Every year the Renewable Energy Network for the 21st Century (REN21) and the Worldwatch Institute put together a profile and report card of the world’s renewable energy sector.

The REN21 Renewables 2007 Global Status Report found that last year, wind power capacity increased about 28 percent and solar power capacity went up 52 percent. Renewable energy employs 2.4 million people and 65 countries now have national standards for accelerating the use of renewables. Investors and businesses of all sizes have followed suit. And while that’s impressive, Mohamed El-Ashr, Chair of Ren21, had this interesting comment:

“So much has happened in the renewable energy sector during the past five years that the perceptions of some politicians and energy-sector analysts lag far behind the reality of where the renewables industry is today … This leadership has never been more important, as renewable energy has now reached the top of the international policy agenda under the United Nations and the G8.”

(more…)

Scientific American has a thought-provoking proposal in its January 2008 issue. The magazine proposes a massive, far-reaching plan to get solar power generating 69 percent of America’s electricity 35 percent of our total energy by 2050, thus replacing all of our foreign oil needs and slashing global warming emissions. Below are some of the highlights of that “solar grand plan.”

Technology

The American Southwest would be the home of massive amounts of solar power needed for this clean energy conversion. Specifically, two types of solar power would be employed: Photovoltaic (PV) cells and concentrated solar power.

According to the solar grand plan, 30,000 square miles of PV cells would provide 3,000 gigawatts (GW) of energy. The “30,000 square miles” part made me flinch, but already existing solar installations indicate that the land needed for each gigawatt-hour of solar energy in the Southwest is less that the amount of land needed to run a coal plant and mine the fossil fuel for it.

Concentrated solar power would supply about one-fifth of the solar energy in the plan. Concentrated solar power uses long metallic mirrors that focus the sun’s rays onto a pipe filled with fluid. The fluid is heated and runs through a heat exchanger that produces steam that turns a turbine. Nine plants like this already exist in the in U.S. (more…)

A report commissioned by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) says that renewable energy is making a difference in the fight against global warming and that we need more of it. In fact, renewable energy is the best way to cut carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.

At least 56 nations have policies that promote renewable energy and 44 countries, states, and provinces have requirements that a certain portion of their energy must come from renewable sources.

All told, the Renewables 2007: Global Status Report found that renewable energy continued its double-digit growth in 2007 and that more than 5 gigatons (5 billion tons) of CO2 were avoided. By the end of this year, investment in wind power, solar power, and other technologies should surpass $100 billion.

Wind power receives the largest share of that investment, beating out large hydropower.

So how to do we keep this momentum going? While renewable energy may have moved from an “alternative” source into mainstream use, Mohamed El Ashry, head of the global policy network REN21 that produced the report with the WorldWatch Institute, said that policymakers can do more:

“[Renewable energy] growth is being driven by policies to promote renewable energy, which have mushroomed over the past few years. What’s needed now are binding targets in an international agreement to establish policies that can rapidly accelerate the large-scale deployment of renewable energy to replace fossil fuels.”

Unlike the promises of future technologies like “cleaner” coal or mainstream carbon sequestration, renewable energy is the best option to mitigate global warming because it is here, now, and making an impact. The UNEP reports that the costs of renewable energy will continue to decline and that the clean energy sector is an avenue to economic development, energy security, local environmental benefits, and a global warming solution.

News Blaze
Reuters, via Thoughts on Global Warming Blog
United Nations Environment Programme

Despite all the talk about solar energy, it only generates a measly .1% of electricity in the US. Meanwhile, national demand for electricity is growing by 2% annually. Considering that solar technology has been in use for decades, why is it not more widespread?

Cheap Fossil Fuels

Even though sunlight is free, fossil fuels in the US have been widely available at a very low cost. There are extensive coal fields all across the country. Nationally, coal produces about 50% of our electricity, with a majority of it being used for base load. That means that coal plants produce a steady stream of electricity a majority of the time.

Natural gas however has skyrocketed in price over the last 6 years. It is widely used to generate electricity during peak times, typically on warmer days when we are cranking up the air conditioning. Natural gas plants can start up quickly and come to the rescue when needed, but the cost of fuel has gotten quite high recently.

Solar energy is very capable of producing peak electricity and is ideally suited for for it. Solar radiation is what causes us to need air conditioning in the first place. The utility companies have started taking notice of solar energy’s potential to generate electricity during peak demand.

(more…)

The April/May issue of Home Power magazine features a story by Kelly Davidson entitled “The Best States for Solar” that features criteria for selection one would not expect. It’s not the number of sunny days nor the latitude that makes a good solar state, but strong incentives, regulatory policies that are looking ahead, and strong support for setting renewable energy usage targets. Listed alphabetically, they are:

1. California — Its California Solar Initiative calls for a $3.3 billion, ten-year program that will help CA hold its position as the leading producer of solar technologies in the US, and one of the largest solar markets in the world

2. Colorado — 300 sunny days per year help, but this state maximizes its solar assets by offering rebates, loans, and tax exemptions for PV systems while spurring growth of green collar jobs by encouraging solar tech and PV manufacturing.

