Liquid fuels - GCAM - Revision history

Matthew Binsted at 14:08, 24 June 2022

2022-06-24T14:08:12Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:08, 24 June 2022
Line 17:		Line 17:

	=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#gas-to-liquids Gas to Liquids] ===		=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#gas-to-liquids Gas to Liquids] ===
	While a minor contributor to liquid fuels production globally (about 0.1%; (IEA 2012),<ref name = "iea2012"/> gas to liquids has received increased attention in recent years, with several large-scale plants completed in the last decade (Glebova 2013),<ref>Glebova, O. 2013. Gas to Liquids: Historical Development and Future Prospects, Report NG 80, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.</ref> and others in various stages of planning and construction (Enerdata 2014).<ref>Enerdata, 2016. The Future of Gas-to-Liquid (GTL) Industry.</ref> Because of the relatively low carbon content of natural gas, and whole-process energy efficiency ratings typically about 60%, the net CO2 emissions from the process are about 20 kg CO2 per GJ of fuel, significantly lower than coal to liquids. There is only one production technology represented in GCAM, with no CCS option available.		While a minor contributor to liquid fuels production globally (about 0.1%; (IEA 2012),<ref name = "iea2012"/>) gas to liquids has received increased attention in recent years, with several large-scale plants completed in the last decade (Glebova 2013),<ref>Glebova, O. 2013. Gas to Liquids: Historical Development and Future Prospects, Report NG 80, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.</ref> and others in various stages of planning and construction (Enerdata 2014).<ref>Enerdata, 2016. The Future of Gas-to-Liquid (GTL) Industry.</ref> Because of the relatively low carbon content of natural gas, and whole-process energy efficiency ratings typically about 60%, the net CO2 emissions from the process are about 20 kg CO2 per GJ of fuel, significantly lower than coal to liquids. There is only one production technology represented in GCAM, with no CCS option available.

Matthew Binsted at 14:07, 24 June 2022

2022-06-24T14:07:12Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:07, 24 June 2022
Line 14:		Line 14:

	=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#coal-to-liquids Coal to Liquids] ===		=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#coal-to-liquids Coal to Liquids] ===
	The majority of the world’s coal to liquids production is in South Africa (IEA 2012),<ref>International Energy Agency, 2011, Energy Balances of OECD Countries 1960-2010 and Energy Balances of Non-OECD Countries 1971-2010, International Energy Agency, Paris, France.</ref> but the technology is available to all regions in GCAM starting in the first future time period. Note that the CO2 emissions intensity is substantially higher than all other liquid fuel production technologies, due to high process energy intensities, and high primary fuel carbon contents. Where crude oil refining emits about 5.5 kg of CO2 per GJ of fuels produced, coal to liquids emits over 130 kg of CO2 per GJ of fuel produced. The upstream emissions from fuel production by this pathway are substantially higher than the “tailpipe” emissions from combustion of the fuels produced (about 70 kg CO2 per GJ). As with biomass liquids, two different production technologies with CCS are represented, with costs and CO2 removal fractions based on Dooley and Dahowski (2009).<ref>Dooley, J.J., and Dahowski, R.T. 2009. Large-scale U.S. unconventional fuels production and the role of carbon dioxide capture and storage technologies in reducing their greenhouse gas emissions. Energy Procedia 1(1), pp. 4225-4232.</ref>		The majority of the world’s coal to liquids production is in South Africa (IEA 2012),<ref name = "iea2012">International Energy Agency, 2011, Energy Balances of OECD Countries 1960-2010 and Energy Balances of Non-OECD Countries 1971-2010, International Energy Agency, Paris, France.</ref> but the technology is available to all regions in GCAM starting in the first future time period. Note that the CO2 emissions intensity is substantially higher than all other liquid fuel production technologies, due to high process energy intensities, and high primary fuel carbon contents. Where crude oil refining emits about 5.5 kg of CO2 per GJ of fuels produced, coal to liquids emits over 130 kg of CO2 per GJ of fuel produced. The upstream emissions from fuel production by this pathway are substantially higher than the “tailpipe” emissions from combustion of the fuels produced (about 70 kg CO2 per GJ). As with biomass liquids, two different production technologies with CCS are represented, with costs and CO2 removal fractions based on Dooley and Dahowski (2009).<ref>Dooley, J.J., and Dahowski, R.T. 2009. Large-scale U.S. unconventional fuels production and the role of carbon dioxide capture and storage technologies in reducing their greenhouse gas emissions. Energy Procedia 1(1), pp. 4225-4232.</ref>

	=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#gas-to-liquids Gas to Liquids] ===		=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#gas-to-liquids Gas to Liquids] ===
	While a minor contributor to liquid fuels production globally (about 0.1%; (IEA 2012),<ref~~>International Energy Agency, 2011, Energy Balances of OECD Countries 1960-2010 and Energy Balances of Non-OECD Countries 1971-2010, International Energy Agency, Paris, France.<~~/~~ref~~> gas to liquids has received increased attention in recent years, with several large-scale plants completed in the last decade (Glebova 2013),<ref>Glebova, O. 2013. Gas to Liquids: Historical Development and Future Prospects, Report NG 80, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.</ref> and others in various stages of planning and construction (Enerdata 2014).<ref>Enerdata, 2016. The Future of Gas-to-Liquid (GTL) Industry.</ref> Because of the relatively low carbon content of natural gas, and whole-process energy efficiency ratings typically about 60%, the net CO2 emissions from the process are about 20 kg CO2 per GJ of fuel, significantly lower than coal to liquids. There is only one production technology represented in GCAM, with no CCS option available.		While a minor contributor to liquid fuels production globally (about 0.1%; (IEA 2012),<ref name = "iea2012"/> gas to liquids has received increased attention in recent years, with several large-scale plants completed in the last decade (Glebova 2013),<ref>Glebova, O. 2013. Gas to Liquids: Historical Development and Future Prospects, Report NG 80, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.</ref> and others in various stages of planning and construction (Enerdata 2014).<ref>Enerdata, 2016. The Future of Gas-to-Liquid (GTL) Industry.</ref> Because of the relatively low carbon content of natural gas, and whole-process energy efficiency ratings typically about 60%, the net CO2 emissions from the process are about 20 kg CO2 per GJ of fuel, significantly lower than coal to liquids. There is only one production technology represented in GCAM, with no CCS option available.

