Navigant Research Blog

Solar PV Helps Eliminate Kerosene Lamps

— August 20, 2014

About 250 million households, representing 1.3 billion people, lacked reliable access to electricity to meet basic lighting needs in 2010, according to the International Energy Agency.  Until recently, kerosene lamps were one of the few options for illumination in communities with household income as low as $2 per day.  Kerosene is highly detrimental to health and the environment, subjecting people to multiple pollutants, including fine particulate matter, formaldehyde, carbon monoxide, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides.  Exposure to these pollutants can result in an increased risk of respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, cancer, and death.  Despite these hazards, kerosene is the leading source of illumination for most people in developing countries.

There’s now growing momentum to displace the estimated 4 billion to 25 billion liters of kerosene used each year, driven by a combination of government policy, clean energy businesses, and investment.  Kenya, Ghana, India, and Nigeria are a few of the countries that have announced initiatives to phase out kerosene and replace it with solar and other clean energy options, as covered in Navigant Research’s report, Solar Photovoltaic Consumer Products.

  • Kenya’s kerosene phase-out program, announced in 2012, aims to eliminate the use of kerosene for lighting and cooking, replacing the fuel with clean energy products.  Norway has pledged $44.5 million toward the initiative.
  • India’s National Solar Mission seeks to achieve 20 GW of solar power by 2022, in part through the installation of rooftop PV systems.  It has also set the specific goal of providing 20 million solar lighting systems in place of kerosene lamps to rural communities, with the goal of reaching an estimated 100 million people.
  • The Ghana Solar Lantern Distribution project provides subsidies to support sales of 200,000 solar lanterns between 2014 and 2016 using money formerly allocated for fuel subsidies.

Kerosene remains the most important lighting fuel for off-grid and under-electrified households and small businesses in Africa, and accounts for approximately 55% of total lighting expenditure for those living on less than $2 per day, according to Lighting Africa.  Kerosene has been increasing as a percentage of household expenditure.  Ted Hesser developed the following chart with data from the United Nations, Saviva Research, World Bank, and the U.S. Energy Information Administration, highlighting the growth in kerosene prices.  Between 2000 and 2012, kerosene prices increased 240% in the developing world, from an average price of roughly $0.50 per liter in 2000 to about $1.20 per liter in 2012.  In high-cost markets – including Burundi, Guatemala, and Panama – kerosene costs can be as high as $1.80 to $2.10 per liter.

Price of Kerosene by Country, Selected World Markets: 2000-2012

 

(Source: Ted Hesser)

Beyond CO2

The climate impact of kerosene lamps has been dramatically underestimated by considering only CO2.  Recent studies estimate that 270,000 tons of black carbon (i.e., fine particulate matter that results from the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels, biofuels, and biomass) are emitted from kerosene lamps annually – leading to a warming equivalent of about 4.5% of U.S. CO2 emissions and 12% of India’s, according to a Brookings Institute study.

The Brookings study points out that kerosene lamps are not the largest emitters of black carbon.  The leading source is residential burning of solid fuel, such as wood and coal for cooking – which emits 6 times more black carbon than lamps.  Similarly, diesel engine black carbon emissions are 5 times that of lamps.

Solar PV and other lower-emissions consumer products, such as improved cook stoves, are making their way to the market through a variety of private, non-profit, and public initiatives.  Education and awareness of the options available to consumers are the biggest challenges to changing the behavior of customers in remote communities.  But the combination of new business models, government leadership, and technical innovation are leading to a growing number of success stories that could lead to significant reductions in black carbon emissions.

 

United States, China Collaborate on Carbon Capture

— August 5, 2014

In a previous blog, I outlined some of the recent efforts to reduce carbon emissions in the United States and China.  Following that trend, earlier this month the United States and China signed eight partnership agreements to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  Of the eight agreements, four promote collaboration in carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology.  As China alone consumes nearly half of the world’s coal and the United States consumes 11%, these agreements mark an important step in promoting international cooperation to combat climate change.

As Richard Martin noted in a previous blog post, the Chinese government has been looking at options to combat air pollution by curbing coal consumption for quite some time.  Despite the need to reduce coal consumption overall, throwing the combined weight of the United States and China at developing CCS technology to mitigate the effects of coal combustion is a move in the right direction.

Strengthening Ties

The majority of the CCS agreements are focused on regional projects that involve collaboration between research institutions in the United States and China.  One agreement, between the University of Kentucky and China’s Sinopec Corporation, features a demonstration project that will capture, utilize, and store 1 million tons of CO2 annually from a coal-fired plant in Shandong, China.  The project is projected to continue through 2017, and researchers hope to develop CCS technologies that can be used on a broader scale.  The University of Kentucky, along with the Shanxi Coal International Energy Group and Air Products & Chemicals Inc., is also working on a coal-fired power plant able to capture 2 million tons of CO2 per year.  Another of the efforts is an undertaking between the Huaneng Clean Energy Research Institute and Summit Power Group LLC to develop clean coal power generation technology. In the Shaanxi province, West Virginia University along with Yanchang Petroleum and Air Products and Chemicals will pursue an oxy-combustion coal technology project.

Issues Remain

Developing CCS technology in a world where the two largest emitters of CO2 also have massive natural coal reserves seems like a good way to mitigate emissions problems.  However, problems remain with the technology, including water intensity, high cost, and slow deployment rates.  Although coal companies and other fossil fuel advocates charge that President Obama is waging a “war on coal,” the administration has made it clear that coal and natural gas will remain a prominent part of America’s energy future for years to come. The same remains true in China, where the 12th Five-Year Plan emphasizes clean technologies and energy efficiency, but realistically acknowledges that China’s vast coal reserves will continue to be tapped to facilitate growth and economic development.

