pathways to sustainable energy project and recommendations ... · rus russian federation scs south...
TRANSCRIPT
E N E R G Y
Pathways to Sustainable Energy
Project and recommendations from
EGRMPresented by Anastasia Ioannou and Gioia Falcone
1 May 2019
1
ENERGY
How can the UNECE Region attain Sustainable Energy (SE)?
Current Phase: May 2017 – Oct 2019 (further phases planned)
Outputs
Pathways and Scenario Development Modelling of SE scenarios (towards 2050) at a Sub-regional and Regional
level
Policy and technology options
Policy dialogue Dialogues with project stakeholders
Sub-regional workshops
“Early-warning system” development SE Targets
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
Signposts
https://www.unece.org/energy/pathwaystose.html
Pathways project overview
2
ENERGY
Timeline of the project
Timeline:
Pathways Project – Consultations with Stakeholders
Key eventsSep 25-28, High Level
Political Dialogue
May 14-15, Outreach workshop
May 16, CSE open-ended consultation meeting
Dec 2018 – Feb 2019,
preparation of the
documentation
Mar 1, formal
consultations start – send
out drafts to EG
Mar 2019, collection of
feedback – calls with
EGs, CSE Bureau,
Advisory board
May 2019, integration of
feedback & finalisation of
materials
May 3, send out materials to
CSE in preparation of May 16
meeting
Apr 4, webinar on
key findings from
EGs
3
GHG emissions from the energy system
Energy-related air pollution,
Water use & water stress
Energy / electricity services per capita Total energy expenditures per GDP per capita
Share of calories from non-staple food (%)
Energy for
Sustainable
Development
ENERGY FOR
QUALITY OF LIFE
ENERGY AND
ENVIRONMENT
ENERGY
SECURITY
“Secure the energy needed for economic development”
• Net imports
• Energy intensity
• Rate of improvement in
energy intensity
• Conversion efficiency
Sustainable EnergyThree Pillars
Energy investments
Total Final Energy Consumption (TFC) and Total Primary Energy Supply (TPES), and in electricity (%)
“Minimize adverse energy system
impacts on climate, ecosystems & human
health”
“Provide affordable energy that is available
for all at all times”
ENERGY
4
ENERGY
OUTPUT
• Net imports
• Energy intensity (J/US$ PPP)
• Rate of improvement in energy intensity (% CAGR)
• Conversion efficiency
• Energy investment of GDP
• Total Final Energy Consumption and Total Primary Energy Supply, and in electricity (%)
Energy Security
• Electricity consumption per capita
• Energy expenditure per GDP
• GDP per cap
Quality of Life
• Total global GHG emissions
• SO2 NOx O3 concentrations
• Cooling water use in electricity generation (l/kWh)
Environmental Sustainability
MODEL
LPG/KPI
LPG/KPI
LPG/KPI
Targets/GoalsMetric
examples
• Population by regionDemographic
• GDP per capita by regionProductivity
•Power plant conversion efficiency
•Transport fuel economy, etc.
•Crop yields, etc.
Technology
•Fossil fuel, uranium, solar, wind, geothermal, land, water and other
Resources
•Pollution control
•NDCs
•Water usePolicies
INPUT Examples
Integrated Model
• Resource extraction, exports-imports, energy transformation and use
• Markets• Capital• Labor• Agriculture• Land use• Carbon cycle• Atmosphere• Hydrology• Oceans
Scenario developmentIllustration of scenario design
5
ENERGY
Two integrated assessment models based on different methodologies
GCAM - Global Change Assessment Model: A global Equilibrium model which clears markets through iterative price adjustments and feedback loops, and
MESSAGE - Model for Energy Supply System Alternatives and their General Environmental Impacts Optimization model: according to which supply must meet predetermined demand at minimum system costs (partial equilibrium)
Technology zoom-in Technology Research assessing the status and prospects (availability,
performance, costs) of current and future energy system technologies
6
Integrated Assessment ModelsParticipating Organisations
7
BMU Belarus, Moldova, Ukraine
CAS Central Asia
NAM North America
RUS Russian Federation
SCS South Caucasus
WEU Western Europe
ENERGY
Modeling Regions
MESSAGE model: 7 UNECE Sub-Region
EEU Central &Eastern Europe
ENERGY
Summary of policy scenarios &
technology sensitivities
Population and GDP trajectories taken from the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 2 (SSP2)
8
Policy scenarios - reflect various levels of emissions constraints based on explicit sustainability policies REF (SSP2 Middle of the Road Development) NDC (regional CO2 constraints consistent with country-level NDCs through 2030 with
“continued ambition” through 2100*) NDC-G (global CO2 constraint equal to the sum of regional NDC constraints, model allocates
across regions based on economic efficiency) P2C (regional CO2 constraints consistent with country-level NDC pledges through 2030 then
continued reductions to achieve a 2ºC target in 2100) P2C-G (global CO2 constraint equal to the sum of regional P2C constraints, model allocates
across regions based on economic efficiency)
Policy scenarios are further explored by technology sensitivities A technology’s sensitivity case should be compared to its own reference scenario to inform
decision makers about the impacts of alternative technology priorities on reaching sustainability development objectives
Technology sensitivities - represent different potential technological development pathways in which specific technologies develop more quickly or slowly than in the REF assumptions
REF (reference energy technology assumptions)
RES (reduced capital costs for geothermal, solar, and wind)
NUC (reduced capital costs for nuclear)
noCCS (RefTech – CCS technology)
Why the SSPs?
SSPs1 are widely used in the Sustainable Development (SD) and Climate Change
(CC) communities. They represent well described and ‘agreed’ development pathways.
