Energy and GHG Emissions in British

Energy and GHG Emissions in British Columbia
1990 - 2010
Report Highlights
John Nyboer and Maximilian Kniewasser
Canadian Industrial Energy End-use Data and Analysis Centre (CIEEDAC)
Simon Fraser University
June 2012
Sponsors of CIEEDAC: Environment Canada, Natural Resources Canada, Aluminium Industry Association, Canadian Chemical Producers’ Association,
Canadian Construction Association, Canadian Foundry Association, Canadian Gas Association, Canadian Petroleum Products
Institute, Canadian Steel Producers Association, Cement Association of Canada, Forest Products Association of Canada, Mining
Association of Canada, Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions.
The Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions gratefully
acknowledges the generous endowment provided
by the Province of British Columbia through the
Ministry of Environment in 2008. This funding is
enabling ongoing independent research aimed at
developing innovative climate change solutions,
opportunities for adaptation, and steps toward
achieving a vibrant low-carbon economy.
Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions
University of Victoria
PO Box 1700 STN CSC
Victoria, BC V8W 2Y2
Phone 250-853-3595
Fax 250-853-3597
E-mail [email protected]
Web pics.uvic.ca
Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions HIGHLIGHTS The Energy and GHG Emissions in British Columbia, 1990–2010 report uses data from Statistics Canada (STC) and other surveys to track trends in BC energy use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. These “Highlights” summarize key information from the report, mainly in graphs and tables. Details supporting these highlights are available in the full report at http://pics.uvic.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/publications/Energy_Data_Report_2010.pdf.1 BC ENERGY USE AND INTENSITY, 1990–2010 Energy use in BC increased overall between 1990 and 2010. From 2007 to 2009, it had decreased as a result of the economic downturn in which industrial activity was particularly hard hit. In 2010 energy consumption was up 2.6% over 2009, evidence of the beginning of the economic recovery. Both population and GDP grew consistently between 1990 and 2010. At the end of this period, from 2009 to 2010, population grew 1.6%, while overall GDP grew by 4.2% (8% in industrial sectors). This growth in GDP contrasted positively with the 1.3% drop from 2008 to 2009. Energy Use, Population and GDP for BC, 1990–2010 Sources: STC Report on Energy Supply and Demand (RESD); Canadian Socio-­‐economic Information Management (CANSIM) Table 379-­‐0025 and Table 051-­‐0001 Intensity ratios are useful indicators for illustrating general trends over time. Energy intensity indicators (energy consumption per unit of GDP or population) decreased over the period of the review. This decline suggests a significant increase in energy efficiency since 1990. However, other factors could have caused or contributed to the decrease in energy intensity, such as changes in industry structure or a shift from a manufacturing to a service economy. 1
Note that this report is distinct from the Progress to Targets: B.C. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report, 1990-2010
1 Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions Energy Intensity for BC, 1990–2010 Sources: Calculated from STC RESD; CANSIM Table 379-­‐0025 and Table 051-­‐0001 Natural gas, electricity and refined petroleum products (RPPs) are the major types of energy used in BC. RPPs include still gas, gasoline, kerosene, diesel, light and heavy fuel oil, petroleum coke, aviation gasoline and aviation turbo fuel. From 1990 to 2010, aggregate use of all types of energy grew in BC. However, in 2009, the recession led to an overall decrease from the previous year. In 2010 use of many types of energy began increasing again. The exceptions were electricity use (relatively flat), natural gas use (down 5% from 2009) and a number of minor RPPs (e.g., LFO dropped 26% from 2009 and 86% from 1990). Energy Use by Type of Energy in BC, 1990–2010 Note: “Petroleum Products” includes still gas, gasoline, kerosene, diesel, light and heavy fuel oil, petroleum coke, aviation gasoline, and aviation turbo fuel; “Other” includes coal, coke, gas plant natural gas liquids (NGLs), steam, wood waste (hog fuel) and spent pulping liquor. Source: STC RESD Electricity production is classified as primary or secondary. Primary electricity production is from renewable sources, such as hydro, wind and solar power. Secondary electricity production 2 Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions is mainly from burning fuels (natural gas, oil, diesel, coal or other fuels) to create steam in a thermal generation process. Primary electricity in the form of hydro dominates BC’s electricity generation market. In BC’s secondary electricity production, “other” fuels, with a 37% share, displaced natural gas as the main energy source. “Other” includes manufactured gases, other petroleum products including refinery fuel gas, and other fuels not defined by STC. At 34%, natural gas was a close second to “other.” The category