Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Discussions about the economic and financial ramifications of PEAK OIL

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby ralfy » Fri 10 Jul 2015, 21:58:30

Graeme wrote:You can't have business without cooperation. In fact, the nature of business is changing:

Mapping the Connections Between Cities, Inequality, and Creative Economies

Capitalism is in transition. It’s pulling away from its previous industrial model to a new one based on creativity and knowledge. In place of the natural resources and large-scale industries that powered the economies of previous centuries, economic growth today turns on knowledge, innovation, and talent.

In a new report released Wednesday, my Martin Prosperity Institute colleagues Charlotta Mellander and Karen King and I evaluate 139 nations worldwide on their ability to compete and prosper in this new, creativity-powered knowledge economy.

The map below shows how the nations of the world stack up on our Global Creativity Index—a comprehensive measure of creative competitiveness based on six indicators organized across the three key factors (“the three Ts”) driving today’s economic development: technology, talent, and tolerance. On the map, the nations that perform the best are in purple; the nations that do most poorly by our ranking are in light blue.

Australia takes the top spot on the GCI, followed by the United States. New Zealand comes in third, Canada fourth, and Denmark and Finland are tied for fifth. The rest of the top 10 includes Sweden in seventh place, Iceland in eighth, Singapore in ninth, and the Netherlands in tenth. While much has been made of the recent economic performance of the so-called BRIC nations—Brazil, Russia, India, and especially China—these rank much lower on our index: Brazil is in 29th place, Russia 38th, China 62nd, and India 99th.


Image

citylab


You're confusing cooperation as profitable agreements made between entities in business enterprises with global, non-profitable agreements made to deal with global warming and other crises.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5569
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby Graeme » Fri 10 Jul 2015, 22:25:32

No that is false. RE growth and climate mitigation has just recently been proven. Look back and you will see that growth has decoupled from emissions (see page eight).

The global economy grew strongly last year without increasing greenhouse gas emissions, suggesting that government regulations, carbon markets and existing technologies are starting to bite in the battle against climate change.


The IEA outlook that’s being presented Monday shows what would happen under the national pledges already set out for Paris, which at the time the report was written in May accounted for a third of global emissions. Under that outlook, the IEA sees the world economy growing 88 percent by 2030 with carbon emissions gaining just 8 percent.
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby Graeme » Sat 11 Jul 2015, 18:25:10

A Low-Carbon Revolution Can Mean Good Economic Growth

Last month, two democrats, Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Brian Schatz (D-HI), unveiled new legislation to address climate change at an event hosted by the American Enterprise Institute. If it becomes a law, the proposed bill will tax fossil fuels, starting at $45 per ton of carbon dioxide and steadily rising each year.

Policymakers are often addressing conflicting goals when tackling climate change. While they see an urgent need for action, they also fear slow economic growth. But, as British Columbia has shown us, climate change action can be synonymous with economic prosperity.

When British Columbia implemented the carbon tax in 2008, it was a risky proposition. Critics said the tax would devastate BC's economy. Seven years later, it is an economic and environmental success. For countries that grapple with the economic realities that come with switching from fossil fuels to renewable resources, this is one option that deserves serious consideration.

Since 2008, BC's fuel consumption has declined 17.4 percent across all fuel types covered by the tax, according to Sustainable Prosperity. During that time, BC's GDP stayed in line with the rest of Canada. The tax levies a fee on carbon-based fuels, and all revenues from the carbon tax fund tax rebates in other areas. In 2012, this tax program gave BC the lowest tax rate in Canada.

World leaders may want to take the clue. According to Time, this year, G-7 world leaders laid out an "ambitious" plan to eliminate the use of fossil fuels worldwide by 2100, but didn't provide specifics on scaling back fuel consumption in their respective countries. In other words, the plan is a whole lot of nothing, wrapped in the pretty ribbon of good intentions.

It's a complex issue, which requires leaders to balance the fate of the planet against economic realities, powerful lobbying groups, and some legislators' skepticism about global warming. Even Germany, who many see as an environmental pioneer, has had to evaluate their ambitious climate change agenda when faced with the prospect of losing 100,000 jobs after the country approved a levy on high-polluting coal plants.

On the flip side of the coin, the carbon-climate crisis is also devastating. In 2010, economic problems caused by climate change were severe, causing $700 billion in losses or one percent of the global GDP, according to DARA International. Combined climate change and carbon economy losses in 2010 totaled $1.2 trillion.

