Energy Profile Analysis

The United States

Introduction

According to the Kyoto Protocol, the United States is mandated to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions eight-fold by the year 2012. This potential definitely exists with respect to the Protocol, and the U.S. has developed several options for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Historically, the U.S. has seen development in energy derived from fossil fuels and other non-renewable resources, but in recent years has seen a dramatic increase in the usage of more sustainable forms of energy. With increasing research and development, these types of fuel have in the long run become much more cost-effective and efficient to use, and in compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, have helped to move the United States away from complete dependence on oil and gas for energy needs.

Because the structure and size of the United States energy system is driven by the demand for energy services, energy services, in turn, are driven by driving forces. This primarily includes economic trends, structure and activity, but is also comprehensive of income levels and distribution, demographics, technology base, and natural resource endowment, to name a few. The structure and level of demand for energy, together with the performance of end-use technologies, largely determine the magnitude of final energy demand. The GDP (gross domestic product), which measures the final amount of energy per unit of economic output, is often used to measure the effectiveness of energy use and the consumption patterns of different economies. The United States maintains one of the highest GDP’s world-wide, yet energy use in developing countries increases at rates three to four times as developed countries. This comes as the result of lifestyle changes made possible by rising incomes and higher population growth rates.

While the United States remains vested in the trading of crude oil and its products, there has been a sharp movement away from foreign dependence on oil and oil technologies and an investment in other forms of energy development. Its interests include hydroelectric power, geothermal power, wind power, solar energy, nuclear power technologies, energy derived from biomass, and most recently, hydrogen fuel cells. In addition, recent developments have shown the emerging need for oil supplements in markets dealing with liquid fuels, and the potential for advanced fossil energy technologies within the United States economy as it gradually moves away from completely oil-based energy services. Each of these energy services provides particular advantages and disadvantages both to the consumer and to the environment with respect to greenhouse gas emissions, and at the same time offers grounding for cost and benefit analysis to the United States economy. Each of these types will be explored in detail, while assessing the potential for reduction in carbon dioxide emission in accordance with the Kyoto Protocol.

Hydroelectric Power

Hydroelectric power is a clean renewable source of energy generated by hydro-powered turbines. Large turbines are regarded as an essentially efficient technology; however, improvements on smaller turbines are still being designed. Currently hydropower makes up approximately 20% of worldwide energy production. This is about a third of its potential contribution. In regions such as Western Europe and North America, as much as 65% of economically pursuable hydropower is in use. In more underdeveloped regions such as Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia, less than 18% of feasible hydropower is in use by comparison (251). Presently electricity production in large hydroelectric plants is about $.02-.04 a kilowatt hr (254), but there have been some advances in dam building technology which could lower these costs. However, environmental and social impacts due to hydropower are increasing, and thus the cost of reducing these impacts will probably cause the overall hydroelectricity costs to remain about the same.

Hydropower is a viable alternative to fossil fuels, though as mentioned above there are many environmental and social concerns. Some of these concerns include; habitat deterioration, water quality, affect on marine life, human health hazards and displacement, as well as soil deterioration. The United States has had to contend with all of these issues while trying to expand its hydroelectric sector. In regions well suited for hydroelectric facilities (in particular the Pacific Northwest) plans to expand facilities further are often met with criticism and protest, as local populations do not want to be affected by the above mentioned issues.

For hydroelectric power to move forward and be used to its full potential, at least partial solutions to these problems are going to have to be discovered. These solutions in conjunction with better project cost estimation would greatly reduce criticisms of hydroelectric power allowing its full benefits to be realized.

Geothermal Power

Geothermal power utilizes the heat generated from the core of the Earth to produce electricity and to be applied directly, as a source of heat or as a means to transport hot water and steam through hydrothermal interactions. Geothermal energy has been in use commercially for some 70 years, but its use worldwide has increased rapidly in the past three decades – at about 9 percent a year in 1975-95 for electricity and about 6 percent a year for direct uses (255). The United States has increased its total generation capacity of electricity via geothermal energy from 1990-1998 by roughly 75 megawatts, and North America as a whole produces approximately 4.0 terawatt-hours of thermal energy each year, or about 10% of the global total. Exploitable geothermal systems occur in various geologic environments, yet high-temperature fields used in conventional power production are typically confined to areas characterized by volcanism, seismic, and magmatic activity. Low-temperature resources, however, are suitable for direct use and can be found in many countries, including the United States, and one of the chief advancements in this field has been the ground source geothermal heat pump. The scope for direct use of geothermal energy is even more plentiful than its use for electricity production, estimated at about 600,000 exajoules. Thus, with both ample resources and a relatively advanced and efficient technology at hand, future development of geothermal energy over the next 20 to fifty years boils down to economics and political competitiveness with other resources in the worldwide market.