3. Connecticut — The Connecticut Clean Energy Fund provides solar incentives, while the state’s RPS (renewable portfolio standard) requires that 27% of the the state’s electricity come from renewable sources by 2020.

4. Maryland — The state has jump-started its support of solar energy with increased rebates, causing total installed solar capacity to jump to 1MW. (more…)

The Solar Thermal Edition

In my first post about the feast or Famine Cycles of American Clean Energy Development, I discussed renewable energy more broadly and used the example of wind to show my point. I also touched upon the up and down nature of federal funding for renewable energy deployment in the late 70s and early 80s. With that said, the following examination adds some more context with a historical-institutional perspective of what went down in the early 80’s, how, and why. And in the spirit of some of the earlier posts this week that covered the technology of solar thermal, and the practical application of solar thermal technology to entire neighborood developments, I have decided to follow suit by writing about solar thermal as well. I hope to show that the decline and slow fazing out of federal support for solar thermal research and development during the Reagan and George Bush administrations has had a substantial effect on where the industry is today. (more…)

Since the energy crisis of the late 1970s, the federal government has employed various policy mechanisms to support renewable energy development. Driving through the neighborhoods that were developed in the late 70s and early 80s, it’s not hard to notice all of the old rooftop solar water heating arrays that were installed because people were taking advantage of a tax credit made available by the Carter administration. But the tax credit expired after Reagan took office, which is why I don’t see rooftop solar hot water nearly as much anymore (at least not recently installed).

The same thing will happen if the renewable energy tax credits expire (more…)

Schott, AG has just broken ground on a facility that will manufacture solar PV cells and receivers. Governor Bill Richardson celebrated the creation of 350 jobs in the short term and 1,500 jobs when the plant is running to capacity. New Mexico has a Renewable Portfolio Standard, requiring that a portion of the state’s energy production must come from renewable sources. Renewable Energy World estimates that there are currently 8.5 million jobs created from renewable energy industries, not only in engineering, but in manufacturing, construction, management, and accounting.

“By the year 2030, the renewable energy and energy efficiency industries could generate up to $4.5 trillion in revenue in the U.S., but only with the appropriate public policy. This would include a renewable portfolio standard, renewable energy incentives, public education, and R&D” –ASES

The beauty of green collar jobs is that they can’t be outsourced: they are local and they are looking toward the future. One source of jobs in renewable energy is at AlternativeEnergy.com.

The National Governors Association (NGA) pretty much agrees that global warming is a problem that needs action, but they’re hardly at a consensus on what to do about it.

NGA chairman, Governor Tim Pawlenty (R-MN) launched a year-long initiative called, “Securing a Clean Energy Future,” that outlines how to diversify the U.S.’s energy sources. The Governors agree that more clean technology - like wind power and solar power - will have to be added to the energy mix, but oil and coal-producing states are worried about regulations that put a cost on the pollution that comes from burning fossil fuels. If states are going to regulate the pollution, governors like Governor Joe Manchin (D-WV) want help financing technologies that could make burning coal cleaner, or help exploring carbon capture and sequestration methods. Others, like Governor Haley Barbour (R-MS), took a harder line and called the option of a carbon tax “stupid.”

General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt even made an appearance to address why business is taking action on global warming and why many corporations are asking for stronger national regulations of carbon dioxide. But that didn’t sway some governors: “I don’t think there’s any kind of consensus among the people that were in there; we’re almost 50 different opinions,” said Alabama Gov. Bob Riley (R). Work continues to hammer out a joint NGA global warming policy.

Infozine.com

This post is designed as a complement to a recent story by Timothy Hurst on article U.S. Investors and renewable energy.

Renewable energy has attracted a lot of attention lately as the world looks for cleaner ways to power our world. Wind and solar stand as the most recognizable clean, green dynamos, but they still struggle to compete with traditional and entrenched power producers. True to conventional economic values, competition is everything. Yet, in the U.S.A. these technologies have survived in the dog-eat-dog industry for decades mostly without the aid of government subsidies (unlike coal and oil), and many claim that renewables could take off with just a little help from Uncle Sam. What are the obstacles? Are government subsidies the only saving grace for renewables? This post hopes to shed some light on the topic and burn through the conflicting noise that surrounds this fundamental and controversial industry.

It seems like I’m always reading articles about improvements, investments, and the promise of renewable energy. For a more practical perspective, I recently asked a successful businessman, who sometimes works with solar panels, for his opinion. Did he think that solar was going to boom in the next few years? His opinion was that the industry would need more government subsidies to really take off. Even with high oil prices, it was still simply too expensive to invest on a small scale. You might regain your initial investment in 15+ years in ideal conditions. Even in states with incentives to support renewable energy, it’s expensive. His view echoed my cousin’s frustration. Yet despite the initial cost, renewables are still an attractive option. As expensive as it may be to buy and install solar panels, it’s also very expensive ($1.8-billion and rising) to build a new coal-fired power plant with “clean coal” technologies. Hidden costs also plague coal power plants: the cost to clean up mercury emissions, the water required to operate, and in some places, the cost of carbon credits. Finally, the bottom line: how much does it cost to generate each kilowatt hour? Compare two graphs, one for coal and one for solar, and you may be surprised. (more…)