Energy and Carbon* Use in

Manufacturing

gutowski@mit.edu

* and the other 91 naturally occurring element too!

Outline

1. Scale and Boundaries

2. Strategies

3. The other 91

Outline

1. Scale and Boundaries

2. Strategies

3. The other 91

Planet

NationSectorFirm

Product

Process

There are Many Scales to this Problem

1.5% 0.25% 1.25% 2% 1% Carbon

ÄCarbon

Energy

Carbon

GDP

Energy

Pop

GDPPopulationCarbon

+=++=

=

Global emissions

for 2005 = 7.56 GtC

“Stabilization Wedges”,

Pacala and Socolow,

Science, Vol 305 2004

= dtrateTotal

if goal is500±50ppm CO2

max,

then we need to

hold at 7GtC/yr for

50 years then reduce

Weight of Nations 2000

National Level

tonne = metric ton

(source: European Environment Agency, 2006)

• Direct Mfg Carbon is about 25 – 40%

• Direct and Indirect ~ 45 – 50%

• Of ~ 7GtC, Industry is about 2 to 3.5 GtC

Total Energy-Related Carbon Emissions

for Selected Manufacturing Industries

Source: Energy Information Administration, 1994

0 10 20 4030 50 60 70 80 90

All others (69.5)

Stone, Clay, and Glass Products (21.6)

Food and Kindred Products (24.4)

Paper and Allied Products (31.6)

Primary Metal Industries (64.5)

Chemical and Allied Products (78.3)

Petroleum and Coal Products (81.9)

Million Metric Tons

Manufacturing accountsfor about 80% of allindustrial energyconsumption, and80% of energy relatedcarbon emissions

Sullivan 1998

Energy Use by First 2 Lifecycle Stages

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Material

Production

Manufacturing Use Maintenance

and Repair

End of Life

Lifecycle Stage

To

tal

En

erg

y U

se

Pe

r C

ar

(GJ

)

Automobile Manufacturing

Sullivan 1998

Total Energy Use by Lifecycle Stage

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

Material

Production

Manufacturing Use Maintenance

and Repair

End of Life

Lifecycle Stage

To

tal

En

erg

y U

se

Pe

r C

ar

(GJ

)

Automobile

Sullivan 1998

Total Energy Use by Lifecycle Stage

0

Material

Production

Manufacturing Use Maintenance

and Repair

End of Life

Lifecycle Stage

To

tal

En

erg

y U

se

(G

J)

Computer

Electrical Energy Requirements

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

EAF Steel Aluminum Poly Si wafer Si Nano-tube

Material

Lo

g1

0 (

MJ

/kg

)

Data from Toyota, in Gutowski et al JCP 13 (2005) 1-17

1.E+02

1.E+03

1.E+04

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

1.E+08

1.E+09

1.E+10

1.E+11

1.E+12

1.E-07 1.E-05 1.E-03 1.E-01 1.E+01 1.E+03

Process Rate [cm3/s]

Injection Molding Machining Finish Machining

CVD Sputtering Grinding

Abrasive Waterjet Wire EDM Drill EDM

Laser DMD Oxidation Upper Bound

Lower Bound

Ele

ctr

icity R

eq

uir

em

en

ts [

J/c

m3

]

Conventional

Processes

Advanced

Processes

Micro/Nano

8 o

rders

of

magnitude

Gutowski, et al

IEEE, 2007

1.E+05

1.E+06

1.E+07

1.E+08

1.E+09

1.E+10

1.E+11

1.E+12

1.E+13

1.E+14

1.E-06 1.E-04 1.E-02 1.E+00 1.E+02 1.E+04

Process Rate [kg/hr]

Ele

ctr

icity R

equirem

ents

[J/k

g]

Outline

1. Scale and Boundaries

2. Strategies

3. The other 91

1. Changing Fuels/Renewables

2. Improved Efficiency

3. “Stabilization Wedges”

15Natural Gas (methane)

18.5Gasoline (octane)

18U.S. electrical grid

20Oil (0.856 g C/g Oil)

30Coal (carbon)

Carbon Intensity

gC/MJ

Energy Source

Energy-ROI, (EROEI)

Cleveland, Energy, 30, 5, pp769-782 (2005)

Energy

Investment

En

erg

y o

r C

arb

on

Time

Payback

Time

Lifetime

Payback/EROI w/o storage

18~ 1 yr = 0.35

10~ 2 yr = 0.19

(20yrs)

6 - 102 – 4 yrsDetroit = 0.16

12-211 – 2 yrsPhoenix = 0.16

(25yrs)

Worldwide Energy

Efficiency of Pig Iron Production

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000

Year

Eff

icie

nc

y o

f P

ig I

ron

Pro

du

cti

on

.

(kg

pro

du

ce

d p

er

GJ

of

en

erg

y u

se

d)

.

Efficiency

Worldwide Pig Iron Production and the

Efficiency of Pig Iron Production

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000

Year

Eff

icie

ncy o

f P

ig Iro

n P

rod

ucti

on

.

(kg

pro

du

ced

per

GJ o

f en

erg

y u

sed

)

0

100

200

300

400

500

Wo

rld

wid

e P

ig Iro

n P

rod

ucti

on

(b

illio

n k

g)

.

Efficiency

Production

Impact of Worldwide Pig Iron Production (Energy)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000

Year

Imp

ac

t (G

J o

f e

ne

rgy

us

ed

)

P

P

e

e

Worldwide Pig Iron Production versus

the Efficiency of Pig Iron Production

0

100

200

300

400

500

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Efficiency of Pig Iron Production (kg produced per kJ of energy used)

Wo

rld

wid

e P

ig I

ron

Pro

du

cti

on

(b

illi

on

kg

)

Worldwide Primary Aluminum Production versus the Efficiency

of Aluminum Oxide Reduction (Hall-Heroult Process)

0

5

10

15

20

0 5 10 15 20

Efficiency of Aluminum Oxide Reduction (kg produced per GJ of energy used)

Wo

rld

wid

e P

rim

ary

Alu

min

um

Pro

du

cti

on

(b

illi

on

kg

)

Worldwide Nitrogen Fertilizer Production versus

the Efficiency of Ammonia Synthesis

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Efficiency of Ammonia Synthesis (kg produced per GJ of energy used)

Wo

rld

wid

e N

itro

ge

n F

ert

iliz

er

Pro

du

cti

on

(th

ou

sa

nd

kg

)

Revenue Passenger Kilometer (RPK) Production versus the

Efficiency of Aircraft Travel (US data)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

Efficiency of Aircraft Travel (RPK produced per MJ of energy used)

To

tal

RP

K P

rod

uc

tio

n (

mil

lio

n R

PK

)

Pig Iron Aluminum

Nitrogen

Fertilizer

U.S. Air Travel

Impact of Worldwide Pig Iron Production (Energy)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 2000

Year

Imp

ac

t (G

J o

f e

ne

rgy

us

ed

)

Impact of Worldwide Primary Aluminum Production

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000

Year

Imp

ac

t (m

illi

on

GJ

of

en

erg

y u

se

d)

Impact of Worldwide Nitrogen Fertilizer Production

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

1920 1940 1960 1980 2000

Year

Imp

ac

t (G

J o

f e

ne

rgy

us

ed

)

Impact of Aircraft Travel (US data)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Year

Imp

ac

t (m

illi

on

GJ

of

en

erg

y u

se

d)

