Peak Oil The Forward End of the Curve

Peak Oil The Forward End of the Curve

Presentation to the

City of Madison

April 10, 2006

By

Mark Daugherty

Focus On Energy

Renewable Energy Business Development

This presentation is funded in part by Focus on Energy.

Oil and Gas Supply

Global oil discoveries are following a typical bell shaped curve.

Note: Global data shown here is reported by ExxonMobil, it is consistent with many others. See: Harry J. Longwell, executive VP of Exxon-Mobil corporation, http://www.energybulletin.net/primer.php, http://www.feasta.org/documents/wells/contents.html?one/longwell.html and C.J.Campbell, ASPO http://www.peakoil.net/, http://www.peakoil.ie/downloads/newsletters/newsletter35_200311.pdf* IHS Consultants at http://www.ihsenergy.com/

2003 first year since 1920s no single discovery > 500 million barrels. (No single field found large enough to meet demand for 1 week.)*

From the Association for the Study of Peak Oil (ASPO) 2004See also: Global Oil and Gas Depletion: an Overview, R.W. Bently, Energy Policy 30 (2002) 189-205. Congressman Rosco Bartlett (R-6-MD), Congressional Record, March 14, 2005, Pages H1409-H1414. http://www.bartlett.house.gov/SupportingFiles/documents/PeakOil.pdf

Data Forecast

Global conventional oil production peak estimated in 2006 to 2008 timeframe.

Current demand is beginning to hit physical supply constraints

(Bil

lio

n B

arre

ls /

Yr)

V1

V2

V1 = V2

From the Association for the Study of Peak Oil (ASPO) 2002.Excellent Summary on Peak Oil: Congressman Rosco Bartlett (R-6-MD), Congressional Record, March 14, 2005, Pages H1409-H1414. http://www.bartlett.house.gov/SupportingFiles/documents/PeakOil.pdf

Gap

Natural Gas : US, Canada & Mexico Discoveries and Production

V1

V2

V1 = V2

Discovery curve shifted

23 years.

See: http://www.peakoil.net/JL/JeanL.html

In 2002 Oil and Gas made up 62% of global primary energy supply.

Source International Energy Agency (IEA) http://www.iea.org/statist/index.htm

What about non - conventional fossil fuel supplies?

• Technologies include: tar sands, oil shale, heavy oil, gas to liquids technology

• Like trying to drink through a smaller and smaller straw. • Lower energy return, Extensive environmental damage.• Strip mining + heating or steam injection.• 1.5-2 tons material processed per barrel of oil.• Bottom line: higher cost, smaller volume

~ 10 times current global coal mining required to meet present oil needs with tar sands or oil shale.

Historical Primary Energy Substitution

http://www.pewclimate.org/docUploads/snowmass%5Fnakicenovic%2Epdf

Possible Global Energy Supply (2005-2100)

0.0E+00

1.0E+13

2.0E+13

3.0E+13

4.0E+13

5.0E+13

6.0E+13

7.0E+13

2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 2055 2065 2075 2085 2095

kW

Ho

ur Oil

Gas

Coal

Nuclear

Renewable

For background data see: http://www.eia.doe.gov/, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/gas.html, http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/infosheets/coalreserves.htm, http://www.iea.org/, http://www.euronuclear.org/info/encyclopedia/u/uranium-reserves.htm, http://www.peakoil.net/

Oil

Gas

Coal

Nuclear

Renewable

Possible Cumulative Global Energy Supply (2005-2100)

0.00E+00

2.00E+13

4.00E+13

6.00E+13

8.00E+13

1.00E+14

1.20E+14

1.40E+14

1.60E+14

1.80E+14

2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 2055 2065 2075 2085 2095

kW H

ou

r

Renewable

Nuclear

Coal

Gas

Oil

For background data see: http://www.eia.doe.gov/, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/gas.html, http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/infosheets/coalreserves.htm, http://www.iea.org/, http://www.euronuclear.org/info/encyclopedia/u/uranium-reserves.htm, http://www.peakoil.net/

Burning fossil fuels generates greenhouse gas emissions driving climate change.

Minimum Artic Ice 1979 Minimum Artic Ice 2005

Inage: MSNBC, Associated Press, Sept. 29, 2005http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9527485/Thinning: Professor Peter Wadhams, Scott Polar Research Institute, Cambridge, UK, BBC news, Wednesday, 27 March, 2002 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1894740.stm

Ice ~ 43% thinner in 1996 than in 1976

Antartica - Collapse of Larsen B Ice Shelf

•3,250 km2 of shelf area disintegrated.•Glacier speeds increased ~ 250% after collapse.

National Snow and Ice Data Centerhttp://nsidc.org/iceshelves/larsenb2002/http://nsidc.org/news/press/20031219_speed_up.html

31 January, 2002 5 March, 2002

Extent of ice melt in Greenland, 1992 and 2002

John P. Holdren, Harvard University, Co-Chair National Commission on Energy Policy, 2005 Institutional Investor Summit on Climate Risk,United Nations • New York • 10 May 2005, citing Arctic Climate Impact Assessment 2004

+7 m

+12 m +70 m

GIS = Greenland Ice Sheet

WAIS = West Antarctic Ice Sheet

EAIS = East Antarctic Ice Sheet

(Estimated time scale is several centuries.)

From a presentation by Richard B. Alley, U. of Pennsylvania, Cited by John P. Holdren, Harvard University, Co-Chair National Commission on Energy Policy, 2005 Institutional Investor Summit on Climate Risk,United Nations • New York • 10 May 2005, citing Arctic Climate Impact Assessment 2004

Impact of Melting Ice

Greenhouse Gas emissions for advanced generation (2010-2020) technologies.