of wood and spent pulping liquor was third at 28%. Primary and Secondary Electricity Production in BC, 1990–2010 Source: STC RESD BC ENERGY USE AND INTENSITY BY SECTOR, 1990–2010 All sectors but Agriculture showed an increase in energy use over the entire period from 1990 to 2010, with a drop in most sectors during the 2007–2009 economic downturn. The greatest impact of the downturn was in the Total Industrial and Commercial/Institutional sectors. In 2010, the Total Industrial sector showed signs of increase but the Commercial/Institutional sector was flat. 3 Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions Energy Use in the Major Sectors of BC, 1990–2010 Source: STC RESD Energy use in the Total Industrial sector was slightly below 1990 levels at the end of 2010, but up from 2009. This pattern reflected the impact of the recession and recovery on this sector’s major component, Total Manufacturing, which in turn reflected energy use in its major component, Pulp and Paper Manufacturing. In the non-­‐manufacturing industries, energy use in the Mining/Oil and Gas Extraction industry increased dramatically in recent years owing in part to the rapid expansion of the gas extraction industry in BC.2 The Forestry and logging and support activities for forestry 3(hereafter “Forestry”) energy use also increased significantly during the period, although some of the changes may be related to changes in STC data methodology and allocation. 2
Data from the Annual Census of Mines, which looks at the extraction of metal ores, non-metallic ores, and sand
and gravel pits/quarries, does not show any significant change in energy consumption in BC. While the data source
is different than that used in the RESD, it is collected by STC on behalf of Natural Resources Canada and can be
used to indicate trends.
3
The industry designated Forestry and logging and support activities for forestry covers only the extraction of
forest products and does not include any processing that would otherwise be defined as Wood Products (dimension
lumber, panel board, plywood, shakes, and the like) or Pulp and Paper.
4 Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions Energy Use by Industry in BC, 1990–2010 SOURCE: STC RESD With the exception of Forestry, energy intensities in the non-­‐manufacturing industries decreased between 1990 and 2010. Forestry is notable for its dramatic climb between 1995 and 2001 and again in 2010. This rapid increase in energy intensity was due to very large changes in diesel fuel use without any equivalent change in GDP. In fact, in some years, GDP diminishes and energy use increases, which tends to emphasize changes in the energy intensity indicator. For this reason, the energy intensity indicators shown below should be treated with caution as they are based on monetary measures of output. Recall also that intensity change may not always be the result of efficiency changes but may be due, for example, to shifts in industry structure. 4 4
The rather significant rise in intensity is not well understood. Further review with industry specialists is warranted.
5 Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions Industrial Energy Intensity Based on GDP for BC, 1990–2010 Sources: STC RESD; CANSIM Table 379-­‐0025 — Gross Domestic Product (GDP) at basic prices, by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND INTENSITY, 1990–2010 GHG emissions in BC peaked in 2004, finishing the period in 2010 at 21% above 1990 levels. Emissions levels increased in 2010 by 13% over 2009 levels. GHG Emissions, Population and GDP for BC, 1990–2010 Sources: STC RESD energy data converted to GHGs using EC coefficients (EC 2010); CANSIM Table 379-­‐0025 and Table 051-­‐0001 Between 1990 and 2010, GHG emissions intensity index based on population decreased 12%, and the intensity index based on GDP decreased 25%. These data indicate that, while considerably less GHG emissions were generated per unit of value added, emissions per person did not change as much. The reasons for the changes in emissions are difficult to identify because the link between energy and GHG emissions is not always straightforward. Issues related to the analysis of GHG emissions include the definition of process vs. fuel-­‐based GHG 6 Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions emissions, confidentiality of energy and estimated GHG data, and the estimation of indirect emissions from steam or electricity purchases.5 GHG Emissions Intensity for BC, 1990–2010 Sources: STC RESD; CANSIM Table 379-­‐0025 and Table 051-­‐0001 An analysis by fuel type shows that most GHG emissions in BC come from refined petroleum products, with gasoline as the main source. Emissions from all fuels dropped from 2008 to 2009 and increased for most types in 2010, except for natural gas. This drop reflects the decreasing use of natural gas as an energy source. GHG Emissions by Fuel for BC, 1990–2010 Source: STC RESD energy data converted to GHG emissions using EC coefficients (EC, 2010) 5
While the report does not attribute indirect emissions to the various industries that use electricity, the data are
available to allow such allocations to be made.
