Thursday, October 16, 2014

Energy and Transportation


Energy and Transportation

            The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reported recently that emissions from transportation doubled from 1970 to 7 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2010. Road vehicles accounted for 80% of this increase. The top 4 transportation sources accounted for 92% of emissions from the transport sector:

            Road                                                    72.06%

            International ad coastal shipping   9.26%

            International aviation                        6.52%

            Domestic aviation                               4.11%

In contrast, rail contributed 1.6% of transportation emissions.

            Only 10% of the global population accounts for 80% of passenger kilometers. Passenger kilometers are up 50% from 2005 and are expected to double by 2050. Not only are road vehicles the greatest transport sector contributor to greenhouse gasses, road vehicle kilometers are the fastest growing member of the transport sector.

            Putting the transport sector in perspective, energy was the greatest contributor to total emissions at 34% and agriculture, forestry, and land use was next at 24%. Transport contributed about 14% to total emissions. For the United States, electric power was the greatest contributor to US emissions at 38% while transport was next at 34%.  Transport, and especially road vehicles, may then be expected to grow in importance as transport becomes a greater proportion of greenhouse gas emissions.

            One might hope that the electric power sector might experience declines that give some room for an ever expanding transportation contribution to greenhouse gas emissions. On the contrary, the International Energy Agency forecasts a 56% increase in electric power by 2040 and the US Energy Information Agency forecasts a 25% increase in US electric power by  2040. The US is currently below 2008 emissions by about 14% and would rise to just below 2008 levels as 2040 would see as much electric power generated from coal and nuclear as today while a third of the increase of 25% by 2040 would be met by doubling generation from renewables and two-thirds from increased use of natural gas. While natural gas emissions are half those of coal, they are about 100 times emissions from renewables.

            The US is second in overall greenhouse gas emissions behind China and ahead of India, the third largest emitter nation. Yet US per capita emissions are three times per capita emissions for China and 12 times per capita emissions for India. US leadership in reducing emissions may therefore be center stage for progress capping the rise in global temperature to 2 degrees. Just to focus the mind, looking at historic data for when global temperatures were 4 degrees higher, sea levels were 18 feet higher. Looking further back to when average temperatures were 6 degrees higher, sea levels were 120 feet higher. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change may expect current efforts to lead to a rise of 4.7 degrees. Forecasts of the population that could be supported at an 18 foot rise in sea level are about 1 billion people. For me, looking at ways to curb greenhouse gas emissions are preferable to discussions of the fate of the other 8 billion or so that will have to go.

            For the US, the Clean Power Plan that would cut electric power emissions by 30%

are a key step. US standards for mileage for cars and light trucks to rise to 54.5 miles per gallon by model year 2025 are hopeful. US mileage has improved from 13mpg in 1975 to

19.7 mpg in 1999 and even further to 24 mpg in 2013. Yet the US has a long way to go to catch up with  the European Union at 45 miles per gallon and even higher mileage in Japan. Gas prices in the  EU are about $9 per gallon and cars are much smaller attesting to the importance of price signals. A US increase in gasoline tax would fuel funds for infrastructure improvements and get clear results in reduced emissions.

            The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change calls for actions to avoid energy use (walking or biking come to mind), modal choice (rail versus ancient trucks in an improved rail network in Africa jumps out from Jeffrey Sachs Age of Sustainable Development comparison of the nationwide rail network in India versus the continent of Africa’s fragmented links to various minerals and other natural resources), energy intensity (US potential savings from energy efficiency, for example, are well documented), and improved carbon intensity (using renewables to produce electricity may be 200 yield 200 times fewer emissions than coal).

            International documentation of success stories in each of these action areas may produce the wave of progress that we clearly need. Let the innovation begin!energy and transportation

Tuesday, October 7, 2014

Fuel for the Home Fires of Haiti


Fueling the Home Fires in Haiti

            Haiti has about 2 million households. Domestic energy for cooking comes from propane for about 100,000 and 50,000 use some other upscale fuel. The other 1.85 million households (averaging 5 persons per household) use wood or charcoal for cooking. Haiti can sustainably harvest about 500,000 tons of wood (for direct use or to make charcoal) per year. Actual use is 4 million tons per year. Stretching a bit, 250,000 households can use wood or wood charcoal. That leaves a target of 1.6 million households to find alternative fuel

            More efficient charcoal or wood stoves which use half as much fuel could sustainably serve a half million households. These stoves pay for themselves through fuel savings in a few months. Up front costs are a barrier as over half  of Haitians live on less than a dollar a day and maybe 75% live on less than $2 a day. Yet D&E Green and the International Lifeline Fund between them have over 50,000 improved stoves in use in the Port Au Prince area.

            Biofuels are an alternative that would boost the local economy. An expert on domestic energy suggests targets of 100,000 households using ethanol and 400,000 using biomass.  Ethanol virtually eliminates emissions and leaves the user with clean hands, unlike charcoal where a shower may be needed after use. Biomass can be in pellets which compress ingredients or briquettes which also char the ingredients before pressing. Pellets and briquettes from waste are especially attractive.

            For ethanol and biofuels, what are the investments needed per family, what are the running costs, and what is the value chain of raw material, jobs, land, and investment for their production?  My recent trip to Haiti explored both ethanol and also briquettes made from coconut husks by my friends at Konpay. For 1.6 million households currently deforesting Haiti, all of the above is the best approach.

 

 

 
Fuel for the Home Fires of Haiti