Net zero emissions zero pollution - 2nd of June 10 to 11.30 (CET) - LOCOMOTION | H2020
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Net zero emissions ≠ zero pollution 2nd of June 10 to 11.30 (CET)
Agenda 10:00 – 10:10: Welcome and introduction to LOCOMOTION • Katy Wiese (Associate Policy Officer for Economic Transition, European Environmental Bureau) 10:10 – 10:20: Keynote: The hidden material costs of green technologies • Iñigo Capellán Pérez, Post-doctoral Researcher, University of Valladolid) 10:20 – 10:30: Presentation of alternatives for simulation • Iñigo Capellán Pérez (Post-doctoral Researcher, University of Valladolid) 10:30 – 10:45: Presentation of results of modelling exercise • David Alvarez Antelo (Doctoral Researcher, University of Valladolid 10:45 – 11:10: The hidden social and environmental costs and limitations of the EU energy transition • Marga Mediavilla (Professor, University of Valladolid) on the hidden environmental cost of electric cars • Dirk-Jan Van de Ven (Postdoctoral Researcher, BC3 Basque Centre for Climate Change) on the hidden land costs of solar energy • Diego Marin (Assistant Environmental Justice, European Environmental Bureau) on recommendations to address the hidden social and environmental costs of the energy transition 11:10-11:25: Q and A • Katy Wiese (Associate Policy Officer for Economic Transition, European Environmental Bureau) 11:25-11:30: Closing and farewell 2
Doing the locomotion LOCOMOTION is developing sophisticated models and tools to assess the socioeconomic and environmental impact of different policy options in order to help society make informed decisions about the transition to a sustainable, low-carbon future.n LOCOMOTION’s models will assess: • The European Green Deal • The transition to climate neutrality by 2050 • The effects of pandemics • And much more A future in modelling 3
Introducing WILIAM WILIAM stands for Within Limit Integrated Assessment Model. It is made up of several interrelated models. • Economy and finance • Renewable and non-renewable energy • Raw materials • Energy infrastructure and technologies • Environment • Climate change • Population and society A future in modelling 4
Keynote: The hidden material costs of green technologies Low-carbon society: An enhanced modelling tool for the transition to sustainability EU Green Week, 02/05/2021 Iñigo Capellán-Pérez GEEDS-UVa (https://geeds.eu) This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 821105.
Material requirements of green technologies • Renewables power plants are made of non-renewable materials! • RES-based system: higher material requirements (& diversity) than fossil fuel-based system 2nd Law Thermodynamics: Concentrating necessarily implies inefficiency; and concentrating a lot implies a lot of inefficiency Variability management of renewables Zappa et al 2019, Applied Energy Smil 2015 “Power density” 6
Many questions arise: • Which amount and of which materials will the transition to sustainable energy systems will require? • How much of these materials could come from recycling or from mines? (→ recycling, circularity) • How many materials will be demanded by the rest of the economy? • Identification of potential “critical” materials (supply, economic importance) • Identification of potential substitutions of these “critical” materials in energy technologies • Where are the mines of these minerals? (→socio-ecological impacts, geopolitics) • Where are they being recycled? (→ circularity, geopolitics, economy) 2021 2010 2019 7 2019
Data and figures from published papers: 8
Material requirements of wind A 50 MW wind farm (*current sub technology mix*) with a lifetime of 20 years requires: Construction Operation kg kg Steel 6305000 Iron (Fe) 1100000 Copper (Cu) 135000 5800 Aluminium (Al) 101500 10800 Nickel (Ni) 5550 Neodimium (Nd) 3050 Dysprosium (Dy) 243 9
Material requirements of solar PV 60 MW photovoltaic solar plant (*current sub technology mix*) with a 20-year lifetime requires*: Construction Operation kg kg Iron (Fe) 9750000 Aluminium (Al) 960000 Copper (Cu) 132000 Steel 120000 Chromium (Cr) 33000 Manganese (Mn) 30000 Tin (Sn) 27780 Nickel (Ni) 14100 Zinc (Zn) 9750 Magnesium (Mg) 3210 Molibdenum (Mo) 3000 Silver (Ag) 2802 48 Lead (Pb) 1272 Titanium (Ti) 375 Cadmium (Cd) 366 Telurium (Te) 282 Indium (In) 270 Vanadium (V) 28.5 10 Galium (Ga) 18