Matthew Binsted at 21:12, 21 June 2022

2022-06-21T21:12:07Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:12, 21 June 2022
Line 8:		Line 8:

	=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#oil-refining Oil Refining] ===		=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#oil-refining Oil Refining] ===
	The oil refining subsector accounts for the vast majority of the historical output of the refining sector, globally and in all regions. Each region is assigned a single production technology for oil refining; this technology does not differentiate between conventional and unconventional oil, whose competition is explicitly modeled upstream of the refining sector. In a typical region, the oil refining technology consumes three energy inputs: crude oil, natural gas, and electricity. The coefficients of the oil refining production technology reflect whole-process inputs and liquid fuel outputs; there is no explicit tracking of the production and on-site use of intermediate products such as refinery gas (still gas). Electricity produced at refineries (both the fuel inputs and electricity outputs) is modeled in the electricity and/or industrial energy use sectors, as the IEA Energy Balances ~~[https://jgcri.github~~.~~io/gcam-doc~~/~~supply_energy.html#iea2019 IEA 2019]~~ do not disaggregate autoproducer electric power plants at refineries from elsewhere. There is no oil refining technology option with CO2 capture and storage (CCS) considered.		The oil refining subsector accounts for the vast majority of the historical output of the refining sector, globally and in all regions. Each region is assigned a single production technology for oil refining; this technology does not differentiate between conventional and unconventional oil, whose competition is explicitly modeled upstream of the refining sector. In a typical region, the oil refining technology consumes three energy inputs: crude oil, natural gas, and electricity. The coefficients of the oil refining production technology reflect whole-process inputs and liquid fuel outputs; there is no explicit tracking of the production and on-site use of intermediate products such as refinery gas (still gas). Electricity produced at refineries (both the fuel inputs and electricity outputs) is modeled in the electricity and/or industrial energy use sectors, as the IEA Energy Balances (IEA 2019)<ref>International Energy Agency, 2019, Energy Balances of OECD Countries 1960-2017 and Energy Balances of Non-OECD Countries 1971-2017, International Energy Agency, Paris, France.</ref> do not disaggregate autoproducer electric power plants at refineries from elsewhere. There is no oil refining technology option with CO2 capture and storage (CCS) considered.

	=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#biomass-liquids Biomass Liquids] ===		=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#biomass-liquids Biomass Liquids] ===
Line 14:		Line 14:

	=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#coal-to-liquids Coal to Liquids] ===		=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#coal-to-liquids Coal to Liquids] ===
	The majority of the world’s coal to liquids production is in South Africa (~~[https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#iea2012~~ IEA 2012]), but the technology is available to all regions in GCAM starting in the first future time period. Note that the CO2 emissions intensity is substantially higher than all other liquid fuel production technologies, due to high process energy intensities, and high primary fuel carbon contents. Where crude oil refining emits about 5.5 kg of CO2 per GJ of fuels produced, coal to liquids emits over 130 kg of CO2 per GJ of fuel produced. The upstream emissions from fuel production by this pathway are substantially higher than the “tailpipe” emissions from combustion of the fuels produced (about 70 kg CO2 per GJ). As with biomass liquids, two different production technologies with CCS are represented, with costs and CO2 removal fractions based on ~~[https://jgcri~~.~~github~~.~~io/gcam~~-~~doc/supply_energy~~.~~html#dooley2009 Dooley~~ and ~~Dahowski~~ (~~2009~~)].		The majority of the world’s coal to liquids production is in South Africa (IEA 2012),<ref>International Energy Agency, 2011, Energy Balances of OECD Countries 1960-2010 and Energy Balances of Non-OECD Countries 1971-2010, International Energy Agency, Paris, France.</ref> but the technology is available to all regions in GCAM starting in the first future time period. Note that the CO2 emissions intensity is substantially higher than all other liquid fuel production technologies, due to high process energy intensities, and high primary fuel carbon contents. Where crude oil refining emits about 5.5 kg of CO2 per GJ of fuels produced, coal to liquids emits over 130 kg of CO2 per GJ of fuel produced. The upstream emissions from fuel production by this pathway are substantially higher than the “tailpipe” emissions from combustion of the fuels produced (about 70 kg CO2 per GJ). As with biomass liquids, two different production technologies with CCS are represented, with costs and CO2 removal fractions based on Dooley and Dahowski (2009).<ref>Dooley, J.J., and Dahowski, R.T. 2009. Large-scale U.S. unconventional fuels production and the role of carbon dioxide capture and storage technologies in reducing their greenhouse gas emissions. Energy Procedia 1(1), pp. 4225-4232.</ref>

