Greenhouse Zero-Dimensional Model with CO2 Reduction in Emission due to Renewable Energy use and New Technologies Skender Kabashi1*, Gazmend Kabashi2 , Sadik Bekteshi1, Skender Ahmetaj1 and Albert Jonuzi1 1Faculty of Mathematical and Natural Sciences, Mother Theresa str. Nr. 5 University of Prishtina, Prishtina, Kosovo 2Faculty of Electric Engineering and Computer Sciences, Bregu i Diellit, II str. pn. University of Prishtina, Prishtina, Kosovo ++37744259017,
[email protected] ABSTRACT: Atmospheric concentration of CO2 and other greenhouse gases (GHG) is higher than any time in the last 400000 years and growing faster than at any time in the past 18000 years. The high concentration of GHG generates radiative forcing that contributes to climate change. Energy production from fossil fuels has central role in regard to the climate change. . Reconstruction of the global-scale record of temperature suggests a relatively slow and steady cooling of about 0.20C that extends from about year 1000 until the middle of 19th century; beginning in the late 19th century (since the industrial revolution ) and continuing through the 20th century, an unusually rapid warming of about 0.60C has been taking place. Harnessing of renewable energy sources is vital to constraining the extent of climate change in global and regional level. The impact of renewable energy and new technologies in CO2 reduction on global level is modeled and it is shown that increasing the Earth surface temperature would stop if the CO2 reduction the next 50 years would be 80% due to renewable use and new technologies. The initial time value for this model is taken year 2005. In this model we made the degree of reduction variable due to the renewable energy use, new technology options for CO2 reduction and policy initiatives Keywords: Climate Change, Renewable Energy, CO2, Reduction, Modeling, Stella, Kosovo. I. INTRODUCTION The Sun powers Earth’s climate, radiating energy at very short wavelengths, predominately in the visible or near- visible (e.g., ultraviolet) part of the spectrum. Roughly one- third of the solar energy that reaches the top of Earth’s atmosphere is reflected directly back to space. The remaining two-thirds are absorbed by the surface and, to a lesser extent, by the atmosphere. To balance the absorbed incoming energy, the Earth must, on average, radiate the same amount of energy back to space. Because the Earth is much colder than the Sun, it radiates at much longer wavelengths, primarily in the infrared part of the spectrum. Much of this thermal radiation emitted by the land and ocean is absorbed by the atmosphere, including clouds, and reradiated back to Earth. This is called the greenhouse effect [1]. The glass walls in a greenhouse reduce airflow and increase the temperature of the air inside. Analogously, but through a different physical process, the Earth’s greenhouse effect warms the surface of the planet. Without the natural greenhouse effect [2] the average temperature at Earth’s surface would be below the freezing point of water (-19oC). Thus, Earth’s natural greenhouse effect makes life as we know it possible (Te=15 oC). However Human activities contribute to climate change by causing changes in Earth’s atmosphere in the amounts of greenhouse gases and cloudiness. The largest known contribution comes from the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil and natural gas), which releases carbon dioxide gas to the atmosphere. Human activities result in emissions of four principal gases: carbon dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4), Nitrous oxide (N2O) and halocarbons (a group of gases containing fluorine, chlorine and bromine). These gases accumulate in the atmosphere, causing concentrations to increase with time. Significant increases in all of these gases have occurred since the industrial era. Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is most important anthropogenic greenhouse gas. The global atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has increased from a pre-industrial value of about 280 ppm to 380 ppm in 2007. The atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide in 2007 exceeds by far the natural range over the 650000 years (180-300ppm) as determined from ice cores. The annual carbon dioxide concentration growth rate was larger during the last 15 years (1.9ppm, current concentration 1.3ppm per year) [3, 4] Greenhouse gases and aerosols affect climate by altering incoming solar radiation and outgoing infrared (thermal) radiation that are part of Earth’s energy balance. Atmospheric concentration of CO2 and other greenhouse gases (GHG) is higher than any time in the last 400000 years and growing faster than at any time in the past 18000 years. Reconstruction of the global-scale record of temperature suggests a relatively slow and steady cooling of about 0.20C that extends from about year 1000 until the middle of 19th century; beginning in the late 19th century (since the industrial revolution) and continuing through the 20th century, an unusually rapid warming of about 0.60C has been taking place [5] .The high concentration of GHG generates radiative forcing that contributes to climate change. The impact of renewable energy in CO2 reduction on global level is modeled and it is shown that increasing the Earth surface temperature would stop if the CO2 reduction the next 50 years would be 80% due to renewable use and new technologies. The initial time value for this model is taken year 2005. Climate change will be the first truly global challenge for sustainability. Because climate change is regionally driven with global consequences and is a result of economic imperatives and social values, the harnessing of renewable energy sources regionally in each country and improvement of the new technology on burning the fossil fuels is vital to constraining the extent of climate change on global leve[6]. 7th Mediterranean Conference and Exhibition on Power Generation, Transmission, Distribution and Energy Conversion 7-10 November 2010, Agia Napa, Cyprus (Paper No. MED10/165) II. CLIMATE MODEL WITH NO GHG’S IN ATMOSPHERE Measurements of the planetary albedo combined with the known impinging solar radiation at the top of the atmosphere supply the necessary information on the first component of the radiation budget, the net solar input. The second component of the radiation budget involves measuring the long-wave, terrestrial radiation. Less uncertainty seems to be involved in this determination, expect for effects associated with the diurnal cycle in cloudiness. By and large, the earth as whole is in radiative equilibrium averaged over a period of several years. In other words, as much energy must be leaving the system in the form of long-wave radiation as is entering in the form of short- wave radiation: Since the average albedo of the earth is on the order of 31%, an amount of solar radiation given by 222 1 235)1)(4/( −≈−=Φ−Φ WmSaRRS ππ (Figure 1.) Fig1. Diagram showing the shadow area of spherical planet Is absorbed in the atmosphere and oceans, and later re- emitted as long-wave terrestrial radiation, where the solar constant S=1368 W/m2.The value of 235 W/m2 is a useful reference number for our later studies of the radiational energy available for the atmospheric and oceanic energetic. Assuming that there is a balance between the amount of solar energy received and the amount of energy emitted by the earth as whole and that the earth radiates as a earth from the Stefan–Boltzman law so that 24 /235 mWTe =σ The relationship between energy flux and surface temperature is given as: 4Tσ=Φ Where Φ =energy flux (W/m2) σ =the Stefan-Boltzman constant equal to 5.67 10-8(W/m2 /K4) T=temperature in degrees Kelvin. For the solar-earth system, the amount of energy flux absorbed and radiated by the earth ( EΦ ) is equal to (1-a) sΦ .Thus, the earth’s average surface temperature is calculated as: 4 1 4 1 )1( )( Φ− = Φ = σσ sE aT (1) Note that temperature represents an average surface temperature-one that we expect if the solar energy flux were distributed equally over all parts of the globe. This, of course, is not the case, but it gives us a point of departure for studying the global warming phenomenon. By substituting values of a=0.313 and sΦ =342W/m 2, we can calculate the value of the earth’s surface temperature to be approximately 254K (or -19˚C) III. GREENHOUSE ZERO-DIMENSIONAL MODEL WITH CO2 ACCUMULATION AND REDUCTION IN EMISSION DUE TO RENEWABLE ENERGY USE AND NEW TECHNOLOGIES This model is written in STELLA software language and is presented in Figure 2. [7, 8] Model also includes the values for each of parameters shown below; however, the parameters are modified in the model so that our time units are in years. ΦS=342 W/m 2, A=518.15J/m2. E = 491.31 J/m2. fa = 0.901, fb = 0.285, Ra = 0.626, a = 0.313, te = 0.207. This model includes a stock of CO2 in the atmosphere [8]. This stock is in units of parts per million (ppm) and is initially set 371.1 ppm (present value in year 2005). The inflow is set as positive 1.3ppm/year (i.e., an increase in CO2 concentrations of 1.3ppm annually). Fig 2. Greenhouse zero-dimensional model with CO2 reduction in emission due to renewable energy use and new technology options Solar Flux Atmosphere Earth Sun2Atm Sun2Earth Earth2Atm Earth2Space Atm2Earth Thermal Atm2Space albedof b fb ~ f a te te ~ Ra ~ Ra Temperature SBConstant Earth2Atm Earth2Space CO2 in the Atmosphere emitt ing into atmosphere remov ing f rom atmosphere degree of reduction Lev el of Energy consumption f rom f ossil f uels f ossil energy consumption growth f ossil energy consumption growth rate CO2 emissions per unit of energy consumption Lev el of energy consumption f rom renewable sources Renewable energy consumption growth Renewable energy consumtion growth rate A. Greenhouse Zero-Dimensional Model with CO2 Accumulation We will determine the impact an increased level of carbon dioxide on average surface temperatures of the earth. This increase in carbon dioxide is expected to affect two primary parameters in system directly. First, it will affect fa , the fraction of outgoing IR radiation from the earth that is absorbed by the atmosphere. Second, it will affect Ra , the fraction of outgoing IR radiation from the atmosphere that is directed back toward the earth We can add the CO2 component to this model to address the impact of CO2 increasing in earth temperature. To do this, we might envision a stock of CO2 (or other GHGs) in atmosphere that changes over time. The reservoir would impact values of Ra and fa with CO2 in the atmosphere is not straightforward; however, we would expect that as CO2 concentrations increase, our values for Ra and fa would increase as well. We also note that there is some saturation effect, whereby the marginal increase in Ra or fa decreases as CO2 concentrations are increased. Note in this model as well that Ra and fa are nonlinear functions of CO2 (Figure 3.) Fig 3.Functional dependence of Ra and Fa on CO2 concentration in atmosphere fa = the fraction of outgoing radiation from the earth that is absorbed by the atmosphere; Ra =the fraction of atmospheric radiation that is radiated toward and is absorbed by the earth; If CO2 emitting in Atmosphere is constant 1.3ppm over a 50 year period in the simulation the accumulation of CO2 grew linearly and the Earths Surface Temperature will grow for 2oC until year 2055.Many scenarios have been made showing a warming of the Earth by between 1.5 and 4.5 oC until the year 2100 [9].The accumulation of CO2 doesn’t remain constant 371.1ppm like the emitting inflow 1.3ppm but accumulation grew linearly from 377.1 ppm in year 2005 to 440 ppm in the year 2055. If CO2 accumulation of CO2 grew linearly (Figure 4.) and the Earths Surface Temperature will grow for 2oC until year 2050 (Figure 5.) The stock (the accumulation of CO2) doesn’t remain constant 375pm like the emitting inflow 1.3ppm but accumulation grew linearly from 377.1 ppm in year 2005 to 440 ppm in the year 205 Fig 4. Carbon dioxide concentration linear growth rate during the next 50 years year Period Fig 5. Temperature of Earth Surface during next 50 years B. greenhouse zero-dimensional model with CO2 reduction in emission due to renewable energy use and new technologies In this model we made the degree of reduction variable due to the renewable energy use, new technology options for CO2 reduction