Material requirements of electric batteries Nissan Leaf MNO kg/MW LiMnO2 NMC-622 NMC-811 NCA LFP Aluminium 500 693 693 483 1478 Copper 289 429 429 295 855 Iron 0 0 0 0 765 Lithium 34 71 60 31 96 509 110 55 0 0 VW Passat NMC Manganese Nickel 0 335 412 192 0 Cobalt 0 110 55 40 0 0 0 0 0 425 Phosphorus Graphite 310 405 405 272 825 Plastics 515 705 705 345 1800 +chargers Tesla 5 NCA BYD K9 LFP Volvo NMC 11
Demand of the rest of the economy • Rest of the economy? → regressions with historical data demand ∝ f(GDP) • Example: Silver (Ag) 12
Baseline scenario: Green Growth 100% renewables 2060 Global scenario (MEDEAS-W) + economic growth - Population growth + Renewables + Efficiency improvements + Transition to electric vehicles Current recycling rates recycled content (RC) kept constant Outputs: Required minerals vs availability (“warnings”, no feedback on demand) 13
Data from USGS: https://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/mcs/ Reserves vs. resources 14
Results Primary demand increase for energy technologies vs total by 2060: tellurium indium lithium tin > +50% silver galium copper aluminium cadmium between +10 and +50% lead manganese molybdenum nickel chromium magnesium vanadium < +10% zinc 15
Results 16
Results 17
Evolution of EROI of the system = 18
Potential of recycling? Current global recycling rates (recycled content) Mineral (UNEP 2011) Aluminium (Al) 35% Basic pre-requisites: Cadmium (Cd) 50% Chromium (Cr) 19% - Products designed to be recycled Copper (Cu) 29% Dysprosium (Dy) 0% - Recycling profitable Galium (Ga) 38% Indium (In) 38% Iron (Fe) 40% Lithium (Li) 15% Magnesium (Mg) 33% Manganese (Mn) 37% Molybdenum (Mo) 33% Neodymium (Nd) 0% Nickel (Ni) 35% Lead (Pb) 53% Silver (Ag) 26% Tin (Sn) 22% Steel 40% Tellurium (Te) 0% Source: UNEP (2011) and own estimations Titanium (Ti) 52% Vanadium (V) 0% 19 Zinc (Zn) 23%
Mineral availability? • Inherent uncertainty in the estimates of mineral resources. Bauxite ore • Availability depends on: • market factors: • Speculation • Price of minerals e.g. Leaching • Geological factors: • Interdependences: many metals are extracted as co-products of others • Regulation: • E.g. protection of environment and/or societies 20
Proposals of options to simulate „live“ with MEDEAS-W • Baseline scenario Green growth with 100% renewable electric energy in 2060 and current recycling rates • Alternative scenarios: • A: improve 50% recycling rates by 2050 and 2x current estimated reserves • B: improve 100% recycling rates by 2050 and 2x current estimated reserves • C: improve 50% recycling rates by 2050 and half current estimated reserves • D: improve 100% recycling rates by 2050 and half current estimated reserves Improve recycling rates by 2050 +50% +100% Uncertainty in 2x A B mineral reserves half C D 21
References • Capellán-Pérez, I., de Castro, C., Miguel González, L.J., 2019. Dynamic Energy Return on Energy Investment (EROI) and material requirements in scenarios of global transition to renewable energies. Energy Strategy Reviews 26, 100399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2019.100399 • de Castro, C., Capellán-Pérez, I., 2020. Standard, Point of Use, and Extended Energy Return on Energy Invested (EROI) from Comprehensive Material Requirements of Present Global Wind, Solar, and Hydro Power Technologies. Energies 13, 3036. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13123036 • Pulido Sanchez, D.P., Capellán-Pérez, I.C., Mediavilla Pascual, M., de Castro Carranza, C., Frechoso Escudero, F.A., 2021. Analysis of the material requirements of global electrical mobility. DYNA 96, 207–213. https://doi.org/10.6036/9893 • Smil, V., 2015. Power Density: A Key to Understanding Energy Sources and Uses. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. • UNEP, 2011. Recycling rates of metals. A status report. International Resource Panel. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, Kenya. • Zappa, W., Junginger, M., & van den Broek, M. (2019). Is a 100% renewable European power system feasible by 2050?. Applied energy, 233, 1027- 1050. 22
Iñigo Capellán-Pérez Low-carbon society: An enhanced modelling tool for the transition to sustainability info@locomotion-h2020.eu www.locomotion-h2020.eu This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 821105. Follow us
The hidden environmental cost of electric cars Marga Mediavilla (Professor, University of Valladolid) 24
Objective: transport decarbonization 2050 25
Objective: transport decarbonization 2050 How? E-scenarios 1. Past trends 2. EV high 3. E-bike 26
