UNCONVENTIONAL GAS AND THE FUTURE John H Perkins, PhD Kyiv, Ukraine 26 September 2013.

UNCONVENTIONAL GAS AND THE FUTURE

John H Perkins, PhD

Kyiv, Ukraine

26 September 2013

THE BRIDGE IDEA

“Natural gas can serve as a bridge fuel to a low-

carbon, sustainable energy future.”

John Podesta and Timothy Wirth, “Natural Gas—A Bridge Fuel for the 21st Century”August 10, 2009

(http://www.energyfuturecoalition.org/files/webfmuploads/CAP%20EFC%20NG%20Memo%208-08-09.pdf)

The Question

In unconventional gas a bridge to sustainable energy?

Multiple answers: Yes, Maybe, No

My answer– At best: Maybe, but not likely– Most likely: No

To build a sustainable energy future:– Invest in efficiency and renewable energy– Put price on carbon

Framework:“Energy Systems”

Energy: essential

Fossil fuels = 84%

Fuels specialized...

…interchangeable

Expensive facilities

Slow turnover

Change affects all parts of system

http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/cfpp/CFPPs/SuccessStories.htm

Northside Generating Station, Florida

Ukraine’s Energy System

Ukraine: The Big Problems

Energy insecurity (gas)– Physical– Economic– Political

Climate change

Resource depletion

Ukraine – Russia Gas Dispute, 2009Source: The Other Russia and the BBC

Ukraine: Climate Change

“In Central and Eastern Europe, summer precipitation is projected to decrease, causing higher water stress. Health risks due to heat waves are projected to increase. Forest productivity is expected to decline and the frequency of peat-land fires to increase.” (IPCC, Working Group II, Climate Change 2007: Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Summary for Policy Makers, p. 12, 2007)

Security and Climate Change

Short term– Supply– Costs

Long term– Climate change

Sheffield & Wood, Projected changes in drought occurrence under future global warming frommulti-model, multi-scenario, IPCC AR4 simulations, Climate Dynamics 31 (2008): 79 – 105.

New Gas: Questions for Security and Climate

Production costs – Pipeline access – Prices?

And then what?– Replace imported gas or coal for electricity?– Replace nuclear for electricity?– Replace coal for industry?– Expand energy use?– Efficiency investments?– Renewable investments?– Expand exports?

Replace coal for

electricity?

Replace nuclear for electricity?

Replace coal for industry?

Expand energy use?

Interactions with efficiency investments?

Interactions with renewable investments?

Expand exports?

Replace imported gas for electricity?

Who Decides?

Producing companies?

National government?

Regional or local government?

Private citizens?

With what criteria?– Sales price & profit?– National security?– Climate change?

Ukraine: Wind Resources

European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, “Ukraine Country Profile,” 2010

Solar Resources

http://solargis.info/doc/_pics/freemaps/1000px/ghi/SolarGIS-Solar-map-Europe-en.png

Conclusions

Think energy systems

Unconventional gas:– May or may not help security– May or may not help climate change– May or may not help sustainability

Energiewende:– Provides best goals (for all countries)– Directs investments in right direction– Provides more manageable impacts– Leaves gas in the ground

Contact Information

John H Perkins, PhD236 Cambridge AvenueKensington, CA 94708

[email protected]

THANK YOU!

World Energy Flows (2007)

UKRAINE: Insecurity (gas), 2010

Natural gas

Oil

Coal/peat

Biofuels & waste

Hydro

Nuclear

Gas42.2%

Oil10.1%

Coal & peat27.9%

Biofuels & waste1.1%

Nuclear17.9%

Hydro0.9%

Prepared from: http://www.iea.org/stats/WebGraphs/UKRAINE4.pdf

130.5 MTOE = 5.2 quads

World Energy Flows (2007)

Private companies and

state enterprises

Competition

Communities and jobs

Customers and

communities dependent on energy

services

Ukraine: Solar Resources

European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, “Ukraine Country Profile,” 2010

Total World Energy Supply(2008, 492 EJ)

IPCC, Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources (2011)

Private companies and state

enterprises

Competition

Communities and jobs

Customers and

communities dependent on energy

services

Ukraine: Climate Change

“. . . rainfed agriculture might indeed face more climate-elated risks, but the overall conditions will probably allow for acceptable yield levels in most seasons. However . . . the risk of extremely unfavourable years . . . is likely to increase.” (Trnka, M., et al., Is rainfed crop production in central Europe at risk? Using a regional climate model to produce high resolution agroclimatic information for decision makers, Journal of Agricultural Science  148 (2010): 639-656)

ENERGY IS A MESS!

Insecure supplies

Pollution damages health

Habitat disruption

Energy poverty & energy “overabundance”

Injustices

Complicates foreign policies

Pressure on foreign-exchange reserves

UNSUSTAINABLE!

Fixing Energy:A Philosophical Framework

Sustainable energy: provide for today, leave enough for tomorrow

Energy must change and is changing.

The Questions– Which fuels?– Who decides?– Based on what criteria?– At what speed?– Who pays?– Eliminate injustices

From Fuels to Energy:The Big Picture for Ukraine and USA

Total energy on top

Fuels on left

Electricity in center

On right– Energy services

Residential

Commercial

Industrial

Transport

Non-energy use

– Discarded energyhttps://flowcharts.llnl.gov/

Energy Flow Charts(Sankey diagrams)

Riall Sankey– Irish engineer– 1898– Study of steam engine efficiency

Widely used– Flows of energy & materials– Quantitative data without lots of math– Efficiency and conservation paramount– Decision-making by large group

DRIVERS OF ENERGY CHANGE

Energy insecurity– Uneven geographic distribution– Instability of supply—geopolitical tensions– Poverty

Climate change– CO2 major cause: from fossil fuels

– Climate sensitivity to CO2 uncertain

– Need high reduction of fossil fuels– 80% reduction of CO2 61% fewer quads

80 PERCENT CO2 REDUCTIONS (USA)

FUEL Quads, 2012 CO2

Emissions(106 metric

tons)

Emissions after reduction

(106 metric tons)

Quads remaining

Coal 17.4 1660 0 0

Petroleum 34.7 2270 0 0

Gas 26.0 1370 1060 20.1

Geothermal 0.23 0.4 0.4 0.4

Biomass 4.32 0 0 4.32

Wind 1.36 0 0 1.36

Hydro 2.69 0 0 2.69

Nuclear 8.05 0 0 8.05

Solar 0.24 0 0 0.24

TOTAL 95.1 5300 1060.4 37.2 or 39%

SOLUTION:ENERGIEWENDE

Avoid fossil fuels, nuclear power

Efficiency: use less energy

Use renewable energy

New lifestyles: use less energy

CRITERIA FOR CHOICES

Technology– Functional– Acceptable (democratic)– Cost effective

Political economy (security)

Health (climate change; pollution)

Environment (climate change; pollution)

Corruption (no!)

CONCLUSIONSSustainable energy systems– Efficiency– Solar– Wind– Electrification– Energy-Environment-Economics-Equity

Success = changing Sankey flow chart– Reduce fossil fuels and CO2

– Avoid gas & nuclear

All new investment to renewable energyTime period: two generations, 50 years

SUCCESS

https://flowcharts.llnl.gov/

Time: Think 2 Generations