Low carbon transportation Filip Černoch cernoch@jTLail.muni.cz Transport and decarbonization • Transport sector accounts for 23% of global energy-related GHG emissions (2017) — dependency on crude oil. Available improvements: • Reduction of travel distances (urban planning). • Increase of share of public transportation. • Shift of road freight activity to rail and shipping. • Development of energy efficiency of vehicles. • Increasign the share of 2ero-emission vehicles. • Promoting the use of low-carbon fuels. Biofuels • Replacement of imported oil with domestic biofuels — benefits in energy security and balance of payment. • Carbon neutral. • Support of domestic agriculture, revitali2ation of rural economy. • Supported in multiple countries (in the EU the aim of 10% of RES in transportation by 2020, preference given to second and third generation). • Specific aims, since crops, wood and waste is better to be used in electricity or heat production. Biofuels • In 2016 accounted for around 4% of world road transport fuel (4,9% in the EU, 81% out of it being biodiesel). Double digit global production growth before 2010 slowed to 2% year-on-year. • In U.S., ethanol output plateauing due to lower investments in new capacity and reaching the corn ethanol limit of Renewable Fuel Standars. • Bra2Ü approaching its 2030 18% share of biofuels in its energy mix. • EU put a cap on food crop-based biofuels of 3.8% by 2030, overal 10% aim cancelled. • Boosting Asia markets for ethanonol (e.g. India, Thailand) and biodiesel (e.g. Indonesia, Malaysia). Projects in China... • International aviation to achieve 'carbon —neutral growth' by 2020. Commercialisation status of main biofuel technologies Bioethanol Diesel-type biofuels Other fuels and additives Biornethane Hydrogen Advanced biofuels Basic and applied R&D Demonst ration Early commercial Cellulosic ethanol Biodiesel from microalgae; Sugar-based hydrocarbons ovel fuels e.g. furan BtL'-diesel (from gasification + FTJ) Biobutanol; DME ; rolysis-based fuels Hydrotreated vegetable oil Bio-SC All other Gasification novel routes with reforming _I_ ■ Liquid biofuel Caseous biofuel 1. Biomass-to-liquids; 2. Fischer-Tropsch; 3. Dimethylether; 4. Bio-synthetic gas. Conventional biofuels Commercial Ethanol from sugar and starch crops Biodiesel (by transesterification) Biogas (anaerobic digestion) Impact on environment • Contribute to global climate mitigation and cleaning up the atmosphere, but encourage monoculture of energy crops and reduction of biodiversity. • Transport of bio fuels from around the world (supported by subsidies). • So far only Bra2il's and Thailand's sugarcane-to-ethanol; ethanol as a byproduct of cellulose output in Sweden or Swit2erland, and manufacture of biodiesel from animal fats and used cooking oil are delivering significant climate benefits. • The other conventional biofuels delivers savings unders 40% compared to fossil fuel alternative (plus land use - soil acidification, fertili2er use, biodiversity loss, toxicity of agricultural pesticides). Impact on environment Advanced biofuels i-1-r Demonstration Conventional biofuels I I i-r urn sic-nol OA d; o = c beet-anol O c O c ME ME Ö nj nj < < Cellul eth is co CO cn 111 Z] LJ ■ i _L O ŮJ .C 5 5 Rapes _E o Commercial Gasoline replacement Diesel replacement Natural gas replacement Impact on food production • Calculated by the U.S. administration as low as 3% but by World Bank as high as 75-140% rise of a basket of food commodities in the period of 2002-2008. • Peak in agricultural commodity prices in 2007-2008 — supposedly combination of high prices of oil, poor harvests, speculations and biofuels. World biomass shipping today Source: Based on Bradley et al, 2009, Economics of biofuels • Exemptions from, or reduced rates of, excise duty on fuel. • Regulation on blending them to fuels. • (Some) link to the price of oil. • Problem with transportation. • Competition with other industries — woody material (construction, packaging), agriculture products (chemistry). Limited potentia • BrasiTs sugarcane (energy density 0,45W/m2) = 600 million ha to replace existing consuption of oil in transport. Equivalent of 40% of all agricultural land worldwide or of all tropical areas combined. • In U.S., all corn (0,35W/m2) production (280 million tons) processed to ethanol (0,41/kg) provides for 13% of fuel consumption in transportation. 