	=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#gas-to-liquids Gas to Liquids] ===		=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#gas-to-liquids Gas to Liquids] ===
	While a minor contributor to liquid fuels production globally (about 0.1%; ~~[https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#iea2012~~ IEA 2012]), gas to liquids has received increased attention in recent years, with several large-scale plants completed in the last decade (~~[https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#glebova2013~~ Glebova 2013]), and others in various stages of planning and construction (~~[https://jgcri~~.~~github~~.~~io/gcam~~-~~doc/supply_energy.html#enerdata2014 Enerdata 2014]~~). Because of the relatively low carbon content of natural gas, and whole-process energy efficiency ratings typically about 60%, the net CO2 emissions from the process are about 20 kg CO2 per GJ of fuel, significantly lower than coal to liquids. There is only one production technology represented in GCAM, with no CCS option available.		While a minor contributor to liquid fuels production globally (about 0.1%; (IEA 2012),<ref>International Energy Agency, 2011, Energy Balances of OECD Countries 1960-2010 and Energy Balances of Non-OECD Countries 1971-2010, International Energy Agency, Paris, France.</ref> gas to liquids has received increased attention in recent years, with several large-scale plants completed in the last decade (Glebova 2013),<ref>Glebova, O. 2013. Gas to Liquids: Historical Development and Future Prospects, Report NG 80, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.</ref> and others in various stages of planning and construction (Enerdata 2014).<ref>Enerdata, 2016. The Future of Gas-to-Liquid (GTL) Industry.</ref> Because of the relatively low carbon content of natural gas, and whole-process energy efficiency ratings typically about 60%, the net CO2 emissions from the process are about 20 kg CO2 per GJ of fuel, significantly lower than coal to liquids. There is only one production technology represented in GCAM, with no CCS option available.

Matthew Binsted at 02:00, 17 June 2022

2022-06-17T02:00:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:00, 17 June 2022
Line 5:		Line 5:

	== Refining ==		== Refining ==
	The refining sector, or liquid fuels production sector, explicitly tracks all energy inputs, emissions, and costs involved with converting primary energy forms into liquid fuels. Liquid fuels include gasoline, diesel, kerosene, ethanol and many other liquid hydrocarbon fuels; for the full mapping see [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/~~energy~~.html#mapping-the-iea-energy-balances Mapping the IEA Energy Balances]. The refining sector includes subsectors of oil refining, biomass liquids, gas to liquids, and coal to liquids, each of which are described below. Each of these four subsectors is available starting in the first future time period, and the capital stocks of refineries are explicitly tracked. Click on the headings for links to the corresponding section in the documentation, and see the ~~full~~ refining ~~section~~ [~~http~~://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/~~energy~~.html#refining ~~here~~].		The refining sector, or liquid fuels production sector, explicitly tracks all energy inputs, emissions, and costs involved with converting primary energy forms into liquid fuels. Liquid fuels include gasoline, diesel, kerosene, ethanol and many other liquid hydrocarbon fuels; for the full mapping see [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/details_inputs.html#mapping-the-iea-energy-balances Mapping the IEA Energy Balances]. The refining sector includes subsectors of oil refining, biomass liquids, gas to liquids, and coal to liquids, each of which are described below. Each of these four subsectors is available starting in the first future time period, and the capital stocks of refineries are explicitly tracked. Click on the headings for links to the corresponding section in the documentation, and see the documentation sections on [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#refining refining] and [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/details_energy.html#refining refining details].

	=== [~~http~~://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/~~energy~~.html#oil-refining Oil Refining] ===		=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#oil-refining Oil Refining] ===
	The oil refining subsector accounts for the vast majority of the historical output of the refining sector, globally and in all regions. Each region is assigned a single production technology for oil refining; this technology does not differentiate between conventional and unconventional oil, whose competition is explicitly modeled upstream of the refining sector. In a typical region, the oil refining technology consumes three energy inputs: crude oil, natural gas, and electricity.		The oil refining subsector accounts for the vast majority of the historical output of the refining sector, globally and in all regions. Each region is assigned a single production technology for oil refining; this technology does not differentiate between conventional and unconventional oil, whose competition is explicitly modeled upstream of the refining sector. In a typical region, the oil refining technology consumes three energy inputs: crude oil, natural gas, and electricity. The coefficients of the oil refining production technology reflect whole-process inputs and liquid fuel outputs; there is no explicit tracking of the production and on-site use of intermediate products such as refinery gas (still gas). Electricity produced at refineries (both the fuel inputs and electricity outputs) is modeled in the electricity and/or industrial energy use sectors, as the IEA Energy Balances [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#iea2019 IEA 2019] do not disaggregate autoproducer electric power plants at refineries from elsewhere. There is no oil refining technology option with CO2 capture and storage (CCS) considered.

	The ~~coefficients~~ of ~~the oil refining~~ production ~~technology reflect whole~~-~~process inputs and liquid fuel outputs; there is no explicit tracking of the production and on-site use of intermediate products such~~ as ~~refinery gas (still gas). Electricity~~ produced ~~at refineries~~ (~~both the fuel inputs and electricity outputs) is modeled~~ in the ~~electricity and/or industrial energy use sectors, as the IEA Energy Balances~~ [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/~~energy~~.html~~#references~~ (~~IEA 2012~~)~~] do not disaggregate autoproducer electric power plants at refineries~~ from ~~elsewhere~~. ~~There is no oil refining technology option~~ with ~~CO<sub>~~2~~</sub>~~ capture and ~~storage~~ (~~CCS~~) ~~considered~~.		=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#biomass-liquids Biomass Liquids] ===
			The biomass liquids subsector includes up to eight technologies in each region, with a global total of 11 production technologies. The biomass liquids technologies include up to four “first-generation” biofuels in each region, defined as biofuels produced from agricultural crops that are also used as food, animal feed, or other modeled uses (described in the [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/land.html land module]). The model tracks secondary feed outputs of first generation biofuel production, as DDGS (dried distillers grains and solubles) from ethanol production, and as feedcakes from biodiesel production. Second-generation technologies consume the “biomass” or “biomassOil” commodities, which include purpose-grown bioenergy crops, as well as residues from forestry and agriculture, and municipal and industrial wastes. Starting in 2020, second-generation biofuels (cellulosic ethanol and Fischer-Tropsch syn-fuels) are introduced, each with three levels of CCS: none, level 1, and level 2. The first CCS level generally consists of relatively pure and high-concentration CO2 sources (e.g., from gasifiers or fermenters), which have relatively low capture and compression costs. The second CCS level includes a broader set of sources (e.g., post-combustion emissions), and incurs higher costs but has a higher CO2 removal fraction.