and policy initiatives. The initial value for Total World Energy Consumption (Fossil, Renewable and Nuclear) in the year 2005, in figure And The World Energy Consumption growth (Fossil and Renewable) from year 1995 to 2005 is presented in figure 6. Fig 6. Total World Energy Consumption (Fossil, Renewable and Nuclear) in the year 2005 0.605 0.61 0.615 0.62 0.625 0.63 0.635 0.64 0.645 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 CO2(ppm) Ra 0.861 0.876 0.891 0.906 0.921 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 CO2(ppm) fa 6:00 PM Fri, Apr 18, 2008 2005.00 2015.00 2025.00 2035.00 2045.00 2055.00 Years 377 411 445 1: CO2 1 1 1 1 1 p m 2005.00 2015.00 2025.00 2035.00 2045.00 2055.00 287.91 288.96 290.00 1: Temperature 1 1 1 1 1 Total World Energy Consumption(Quad) Total fossil fuels; 399,5663; 87% Total renewable; 33,283; 7% Nuclear; 27,473; 6% Total fossil fuels Total renewable Nuclear Fig 7. The World Energy Consumption growth (Fossil and Renewable) from year 1995 to 2005 C. Options for Reducing CO2 In this model we made the degree of reduction variable due to the renewable energy use, new technology options for CO2 reduction and policy initiatives. The possible options for reducing CO2 emissions [10, 11] include the following: • Demand-side conservation and efficiency improvements, including less space heating and better insulation, less air conditioning, fluorescent lighting, more energy-efficient appliances, process modification in industry, and, very importantly, more fuel-efficient automobiles. Such measures may even incur a negative cost ( i.e., consumer savings by using less energy) or at least a rapid payback period for the investment in energy-saving devices. • Supply-side efficiency measures. Here we mean primarily increasing the efficiency of coal fired power plants. Coal gasification combined –cycle power plants have a thermal efficiency in the 45-50% range, compared with single-cycle pulverized-coal plants in the 35-40% range. However, coal gasification power plants are more expensive than single-cycle plants. • Capture of CO2 from the flue gas of power plants and sequestration in terrestrial or deep ocean reservoirs. This is an expensive option, and it will be exercised only if governments mandate or subsidize it. • Utilization of the captured CO2.The utilization for enhanced oil and natural gas recovery is economically attractive: the utilization of CO2 as a raw material for the production of some fuels and chemical requires extra energy input and does not appear to be economical. • Shift to no fossil energy sources. The choices here are agonizing, because the largest impact could be made by shifting to nuclear electricity and hydroelectricity, both presently very unpopular and fraught with environmental and health concerns. The shift to solar, wind, geothermal, and ocean energy are popular, but because of their limited availability and intermittency and because of their larger cost compared to fossil energy, a substantial shift to these energy sources can not be expected in the future. • Greater use of biomass, especially wood. The use of biomass is reabsorbed in the growth of the next generation of vegetation [12] . • A forestation without using he trees for 100-200 years, during which period the CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere will decline because of exhaustion of fossil fuel resources and shift to no fossil energy sources • Stopping slash and burning practices of forests, especially tropical forests [13] , which are prodigious absorbents of CO2, and the burning of which releases CO2. The effect of police and technological options for reducing CO2 emission during next 50 years are presented in Figure 8, for reducing the consumption of fossil fuels, for increasing the level of renewable energy consumption in Britain Quadrillion Units of Energy (Q), Figure 9. Fig 8. Level of Total Energy Consumption from Fossil Fuels the line (2) is shown the high increasing the fossil energy consumption growth at the present rate of about 2.54% and line (1) is shown the degrease in total consumption growth for fossil fuels during the next 50 