1 Global Emissions of SF 6 and the Costs of Reducing Them: EPA’s Global Emissions and Mitigation Reports Deborah Ottinger Schaefer (EPA), Ravi Kantamaneni, and Marian Van Pelt (ICF International)
1
Global Emissions of SF6 and the Costs of Reducing Them: EPA’s Global Emissions and Mitigation Reports
Deborah Ottinger Schaefer (EPA), Ravi Kantamaneni, and Marian Van Pelt (ICF International)
2
Overview
Scope and purpose of the reportsRole of fluorinated gases and SF6
EmissionsAssumptionsResults
ReductionsAssumptionsTechnologiesResults
3
Purpose of the Reports
Where are emissions and reduction opportunities for non-CO2 greenhouse gases?
Which industry sectors?Which countries and regions?
Global Emissions Report: Global and country-specific emissions Global Mitigation Report: Global and country-specific reduction opportunities and their costsAvailable at:
http://www.epa.gov/nonco2/econ-inv/international.html
4
Global GHG Emissions and Sinks, 2000
F gases1%
CO2 - Fuel and cement
56%
N2O9%
CH415%
CO2 - LUCF19%
5
GER 2005 High-GWP Emissions by Gas
HFCs55%
HFC-2320%
PFCs13%
SF611%
Use of EE 9%
Mg 1%
Semiconductors (SF6 only) 1%
Total High-GWP Emissions = 503 MtCO2-eq
6
CaveatsSF6 emissions don’t include
Manufacture of flat panel displayManufacture of electrical equipmentOther SF6 applications
Other studies (e.g., RAND survey) indicate some of these sources are significantAssumes that SF6 emissions make up the same fraction of semiconductor emissions in world as in U.S.
7
Example of “Other Application:”AWACS
IPCC Tier 1 Method:AWACS Emissions = 740 kg x no. of planesGlobal AWACS fleet = 70 planes (Boeing)740 x 70 = 51,800 kg SF6 = 1.24 MtCO2-eq= 2% of 2005 GER SF6 emissions
8
Why are High-GWP Gases Important?
High potential growth (early action = high payoffs)
PFCs and SF6 have long atmospheric lifetimesRelatively cheap to abate
1990-2020 High-GWP Emissions from Industrial Sources (TAB) and ODS Substitutes
-
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1,000
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Em
issi
ons
MtC
O2-
eq
ODS SubstitutesIndustrial
9
Sources of High-GWP GasesIndustry Gas Reason Emitted Substitutes for Ozone-Depleting Substances
HFCs Various performance characteristics
Primary Aluminum
PFCs Byproduct
HCFC-22 Production
HFC-23 Byproduct
Semiconductor Manufacture
HFC-23, PFCs, SF6
Fluorine source for etching, cleaning
Magnesium prod. and processing
SF6 Cover gas to prevent oxidation
Electric Transmission
SF6 Insulating gas for electrical equip.
10
Estimating Emissions
Current emissions: Used methods based on IPCC guidanceTwo scenarios for future emissions:
Technology Adoption: Assumes industries decrease emission rates to meet their global and regional emission reduction goals No Action: Assumes current emission rates will continue unchanged
11
Industrial High-GWP Emissions by Sector: Technology-Adoption and No-Action ScenariosTechnology-Adoption
EPA believes future emissions are likely to be closer to this scenarioBut additional actions are required to realize expected reductions
No-ActionProvided as upper-boundShows industry commitments avert very large emissions
-
100
200
300
400
500
TAB NAB TAB NAB TAB NAB TAB NAB TAB NAB TAB NAB TAB NAB
Technology Adoption Baseline (TAB) and No Action Baseline (NAB) Scenarios
Emis
sion
s (M
tCO
2eq)
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
HCFC-22 Production Electric Power Systems Aluminum ProductionSemiconductor Manufacturing Magnesium Manufacturing
12
Global and Regional Reduction GoalsIndustry Global Industry
Assoc., Region, or Country
Percent of World Production/ Emissions in 2003
Goal
Semiconductor manufacturing
World Semiconductor Council
85% Reduce fluorinated emissions to 90% of 1995 level by 2010
Magnesium production and processing
International Magnesium Association
70% (about 90% of sector’s SF6emissions)
Phase out SF6 use by 2011
Aluminum production
International Aluminum Institute
70% (but goal applies to entire industry)
Reduce PFCs/ton Al by 80% relative to 1990 levels by 2010
Electrical Equipment (Use)
EU-25+3, Japan, U.S.
40% of use emissions
Country-specific reductions from 2003 totaling 2.5 MtCO2-eq, (15%).
HCFC-22 China, India, Korea, Mexico
65% of emissions CDM projects totaling 55 MtCO2-eq, (63% of 2010)
13
1990-2020 High-GWP Industrial Emissions by Sector
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Emis
sion
s (M
tCO
2-eq
)
HCFC-22 Production Electric Power Systems Aluminum ProductionSemiconductor Manufacturing Magnesium Manufacturing
14
Current SF6 Emissions from Use of Electrical Equipment
Manufacturing not included!Bottom-up country and regional studies used for U.S., Japan, EU-25+3 (Ecofys)For rest of the world, Emissions = RAND sales to utilities + nameplate capacity of retiring equip. (40-year life)+ 16% add-on for Russia and China (not in RAND)- U.S., Japanese, EU-25+3 emissionsThese emissions are allocated to countries according
to their net electricity consumption.