	=== [~~http~~://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/~~energy~~.html#~~biomass~~-liquids ~~Biomass~~ Liquids] ===		=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#coal-to-liquids Coal to Liquids] ===
	The ~~biomass liquids subsector includes up to eight technologies in each region, with a global total~~ of ~~11. The technologies include up~~ to ~~four “first-generation” biofuels~~ in ~~each region, defined as biofuels produced agricultural crops that are also used as food, animal feed, or other modeled uses~~ (~~described in the~~ [~~http~~://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/~~aglu~~.html ~~AgLU module~~]). ~~The model tracks secondary feed outputs of biofuel~~ production, ~~as DDGS (dried distillers grains~~ and ~~solubles) from ethanol production~~, ~~and as feedcakes~~ from ~~biodiesel~~ production~~. Second-generation technologies consume~~ the ~~“biomass” or “biomassOil” commodities, which include purpose-grown bioenergy crops, as well as residues~~ from ~~forestry and agriculture, and municipal and industrial wastes. Starting in 2020, second-generation biofuels~~ (~~cellulosic ethanol and Fischer-Tropsch syn-fuels~~) ~~are introduced~~, ~~each~~ with ~~three levels of~~ CCS~~: none, level 1~~, and ~~level 2~~. ~~The first CCS level generally consists of relatively pure and high~~-~~concentration CO2 sources (e~~.~~g., from gasifiers or fermenters), which have relatively low capture~~ and ~~compression costs. The second CCS level includes a broader set of sources~~ (~~e.g., post-combustion emissions~~)~~, and incurs higher costs but has a higher CO<sub>2</sub> removal fraction~~.		The majority of the world’s coal to liquids production is in South Africa ([https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#iea2012 IEA 2012]), but the technology is available to all regions in GCAM starting in the first future time period. Note that the CO2 emissions intensity is substantially higher than all other liquid fuel production technologies, due to high process energy intensities, and high primary fuel carbon contents. Where crude oil refining emits about 5.5 kg of CO2 per GJ of fuels produced, coal to liquids emits over 130 kg of CO2 per GJ of fuel produced. The upstream emissions from fuel production by this pathway are substantially higher than the “tailpipe” emissions from combustion of the fuels produced (about 70 kg CO2 per GJ). As with biomass liquids, two different production technologies with CCS are represented, with costs and CO2 removal fractions based on [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#dooley2009 Dooley and Dahowski (2009)].

	=== ~~[http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#coal-to-liquids Coal to Liquids] ===~~		=== [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#gas-to-liquids Gas to Liquids] ===
	The majority of the world’s coal to liquids production is in South Africa [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#references (IEA 2012)], but the technology is available to all regions in GCAM starting in the first future time period. Note that the CO<sub>2</sub> emissions intensity is substantially higher than all other liquid fuel production technologies, due to high process energy intensities, and high primary fuel carbon contents. Where crude oil refining emits about 5.5 kg of CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ of fuels produced, coal to liquids emits over 130 kg of CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ of fuel produced. The upstream emissions from fuel production by this pathway are substantially higher than the “tailpipe” emissions from combustion of the fuels produced (about 70 kg CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ). As with biomass liquids, two different production technologies with CCS are represented, with costs and CO<sub>2</sub> removal fractions based on [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/~~energy.html#references Dooley and Dahowski (2009)].~~		While a minor contributor to liquid fuels production globally (about 0.1%; [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#iea2012 IEA 2012]), gas to liquids has received increased attention in recent years, with several large-scale plants completed in the last decade ([https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#glebova2013 Glebova 2013]), and others in various stages of planning and construction ([https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/supply_energy.html#enerdata2014 Enerdata 2014]). Because of the relatively low carbon content of natural gas, and whole-process energy efficiency ratings typically about 60%, the net CO2 emissions from the process are about 20 kg CO2 per GJ of fuel, significantly lower than coal to liquids. There is only one production technology represented in GCAM, with no CCS option available.

	~~=== [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy~~.html#gas-to-liquids Gas to Liquids] ===
	While a minor contributor to liquid fuels production globally (about 0.1%; [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/~~energy~~.html#~~references~~ IEA 2012]), gas to liquids has received increased attention in recent years, with several large-scale plants completed in the last decade ([https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/~~energy~~.html#~~references~~ Glebova 2013]), and others in various stages of planning and construction ([https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/~~energy~~.html#~~references~~ Enerdata 2014]). Because of the relatively low carbon content of natural gas, and whole-process energy efficiency ratings typically about 60%, the net ~~CO<sub>2</sub>~~ emissions from the process are about 20 kg ~~CO<sub>2</sub>~~ per GJ of fuel, significantly lower than coal to liquids. There is only one production technology represented in GCAM, with no CCS option available.

