Addressing energy drivers: g gyEconomic perspective for

l h l iclean technologies

Dr. Eric BibeauDr. Eric BibeauMechanical & Manufacturing Engineering DeptMechanical & Manufacturing Engineering Dept

Manitoba Hydro/NSERC Alternative Energy Chair Manitoba Hydro/NSERC Alternative Energy Chair

Fueling the Future: International Business Opportunities in Energy

2008 Mellem Business Symposium, Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Opportunities in Energy

Economic Perspective forEconomic Perspective forClean TechnologiesClean Technologies

Drivers Not easyDrivers Not easy being green

What is “Clean Technologies”g–Ex: is using more fossil fuels for

“greening” a robust business model to fuel the futuremodel to fuel the future

Energy DriversEnergy DriversgygyPeak oilPeak oilEnvironmental emissionsEnvironmental emissionsGHGGHG Global warmingGlobal warmingSustainabilitySustainabilityDependable supplyDependable supply

Clean TechnologiesClean TechnologiesggWhich drivers to target?– GHG reduction versus Sustainability

Cl t h l i f il– Clean technologies versus more fossil

Where is economic value proposition?Where is economic value proposition?How to compare options?How to compare options?– Focus on best long term value for society– Use fossil to address drivers and control public

perspective (e.g: Clean Coal)

My definition of My definition of Clean TechnologiesClean Technologies

Increase the renewable energy ratio RER of a closed systemRER of a closed system– RE

RE– PE– Closed system

RERER=Closed systemPE

RER

Increasing RERN t i ti– Not economic perspective on energy

Gasoline 12.6%

Diesel 8.94% Petroeum Gases 0.483%

P t l C k 1 27%

Kerosene and Stove Oil 0.127% CanadaNGL's 4.11%

Still Gas 2.78%

Light Fuel Oil 1.57%

Petroleum Coke 1.27%

PEAviation Fuel 2.29%

Heavy Fuel Oil 2.18%

Coal 1.72%

Non-Renewable Fuel

N t l G 28 2%

Non-Renewables

Natural Gas 28.2%

Coal 9.99%Renewables Non-Rew.

Elec. 11.33 EJNatural Gas 3.07%

Renewable Electricity

Rew.Fuel

Nuclear 2.76%

Biomass-P&P 4.51%Hydro 10.5%

Wind and Tidal 0.235%Biomass 0.221%

Heavy Fuel Oil 1.13%

Petroleum Coke 0.300%Diesel 0.0488%Light Fuel Oil 0.00413%

Biomass-Non-P&P 0.936%Biofuels 0.0476%

Renewable Secondary Electricity 1.88% Geothermal

0.0295%Renewable Secondary Electricity

0.489%Diesel 0.0205%Light Fuel Oil 0.00174%

Other 0.108%

Biomass-P&P 0.0928%

Biomass 6.58% Coal 4.19%Nuclear 3.42%

Natural Gas 1.29%Heavy Fuel Oil 0.476%

Petroleum Coke 0.126%Diesel 0.0205%

Non-Rew. Sec. Elec. 0.332%

Heavy Fuel Oil 0.0324%

Hydro 13.7%

Wind and Tidal 0.307%

Heat ElectricityCanadaMotor Gasoline 16.5%

Natural Gas 1.17%Renewables

Electricity

Chemical

SE

Coke 1.74%

Diesel 1.51%

Non-RenewablesTrasportation

Chemical

8.644 EJDiesel Fuel Oil 10.1%

Light Fuel Oil 2.05%

Heavy Fuel Oil 1.78%

Non-Rew. Sec. Elec. 0.0165%Kerosene and Stoe Oil 0.167%

Heat

Aviation Fuel 3.00%

Natural Gas (Pipelines) 2.31%

Natural Gas 22.7%Heavy Fuel Oil 0 781%

Propane 0.119%

Non-Rew.Sec. Elec. 1.28%

Propane 1.13%

Heavy Fuel Oil 0.781%

Simplification of Course of ActionSimplification of Course of Actionpp

Address all drivers at onceIncreasing the renewable energy ratio

RE– 3 levers (R E D) PE

RERER =

R: Add more RenewablesE I ll Effi iE: Increase overall EfficiencyD: Reduce energy DemandD: Reduce energy Demand

