Clean costs

Clean energy is the obvious choice for a planet faced with global warming. But going clean comes with a price – a price that can be costly.

Because electricity and heat account for 41 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions, curbing climate change will require satisfying much of that demand with renewables rather than fossil fuels. But solar and wind come with their own up-front carbon costs. Photovoltaics require much more aluminum—for panel frames and other uses—than other technologies do, according to a 2011 study at Leiden University in the Netherlands.

Alloys for wind turbines demand lots of nickel. Those metals are carbon culprits because they are produced in large amounts by high-energy extracting and refining processes.

The demand for metals, and their already significant carbon footprint, may grow with a switch to green energy. Given all the resources needed for new infrastructure, an analysis last year found that large solar installations take one to seven years to “break even” with coal power on the greenhouse scorecard. Wind farms take from less than one year up to 12 years. All the more reason to make the switch sooner than later??

Storing RE not always sensible

Renewable energy holds the promise of reducing carbon dioxide emissions. But there are times when solar and wind farms generate more electricity than is needed by consumers. Storing that surplus energy in batteries for later use seems like an obvious solution, but a new study from Stanford University suggests that might not always be the case. The costs involved in terms of energy are too high.

Grid-scale batteries make sense for storing surplus solar energy, but not for wind they found. The study, which is supported by GCEP, is published in the online edition of the journal Energy and Environmental Science.

The Stanford team looked at several emerging technologies, including five battery types -- lead-acid, lithium-ion, sodium-sulfur, vanadium-redox and zinc-bromine. Batteries with high energetic cost consume more fossil fuels and therefore release more carbon dioxide over their lifetime. If a battery's energetic cost is too high, its overall contribution to global warming could negate the environmental benefits of the wind or solar farm it was supposed to support.

The researchers compared the energetic cost of curtailing solar and wind power, versus the energetic cost of grid-scale storage. Their calculations were based on a formula known as "energy return on investment" -- the amount of energy produced by a technology, divided by the amount of energy it takes to build and maintain it.

Using that formula, the researchers found that the amount of energy required to create a solar farm is comparable to the energy used to build each of the five battery technologies. The results were quite different for wind farms. The scientists found that curtailing wind power reduces the energy return on investment by 10 percent. But storing surplus wind-generated electricity in batteries results in even greater reductions -- from about 20 percent for lithium-ion batteries to more than 50 percent for lead-acid.

As the team notes, it is important for society to be energy-smart about implementing new technologies.  When plunging into new technologies, policymakers and investors need to consider the energetic cost as well as the financial cost of new technologies.

Renewables catching up with gas: IEA

Wind and solar power keep getting cheaper, and that’s encouraging their adoption even as government subsidies falter, a new report from the International Energy Agency concludes. In just a few years, more power will come from renewables than from natural gas, the report said.

The IEA notes that wind is now competitive with fossil fuels in places such as Brazil and New Zealand. Solar competes with fossil fuels for peak electricity production. But here’s some context: while renewable energy use is growing, so is the use of coal, which means that so far, carbon dioxide emissions continue to rise.

Coal is attractive because it’s cheap, and because it produces electricity on demand—it’s not subject to the time of day or the weather. Can the balance shift? For that utilities need to demonstrate technological solutions to the intermittency of renewable energy. Development of base load sources of renewable power like hydropower and geothermal can also help.

Renewable electricity generation increased strongly worldwide in 2012, and deployment is occurring in a greater number of markets. However, the story of renewable energy development is becoming more complex. Short-term indicators in some regions of the globe have pointed to increased challenges. Despite remaining high, global new investment in renewable energy fell in 2012. Policy uncertainties, economic challenges, incentive reductions and competition from other energy sources clouded the investment outlook for some markets. Some countries and regions have faced difficulties in integrating variable renewables in their power grids. The renewable manufacturing industry, particularly solar and wind, entered a deeper period of restructuring and consolidation. 

Nevertheless, despite economic, policy and industry turbulence, the underlying fundamentals for renewable deployment remain robust. Even with challenges in some countries, more positive developments elsewhere continue to drive global growth. Competitive opportunities for renewables are emerging across traditional and new markets. While OECD countries remain a driver of renewable power development, non-OECD countries are increasingly accounting for overall growth. 

