CMI Ninth Annual Meeting February 9-10, 2010

Co-Directors: Steve Pacala and Robert Socolow (on leave 2009-2010)Acting Co-Director: Craig Arnold

Princeton Universitycmi.princeton.edu

Goal: The goal of the meeting is to understand the history of the CMI, to review findings from our work in 2009, to exchange information about future domestic and international policy in the context of Copenhagen, and to exchange information that will help frame our partnership in 2010-2015.

CMI Ninth Annual Meeting Conference Schedule: Tuesday, Feb. 9, 2010Part One

8-8:30 a.m. Breakfast Available

8:30-8:45 a.m. Pablo Debenedetti: "Welcome and Safety Moment; Update on Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment"

8:45-9:15 a.m. Steve Pacala & Robert Socolow: "CMI and PEI Overview; Recent Developments"

9:15-10 a.m. Jorge Sarmiento: "Highlights of CO2 Science"

10-10:45 a.m. "Highlights of CO2 Capture"

10-10:20 a.m. Craig Arnold: "Reliable Electrochemical Energy Storage for Alternative Energy"

10:20-10:45 a.m. Robert Williams

10:45-10:55 a.m. Break

10:55-11:40 a.m. Michael Celia: "Highlights of CO2 Storage"

11:40-12:40 p.m. "Highlights of CO2 Integration"

11:30-12 p.m. Robert Socolow: "Group Overview"

12-12:30 p.m. Shoibal Chakravarty and Massimo Tavoni: "One Billion High Emitters: An Individual Perspective on Emissions and Reductions"

12:40–1:20 p.m. Lunch

1:20–1:30 p.m. Group Photo

1:30-2 p.m. David Eyton: "BP Review of 2009"

2-2:15 p.m. Venkatesh Narayanamurti: "Overview: Energy Technology Innovation Policy (ETIP), Harvard"

2:15-2:30 p.m. Chris Somerville and Stephen Long: "Overview: Energy Biosciences Institute (EBI)"

2:30-5 p.m. First Deep Dive: Domestic Climate Policy Chair: Robert Socolow

2:30-3:30 p.m. U.S. Climate Policy Prospects in Wake of COP15

2:30-2:50 p.m. Dallas Burtraw, Senior Fellow, Resources for the Future: "Changing Political Landscapes and Pathways Forward: The Distribution of Cost from Climate Policy"

2:50-3:10 p.m. David Hawkins, Director of Climate Programs, NRDC: "Update on Climate Policy in Congress"

3:10-3:30 p.m. Henry Lee, Co-PI ETIP, Harvard University: "Climate and the Transport Sector"

3:30-4:10 p.m. Domestic Gas Production and Refining

3:30-3:50 p.m. David Nagel, Executive Vice President, BP America: "Natural Gas: Technology and Policy"

3:50-4:10 p.m. James Keating, Environmental Policy Advisor, BP America: "Climate Policy and Impacts on the Refining Industry"

4:10-4:20 p.m. Break

4:20-5 p.m. General Discussion

5:30-8:30 p.m. Reception and Dinner at Prospect HouseGuest Speaker: Daniel Schrag, Director of the Center for the Environment, Harvard University: "A Path Forward on Pricing Carbon?"

CMI Ninth Annual Meeting Conference Schedule: Tuesday, Feb. 9, 2010, Palmer HousePart Two

8-9 a.m. Executive Committee Breakfast

8:30-9 a.m. Breakfast Available

9-9:05 a.m. Steve Pacala and Robert Socolow: "Welcome and Safety Moment"

9:05-9:15 a.m. Ellen Williams, Chief Scientist, BP: "Introductions and Reflections on New Role as Chief Scientist at BP"

9:15-12 p.m. Second Deep Dive: International Climate PolicyChair: Steve Pacala

9:15-9:35 a.m. Robert Keohane, Professor of International Affairs, Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University: "The Regime Complex for Climate Change"

9:35-9:55 a.m. Michael Levi, Senior Fellow for Energy and the Environment, Council on Foreign Relations: "Outcomes and Implications from COP15"