Peer reviewed and vetted
1Adapted from B. van Ruijven (2015); K. Riahi (2017); and O’Neil (2017)
ENERGY
SSP2: “Middle of the road”Reference Scenario
9
Why SSP2 out of five
SSPs?
“Middle of the road”
scenario deemed most
suitable
Social, economic, and
technological trends proceed
along historical patterns
Modeling results
10
11
ENERGY
Modeling Results: Primary energy supply
Primary energy supply, UNECE
Reference Scenario
12
ENERGY
Modeling Results: Primary energy supply
Primary energy supply, UNECE
P2C Scenario
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Prim
ary
energ
y s
upply
[E
J]
Electricity
Biomass
Wind
Solar
Geothermal
Hydro
Nuclear
Gas
Oil
Coal
13
ENERGY
Modeling Results: Investment needs
Comparing investment needs, UNECE
T&D: transmission and distribution of electricity and district heat
Investment needs
for achieving
NDC is slightly
more than no-
policy scenario
(4% on average)
For achieving a 2-
degree target the
investment needs
grow significantly
by 34% compared
to REF
Investment in RE
and energy
efficiency
comprise a big
part of new
investments in
P2C
ENERGY
Modeling Results: Indicators
NDC policy change, by
technology in UNECE
Percent change from
reference values, by
technology
For the whole UNECE
region, comparing to each
technology’s P2C scenario
to its own no policy
(reference) scenario in
2050
2050
Import Dependence
FE Intensity
Energy Expend
Electricity per cap
GDP per cap
GHG Emissions
CO2 per capita
CH4 Emissions
NOX Emissions
SO2 Emissions
NOTE: Higher values indicate improvement for all metrics
ENERGY
Modeling Results: Indicators
P2C policy change, by
technology in UNECE
Percent change from
reference values, by
technology
For the whole UNECE
region, comparing to each
technology’s P2C scenario
to its own no policy
(reference) scenario in
2050
Import Dependence
FE Intensity
Energy Expend
Electricity per cap
GDP per cap
GHG Emissions
CO2 per capita
CH4 Emissions
NOX Emissions
SO2 Emissions
2050
NOTE: Higher values indicate improvement for all metrics
EGRM Feedback
16
ENERGY
Key Insights from the Perspective of EGRM:
Reached out to EGRM Bureau and Chairs of sub-groups: 6 responses received. EGRM is a multi-sector EG
representing the full energy portfolio. Contrasting/diverging views.
Oil & gas still leading the transition. RE and nuclear will not displace them unless the financial/policy drivers
exist. Oil should be replaced by gas and RE for heating and transport, and kept for petrochemicals.
RE alone will not suffice to achieve 1.5/2.0 oC target, Gradual phase out of coal and replacement by gas,
cleaner coal industry, greater focus on energy efficiency. Contrasting views on nuclear power role. Hydrogen
not an effective solution yet. Should seek a sustainable energy mix rather than focusing on particular fuels in an
isolated manner.
Synergies between fossil fuels and RE. Increasing role of NG as a bridging fuel leading to 2030.
Contrasting views on CCS: Viable technology if costs decrease. Huge investments required, which may have a
negative social impact, currently no policy incentives provided. CCS and bio-energy with CCS likely not to be
ready even by 2050.
Massive amounts of critical elements required (e.g. batteries, PVs), which could be a limiting factor also due
to geopolitical differences; however, alternative technology, acceptable international standards, efficient use and
circular economy may address it.
Business models and disruptive technologies: Shale oil disruptive force in recent years, new nuclear
technologies such as molten salt reactors, thorium, better storage technologies, decentralized RE production.
Feedback received Key insights
17
ENERGY
Policy Recommendations:
Governments should develop new, transformative policy instruments and speed up regulatory reform. Laws & taxes appropriately modified to foster the rapid demand and supply of RE while penalizing fossil fuels.
Development of storage technologies should be pushed by governments as strongly as possible, main game changer for RE. Heat storage in molten salts and other forms of storage should also be investigated.
The transport sector, particularly rail and maritime should be pushed by governments as large carbon contributors not bound by government legislation.
Role of nuclear filling the gap of reliable, low carbon electricity may be considered. In many countries, consultations with governments have already determined that nuclear has to be a key component especially if uranium and possibly thorium resources available from the country.
Alternative business models moving away from energy as commodity (push model/ customer communication as a one dimensional bill) to energy as true utility (service/ public good?) where customer partners with (or even replaces) the provider.
Global governance required to ensure optimal usage of scarce/limited resources. Transition from a linear to a circular model. EU Waste Directive should promote further this shift. Waste management part of the initial development plans. Zero waste principal should be built into incentives. Adoption of innovative accounting tools such as the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA).
Resource curse can be avoided if a dynamic systems approach and proper information architecture are used in studying the problems, proper tools could be developed. The UN Resource Management System is one such approach.
18
Feedback receivedPolicy recommendations
ENERGY
What are the socio-economic-environmental impacts of the energy transformation? For example: Role of coal in the future energy mix towards achieving sustainable energy targets: Phasing out coal power plants or investing in renovating existing coal plants should take into account socio-economic-environmental aspects.
How would an accelerated transition to sustainable energy impact natural resources (e.g. water resources and resource production)? What can be the role of circular economy?
What do you think about phasing out of RE subsidies?
How do you see the UNFC contributing to Pathways? Does the E-axis capture all social impact (e.g. resource curse) and land-food-energy-water nexus nuances?
Should land, forests, waters, fisheries, etc. be regarded as UNFC-classifiable resources?
What are the priorities that emerge from EGRM Policy Recommendations for Pathways?
If there was a Phase II of the pathways project, which focus area would you suggest?
Discussion for further feedback
19
