of energy 420 Megawatts of energy 75% of Cape and Islands electricity needs 75% of Cape and Islands electricity needs Equivalent to removing 162,000 cars Equivalent to removing 162,000 cars 113 million gallons of oil 113 million gallons of oil Birds, views, sealife, navigation, noise Birds, views, sealife, navigation, noise Image courtesy of EPA

39. Electric Potential of Wind Image courtesy of US Department of Energy In 1999, U.S consumed 3.45 trillion kW-hr of Electricity = 0.39 TW

40. Top-down: Downward kinetic energy flux: 2 W/m 2 Total land area: 1.5x10 14 m 2 Hence total available energy = 300 TW Extract <10%, 30% of land, 30% generation efficiency: 2-4 TW electrical generation potential Bottom-Up: Theoretical: 27% of earth’s land surface is class 3 (250-300 W/m 2 at 50 m) or greater If use entire area, electricity generation potential of 50 TW Practical: 2 TW electrical generation potential (4% utilization of ≥class 3 land area, IPCC 2001) Off-shore potential is larger but must be close to grid to be interesting; (no installation > 20 km offshore now) Global Potential of Terrestrial Wind

41. Global: Top Down Requires Large Areas Because Inefficient (0.3%) 3 TW requires ≈ 600 million hectares = 6x10 12 m 2 20 TW requires ≈ 4x10 13 m 2 Total land area of earth: 1.3x10 14 m 2 Hence requires 4/13 = 31% of total land area Biomass Energy Potential

42. Land with Crop Production Potential, 1990: 2.45x10 13 m 2 Cultivated Land, 1990: 0.897 x10 13 m 2 Additional Land needed to support 9 billion people in 2050: 0.416x10 13 m 2 Perhaps 5-7 TW by 2050 through biomass (recall: $1.5- 4/GJ) Possible/likely that this is water resource limited Biomass Energy Potential Global: Bottom Up

43. Theoretical: 1.2x10 5 TW solar energy potential (1.76 x10 5 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

44. 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

45. Solar Land Area Requirements 6 Boxes at 3.3 TW Each

46. U.S. Land Area: 9.1x10 12 m 2 (incl. Alaska) Average Insolation: 200 W/m 2 2000 U.S. Primary Power Consumption: 99 Quads=3.3 TW 1999 U.S. Electricity Consumption = 0.4 TW Hence: 3.3x10 12 W/(2x10 2 W/m 2 x 10% Efficiency) = 1.6x10 11 m 2 Requires 1.6x10 11 m 2 / 9.1x10 12 m 2 = 1.7% of Land Solar Land Area Requirements

47. Artificial Photosynthesis http://web.mit.edu/new soffice/2008/oxygen- 0731.html http://web.mit.edu/new soffice/2008/oxygen- 0731.html http://web.mit.edu/new soffice/2008/oxygen- 0731.html http://web.mit.edu/new soffice/2008/oxygen- 0731.html Nathan Lewis (Cal Tech)-creates electricity from sunlight Nathan Lewis (Cal Tech)-creates electricity from sunlight Daniel Nocera (MIT)- catalyst to split water Daniel Nocera (MIT)- catalyst to split water Fuel cell burns H 2 + O 2 Fuel cell burns H 2 + O 2 *Image removed due to copyright restrictions.

48. The Need to Produce Fuel “Power Park Concept” Fuel Production Distribution Storage

49. Need for Additional Primary Energy is Apparent Case for Significant (Daunting?) Carbon-Free Energy Seems Plausible (Imperative?) Scientific/Technological Challenges Energy efficiency: energy security and environmental security Coal/sequestration; nuclear/breeders; Cheap Solar Fuel Inexpensive conversion systems, effective storage systems Policy Challenges Is Failure an Option? Will there be the needed commitment? In the remaining time? Summary

50. Light Fuel Electricity Photosynthesis Fuels Electricity Photovoltaics sc e SC CO Sugar H O O 2 2 2 Energy Conversion Strategies Semiconductor/Liquid Junctions H 2 O O H 2 2 SC

51. O2O2 A H2H2 e-e- cathode anode Fuel Cell vs Photoelectrolysis Cell H2H2 anode cathode O2O2 Fuel Cell MEA Photoelectrolysis Cell MEA membrane MO x MS x e-e- H+H+ H+H+

52. Solar-Powered Catalysts for Fuel Formation hydrogenase 2H + + 2e -  H 2 10 µ chlamydomonas moewusii 2 H 2 O O2O2 4e - 4H + CO 2 HCOOH CH 3 OH H 2, CH 4 Cat oxidationreduction photosystem II 2 H 2 O  O 2 + 4 e - + 4H +

53. Photovoltaic + Electrolyzer System

54. Global Energy Consumption

55. 19501960 1970 1980 1990 2000 5 10 15 20 25 Efficiency (%) Year crystalline Si amorphous Si nano TiO 2 CIS/CIGS CdTe Efficiency of Photovoltaic Devices

57. US Energy Flow -1999 Net Primary Resource Consumption 102 Exajoules

58. Tropospheric Circulation Cross Section Source: John Brandon www.auf.asn.auwww.auf.asn.au

59. Powering the Planet Solar  Electric Extreme efficiency at moderate cost Solar paint: grain boundary passivation Solar  Chemical Chemical  Electric Inorganic electrolytes: bare proton transport O H S 100 nm Catalysis: ultra high surface area, nanoporous materials Photoelectrolysis: integrated energy conversion and fuel generation h = 2.5 eV H 3 O + ½H 2 + H 2 O ½O 2 + H 2 O OH  __S* __S + S__ TiO 2 VB CB Pt Bio-inspired fuel generation ee Synergies: Catalysis, materials discovery, materials processing

60. By essentially all measures, H 2 is an inferior transportation fuel relative to liquid hydrocarbons So, why? Local air quality: 90% of the benefits can be obtained from clean diesel without a gross change in distribution and end-use infrastructure; no compelling need for H 2 Large scale CO 2 sequestration: Must distribute either electrons or protons; compels H 2 be the distributed fuel-based energy carrier Renewable (sustainable) power: no compelling need for H 2 to end user, e.g.: CO 2 + H 2 CH 3 OH DME other liquids Hydrogen vs Hydrocarbons

61. 1.2x10 5 TW of solar energy potential globally Generating 2x10 1 TW with 10% efficient solar farms requires 2x10 2 /1.2x10 5 = 0.16% of Globe = 8x10 11 m 2 (i.e., 8.8 % of U.S.A) Generating 1.2x10 1 TW (1998 Global Primary Power) requires 1.2x10 2 /1.2x10 5 = 0.10% of Globe = 5x10 11 m 2 (i.e., 5.5% of U.S.A.) Solar Land Area Requirements

62. Need for Additional Primary Energy is Apparent Case for Significant (Daunting?) Carbon-Free Energy Seems Plausible (Imperative?) Scientific/Technological Challenges Coal/sequestration; nuclear/breeders; Cheap Solar Fuel Inexpensive conversion systems, effective storage systems Policy Challenges Energy Security, National Security, Environmental Security, Economic Security Is Failure an Option? Will there be the needed commitment? Summary