INDC Pakistan – Analysis of emissions reductions in energy demand sectors
T. Kober,D. Faber, O. Usmani, N. Harms, L. Cameron
Amsterdam, 30July 2015
Technical project proposal JRC-EU-TIMES1
T
Technical project proposal JRC-EU-TIMES1
Contents
1.Total reductions in demand
1.1Total emission reductions
1.2Emission reductions from lower fossil fuels demand
1.3Reduction in electricity demand
2.Industry
2.1Emissions reductions
2.2Cement industry
2.3Brick industry
2.4Textile industry
2.5Fertilizer Industry
2.6Iron and steel industry
2.7Pulp and paper industry
2.8Other industries
3.Residential, commercial, agricultural sector fossil fuels emissions reduction
3.1Methodology
3.1.1Reduction as product of technical potential and realisation
3.1.2Technical potential
3.1.3Realisation
3.1.4Costs
3.2Results
3.3Measures
3.3.1Efficient stoves
3.3.2Efficient water heaters
3.3.3Efficient space heaters
3.3.4More efficient irrigation motors and pumps (LDO)
3.3.5More efficient irrigation motors and pumps (HSD)
4.Reduction of electricity demand in the industry sector
5.Reduction of electricity demand in the residential, commercial, and agricultural sector
5.1Methodology
5.1.1Reduction as product of technical potential and realisation
5.1.2Technical potential
5.1.3Realisation
5.1.4Costs
5.2Results
5.3Measures
5.3.1More efficient irrigation motors and pumps
5.3.2Replace incandescent bulbs with CFLs
5.3.3Efficient air conditioners
5.3.4Efficient refrigerators
5.3.5Efficient FTLs
5.3.6Improve roof insulation
5.3.7Efficient water pumps
6.References
Figure 1: Impact of reductions of demand on emissions
Figure 2: Impact of changing the supply of electricity
Figure 3: Emissions due to the use of fossil fuels
Figure 4: Electricity demand
Figure 7: Effects of energy efficiency improvements on Pakistan’s emissions development in the industry sector
Figure 8: Effects of energy efficiency improvements on coal use in the cement sector
Figure 9: Effects of energy efficiency improvements on coal use in the brick industry
Figure 10: Effects of energy efficiency improvements on coal use in the textile industry
Figure 11: Effects of energy efficiency improvements on gas use in the fertilizer industry
Figure 12: Effects of energy efficiency improvements on gas use in the iron and steel sector
Figure 13: Effects of energy efficiency improvements on gas use in the paper and pulp sector
Figure 14: Effects of energy efficiency improvements on fossil fuel use in other industries
Figure 15: Fossil fuels emission reductions in the residential, commercial and agricultural sector
Figure 16: Fossil fuels abatement curve in the residential, commercial and agricultural sector
Figure 17: Savings of electricity resulting from energy efficiency improvements in the industry
Figure 18: Electricity Savings in the residential, commercial, and agricultural sector
Figure 19: Electricity abatement curve in the residential, commercial, and agricultural sector
Table 1: Total emission reductions due to reductions of demand
Table 2: Fossil fuels emission reduction by sector
Table 3: List of measures/domains for reducing fossil fuels emissions
Table 4: Electricity demand reductions by sector
Table 5: List of measures/domains to reduce electricity demand
Table 6: Emissions reductions resulting from energy efficiency improvements in the industry sector by fuel in 2030 (values in MtCO2e and in brackets as relative shares w.r.t. baseline emissions)
Table 7: Pakistan's cement production capacity per kiln type in 2008
Table 8: Energy efficiency improvements for conversion clinker production from wet cement kilns to semi wet and dry kiln types (Worrel et al. 2013)
Table 9: Brick kiln investment costs
Table 10: Technologies for energy efficiency improvement in the textile industry
Table 11: Natural gas based ammonia production and its efficiency improvements (IEA 2014)
Table 12: Summary of results for the residential, commercial and agricultural sector
Table 13: Summary of results for electricity in the residential, commercial, and agricultural sector
Background
1.Total reductions in demand
1.1Total emission reductions
The projected emissions due to the demand in the industrial and the residential, commercial, and agricultural sectors increase from about 110 million tonnes CO2 equivalent (MtCO2e) in 2013 to about 152 MtCO2e in 2020 and 239 MtCO2e in 2030.
