The refinery of the future.

Fossil fuels-coal, oil and gas-supply most of the world's energy and also form the basis of many products essential for everyday life. Their use is the largest contributor to the carbon dioxide emissions that drive global climate change, prompting joint efforts to find renewable alternatives that might enable a carbon-neutral society by as early as 2050. There are clear paths for renewable electricity to replace fossil-fuel-based energy, but the transport fuels and chemicals produced in oil refineries will still be needed. We can attempt to close the carbon cycle associated with their use by electrifying refinery processes and by changing the raw materials that go into a refinery from fossils fuels to carbon dioxide for making hydrocarbon fuels and to agricultural and municipal waste for making chemicals and polymers. We argue that, with sufficient long-term commitment and support, the science and technology for such a completely fossil-free refinery, delivering the products required after 2050 (less fuels, more chemicals), could be developed. This future refinery will require substantially larger areas and greater mineral resources than is the case at present and critically depends on the capacity to generate large amounts of renewable energy for hydrogen production and carbon dioxide capture.

Preindustrial 14CH4 indicates greater anthropogenic fossil CH4 emissions.

Atmospheric methane (CH4) is a potent greenhouse gas, and its mole fraction has more than doubled since the preindustrial era1. Fossil fuel extraction and use are among the largest anthropogenic sources of CH4 emissions, but the precise magnitude of these contributions is a subject of debate2,3. Carbon-14 in CH4 (14CH4) can be used to distinguish between fossil (14C-free) CH4 emissions and contemporaneous biogenic sources; however, poorly constrained direct 14CH4 emissions from nuclear reactors have complicated this approach since the middle of the 20th century4,5. Moreover, the partitioning of total fossil CH4 emissions (presently 172 to 195 teragrams CH4 per year)2,3 between anthropogenic and natural geological sources (such as seeps and mud volcanoes) is under debate; emission inventories suggest that the latter account for about 40 to 60 teragrams CH4 per year6,7. Geological emissions were less than 15.4 teragrams CH4 per year at the end of the Pleistocene, about 11,600 years ago8, but that period is an imperfect analogue for present-day emissions owing to the large terrestrial ice sheet cover, lower sea level and extensive permafrost. Here we use preindustrial-era ice core 14CH4 measurements to show that natural geological CH4 emissions to the atmosphere were about 1.6 teragrams CH4 per year, with a maximum of 5.4 teragrams CH4 per year (95 per cent confidence limit)-an order of magnitude lower than the currently used estimates. This result indicates that anthropogenic fossil CH4 emissions are underestimated by about 38 to 58 teragrams CH4 per year, or about 25 to 40 per cent of recent estimates. Our record highlights the human impact on the atmosphere and climate, provides a firm target for inventories of the global CH4 budget, and will help to inform strategies for targeted emission reductions9,10.

The geographical distribution of fossil fuels unused when limiting global warming to 2 °C.

Policy makers have generally agreed that the average global temperature rise caused by greenhouse gas emissions should not exceed 2 °C above the average global temperature of pre-industrial times. It has been estimated that to have at least a 50 per cent chance of keeping warming below 2 °C throughout the twenty-first century, the cumulative carbon emissions between 2011 and 2050 need to be limited to around 1,100 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide (Gt CO2). However, the greenhouse gas emissions contained in present estimates of global fossil fuel reserves are around three times higher than this, and so the unabated use of all current fossil fuel reserves is incompatible with a warming limit of 2 °C. Here we use a single integrated assessment model that contains estimates of the quantities, locations and nature of the world's oil, gas and coal reserves and resources, and which is shown to be consistent with a wide variety of modelling approaches with different assumptions, to explore the implications of this emissions limit for fossil fuel production in different regions. Our results suggest that, globally, a third of oil reserves, half of gas reserves and over 80 per cent of current coal reserves should remain unused from 2010 to 2050 in order to meet the target of 2 °C. We show that development of resources in the Arctic and any increase in unconventional oil production are incommensurate with efforts to limit average global warming to 2 °C. Our results show that policy makers' instincts to exploit rapidly and completely their territorial fossil fuels are, in aggregate, inconsistent with their commitments to this temperature limit. Implementation of this policy commitment would also render unnecessary continued substantial expenditure on fossil fuel exploration, because any new discoveries could not lead to increased aggregate production.

Supply curves for using powder river basin coal to reduce sulfur emissions.

Supply curves were prepared for coal-fired power plants in the contiguous United States switching to Wyoming's Powder River Basin (PRB) low-sulfur coal. Up to 625 plants, representing approximately 44% of the nameplate capacity of all coal-fired plants, could switch. If all switched, more than dollars 8.8 billion additional capital would be required and the cost of electricity would increase by up to dollars 5.9 billion per year, depending on levels of plant derating. Coal switching would result in sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions reduction of 4.5 million t/yr. Increase in cost of electricity would be in the range of 0.31-0.73 cents per kilowatt-hour. Average cost of S emissions reduction could be as high as dollars 1298 per t of SO2. Up to 367 plants, or 59% of selected plants with 32% of 44% nameplate capacity, could have marginal cost in excess of dollars 1000 per t of SO2. Up to 73 plants would appear to benefit from both a lowering of the annual cost and a lowering of SO2 emissions by switching to the PRB coal.