ctrade.orgprabhucarbon2.pdfdoe.govEmissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States 2001-Executive SummaryMarch 2000 15EMEMFeatureEditor’s note: This article contains infor-mation from papers presented at the Elec-tric Utilities Environmental Conference(EUEC), held January 11–13, 1999, in Tuc-son, AZ.Scientists predict the earth’sclimate is changing becausehuman activities are alteringthe chemical compositionof the atmosphere. In par-ticular, the buildup of greenhouse gases(GHGs) such as carbon dioxide (CO2),methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O),hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluoro-carbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride(SF6) is changing the radiation balanceof the planet. The greenhouse effect oc-curs when concentrations of GHGs inthe earth’s atmosphere prevent energygenerated by the sun from escaping backinto space. Heat is trapped close to theearth’s surface, contributing to the risein global temperature (Figure 1). Accord-ing to temperature records, the past de-cade has been the warmest this pastcentury (Figure 2). These trends may beevidence of global warming, which, inaddition to temperature changes, cantrigger destructive changes in precipita-tion, soil moisture, and sea level.OVERVIEW OF THE KYOTOPROTOCOLIn December 1997, the United Statesand more than 160 countries partici-pating in the Framework Conventionon Climate Change adopted the KyotoProtocol for reducing GHG emissions.The agreement requires each industrial-ized country ratifying the treaty to re-duce its emissions of six GHGs by theperiod 2008–2012 to a specified levelrelative to 1990 emissions. The agree-ment covers CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs,and SF6. If the Kyoto Protocol is ratifiedby the Senate, the United States will becommitted to reduce GHG emissions toa level that is 7% below 1990 emissionsby the period 2008–2012. Japan andCanada each pledged a 6% reduction bythis period. The agreement will becomebinding following ratification by at least55 countries, accounting for at least 55%of the 1990 CO2 emissions of industri-alized countries.PROJECTION OF U.S. CARBONEMISSIONSThe combustion of fossil fuels such ascoal, natural gas, oil, and gasoline emitslarge quantities of CO2 (Figure 3). TheHouse Committee on Science hasFigure 1. The greenhouse effect naturally warms the earth’s surface. Without it, the earthwould be 60 °F cooler than it is today––uninhabitable for life as we know it. Source: Office ofScience and Technology Policy.Carbon Trading and Sequestration ProjectsOffer Global Warming SolutionsCarbon Trading and Sequestration ProjectsOffer Global Warming SolutionsNations respond to global warming with successfulcarbon sequestration projects and internationalcarbon trading programs designed to reducegreenhouse gas emissions. by Prabhu DayalEMFeature16 March 2000EMFigure 2. The global average temperature has risen by about 1 °Fover the last century. Source: Office of Science and Technology Policy.Figure 3. Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in themiddle of the 19th century, the concentration of CO2 in the atmo-sphere has steadily increased. Beginning in 1957, continualmeasurements of atmospheric CO2 concentrations have been madeby scientists at an observatory in Mauna Loa, HI. The seasonal cycleof vegetation in northern latitudes can be seen in this record: eachspring the vegetation “inhales” and absorbs CO2, and each autumnmost of that CO2 is released into the atmosphere. Source: Office ofScience and Technology Policy.charged the Energy Information Administration (EIA) withanalyzing the Kyoto Protocol, “focusing on U.S. energy useand prices and the economy in the 2008–2012 time frame.”Mary Hutzler of the U.S. Department of Energy summarizedthe findings of this report at the 1999 EUEC. EIA forecast a22% increase in carbon emissions, or about 328 million met-ric tons, in the United States between now and 2010. Duringthe same period, the energy efficiency of new equipment isexpected to improve in all sectors of the United States. Be-tween 1996 and 2020, energy efficiency––as measured by theamount of energy consumed per dollar of gross national prod-uct in the U.S. economy––is projected to improve by 21%.In addition to reflecting efficiency improvements in allsectors of the energy economy, this trend will demonstratethe projected continuing shift toward less energy-intensiveindustries in the United States. In the transportation sector,the average miles per gallon for new cars is expected to im-prove by 12%, while aircraft and rail efficiency are projectedto improve by 17% and 13%, respectively. In the power gen-eration sector, the average fossil fuel heat rate is expected todecrease by 13%, from roughly 10,400 to 9060 Btu per kilo-watt-hour. While these improvements in energy efficiencywill help reduce some of the expected increases in carbonemissions, economic growth combined with increased de-pendence on fossil fuels more than offsets the efficiency im-provement. The net result of these conflicting trends is thatU.S. carbon emissions are projected to increase 33%, or 445million metric tons above the 1990 level, in 2010. The KyotoProtocol, if ratified, would require the United States to re-duce its GHG emissions approximately 43%, or 539 millionmetric tons per year, to meet the target of 7% below 1990levels by 2010.1IMPACTS OF THE KYOTO PROTOCOL ON ATYPICAL ELECTRIC UTILITYConsider a hypothetical 15,000-MW capacity electric utilitywith a fuel mix for generation of 80% coal, 5% oil/natural gas,5% renewables, 5% purchased power, and 5% nuclear. Theelectricity demand growth rate is assumed to be 2% per year.The impacts of CO2 emission reductions required under theKyoto Protocol are illustrated in Figure 4. An average reduc-tion of about 8 million tons of CO2 per year is projected forthis utility between 2008 and 2012.Switching from coal to natural gas in boilers could reduceCO2 emissions by more than 40%. This “in-system” optioncan achieve a quantity of reductions sufficient to return to1990 levels. However, it is also a relatively expensive option.Approximately 20 MMBtu of gas must be substituted for sub-bituminous coal to reduce CO2 emissions by 1 ton. If the natu-ral gas cost is $.40 per MMBtu higher than coal on a deliveredbasis, then the CO2 reduction costs about $8 per ton. For someenergy companies, higher coal-to-gas price differentials wouldlead to CO2 reduction costs of $20 per ton or more. In eithercase, with a requirement for GHG emission