7 Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions Coal-­‐based GHG emissions stand out in that they appear to be negative. This is due to the method used to determine net supply for coal, which takes into account exports and imports as well as use. In years when exports exceed availability (i.e., shipment of previous year’s stock), the value becomes negative. The matter of how GHG allocation is determined will be reviewed both with STC and with provincial assessment agencies. Fuel Types Contributing to GHG Emissions in BC, 2010 Note: RPP: refined petroleum products; LFO: light fuel oil; HFO: heavy fuel oil; NGLs: natural gas liquids; Pet coke: petroleum coke; RefLPG: refined liquid petroleum gas Source: STC RESD energy data converted to GHG emissions using EC coefficients (EC, 2010) Most sectors displayed noticeable changes in energy use and thus in GHG emissions between 1990 and 2010. The greatest increases were in the Electricity, Transportation and Agriculture sectors. The data for the Agriculture sector show a significant increase in 2010 due to a magnitude change in the use of natural gas. Historically consumption in this industry, while variable from year to year, does not show an upward trend. Because of changes in STC’s methodology and allocation, the 2010 data are under review and should be treated with caution. The greatest decreases were in the Residential, Commercial/Institutional and Total Industrial sectors. GHG emissions resulting from electricity production fluctuated greatly over the study period, mainly because of changes in fossil fuel consumption by electricity utilities. 8 Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions GHG Emissions in Major Sectors of BC, 1990–2010 Source: STC RESD energy data converted to GHG emissions using EC coefficients (EC, 2010) COGENERATION FACILITIES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA, 2000–2010 Cogeneration is the simultaneous production of electrical and useful thermal energy from a single fuel. Because of its efficiency in converting primary energy into electrical and thermal energy, this technology is at the forefront of many CO2 emission reduction strategies. In 2010, BC still had the third largest electrical and thermal cogeneration capacity in Canada, after Alberta and Ontario. It maintained this ranking from 2009, despite a drop in capacity caused by the closure of several paper mills. Because not all survey respondents provided information on thermal capacity, our estimates of thermal capacity for both BC and Canada are likely too low. Cogeneration Capacity in BC, 2000–2010 Region 2000 2001 2002 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Electrical Capacity (MWe) British Columbia 1,373 1,408 1,408 1,408 1,408 1,468 1,468 1,468 1,468 1,018 Canada % BC of Total 4,525 30.3 5,267 26.7 6,352 22.2 6,743 20.9 6,789 20.7 6,936 21.2 7,007 21.0 7,007 21.0 7,007 21.0 6,553 15.5 Thermal Capacity (MWt) British Columbia Canada % BC of Total 4,156 4,433 4,433 4,433 4,433 4,433 4,433 4,433 4,433 4,848 27,200 27,846 28,937 29,063 29,127 29,159 29,473 29,473 29,473 20,056 15.3 15.9 15.3 15.3 15.2 15.2 15.0 15.0 15.0 24.2 Source: Canadian Cogeneration Database, CIEEDAC. Current values for all components are still under review. In 2010, the Pulp and Paper Manufacturing sector had the most cogeneration capacity in BC. This sector had the highest average heat-­‐to-­‐power ratio of all sectors, and the Wood Product Manufacturing sector had the second highest ratio. These industries require high quality 9 Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions thermal energy, leaving less energy available to produce electricity. Utilities using cogeneration have low heat-­‐to-­‐power ratios because their systems are designed to maximize electricity output. Cogeneration Capacity in BC by System Operator/Thermal Host, 2010 Note: Metro Vancouver’s water treatment facility on Iona Island acts as a utility in that it is listed as providing district energy. Source: Canadian Cogeneration Database, 2010, CIEEDAC Total electricity generation in BC in 2010 was 63,637 GWh, of which 12,429 GWh was non-­‐
