Fornybar energi - Finansforeningen

Fornybar energi:
Politikk, rollefordeling, fortjeneste
Danske finansanalytikere, København, 21.
November, 2007
Gunnar S. Eskeland, CICERO
Klimaet har alltid variert
• Skyldes naturlige faktorer som variasjon i
solstråling og vulkanutbrudd
• Klimaet har vært forholdsvis stabilt de siste ti
tusen år
• Nå står vi overfor store klimaendring vi selv
skaper
Hovedkonklusjonen til FNs klimapanel 2007
”FNs klimapanel regner det som meget
sannsynlig at mesteparten av
klimaendringene de siste 50 år er
menneskeskapte.”
(Meget sannsynlig > 90 % sannsynlighet)
Kilde: IPCC
Vind og havnivåstigning
• I Skagerrak og Nordsjøen beregnes inntil 8 flere døgn per
år med sterk kuling, en økning på rundt 20 %
• Men vanskelig å si noe om ekstremvind
• Om høsten øker vinden mest langs kysten
• Havnivåstigning (nedsmelting av is, oppvarming av vann)
stiger nå med dobbel hastighet jf. målinger siste hundre år
• Lavtrykksaktivitet øker: stormflo økende
Climate change impacts on electricity supply
• Hydro-electric: Likely boosted
• Wind: poorly predicted by climate scientists. Likely boosted
• Thermal, both nuclear and combustion based: likely negative impact through
cooling costs
• Biomass: positive impact possible (temperature, precipitation, co2
fertilization). Unlikely important.
• Solar: on solar thermal, positive perhaps. Photovoltaics: no effect
• Generally: apart from through hydropower, effects are poorly known, or
considered minor
Enorm treghet i klimasystemet – Tilpasning må starte
nå, samtidig med utslippsreduksjoner
Utslippsreduksjoner: 500 PPM (togradersmålet),
krever store globale utslippsreduksjoner innen 2050
Behovet for utslippsreduksjoner
• Planleggerens løsning: hvor og hvordan kniper vi på utslippene
• Økonomlæreboken: hvis det koster å slippe ut...
• Markedet: en svak eim av profittmuligheter?
- ’Feel good’ vs ’money does not stink’
- Skal noen ’miste skjorten’ også?
- Etablerte interesser, og ’creative destruction’
Internasjonal klimapolitikk
• Kyotoprotokollen: 28 % av verdens utslipp, 5 av århundrets år,
kanskje ikke avvik fra ’business as usual’ (3 dimensjonalt svakt)
• IPCCs 4th assessment report, and Stern Review: mitigation is
good investment
• Europa: 2 grader celsius 100 år, 20 eller 30 prosent kutt, 20 år
• Etter Kyotos første periode 2008-12?
What are the macro-economic costs (2030)?
All sectors and regions have the potential to
contribute (IPCC)
How can emissions be reduced?
Behovet for teknologisk endring:
Lavutslippsbanen 1990-2005 peker på muligheter.
Kilde: NOU 2006:18 ”Et klimavennligere Norge”
Emission Reduction by Technology Area
ACT Map Scenario
Coal to gas
Nuclear
End-use
efficiency
Power
generation
Fossil fuel generation
efficiency
CCS
Hydropower
Biomass
Biofuels in transport
CCS in fuel
transformation
Fuel mix in buildings
and industry
Other renewables
CCS in industry
Improved energy efficiency most important contributor to reduced
emissions
Scenario Analysis
Key Findings (from IEA, ETP study)
• Most energy still comes from fossil fuels in 2050
• Global CO2 emissions can be returned towards today’s level by 2050
• Growth in global oil and electricity demand can be halved
• Power generation can be substantially de-carbonised by 2050
• De-carbonising transport will take longer but must be achieved in the
second half of the century
INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY
AGENCE INTERNATIONALE DE L’ENERGIE
Key Technologies
• A technology portfolio will be needed
• Improving energy efficiency is top priority
• CCS is key for a sustainable energy future
• Other important technologies:
 Renewables, including biofuels
 Nuclear
 Efficient use of natural gas
 In time and with effort, hydrogen and fuel cells
INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY
AGENCE INTERNATIONALE DE L’ENERGIE
Costs
• None of the technologies have higher incremental costs than 25 USD/tonne
CO2