Matthew Binsted at 19:49, 1 September 2020

2020-09-01T19:49:27Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:49, 1 September 2020
Line 5:		Line 5:

	== Refining ==		== Refining ==
	The refining sector, or liquid fuels production sector, explicitly tracks all energy inputs, emissions, and costs involved with converting primary energy forms into liquid fuels. Liquid fuels include gasoline, diesel, kerosene, ethanol and many other liquid hydrocarbon fuels; for the full mapping see [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#mapping-the-iea-energy-balances Mapping the IEA Energy Balances]. The refining sector includes subsectors of oil refining, biomass liquids, gas to liquids, and coal to liquids, each of which are described below. Each of these four subsectors is available starting in the first future time period, and the capital stocks of refineries are explicitly tracked [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#refining ~~<nowiki>[1]</nowiki>~~].		The refining sector, or liquid fuels production sector, explicitly tracks all energy inputs, emissions, and costs involved with converting primary energy forms into liquid fuels. Liquid fuels include gasoline, diesel, kerosene, ethanol and many other liquid hydrocarbon fuels; for the full mapping see [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#mapping-the-iea-energy-balances Mapping the IEA Energy Balances]. The refining sector includes subsectors of oil refining, biomass liquids, gas to liquids, and coal to liquids, each of which are described below. Each of these four subsectors is available starting in the first future time period, and the capital stocks of refineries are explicitly tracked. Click on the headings for links to the corresponding section in the documentation, and see the full refining section [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#refining here].

	=== Oil Refining ===		=== [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#oil-refining Oil Refining] ===
	The oil refining subsector accounts for the vast majority of the historical output of the refining sector, globally and in all regions. Each region is assigned a single production technology for oil refining; this technology does not differentiate between conventional and unconventional oil, whose competition is explicitly modeled upstream of the refining sector. In a typical region, the oil refining technology consumes three energy inputs: crude oil, natural gas, and electricity.		The oil refining subsector accounts for the vast majority of the historical output of the refining sector, globally and in all regions. Each region is assigned a single production technology for oil refining; this technology does not differentiate between conventional and unconventional oil, whose competition is explicitly modeled upstream of the refining sector. In a typical region, the oil refining technology consumes three energy inputs: crude oil, natural gas, and electricity.

	The coefficients of the oil refining production technology reflect whole-process inputs and liquid fuel outputs; there is no explicit tracking of the production and on-site use of intermediate products such as refinery gas (still gas). Electricity produced at refineries (both the fuel inputs and electricity outputs) is modeled in the electricity and/or industrial energy use sectors, as the IEA Energy Balances (IEA 2012) do not disaggregate autoproducer electric power plants at refineries from elsewhere. There is no oil refining technology option with CO<sub>2</sub> capture and storage (CCS) considered ~~[http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#oil-refining <nowiki>[2]</nowiki>]~~.		The coefficients of the oil refining production technology reflect whole-process inputs and liquid fuel outputs; there is no explicit tracking of the production and on-site use of intermediate products such as refinery gas (still gas). Electricity produced at refineries (both the fuel inputs and electricity outputs) is modeled in the electricity and/or industrial energy use sectors, as the IEA Energy Balances [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#references (IEA 2012)] do not disaggregate autoproducer electric power plants at refineries from elsewhere. There is no oil refining technology option with CO<sub>2</sub> capture and storage (CCS) considered.

	=== Biomass Liquids ===		=== [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#biomass-liquids Biomass Liquids] ===
	The biomass liquids subsector includes up to eight technologies in each region, with a global total of 11. The technologies include up to four “first-generation” biofuels in each region, defined as biofuels produced agricultural crops that are also used as food, animal feed, or other modeled uses (described in the [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/aglu.html AgLU module]). The model tracks secondary feed outputs of biofuel production, as DDGS (dried distillers grains and solubles) from ethanol production, and as feedcakes from biodiesel production. Second-generation technologies consume the “biomass” or “biomassOil” commodities, which include purpose-grown bioenergy crops, as well as residues from forestry and agriculture, and municipal and industrial wastes. Starting in 2020, second-generation biofuels (cellulosic ethanol and Fischer-Tropsch syn-fuels) are introduced, each with three levels of CCS: none, level 1, and level 2. The first CCS level generally consists of relatively pure and high-concentration CO2 sources (e.g., from gasifiers or fermenters), which have relatively low capture and compression costs. The second CCS level includes a broader set of sources (e.g., post-combustion emissions), and incurs higher costs but has a higher CO<sub>2</sub> removal fraction ~~[http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#biomass-liquids <nowiki>[3]</nowiki>]~~.		The biomass liquids subsector includes up to eight technologies in each region, with a global total of 11. The technologies include up to four “first-generation” biofuels in each region, defined as biofuels produced agricultural crops that are also used as food, animal feed, or other modeled uses (described in the [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/aglu.html AgLU module]). The model tracks secondary feed outputs of biofuel production, as DDGS (dried distillers grains and solubles) from ethanol production, and as feedcakes from biodiesel production. Second-generation technologies consume the “biomass” or “biomassOil” commodities, which include purpose-grown bioenergy crops, as well as residues from forestry and agriculture, and municipal and industrial wastes. Starting in 2020, second-generation biofuels (cellulosic ethanol and Fischer-Tropsch syn-fuels) are introduced, each with three levels of CCS: none, level 1, and level 2. The first CCS level generally consists of relatively pure and high-concentration CO2 sources (e.g., from gasifiers or fermenters), which have relatively low capture and compression costs. The second CCS level includes a broader set of sources (e.g., post-combustion emissions), and incurs higher costs but has a higher CO<sub>2</sub> removal fraction.