The Medium-Term Renewable Energy Market Report 2013 assesses market trends for the renewable electricity, biofuels for transport and renewable heat sectors.

Can do, but will do??

Mark Jacobson of Stanford University has been a strong proponent of renewable energy. In 2009 he showed how the world could get all its energy from wind, solar and water. He calculated just how many hydroelectric dams, wave-energy systems, wind turbines, solar power plants and rooftop photovoltaic installations the world would need to run itself completely on renewable energy.

This time Jacobson has showed in much finer detail how New York State’s residential, transportation, industrial, and heating and cooling sectors could all be powered by wind, water and sun, or “WWS,” as he calls it. His mix: 40 percent offshore wind (12,700 turbines), 10 percent onshore wind (4,020 turbines), 10 percent concentrated solar panels (387 power plants), 10 percent photovoltaic cells (828 facilities), 6 percent residential solar (five million rooftops), 12 percent government and commercial solar (500,000 rooftops), 5 percent geothermal (36 plants), 5.5 percent hydroelectric (6.6 large facilities), 1 percent tidal energy (2,600 turbines) and 0.5 percent wave energy (1,910 devices).

In the process, New York would reduce power demand by 37 percent, largely because the new energy sources are more efficient than the old ones. To the old doubts about intermittency of renewables, he believes that if you get the [power] transmission grid right you don’t need a whole lot of storage. By combining wind and solar and geothermal and hydroelectric, you can match the power demand. And if you oversize the grid, when you’re producing extra electricity you use it to produce hydrogen [for fuel-cell vehicles and ships as well as some district heating and industrial processes]. You can also spread the peak demand by giving financial incentives!

There may be any number of possibilities, but does that mean there are takers? Especially in a world comfortable with burning fossil fuels!

Good show by clean energy

According to RenewableEnergyWorld’s Clean Energy Trends 2013 report, the fundamental global market drivers for clean technology remain largely intact. The report found that lower prices for many clean-tech goods and services, combined with a renewed focus on scalable projects, resulted once again in record annual solar, wind, and biofuels deployment. Against this continued expansion, however, combined global revenue for solar PV, wind power, and biofuels expanded just one percent, from $246.1 billion in 2011 to $248.7 billion in 2012. This marginal growth was one of the many consequences of rapidly declining solar PV prices.

 
Some of the report’s key findings include: 

• Global wind capacity additions totaled 44.7 GW (gigawatts) in 2012, a record year led by more than 13 GW added in both China and the U.S., and an additional 12.4 GW of new capacity in Europe.
• Solar photovoltaics (including modules, system components, and installation) decreased from a record $91.6 billion in 2011 to $79.7 billion in 2012 as continued growth in annual capacity additions was not enough to offset falling PV prices.
• Together, these three sectors are projected to continue to grow over the next decade, nearly doubling from $248.7 billion in 2012 to $426.1 billion in 2022. 

·     In 2012, newly installed solar PV accounted for 37 percent of all added capacity, followed by wind with a 26.5 percent share, and gas at 23 percent.

·     Generating capacity is, of course, not the same as actual generation. But even in this regard, clean energy sources have moved past their days as rounding errors and are playing a significant role in meeting electricity demand in a number of global markets. Wind energy in Denmark blew past a 30 percent share of national electricity use in 2012, and an official target is in place to generate half of the nation’s power from wind by 2020. In Germany, clean energy already accounts for 25 percent of energy production — led by wind (9.2 percent), biomass (5.7 percent), and solar (5.3 percent) — and the country is aiming for 35 percent from renewables by 2020.

Saudi sets big renewable goals

Saudi Arabia sits upon the world’s second-largest oil reserves, but in recent years, Saudi Arabia has begun taken advantage of the abundant sun and wind it enjoys by developing several major renewable energy projects. According to a new white paper published this week, Saudi Arabia will seek to develop 23.9 GW of renewable energy by 2020 and 54.1 GW by 2032, making it one of the biggest renewable energy producers in the world.

The goals outlined in the new Saudi white paper are some of the most ambitious renewable energy targets set by any nation. Of the 54 GW of renewable energy the kingdom will develop by 2032, 41 GW will be solar power, and the other 13 GW will be powered by wind energy, geothermal and waste-to-energy power.