The demand can be reduced by increasing the share of more efficient processes and devices. The potential for this reduction is about 18 MtCO2e in 2020, and 54 MtCO2e in 2030, as shown in Figure 1, and in Table 1, which shows the split between sectors. .
Figure 1: Impact of reductions of demand on emissions
Sector / 2020 reductions (MtCO2e) / 2030 reductions (MtCO2e)Industrial / 10.05 / 32.32
Residential, commercial, and agricultural / 7.55 / 22.01
Total / 17.60 / 54.33
Table 1: Total emission reductions due to reductions of demand
One point to keep in mind is that these reductions stem both from reductions in demand from fossil fuels, and from electricity demand. Converting changes in demand for the fossil fuels part is relatively straightforward, as emission factors for fossil fuels shouldn’t change much with time and/or measures taken. On the other hand, changes in the electricity supply mix could change the emission intensity of producing electricity quite dramatically. Figure 1 is based on the emission intensity from our baseline. Actions taken to decarbonise the supply could change this. Figure 2 shows what would happen if the intensity ofproducing electricity was 75% of what it is in the baseline in 2030 (with a linear change starting in 2015). There would be fewer emissions because of this, but the demand reductions would have a bit less impact (for the part that comes from reductions in electricity demand). That part would be absorbed by the supply reductions. To avoid confusion, and to clearly show the impact of various measures, we split the reductions into emission reductions for activities based on fossil fuels, and demand reductions for activities that use electricity.
Figure 2: Impact of changing the supply of electricity
1.2Emission reductions from lower fossil fuels demand
The projected emissions due to fossil fuel use in the industrial and the residential, commercial, and agricultural sectors increase from about 67 million tonnes CO2 equivalent (MtCO2e) in 2013 to about 100 MtCO2e in 2020 and 173 MtCO2e in 2030.
The demand can be reduced by increasing the share of more efficient processes and devices. The potential for this reduction is about 13 MtCO2e in 2020, and 46 MtCO2e in 2030, as shown in Figure 3Figure 1, and in Table 2, which shows the split between sectors. The measures/domains adding up to that number are listed in Table 3. For details about these numbers and a discussion of these domains/measures, see Chapter 2 for the industrial sector, and Chapter 3 for the residential, commercial, and agricultural sector.
Figure 3: Emissions due to the use of fossil fuels
Sector / 2020 reductions (MtCO2e) / 2030 reductions (MtCO2e)Industrial / 6.55 / 30.12
Residential, commercial, and agricultural / 6.62 / 15.77
Total / 13.17 / 45.88
Table 2: Fossil fuels emission reduction by sector
Domain / Sector / 2020 reductions (MtCO2e) / 2030 reductions (MtCO2e)Water heaters / Residential-commercial-agricultural / 0.96 / 2.20
Space heaters / Residential-commercial-agricultural / 0.42 / 0.94
Stoves / Residential-commercial-agricultural / 5.01 / 12.10
Irrigation / Residential-commercial-agricultural / 0.23 / 0.53
Cement / Industrial / 3.97 / 17.49
Textiles / Industrial / 0.55 / 2.78
Other Industries / Industrial / 0.23 / 1.27
Brick / Industrial / 0.91 / 5.67
Fertilizer / Industrial / 0.38 / 1.36
Iron and Steel / Industrial / 0.39 / 0.91
Sugar / Industrial / 0 / 0
Pulp and Paper / Industrial / 0.12 / 0.64
Table 3: List of measures/domains for reducing fossil fuels emissions
1.3Reduction in electricity demand
The projected electricity demand in the industrial and the residential, commercial, and agricultural sectors increase from about 78 TWh in 2013 to about 107 TWh in 2020 and 164 TWh in 2030.