– Levers Relative and Independent

Canada’s RER PerformanceCanada’s RER Performance0.160

0.180

0 120

0.140

0.100

0.120

We are willing to use public

0.060

0.080 and private funds to support clean technologies that

0.020

0.040

greduces the RER

0.000

Energy SourcesPlanetFusion

SunRenewable

BiomassPhotosynthesis

RenewableNon‐Renewable

Fission

Renewable

able

Climate

PlanetMotion

Climate

Fossil Fuels Geothermal

Non

‐Ren

ewa

Ocean Thermal

Climate

Wind HydroWaves

Tidal

Radiation

Heat NuclearElectricityChemical 

R

End  MechanicalEnergy Forms

Energy

User

Fuels Latent Electro

Mechanical work

EnergyStorage

Fuelsliq/gas/solid

Latent  sensible

Solid FuelElectrochemical

Mechanical

Renewable Energy Vectors Electricity Hot waterRenewable Energy Vectors Electricity Hot water

Keeping perspectiveKeeping perspectiveWorld consumes 17 TWR bl E fRenewable Energy form – Sun = 7000 timesSun 7000 times– Tides = 0.3 times – Earth = 190 times

RERRER1 kW R = 1 kW E = 1 kW D– 1 kW R = 1 kW E = 1 kW D

Energy use increasinggy g– Population and Per capita

Renewable Sources to Increase RER Renewable Sources to Increase RER World demand = 17 TWWorld demand = 17 TWWorld demand = 17 TWWorld demand = 17 TW

Solar – 78,000 TW radiation

39 000 TW t– 39,000 TW water evaporation

– 3,600 TW wind & waves– 90 TW Photosynthesis

Renewable Sources to Increase RER Renewable Sources to Increase RER World demand = 17 TWWorld demand = 17 TWWorld demand = 17 TWWorld demand = 17 TW

Tides – 3 TW Tides caused by moon

Nuclear energy from earth – 32 TW rock conduction– 0.3 TW volcanoes and hot springsp g

Practical potential of REPractical potential of REPractical potential of REPractical potential of REHydro Power 0.9 TWHydro Power 0.9 TW– can find additional forms

Wind 2 TW – 4% utilization of ≥ class 3 land area)4% utilization of ≥ class 3 land area)

Geothermal unknown – needs drilling technology breakthrough

Waves and tides 1 5 TWWaves and tides 1 - 5 TW– Technology in development

Practical potential of REPractical potential of REPractical potential of REPractical potential of RE

Solar heat all heat/power– Marginal economicsMarginal economics

Solar PV all power – High cost issues

Biomass 3 TWBiomass 3 TW – 5% of earth surface– Exclude algae

Fossil: Business as usual?Fossil: Business as usual?(Money Time Talent Resources)(Money Time Talent Resources)(Money, Time, Talent, Resources)(Money, Time, Talent, Resources)

NPC Global Oil Report (next 25 years)• Accumulating risks; Workforce lacking• CO2 policies will change energy mix, increase cost and reduce

demand

Which is a better Which is a better economic prospecteconomic prospect

Impact on RER (3 levers R E D)CCS CHP–CCS or CHPHydrogen & fuel cells or PHEV–Hydrogen & fuel cells or PHEV

–Biofuels or CHP

What gets funded (public/private)g (p p )–Hydrogen, CCS, Biofuels

CCS versus CHP in CanadaCCS versus CHP in Canada

9.98 EJ

Non-Renewable Resources

0.175

Renewable Ratio

9.47 EJ0.164

0.1578.75 EJ

Current Energy Use Coal CCS Coal Cogeneration (CHP)

Coal Consumption Primary Conversion Efficiency

Current Energy Use Coal CCS Coal Cogeneration (CHP)

1.33 EJ

1.84 EJ

1.33 EJ

81.2%

75.9%

72.7%

Current Energy Use Coal CCS Coal Cogeneration (CHP) Current Energy Use Coal CCS Coal Cogeneration

(CHP)

My “Clean Technologies” R&D My “Clean Technologies” R&D Areas to Increase RERAreas to Increase RER

PETTM T h l (R E D)PETTM Technology (R E D)Electric mobility via the PHEV–Electric mobility via the PHEV pathway