• Significant transitional costs for RD&D and deployment programs
• Improved energy efficiency substantially reduce need for supply side
investments and fuel imports
– Electricity sector: demand side savings offset most of the additional investment
costs for power generation
• Progress in efficiency and CCS key to keep mitigation costs down
INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY
AGENCE INTERNATIONALE DE L’ENERGIE
Bottom up analysis
€ce nt s/ kW h
Marginal costswith no CO2-price
6,77
8,00
5,59
4,89
4,83
6,00
3,29 3,50
2,72
4,00 1,99
2,00
0,00
EC EG NG NC NG NC EC EG
CCS CCS CCS CCS
EC
EG
NG
NC
NGCCS
NCCCS
ECCCS
EGCCS
Carbon capture and storage: a central question
New Power Plants:
Cost of electricity
Equivalent CO2 price
Natural Gas Combined Cycle
€cents/kWh
€/tCO2
Without CCS
2,38 - 3,85
With capture and enhanced oil recovery
2,85 - 5,38
14,6 - 52,3
With capture and geological storage
3,30 - 5,92
29,2 - 70
Pulverized Coal
Without CCS
3,30 - 4,00
With capture and enhanced oil recovery
3,77 - 6,23
6,9 - 33,8
With capture and geological storage
4,85 - 7,61
23 - 54,6
Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle
Without CCS
3,15 - 4,69
With capture and enhanced oil recovery
3,07 - 5,77
(-5,4) - 23,8
With capture and geological storage
4,23 - 7,0
10,8 - 40,8
Source: IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage - 2005, CICERO calculations
Marginal costswith various CO2 prices
14,00
€
cents/ kWh
12,00
10,00
8,00
6,00
4,00
0,00
50
EC
EG
NG
The colors show how each technology will
be affected relative to the others of higher
NC
NGCCS NCCCS
ECCCS
0
EGCCS
CO2
prices:
0,20,50 &
100€
/ tCO
2
2,00
Behovet for teknologisk endring: Energi:
Green energy
Fossil energy
Emissions
Biomass
Wind
Sun
Waves
Tides
Geothermal
Salt gradients
Nuclear
CO2 capture &
storage
Coal, oil, gas
2000
2025
2050
2075
2100
Teknologiutvikling: myndighetsoppgave?
Cap-and-trade, or emission tax regime
No
Yes
No
- Cost effective.
- No climate policy
Con:
- Likely to have low participation.
- W eak on long term mitigation.
Pro:
- Seeks long term carbon-lean
solutions.
- Some R&D can be done by country
or small coalition.
Yes
Technology, R&D cooperation regime
Pro:
- Some climate friendly tech. R&D
justified by other objectives: energy
security, environment, etc.
Con:
- R&D program alone likely weak on
direction, implementation and
adoption, since incentives fail
Pro:
- R&D strengthens long term dimension of
tax- or cap-and-trade system.
Technological advances will reduce
political resistance to mitigation. Cap-andtrade improves direction and efficiency of
R&D. Thereby also broadens participation
and deepens emission reductions.
Con:
- Multiple treaties may make for complex
negotiations
The distribution of costs:
• Depends entirely on instrument choice
• History speaks:
– Established capital is barely challenged
– Freely distributed quotas as a way to change the world
• Electricity sector as example
– Free quotas to old and to new: reasons and consequences
– Green certificates etc: Tax and cross-subsidize (variations on PPP:
PPO and CPP)
• Future speaks
– Rewards to renewables: New capacity and old, new tech. and old
– Who generates new technology?
El i Europa:
Halvparten fossilt, halve resten kjernekraft
Country
Fossil fuels
Nuclear
France
8,6
76,5
Germany
62,5
29,4
Italy
77,4
0
Netherlands
90,7
4,2
Norway
0,4
0
Russia
64,6
15,4
Sweden
4
44,6
73,5
23,4
UK
‘Average’
Source: IEA, 2001a. Electricity statistics.
48
24
Answer: deployment of presently available
technologies will be assisted (not merely pulled):
• Green certificates
• investment subsidies
• feed in tariffs
• Standards
• Quotas and/or emission trading
system
• Energy efficiency/decentralized
solutions
Til slutt:
• Utslippsreduksjoner kan vanskelig bli drepende
• Internasjonal koordinering betyr alt
• Stødighet betyr nesten alt
• Teknologiendring betyr mye
• Bred politisk forankring viktig og mulig