The demand can be reduced by increasing the share of more efficient processes and devices. The potential for this reduction is about 9 TWh in 2020, and 21 TWh in 2030, as shown inFigure 4Figure 1, and inTable 4, which shows the split between sectors. The measures/domains adding up to that number are listed inTable 5. For details about these numbers and a discussion of these domains/measures, see Chapter 4 for the industrial sector, and Chapter 5 for the residential, commercial, and agricultural sector.
Figure 4: Electricity demand
Sector / 2020 reductions (TWh) / 2030 reductions (TWh)Industrial / 2.07 / 5.44
Residential, commercial, and agricultural / 7.11 / 15.42
Total / 9.18 / 20.88
Table 4: Electricity demand reductions by sector
Domain / Sector / 2020 reductions (TWh) / 2030 reductions (TWh)Replace incandescent bulbs with CFLs / Residential-commercial-agricultural / 2.07 / 4.29
Efficient FTLs / Residential-commercial-agricultural / 0.59 / 1.22
Efficient refrigerators / Residential-commercial-agricultural / 1.16 / 2.64
Efficient water pumps / Residential-commercial-agricultural / 0 / 0
Efficient air conditioners / Residential-commercial-agricultural / 0.83 / 1.75
Improved roof insulation / Residential-commercial-agricultural / 0.95 / 2
Irrigation / Residential-commercial-agricultural / 1.51 / 3.52
Cement / Industrial / 1.48 / 2.78
Textiles / Industrial / 0.14 / 0.61
Other Industries (include. Pulp and paper) / Industrial / 0.19 / 1
Brick / Industrial / 0 / 0
Fertilizer / Industrial / 0.17 / 0.59
Iron and Steel / Industrial / 0.09 / 0.46
Sugar / Industrial / 0 / 0
Table 5: List of measures/domains to reduce electricity demand
Technical project proposal JRC-EU-TIMES1
2.Industry
2.1Emissions reductions
The energy-related emissions of the industry sector in the baseline increase from around 40MtCO2e in 2013 to 60MtCO2e in 2020 and further to 120MtCO2e in 2030. Improving the energy efficiency of industrial applicationsallows to reduce emissions by6.5MtCO2e in 2020 and 30MtCO2e (Figure 5). Given the cement and brick sectors’ importance in the baseline emissions development, both sectors combined contribute with almost 80% to the industry’s total emissions reduction in 2030. In the cement industry, this emission reduction can be realised through the conversion of old energy intensive kilns to best available technology (BAT) standard and the shift from inefficient cement processes (wet and single-stage dry processes) to modern multi-stage dry cement processes. For brick production the conversion from clamp kilns and bull trench kilns to so-called zig-zag kiln technology offers substantial emissions reduction potential (6 MtCO2e by 2030) at low-cost. In addition to the cement and brick industry further 7MtCO2e can be avoided by 2030 resulting of improved technologies in other industry sectors, such as textile (2.8MtCO2e), fertilizer production (1.4MtCO2e) and iron and steel (0.9MtCO2e).
Figure 5: Effects of energy efficiency improvements on Pakistan’s emissions development in the industry sector
Table 6 provides the overview of the emissions reductions across the industry sub-sectors for the year 2030, displaying the contribution of the respective fuelsavings. Emission reduction from coal use apply primarily to the cement and brick industry, whereas in the textile, fertilizer and iron & steel industry reduced consumption of natural gas is the main driver for emissions mitigation. Important measures to increase energy efficiency in the latter sectors are enhancements of the thermodynamic systems including reduction of heat losses, improved boiler systems, waste heat recovery and better process integration.
