85% of British power can be via renewables by 2030, says Greenpeace.
Britain could produce more than 80 percent of its electricity from wind, solar and tidal power in fifteen years if the country’s leadership follows guidelines set out in a new report commissioned by Greenpeace.Making the global switch from climate-altering fossil fuels to renewables by 2050 would require an extra $1 trillion (880 billion euros) per year, but the bill will be covered by lower energy costs, a Greenpeace report said Monday.Britain can produce 85% of its power via renewable energy by 2030 provided it undergoes significant changes in energy production and use, according to a new study by Greenpeace.
Renewable energies are a hot topic right now: From discussions by Republican and Democratic candidates in their presidential campaigns to international interest leading up to the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris, France later this year, everyone is talking about renewable energies.Earlier this year, the energy consulting firm Meister noted that, of all the forecasts made by government agencies, non-profits, and industry investors, the group that most correctly predicted the rapid rise of clean power was Greenpeace.
The Karoo town is home to a coalition of municipal, government and civil society partners planning a possible 100% renewable energy future for this remote region, showing the way forward for the rest of the country. On top of some 600 billion euros per year already earmarked by governments and businesses for investment in renewables, the extra funding would be needed to build enough green energy generators to replace coal-, oil- and gas-fired power stations, it said. Between wind, geothermal, tidal and solar energies there are lots of different choices for both businesses and homeowners alike, ranging from relatively inexpensive home projects to massive full-scale operations. The investment would be more than offset by annual savings of nearly $1.1 trillion in fuel costs, said the report entitled “Energy (R)evolution”, compiled by experts from Greenpeace and the German Aerospace Centre.
It foresees wind leaping from today’s level of 13 gigawatts (GW) of wind farms in operation – enough to power around 10 million homes – to a level of 77GW in 2030, with solar rising from just more than 5GW to 28GW. Here in Maryland, we are lucky to have access to many different kinds of renewable energy sources and strive to use these to the best of our abilities. In the beginning, the report, which mines market research to predict clean energy industry trends, may have read to an outsider like an activists’ wishful dreaming. We could proceed with business as usual: a low-growth, centralised energy model highly dependent on fossil fuels in which citizens suffer the double burden of rising energy costs in tandem with a deteriorating environment: air pollution, water contamination from coal mining and climate change in a vulnerable and inequitable economy — perhaps also crippled with enormous debt and mounting lethal waste from an expensive and unnecessary nuclear programme.
Wind turbines, for example, run on a “free” energy source — the wind, while a power station has to be constantly refuelled with expensive coal or gas. “Because renewables don’t require fuel, the savings… (until 2050) are $1.07 trillion per year, so more than meet the costs of the required investment,” said a Greenpeace statement. However, the renewables drive would need to be accompanied by a 60% reduction in demand for domestic heating through a home insulation programme and other initiatives, according to the report by energy system analysts, Demand Energy Equality. “For a long time the government and the fossil fuel industry have peddled the argument that renewables can’t keep the lights on if the wind’s not blowing. This hasn’t been based on evidence, but out of date instincts seemingly from staring out the window to see how windy it is,” said Doug Parr, chief scientist at Greenpeace. “For the first time, we have the evidence showing it is possible to keep the power system working and decarbonise the electricity system. Right now, solar energy tends to be the easiest and least expensive to install and maintain and can be added to homes, businesses, outdoor areas and more. The report highlighted that as many as 9.7 million people could have jobs in the solar power industry by 2030 — more than 10 times as many as today and equivalent to the current number of jobs in the coal sector.
We need to go for renewable energy with the help of new smart technology and reducing demand for power too. “It is hugely ambitious but definitely doable, and it will take the same kind of enthusiasm and financial support from government, normally the sole preserve of the nuclear and fossil fuel industries.” The plan, which would require a major change in government policies, envisages fossil fuels playing a role via combined gas-fired heat and power projects. And, given his track record, perhaps we should take the conclusion seriously—the man who most accurately predicted our current clean power boom back in 2005 says we could see 100 percent clean energy by midcentury. This will be cheaper; reduce the direct effects of fossil fuels on the environment and water supply; help avert dangerous climate change; help decentralise our economy for sustainable as well as equitable growth and will keep it in step with the rapidly advancing global technological revolution in renewable energy.
The researchers based their forecasts on UN estimations for economic development and population growth, and assumed the world’s energy system would be completely “decarbonised” over the next 35 years. The takeaway is right there in its opening salvo: “100 percent renewable energy for all is achievable by 2050, and is the only way to ensure the world does not descend into catastrophic climate change.” Scientists say that the best way to ensure we don’t see mass destabilization is to limit global warming to 2˚Celsius, which means we can only burn 1,000 more gigatons of carbon before we tip the scales. “We did a very detailed market analysis,” Teske told me. “It is not just technically and economically possible to make the transition to 100 percent renewables within one generation, it is a must-do to save our climate.” There are two primary components of the latest report: a drawing down of coal, oil, and gas, and a buildup of renewable technologies. The UK government meanwhile sealed a deal with China on Monday guaranteeing £2 billion investment in the controversial Hinkley Point C nuclear power station. They also considered rising energy demand in fast-growing Africa and Asia, offset by lower demand in rich nations resulting in a peak of global demand by about 2020.
In order to create the electric field necessary to allow for electricity to flow, one silicon section is given a positive electric charge while the other is given a negative electric charge. Then, as coal is phased out, larger-scale clean power projects like offshore wind and concentrated solar power (CSP)—power plant-sized solar technology that focuses the sun’s rays on a single generator to make steam—gain prominence, too.