Direct application of geothermal energy can involve a variety of end-uses, including space heating and cooling, industrial production, fish farming, and in health spas. Recent developments in the application of ground source heat pumps, specifically in the United States, have yielded the Earth to act as a heat source in heating or as a heat sink for cooling, depending on the season. At the end of 1997, the United States boasted more than 300,000 geothermal heat pumps operating nation-wide in homes, schools, and commercial buildings, providing between 8 and 11 terawatt-hours a year of end-use energy (256). The United States also has laid claim to the largest installed geothermal electricity generation capacity from 1998-2000, at 2,850 megawatts in 1998 (based on IGA, 1999), as well as one of the highest direct-use installed capacities, at 1.91 gigawatts with 3.97 terawatt-hours of heat production a year (Stefansson and Fridleiefsson, 1998).

Geothermal heat pumps as a whole are rated the most energy-efficient space conditioning equipment available in the United States, and the Geothermal Heat Pump Consortium has established a $100 million six-year program to increase heat pump sales on an annual basis, effectively reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 1.5 million metric tones of carbon each year. In addition, extrapolations of past trends in geothermal energy used in electricity production show a long-term forecast for potential development, and if the present rate of electricity generation were to continue for another 25 years, the installed capacity would reach 58 gigawatts of electricity in 2020 (257). Looking at environmental impact, it is obvious that gas emissions from low-temperature geothermal resources are only a fraction of the emissions from high-temperature fields. Conventional schemes in geothermal energy use commonly produce brines that are generally re-injected back into the reservoir and thus are never released into the environment. The carbon dioxide emission from this is thus zero.

Wind Power

In the last 25 years world wide energy from wind powered sources has increased significantly. Wind energy has the potential to become the provider of a very large percentage of world power over the next decade; anywhere from 20,000 to 50,000 terawatt-hours might be generated by wind (235). Approximately 41% of North America’s land surface has wind within classifications 3-7, the range necessary for a successful wind farm (165). Currently North America produces 23% of the world’s wind power with a significant portion of that coming from the United States (234).

Wind power continues to benefit from technological advances in becoming much more efficient and cost effective. Rotor blade size and shape has been engineered for greater generating power as well as to reduce noise; better design and stronger building materials have contributed to lower maintenance costs. In addition, new advances in offshore wind projects have increased viability for wind power as a large scale power provider in regions not historically familiar with wind as an energy source. There have also been advances made in wind energy storage, one of the major drawbacks in wind energy as it has been found to be very difficult and costly to adequately store potential energy generated from wind in electrical form. Further research and development in the way of engineering could introduce the possibility of wind electricity eventually costing as little as $.01-.03 per kilowatt hour.

Though wind power is virtually pollution free and causes relatively few other environmental impacts, economic, aesthetic, and topographical issues prevent wind electricity from being produced to its maximum. Wind power contains high turnkey costs making investors wary of the long term profit possible from wind. Wind turbines require specific climatic conditions regarding wind speed and continuity, and land use for wind farms can be difficult to secure. Many also dislike the visual aspects of wind farms and worry about noise pollution, as well as the long-term environmental and ecological effects of wind turbines. In retrospect the United States, due to its large area, variety of climates, wealth, and multitude of plausible investors, has numerous large-scale wind power opportunities. Once the general population is educated on the benefits of wind power and realize that the long term gains outweigh the short term costs, the U.S. can further expand its role as a leader in world wind energy.

Solar Power

There are generally three types of solar energy systems in existence worldwide: photovoltaic energy (used in electricity production), solar thermal or high temperature systems, and low temperature systems. Solar energy by nature is a very diffuse form of energy, completely dependent on solar insolation, and varies over temporal and geographic boundaries. It has a very low power density, the maximum solar radiance being 100 watts per square meter, and the maximum achievable energy only a fraction of that. The economic potential of solar energy depends on the perspectives of cost reduction, and on the technologies used, and in the recent past several scenario studies have assessed the potential application of solar energy technologies, as well as the current and future cost of solar thermal energy with conventional power systems. One of the main causes for analysis in the field of solar energy is environmental life cycle analysis, and carbon dioxide mitigation potential.