	=== Coal to Liquids ===		=== [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#coal-to-liquids Coal to Liquids] ===
	The majority of the world’s coal to liquids production is in South Africa (IEA 2012), but the technology is available to all regions in GCAM starting in the first future time period. Note that the CO<sub>2</sub> emissions intensity is substantially higher than all other liquid fuel production technologies, due to high process energy intensities, and high primary fuel carbon contents. Where crude oil refining emits about 5.5 kg of CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ of fuels produced, coal to liquids emits over 130 kg of CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ of fuel produced. The upstream emissions from fuel production by this pathway are substantially higher than the “tailpipe” emissions from combustion of the fuels produced (about 70 kg CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ). As with biomass liquids, two different production technologies with CCS are represented, with costs and CO<sub>2</sub> removal fractions based on ~~Dooley and Dahowski (2009)~~ [~~http~~://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#~~coal-to-liquids <nowiki>[4]</nowiki>~~].		The majority of the world’s coal to liquids production is in South Africa [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#references (IEA 2012)], but the technology is available to all regions in GCAM starting in the first future time period. Note that the CO<sub>2</sub> emissions intensity is substantially higher than all other liquid fuel production technologies, due to high process energy intensities, and high primary fuel carbon contents. Where crude oil refining emits about 5.5 kg of CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ of fuels produced, coal to liquids emits over 130 kg of CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ of fuel produced. The upstream emissions from fuel production by this pathway are substantially higher than the “tailpipe” emissions from combustion of the fuels produced (about 70 kg CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ). As with biomass liquids, two different production technologies with CCS are represented, with costs and CO<sub>2</sub> removal fractions based on [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#references Dooley and Dahowski (2009)].

	=== Gas to Liquids ===		=== [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#gas-to-liquids Gas to Liquids] ===
	While a minor contributor to liquid fuels production globally (about 0.1%; IEA 2012), gas to liquids has received increased attention in recent years, with several large-scale plants completed in the last decade (Glebova 2013), and others in various stages of planning and construction (Enerdata 2014). Because of the relatively low carbon content of natural gas, and whole-process energy efficiency ratings typically about 60%, the net CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from the process are about 20 kg CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ of fuel, significantly lower than coal to liquids. There is only one production technology represented in GCAM, with no CCS option available ~~[http://jgcri~~.~~github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#gas-to-liquids <nowiki>[5]</nowiki>].~~		While a minor contributor to liquid fuels production globally (about 0.1%; [https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#references IEA 2012]), gas to liquids has received increased attention in recent years, with several large-scale plants completed in the last decade ([https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#references Glebova 2013]), and others in various stages of planning and construction ([https://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#references Enerdata 2014]). Because of the relatively low carbon content of natural gas, and whole-process energy efficiency ratings typically about 60%, the net CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from the process are about 20 kg CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ of fuel, significantly lower than coal to liquids. There is only one production technology represented in GCAM, with no CCS option available.

	~~== References ==~~
	[Dooley and Dahowski 2009] Dooley, J.J., and Dahowski, R.T. 2009. Large-scale U.S. unconventional fuels production and the role of carbon dioxide capture and storage technologies in reducing their greenhouse gas emissions. ''Energy Procedia'' 1(1), pp. 4225-4232. [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876610209008765 Link]

	~~[Enerdata 2014] Enerdata, 2016. ''The Future of Gas-to-Liquid (GTL) Industry''. [https://www.enerdata.net/publications/executive-briefing/future-gas-liquid-gtl-industry.html Link]~~

	[Glebova 2013] Glebova, O. 2013. ''Gas to Liquids: Historical Development and Future Prospects'', Report NG 80, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies. [https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/NG-80.pdf Link]

	IEA 2012] International Energy Agency, 2011, ''Energy Balances of OECD Countries 1960-2010 and Energy Balances of Non-OECD Countries 1971-2010'', International Energy Agency, Paris, France. [https://www.iea.org/bookshop/661-Energy_Balances_of_OECD_Countries Link]

Matthew Binsted: /* Oil Refining */

2020-08-25T15:03:32Z

Oil Refining

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:03, 25 August 2020
Line 10:		Line 10:
	The oil refining subsector accounts for the vast majority of the historical output of the refining sector, globally and in all regions. Each region is assigned a single production technology for oil refining; this technology does not differentiate between conventional and unconventional oil, whose competition is explicitly modeled upstream of the refining sector. In a typical region, the oil refining technology consumes three energy inputs: crude oil, natural gas, and electricity.		The oil refining subsector accounts for the vast majority of the historical output of the refining sector, globally and in all regions. Each region is assigned a single production technology for oil refining; this technology does not differentiate between conventional and unconventional oil, whose competition is explicitly modeled upstream of the refining sector. In a typical region, the oil refining technology consumes three energy inputs: crude oil, natural gas, and electricity.

	The coefficients of the oil refining production technology reflect whole-process inputs and liquid fuel outputs; there is no explicit tracking of the production and on-site use of intermediate products such as refinery gas (still gas). Electricity produced at refineries (both the fuel inputs and electricity outputs) is modeled in the electricity and/or industrial energy use sectors, as the IEA Energy Balances (IEA 2012) do not disaggregate autoproducer electric power plants at refineries from elsewhere. There is no oil refining technology option with CO<sub>2</sub> capture and storage (CCS) considered.		The coefficients of the oil refining production technology reflect whole-process inputs and liquid fuel outputs; there is no explicit tracking of the production and on-site use of intermediate products such as refinery gas (still gas). Electricity produced at refineries (both the fuel inputs and electricity outputs) is modeled in the electricity and/or industrial energy use sectors, as the IEA Energy Balances (IEA 2012) do not disaggregate autoproducer electric power plants at refineries from elsewhere. There is no oil refining technology option with CO<sub>2</sub> capture and storage (CCS) considered [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#oil-refining <nowiki>[2]</nowiki>].