The news comes just months after Saudi officials announced plans for the country to transition to 100-percent renewable energy in coming decades. At present, the country is powered almost entirely by fossil fuels — two-thirds oil and one-third natural gas. Last spring, the country announced plans to invest over $100 billion to develop 41 gigawatts of solar electricity by 2032. The new roadmap significantly eclipses that figure, and it shows Saudi Arabia’s commitment to a more sustainable energy future.

SE4All could be the answer

The UN's Sustainable Energy for All initiative, if successful, could make a significant contribution to the efforts to limit climate change to target levels, according to a new analysis. The study, published in Nature Climate Change, showed that reaching the 3 energy-related objectives proposed by the United Nations in their Sustainable Energy for All (SE4All) initiative, launched in 2011, would reduce emissions of greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change and, in combination with other measures, could help keep global temperature rise from exceeding the internationally agreed target level of 2°C.

The SE4All objectives include providing universal access to modern energy, doubling the share of renewable energy globally, and doubling the rate of improvement in energy efficiency -- all by 2030. While the SE4All objectives do not explicitly address climate change, it is clear that sustainable energy is a prerequisite for reducing greenhouse gas emissions: 80% of human carbon dioxide emissions come from the global energy system, including transportation, buildings, industry, and electricity, heat, and fuel production.

But as the team observed, the UN's objectives must be complemented by a global agreement on controlling greenhouse gas emissions. While the UN energy objectives are formulated as global goals, the researchers also note that regional and national actions will be vital to achieving them.

Using a broad range of scenarios, the researchers found that if all the SE4All objectives were met, the likelihood of keeping temperature rise below 2°C would be more than 66%.­ If only the renewable energy goal is met, chances of keeping temperatures below 2°C would range from 40 to 90%, while achieving just the energy efficiency goal would improve the chances to between 60 and 90%. But the researchers warn that the latter result depends strongly on what economic growth is assumed in the future. The researchers note that the likelihood of reaching climate targets within the scenarios depended on a variety of other factors, including future energy demand growth, economic growth, and technological innovation.

The study also found that providing universal energy access by 2030 will not hinder long-term climate goals, thanks to the marked gains in energy efficiency that will result.

Better than coal, oil and nuclear is hydro

After damning the dams, now here comes a research that feels hydro is most sustainable and acceptable environmentally and economically!

Researchers in Italy and the UK have reviewed the economic, social and environmental impact of hydro, coal, oil, gas and nuclear power. Each has its advantages and disadvantages, but of these conventional electricity generation technologies, hydroelectric power wins the race.

Research literature has offered several studies of the economics of power plants but these are commonly based on cash flow considerations whereas sustainability factors, such as environmental and social considerations have moved higher up the agenda when investment in this area of technology is considered.

Writing in the International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, the team explains that as worldwide demand for electricity grows, new power plants must be built. However, the "green" options of solar, wind, tidal and other newer forms of electricity generation simply cannot maintain pace with demand. The team has considered various factors: fuel supply security, environmental impact, public acceptance, volatility of fuel price, risk of severe accident and emergency planning zone (EPZ) consideration -- in assessing each classification of power generation. Where hydroelectric power generation is not possible, nuclear and coal-fired power plants are the next obvious choice, but each has many pros and many cons.

The question is whether we should be looking at lesser of evils or rooting out evil!! Renewable may not be able to match demand on its own but surely a combination could stand taller than the hydro option which has its own environmental fallouts?

Fueling a revolution

Rapid deployment and high learning rates for technology “has produced a virtuous circle that is leading to significant cost declines and is helping fuel a renewable revolution,” according to a new global study of renewable power generation costs in 2012 produced by IRENA, the International Renewable Energy Agency. The agency announced it is establishing its global headquarters in the United Arab Emirates during last week’s Abu Dhabi Sustainability Week.

Additions to global wind power generation capacity totalled 41 gigawatts (GW) in 2011, according to IRENA’s “Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2012: An Overview.” That’s in addition to 30 GW of new solar photovoltaic (PV) electricity generation capacity, 25 GW of hydro power, 6 GW of biomass, 0.5 GW of concentrated solar power (CSP), and 0.1 GW of new geothermal power capacity.