15
Future SF6 Emissions from Use of Electrical Equipment
For Technology-Adoption scenario, U.S., Japan, EU-25+3 are assumed to meet their emission reduction goalsOther developed countries maintain constant emissions (system growth offset by decreasing charge sizes and leak rates)Developing countries’ emissions grow with net electricity consumption (charge sizes already small)
16
TAB and NAB Scenarios for Use of Electrical Equipment
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Emis
sion
s (M
tCO
2-eq
)
No-Action BaselineTechnology-Adoption Baseline
17
Emissions from Use of Electrical Equipment by Region (TAB)
-
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1990 2000 2010 2020
Emis
sion
s (M
tCO
2eq)
OECD90+ China/CPAS&E Asia Non-EU Eastern EuropeLatin America Non-EU FSUAfrica Middle East
United States
EU-25
Japan
18
Current SF6 Emissions from Mg
Production/processing estimatesPrimary and secondary production: USGSDie Casting: Regional studies or auto production
Emission and usage factorsWhere SF6 is used, 0.75 - 1 kg SF6/ton MgIn China, 10% primary and 100% die casters use SF6
19
Future SF6 Emissions from Mg
Production/processing growthPrimary: 1% – 6%, depending on regionCasting: 2% - 10%, depending on regionGrowth assumed to slow after 2010
Emission factor changesFor Technology-Adoption scenario, almost all producers/processors outside of China are assumed to phase out use of SF6 by 2011 under IMA goal.
20
NAB and TAB Scenarios for Magnesium Production and Processing
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Emis
sion
s (M
tCO
2-eq
)
No-Action BaselineTechnology-Adoption Baseline
21
Emissions from Production and Processing of Magnesium by Region (TAB)
-
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1990 2000 2010 2020Year
Emis
sion
s (M
tCO
2eq)
OECD90+ Non-EU FSU China/CPA
Middle East Latin America S&E Asia
United States
EU-25
Japan
22
Reduction Options, Potentials, and Costs
Again, two scenariosTechnology Adoption: Assumes industries decrease emission rates to meet their global and regional emission reduction goals.
Both emissions and reduction potentials lower. Some options (e.g., SF6 recycling in Europe) fully implemented in baseline and thus aren’t in MAC.
No Action: Assumes current emission rates will continue unchanged. Emissions and reduction potentials higher.
23
Reduction Options for Use of Electrical Equipment* (TAB)Technology Baseline
market penetration
Share of unabated emissions to which applied
Fraction of share reduced
SF6 Recycling 80% (rises to 93% in
U.S.)
67% 95%
Leak Detection and Repair
80% (rises to 93% in
U.S.)
30% 50%
Equipment Refurbishment
80% (rises to 93% in
U.S.)
3% 95%
*All countries but EU-25+3 and Japan. For EU-25+3 and Japan, options, reduction potentials, and costs drawn from 2005 Ecofys study for Capiel.
24
Reduction Options for Mg Production/Processing (TAB)
Technology Baseline market penetration
Share of unabated emissions to which applied
Fraction of share reduced
SO2 Rises to 50% by 2011 outside China
50% 100%
Fluorinated gases
Rises to 50% by 2011 outside China
50% 97%
25
Inputs into Cost AnalysisExample: SF6 Recycling (EE)
EffectivenessApplicability: 67%Baseline market penetration: 80%Maximum market penetration: 100%Reduction efficiency: 95%Total reduction off baseline: 50%U.S. reduction: 6.6 MtCO2eq
Cost (U.S.)Capital costs: $5.6 M ($25,000 per unit)Operating costs: $277,000 (labor)Gas savings: $4.3 MProject lifetime: 10 yrsCost/tCO2-eq: ($0.10)
26
2020 Sector-by-Sector Technology Adoption MACs for High-GWP Industrial Sources
$(80)
$(60)
$(40)
$(20)
$-
$20
$40
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Cumulative Reductions (MtCO2eq)
Mar
gina
l Cos
t ($/
tCO
2eq)
Semiconductors
Electric T&DHCFC-22
Magnesium
Aluminum
27
Options with Largest SF6Reductions (2020)
Industry Sector
Option Reduction(MtCO2-eq)
Cost($/tCO2-eq)
Use of Electrical Equipment
SF6 Recycling 25 Near 0
Magnesium Production and Processing
SO2 4.2 Near 0.65
Use of Electrical Equipment
Leak Detection and Repair
3.5 Near 1
28
2020 No-Action and Technology-Adoption MACs for Use of Electrical Equipment
$(10)
$-
$10
$20
$30
$40
$50
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Cumulative Reductions (MtCO2-eq)
Mar
gina
l Cos
t ($/
tCO
2-eq
) No-Action MACTechnology-Adoption MAC
29
2020 No-Action and Technology-Adoption MACs for Magnesium
$-
$0.20
$0.40
$0.60
$0.80
$1.00
$1.20
$1.40
$1.60
0 5 10 15 20Cumulative Reductions (MtCO2-eq)
Mar
gina
l Cos
t ($/
tCO
2-eq
)
No-Action MACTechnology-Adoption MAC
30
2020 High-GWP Industrial Technology Adoption MACs by Region
$(80)
$(60)
$(40)
$(20)
$-
$20
$40
- 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Cumulative Reductions (MtCO2eq)
Mar
gina
l Cos
ts ($
/tCO
2-eq
)
ChinaROWU.S.Other OECD
EU-15
Japan
31
UncertaintiesRAND data for utilities only shows part of the world. Imports from/exports to China or Russia would affect results.Relationship between emissions and net electricity consumption can vary considerably.Chinese use of SF6 for primary assumed 10%; could be higher or lower.Emissions sensitive to control efforts:
Higher if industry goals are not met.Lower if developing countries lower emission rates (e.g., through CDM).
32
ConclusionsIndustrial (not ODS sub) high-GWP emissions are expected to decline in developed countries and to increase in developing countries. Driven by
Emission controls in developed countriesHigher growth rates of activity in developing countries
Largest reduction opportunities are also in developing countriesEven in Technology-Adoption Scenario, large and inexpensive reduction opportunities remain.