Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Hubbert’s Peak, The Question of Coal, and Climate Change Dave Rutledge Chair, Division of Engineering and Applied Science Caltech “There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.” Mark Twain Life on the Mississippi slides (.ppt) and spreadsheets (.xls) at http://rutledge.caltech.edu/ 1 The UN Panel on Climate Change • The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change publishes assessment reports that reflect the consensus on climate change • The 4th report is being released this year – Over one thousand authors – Over one thousand reviewers • Updated measurements show that the temperature is rising 0.013C per year (1956-2005) 2 IPCC Climate-Change Predictions • Report discusses climate simulations for fossil-fuel carbon-emission scenarios • There are 40 scenarios, each considered to be equally valid, with story lines and different government policies, population projections, and economic models 3 Annual Fossil-Fuel Carbon Emissions, Gt The 40 UN IPCC Scenarios 40 A1C AIM 30 20 10 B1T Message 0 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100 Carbon Emitted A1 AIM A1 ASF A1 Image A1 Message A1 Minicam A1 Maria A1C AIM A1C Message A1C Minicam A1G AIM A1G Message A1G Minicam A1V1 Minicam A1V2 Minicam A1T AIM A1T Message A1T Maria A2 ASF A2 AIM A2G Image A2 Message A2 Minicam A2-A1 Minicam B1 Image B1 AIM B1 ASF B1 Message B1 Maria B1 Minicam B1T Message B1High Message B1High Minicam B2 Message B2 AIM B2 ASF B2 Image B2 Maria B2 Minicam B2High Minicam B2C Maria • • • • Data from the EIA (open symbols, 1980 to 2004) Emissions have increased 18% since the Kyoto Agreement was negotiated in 1997 Large differences in emissions among scenarios Oil production in 17 of the scenarios is greater in 2100 than in 2005 4 The Wall Street Journal April 5 Collapse of the World’s Second-Highest Producing Oil Field 5 World crude-oil production fell in 2006 by roughly the amount of this drop Outline • The 4th UN IPCC Assessment Report • Hubbert’s peak – – – – The history of US oil production How much oil do the Saudis have? The future of world hydrocarbons The Canadian oil sands • The coal question – – – – British coal, a nearly complete history Chinese coal American coal The future of world coal, by regions • Climate change – Simulations of future temperature and sea level – Carbon capture – Wind and sun • Concluding thoughts 6 King Hubbert • Geophysicist at the Shell lab in Houston • In 1956, he presented a paper “Nuclear Energy and Fossil Fuels” at a meeting of the American Petroleum Institute in San Antonio • He made predictions of the peak year of US oil production based on two estimates of the ultimate production 7 Hubbert’s Peak • • • From his 1956 paper Hubbert drew these by hand, and integrated by counting squares For the larger estimate, Hubbert predicted a peak in 1970 8 Annual Crude-Oil Production, billions of barrels. What Actually Happened? 1970 Hubbert’s Peak Alaskan oil 3 2 1 0 1900 • • 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 Data from the DOE’s Energy Information Administration (EIA) Production has dropped 15 years in a row 9 Cumulative Production, billions of barrels. US Crude-Oil Production 200 29Gb remaining 100 0 1900 • • • 1950 2000 2050 2100 EIA data (1859-2006) Cumulative normal (lms fit for ultimate of 225Gb, mean of 1975, and sd of 28 years) Hubbert’s larger ultimate was 200 billion barrels (the Alaska trend is 19 billion barrels) 10 The Largest US Oil Field Prudhoe Bay, Alaska Discovered 1968 11 Annual Production, millions of barrels . Prudhoe Bay Oil Production 600 400 200 Trend for ultimate is 12 billion barrels 0 0 5 10 Cumulative Production, billions of barrels • • FY1977-2006 data from the Alaska Department of Revenue, Tax Division Initially considered as 8 billion barrels of reserves 12 Estimating Remaining Production from Reserves is Challenging • Reserves refer to