“Renewable technologies are now the most economic solution for new capacity in an increasing number of countries and regions,” IRENA concluded upon analyzing the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) among some 8,000 renewable power projects in its database and related literature. No wonder over 50 percent of all new power plants globally are renewable.

IRENA’s analysts emphasize that while a single global LCOE for the wide variety of renewable energy systems being deployed today offers a general indication of cost trends, attempts to do so entail making numerous substantive, generalized assumptions and somewhat arbitrary choices regarding inputs that can substantially alter results. More generally, “The costs of renewables are very site specific, and resources are distributed unevenly across regions, countries and within a country. There is therefore no single ‘true’ LCOE value for each renewable power generation technology.

Forecasting ongoing declines in equipment costs across the range of renewable energy technology, the report authors go on to focus on the growing share of so-called “soft costs” – those in addition to equipment costs, such as permitting, installation, operations, and maintenance – in the overall cost of deploying renewable power systems, and the need to drive these balance-of-system (BOS) costs lower as rapidly as possible.

Non-equipment costs are also higher in developing countries where transmission lines and roads must be built as part of the project. IRENA report authors see CSP, solar PV, and wind power as having the greatest potential for further cost reductions. Access to affordable financing is another essential factor in the drive towards ongoing renewable energy growth. To this point, access to affordable financing is not yet the norm globally, IRENA report authors find.

Telecom to look at renewables

Diesel prices have nearly tripled in the past twelve years in India, and is expected to increase further with diesel deregulation. One of the direct hits of this will be on the mobile industry which uses diesel to power its towers.

The Indian telecom industry consumed an estimated 3.2 billion liters of diesel in 2011, and the amount could rise to six billion liters by 2020, according to Greenpeace India. Enforcement of new regulation that requires use of renewable energy instead of diesel would save more than 540 million liters of diesel annually and cut about nine million tons of carbon emissions by 2015.

In India, which has about 400,000 base stations, the government has mandated that 50 percent of rural sites be powered by renewables by 2015. The decision comes as the Indian government, which heavily subsidizes diesel, looks to lessen the country’s reliance on foreign oil and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. By 2020 75 percent of rural and 33 percent of urban stations will need to run on alternative energy.

There are about five million cell phone towers worldwide, 640,000 of which aren’t connected to an electrical grid and largely run on diesel power. One study estimated that 75,000 new off-grid towers would be established in 2012 alone.
Today, solar installations with battery backups are more expensive to install upfront, but the yearly operational expenditure is far lower, recouping the investment in about two to four years. The current annual cost to run a diesel generator for a base station is about $14,510 in India, compared with $8,215 for solar with battery backup. By 2020 the annual cost of using diesel is expected to be more than $20,000 whereas the cost of solar and batteries will likely fall to less than $5,500.

Renewable options also become much more viable as the amount of energy needed to power base stations is reduced. Most of the energy is used by the radio to transmit and receive cell-phone signals. On the low end, a tower that runs all the time uses about the same energy annually as an average U.S. household. Many of the off-grid stations, however, use closer to five kW, according to Pike Research, a market research firm that covers global clean-tech markets.

Globally, the focus is on efficiency and low-power components, especially as bandwidth requirements strain networks. Lowering the energy needs of base stations could also help spur the adoption of renewables. If the architecture of mobile networks moves to smaller, more distributed small cells, renewable power could be more attractive in developed and developing countries.

Scaling up renewables the way to beat the unreliability!

Often, the solution is simple. Even as we go chasing complex ways to solve a problem, the simple and often direct method lies ignored. So also with renewable energy where the challenge has been that of intermittency and unreliability of supply. Storage has been the oft quoted solution, and not without its own set of challenges.

Now consider what research from University of Delaware suggests: By 2030, scaled-up green power could meet the demands of a large grid 99.9 percent of the time. Simple, right? Intermittency and unreliability comes in when you dont have enough. So what best than to boost supply through a diverse range of sources?

A mix of offshore and onshore wind, along with contributions from solar power, could provide reliable power flow during all but a handful of days.

Moreover, researchers found that scaling up renewable generation capacity to seemingly excessive levels -- more than three times the needed load, in some instances -- proved more cost-effective than scaling up storage capacity, due to the high systems costs associated with storage technology.