9:55-10:15 a.m. Kelly Sims Gallagher, Associate Professor, Tufts, and Research Associate, Harvard University: "Considering Copenhagen"

10:15-10:35 a.m. Steven Hamburg, Chief Scientist, Environmental Defense Fund: "International Policy Implications from Forestry Offsets"

10:35-10:45 a.m. Break

10:45-12 p.m. General Discussion

12-12:30 p.m. Report from Advisory Council and Discussion; Co-Chairs: Sally Benson and David Keith

12:30-1:30 p.m. Lunch for all participants

1:30 p.m. Meeting Adjourns

Wednesday, Feb. 10, 2010, Palmer)

CMI Ninth Annual Meeting Conference Schedule: Wednesday, Feb. 10, 2010, Palmer House

LAUNCH OF THE AGREEMENT

December 1999 – June 2000. BP runs an internal, U.S.-based competition for a research initiative in carbon mitigation.

October 2000. BP and Ford Motor Company jointly announce the formation of the Carbon Mitigation Initiative (CMI) at Princeton University to develop new approaches to carbon management.

“CMI will focus on resolving the fundamental scientific, environmental, and technological issues that ultimately will determine public acceptance of carbon management strategies. It will search for strategies that: 1) will have the desired effect on atmospheric carbon and climate; 2) will be safe and reliable with limited environmental impact; and 3) will involve neither prohibitive economic costs nor prohibitive disruption of patterns of energy consumption.”

Recognizing the complexity and durability of the issues, both BP and Ford Motor Company make a ten-year commitment, with BP funding of $15,100,000 and Ford Fund funding of $5,000,000.

December 2000. Kickoff meeting is held in Princeton.

Mission Statement:

The mission of CMI is to lead the way to a compelling and sustainable solution of the carbon and climate change problem. By combining the unique and complementary strengths of the CMI parties – one premier academic institution and two influential global companies – CMI participants seek to attain a novel synergy across fundamental science, technology development, and business principles that accelerates the pace from discovery, through proof of concept, to scalable solution.

Carbon Integration Carbon Science

Carbon StorageCarbon Capture

2000-2015

Bender / Morel / PacalaSarmiento / Sigman

Celia / Debenedetti / Peters / Prevost / Scherer

Oppenheimer / Pacala /Socolow

Arnold / Kreutz / Larson / Law / Williams

Leverage• Science

– GFDL– NOAA Joint Institute

• Capture– Andlinger Center founded in 2009 with a $100 million gift– Major new $20 million Center on Combustion in May 2009

• Storage– Major new federal funding

• Integration– Siebel Energy Grand Challenge ($1.5 million per year)– New Princeton initiative to build climate science and policy

Co-Directors: S. Pacala

R. Socolow

Co-Directors: S. Pacala

R. Socolow

BP: G. HillBP: G. HillFord: J. Ginder

“pause”

Ford: J. Ginder

“pause”

Advisory Council:

D. BurtrawD. Hawkins

D. KeithM. Levi

S. Benson/F. OrrS.Long /

C.Somerville

Advisory Council:

D. BurtrawD. Hawkins

D. KeithM. Levi

S. Benson/F. OrrS.Long /

C.SomervilleMilan Politecnico

Tsinghua Univ.Alberta Geol. Survey

Climate Central

Milan PolitecnicoTsinghua Univ.

Alberta Geol. SurveyClimate Central

Research Groups:ScienceCapture StorageIntegration

Research Groups:ScienceCapture StorageIntegration

ETIP, HarvardETIP, Harvard

Research Programs:Science Group: From left to right: Bender / Morel / Pacala / Sarmiento / Sigman

The SCIENCE GROUP continued to narrow the uncertainty in the causes and magnitude of the terrestrial and ocean carbon sinks.

New research by the Pacala Group points to the impact of nitrogen cycling on terrestrial carbon sinks, and its new biosphere model is the first to reproduce the history, magnitude and latitudinal distribution of carbon uptake.