120% of all arable land needed to cover the whole transport demand for fuels. EV deployment • Reduced fuel combustion, limited noise —► in 2015, nearly a 1/3 of EVs sold in 14 cities. • 95% of the EVs stock in Canada, China, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, UK and U.S. • In 2016 over 750 000 sales worldwide. • China the biggest market by far (336 000), followed by U.S. (160 000) and the EU (215 000). Also Norway, UK, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden. • In Norway, PVs have 29% market share. 6.4% in the Netherlands and 3.4% in Sweden. EV sales, market share, BEV and PHEV sales shares in selected countries 9 o o e « 'j o o c o 'Si 00 " a; tj l- c 1_ CD ns w (J 3 (J o 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 u c E L. aj aj 35% 30% 25% a 20% C nj 15% ^ u 10% | 5% 0% 2016 BEV sales [%} 2016 PHEV sales (%) 12010 2011 12012 12013 12014 12015 2016 2016 market share Battery-electric vehicles (BEV) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) Support mechanisms for EV deployment • Research support (supports and supported by mass production). • Targets and regulations. • Financial incentives (direct rebates, tax breaks and exemptions...). • Policies for increasing the value of EV (exemption from limits of licence plates for ICE vehicles, exemptions from access restriction to urban areas, exemptions from usage fees for specific parts of the road network — parking, road tolls, dedicated parking, access to public charging infrastructure, access to bus lanes and high-occupancy vehicle lanes). • Fleet procurement (both private and of public authorities). EV incentives development in selected countries, 2016 Country 2015 vs. 2016 policy developments BEV PHEV 2015 vs. 2016 sales growth BEV PHEV 2016 sales BEV PHEV China 75% 30% 257 000 79 000 United States A* 22% 70% 86 731 72 885 Norway 6% 164% 29 520 20 660 United Kingdom 4% 42% 10 509 27 403 France *v 26% 36% 21758 7 749 Japan 4V 48% -34% 15 461 9 390 Germany -6% 20% 11322 13 290 Netherlands 47% -50% 3 737 20 740 Sweden 0% 86% 2 951 10 464 Canada 19% 147% 5 220 6 360 Denmark -71% -49% 1218 182 Korea 75% -40% 5 099 164 Evolution of battery energy density and costs 1 ODD 500 Conventional lithium ion • ■ Advanced lithium ion 900 ..........\....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 450 S00 ..................-\..................................................................................................................................................—....................................................................... 400 * _ 700 ...........................\..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 350 ■ Beyond lithium ion • US DOE battery cost(BEV) • US DOE battery cost (PHEV) % 600.................................................................................................jj300 'I • Cost claimed by GM and Tesla (BEV) I \ "* 500 ................................................-V............................................................................................................................................................................................... 250 pS c c GM battery cost target (BEV) 400 200 £T Tesla battery cost target (BEV) X ■X' tS Hnrt ™ — US DOE battery cost target (PHEV) 300......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 150 CD 200 • 100 US DOE energy density (PHEV) 100 _ ~fl.( J 5Q ■ US DOE energy density (BEV) o _t_J_ o 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 !l 2020 2022 11 Potential - US DOE energy density target (PHEV) Costs of PLDV technologies by country/region in the 2DS £ 20000 o 3 — E 18000 16000 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 United States N o v.. ICE A-A- ...............O.......I^l-.......j.....................o...............-v........—N......................l ~\............................^.............................Si..............i>.............. Ml! villi** iS-^ ■ Engine ■ Electric motor Fuel - Tripling mileage case China Engine improvements Home charger Battery Fuel Jag an Eu.r°pe -V -V .v. PHEV J". o O Q BEV LI Q q o ICE O 0 PHEV J". o O O BEV 1/1 Q O O rj ICE PHEV BEV in o ICE PHEV BEV Global electricity car stock 1400 Ig 1 200 c § 1000 o § 800 u O 600