	=== Biomass Liquids ===		=== Biomass Liquids ===
	The biomass liquids subsector includes up to eight technologies in each region, with a global total of 11. The technologies include up to four “first-generation” biofuels in each region, defined as biofuels produced agricultural crops that are also used as food, animal feed, or other modeled uses (described in the [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/aglu.html AgLU module]). The model tracks secondary feed outputs of biofuel production, as DDGS (dried distillers grains and solubles) from ethanol production, and as feedcakes from biodiesel production. Second-generation technologies consume the “biomass” or “biomassOil” commodities, which include purpose-grown bioenergy crops, as well as residues from forestry and agriculture, and municipal and industrial wastes. Starting in 2020, second-generation biofuels (cellulosic ethanol and Fischer-Tropsch syn-fuels) are introduced, each with three levels of CCS: none, level 1, and level 2. The first CCS level generally consists of relatively pure and high-concentration CO2 sources (e.g., from gasifiers or fermenters), which have relatively low capture and compression costs. The second CCS level includes a broader set of sources (e.g., post-combustion emissions), and incurs higher costs but has a higher CO<sub>2</sub> removal fraction.		The biomass liquids subsector includes up to eight technologies in each region, with a global total of 11. The technologies include up to four “first-generation” biofuels in each region, defined as biofuels produced agricultural crops that are also used as food, animal feed, or other modeled uses (described in the [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/aglu.html AgLU module]). The model tracks secondary feed outputs of biofuel production, as DDGS (dried distillers grains and solubles) from ethanol production, and as feedcakes from biodiesel production. Second-generation technologies consume the “biomass” or “biomassOil” commodities, which include purpose-grown bioenergy crops, as well as residues from forestry and agriculture, and municipal and industrial wastes. Starting in 2020, second-generation biofuels (cellulosic ethanol and Fischer-Tropsch syn-fuels) are introduced, each with three levels of CCS: none, level 1, and level 2. The first CCS level generally consists of relatively pure and high-concentration CO2 sources (e.g., from gasifiers or fermenters), which have relatively low capture and compression costs. The second CCS level includes a broader set of sources (e.g., post-combustion emissions), and incurs higher costs but has a higher CO<sub>2</sub> removal fraction [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#biomass-liquids <nowiki>[3]</nowiki>].

	=== Coal to Liquids ===		=== Coal to Liquids ===
	The majority of the world’s coal to liquids production is in South Africa (IEA 2012), but the technology is available to all regions in GCAM starting in the first future time period. Note that the CO<sub>2</sub> emissions intensity is substantially higher than all other liquid fuel production technologies, due to high process energy intensities, and high primary fuel carbon contents. Where crude oil refining emits about 5.5 kg of CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ of fuels produced, coal to liquids emits over 130 kg of CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ of fuel produced. The upstream emissions from fuel production by this pathway are substantially higher than the “tailpipe” emissions from combustion of the fuels produced (about 70 kg CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ). As with biomass liquids, two different production technologies with CCS are represented, with costs and CO<sub>2</sub> removal fractions based on Dooley and Dahowski (2009).		The majority of the world’s coal to liquids production is in South Africa (IEA 2012), but the technology is available to all regions in GCAM starting in the first future time period. Note that the CO<sub>2</sub> emissions intensity is substantially higher than all other liquid fuel production technologies, due to high process energy intensities, and high primary fuel carbon contents. Where crude oil refining emits about 5.5 kg of CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ of fuels produced, coal to liquids emits over 130 kg of CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ of fuel produced. The upstream emissions from fuel production by this pathway are substantially higher than the “tailpipe” emissions from combustion of the fuels produced (about 70 kg CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ). As with biomass liquids, two different production technologies with CCS are represented, with costs and CO<sub>2</sub> removal fractions based on Dooley and Dahowski (2009) [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#coal-to-liquids <nowiki>[4]</nowiki>].

	=== Gas to Liquids ===		=== Gas to Liquids ===
	While a minor contributor to liquid fuels production globally (about 0.1%; IEA 2012), gas to liquids has received increased attention in recent years, with several large-scale plants completed in the last decade (Glebova 2013), and others in various stages of planning and construction (Enerdata 2014). Because of the relatively low carbon content of natural gas, and whole-process energy efficiency ratings typically about 60%, the net CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from the process are about 20 kg CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ of fuel, significantly lower than coal to liquids. There is only one production technology represented in GCAM, with no CCS option available.		While a minor contributor to liquid fuels production globally (about 0.1%; IEA 2012), gas to liquids has received increased attention in recent years, with several large-scale plants completed in the last decade (Glebova 2013), and others in various stages of planning and construction (Enerdata 2014). Because of the relatively low carbon content of natural gas, and whole-process energy efficiency ratings typically about 60%, the net CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from the process are about 20 kg CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ of fuel, significantly lower than coal to liquids. There is only one production technology represented in GCAM, with no CCS option available [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#gas-to-liquids <nowiki>[5]</nowiki>].

	== References ==		== References ==

Matthew Binsted at 16:57, 19 August 2020

2020-08-19T16:57:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:57, 19 August 2020
Line 3:		Line 3:
	\|DocumentationCategory=Liquid fuels		\|DocumentationCategory=Liquid fuels
	}}		}}

			== Refining ==
			The refining sector, or liquid fuels production sector, explicitly tracks all energy inputs, emissions, and costs involved with converting primary energy forms into liquid fuels. Liquid fuels include gasoline, diesel, kerosene, ethanol and many other liquid hydrocarbon fuels; for the full mapping see [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#mapping-the-iea-energy-balances Mapping the IEA Energy Balances]. The refining sector includes subsectors of oil refining, biomass liquids, gas to liquids, and coal to liquids, each of which are described below. Each of these four subsectors is available starting in the first future time period, and the capital stocks of refineries are explicitly tracked [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/energy.html#refining <nowiki>[1]</nowiki>].

