Energy Assurance: Essential Energy Technologies for Climate Protection and Energy Security

Greene, David L ; Boudreaux, Philip R ; Dean, David Jarvis ; Fulkerson, William ; Gaddis, Abigail ; Graham, Robin Lambert ; Graves, Ronald L ; Hopson, Dr Janet L ; Hughes, Patrick ; Lapsa, Melissa Voss ; Mason, Thom ; Standaert, Robert F ; Wilbanks, Thomas J ; Zucker, Alexander

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

关键词: Hydrocarbons;    Biomass;    Storage;    Probability;    Economics;   

DOI  :  10.2172/971595
RP-ID  :  ORNL/TM-2009/314
RP-ID  :  DE-AC05-00OR22725
RP-ID  :  971595

美国|英语

来源: UNT Digital Library

【 摘 要 】

We present and apply a new method for analyzing the significance of advanced technology for achieving two important national energy goals: climate protection and energy security. Quantitative metrics for U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in 2050 and oil independence in 2030 are specified, and the impacts of 11 sets of energy technologies are analyzed using a model that employs the Kaya identity and incorporates the uncertainty of technological breakthroughs. The goals examined are a 50% to 80% reduction in CO2 emissions from energy use by 2050 and increased domestic hydrocarbon fuels supply and decreased demand that sum to 11 mmbd by 2030. The latter is intended to insure that the economic costs of oil dependence are not more than 1% of U.S. GDP with 95% probability by 2030. Perhaps the most important implication of the analysis is that meeting both energy goals requires a high probability of success (much greater than even odds) for all 11 technologies. Two technologies appear to be indispensable for accomplishment of both goals: carbon capture and storage, and advanced fossil liquid fuels. For reducing CO2 by more than 50% by 2050, biomass energy and electric drive (fuel cell or battery powered) vehicles also appear to be necessary. Every one of the 11 technologies has a powerful influence on the probability of achieving national energy goals. From the perspective of technology policy, conflict between the CO2 mitigation and energy security is negligible. These general results appear to be robust to a wide range of technology impact estimates; they are substantially unchanged by a Monte Carlo simulation that allows the impacts of technologies to vary by 20%.