0

50

100

150

200

Coal NaturalGas

SolarPV

Wind

g C

Eq

/ k

Wh

Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Electricity Generation Chains, Joseph Spadaro, Lucille Langlois and Bruce Hamilton, IEA Bulliten 42/2/2000

Three options to meet demand for carbon-

neutral energy• Fossil fuel with carbon sequestration

• 25 billion metric tons of CO2 produced annually• Equal to the volume of Lake Superior• 1% leak rate would nullify sequestration in a century

• Nuclear power • 10 TW of nuclear power = a new 1-GWe plant every 2 days for the next

50 years. • Then terrestrial uranium exhausted in 10 years.

• Renewable energy• Exploitable hydroelectric < 0.5 TW • Tides and ocean currents < 2 TW• Geothermal energy << 12 TW• Wind potential ~ 2-4 TW • Solar ~120,000 TW strikes the Earth

• 10% efficient solar energy “farm” covering 1.6% of the U.S. land area would meet the country’s entire domestic energy needs (2005 Global Consumption ~ 14 TW)

• Comparable with the land area covered by the nation’s federally numbered highways.

Source: US DOE BASIC RESEARCH NEEDS FOR SOLAR ENERGY UTILIZATION Report on the Basic Energy Sciences Workshop on Solar Energy Utilization, April 18-21, 2005

Possible Cumulative Global Supply with Coal Restriction

0.0E+00

2.0E+13

4.0E+13

6.0E+13

8.0E+13

1.0E+14

1.2E+14

1.4E+14

1.6E+14

2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 2055 2065 2075 2085 2095

kW H

ou

r

Renewables

Nuclear

Coal

Gas

Oil

For background data see: http://www.eia.doe.gov/, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/gas.html, http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/infosheets/coalreserves.htm, http://www.iea.org/, http://www.euronuclear.org/info/encyclopedia/u/uranium-reserves.htm, http://www.peakoil.net/

It will be difficult to meet current energy demand growth indefinitely.

0.0E+00

5.0E+13

1.0E+14

1.5E+14

2.0E+14

2.5E+14

3.0E+14

3.5E+14

2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 2055 2065 2075 2085 2095

kW H

ou

r

Demand at 1.8%/yr growth

Total energy supply from

previous slide.

Effort is required on 2 fronts

1) Reduce energy consumption growth Use efficiency and conservation Economic growth still possible

2) Develop non-fossil fuel supplies Solar electric, wind, solar thermal, biomass Grid, storage, forecasting and control optimized

for non-fossil fuel supply utilization.

Front 1:Increasing efficiency and conservation by 1.8% per yr

0.0E+00

5.0E+13

1.0E+14

1.5E+14

2.0E+14

2.5E+14

3.0E+14

3.5E+14

2005 2015 2025 2035 2045 2055 2065 2075 2085 2095

kW H

ou

r

Stabilize demand growth.

Allow economic growth.

Demand at 1.8%/yr growth

Supply

Efficiency and conservation

Stable demand

Front 2:Increase renewable energy supply

0.0E+00

2.0E+13

4.0E+13

6.0E+13

8.0E+13

1.0E+14

1.2E+14

1.4E+14

1.6E+14

1.8E+14

2.0E+14

2005

2011

2017

2023

2029

2035

2041

2047

2053

2059

2065

2071

2077

2083

2089

2095

kW H

ou

r

Conventional Supply

Renewable energy supply

Current renewable energy growth rates exceed those required to transition to a fully

renewable energy supply.

http://www.ren21.net/globalstatusreport/RE2005_Global_Status_Report.pdfhttp://www.earthscan.co.uk/news/article/mps/uan/508/v/3/sp/IEA: http://www.oja-services.nl/iea-pvps/AWEA: http://www.awea.org/pubs/documents/globalmarket2003.pdf

• 2004 investment in renewables ~ US $30 billion

• Investment in entire power generation sector ~ $150 billion

• Renewable energy capacity to 160 GW ~ 4% of global power. 

How should we invest the remaining fossil energy?

Coal

Nat. Gas

Solar (PV)

Wind

Energy Input

Energy Output

Note: Coal and Natural Gas energy output limited to combustion efficiency at a maximum. Fuel supply, plant construction and decommissioning, and O&M energy uses reduce output below combustion efficiency. Solar, wind and bio can have terrestrial energy output greater than one since they are accessing solar energy entering the terrestrial system from the sun. See: http://www.awea.org/faq/bal.html, http://www.ecotopia.com/apollo2/knapp/PVEPBTPaper.pdf

(30 to 80 depending on site and technology)

Ethanol

Bio Diesel

Electrical Generation

Liquid Fuel Production

Input Output

What might a Wisconsin Renewable energy supply look like?

Notes:

This is a rough estimate, only intended to show magnitudes.

Wisconsin current electrical generation capacity ~12,000 MW.

Wind is not necessarily all located in Wisconsin.

Wind at 27% capacity factor.

Solar at 1250 kWh/yr per rated kW output.

Percent Annual Continuous Ratedof Output Equivalent Capacity

Total (kWh) (MW) (MW)Wind 20% 1.2E+11 13,423 49,716Solar Electric 50% 2.9E+11 33,558 235,178Biomass 15% 8.8E+10 10,068 10,068Solar Thermal 15% 8.8E+10 10,068 70,553

100% 5.9E+11 67,117