Inefficiency is something that troubles thermal plants.  Power plants burn three times the amount of fuel energy needed to produce their energy output. Over-generation of renewable power would be cost effective even if all excess energy were simply dumped, according to the study. If that excess energy were harnessed -- to offset the costs of heating fuels, for example -- costs could be lowered even further.

If reliability has long haunted renewable sector, the answer lies in spread! By extending enough wind turbines and solar panels over a wide enough area, it is possible to achieve approximate reliability by shifting power from active to passive regions.

Coming to baseload power and using fossil fuel backed plants as backup, the University of Delaware study found a large enough system of renewable energy generators could feasibly fill its own reliability gaps. In our 99.9 percent scenario, they found that, in four years, only five times would you need to bring fossil-fuel plants back online to ensure power supply.

Storage holds the key for meaningful transition

Science Daily reports on a study from the University of Delaware and Delaware Technical Community College suggests that wind and solar could power the grid 99.9% of the time if combined with a certain amount of energy storage and fossil fuel backups for the rare occasion that clean energy alone was not enough.

Using computer modeling, the researchers explored 28 billion combinations of renewables and storage mechanisms, each tested with four years of weather and energy demand data. The results were encouraging, and because the study focused not just on matching supply with demand, but rather achieving the most cost effective solutions, it revealed some rather useful findings. For one, that it is cheaper to over-build generation capacity to a point where there is excess supply on sunny or windy days, and still an adequate direct supply when demand is high but wind or sun are in short supply.

During the hours when there was not enough renewable electricity to meet power needs, the model drew from storage and, on the rare hours with neither renewable electricity or stored power, then fossil fuel. When there was more renewable energy generated than needed, the model would first fill storage, use the remaining to replace natural gas for heating homes and businesses and only after those, let the excess go to waste.

The study used cost estimates for renewables in 2030, that showed wind and solar at roughly half the installation price they are today, with maintenance costs remaining roughly constant. Add energy conservation and sustainable resource use and what have you?!

Efficiency shows US the way

Americans used less energy in 2011 than in the previous year, due mainly to a shift to higher-efficiency energy technologies in the transportation and residential sectors. Meanwhile, less coal was used but more natural gas was consumed according to the most recent energy flow charts released by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

Wind power saw the biggest jump from .92 quadrillion BTU, or quads, in 2010 up to 1.17 quads in 2011. Hydroelectricity also saw an increase going from 2.51 quads in 2010 up to 3.17 quads in 2011. Hydroelectricity jumped significantly in 2011 because 2011 saw large amounts of precipitation in the Western U.S.

The majority of energy use in 2011 was used for electricity generation (39.2 quads), followed by transportation, industrial, commercial and residential consumption. However, energy use in the residential, commercial and transportation sectors decreased while industrial energy use increased if only slightly.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the nation’s solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity now exceeds 3.5 GW. This figure is the result of a new system at the EIA for estimating the lower bound on total installed PV capacity. The figure includes both utility and customer-scale installations. The latter was not captured in previous estimates.

Of this 3.5 GW of installed solar PV, about 30% of it is considered utility-scale solar. The remaining 70% is found in consumer-sited installations, including commercial/industrial (42%) and residential (28%). These data will give researchers the ability to more accurately track small-scale solar grown in the United States. Though, these data will still not capture off-grid PV systems.

UK renews hopes

According to a latest research conducted by alternative energy analysts at GlobalData, UK’s renewable energy installed capacity is expected to match the dominant thermal energy sector by 2025. Aggressive government policies and support are expected to be a key reason for a drastic shift in the UK’s energy mix by 2025.

The report determines that the renewable energy industry is the fastest-growing segment in the UK’s power sector, and is expected to climb significantly from 11,000 MW of installed capacity recorded last year.

The report predicted that, by 2025, cumulative installed capacity of renewable energy will reach up to 79,000 MW, which is just 2,000 MW less than the anticipated capacity of thermal power capacity at that time.

According to the report, the wind energy sector is expected to grow at the fastest pace — from 6,000 MW in 2011, to 53,000 MW in 2025. Solar photovoltaics is also expected to show strong growth — from just 1,000 MW in 2011, to 13,338 MW in 2025. Many hurdles there, but as starters that is good news.