Entropic Cycle (R)–distributed low-cost bioenergy CHP

Kinetic Turbines (R)f f–Extracting energy from flowing water

1. PET™1. PET™PlugPlug--in Electric Transporter (in Electric Transporter (R, E, DR, E, D))

PHEV strong value proposition for mobilityPHEV strong value proposition for mobility– favors the development of renewables– allow most effective use of electricity for mobility– manages vehicle weight for extended rangemanages vehicle weight for extended range

PET– Platform technology to allow 900 million vehicles

and the 600 projected additional vehiclesp jaccess benefits of hybridizationaccess benefits of grid electricity for mobilityaccess benefits of grid electricity for mobility

PlugPlug--in Electric Transporter Design in Electric Transporter Design gg p gp gProvides opportunity for users – buy smaller vehicles to tow occasional loads

Key aspects of PETKey aspects of PET– limited changes to the vehicle

After market product simple to install

PHEV and the PHEV and the RERRERWhy new PHEV loads need to come from

blnew renewables– Capital cost for new renewables << storage costCap ta cost o e e e ab es sto age cost– To increase RER: new R and increase in E

C d ’ h d l d d f– Canada’s hydro power already accounted for– For Manitoba, power taken from exports for PHEV p p

is replaced by mostly coalICE 30%ICE 30%Coal plant 40%

Power Export Assumed MH Current EmissionGHG Export Factor

Displacements Profile (%) (kg CO2/kWhr)North Dakota 10 1.02Mi t 80 0 69Minnesota 80 0.69Saskatchewan 5 0.83Ontario 5 0.24

0.71Total

2. Entropic Cycle (2. Entropic Cycle (RR) ) p y (p y ( ))Small scale (50 to 5,000 kWe)– thermal energy conversion – renewable fuels and waste heatrenewable fuels and waste heat

Combined heat and power (CHP)l t i it d 90oC h t t– electricity and 90oC hot water

Closed, single-loop, fluid mixture– temperature change during boiling– internal recuperation of latent heatp

Steam operators not requiredD l d f l t di t ib t dDeveloped for low cost distributed power

Entropic Cycle and Entropic Cycle and RERRERp yp yDerive 70% of the LHV of the biomass residuesLimits transportation fuel as used locallyReplacesReplaces– fossil fuel used for heat with renewable energy

fossil base electricity with renewable energy– fossil base electricity with renewable energy

Can be best strategy for communities to cost ff ti l i th i REReffectively increase their RER

No steam operators and added safety

Small-scale SteamCONVERSION EFFICIENCY

HEA T

10%

EL

20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Organic Rankine Cycle

Entropic Cycle

Air Turbine

HEA TELEC

HEA TELEC T

HEA TEL

ApplicationsApplicationsApplicationsApplicationsHeat recovery y– gas turbines, diesel compressors, flare

C t i d t i l t h tCapture industrial waste process heat – aluminum, glass, steel plants, g , p

Sawmills can become energy integrated– remanufacturing plants & construction

District CHP displacesDistrict CHP displaces – diesel generation; natural gas; propane– agricultural and remote communities

3. Kinetic Turbines (3. Kinetic Turbines (RR))3. Kinetic Turbines (3. Kinetic Turbines (RR))Important undeveloped hydro resourcesImportant undeveloped hydro resourcesLimited civil structuresFast deploymentL k f il bl f d tLack of available performance dataRemote sites to displace dieselRemote sites to displace dieselMultiple units to increase capaicty

InIn--Situ River TestingSitu River TestingInIn--Situ River TestingSitu River TestingQuantify costsy• deployment• operational• operational• maintenance

Study effect of ice and cold weatherTest if suitable for river applicationsTest if suitable for river applications

Design NeedsDesign NeedsDesign Needs Design Needs Low cost anchorSimple to deploy/retrieveAdd i t l f tAddress environmental factors• ice break up and active/passive frazzle icep p• logs and debris• cold temperatures (safety and loads)• cold temperatures (safety and loads)

AcknowledgementAcknowledgementNSERC/Manitoba Hydro Chair in

AcknowledgementAcknowledgementy

Alternative Energy

Presentations on alternative energyPresentations on alternative energyhttp://www.umanitoba.ca/engineering/mech_and_ind/prof/bibeau/