Objective: share of household vehicles 2050 Gasoline Gasoline/gasoil cars E-motorbikes motorbikes Today Gasoline Electric cars Gasoline/gasoil cars E-motorbikes motorbikes Trends Trends • EV high: strong electrification Electric cars E-motorbikes EVEVhigh high • E-bike: light vehicles Electric cars E-motorbikes E-bikes E-bike E-bike 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 27
Objective: share of transportation vehicles 2050 Electric Gasoil Gasoil trucks Gasoil vans Gasoil buses trains trains Today Electric Gasoil Gasoil trucks EV vans E-buses trains trains Trends Trends • Not an easy electrification of heavy vehicles Hybrid trucks EV vans E-buses Electric trains EVhigh EV high • Avitation and marine transport: no electrification only eficiency Gasoil trucks EV vans E-buses Electric trains improvements. E-bike E-bike 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% hybrid trucks other trucks EV vans other vans E-buses other buses E-train other train 28
Results: emissions -80% objective 29
Results: minerals. Percent of reserves used. LITHIUM E-bike Recycling rates double EV high Present recycling rates Trends Rest of the economy Different types of batteries for EV 30
Results: minerals. Percent of reserves used. COBALT E-bike Recycling rates double EV high Present recycling rates Trends Rest of the economy Different types of batteries for EV 31
Results: minerals. Percent of reserves used. NICKEL E-bike Recycling rates double EV high Present recycling rates Trends Rest of the economy Different types of batteries for EV 32
Results: minerals. Percent of reserves used. COPPER E-bike Recycling rates double EV high Present recycling rates Trends Motors of the EV Charging infrastructure Rest of the economy 33
Marga Mediavilla. Geeds-UVa. Low-carbon society: An enhanced modelling tool for the transition to sustainability info@locomotion-h2020.eu www.locomotion-h2020.eu This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 821105. Follow us
The hidden land costs of solar energy Dirk-Jan van de Ven (Basque Centre for Climate Change) The hidden land costs of solar energy – Dirk-Jan van de Ven 35
Background • Important role of solar energy in EU decarbonisation pathways • Abundant solar resources • Zero emissions • Less visible and noisy than wind energy • Cheap: in many places cheapest source of new energy capacity, with costs still declining • Land occupation as main drawback • Solar energy needs large amount of horizontal space to capture sunlight • Most land in Europe has high productive or natural value • With more expansion, more competition with existing land uses • Rooftop space insufficient to meet energy demands • Large scale import from Africa unrealistic The hidden land costs of solar energy – Dirk-Jan van de Ven 36
Study Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM) + solar energy https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-82042-5 The hidden land costs of solar energy – Dirk-Jan van de Ven 37
Land occupation European Union 240 within the region, In 1000 km2 Scenario 50% 210 Total Land cover change i 180 n 2050 relative to 2015 solar in 150 120 electricity mix 90 60 30 0 -30 -60 -90 -120 -150 -180 -210 -240 Land-based solar in 0% 19% 27% 36% 45% 54% 63% 71% electricity mix by 2050 the region by 2050, in cover change outside penetration on land 120 Impact of solarland 90 60 1000 km2 30 0 -30 -60 -90 -120 The hidden land costs of solar energy – Dirk-Jan van de Ven 38
Land use change emissions 70 Range of non-land life cycle emissions for PV 1 in Europe (~ 1226 electricity output between 2020 and 2050 60 grams of CO2 from LUC per kWh solar sun-hours per year) Visonta, Hungary 50 40 30 20 10 European Union 0 Puertollano, Spain 20,00% 40,00% 60,00% 80,00% % Penetration in electricity mix The hidden land costs of solar energy – Dirk-Jan van de Ven 39
Conclusions • Solar energy in Europe not without impacts • May occupy an area as big as total urbanised land nowadays • Likely displaces natural land within and outside Europe (indirectly) • The higher the penetration, the more land use change emissions per kWh generated • But context is important: • Land use change emissions 4 to 16% of the CO2 emissions from natural gas fired electricity • 6 to 25 less land use change emissions per kWh than biomass-fired electricity • Recommendations: • Policies on siting and land management of solar parks • As much generation as possible in urban areas • Reduce energy demand! The hidden land costs of solar energy – Dirk-Jan van de Ven 40
