Well-to-Wheels: Setting the Scene

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Well-to-Wheels: Setting the Scene"

Betty Rose
5 years ago
Views:

1 Well-to-Wheels: Setting the Scene Michael Lane Secretary General, CONCAWE 21 st March 2011

2 CONservation of Clean Air and Water in Europe The Oil Companies European association for health, safety and environment in refining and distribution (founded in 1963) 2

3 CONCAWE Membership Open to companies owning refining capacity in Europe Currently 41 Member Companies: ALMA API APC BP CEPSA Chevron ConocoPhillips ENI ERG ExxonMobil Hansen & Rosenthal Hellenic Petroleum INA Ineos IPLOM Koch KPI Lotos Lukoil LyondellBasell Murco MOL Motor Hellas Neste Oil Nynas OMV Petrogal Petroplus PKN Orlen Preem Repsol RHG Rompetrol Sara SARAS Shell SRD ST1 Statoil Tamoil Total Represents nearly 100% of European refining capacity Not for profit association, funded by Member Companies 3

4 CONCAWE: key research assets for members REACH Regulation: now and in the future Refining modelling capability: support to industry advocacy on refining future & EU energy policy ETS Benchmarking: allocation of CO 2 allowances in Air quality modelling: IPPC revision (IED) & BREFs (BAT reference documents) Transport fuels: Well2Wheels, links to automotive industry, bio fuels, quality & specifications, demand evolution CONCAWE will continue to improve its delivery capabilities in these vital areas of work (and several other areas of important work) 4

5 The JEC Consortium: A Short History The JEC Research Consortium was initiated in 2000 by: JRC: Joint Research Centre of the European Commission EUCAR: European Council for Automotive R&D CONCAWE: Research Association of the European Oil Refining Industry JEC Consortium Activities: : Projects Completed Well-to-Wheels (WTW) Study Versions 1, 2b, and 2c WTW Study Version 3: Tank-to-Wheels (TTW) ( ) WTW Study Version 3: Well-to-Tank (WTT) and Well-to-Wheels (WTW) Impact of ethanol on vehicle evaporative emissions (SAE ) Impact of ethanol in petrol on fuel consumption and emissions JEC Biofuels Programme for a 2020 time horizon 2011+: Projects under discussion 2011+: Revision of WTW Study (Version 4) 5

6 The JEC WTW Study Objectives of the JEC WTW Study Well-to-wheels energy use and GHG emissions assessment of a wide range of automotive fuels and powertrains relevant to Europe in 2010 and beyond Consider the viability of each fuel pathway and estimate the associated macro-economic costs Conceived as an evergreen study Version 1: published in December 2003 Version 2: published in January 2007 Version 3: partial results released in December 2008 Version 3c: in final review for publication 2Q 2011 Version 4: scope is under discussion Has been used by many as the benchmark study in EU JEC Consortium advised the EU Commission and supplied data for the development of the Renewable Energy Directive GHG methodology and default values 6

Typical Well-to-Wheels Pathway Well Produce primary fuel Transport

energy required Total GHG emitted Well-to-Tank (WTT) ~15% (production

vehicle 2 6% Refining 8 10% Distribution & Retail 1% Tank-to-Wheels

7 Typical Well-to-Wheels Pathway Well Produce primary fuel Transport primary fuel Produce road fuel For each WTW pathway, calculate: Total energy required Total GHG emitted Well-to-Tank (WTT) ~15% (production side) Distribute road fuel Fuel vehicle Crude Production Burn fuel in vehicle 2 6% Refining 8 10% Distribution & Retail 1% Tank-to-Wheels (TTW) Wheels Source: JEC Well to Wheels Study (2005) ~85% (consumption side) 7

8 Well-to-Wheels Pathways Resource Crude oil Coal Natural Gas Biomass Wind Nuclear Including preliminary views on Carbon Capture and Sequestration Fuels Conventional Gasoline/Diesel/ Naphtha Synthetic Diesel CNG (inc. biogas) LPG MTBE/ETBE Hydrogen (compressed / liquid) Methanol DME Ethanol Bio-diesel (inc. FAEE) Powertrains Spark Ignition: Gasoline, LPG, CNG, Ethanol, H 2 Compression Ignition: Diesel, DME, Bio-diesel Fuel Cell Hybrids: SI, CI, FC Hybrid Fuel Cell + Reformer Single vehicle platform: Medium-size EU car 8

9 Revised Crude Oil Production Figures The original figure was 3.3 ( ) g CO 2 /MJ, an average of International Oil Companies (IOCs) figures dating back to the late 1990s An update appeared justified since: GHG emissions reporting was not well developed at that time IOCs energy and GHG emissions performance tend to be better than for National Oil Companies Two main sources of information: Industry statistics from Oil and Gas Producers association (OGP) Flaring and venting data collected by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) The new figure for Version 3c is 4.8 ( ) g CO 2 /MJ (EU average crude oil supply) resulting in the following changes: WTW Gasoline: 87.6 g CO 2 /MJ (previously 86.0) WTW Diesel: 89.2 g CO 2 /MJ (previously 87.5) 9

Low sulphur marine fuel options: Technical, environmental & economic aspects

Low sulphur marine fuel options: Technical, environmental & economic aspects Maritime Stakeholder Event Michael Lane Secretary General, CONCAWE 1 st June 2011 CONservation of Clean Air and Water in Europe