Table 6: Emissions reductions resulting from energy efficiency improvements in the industry sector by fuel in 2030 (values in MtCO2e and in brackets as relative shares w.r.t. baseline emissions)
Motor Spirit / Kero- sene / HSD / LDO / Fur- nace Oil / Lubes & Greases / Natural Gas / Coal / TotalCement / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 17.5 / 17.5
(0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (47%) / (44%)
Textiles / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 2.8 / 0.0 / 2.8
(0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (22%) / (0%) / (21%)
Other Industries / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.1 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.9 / 0.0 / 1.0
(3%) / (0%) / (4%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (4%) / (0%) / (3%)
Brick / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 5.7 / 5.7
(0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (34%) / (34%)
Fertilizer / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 1.4 / 0.0 / 1.4
(0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (40%) / (0%) / (40%)
Iron and Steel / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.9 / 0.0 / 0.9
(0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (19%) / (0%) / (17%)
Sugar / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0
(0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%)
Pulp and Paper / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.6 / 0.0 / 0.6
(7%) / (0%) / (7%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (7%) / (0%) / (7%)
Total / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.1 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 0.0 / 6.5 / 23.2 / 29.8
(3%) / (0%) / (3%) / (0%) / (0%) / (0%) / (13%) / (43%) / (25%)
In the following sections we highlight the main energy efficiency improvement measures for the industry sub-sectors and their resulting fuel savings. We also present our main assumptions and data sources behind the calculation.
2.2Cement industry
The cement industry in Pakistan is the largest industrial sector with regards to energy use, accounting in 2012 for 25% of all energy used in the industrial sector and 67% of total industrial coal use. Coal accounts for 92% of energy consumption in the sector while oil and gas cover the remaining energy requirements. Energy improvements in the cement sector as addressed here, mainly refer to options that reduce coal as it is by far the most frequently used fuel as well as the fuel with the highest associated emission intensity.
Based on historic figures, cement production in Pakistan can be clusteredinto the three main types of kilns used for cement production. With regards to energy consumption, the three different kinds of kilns differ substantially (Table 7). Since in wet kilns raw materials are entered into the kiln with a high water content, a significant amount of fuel is used to evaporate this water. In a single-stage preheating dry kiln, raw materials are pre-heated in order to start the calcinating process at a more energy efficient temperatures. In multi-stage preheating dry kilns, raw material preheating is performed in several stages (where early stages of the pre-heating can use lower temperature heat, and later stages use the higher temperature heat) allowing for even higher energy efficiency.
Table 7: Pakistan's cement production capacity per kiln type in 2008 [1]
Kiln type / No of plants / Total capacity (Mt/year) / Energy Intensity (GJ/t clinker)[2]•Wet / •5 / •5.48 / •5.0 - 6.0
•Single-stage dry / •10 / •7.34 / • 4.2 - 5.0
•Multi-stage dry / •14 / •23.81 / •3.1 - 4.2
•Total / •29 / •37.09 / •N/A
To reduce emissions in the cement industry we consider two measures: 1) introducingBAT standard to all cement plants, and 2) converting the energy-inefficient wet and single stage dry kilns to multi stage dry kilns. Both measures together allow to reduce coal consumption and hence emissions of the cement production by 44% compared to the baseline in 2030 (Figure 6). In our assessment we assume that both measures are conducted gradually starting in 2015 and being completed in 2030.
Figure 6: Effects of energy efficiency improvements on coal use in the cement sector
The first measure, the transition to BAT for each of the three plant types, entails improving and retrofitting existing cement plants so that energy efficiency in these plants resembles energy efficiency of today’sbest practice cement plants. This translates into specific coal consumptions per tonne of cement of 4.2 GJ for wet kilns, 3.5 GJ for single-stage dry kilns and 2.4 GJ for multi-stage dry kilns in 2030. Specific technology improvements comprise, for instance[3]:
- Installation of wash mills with closed circuit classifier (for wet kilns only)
- Kiln shell heat loss reduction
- Process control and management systems
- Kiln combustion system improvements
- Improved raw-materials preparation.
