Population is forecast to increase to around 420 million by 2050, which is approximately a 35% increase. There’s little reason to believe that the number of vehicles won’t increase by the same percentage, along with CO2 emissions, without taking specific actions to reduce the use of gasoline.

An increase in the number of vehicles would result in CO2 emissions of 1,560 MMT.

Aside from stopping or restricting the use of automobiles, there are basically three ways to cut CO2 emissions from the use of gasoline.

• Replacing gasoline-powered vehicles with pure electric vehicles (EVs).
• Increasing the miles per gallon without increasing miles driven.
• Replacing gasoline with ethanol or hydrogen.

A study by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory determined that 43% of existing cars and light trucks could be EVs before new generation and transmission infrastructure would be required.

If 43% of 223 million vehicles existing at the time of the study were EVs in 2050, it could cut CO2 emissions from gasoline by around 500 MMT – assuming that all the electricity used to recharge batteries came from nuclear, wind, solar or CCS enabled coal-fired power plants, which might not be the case.

Under this scenario, there would be 95 million all electric EVs on the road in 2050.

If mpg of remaining vehicles was doubled, another 600 MMT could be cut.

These two actions, if they were possible, would cut CO2 emissions by 1,100 MMT, which wouldstill require cutting another 300 MMT from the use of gasoline.

With respect to using ethanol instead of gasoline, it appears as though a consensus is emerging that ethanol doesn’t cut CO2 emissions.

With respect to the price of gasoline, if the price was $10 per gallon the miles driven might decrease, but most people wouldn’t find this an equitable answer.

With respect to hydrogen vehicles, the fuel cells required for them still cost several times more than an internal combustion engine. Until the cost of fuel cells is dramatically lowered, it is doubtful that hydrogen-powered vehicle will be a serious factor. There is also the question of building hydrogen fueling stations. If hydrogen powered cars are used in quantity, however, they could help cut CO2 emissions dramatically since they have zero emissions.

Conclusions

Whether it will be possible to have 95 million EVs on the road by 2050 is highly problematic. Only 38 years remain before 2050, which means that 2.5 million BEVs must be sold every year between now and 2050. The closer we get to 2050 the greater the number of EVs that must be sold every year.

There is also the question of whether billions will be spent on building charging stations.

The track record to-date on the adoption of EVs isn’t encouraging in these respects.

Doubling the mpg is possible, assuming nearly everyone will be satisfied with a compact vehicle or there is some revolutionary technology for improving gasoline mileage.

Even accepting that these alternatives are possible, there is still another 300 MMT that will have to be cut to achieve an 80% reduction in CO2 emissions from the use of gasoline.

While it’s not impossible to cut CO2 emissions 80% by 2050, it’s a fool’s errand to try.

And then there are the other segments that account for 40% of CO2 emissions that will have to be cut 80%.

More on those in the next article.

Note:

EVs or BEVs, but not PHEVs.

Carbon Folly available at Amazon contains additional information.

Read more of Donn’s columns at his blog, Power for USA.

Related posts:

1. Exposed: The UN’s Latest Bogus CO2 Claim The UN claims that developed countries, including the United States,…
2. Who Knew? Contraceptives Will Aid Bogus ‘Global Warming Crisis’ It’s amazing how liberals can, with a straight face, rationalize…

The UN claims that developed countries, including the United States, must cut their CO2 emissions 80% by 2050 or there will be a climate catastrophe.

It follows that if these countries can’t cut their CO2 emissions 80%, there will be an unavoidable climate catastrophe.

Can the United States cut its CO2 emissions 80%?

The answer is no, and this group of articles will explain why.

It then follows that it’s wasted effort and money to attempt to cut CO2 emissions, and that this effort should be used, instead, to grow the economy.

The source of CO2 emissions in the United States are approximately as follows:

• 40% from generating electricity
• 20% from using gasoline for cars
• 40% from all other sources

CO2 emissions from generating electricity and from gasoline must be cut 80% or it will not be possible to achieve an overall 80% reduction by cutting the remaining emissions more than 80%.

Let’s deal with the electricity generation segment first, and the gasoline segment in the next article.

Figure I shows how electricity was generated in the United States in 2011.