			=== Oil Refining ===
			The oil refining subsector accounts for the vast majority of the historical output of the refining sector, globally and in all regions. Each region is assigned a single production technology for oil refining; this technology does not differentiate between conventional and unconventional oil, whose competition is explicitly modeled upstream of the refining sector. In a typical region, the oil refining technology consumes three energy inputs: crude oil, natural gas, and electricity.

			The coefficients of the oil refining production technology reflect whole-process inputs and liquid fuel outputs; there is no explicit tracking of the production and on-site use of intermediate products such as refinery gas (still gas). Electricity produced at refineries (both the fuel inputs and electricity outputs) is modeled in the electricity and/or industrial energy use sectors, as the IEA Energy Balances (IEA 2012) do not disaggregate autoproducer electric power plants at refineries from elsewhere. There is no oil refining technology option with CO<sub>2</sub> capture and storage (CCS) considered.

			=== Biomass Liquids ===
			The biomass liquids subsector includes up to eight technologies in each region, with a global total of 11. The technologies include up to four “first-generation” biofuels in each region, defined as biofuels produced agricultural crops that are also used as food, animal feed, or other modeled uses (described in the [http://jgcri.github.io/gcam-doc/aglu.html AgLU module]). The model tracks secondary feed outputs of biofuel production, as DDGS (dried distillers grains and solubles) from ethanol production, and as feedcakes from biodiesel production. Second-generation technologies consume the “biomass” or “biomassOil” commodities, which include purpose-grown bioenergy crops, as well as residues from forestry and agriculture, and municipal and industrial wastes. Starting in 2020, second-generation biofuels (cellulosic ethanol and Fischer-Tropsch syn-fuels) are introduced, each with three levels of CCS: none, level 1, and level 2. The first CCS level generally consists of relatively pure and high-concentration CO2 sources (e.g., from gasifiers or fermenters), which have relatively low capture and compression costs. The second CCS level includes a broader set of sources (e.g., post-combustion emissions), and incurs higher costs but has a higher CO<sub>2</sub> removal fraction.

			=== Coal to Liquids ===
			The majority of the world’s coal to liquids production is in South Africa (IEA 2012), but the technology is available to all regions in GCAM starting in the first future time period. Note that the CO<sub>2</sub> emissions intensity is substantially higher than all other liquid fuel production technologies, due to high process energy intensities, and high primary fuel carbon contents. Where crude oil refining emits about 5.5 kg of CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ of fuels produced, coal to liquids emits over 130 kg of CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ of fuel produced. The upstream emissions from fuel production by this pathway are substantially higher than the “tailpipe” emissions from combustion of the fuels produced (about 70 kg CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ). As with biomass liquids, two different production technologies with CCS are represented, with costs and CO<sub>2</sub> removal fractions based on Dooley and Dahowski (2009).

			=== Gas to Liquids ===
			While a minor contributor to liquid fuels production globally (about 0.1%; IEA 2012), gas to liquids has received increased attention in recent years, with several large-scale plants completed in the last decade (Glebova 2013), and others in various stages of planning and construction (Enerdata 2014). Because of the relatively low carbon content of natural gas, and whole-process energy efficiency ratings typically about 60%, the net CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from the process are about 20 kg CO<sub>2</sub> per GJ of fuel, significantly lower than coal to liquids. There is only one production technology represented in GCAM, with no CCS option available.

			== References ==
			[Dooley and Dahowski 2009] Dooley, J.J., and Dahowski, R.T. 2009. Large-scale U.S. unconventional fuels production and the role of carbon dioxide capture and storage technologies in reducing their greenhouse gas emissions. ''Energy Procedia'' 1(1), pp. 4225-4232. [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876610209008765 Link]

			[Enerdata 2014] Enerdata, 2016. ''The Future of Gas-to-Liquid (GTL) Industry''. [https://www.enerdata.net/publications/executive-briefing/future-gas-liquid-gtl-industry.html Link]

			[Glebova 2013] Glebova, O. 2013. ''Gas to Liquids: Historical Development and Future Prospects'', Report NG 80, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies. [https://www.oxfordenergy.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/NG-80.pdf Link]

			IEA 2012] International Energy Agency, 2011, ''Energy Balances of OECD Countries 1960-2010 and Energy Balances of Non-OECD Countries 1971-2010'', International Energy Agency, Paris, France. [https://www.iea.org/bookshop/661-Energy_Balances_of_OECD_Countries Link]

Rineke Oostenrijk: Rineke Oostenrijk moved page Liquid fuels - GAMS to Liquid fuels - GCAM without leaving a redirect: Text replacement - "GAMS" to "GCAM"

2019-12-17T15:38:05Z

Rineke Oostenrijk moved page Liquid fuels - GAMS to Liquid fuels - GCAM without leaving a redirect: Text replacement - "GAMS" to "GCAM"

← Older revision

Revision as of 17:38, 17 December 2019

Rineke Oostenrijk: Text replacement - "GAMS" to "GCAM"

2019-12-17T15:37:59Z

Text replacement - "GAMS" to "GCAM"

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:37, 17 December 2019
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{ModelDocumentationTemplate		{{ModelDocumentationTemplate
	\|IsDocumentationOf=~~GAMS~~		\|IsDocumentationOf=GCAM
	\|DocumentationCategory=Liquid fuels		\|DocumentationCategory=Liquid fuels
	}}		}}

Rineke Oostenrijk: Edited automatically from page GAMS setup.

2019-12-17T14:28:17Z

Edited automatically from page GAMS setup.

New page

{{ModelDocumentationTemplate
|IsDocumentationOf=GAMS
|DocumentationCategory=Liquid fuels
}}