CSP, PV, and a Renewable Future Institute for Analysis of Solar Energy George Washington University 24 April 2009 Sam Baldwin Chief Technology Officer and Member, Board of Directors Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy U.S. Department of Energy
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
CSP, PV, and a Renewable Future
Institute for Analysis of Solar EnergyGeorge Washington University
24 April 2009
Sam BaldwinChief Technology Officer and Member, Board of Directors
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
U.S. Department of Energy
2
Energy-Linked Challenges• Economic— economic development and growth; energy costs
• Security— foreign energy dependence, reliability, stability
• Environmental— local (particulates), regional (acid rain), global (GHGs)
• Scale and Time Constants
Responses• CSP Technologies
– System Design– Growing Markets– Value of CSP– R&D Needs
• The Renewable Future– Technologies– Scale– Utility Integration– Policy & Incentives– Mobilizing Capital– Human Resources
3
Nations that HAVE oil(% of Global Reserves)Saudi Arabia 26%Iraq 11Kuwait10Iran 9UAE 8Venezuela 6Russia 5Mexico 3Libya 3China 3Nigeria 2U.S. 2%
Nations that NEED Oil(% of Global Consumption)U.S. 24. %China 8.6Japan 5.9Russia 3.4India 3.1Germany 2.9Canada 2.8Brazil 2.6S. Korea 2.6Mexico 2.4France 2.3Italy 2.0Global ~85 MM Bbl/day
Source: EIA International Energy Annual
The Oil Problem
4
Impacts of Oil Dependence• Domestic Economic Impact• Trade Deficit: Oil ~57% of $677B trade deficit in 2008• Foreign Policy Impacts
– Strategic competition for access to oil– Oil money supports undesirable regimes – Oil money finds its way to terrorist organizations
• Vulnerabilities– to system failures: tanker spills; pipeline corrosion; …– to natural disasters: Katrina; …– to political upheaval: Nigeria; … – to terrorist acts: Yemen; Saudi Arabia; …
• Economic Development – Developing world growth stunted by high oil prices; increases instability
• Natural Gas?– Largest producers: Algeria, Iran, Qatar, Russia, Venezuela– Russia provides 40% of European NG imports now; 70% by 2030.– Russia cut-off of natural gas to Ukraine
5
Oil Futures
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
MM
Bb
l/D
ay
Demand
Domestic Supply
Imports
New Oil
CAFE
Ethanol
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
MM
Bb
l/D
ay
Demand
Domestic Supply
Imports
New Oil
CAFE
Ethanol
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
MM
Bb
l/D
ay
Demand
Domestic Supply
Imports
New Oil
CAFE
Ethanol
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
MM
Bb
l/D
ay
Demand
Domestic Supply
Imports
New Oil
CAFE
Ethanol
6
Oil Sources
• Constraints– Cost– Energy – Water– Atmosphere
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Other
Czech Republic
Poland
South Africa
Germany
Australia
India
China
Former Soviet Union
United States
Coal Reserves World Total: 1,088 Billion Short Tons
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
5% 85.87% 9.13% 2016 2028
Mean=2022.669
Peak Year of ROW Conventional OilProduction: Reference/USGS
0.000
0.020
0.040
0.060
0.080
0.100
0.120
0.140
Mean=2022.669
2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Source: David Greene, ORNL
• Resources – Oil Shale
• U.S.—Over 1.2 trillion Bbls-equiv. in highest-grade deposits
– Tar Sands• Canadian Athabasca Tar Sands—
1.7 T Bbls-equivalent• Venezuelan Orinoco Tar Sands
(Heavy Oil)—1.8 T Bbls-equiv.– Coal
• Coal Liquefaction—4 Bbls/ton
7
Potential Impacts of GHG Emissions• Temperature Increases
• Precipitation Changes• Glacier & Sea-Ice Loss• Water Availability
• Wildfire Increases • Ecological Zone Shifts• Extinctions
• Agricultural Zone Shifts• Agricultural Productivity
Hoegh-Guldberg, et al, Science, V.318, pp.1737, 14 Dec. 2007
8
Climate Change
– “We urge all nations … to take prompt action to reduce the causes of climate change …”.
– National Academies’ of Science, 2005: Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Russia, United Kingdom, U.S.A.
• Joint Science Academies’ Statement: – “There is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring.”
– “…most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities.”
– “The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action.”
– “Long-term global efforts to create a more healthy, prosperous, and sustainable world may be severely hindered by changes in climate.”
– National Academies’ of Science, 2008: “Immediate large-scale mitigation action is required”
9
New York City during the August
2003 blackout
Kristina Hamachi LaCommare, and Joseph H. Eto, LBNL
Costs of Power Interruptions
10
Scale of the Challenge• Increase fuel economy of 2 billion cars from 30 to 60 mpg.• Cut carbon emissions from buildings by one-fourth by 2050—on top of
projected improvements.• With today’s coal power output doubled, operate it at 60% instead of 40%
efficiency (compared with 32% today).• Introduce Carbon Capture and Storage at 800 GW of coal-fired power.
• Install 1 million 2-MW wind turbines.
• Install 3000 GW-peak of Solar power.
• Apply conservation tillage to all cropland (10X today).
• Install 700 GW of nuclear power.
Source: S. Pacala and R. Socolow, “Stabilization Wedges: Solving the Climate Problem for the Next 50 Years with Current Technology”, Science 13 August 2004, pp.968-972.