Solar technologies in general do not cause emissions during operation, but they do cause emissions during manufacture and possible during decommissioning. With the growing industry, there is now considerable interest in the environmental aspects of solar energy within the United States and worldwide. Efficiency within solar technologies is a cause for concern mainly due to the fact that the amount of energy required to manufacture a complete system is as much or larger than the energy produced over the structure’s lifetime. Despite the relatively non-existent carbon dioxide emissions from these systems, the energy payback time can be longer than a system’s entire lifetime. Since 1975 the learning rate of photovoltaic energy has been roughly 20 percent (243), and as a result, modern grid-connected rooftop systems have allowed consumers to invest in this technology and enjoy much shorter payback times. However, for ground-based systems, payback is often much longer, leading to a divestiture and little reason for countries, including the United States, to spend money on such cost-ineffective systems.

The carbon dioxide mitigation potential of photovoltaics and high- and low-temperature systems can be roughly inferred from the data on energy payback time, assuming that emissions of greenhouse gases related to photovoltaic cell and module production found in solar thermal systems are effectively minimized. A typical photovoltaic system with an energy payback time of two years at 1,500 kilowatt-hours per square meter per year and a technical lifetime of 30 years will produce 15 kilowatt-hours of electricity without emissions for each kilowatt-hour of electricity ‘invested’ in manufacturing. Specific carbon dioxide emissions are thereby fifteen times lower than those of conventional fuel mixes.

Nuclear Power

Nuclear power dominates electricity production in many industrialized countries, but has seen a dramatic decline in its contributions to energy production within the United States over the last several decades. Although on a global scale there is likely to be modest expansion until 2010, most projections are that the nuclear share of electricity generation will be less in 2020 than today. For industrialized countries, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) projects that nuclear capacity in 2020 will be “44, 75, and 100 percent the capacity of 1997 for its low-growth, reference, and high-growth scenarios” (306). In fact, many analysts envision nuclear powers’ absolute contribution to the world-wide power grid to be no more than today and are likely to be less.

Historically, devastating events associated with nuclear power have deterred further development in the field. Thus, it is desirable to see if acceptable solutions can be found to the economic, safety, proliferation, and diversion, and waste management concerns that presently constrain the prospects for further nuclear deployment. If ways can be found to make nuclear power more widely acceptable, it could potentially help address problems posed by conventional fossil energy technologies – especially the health impacts of air pollution and climate change arising from carbon dioxide buildup. Considering the chain of processes required for nuclear power production (mining operations, nuclear power conversion, plant operation, decommissioning, transportation, and disposal), recent analysis carried out by the European Commission’s “Externe Program” estimated that the total cost of environmental damage (on local, regional, and global scales) is about $0.003 per kilowatt-hour when evaluating future impacts with a zero discount rate (Rabl and Spadaro, 2000). This is far less than the environmental damage costs of coal plants using best available control technologies. In addition, greenhouse gas emissions are zero in the generation of nuclear power, a benefit that must also be taken into account in comparing nuclear and fossil energy technologies.

Solutions are desirable in this area both because nuclear energy can potentially contribute to solving the major problems posed by conventional fossil technologies, and because of uncertainties associated with the prospects of other advanced energy-supply options, such as alternative fossil technologies and renewable technologies. In addition, nuclear fuel costs are generally low relative to fossil fuel costs, and as a result recent emphasis has been focused on technological strategies and the types of research and development that offer promise in making the nuclear option more attractive. However, more sustainable means to harness electricity from nuclear power need to be developed, or means made more efficient for nuclear power to remain a more clean form of energy than coal, with the aim of reducing total carbon dioxide emissions in accordance with the Kyoto Protocol. If the United States continues their current trend of nuclear energy generation, uranium as a resource will last for about another 30 years, provided nuclear power is only used to produce electricity.

Energy from Biomass

Biomass is the general term for all organic matter that comes from plants. It contributes significantly to worldwide energy use - between 9-13% of the worlds energy is produced by biomass, although a third of this is contributed solely by underdeveloped nations (222). Traditionally, biomass is used domestically in heating homes and cooking, but more recently biomass has been adapted to produce electricity steam and bio-fuels. Ethanol produced by fermenting sugars is an alternative use for corn and sugar cane; the practice is widespread in the U.S. and the government often offers subsidies to farmers who participate in ethanol production - farmers are paid to leave 10% of their cropland untouched (229). Though ethanol is a clean burning fuel it has been calculated that the energy used to produce ethanol can actually be greater than the energy encompassed by the ethanol itself. Thus the efficiency and economic sensibility of a large scale ethanol industry is somewhat questionable. Methanol, another bio-fuel, is produced by gasification technology but is only economically attractive when oil prices are rising, as the two are in direct competition (226).