DARA projects severe economic losses in the United States, China and India. In 2030, these three countries will have $2.5 trillion in combined economic costs linked to climate change and the carbon economy.

According to Time, 59 percent of global carbon emissions are created by G-7 countries. More than 10 times the carbon emissions produced by 48 developing countries. But, DARA reports that developing countries will feel the brunt of the economic loss from the carbon-climate crisis, totaling $4 trillion in 2030.

In the meantime, BC's economic performance is slightly outperforming the rest of Canada. In fact, the political debate focuses more on where to spend the tax revenue than whether or not to keep the tax. The carbon tax represents the out-the-box thinking and decisive action required to enact change.


huffingtonpost
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby Graeme » Mon 13 Jul 2015, 17:39:05

100% Renewable Energy — How To Get There (Video)

Continuing this series on Renewable Cities PechaKucha presentations, Mark Z Jacobson, a legend in the world of renewable energy research, gave an excellent, information-packed presentation on the opening night of the Renewable Cities Global Learning Forum (see our Renewable Cities archives here).

I love that he started by highlighting the insane health costs of burning fossil fuels, noting that “air pollution kills 4–7 million people prematurely each year,” with about 20% of those people being children under the age of 5 years old. Insane. It was particularly interesting seeing the image of a 1970s nonsmoking LA teenager’s lungs, which had suffered the equivalent of smoking two packs of cigarettes per day. Air pollution in much of the world today is comparable to LA in the 1970s….

Of course, Mark also highlighted global warming, which could even dwarf the negative effects of air pollution.

One of Mark’s big projects has been finding out how the world could switch 100% renewable energy using existing technology (and note that this is in reference to all human energy usage, not just electricity). You can see a quick run-through of the general plan in the presentation below. Enjoy!


cleantechnica
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby Graeme » Tue 14 Jul 2015, 18:47:41

BNEF Correction Strengthens Q2’15 Clean Energy Investment Figures

Bloomberg New Energy Finance has released a correction to its Q2’15 clean energy investment figures, which strengthened the numbers significantly from $53 billion to $73.5 billion.

Last week Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) released its clean energy investment figures for the second quarter of 2015. The numbers were significantly sluggish compared to 2014:

2014 was a big year for clean energy investment, but that trend has certainly not continued through to 2015. Investment numbers for Q1 were revised to stand at $54.4 billion, dropping a little bit further to Q2’s $53 billion mark, which itself was a catastrophic 28% down compared to the $73.6 billion recorded in Q2’2014.

“The first two quarters of 2015, taken together, have seen investment down 18% compared to the first half of last year,” said Michael Liebreich, chairman of the advisory board at Bloomberg New Energy Finance. “It is possible that the Q1 and Q2 2015 figures will be revised up a bit in due course as some more deals are disclosed, but we have been predicting since January that this year would see lower investment than 2014 because of the strong dollar.”

However, in a press release published Friday, BNEF had to revise its figures due to “errors in the aggregating of project and deal-level data.”

Subsequently, Bloomberg figures reveal that the second quarter was much stronger than previously thought, up to $73.5 billion from their previously announced $53 billion. This means that Q2 investments were only 0.2% down on the same quarter a year earlier, and takes the first half of 2015’s clean energy investment figures up to $127.9 billion, only 3% down on the first half of 2014.

Bloomberg released a list of key features highlighted in the second quarter of 2015:


cleantechnica
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby ralfy » Wed 15 Jul 2015, 05:32:26

Graeme wrote:No that is false. RE growth and climate mitigation has just recently been proven. Look back and you will see that growth has decoupled from emissions (see page eight).

The global economy grew strongly last year without increasing greenhouse gas emissions, suggesting that government regulations, carbon markets and existing technologies are starting to bite in the battle against climate change.


The IEA outlook that’s being presented Monday shows what would happen under the national pledges already set out for Paris, which at the time the report was written in May accounted for a third of global emissions. Under that outlook, the IEA sees the world economy growing 88 percent by 2030 with carbon emissions gaining just 8 percent.


CO2 ppm has been rising:

http://co2now.org/

The IEA outlook is dependent on gas and oil production rising steadily (see earlier WEO).
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5569
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby ralfy » Wed 15 Jul 2015, 05:35:11

Graeme wrote:A Low-Carbon Revolution Can Mean Good Economic Growth

Last month, two democrats, Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Brian Schatz (D-HI), unveiled new legislation to address climate change at an event hosted by the American Enterprise Institute. If it becomes a law, the proposed bill will tax fossil fuels, starting at $45 per ton of carbon dioxide and steadily rising each year.

