World Energy Outlook Isabel Murray Russia Programme Manager Moscow, 3 February 2010

Transcription

1 World Energy Outlook 2009 Isabel Murray Russia Programme Manager Moscow, 3 February 2010

2 Key Differences between the WEO and Primes Model WEO is designed as a tool for policy makers: > to understand current trends > to understand what is needed if the world is to get on a more sustainable energy path Policies Technologies, and Level of investment > Reference scenario and 450 ppm scenario Difficult to compare WEO-2009 and EC Primes model results: > WEO-2009 was modeled during the financial crisis EU 2009 numbers pre-crisis > WEO incorporates only policies that are in place or already backed by laws The WEO does not model government goals or plans > Various methodological differences E.g., assumptions on nuclear

3 Change in primary energy demand in the Reference Scenario, Coal Oil Gas Nuclear OECD Non-OECD Hydro Biomass Other renewables Mtoe Fossil fuels account for 77% of the increase in world primary energy demand in , with oil demand rising from 85 mb/d in 2008 to 88 mb/d in 2015 & 105 mb/d in 2030

4 Worldwide upstream oil & gas capital expenditures Billion dollars * * Budgeted spending Global upstream spending (excluding acquisitions) is budgeted to fall by over $90 billion, or 19%, in 2009 the first fall in a decade

5 Oil production in the Reference Scenario mb/d NGLs Unconventional oil Crude oil fields yet to be developed or found Crude oil currently producing fields Sustained investment is needed mainly to combat the decline in output at existing fields, which will drop by almost two-thirds by 2030

6 World natural gas production (Reference Scenario) tcm % 80% 60% 40% Fields yet to be developed or found Currently producing fields Share from fields not yet producing (right axis) 1 20% % Additional capacity of around bcm, or 4 times current Russian capacity, is needed by 2030 half to offset decline at existing fields & half to meet the increase in demand

7 Russian gas production by source in the Reference Scenario bcm Non-Gazprom output from fields yet to be developed Non-Gazprom output from Existing fields Gazprom output from fields yet to be developed Gazprom output from Existing fields Russian gas production is projected to rise from 657 bcm in 2008 to 760 bcm in 2030, with declining production at existing fields pushing new capacity needs to over 600 bcm

8 OECD Europe gas production in the Reference Scenario bcm Norway Other OECD Europe United Kingdom Netherlands European Union production Despite rising output in Norway up to 2025, European gas production declines steadily to 2030, from 309 bcm in 2008 to 220 bcm in 2030, with the sharpest fall occurring in the UK

9 US natural gas supply in the Reference Scenario bcm Net imports Conventional Unconventional Mainly as a result of shale gas production growth, US gas output grows gradually through to 2030, outstripping US demand & squeezing US net imports

10 Natural gas inter-regional regional transportation capacity in the Reference Scenario bcm % 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Unutilised capacity Total trade Capacity utilisation rate (right axis) % A sizable glut of gas capacity is looming reaching 200 bcm by 2011 & is set to persist for several years a result of weaker than expected demand growth & new capacity additions

11 Russia s s capability to export to Europe bcm Ukraine South Stream Nord Stream Blue Stream Belarus, Yamal-Europe Belarus Finland, Baltic States Russian exports to Europe In the Reference Scenario Export capacity is ample now especially with the recent slump in European demand but new capacity could be needed to meet rising demand by the end of the 2010s

12 OECD Europe gas demand by sector in the Reference Scenario bcm Transport Non-energy use Other Industry Power generation Residential, services & agriculture EU demand Gas demand in OECD Europe recovers to the 2008 level of around 550 bcm in 2015 and then rises steadily to 650 bcm in 2030, driven mainly by the power sector

13 EU Renewables Outlook: WEO Reference Scenario WEO Reference Scenario reflects a major increase in wind-based power generation, growing from 100 TWh in 2007 to 400 TWh by 2020.

14 EU primary natural gas imports by scenario Bcm % (204 bcm) Reference Scenario 450 Scenario +37% (116 bcm) EU gas imports continue to grow in the 450 Scenario, but plateau by the mid-2020s Chinese gas imports soar to 90 bcm in 2030.

