Brief Analysis of Climate Change Report

Here’s my brief analysis of and comments on the recent IPCC working group report on Mitigation of Climate Change released from Bangkok, Thailand as it relates to alternative energy.

Energy Efficient & Net Zero Energy Buildings

Energy efficiency and renewable energy are rightly held to be a key ways to reduce carbon emissions. Buildings, both residential and commercial, are a significant emitter of greenhouse gasses.

Solar hot water heating can be used to provide up to 70% of annual hot water needs for homes, it can also be used in commercial buildings that require significant hot water such as gyms and nursing homes.

Geothermal (ground source heat pumps) is a lesser known source of alternative energy which can be used to both heat and cool buildings in a highly efficient way and is suited both to residential and commercial buildings. It can also be used to provide hot water. As bore holes and/or trenches need to be dug for geothermal to be installed, it is particularly suited to new builds.

Electricity can be provided from renewable sources via the grid (e.g. wind power) or off-grid it can be generated using for example solar photovoltaic panels (PV).

The use of insulation, natural light & shade, low energy lighting, motion detection lighting etc. can further reduce energy usage.

As noted in the report appropriate building codes can minimise carbon emissions from buildings.

Alternative Energy = Energy Security

The report notes that nations seeking energy security (security of supply) can help achieve it using alternative energy. Nations lacking their own fossil fuels resources should be concerned with the negative impact reliance on fossil fuels can have on their economies. By increasing utilisation of alternative energy resources, nations can increase their energy security.

Transport Policy & Fossil Fuels Subsidies

I was disappointed by the report’s lack of vision on transport. It correctly notes that past increases in efficiency in internal combustion engine (ICE) design have been used to increase power rather than fuel efficiency meaning vehicle carbon emissions have continued to climb. This trend has even continued into hybrid vehicles with performance being favoured over fuel economy (e.g. Lexus hybrid cars). Mention was made of making increased use of biofuels, which can actually significantly increase carbon emissions (see this post on Palm Oil Biodiesel). The glaring emission, is the need for a fundamental shift from the internal combustion engine to electric vehicles. I got the impression the report in trying to build consensus was avoiding treading on any toes. Perhaps that’s why it recommended only reducing rather than eliminating the subsidisation of fossil fuels.

Research and Development + Technology Transfer

India and China will soon be at the top of the list of carbon emitting nations. The report wrongly suggests that because many new power stations are being built in developing nations, they will be using new energy efficient designs and technologies. While new power stations may be more efficient than those built decades ago, for cost reasons less efficient technology is usually used (for more details see this post on Clean Coal). The report notes there have been low levels of investment in research and development. Investment is needed now and much more should be done to aid the transfer of the most energy efficient technologies between nations.

IPCC working group report on Mitigation of Climate Change (pdf link)

Home Savings from Ground Source Heat Pumps

Alternative Energy Blog reader Bruce Stenswick from Minnesota emailed me about his experience of installing a ground source heat pump. Here's what he says to say:

For the winter of 2003-2004, from early October to early May I used 7620 kwh of electricity. That is equivalent to 26MBtu of natural gas. My heat pump has a coefficient of performance of 3.3, which means I needed 26 x 3.3 = 85 MBtu of heat for the winter. In order to obtain that amount of heat from a 95% efficient natural gas furnace, I would have to purchase 85/.95 = 90 Mbtu of natural gas. 95% efficient is close to the tops in efficiency. Natural gas this last winter varied from $8.60 to $9.90 /MBtu. At $9.50, 90 MBtu is $850. The 7620 kwh of electricity at Xcel Energy's electric space heating rate of $0.054...../kwh would be $413. So I cut my heating bill in half.

From an energy perspective, I assume a 35% efficient power plant and 7% line losses. Doing the calculations on this I come up with 80 MBtu of natural gas needed to produce the 7620 kwh of electricity delivered to my house.

From a CO2 perspective, I calculate I cut my CO2 output about 30%. 11% because of the efficiency gain, and another 20% due the fact that Minnesota gets 20% of it electricity from sources that do not produce CO2, mostly nuclear.

Other pollutants, I have no idea how to calculate.

In reality, I like to claim I put nothing into the air when I heat my house. I buy all of my electricity from Xcel Energy's WindSource program, which means I pay $0.02/kwh extra. Xcel then goes out and buys or builds that much extra wind energy above and beyond what has been mandated by the legislature. Even doing that, I still cut my heating bill 33%.

These numbers might not hold for everyone. Heat pumps do not work well in cold temperatures with setback thermostats. That does not affect me since someone is always home and the thermostat is never below 68 in the winter. People with setback thermostats often have the house at 60 when no one is home.

This is an overlooked area. At the gas rates we had this winter, I cut my heating bill in half because of the low electric rates that utilities give for heating with electricity. My house was a retrofit. Geothermal heat pumps beat the pants off of natural gas if you are building from scratch and can put in radiant floor heat.

(please note I haven't verified his figures)

Grants for Geothermal Ground Source Heat Pumps

Author of The Tipping Point & Blink on Geothermal Energy