The free electron will be pushed out of the silicon junction and into metal conductive plates, found on the side of the cell, where they are then transferred to wires. The new analysis shows a low-carbon energy sector is possible but only if our relationship with energy changes at the national, household and personal level. At this point, the electricity will flow through the wires and usually into an inverter, which turns the Direct Current (DC) into an Alternating Current (AC). The cost of the transformation programme is not spelled out, but the Greenpeace report notes that a similar study done in 2011 by Poyry consultants for the parliamentary climate change committee produced a price tag of between £126bn and £227bn to achieve 65% renewable penetration by 2030.
Not only are renewable energy options more labour-intensive than using the energy of fossils and nuclear, the jobs are typically much better — safer, healthier and better paid than in the dirty and often dangerous fossil fuel sector. While solar panels and arrays, which are a series of connected solar panels and photovoltaic modules do produce quality electricity, they can only do so when hit by light. Onshore wind is already the cheapest power generation technology in many places,” he said. “And if you own a roof, you can probably afford solar.” He points to developments like the plunging cost of solar panels, the rising popularity of home PV systems, and Tesla’s newly announced battery storage systems, and that we’re on the cusp of seeing a home solar arms race that will propel the global industry. “Solar PV is far cheaper than diesel generators, so that creates a natural market,” he added. South Africans envy the high growth rates of “African tigers” such as Ethiopia, Rwanda and Mozambique — while not noticing that these countries are resolute about following “green growth” paths. The report also reminds us that while renewable energy subsidies are a common political scapegoat, fossil fuels receive roughly twice the amount, at $550 billion annually.
Ethiopia, with close to 10% annual growth in 2013-14, is determined to avoid the pitfalls of what it calls the conventional economic path — increased emissions, depleted resources, being locked into “outdated technologies” and vulnerability to increasingly volatile fossil fuel energy prices. The wind lobby group RenewableUK said there was no reason why more wind farms should not be built. “There is no technical or logistical barrier to the UK installing up to 55GW by 2030, but it needs political will – a supportive policy framework from government, especially sufficient financial support allocated in the offshore wind pot,” said a spokesman.
One way to get around this is to have the solar array connected to batteries that allow for the storage of excess electricity, which in turn can be used when the array is not creating any electricity. The big difference is that the energy department’s forecasts are based on what it believes is feasible under certain circumstances by 2050, rather than the 2030 time period used by Greenpeace. Still, he’s under no illusions that realizing the blueprint will be anything but a radical undertaking. “If we could continue the growth of renewables as we have in the past 10 years, we are on the road to 50-60 percent anyway,” Teske said. “I’m very confident that with the current dynamics of the market. In 2007, the state goal mandated a goal of generating at least 1,250 megawatts of electricity through renewable resources, which state officials expect to meet by the end of this year.
Equally, carbon capture technology – where carbon dioxide is stored underground as soon as it is emitted – has been excluded as it is deemed an unproven method. The state government has also added many incentives and benefits for homeowners and businesses looking to change to solar and to help bring in solar companies.
In fact, Maryland currently has more than 177 solar companies at work, which employ more than 3,000 people, and that number is growing steadily every year. •The Clean Energy Production Tax Credit, which allows homeowners to claim a credit on their state income tax return. It’s still uncertain whether some of the technologies, like CSP in particular, are economical, and while promising, are not as established as wind or conventional solar. Climate change brings present and future risks, but SA is already facing high levels of social and political risk, and human suffering associated with crippling levels of unemployment. Maryland will give homeowners up to $500 toward installation of a solar hot water heater and up to $1,000 for photovoltaic panels, provided the products meet certain specifications.
And that’s a social problem.” Teske thinks the answer lies with pressuring the polluting corporations—he would like to see carbon-intensive companies pivot their business models altogether. “The fossil fuel companies have a social responsibility to see the writing on the wall, and shift their business model towards renewables—and they have 15-20 years. In Australia, for example, the union representing coal miners supports new opposition Labour Party targets for 50% renewable energy, on condition provision is made for reskilling mine workers. For a more comprehensive list of current incentives and exemptions, an excellent resource is the Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency, run by North Carolina State University. They can be directly accessed by communities and households, avoiding or reducing cash payments to distant suppliers and providing a platform for skills development and employment. But there’s another sign that the global energy revolution is already well underway, Teske says, and that’s because he’s “getting requests from developing countries—countries with no political ideology behind electricity generation,” he said.
KENYA may get nearly half its power from solar energy by next year and will host Africa’s largest wind farm, while also getting significant energy from geothermal sources. Developing countries are neutral, they just want electricity, and they don’t care where it comes from—they just want affordable power.” These days, that often means rooftop solar, and they’re spreading fast. The bulk of that technology is more or less ready, if we are; a clean-powered planet would be a monumental engineering and political task, but it’s not impossible. Photovoltaics and large-scale wind are emerging as the cheapest new energy options for SA, without the financial, waste and security risks of nuclear energy.
Certainly: SA’s resources far exceed expected needs and meeting base-load demand is a requirement of the entire generation fleet and the management of the system; it is not dependent on a particular type of plant or fuel. What is needed now is a decisive commitment to strong and steady growth of local renewable industries, without diverting a major share of available finance to massive infrastructure — coal or nuclear — that undermines renewable energy development.