11
Time Constants• Political consensus building ~ 3-30+ years• Technical R&D ~10+ • Production model ~ 4+ • Financial ~ 2++ • Market penetration ~10++ • Capital stock turnover
Cost Reduction Potential– Estimates from Sargent & Lundy and WGA
Solar Task Force indicate CSP costs can go below 6 cents/kWh assuming R&D and deployment.
Factors Contributing to Cost Reduction– Scale-up ~37%– Volume Production ~ 21%– Technology Development 42%
Direct-Normal Solar Resource for the Southwest U.S.
Map and table courtesy of NREL
Filters:Transmission>6.75 kWh/m2dEnvironment X Land Use XSlope < 1%Area > 1 km2
5 acres/MW27% annual CF
27
CSP R&D Opportunities• CSP Solar Field R&D:
– Accounts for ~50-60% of capital cost– High-performance long-life low-cost reflectors with self-
cleaning or hydrophobic coatings; Increase optical accuracy and aiming.
– Receiver: Stable, high temperature, high performance selective surfaces.
• CSP Thermal Storage:– Accounts for ~20-25% of capital cost– Stable, high temperature heat transfer and thermal
storage materials to 600C (1200 C for advanced technology), with low vapor pressure, low freezing points, low cost ($15/kWth) , appropriate viscosity & density, etc.
• Advanced CSP Systems:– Power block accounts for ~10-15% of capital cost; 37.6%
efficiency– Brayton Cycles for higher temperature, higher efficiency
• Fuels:– High-temperature thermochemical cycles for CSP
production—353 found & scored; 12 under further study; Develop falling particle receiver and heat transfer system for up to 1000 C cycles. Develop reactor/receiver designs and materials for up to 1800 C cycles
28Source: Building Technology Program Core Databook, August 2003. http://buildingsdatabook.eren.doe.gov/frame.asp?p=tableview.asp&TableID=509&t=xls; Annual Energy Outlook 2008.
Often Forgotten Solar
Space Heating27%
Lighting21%
Water Heating14%
Space Cooling12%
Refrigeration8%
Computers2%
Ventilation3%
Appliances7%
Electronics6%
Buildings: Total Primary Energy
38.9 quads(2006)
BUILDINGS• Passive Solar Design• Daylighting• Solar Water Heaters• Active Solar Heating/Cooling
INDUSTRY• Industrial Process Heat• Solar Water Heaters• Daylighting
• Cost of wind power from 80 cents per kilowatt-hour in 1979 to a current range of ~5+ cents per kWh (Class 5-6).
• Low wind speed technology: x20 resource; x5 proximity• >8000 GW of available land-based wind resources• ~600 GW at $0.06-0.10/kWh, including 500 miles of Transmission.• Offshore Resources. • Directly Employs 85,000 people in the U.S.
U.S. Wind Market Trend
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 20040
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Capaci
ty (
MW
)
Cost
of
Energ
y (c
ents
/kW
h*)
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 20040
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Capaci
ty (
MW
)
Cost
of
Energ
y (c
ents
/kW
h*)
9245 MW (End of 2005)
11,600 2006
~16,800 2007
Source: EERE/WTP
~25,500 2008
35
Typical Rotor Diameters
.75 MW 1.5 MW 2.5 MW 3.5 MW 5 MW
50m (164 ft)
66m (216 ft)
85m (279 ft)
100m (328 ft)
747
120m (394 ft)
Boeing
Wind Energy
GE Wind 1.5 MW
Source: EERE/WTP
Source: S. Succar, R. Williams, “CAES:Theory, Resources, Applications…” 4/08
Geothermal Technologies
• Current U.S. capacity is ~2,800 MW; 8,000 MW worldwide.• Current cost is 5 to 8¢/kWh; Down from 15¢/kWh in 1985• 2010 goal: 3-5¢/kWh.
Grid Integration• Assess potential effects of large-
scale Wind/Solar deployment on grid operations and reliability:
- Behavior of solar/wind systems and impacts on existing grid
- Effects on central generation maintenance and operation costs, including peaking power plants
• Engage with utilities to mitigate barriers to technology adoption
- Prevent grid impacts from becoming basis for market barriers, e.g. caps on net metering and denied interconnections to “preserve” grid
- Provide utilities with needed simulations, controls, and field demos
• Develop technologies for integration:- Smart Grid/Dispatch.
• Barriers: Variable output; Low capacity factor; Located on weak circuits; Lack of utility experience; Economics of transmission work against wind/solar.
• ISSUES– Geographic Diversity– Ramp Times– Islanding– System Interactions
with the most leverage at the minimum public expense?
43
Human Resources: Solar DecathlonHuman Resources: Solar Decathlon
Carnegie Mellon; Cornell; Georgia Tech; Kansas State; Lawrence Technological University; MIT; New York Institute of Technology; Pennsylvania State; Santa Clara University; Team Montreal (École de Technologie Supérieure, Université de Montréal, McGill University); Technische Universität Darmstadt; Texas A&M; Universidad Politécnica de Madrid; Universidad de Puerto Rico; University of Colorado – Boulder; University of Cincinnati; University of Illinois; University of Maryland; University of Missouri, Rolla; University of Texas, Austin.
AppliancesHot WaterLightingEnergy BalanceGetting Around
Source: STP
• Issues– At $100K/cap, $100B/y 1 M Jobs– How can this scale be ramped up to quickly?– How can quality control best be maintained?– What outreach to state/local level will be most effective?