fossil fuels that are appropriate to produce, taking the price into account • Reserves may be listed conservatively, as for Prudhoe Bay • Coal reserves have been too high, and they are often not properly distinguished from resources, which are volume estimates for coal seams of a minimum thickness and a maximum depth • Often reserves are not adjusted for production • New discoveries are important for oil and natural gas • In most countries, the details of oil reserves are secret, and this means that the published reserves are political statements 13 OPEC Reserves Go Up When the Price Goes Down! Iran 20 Iraq 50 Kuwait UAE 10 Price 0 1975 • • 30 100 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 Price, dollars per barrel . Reserves, billions of barrels . 40 0 2005 Data from the 2006 BP Statistical Review 269Gb rise in reserves, no adjustment for 65Gb produced since 1986 14 Reserves, billions of barrels . Saudi Reserves Saudi control 264Gb reserves 200 Nehring RAND study 176Gb reserves 100 0 1975 • • 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Data from the 2006 BP Statistical Review 95Gb rise in reserves, no adjustment for 53Gb of production since 1988 15 Estimating Remaining Production from a Graph • In plots of annual production vs cumulative production – We can estimate the remaining production from a trend line – Advantage is that we can identify points on the trend line – Disadvantage is that we cannot make an estimate until the production drops • Alternative is to plot the growth rate of the cumulative production (annual production over cumulative production) instead of the annual production – First applied to Daphnia populations in biology in 1963 – King Hubbert introduced this approach for estimating remaining oil production in 1982 – Advantage is that we can make an estimate before the peak – Disadvantage is that we need to know the cumulative production 16 Growth-Rate Plot for US Crude Oil Growth Rate for Cumulative . 10% Trend line is for normal fit (225 billion barrels) 5% 0% 0 100 200 Cumulative Production, billions of barrels • EIA data (cumulative from 1859, open symbols 1900-1930, closed symbols 1931-2006) 17 Growth Rate for Cumulative . How Much Oil do the Saudis Have? 10% Trend line is for 1978 RAND study (90Gb remaining) Official Saudi reserves are 264 billion barrels 5% 0% 0 50 100 150 200 Cumulative Production, billions of barrels • • EIA data (open 1975-1990, closed 1991-2006), 1975 cumulative from Richard Nehring Matt Simmons was the first to call attention to this anomalous situation in his book, Twilight in the Desert 18 Growth Rate for Cumulative . Growth-Rate Plot for World Hydrocarbons 6% Trend line for 3Tboe remaining 4% 2% 0% 0 1 2 3 Cumulative Production, trillion barrels of oil equivalent • • • Oil + natural gas + natural gas liquids like propane and butane Data 1965, 1972, 1981, 2006 BP Statistical Review (open 1960-1982, closed 1983-2005) The German resources agency BGR gives hydrocarbon reserves as 2.7Tboe – – Expectation of future discoveries and future OPEC oil reserve reductions Includes 500Gboe for non-conventional sources like Canadian oil sands 19 Cumulative Production,Tboe. World Hydrocarbon Production 4 3 2 0 1960 • • 3Tboe remaining 1 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100 Cumulative normal (ultimate 4.6Tboe, lms fit for mean 2018, sd 35 years) IPCC scenarios assume that 11 to 15Tboe is available 20 Fort McMurray, Alberta Oil Sands 21 Canadian Oil Sands • 1.0 Mb per day in 2005, increasing 8% per year • 35Gb reserves for mining (comparable to one year of world oil production) • 140Gb reserves for wells – Production with a steam process – Production and upgrading to synthetic crude oil use 25% of the oil energy equivalent in natural gas – Canadian gas reserves are 10Gboe (end of 2005) – Annual gas production is 12% of reserves per year – Challenges in meeting obligations under the Kyoto agreement • The