Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T06:02:11.889Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Economics of Energy Options

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

Lester B. Lave
Affiliation:
Carnegie Mellon University, USA

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Increasing demand for energy, diminishing stocks of oil and natural gas, and the public's desire to enhance environmental quality, particularly by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, all point to the need for improved materials. For example, generating electricity from the most abundant fossil fuel, coal, efficiently and with no environmental damage, presents notable challenges to develop higher performance materials. Technologies exist to transform one fossil fuel to other uses, such as coal to a gas or liquid. New materials that increase the efficiency of the transformation and lower its cost would provide valuable flexibility. Materials should be evaluated in terms of their entire life-cycle in order to discern which will make the greatest contribution. Because society has many pressing needs, both commercial value and contribution to fundamental materials science should guide priorities in materials research.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2008

References

1.Hendrickson, C., Lave, L., Matthews, H., Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Goods and Services: An Input-Output Approach (Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, 2006).Google Scholar
2.U.S. Department of Energy, World Energy Use and Carbon Dioxide Emissions, 1980–2001 (Energy Information Administration, May 2004); www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/carbonemiss/energycarbon2004.pdf (accessed January 2008).Google Scholar
3.U.S. Department of Energy, Table A2 from Reference Case Projections Tables (1990–2030), Energy Information Administration; www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/ieorefcase.html (accessed January 2008).Google Scholar
4.U.S. Department of Energy, U.S.A. Energy Supply and Use in 2004, Energy Information Administration; www.eia.doe.gov/overview_hd.html (accessed January 2008).Google Scholar
5.See Energy Information Administration, U.S. Department of Energy; www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/carbonemiss/chapter1.html (accessed January 2008).Google Scholar
6.Schurr, S.H., Netschert, B.C., Elasberg, V., Lerner, J., Landsberg, H., Energy in the American Economy, 1850–1975 (Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, 1960).Google Scholar
7.U.S. Department of Energy, see Table in Energy Consumption by Primary Energy Source, 1949–2006, Energy Information Administration; www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/txt/ptb0103.html (accessed January 2008).Google Scholar
8.See Energy Information Administration, U.S. Department of Energy; www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/carbonemiss/chapter2.html (accessed January 2008).Google Scholar
9.Darmstadter, J., Dunkerley, J., Alterman, J., How Industrial Societies Use Energy (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 1977).Google Scholar
10.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, The Benefts and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1970 to 1990 (October 1997); www.epa.gov/air/sect812/retro.html (accessed January 2008).Google Scholar
11. See the Web site for the “Combined Heat and Power Partnership” of the Energy Information Administration, U.S. Department of Energy; www.epa.gov/CHP/basic/effciency.html (accessed January 2008).Google Scholar
12.U.S. Department of Energy, see Table in Net Generation by Energy Source by Type of Producer, 1995 through 2006, Energy Information Administration; www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epat1p1.html (accessed January 2008).Google Scholar
13.Jaramillo, P., Samaras, S., Emissions from Coal-to-Liquids and Plug-in Hybrids (Working paper, Electricity Industry Center, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, 2007).Google Scholar