Pig IronAluminum

Nitrogen

Fertilizer

U.S. Air Travel

Time PeriodAverage

Annual _e/e

Average

Annual _P/P

Average _P/P /

Average _e/e

Pig Iron 1800-1984 1.1% 4.1% 3.7

Aluminum 1900-1987 1.0% 11.1% 11.4

Nitrogen Fertilizer 1915-2000 0.9% 9.6% 10.2

from Coal 1920-2005 1.3% 5.8% 4.5

from Oil 1920-2005 1.5% 6.9% 4.5

from Natural Gas 1920-2005 1.8% 9.6% 5.4

Freight Rail Travel 1960-2005 2.0% 2.5% 1.2

Passenger Air Travel 1960-2005 1.3% 6.5% 4.9

Motor Vehicle Travel 1936-2005 0.3% 3.9% 13.0

Refrigeration 1960-2000 -0.9% 2.5% ---

Electricity

Industrial Activity

Refrigeration

Motor Vehicle Travel

Passenger Air Travel

Freight Rail Travel

Electricity - natural gas

Electricity - oil

Electricity - coal

Nitrogen Fertilizer

Aluminum

Pig Iron

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

-1% 0% 1% 2%

Average Annual _e/e

Avera

ge A

nn

ual

_P

/P

• Rebound effect

Time PeriodAverage

Annual _e/e

Average

Annual _P/P

1960-2000 2.0% 2.5%

1960-1969 1.7% 3.0%

1970-1979 1.3% 1.8%

1980-1989 3.7% 1.4%

1990-1999 1.9% 3.6%

2000-2005 1.2% 2.9%

Passenger Air Travel 1960-2005 1.3% 6.5%

1960-1969 -1.6% 15.6%

1970-1979 4.7% 5.3%

1980-1989 1.4% 5.2%

1990-1999 0.6% 3.0%

2000-2005 1.8% 1.6%

Industrial Activity

Freight Rail Travel

Time PeriodAverage

Annual _e/e

Average

Annual _P/P

1960-2000 -0.9% 2.5%

1960-1969 -5.9% 3.6%

1970-1979 -4.9% 2.8%

1980-1989 1.9% 2.2%

1990-1999 4.6% 1.7%

Motor Vehicle Travel 1936-2005 0.3% 3.9%

1940-1949 -0.5% 5.3%

1950-1959 -0.5% 5.2%

1960-1969 -0.3% 4.3%

1970-1979 0.4% 3.8%

1980-1989 2.4% 3.2%

1990-1999 0.5% 2.5%

2000-2005 0.5% 1.8%

Industrial Activity

Refrigeration

FIGURE 12: Average Annual _ P/P versus

Average Annual _ e/e for Freight Rail Travel (US Class I railroads)e

2000-2005

1990-1999

1980-1989

1970-1979

1960-1969

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

0% 1% 2% 3% 4%

Average Annual _e/e

Avera

ge A

nn

ual

_P

/P

1960-2005

FIGURE 13: Average Annual _ P/P versus

Average Annual _ e/e for Passenger Air Travel (US airlines) f

2000-2005

1990-1999

1980-1989

1970-1979

1960-1969

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

-2% -1% 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6%

Average Annual _e/e

Avera

ge A

nn

ual

_P

/P

1960-2005

FIGURE 14: Historical Jet Fuel Prices f

0

50

100

150

200

250

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Year

Avera

ge J

et

Fu

el

Pri

ce P

aid

by U

S A

irlin

es

(2006 c

en

ts p

er

gallo

n)

1990-1999

1980-1989

1970-1979

1960-1969

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

-6% -4% -2% 0% 2% 4% 6%

Average Annual _e/e

Avera

ge A

nn

ual

_P/P

FIGURE 15: Average Annual _P/P versus

Average Annual _e/e for Refrigeration (US data) h

1960-2000

• Deregulation

• Fuel price/Taxes

• Efficiency Regulation

• Rebound effect

“Sta

bili

zation W

edges,

Pacala

and S

ocolo

w,

Scie

nce

, V

ol 3

05

20

04

Strategies

1. cars – fuel efficiency

2. less driving

3. efficient buildings

4. efficient coal

5. gas for coal

6. capture from coal

7. capture at H2

1. capture at synfuel

2. nuclear for coal

3. wind for coal

4. PV for coal

5. wind – H2

6. biomass for fossil

7. reduce deforest

8. alter tillage

Strategies

1. cars – fuel efficiency

2. less driving

3. efficient buildings

4. efficient coal

5. gas for coal

6. capture from coal

7. capture at H2

1. capture at synfuel

2. nuclear for coal

3. wind for coal

4. PV for coal

5. wind – H2

6. biomass for fossil

7. reduce deforest

8. alter tillage

Outline

1. Scale and Boundaries

2. Strategies

3. The other 91

Klee & Graedel look at the

mobilization (fluxes) of the elements

• Natural flows

– weathering and

erosion

– sea spray

– primary plant

productivity

• Anthropogenic flow

– mining

– fossil fuels

– biomass burning

Adapted from Klee and Graedel, 2004

54/77 = 0.7 red or orange

Thank YouThank Youhttp://http://web.mit.edu/ebmweb.mit.edu/ebm//