15 World primary energy demand by fuel in the 450 Scenario Mtoe % Fossil fuels 30% 24% 18% 12% 6% Zero-carbon fuels Share of zero- carbon fuels (right axis) 0 0% In the 450 Scenario, demand for fossil fuels peaks by 2020, and by 2030 zero-carbon fuels make up a third of the world's primary sources of energy demand

16 World abatement of energy-related related CO 2 emissions in the 450 Scenario Gt Reference Scenario OECD+ World, abatement by technology, 2030 Efficiency - 57% Gt Gt OME OC Scenario Renewables & biofuels - 23% Nuclear - 10% CCS - 10% An additional $10.5 trillion of investment is needed in total in the 450 Scenario, with measures to boost energy efficiency accounting for most of the abatement through to 2030

17 European Union energy-related related CO 2 emissions abatement Gt Reference Scenario 450 Scenario Abatement in 450 vs. Reference Scenario (Mt CO 2 ) Efficiency End-use Power plants 9 24 Renewables Biofuels 1 50 Nuclear CCS TOTAL Cumulative additional investment in 450 vs Reference Scenario $480 bn $1 130bn Total additional investment in the 450 Scenario of nearly $1 300 billion in low-carbon power generation over (77% renewables, 16% nuclear, 7% CCS)

18 Russian abatement of energy-related related CO 2 emissions in the 450 Scenario Russia, abatement by technology, 2030 Efficiency - 52% Renewables & biofuels - 32% Nuclear - 6% CCS - 10% Over half of the CO2 abatement is assumed to arise from energy efficiency gains, while renewables account for almost one third of the abatement

19 25 energy efficiency policy recommendations across 7 priority areas IEA/OECD, Across sectors 1.1 Measures for increasing investment in energy efficiency; 1.2 National energy efficiency strategies and goals; 1.3 Compliance, monitoring, enforcement and evaluation of energy efficiency measures; 1.4 Energy efficiency indicators; 1.5 Monitoring and reporting progress with the IEA energy efficiency recommendations themselves. 2. Buildings 2.1 Building codes for new buildings; 2.2 Passive Energy Houses and Zero Energy Buildings; 2.3 Policy packages to promote energy efficiency in existing buildings; 2.4 Building certification schemes; 2.5 Energy efficiency improvements in glazed areas. 3. Appliances 3.1 Mandatory energy performance requirements or labels; 3.2 Low-power modes, including standby power, for electronic and networked equipment; 3.3 Televisions and set-top boxes; 3.4 Energy performance test standards and measurement protocols. 4. Lighting 4.1 Best practice lighting and the phase-out of incandescent bulbs; 4.2 Ensuring least-cost lighting in nonresidential buildings and the phase-out of inefficient fuel-based lighting. 5. Transport 5.1 Fuel-efficient tyres; 5.2 Mandatory fuel efficiency standards for light-duty vehicles; 5.3 Fuel economy of heavy-duty vehicles; 5.4 Eco-driving. 6. Industry 6.1 Collection of high quality energy efficiency data for industry; 6.2 Energy performance of electric motors; 6.3 Assistance in developing energy management capability; 6.4 Policy packages to promote energy efficiency in small and medium-sized enterprises. Global implementation of recommendations could save about 8.2 GtCO 2 /yr by 2030; equivalent to 20% of global reference scenario energy related 7. Utilities CO 2 emissions in Utility end-use energy efficiency schemes.

20 Implementation of IEA Energy Efficiency recommendations across the G8 IEA/OECD, 2009 No country has fully or substantially implemented more than 57% of the relevant recommendations.

21 Russia 6% 6% 7% 22% 7% 23% 29% 14% 25% 44% 19% 64% 77% 57% CROSS-SECTORAL BUILDINGS APPLIANCES LIGHTING 18% 9% 18% 55% TRANSPORT INDUSTRY UTILITIES IEA/OECD, 2009

22 Summary & conclusions Different models hold different assumptions and results Common element between WEO-2009 and PRIMES models: > UNCERTAINTY especially due to the financial crisis > The financial crisis has halted the rise in global fossil-energy use, but its long-term upward path will resume soon on current policies Common element in EU and Russian energy policy outlooks: > Ambitious goals on energy efficiency and renewables > Tackling climate change & enhancing energy security require a massive decarbonisation of the energy system We are now on course for a 6 C temperature rise & rising energy costs Limiting temperature rise to 2 C will require big emission reductions in all regions Natural gas can play a key role as a bridge to a cleaner energy future The challenge is enormous but it can and must be met through improved energy efficiency & technology deployment > This is in line with the goal to move to an innovative economy in Russia > This is in line with the key focus of IEA-Russia co-operation (Joint Statement)