The Sarmiento Group is working to improve calculations of the ocean carbon sink and explain a puzzling increase in terrestrial uptake in the early 90s.

New field and lab results from the Bender and Morel Groups are providing insights into controls on the distribution of ocean productivity and the impacts of ocean acidification. In paleoclimate studies, new samples collected by the Bender Group may be able to extend the Antarctic ice core record much further back in time, and the Sigman Group’s latest results are narrowing down the possible mechanisms of ice age CO2 drawdown.

Science Group 2009 Summary

Research Programs:Integration Group: From left to right: Oppenheimer / Pacala / Socolow

The Pacala-Socolow Group has proposed a new approach to the allocation of a global CO2 emissions target among the nations of the world, based on a reinterpretation of concept of “common but differentiated responsibilities” (language in the current international agreements), so that the phrase refers to individuals rather than nations. In this formulation, obligations are the same for individuals with similar life-styles, independent of the per-capita emissions of the country in which they live. Follow-on work is aimed at modeling CO2 emissions generated by activities strongly correlated with wealth, including travel by air and meat-eating. Other work documents a remarkable increase in the level of installation and operation of SO2 scrubbers at China's coal plants, which conventional economic models would not expect to occur until China had reached a substantially higher per capita income.

Integration Group 2009 Summary (1 of 4)

Chakravarty, Shoibal, A. Chikkatur, H. de Coninck, Stephen W. Pacala, Robert H. Socolow, and M. Tavoni, 2009: Sharing global CO2 emission reductions among one billion high emitters. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(29), doi:10.1073/pnas.0905232106 11884-11888

Sharing Global CO2 Emissions Reductions Among One Billion High Emitters:

Abstract: Recent analyses of the energy and greenhouse-gas performance of alternative biofuels have ignited a controversy that may be best resolved by applying two simple principles. In a world seeking solutions to its energy, environmental, and food challenges, society cannot afford to miss out on the global greenhouse-gas emission reductions and the local environmental and societal benefits when biofuels are done right. However, society also cannot accept the undesirable impacts of biofuels done wrong.

Integration Group 2009 Summary (2 of 4)

Tilman, D., Robert H. Socolow, J. A. Foley, J. Hill, Eric Larson, L. R. Lynd, Stephen W. Pacala, J. Reilly, Timothy Searchinger, C. Sommerville, and Robert H. Williams, July 2009: Beneficial Biofuels - The Food, Energy, and Environment Trilemma. Science, Washington, D.C., American Association for the Advancement of Science, 325(5938), doi:10.1126/science.1177970 270-271

Beneficial Biofuels – The Food, Energy, and Environment Trilemma

The CMI Biofuels Workshop hosted at Princeton University on June 19-20, 2008 assembled 11 experts from various backgrounds for discussions about the sustainability of biofuels, food and the environment. The workshop led to the following Science paper:

CMI has partnered with the National Energy Education Development Project to bring the “stabilization wedges” concept to teachers.

The Oppenheimer Group has initiated a project on the history of environmental assessments, beginning with an assessment of the problem of stratospheric ozone depletion. Through analysis of published and archival documents and interviews with key scientists, policy makers, and members of industry, the history of scientific assessment of ozone depletion is being reconstructed. An intriguing dimension of this work is "negative learning" – the phenomenon where scientists stick for long periods of time to the wrong path, rather than converging on the truth inexorably via successive approximations. The expectation is that insights gained from this project will improve our understanding of the scientific learning process and will be transferable to scientific assessment of global climate change.

Integration Group 2009 Summary (3 of 4)

CMI is helping steer the national dialogue on carbon mitigation 

Co-Directors Pacala and Socolow have both undertaken substantial projects in the service of U.S. carbon policy. 

Pacala is leading a committee of the National Academies on carbon monitoring. 

Socolow has been a member of two National Academies’ panels on America’s Energy Future and America’s Climate Choices, and is co-directing (with BPs Michael Desmond) an American Physical Society study on the potential for CO2 capture from air.