Uppsala Hydrocarbon Depletion Group were the first to call attention to these limitations 22 Outline • The 4th UN IPCC Assessment Report • Hubbert’s peak – – – – The history of US oil production How much oil do the Saudis have? The future of world hydrocarbons The Canadian oil sands • The coal question – – – – British coal, a nearly complete history Chinese coal American coal The future of world coal, by regions • Climate change – Simulations of future temperature and sea level – Carbon capture – Wind and sun • Concluding thoughts 23 British Coal 24 British Coal Production Annual Production, Mt . 300 200 100 0 1850 • • 1900 1950 2000 Data from the US National Bureau of Economic Research (1854-1876), the Durham Coal Mining Museum (1877-1956), and the British Department of Trade and Industry (1957-2006) In the peak production year, 1913, there were 3,024 mines 25 Growth Rate for Cumulative . Growth-Rate Plot for British Coal 4% 2% 0% 0 5 10 15 20 25 Cumulative Production, Gt • • 1854-2006, 1853 cumulative from William Jevons, The Coal Question Already near the trend line in 1854 26 Growth Rate for Cumulative . Remaining Production for British Coal 0.2% 10% per year Trend line for 200Mt remaining 0.1% 0.0% 26.2 26.4 26.6 Cumulative Production, Gt • • • Data from the UK Department of Trade and Industry (1993-2006) 6 producing underground mines several with less than ten years of coal 35 strip mines are producing, but there are difficulties in getting permits for new mines 27 Cumulative Production, Gt. Cumulative British Coal Production Pre-war fit 20 Post-war fit 10 0 1850 • • 1900 1950 2000 Pre-war lms fit (1854-1945, ultimate 25.6Gt, mean 1920, sd 41 years) Post-war lms fit (1946-2006, ultimate 27.2Gt, mean 1927, sd 39 years) 28 Reserves-to-Production Ratio for UK Coal R/P ratio, years 900 600 300 0 0 50 100 Years since Edward Hull's Reserve Survey in 1864 • • • 1864 reserves from Edward Hull of the Geological Survey Other data from the World Energy Council Surveys Current R/P ratio is 7 years 29 Reserves vs Remaining Production 1000 Resources + Reserves Hull 100 Gt . Reserves 10 Remaining Production 1 0 1850 • • • 1900 1950 2000 1864 reserves from Edward Hull of the Geological Survey Other data from the World Energy Council Surveys of Energy Resources Resources include seams of 2ft or more at depths of 4000ft or less 30 % of Reserves Eventually Produced . Fraction of Reserves Eventually Produced • • • 40% Hull Hull 20% 0% 1850 1900 1950 2000 1864 reserves from Edward Hull of the Geological Survey Other data from the World Energy Council Surveys of Energy Resources Will use trends if they exist, reserves otherwise 31 Why Are Coal Reserves Too High? • • • It seems likely that there are many social, environmental, and technical hindrances that are not fully taken into account in the reserve estimates The German Energy Watch Group was early in pointing out that there is a problem with reserves worldwide Here are some technical restrictions from the USGS 2000 National Coal Assessment for the Illinois basin 32 Production and Reserves China USA India Australia Russia South Africa World • • Production, Gt 2.38 1.05 Reserves, Gt 189 247 0.45 0.37 0.31 0.26 92 79 157 29 6.20 963 2005 Production numbers from the BP 2006 Statistical Review Reserves from the World Energy Council surveys of resources (2006/2007 South Africa Yearbook for South Africa, and the Chinese Ministry of Land and Resources 2001 by way of Sandro Schmidt at the BGR) 33 Chinese Coal 34 Growth-Rate Plot for China Growth Rate for Cumulative . 