utility. About 72% of the non-­‐utility generation was from hydro. The remainder can be accounted for by cogeneration in the industries (excluding Utilities generation) shown in the table below. The “Known” generation shown is the amount that system operators reported. CIEEDAC used these data to derive an average capacity utilization factor, which we applied to estimate the electricity generation for all cogenerators. Cogenerated Electricity Generation in BC for 2010 Sector Oil and Gas Extraction Utilities Food Manufacturing Wood Products Manufacturing Pulp and Paper Manufacturing Waste Management and Remediation Services British Columbia Known Electricity Generation (MWh/year) 0 1,700,000 4,000 234,592 2,608,388 13,000 4,559,980 Source: Canadian Cogeneration Database, 2010, CIEEDAC 10 Estimated Electricity Generation (MWh/year) 601,565 1,745,882 4,000 234,592 2,949,954 53,274 5,589,267 Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions RENEWABLE ENERGY IN BRITISH COLUMBIA, 2009 Because funding was limited this year, CIEEDAC could not perform its usual update of renewable energy generation via survey. The data, therefore, are for the period from 1990 to 2009. Renewable energy was estimated to provide up to 21% of the energy produced in BC in 2009. About 90% of renewable energy capacity was electrical capacity, with the remainder being thermal capacity. Renewable energy sources provided about 85% of BC’s total installed electrical capacity (non-­‐renewable and renewable) with large hydro dominating the market. If large hydro is excluded, the bulk of renewable energy capacity was provided by biomass wood residue sources (both electrical and thermal) and small hydro. Total Renewable Energy Capacity (kW) by Resource Type in BC, 2009 Source: CIEEDAC Renewable Energy Database, 2010 Average hydro facility capacities are 62 MW for large hydro and 3 MW for small hydro. Hydroelectricity can also be broken into hydro storage, hydro run-­‐of-­‐river and hydro other. Run-­‐of-­‐river is the second most common type of hydroelectricity in BC. 11 Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions Renewable Electrical Capacity (kW) by Resource Type in BC, 2009 Source: CIEEDAC Renewable Energy Database, 2010. Estimates of capacity utilization represent annual generation as a percentage of what could be generated if a plant ran constantly. Possible barriers to obtaining 100% capacity utilization include an inconsistent supply of fuel (biomass), sunlight (solar) or water (hydro), planned downtime for maintenance, mechanical failure and/or a lack of demand during non-­‐peak hours. Capacity Utilization by Resource Type in BC, 2009 Source: CIEEDAC Renewable Energy Database, 2010 The quantity of GHG emissions avoided by using renewable energy sources in BC is estimated to be about 30.8 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent. This assumes that the alternative to renewable electricity generation would be combined-­‐cycle gas turbines and that the alternative to burning wood residue for thermal energy would be burning natural gas in a boiler. Because so much of BC’s electricity generation is from hydro, a renewable source, BC emitted only 1.45 Mt of CO2 from electricity generation in 2009. If combined-­‐cycle gas turbines replaced these renewable energy facilities, CO2 emissions from electricity would be as high as 29.3 Mt. 12 Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions Annual Renewable Energy Generation (GWh) and Avoided Greenhouse Gas Emissions (1000 tonnes CO2 equivalent) in BC, 2009 Fuel Type Biogas Biomass Large Hydro Small Hydro Solar Other Total Known Energy Generation Estimated Energy Generation 16 4,997 60,090 3,058 0 1 68,161 Potential Total Energy Generation 89 1,980 2,022 137 0 43 4,271 105 6,976 62,112 3,195 0 44 72,432 Source: CIEEDAC Renewable Energy Database, 2010 13 Confirmed GHG Emissions Avoided 3 1,415 26,440 1,345 0 1 29,204 Estimated GHG Emissions Avoided 29 636 890 60 0 19 1,634 Potential Total GHG Emissions Avoided 33 2,051 27,329 1,406 0 19 30,838 University of Victoria
PO Box 1700 STN CSC
Victoria, BC V8W 2Y2
Phone 250-853-3595
Fax 250-853-3597
E-mail [email protected]
Web pics.uvic.ca