 

EV Emissions Reconsidered

— July 2, 2014

Quantifying the degree to which plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) improve ambient air quality conditions over conventional gas or diesel-powered vehicles is an important, but difficult, question to answer.  An interview with Electric Power Research Institute’s (EPRI’s) Marcus Alexander, who will discuss the preliminary findings of a study seeking to clarify how PEVs affect environmental conditions at EPRI’s Plug-In 2014 Conference in San Jose, demonstrates the complexity of this subject.

Much of the calculation has to do with where the PEV is driven, as this dictates the carbon intensity of the electric grid used to power the vehicle.  However, in most locations throughout the United States and the globe, the operating emissions of a PEV versus a conventional vehicle on a per-mile basis lean either substantially or marginally toward conventional vehicles.

However, there are nuances to this equation beyond simple pounds of pollutant emitted per unit of energy consumed.  For instance, when a conventional vehicle consumes a gallon of gasoline or diesel, the pollutant emissions calculation is fairly straightforward.

Net Zero

Additionally, the pound of pollutant emitted varies considerably from the mobile source (vehicle) to the stationary source (power plant).  For example, Alexander states that carbon monoxide and volatile organic compounds are more tightly linked to vehicles than power plants, while sulfur dioxide emissions are associated with fossil fuel combustion at power plants.  Supplanting gas or diesel miles driven with electric miles driven can therefore reduce emissions of particular pollutants while increasing others.

However, when a PEV consumes a kilowatt-hour (kWh) of electricity, it may have a net zero impact on pollutant emissions, depending on a complex interaction of emissions regulations and available generation capacity.  Growth of wind generation over the last decade has created excess capacity, often at night when the wind blows strongest and demand is lowest.  Data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) indicates that in 2012, net generation exceeded net load by around 2.3%.  Navigant Research estimates in the report Electric Vehicle Market Forecasts that nearly 300,000 PEVs will be in use in the United States in 2014.  Assuming an average annual PEV mileage of 12,000 and the EIA’s projections on electricity energy demand in the United States, PEVs would represent less than 0.03% of total U.S. electricity demand.

New Sources

Further, while the emissions profile of burning 1 gallon of gasoline will stay relatively consistent over time, the emissions profile of consuming 1 kWh of electricity from the grid will change as new generation assets are added to the grid and old assets retired.  In the last 2 years, nearly 15,000 MW of coal generation has been retired, with a little over 5,000 MW added.  Over the same period, 22,000 MW of renewables generation were added.  If U.S. electricity demand stays on the plateau of the last decade, the replacement of aging high-emissions assets in favor of renewables will be much easier, and the grid’s emissions profile is likely to change quickly.

EPRI’s study seeks to quantify these factors and others (such as energy consumption from lithium ion battery development) to provide the most accurate analysis of how existing PEV technologies will influence environmental conditions.  Alexander clarifies that this study, while quite comprehensive, does not investigate potential opportunities presented by PEVs, such as utilizing them for grid energy storage or ancillary services, that have yet to become market realities.  Findings from the study will be fundamental to defining the efficacy of PEVs in attaining a number of U.S. goals for air quality standards and carbon emissions reductions.

 

Emissions Reduction Efforts Gather Steam

— July 2, 2014

Over the past month, worldwide efforts to reduce global carbon emissions have intensified.  On June 2, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a proposal to cut emissions using state-by-state targets (read more on the proposed rule and its implications in previous blogs by my colleagues Brett Feldman and Ryan Citron).  As states begin to explore different compliance options, regional cap-and-trade programs, such as the Northeast’s Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), have gained traction.  Outside of the United States, The World Bank recently reported that more than 60 carbon pricing systems are either operational or in development worldwide.

Cap-and-Trade Considerations

Despite opposition to the EPA’s proposed rule, some states have already begun to embrace the change by exploring a variety of compliance options.   Washington state and Pennsylvania, among others, see cap-and-trade as a possibility to achieve their state’s target for emissions cuts.  John Podesta, a senior adviser to President Obama, told the Financial Times that a market-based solution to achieve emissions cuts would be “the most cost-effective way that states might come together to get the reductions that will be required.”  Many Democratic governors have already indicated that they will draw on the success of the RGGI and California’s statewide market to achieve compliance with the new targets.

Not to be outdone, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) of China laid out plans to establish a national carbon market starting in 2018.  If it comes to fruition, the national model will take into account outcomes from seven regional pilot programs that launched in 2014 (the last of which was scheduled to launch in June).  The pilot schemes, scheduled for evaluation in 2016, cover around one-third of China’s gross domestic product and one-fifth of its energy use.  If successful, these programs will not only shape the development of a national carbon market, but also help meet the national goal to reduce carbon intensity by 40% to 45% by 2020 from 2005 levels.

Is a U.S. Carbon Market Realistic?

Realistically, such legislation would be extremely unlikely in the immediate future.  National cap-and-trade legislation has failed on several occasions since President Obama took office, with opponents citing economic harm as the primary concern.  However, if China implements a national carbon market that achieves economical emissions cuts, it could provide the impetus to spur federal legislation in the United States.  Additionally, with the United Nations Climate Summit approaching in September, progress from United States and China may help further global efforts to curb emissions.

 

Blog Articles

Most Recent

By Date

Tags

Clean Transportation, Electric Vehicles, Energy Storage, Policy & Regulation, Renewable Energy, Smart Energy Practice, Smart Energy Program, Smart Grid Practice, Smart Transportation Practice, Utility Innovations

By Author


{"userID":"","pageName":"Carbon Emissions","path":"\/tag\/carbon-emissions","date":"9\/3\/2014"}