15% 10% Trend line for 70Gt remaining Reserves are 189Gt 5% 0% 0 10 20 30 40 50 Cumulative Production, Gt • • Data from Tim Wright, D.W. Dwyer, and BP 2006 Statistical Review (cumulative from 1896, open symbols 1918-1961, closed symbols 1962-2005), corrections by Jianjun Tu Reserves from the Chinese Ministry of Land and Resources 2001 by way of Sandro 35 Schmidt at the BGR Cumulative Production for China Cumulative Production, Gt. 100 50 0 1950 • 2000 2050 2100 Cumulative normal (ultimate 111Gt, lms fit for mean 2015 and sd 27 years) 36 American Coal 37 US Coal Production Annual Production, Mt. 1,000 Total 500 West of the Mississippi 0 1850 • • 1900 1950 2000 Data from the USGS (Robert Milici) Will consider the East and the West separately 38 Anthracite in Pennsylvania Annual Production, Mt. 80 60 40 20 0 1850 • • 1900 1950 Data from the USGS (Robert Milici) Anthracite is a grade of coal used for home heating that burns with little smoke 39 Growth-Rate Plot for PA Anthracite Growth Rate for Cumulative 6% 4% 2% 0% 0 1 2 3 4 5 Cumulative Production, Gt • • Data from the USGS (Robert Milici) cumulative from 1800, symbols 1875-1995 16% of the 1913 reserves have been produced 40 Cumulative PA Anthracite Production Cumulative Production, Gt. 5 4 3 2 1 0 1850 • 1900 1950 2000 Normal lms fit for ultimate 5.00Gt, mean 1916, and sd 27 years 41 Bituminous Coal in Virginia Annual Production, Mt. 40 20 0 1900 • • 1950 2000 Data from the USGS (Robert Milici) and the EIA Virginia has coal with high energy content, and much of it is used for metallurgy 42 Growth-Rate Plot for VA Bituminous Growth Rate for Cumulative. 10% 8% Pre-war Trend 6% WWII Trend is for 800Mt remaining Reserves are 2.8Gt 4% 2% 0% 0 1 2 3 Cumulative Production, Gt • • Data from the USGS (Robert Milici) cumulative from 1800, closed 1900-1940, open 1941-1945, closed 1946-2006, reserves from the EIA Trend is for 16% of the 1924 reserves to eventually be produced 43 Cumulative VA Bituminous Production Cumulative Production, Gt. 3 Post-war fit 2 1 Pre-war fit 0 1900 • • 1950 2000 2050 Pre-war normal (ultimate 0.40Gt, lms fit for mean 1926 and sd 16 years) Post-war normal (ultimate 3.03Gt, lms fit for mean 1984 and sd 34 years) 44 Coal East of the Mississippi Growth Rate for Cumulative . 8% 6% Pre-war Trend 4% WWII Trend is for 40Gt remaining Reserves are 96Gt 2% 0% 0 20 40 60 Cumulative Production, Gt • • Does not include Pennsylvania anthracite Data from the USGS (Robert Milici) cumulative from 1800, closed 19001940, open 1941-1948, closed 1949-2005, reserves from the EIA 45 Cumulative Production for the East Cumulative Production, Gt. Post-war fit 40 20 Pre-war fit 0 1850 • • • 1900 1950 2000 Does not include Pennsylvania anthracite Pre-war normal (ultimate 20Gt, lms fit for mean 1924 and sd 20 years) Post-war normal (ultimate 86Gt, lms fit for mean 1999 and sd 67 years) 46 Western Coal 47 Coal West of the Mississippi Growth Rate for Cumulative . 10% 5% Trend is for 25Gt remaining Reserves are 79Gt without Montana Pre-70’s trend 0% 0 5 10 15 Cumulative Production, Gt • • • Data from the USGS (Robert Milici) closed 1800-1970, open 1971-1978, closed 1979-2005 Reserves from the EIA 48 Montana is the state with the largest reserves, 68Gt, but annual production is only 36Mt Cumulative Production for the West 15 Cumulative Production, Gt. Post-70’s fit 10 5 Pre-70’s fit 0 1900 • • 1950 2000 Pre-70’s normal (ultimate 1.6Gt, lms fit for mean 1929 and sd 23 years) Post-70’s normal (ultimate 38Gt, lms fit for mean 2016 and sd 25 years) 49 Growth Rate for Cumulative . Growth-Rate Plot for Australia and New Zealand 6% Trend line for 50Gt remaining Reserves are 79Gt 5% 4% 3% 3 10 Cumulative Production, Gt • • • Data (1981-2005) from the 2006 BP Statistical Review 1990 Australia cumulative from the History of Coal Mining in Australia, A.J. Hargraves Reserves from the 2004 World Energy Council survey 50 Growth Rate for Cumulative. Growth-Rate Plot for Europe 2% 1% Trend line for 23Gt remaining Reserves are 55Gt 0% 50 75 100 Cumulative Production, Gt • • • Data (1981-2005) from the 2006 BP Statistical Review 2005 cumulative from the 2005 BGR Energy Resources Report Reserves from the 2004 World Energy Council survey, down from 171Gt in 1990 51 Growth-Rate Plot for Africa Growth Rate for Cumulative.. 