Integration Group 2009 Summary (4 of 4)

Research Programs:Capture Group: From left to right: Arnold / Kreutz / Larson / Law / Williams

The CAPTURE GROUP has made major strides in developing low-carbon solutions for both liquid fuels and repowering electricity in the U.S., and has a new emphasis on biofuels and electric storage technologies.

Strategies developed this year by the Williams Group use coal and biomass combined with carbon capture and storage to provide liquid fuels with lower biomass requirements than conventional ethanol, and would motivate CCS at coal electric plants at lower emissions prices than retrofits. Recent shale gas discoveries are also motivating new modeling of CCS facilities powered by natural gas rather than coal.

The Arnold Group is exploring how to optimize existing energy storage technology to meet the needs of alternative energy sources and extend battery lifetimes.

A new combustion research center led by Chung Law, leader of the Law Group, will bring Princeton researchers together with experts from across the nation to study and develop new alternative fuels for use in advanced engines.

Capture Group 2009 Summary

Research Programs:Storage Group: From left to right: Celia / Debenedetti / Peters / Prevost / Scherer

The STORAGE GROUP is continuing to develop novel experimental techniques and expand capabilities of models, plus delve into new research areas with external funding.

New time-lapse images of corroding cements are supplying the Scherer-Prevost Group with more detailed information on corrosion kinetics for an improved Dynaflow model.

The Celia Group has added processes important on the long time scales relevant to storage security to their large scale models, and has begun a new collaboration with the Capture Group to explore using produced brine for both plant cooling and control of CO2 injection.

The Debenedetti Group has initiated a new program thrust on the formation and stability of CO2 hydrates.

And finally, members of the Storage Group are part of an exciting new multipurpose underground national laboratory (DUSEL), where they will study CO2 sequestration on realistic length scales in a project led by Civil and Environmental Engineering Professor Catherine Peters. .

Storage Group 2009 Summary

CMI Launches Redesigned WebsiteSept 25, 2009

The site (http://cmi.princeton.edu/) now provides added functionality and content. It includes a searchable index of over 700 articles and annual reports published by CMI faculty and staff since the initiative's inception in 2000.

Also updated and expanded are the comprehensive lists of CMI members and their research interests, sponsors and research partners, and information on CMI's research, education, outreach and affiliated programs.

Special new sections include current news covering research conducted by the CMI community, annual meeting information, materials related to the Stabilization Wedges and One Billion High Emitters papers, a list of resources related to carbon mitigation and more.

Compilation of CMI Publications in Science: 2000 – Present (1/3)

Compilation of CMI Publications in Science: 2000 – Present (2/3)

Compilation of CMI Publications in Science: 2000 – Present (3/3)

Compilation of CMI Publications in Nature: 2000 – Present (1/2)

Compilation of CMI Publications in Nature: 2000 – Present (2/2)

Compilation of CMI Publications in PNAS: 2000 – Present (1/2)

Compilation of CMI Publications in PNAS: 2000 – Present (2/2)

Process for planning 2011-2015• Princeton proposal in 2009 for 2011-2015 • BP announces in 2009 its intention to extend the

partnership with funding at least at previous levels but with budget otherwise to be determined

• Princeton completes inventory of new capabilities in in energy and climate in January 2010

• BP undertakes corresponding inventory in winter 2010

Climategate

• East Anglia group– Hacked email leads to allegations of data manipulation,

suppression of alternative views– Group prominent in IPCC– Penn State exonerates Mann in partial review

• IPCC– Press reports of exaggeration of risks in scientific literature

including Himalayan glaciers and risk of tropical forest loss

Definitive For Uncertain Definitive Against

* *

Climate change in the past

Theory and models

Current records

*

None of the allegations about the IPCC or the East None of the allegations about the IPCC or the East Anglia group changes the strength of the Anglia group changes the strength of the scientific evidence.scientific evidence.

Meeting Overview

• 2009 progress in Science, Capture, Storage and Integration

• Deep dive on domestic policy• Deep dive on international policy