So, uh, Where Are We?

July 04, 2008

There are a couple of juicy reports out this year that paint an enticing picture of what wind and solar might do.  Solar: 69 percent by 2050. Wind: 20 percent by 2030. So, scratch these numbers out on the napkin (and since this is just napkin work, overlook the time factor, and just sort of assume "at some point in time"):

• Solar 69
• Wind 20
• Hydroelectric 8
• Total 97

To the extent these reports are in touch with reality, the majors could be 97 percent of the US electricity mix.  But wait, there's more. The minors. Biomass, geothermal, wave, tidal, urban wind (which doesn't seem to account for much in the 2030 study) ought to be able to kick in a goodly share given some time and focus. And of course there's our existing capacity, including relatively clean sources such as natural gas. Still not there? Nuclear and clean coal. Maybe some Moore's Law type technology acceleration phenomena and things out there that are yet to be discovered. And don't forget conservation. 

String these together for a future that is bright and clean, if you want it to be.

Photo: Kathrin Behrens 

Comments

[stomv]

Very cool.

Trouble is, we don't have until 2050. Sure, this program actually gets off the ground closer to 2020, but even then, I'm worried that we're about 10 years too late. Heck, we may already be too late.

These long term plans, relying on huge projects and long term planning are really important. I dig (or: digg) 'em big time. In the mean time though, what are we doing to reduce our electricity based carbon emissions now? We're still building new coal fired power plants. We're not yet at the point where new renewables are growing faster than current demand. That's the first major milestone -- when the only reason a coal fired power plant is built is to replace an already existing, more highly polluting, less efficient plant.

I hate to be a Debbie Downer, but 2050 plans don't excite me. 2010 and 2015 plans do.

[Chris]

Yeah, I guess I tend to look at things overly simplistically, but its really just an attempt to make a rough gauge of potential. Identify the problem. Envision a solution, any solution (is there any way that this thing could be done?). Go to work.

Knowing that there is a way to do this maybe creates a framework that helps us chip away at the problem.

There are so many ways we can get to where we're going. Maybe the design obstacles to implementing urban wind (a great solution for the multiple contributions it could make) are knocked down and it starts to contribute in a meaningful way by 2015 or 2020. Or the American Institute of Architects' challenge to produce carbon neutral buildings by 2030 gets legs and makes great strides by 2015.

Regarding the first milestones, reducing carbon emissions now, and curtailing the construction of more coal plants, I think T. Boone Pickens is a tremendous example of acting now. He's doing something, and he's telling Congress he's 80 years old and doesn't have time to wait. Hopefully others will pop up around him and we'll work the problem now and as we continue to plan the problem going forward.

[Andy]

Previous commenter wants evidence of current movement towards clean energy production, and away from fossil sources. Perhaps it's not a definitive source but look for the many coal plants canceled or put on hold in 2007 here (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_plants_cancelled_in_2007) and 2008 (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Coal_plants_cancelled_in_2008).

Some are still being built, and given the uncertainties in the global energy market, that's probably not a bad thing. But clearly the tide is changing and many of these would-be developers see the world is changing in ways that make coal a much less attractive power source.

This is just one lens through which to view the changing of the energy guard and there are many more. We're in a period of transition and great upheaval. Too slow for some, too fast for many. But one thing is certain, status quo is out, never to return.