8% 6% 4% Trend line for 10Gt remaining Reserves are 30Gt 2% 0% 0 5 10 Cumulative Production, Gt • • • Data (open 1981-1990, closed 1991-2005) from the 2006 BP Statistical Review 2005 cumulative from the 2005 BGR Energy Resources Report South African reserves were recently reduced by 20Gt (2006/2007 South Africa Yearbook) 52 Growth Rate for Cumulative. . Former Soviet Union 4% Trend line for 18Gt remaining 1996 reserves are 157Gt 2% 0% 15 25 35 Cumulative Production, Gt • • • • Data from BP (closed 1981-1988, open 1989-2005) 2005 cumulative from the 2005 BGR Energy Resources Report Drop that started in 1989 is from the collapse of the Soviet Union Reserves from World Energy Council surveys, unchanged since the collapse of the Soviet Union 53 Growth-Rate Plot for South Asia Growth Rate for Cumulative. 10% Exponential Growth Reserves are 111Gt 5% 0% 0 5 10 15 Cumulative Production, Gt • • • Data (1965-2005) from the 2006 BP Statistical Review Earlier production from World Energy Council Surveys Reserves from the 2004 World Energy Council survey 54 Growth-Rate Plot for Central and South America Growth Rate for Cumulative. 10% 5% Exponential Growth Reserves are 20Gt 0% 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 Cumulative Production, Gt • • • Data (1981-2005) from the 2006 BP Statistical Review 2005 Cumulative from the BGR Resources Report Reserves from the 2004 World Energy Council survey 55 Reserves vs Trends for Remaining Production Region Reserves Gt Trends Gt North America 255 135 East Asia 190 70 Australia and New Zealand 79 50 Europe 55 23 Africa 30 10 223 18 Former Soviet Union • • South Asia 111 Central and South America 20 World (at 3.6boe/t) 963 (3.5Tboe) 437 (1.6Tboe) North America includes trends for the East (40Gt), the West (25Gt), reserves for Montana (68Gt), and trends for Canada and Mexico (2Gt) IPCC scenarios assume 18Tboe is available for production 56 Cumulative Production, Tboe. Future Fossil-Fuels Production 4 3 2 1 0 1960 • • • • 3.0Tboe hydrocarbons remaining 1.6Tboe coal remaining 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100 Hydrocarbons cumulative normal (ultimate 4.6Tboe, lms fit for mean 2018, sd 35 years) 2005 coal cumulative from the 2005 BGR Energy Resources Report (USGS for US) Coal cumulative normal (ultimate 2.6Tboe, lms fit for mean 2024, sd 48 years) The standard deviations of 35 and 48 years can be compared to time constants for 57 temperature and sea level Outline • The 4th UN IPCC Assessment Report • Hubbert’s peak – – – – The history of US oil production How much oil do the Saudis have? The future of world hydrocarbons The Canadian oil sands • The coal question – – – – British coal, a nearly complete history Chinese coal American coal The future of world coal, by regions • Climate change – Simulations of future temperature and sea level – Carbon capture – Wind and sun • Concluding thoughts 58 Fossil-Fuel Carbon Emissions Cumulative Carbon Emissions, Gt. 800 600 • Super-Kyoto Profile 400 520Gt remaining 200 0 1960 • • Producer-Limited Profile 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2080 2100 Total fossil-fuel carbon is an input for climate-change models Carbon coefficients from the EIA: oil (110kg/boe), gas (79kg/boe), coal (141kg/boe), and future hydrocarbons weighted by BGR reserves (98kg/boe) The Super-Kyoto Profile is a 50% stretch-out in time with the same ultimate production 59 Cumulative Future Fossil-Fuel Carbon Emissions, Gt. Comparing with the IPCC Scenarios • • 2,000 1,000 Producer-Limited Profile 0 2000 2050 2100 Our Producer-Limited profile has lower emissions than any of the 40 IPCC scenarios 60 Jean Laherrere was the first to point out this anomalous situation Simulated CO2 Levels Fossil-Fuel Carbon, Gt 430 380 5 Producer Limited Carbon Super Kyoto Carbon Producer Limited CO2 330 Super Kyoto CO2 0 2000 2100 2200 2300 Carbon-Dioxide Concentration, ppm. 10 280 2400 Year • • • Predictions using the program MAGICC from