Renewable lies?

Is renewable energy the answer to our energy demand? This is a question we have asked many times, and often the answer is mixed. Like everything else in life, it has its shades of black and white and grey! The latest study just released by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (an organization that exists to study and promote the viability of renewable energy) suggests that it may be possible to get 80% or so of North America’s electric power from renewable sources by 2050. But is that significant? Not really when you focus on the word power, as against energy! An interesting interpretation of the study goes to show how the same study indirectly proves that renewable energy will be a minority player in humanity’s energy portfolio.

The blogger goes on to show how the study suggests that only 13% of our electric energy will come from solar. Distributed solar enthusiasts (who favor photovoltaic solar panels on rooftops) will be further disappointed because half of that 13% will come from water-sucking centralized concentrated solar thermal power plants, many located in desert ecosystems, leaving only about 6% for solar panels on rooftops, of which many will probably not be on rooftops but in centralized power plants, probably displacing ecosystems or crops.

As electricity represents only 40% of the US’ energy needs, if all renewable energy sources are used up for electricity, there won’t be any left for the other 60% of the energy needs. In other words, what the study tells is that only 32% of the total energy needs can be “potentially” renewable.

He goes on into the definition of renewable, where hydro and biofuels fail to qualify while biomass is shown to be more polluting than coal. Removing all these from the renewable bracket would mean lesser energy available for electricity. Read on for more on nuclear and more.

All this brings us back to – what do we do now? Opt for nuclear? Or put the brakes on energy consumption? Is that possible? Or simply wait for a replenishment of energy dense fossil fuels? This would of course mean another mass extinction that leaves behind organic matter to decay over millions of years to produce the fossil fuels for another race??! Write in.

Clean energy is the way

Check out this stark contrast. In the developed west, people are used to mood lighting,microwave ovens and fast-freeze ice makers, allergy-reducing vacuum cleaners to high-speed broadband connected computers in their homes. And now they are realising the environmental costs of such comforts and looking for new alternatives. In sub-Saharan Africa, just 8% of the rural population has access to electricity. About a quarter of the world's population, particularly those in rural parts of the developing world do not have access to electricity in their homes.

Can the former expect the latter to forego the comforts? But without a change, the planet's climate is headed for a disastrous end. Even to secure temperature reductions in the second half of the century, a rapid transition to clean energy needs to begin immediately. Achieving substantial reductions in temperatures relative to the coal-based system will take the better part of a century, and will depend on rapid and massive deployment of some mix of conservation, wind, solar, and nuclear, and possibly carbon capture and storage.

Benedict Ilozor and Mohammed Kama of the Eastern Michigan University, in Ypsilanti, USA, suggest that renewable energy is a viable option for electrical power in developing and emerging nations. Writing in the inaugural issue of the African Journal of Economic and Sustainable Development, they point out that in most of these nations, the demand for energy far exceeds the generating capacity. They suggests that a rapid response to this huge demand that is informed by social, political, economic, climatic and environmental factors must be put in place so that renewable, sustainable energy supply can be identified.

They suggest that cost is the limiting factor and that communities and governments would be unable to subsidize neither the one-time installation costs nor the ongoing maintenance however low, for most renewable energy solutions. It is, hence up to the private sector and commercial banks, and perhaps charitable organizations, to pitch in.

There are many approaches to solar power, for instance, that could be implemented by individual households or small communities for domestic electricity as well as on a larger scale, while geothermal systems could be run to provide the power for cooling.

Decentralised energy and a mix of locally available energy sources hold the solution to the energy security, climate chage tangle.

Outlook moderate for clean energy this year

Despite record levels in investment in clean energy last year, the outlook for 2012 is much less certain, warn financial consultants Ernst & Young. According to the company’s latest Country Attractiveness Indices report (CAI), China, the US, Germany and India lead the field of 40 countries.

But the UK rose to fifth place from sixth, overtaking Italy, thanks to several large offshore wind projects, including the world’s largest wind farm planned for Caithness in Scotland where £4.5 billion will be invested in a 1500 MW facility. Increases in solar capacity of 762 MW last year and a new £120 million, 53 MW wood-fuelled biomass plant approved in Middlesex also boosted the UK’s standing.