Policymakers are often addressing conflicting goals when tackling climate change. While they see an urgent need for action, they also fear slow economic growth. But, as British Columbia has shown us, climate change action can be synonymous with economic prosperity.

When British Columbia implemented the carbon tax in 2008, it was a risky proposition. Critics said the tax would devastate BC's economy. Seven years later, it is an economic and environmental success. For countries that grapple with the economic realities that come with switching from fossil fuels to renewable resources, this is one option that deserves serious consideration.

Since 2008, BC's fuel consumption has declined 17.4 percent across all fuel types covered by the tax, according to Sustainable Prosperity. During that time, BC's GDP stayed in line with the rest of Canada. The tax levies a fee on carbon-based fuels, and all revenues from the carbon tax fund tax rebates in other areas. In 2012, this tax program gave BC the lowest tax rate in Canada.

World leaders may want to take the clue. According to Time, this year, G-7 world leaders laid out an "ambitious" plan to eliminate the use of fossil fuels worldwide by 2100, but didn't provide specifics on scaling back fuel consumption in their respective countries. In other words, the plan is a whole lot of nothing, wrapped in the pretty ribbon of good intentions.

It's a complex issue, which requires leaders to balance the fate of the planet against economic realities, powerful lobbying groups, and some legislators' skepticism about global warming. Even Germany, who many see as an environmental pioneer, has had to evaluate their ambitious climate change agenda when faced with the prospect of losing 100,000 jobs after the country approved a levy on high-polluting coal plants.

On the flip side of the coin, the carbon-climate crisis is also devastating. In 2010, economic problems caused by climate change were severe, causing $700 billion in losses or one percent of the global GDP, according to DARA International. Combined climate change and carbon economy losses in 2010 totaled $1.2 trillion.

DARA projects severe economic losses in the United States, China and India. In 2030, these three countries will have $2.5 trillion in combined economic costs linked to climate change and the carbon economy.

According to Time, 59 percent of global carbon emissions are created by G-7 countries. More than 10 times the carbon emissions produced by 48 developing countries. But, DARA reports that developing countries will feel the brunt of the economic loss from the carbon-climate crisis, totaling $4 trillion in 2030.

In the meantime, BC's economic performance is slightly outperforming the rest of Canada. In fact, the political debate focuses more on where to spend the tax revenue than whether or not to keep the tax. The carbon tax represents the out-the-box thinking and decisive action required to enact change.


huffingtonpost


Unfortunately, British Columbia <> the world, especially developing countries.

And there's a good reason why they are seen as developing:

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-22956470
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5569
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby ralfy » Wed 15 Jul 2015, 05:37:16

Graeme wrote:100% Renewable Energy — How To Get There (Video)

Continuing this series on Renewable Cities PechaKucha presentations, Mark Z Jacobson, a legend in the world of renewable energy research, gave an excellent, information-packed presentation on the opening night of the Renewable Cities Global Learning Forum (see our Renewable Cities archives here).

I love that he started by highlighting the insane health costs of burning fossil fuels, noting that “air pollution kills 4–7 million people prematurely each year,” with about 20% of those people being children under the age of 5 years old. Insane. It was particularly interesting seeing the image of a 1970s nonsmoking LA teenager’s lungs, which had suffered the equivalent of smoking two packs of cigarettes per day. Air pollution in much of the world today is comparable to LA in the 1970s….

Of course, Mark also highlighted global warming, which could even dwarf the negative effects of air pollution.

One of Mark’s big projects has been finding out how the world could switch 100% renewable energy using existing technology (and note that this is in reference to all human energy usage, not just electricity). You can see a quick run-through of the general plan in the presentation below. Enjoy!


cleantechnica


Many of the vehicles, components, machines, etc., mentioned require fossil fuels for mining, manufacturing, and shipping. Even underdeveloped infrastructure in most parts of the world will require the same.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5569
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby Graeme » Thu 16 Jul 2015, 17:15:12

Renewable energy boom will mean vastly cheaper electricity

Renewable energy, combined with prolific battery storage, will soon result in vastly cheaper electricity -- and solar power that's less expensive than what fossil fuel-based power plants can produce.

Additionally, solar power with lithium-ion and flow-battery storage systems will make the combination of renewable energy so inexpensive that it will surpass nuclear power and obviate the need for futuristic power sources such as fusion.