Tom Wigley at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder with a modified WRE profile The Producer-Limited Profile gives a peak CO2 concentration of 460ppm in 2070 The Super-Kyoto Profile gives a 440ppm peak 61 Temperature Rises Associated with Future Fossil-Fuel Use Associated Temperature Rise, °C. 0.8 0.4 0.0 2000 2100 2200 2300 2400 Year • • • • • Predictions from Tom Wigley’s MAGICC (no mechanical ice model) The temperature rise is a maximum of 0.8C in 2100 The Super-Kyoto Profile (dashed lines) reduces the maxima by 0.04C Time constant is of the order of a thousand years (an integrator) Sensitivity to errors is 0.0012C/Gt carbon 62 CO2 Capture and Storage for Coal Power Plants • MIT has just completed an outstanding study, The Future of Coal, that gives a cost of $150/t of carbon avoided • To reduce the temperature in 2100 by 0.001C, the cost would be 100 billion dollars • Additional cost for transportation and burial – A distribution system is needed that is comparable to our present natural gas pipeline system – Cannot have leaks on the time scale of a thousand years 63 Wind and Sun • • The time constants of around 50 years for fossil-fuel exhaustion imply that a transition to renewable sources of energy is likely Wind is the fastest growing renewable – Current world capacity is 74GW, increasing at 25% per year – 19% of new US capacity last year – Advantage is a production learning curve • Solar photovoltaics for the home and business – World production in 2006 was 2.2GW, up 33% from 2005 – Advantage is that there is no need for new transmission lines – Caltech is installing a 230-kW plant on top of a parking structure • Concentrating solar – Current capacity is 350MW, built in the 80s in the Mojave Desert – New Nevada Solar One with 64MW near Las Vegas – Advantages are that it uses the direct sunlight available in the Southwest, and the possibility of thermal storage – The major California utilities, Southern California Edison, San Diego Gas and Electric, and Pacific Gas and Electric, are each planning to spend a billion dollars on concentrating solar plants 64 Kramer Junction, California 65 • • From Schott Glass Area in red circle in California could supply sufficient energy 66 to replace the entire US grid Nevada Solar One June 2, 2007 67 Concluding Thoughts • Results – Estimate for future hydrocarbon production (3Tboe) is consistent with reserves – Estimate for future coal production (1.6Tboe) is about half of reserves – The time constants for fossil-fuel exhaustion are of the order of 50 years – The time constant for temperature is of the order of 1,000 years • Implications – Since estimate for future fossil-fuel production is less than all 40 UN IPCC scenarios, producer limitations could provide useful constraints in climate modeling – A transition to renewable sources of energy is likely – To lessen the effects of climate change associated with future fossil-fuel use, reducing ultimate production is more important than slowing it down • Opportunities – One-third of US fossil-fuel reserves are on federal lands, so ultimate production could be reduced substantially by limits on new leases for mining and drilling – The US has an outstanding resource in its direct sunlight 68 Thanks for Advice, Criticism, Discussion, and Slides • • • • • • • Tom Wigley and Steve Smith at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder Bill Bridges, Dave Goodstein, Melany Hunt, John Ledyard, Ken Pickar, Tapio Schneider, John Seinfeld, and Tom Tombrello at Caltech Dimitri Antsos at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory John Rutledge at Freese and Nichols, Inc. in Fort Worth Charlie Kennel at the University of California at San Diego Sandro Schmidt at the BGR Juha Karhu at the University of Helsinki Special thanks to Sandy Garstang in the Caltech Library and Dale Yee in the Caltech Engineering Division for their ingenuity in locating mining records 69