The economic assessment of different energy efficiency improvements reveals that a numerous low-cost measures with payback time less than one year exist, such as kiln combustion system improvements, kiln shell heat loss reduction and the introduction of energy management and control systems. These improvements result in fuel savings up to about 0.5 GJ per tonne of cement and can partly be conducted during regular maintenance and renovation cycles. More substantial energy efficiency improvements of up to 1.1 GJ per tonne of cement can be achieved if cement plants are equipped with preheater and precalciner technology. However, the payback time for this kind of process modification is with more than 10 years much longer than for the before mentioned small-scale improvements.[4]
The second measure, the conversion of the entire cement production to multi stage dry kilns, results in an overall coal-energy intensity of the cement production of 2.4 GJ per tonne of cement in 2030, and would allow to reduce coal consumption by 50 PJ in 2030 in addition to the reductions provided by the first measure. Table 8 displays the energy efficiency improvements for conversion of wet cement kilns to semi wet and dry kilnsaccording to Worrel et al. (2013), which shows that in particular the conversion to the dry cement process with precalciner offers highest potential to reduce coal consumption with a payback period of around 7 years. The table also shows that converting from wet to dry cement kilns would increase electricity consumption of clinker production slightly. We assume that this increase can be at least compensated with electricity savings for improved raw material preparation and grinding where saving measures can achieve up to 25 kWh per tonne of cement.
Table 8: Energy efficiency improvements for conversion clinker production from wet cement kilns to semi wet and dry kiln types (Worrel et al. 2013)
Kiln type / Specific Fuel Savings(Mbtu/ton cement) / Specific Electricity
Savings
(kWh/ton cement) / Estimated Payback
Period
(years)
ConversiontoSemi‐DryProcessKiln / 0.93‐1.30 / ‐4.7‐‐ 6.5 / 10(1)
ConversiontoSemi‐WetProcessKiln / 0.60‐0.90 / ‐3.7 / 1‐3
ConversiontoDryprecalcinerKiln / 1.70‐2.70 / ‐8.4 / >7(1)
2.3Brick industry
The clay-brick manufacturing sector in Pakistan, accounting for roughly 1.5% of GDP[5], is a relatively unregulated and undocumented industry sector.[6] The typical production process in Pakistan involves the manual moulding of bricks, which are then generally baked in either a clamp kiln (5% share of total brick production) or a bull trench kiln (BTK) (95% share of total brick production). Compared to other kiln types (e.g. vertical shaft brick kilns (VSBK)), both kiln types are known for their low capital investments, and low energy efficiencies. Attempts have been made to introduce more energy efficient kiln types, such as VSBK. These attempts were not successful due to relatively high required capital requirements and the limitation in production flexibility[7] and a negative social perception of the VSBK.[8],[9]
Our analysis of GHG mitigation options for brick production refers to the shift of existing kilns to modern applications with reduced energy consumption (Figure 7). The first measure involves converting Pakistan’s BTK and clamp kilns to so-called zig-zag kilns (ZZK). The BTK and ZZK share a lot of similarities with regards to kiln layout, and as such converting to ZZKs only requires limited kiln modification[10]. Due to the limited amount of modification needed for the conversion, capital requirements are relatively low making the ZZK a kiln type well suited for the Pakistani brick industry. As a secondary energy efficiency improvement, efforts can be made to convert these ZZKs to ZZKs with BAT standard, which includes adding a fan to increase drought throughout the kiln and improving isolation in the firing section of the kiln. In order to illustrate additional mitigation potential we three further measures which assume the partial conversion Pakistan’s brick kilnsto manual VSBKs (mitigation measure 3) and Vietnamese VSBKs (mitigation measures 4 and 5).