years : Fig 9. Total level of renewable energy consumption forecast (Q), during the next 50 year Line (1) is shown the high level of increasing the level of renewable energy consumption and (2) is shown increasing for present growth rate of 3.5% per year for renewable e Fossil and Renewable Energy consumtion growth from 1995 to 2005 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 year Q u a d ri li o n B tu (Q ) Fossil Renewable 2005.00 2015.00 2025.00 2035.00 2045.00 2055.00 400 900 1400 Lev el of Energy consumption f rom f ossil f uels: 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 Q 2005.00 2015.00 2025.00 2035.00 2045.00 2055.00 0.00 250.00 500.00 Lev el of energy consumption f rom renewable sources: 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 Q Fig 10. CO2 accumulation per year in the model with 0%(1), 20%(2), 50%(3), 80%(4) degree of reduction rate in CO2 emissions per unit of energy and 0% reduction rate with increase the global fossil consumption growth (5) during next 50 year Fig 11. Temperature of the Earth surface in the model with 0% (1), 20% (2),50% (3) and 80% (4) degree of reduction rate in CO2 emission and (5) with 0% reduction rate with increase the global fossil consumption growth during next 50 years What is important to recognize in this model is that the reduction rate of CO2 emission for 20% and 50% does not lead to a reduction in the CO2 accumulation in atmosphere (we have only slowing of the rate of growth in CO2) (Figure 10 ). This means that the global temperature would not decline but only slower its rate of increase (Figure 11). Only if we will simulate a high rate of reducing of CO2 emissions associated with a unit of energy production activity over a 50 year period from 2005 to 2055, we will stabilize the accumulation of CO2 in atmosphere on the constant value and the Earth’s surface temperature until the year 2055 will slightly decrease until the constantan value T=288.26K (Figure 11). This aggressive rate of CO2 reduction per unit of fossil energy consumption (ppm/Q) for about 80% will be achieved if inflow oriented policies focusing on transitioning away from a fossil fuelled energy production and use in alternative renewable energy sources including solar energy in these variety forms as biomass, wind, hydro energy and in new technological innovation in energy production and consumption etc IV. ERROR ANALYZE OF MODEL A. Uncertainty in predictions [14] of the average Earth surface temperature and in total CO2 accumulation in atmosphere Fig. 12-15 shows sensitive analysis for average temperature of the Earth surface and CO2 accumulation in atmosphere in the model with 80% degree of reduction rate in CO2 emission and with uncertainty on surface albedo (a=0.3022-0.31) [15] solar variability (Φs=342.25W/m 2 ± 0.45 W/m2) [16, 17] and CO2 Emission factor (+1.2%) [18, 19] (line1-4) and estimated mean (line 5). The deviation of average temperature of the Earth surface from the estimated mean value for these four scenarios in 2055 ranges from -0.48K to +0.60K with standard deviation of 0.45K and the deviation of the CO2 accumulation ranges from -1.285 ppm to +1.265 ppm with standard deviation of 1.09 ppm (see Table 1). The mean temperature change for these scenarios in case of 80% degree of CO2 reduction rate is 1.12K to 2.12 K at year 2055 (The IPCC SAR results for next 70 year are 1.1 to 3.1K with standard deviation of 0.4K) [20] Fig. 12. Sensitive analysis for average temperature of the Earth surface in the model with 80% degree of reduction rate in CO2 emission and with uncertainty on surface albedo, solar variability and CO2 Emission factor Fig 13. Deviation from mean value for average temperature of the Earth surface in the model with 80% degree of reduction rate in CO2 emission and with uncertainty on surface albedo, solar variability and CO2 Emission factor 2005.00 2017.50 2030.00 2042.50 2055.00 0 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 377 431 485 CO2 in the Atmosphere: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 ppm 2005.00 2017.50 2030.00 2042.50 2055.000.00 12.50 25.00 37.50 50.00 287.90 289.20 290.50 Temperature: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 K Sensit ive analysis f o r Temp erat ure o f t he Eart h surf ace in t he mod el wit h 8 0 % d eg ree o f red uct io n rat e in C O2 emission 2 8 7 . 