Figure II shows that coal produced 81% and natural gas 18% of CO2 emissions from the generation of electricity.

Figure III projects that total generating capacity will need to increase by over 600,000 MW by 2050. This reflects a 1% growth rate as predicted by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) through 2030 and extrapolated to 2050. This growth rate is essentially the same as the population growth rate to 2050 and reflects the EIA’s estimates of energy savings through 2030.

This growth does not include any additional generation required for charging batteries on electric vehicles (EVs).

The projected increase in electricity generation will increase rather than cut CO2 emissions.

In 2050, total CO2 emissions from generating electricity must be reduced to 411 MMT from 2054 MMT in 2011. Figure II indicates that existing natural gas units already produce nearly all the CO2 emissions that will be allowed in 2050.

The fundamental questions are:

1. How will this additional generation be accomplished?

How can CO2 emissions from existing coal-fired and natural gas power plants be cut 80%?

Figure IV shows the predicted outcome based on four assumptions.

1. Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is possible for coal-fired power plants, but not natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) plants. While carbon capture is still experimental for coal-fired power plants, there’s been no credible process demonstrated for capturing CO2 from NGCC plants.
2. Carbon capture results in the derating of existing coal-fired power plants by over 30%. In other words, coal-fired power plants will produce 30% less electricity for the grid when equipment is installed to capture around 90% of the CO2 emissions produced by coal-fired power plants.
3. While some existing nuclear power plants will be retired by 2050, it’s assumed that sufficient new nuclear plants will be built to offset these retirements.
4. That wind and solar can produce 20% of the forecast generation requirements. This is the theoretical maximum percentage that the grid can tolerate from wind or any unreliable method for generating electricity.

   Electricity shortfall in 2050

Figure IV shows that there will be at least a 24% shortfall in electricity, while Figure V shows that existing NGCC power plants produce virtually all permissible CO2 emissions in 2050. No new NGCC plants can be built. Note that over 600,000 new 1.5 MW wind turbines (average size of current units) would have to be built.

Eliminating the 24% shortfall would require building over 300 new nuclear or Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC), 1,000 MW power plants.

IGCC power plants capture around 80% of CO2, which must then be sequestered underground if CO2 emissions are not to exceed the permissible level in 2050. IGCC power plants cost about the same as nuclear power plants.

It should be noted that around 20,000 miles of new high pressure (approx.2,000 psi) pipelines must be built to transport the CO2 to where it can be sequestered.

Without building over 300 new nuclear or IGCC 1,000 MW power plants, the 24% shortfall in electricity would require rationing.

Effect without CCS

Figure IV assumes that carbon capture of coal-fired power plants and sequestration is possible. Carbon capture is still experimental and may not work.

Even with carbon capture, the unvarnished truth is that sequestering 1,640 MMT of CO2 emissions from power plants underground, every year for centuries, and expecting them to remain there for thousands of years without leakage of CO2 back into the atmosphere is unproven and probably not possible.

Without sequestration, the permissible level of CO2 emissions in 2050 would require eliminating all coal fired power plants, including IGCC plants.

Eliminating all coal-fired power plants would result in an over 40% shortfall in electricity and a need to nearly double the number of nuclear power plants that would have to be built.

Without building 500 or more new nuclear power plants, electricity would be in very short supply and the economy would be crippled.

Conclusion for Electricity Generating Segment

It may not be theoretically impossible to cut CO2 emissions from this segment by 80%, but it’s impractical and virtually impossible. And we must still cut CO2 emissions from the use of gasoline and from the other segments of the economy that produce CO2 emissions, such as trucks, railroads, airplanes, heating of homes and industry.

It’s really a fool’s errand to attempt to cut CO2 emissions 80% by 2050.

The next article will examine whether CO2 emissions from gasoline can be cut 80% by 2050.

Notes:

MMT = million metric tons

Additional information is in Carbon Folly available at Amazon. It contains actual emission data for 2004.

Related posts:

1. Who Knew? Contraceptives Will Aid Bogus ‘Global Warming Crisis’ It’s amazing how liberals can, with a straight face, rationalize…
2. Obama’s Gas-Powered War On Coal With the increasingly likelihood that Obama’s health care law will…