Regarding biomass as a whole, there are a multitude of environmental and health concerns. Pesticides used to enhance crop growth can adversely affect soil, plant and animal life and groundwater. Biodiversity and habitat can be at risk when biomass plantations expand to cover large areas of land, and the side effects of burning biomass can result in illness particularly in women and children. Although by 2020 better crop production is predicted to cut biomass production costs to $1.5-2.0 per gigajoule, plantation biomass has potential to be an even greater provider of energy in rural and developing nations like Zimbabwe who rely on biomass to satisfy 75% of their national energy demand (159, 227), the U.S. market for renewable energies will probably rely more heavily on fuels specifically suited to our large scale consumption of energy and technologically advanced markets.

Fuel Cells

There are many different types of fuel cells, and are typically defined by a gauge known as a cell’s “electrolyte”. The electrolyte determines the operating temperature of the cell and the type of fuel it uses. Fuel cells create energy when they are forced through an external circuit, converting energy produced by an internal chemical reaction into electricity (Rocky Mountain Institute). This process is essentially pollution-free.

There are clear advantages to development and implementation of the fuel cell, the first being that fuel cells use potentially renewable or perpetual energy, and they never have to be recharged or refueled. They are extremely efficient, and emissions are virtually non-existent, save for a discernable amount of pure liquid water and scant other byproducts. These cells are quiet, cutting down on noise pollution, and can be implemented practically anywhere that electricity is utilized.

Despite these advantages there are still setbacks to a fuel-cell switch over within the United States in the foreseeable future. The existing infrastructure, along with the uncertainty of the fuel cell future makes the start-up costs of fuel cells and fuel cell vehicles somewhat high. Until fossil fuels run out it is difficult to create urgency to switch to fuel cell vehicles, and there is also the issue of fuel cell infrastructure needing continual maintenance and refueling. Fuel cell technology is continually improving as scientists and engineers investigate on-board fuel creation and increase overall efficiency. President Bush has recently proposed a $1.2 billion hydrogen fuel initiative, with the intentions of making fuel cells commonplace by the year 2020 (WEA). A switch of this nature would greatly reduce not only U.S. but worldwide greenhouse gas emissions, and significantly decrease our dependence on foreign oil sources.

Conclusion: Movement away from Oil and the Potential for

Advanced Fossil Energy Technologies

Sustainability principles indicate that fuel energy technologies should evolve toward the long-term goal of near-zero air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions – without the necessity of utilizing complicated, expensive, and end-of-pipe control technologies. Near-term technologies, strategies, and implementation procedures should support this long-term goal. Oil, the dominant fossil fuel, accounted for 44 percent of fossil fuel use in 1998 (WEA). Although there is no immediate danger of running out of oil, dependence on oil from regions such as the Persian Gulf, where remaining low-cost resources are concentrated, is expected to grow. For example, the United States Energy Information Administration projects the from 1997-2020, as global oil production increases by nearly 50 percent, the Persian Gulf’s production share will increase from 27 to 37 percent (EIA, 1999a). This suggests the need to seek out greater supply diversity in liquid fuel markets in order to lessen energy supply security concerns, reduce long-term carbon emissions, and moderate cost over the next 20 years.

Growing concerns over air quality are leading to increased interest in new fuels that have a higher degree of inherent cleanliness than traditional liquid fuels derived from crude oil, coal, and other dwindling fossil fuels resources. To meet the ever-growing fuel demand in the face of such constraints, some combination of a shift to natural gas and the introduction of clean, synthetic fuels derived from various resources such as petroleum residuals, coal, and biomass is likely needed to supplant oil during the next 25 years.

Additionally, non-liquid fuel markets such as wind, geothermal and hydroelectric can offer economically viable, emission minimal alternatives to traditional energy sources. These alternatives, if implemented, can significantly reduce the nation’s dependence on oil well before the resource becomes scarce. In hindsight, recent focusing events have catalyzed major development efforts for synthetic fuels, and the conception of emergent fuel technologies have proposed better environmental characteristics and, when deployed through innovative multiple-energy product strategies, reasonably good economic prospects, at least in the short term. Moreover, the private sector, rather than the government, is taking the lead in advancing these new technologies. The Institutionalization of energy concerns has witnessed a shift in the government’s role from managing demonstration projects to supporting research and development, which enables the commercialization and innovation of more environmentally-friendly energy sources and its technology to take place.

Works Consulted

World Energy Assessment (2000). "Energy and the Challenge of Sustainability", UNDP.

Rabl and Spadaro (2000). “The Rationale for Considering the Nuclear Option”.

Stefansson and Fridleifsson (1998). “Electricity Generation and Direct Use of Geothermal Energy”.

U.S. Energy Information Administration data, 1997, 1999.

International Energy Agency (IEA) data, 1975-1999.

International Geothermal Agency (IGA) data, 1999.

The Rocky Mountain Institute (2002). “How Fuel Cells Work”.