But access to capital, particularly in the countries blighted by the eurozone crisis, is expected to be a major obstacle this year, with Ernst & Young suggesting that the value of deals is likely to fall.

Jobs is not the issue

An argument oft repeated is whether renewable energy will create new jobs. From the simple premise of any change bringing in new requirements, and hence jobs, but at the cost of earlier existing jobs, it is an impasse.

For instance, taking people off cars into mass transit will create jobs, but what of those who will lose jobs? But who? Those working in the petroleum industry, of course!

Or take the process of retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency - won't that employ many times more people than will be lost in producing the electricity?

Of course, in installing PV, solar thermal, wind, geothermal, hydro, and biomass facilities, nations will have to employ more people than will be lost from the ranks of the traditional sources of energy. But, what happens when all this stuff is installed and operational?

After all, renewable energy is about technology and every innovation in clean energy and transportation will add jobs. But being about technology, and given that technology has a tendency to displace human labor, what then??

Perhaps, it is the wrong argument to be having in the first place. Renewable energy must primarily be adopted for the clean tag it brings, as well as off-setting climate change, besides being abundant. Right?

Solar matrix

There is an interesting article on viable alternatives to fossil fuels in Energy Bulletin. Borrowed from a do-your-math blog, this one sees the blogger, a physicist making some calculations to arrive at the answer.

For his matrix he chooses a few important characteristics - abundance (of the fuel), technical difficulty (in producing energy), intermittency, demonstrated (is it ready for use), electricity, heat, transport, acceptance, backyard (can it be deployed in our backyard), efficiency. Yes, cost is missing! But as he later explains, the lowest scoring ones are the costliest.

Except for abundance aspect where fossil fuels fail, there is no comparison with fossil fuels that tower over the alternatives in every other aspect. But abundance, and repurcussion, such as climate change, are two major aspects.

The best alternatives turn out to be soalr PV and solar thermal. Covering only 0.5% of land area with 15% efficient PV panels provides the annual energy needs of our society, qualifying solar PV as abundant. It’s not terribly difficult to produce; silicon is the most abundant element in Earth’s crust, and PV panels are being produced globally at 25 GW peak capacity per year.

As to solar thermal, it achieves comparable efficiency to PV, but uses more land area, generating electricity from concentrated solar thermal energy automatically fits in the abundant category—though somewhat more regionally constrained. It’s relatively low-tech: shiny curved mirrors tracking on (often) one axis, heating oil or other fluid to run a plain-old heat engine. Intermittency can be mitigated by storing thermal energy, perhaps even for a few days. Because a standard heat-engine follows, fossil fuels can supplement in lean times using the same back-end.

Finally, as the writer notes, the other controlled option is to deliberately adjust our lives to require fewer resources, preferably abandoning the growth paradigm at the same time. 'Can we manage a calm, orderly exit from the building? In either case, the first step is to agree that the building is in trouble. Techno-optimism keeps us from even agreeing on that.'

Check out the calculations for more.

Good News

In this International Year of Sustainable Energy, every bit of good news is welcome. Renewable energy investments in India increased by more than 52 percent in 2011, the fastest growth among major global economies, according to a new report.

More than $10.3 billion was invested in renewable energy projects in India last year, with about $4.6 billion targeting wind energy projects and another $4.2 billion going toward solar projects, the Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) report said. For solar, that represented a seven-fold increase from 2010, when investments totaled about $600 million.

According to the BNEF report, India is likely to exceed its target of adding 12.4 gigawatts of grid-connected renewable energy as set out in its current five-year plan, which ends next month.

But when it comes to new wind power China far and away leads the world. China's wind power push nearly tripled that of the United States, which installed the second-greatest amount. New figures from the Global Wind Energy Council show that China installed 18 gigawatts of new wind power in 2011, bringing its national total to 62.73 GW, a world-leading 26.4% of all our wind power.

Finally, there is news that wind and solar power were responsible for 68% of new European Union (EU) power installations in 2011 and renewable power as a whole was responsible for about 70%.

We are headed in the right direction though the destination is far beyond the horizon. Some cheer.