Dirk-Jan van de Ven Low-carbon society: An enhanced modelling tool for the transition to sustainability Dj.vandeven@bc3research.org info@locomotion-h2020.eu www.locomotion-h2020.eu This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 821105. Follow us
EU Policy Recommendations • Raw Materials • Electric vehicles • Low-carbon technologies Mina do Barroso, Portugal: https://im-mining.com/tag/mina-do-barroso/ Brine pools and processing areas in the Atacama Salt Flats, Chile: https://www.ft.com/content/583cfd8c-202d-11e7-b7d3- 163f5a7f229c
EU Policy Recommendations – Raw Materials Set targets and plans to reduce absolute resource consumption and environmental pressures • Since 1970, the global population has doubled, yet extraction of materials (including fossil fuels for energy) has tripled. • The 1.2 billion poorest people account for just 1% of the world’s consumption, while the 1 billion richest account for 72%.
Global Material Footprints • Higher-income countries consume 13 times more than lower-income countries • Current EU material footprint is 14.5 tonnes per capita and sustainable and just limit is likely somewhere between 5 and 10 tonnes per capita, under ‘business-as-usual’, the EU is heading for colossal overconsumption and catastrophic environmental and social impacts. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2019/goal-12/
2060 Projections
Towards a sustainable and just EU material footprint • The green transition will likely surge a mining and metals boom in the short-term to build infrastructure and low-carbon technologies, accompanied with high greenhouse gas emissions due to energy-intensive mining and processing. • We have emissions reduction targets for climate, we need the same for material reduction in circular economy policies. • Best evidence available shows the EU must reduce its material footprint by up to 70% (to 4.4 tonnes per capita) from current consumption levels by 2050. We propose 30% reduction by 2030, and 50% by 2040.
How do we reduce material consumption? • “Growth is culturally, politically and institutionally ingrained”- EEA • Material wealth beyond a certain level does not lead to corresponding increases in happiness, well-being or health. • Combination of measures targeting energy efficiency, recycling, material substitution, the use of innovative materials, and sustainable lifestyles. • Not up to individuals and behavioral change. The responsibility is on governments to drive the transition away from the growth-based economic system
EU Policy Recommendations – Electric Vehicles • Prioritize micro e-mobility, walking and cycling. • Create safer bike infrastructure, accessible public transport, and reduction in private cars and air travel • The new Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy aims to deliver a 90% reduction in the transport sector’s emissions by 2050, and envisages that by 2030, there will be at least 30 million zero-emission vehicles in operation on European roads.
EU Policy Recommendations – Electric Vehicles • Cycling is ten times more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities. • People who cycle on a daily basis had 84% lower carbon emissions from all their daily travel than those who didn’t. • The average person who shifted from car to bike for just one day a week cut their carbon footprint by 3.2kg of CO₂ – equivalent to the emissions from driving a car for 10km, eating a serving of lamb or chocolate, or sending 800 emails. • If just one in five urban residents permanently changed their travel behaviour, cycling for just one trip per day, over the next few years, it would cut emissions from all car travel in Europe by about 8%.
EU Policy Recommendations – Low-carbon Technologies • Reduce energy demand • Small scale producers and decentralized • Energy democracy
Thank You! Diego Marin Low-carbon society: An enhanced modelling tool for the transition to sustainability diego.marin@eeb.org info@locomotion-h2020.eu www.locomotion-h2020.eu This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 821105. Follow us
Q and A 52
Thank you very much If you want to receive regular updates please join our social media channels: Website: https://www.locomotion-h2020.eu/ Twitter: @LocomotionH2020 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/locomotion-h2020/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/locomotion.h2020/ Research Gate: https://www.researchgate.net/project/LOCOMOTION- H2020 53
You can also read