7 5 2 8 8 2 8 8 . 2 5 2 8 8 . 5 2 8 8 . 7 5 2 8 9 2 8 9 . 2 5 2 8 9 . 5 2 8 9 . 7 5 2 9 0 2 9 0 . 2 5 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 y e a r K 1 2 3 4 5 Deviation From Mean Value (K) - 0 . 5 - 0 . 4 - 0 . 3 - 0 . 2 - 0 . 1 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 0 . 5 0 . 6 2005 2010 2015 20 20 2 025 2 030 2035 2040 20 45 20 50 2 055 Ye ar 1 2 3 4 5 B. Uncertainty in predictions of the total CO2 accumulation in atmosphere Fig. 14. Sensitive analysis for CO2 accumulation in atmosphere in the model with 80% degree of reduction rate in CO2 emission and with uncertainty on surface albedo, solar variability and CO2 Emission factorand Fig. 15. Deviation from the mean value for CO2 accumulation in atmosphere in the model with 80% degree of reduction rate in CO2 emission and with uncertainty on surface albedo, solar variability and CO2 Emission factor Uncertainty in predictions of the CO2 accumulation and average temperature of the Earth surface in year 2055 in the model with 0%(1), 20%(2), 50%(3), 80%(4) degree of reduction rate in CO2 emissions per unit of energy)(ppm) Are presented on table 1 Table 1. Uncertainty in predictions of the CO2 accumulation and average temperature of the Earth surface in year 2055 in the model with 0%(1), 20%(2), 50%(3), 80%(4) degree of reduction rate in CO2 emissions per unit of energy)(ppm) uncertainities Uncertainty in predictions of the CO2 accumulation in year 2055 in the model with 0%(1), 20%(2), 50%(3), 80%(4) degree of reduction rate in CO2 emissions per unit of energy)(ppm) Uncertainty in predictions of the Temperature of the Earth surface in year 2055 in the model with 0%(1), 20%(2), 50%(3), 80%(4) degree of reduction rate in CO2 emissions per unit of energy)(K) Degree of reduction Degree of reduction 0% 20% 50% 80% 0% 20% 50% 80% MD (Main Deviation) 1.43 1.29 1.07 0.85 0.33 0.32 0.32 0.30 s 2 (Variance)(ppm2,K2) 3.43 2.77 1.90 1.20 0.23 0.22 0.22 0.20 σ (Standart deviation) 1.85 1.66 1.38 1.09 0.48 0.47 0.47 0.45 σm (Standard Deviation of mean) 0.93 1.66 0.69 0.55 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.23 V. CONCLUSION. What is important to recognize in this model is that the reduction rate of CO2 emission for 20% and 50% does not lead to a reduction in the CO2 accumulation in atmosphere (we have only slowing of the rate of growth in CO2). This means that the global temperature would not decline but only slower its rate of increase. Only if we will simulate a high rate of reducing of CO2 emissions associated with a unit of energy production activity over a 50 year period from 2005 to 2055, we will stabilize the accumulation of CO2 in atmosphere on the constant value 413.3 ppm and the Earth’s surface temperature until the year 2055 will slightly decrease until the constantan value T=288.8K. This aggressive rate of CO2 reduction per unit of fossil energy consumption (ppm/Q) for about 80% will be achieved if inflow oriented policies focusing on transitioning away from a fossil fueled energy production and use in alternative renewable energy sources including solar energy in these variety forms as biomass, wind, hydro energy and in new technological innovation in energy production and consumption etc. The deviation of average temperature of the Earth surface from the estimated mean value for these scenarios in 2055 ranges from -0.48K to +0.60K with standard deviation of 0.45K and the deviation of the CO2 accumulation ranges from -1.285 ppm to +1.265 ppm with standard deviation of 1.09 ppm The mean temperature change for these scenarios in case of 80% degree of CO2 reduction rate is 1.12K to 2.12 K at year 2055 (The IPCC SAR results for next 70 year are 1.1 to 3.1K with standard deviation of 0.4K) VI. REFERENCES [1] Deaton, M.L and Winebrake, J.J, Dynamic Modelling of Environmental Systems, ©2000 Springer Science+ Business Media, Inc. [2] Kraljic , M.A.(ed.). 1992 . The Greenhouse Effect. New York : H.W. Wilson. [3] IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007. available at: http://www.ipcc.ch [4] The IPPC Directive, The European Commission, 1996. See also:http://www.ec.europa.eu/environment/ipcc/index.htm . [5] NAST(National Assessment Synthesis Team), 2000, Climate Change Impacts on the United States: The Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change, Overview Report, U. S. Global Change Research Program, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 154pp. available at: http://www.nacc.usgcrp.gov [6] Klaassen, G., A. Miketa, K., Riahi and L. Schrattenholzer (2002), Targeting technological progress towards sustainable development', Energy and Environment 13 (4/5),553-78.. [7] STELLA. Copyright©1985-2009 by isee systems, inc. www.iseesystems.com . [8] Robinson, A. W. Modelling Dynamic Climate Systems ( Springer- Verlag, New York 2001). [9] Naturvetenskapliga Forsknigsradet, NFR:s arsbook(1996), Jordens Klimat, pp. 9-17. Swedish Science Press, Uppsala [10] Franchi, J.R, Energy In The 21 st Century. Copyright ©2005 by World Scientific Publishing Co.Pte.Ltd. [11] Fay, J. A. (ed.) Energy and Environment (New York Oxford University Press Copyright © 2002 M.I.T). [12] Zidanšek, A.; Blinc, R.; Jeglič,A.; Kabashi,S; Bekteshi, S.; Šlaus, I. Climate changes, biofuels and the sustainable future. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, doi: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2008. [13] Komor, P and Bazilian, M. 2005.Renewable Energy Police Goals, Sensit ive analysis f or C O2 accumulat io n p er year in t he mod el wit h 8 0 % d egree o f red uct ion rat e in C O2 emissions per unit o f energy 3 7 7 . 1 3 7 9 . 1 3 8 1. 1 3 8 3 . 1 3 8 5 . 1 3 8 7 . 1 3 8 9 . 1 3 9 1. 1 3 9 3 . 1 3 9 5 . 1 3 9 7 . 1 3 9 9 . 1 4 0 1. 1 4 0 3 . 1 4 0 5 . 1 2 0 0 5 2 0 1 0 2 0 1 5 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 5 2 0 3 0 2 0 3 5 2 0 4 0 2 0 4 5 2 0 5 0 2 0 5 5 y e a r pp m 1 2 3 4 5 Deviation from the Mean value (ppm) - 1. 5 - 1 - 0 . 5 0 0 . 5 1 1. 5 2 0 0 5 2 0 10 2 0 15 2 0 2 0 2 0 2 5 2 0 3 0 2 0 3 5 2 0 4 0 2 0 4 5 2 0 5 0 2 0 5 5 y e a r ppm 1 2 3 4 5 Programs And Technologies. In Energy Police. Vol. 33. pp 1873 - 1881. [14] Tailor J.R Introduction to error analysis(2ed, Univ. Sci. Books, 1997). [15] D.A.Stainforth, et al. Uncertainty in predictions of the climate response to rising levels of greenhouse gases. Nature. Vol. 433.2005. [16] EIA. Uncertainty in Emission Estimates(March 2005) [17] Clilverd et al., Predicting Solar activity level in 2100.Astronomy and Geophysics 44(5):5.20-5.22. [18] Jirikovic and Damon, 1994. The medieval solar activity maximum. Climatic Change 26:309-316. [19] Hansen et al. ,1998 Surface albedo change due to changes in land use. [20] Katenberg et al., 1996. The Scence of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group I University Press, Cambridg VI. BIOGRAPHIES Skender Kabashi PhD Doctoral studies (finished) at Institute “Jozef Stefan”, Ljubljana, Slovenia. Dissertation thesis: Dynamic Modelling of Climate Change Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Reduction with Renewable Energy In Kosovo. Born, 1963, Polac, Kosovo. Proffesor Asisttant , Faculty of Mathematical and Natural Sciences University of Prishtina, Prishtina, Kosovo. Sadik Bekteshi, PhD Doctoral studies (finished) at Institute “Jozef Stefan”, Ljubljana, Slovenia. Dissertation thesis: Impact Analysis for Integrated Assessments of Climate Energy Models. Born 1960, Dumnica, Kosovo. Proffesor Asisttant , Faculty of Mathematical and Natural Sciences University of Prishtina, Prishtina, Kosovo. Dr.Sc.Skender Ahmetaj, PhD. In Physics. Born, 1956, Radisheve, Kosovo. Assistant professor, Faculty of Mathematical and Natural Sciences University of Prishtina , Prishtina, Kosovo. Gazmend Kabashi, Mr. Sc. Electro engineer. Born, 1969, Skenderaj, Kosovo. Faculty of Electric Engineering and Computer Sciences, University of Prishtina, Prishtina, Kosovo. Albert Jonuzi Mr. Sc candidate in physics Researcher Assistant Born 1982 Malisheve Faculty of Mathematical and Natural Sciences University of Prishtina, Prishtina, Kosovo