That was consensus view from a several keynote speeches delivered at the Intersolar Conference in San Francisco this week.

Eicke Weber, director of the Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems, said that in sun-rich countries, the cost of solar power is already below 5 cents per kilowatt and it will continue to plummet as battery storage systems become more prolific and less expensive.

"We are looking forward to create electricity for 2 to 4 cents per kilowatt hour. Compared to this, you can forget everything else, especially nuclear power plants and the quest to try to obtain nuclear fusion on earth," Weber said, explaining that solar will be less costly than any other power source.

Tesla CTO JB Straubel said he expects photovoltaic and battery storage systems to continue dropping in price, soon even passing fossil-fuel powered plants in price per kilowatt.

New installations of solar power capacity surpassed those of wind and coal for the second year in a row in 2014, accounting for 32% of all new electrical capacity, according to a report released earlier this year from GTM Research and the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA).
Tesla has a lot of skin in the battery storage game, as the all-electric car maker has announced two new batteries: one for businesses and one for homes.


pcadvisor

Climate finance: Funding a low-carbon global economy
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby Graeme » Mon 20 Jul 2015, 17:44:58

BLOOMBERG REPORT PREDICTS PHENOMENAL RENEWABLE ENERGY GROWTH

With bolder policy action, zero-emission sources will make up 60% of the added world’s energy capacity within 25 years, a new Bloomberg New Energy Finance report states.

The New Energy Outlook 2015, an annual forecast of global energy markets up to 2040, also predicts that new onshore wind and solar plants will be cheaper than new and existing fossil fuel plants by 2030.

“This report predicts the exciting change for renewable energy that we already see developing worldwide,” says Emily Farnworth, Campaign Director of RE100, The Climate Group. “The business case for renewable energy couldn’t be clearer and this is further confirmation for the many companies already signed up to becoming 100% powered by renewables through RE100”.

Influential companies that are signed up to the RE100 campaign – an initiative of The Climate Group in partnership with CDP which encourages companies to go 100% renewable – are already acting on.


theclimategroup
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby Graeme » Wed 22 Jul 2015, 15:49:10

Global Annual Revenue For Solar PV Set To Surpass $151 Billion In 2024

A new report from Navigant Research has concluded that the annual revenue from global solar PV installations is set to surpass $151 billion in 2024.

Navigant Research released its Distributed SolarPV report, which analyzes the solar PV market and provides forecasts for capacity and revenue, down through region and country through to 2024. The report highlights various emerging trends that the authors believe will affect the future of distributed solar energy generation. These include:

Price drops: Navigant report that crystalline module costs have dropped from approximately $4/W in 2006 to, in some cases, below $0.60/W in 2015. These lower prices are opening up new markets for distributed PV while similarly helping existing markets reach grid parity.
Yieldcos and green bonds: Financial structures such as yieldcos and green bonds have been developed that are de-risking investment in solar
Leasing programs: The US has seen third-party owned financing options continuing to drive the residential solar PV market
Governments rein in financial incentives: Governments have been forced at the state and federal level to reevalute their support of solar given the recent years of success for the market.

“The distributed solar PV generation market continues to transition from being dependent on lavish feed-in tariffs and environmentally conscious wealthy homeowners to a cost-effective source of electricity that is gaining traction across market segments and customer types,” said Roberto Rodriguez Labastida, senior research analyst with Navigant Research. “The successful adoption of new business models is expected to continue to further drive the industry in its transition to a post-incentive world in most major markets.”


cleantechnica
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby Graeme » Thu 23 Jul 2015, 17:15:33

Deutsche Bank Revises Solar PV Forecast For India Up 240%

New research published by Deutsche Bank has had to adjust the company’s forecast for India’s solar PV market up 240%, expecting 34 GW by 2020.

This is up from the analysts’ previous forecast of 14 GW by 2020, thanks in part to an influx of approximately $35 billion from global investors into the Indian solar PV sector. India itself has increased its solar energy target to attempt 100 GW by 2022, which has subsequently pushed its Renewable Energy Target up to 175 GW.

In fact, capital expenditure on solar could well surpass coal by the financial year-2019, and solar PV capacity could overtake coal in financial year-2020. Such forecasts are thanks to the current commissioning of 4.5 GW, and a strong pipeline of approximately 5.1 GW under construction and 15 GW worth of new projects. New investment and fund-raising opportunities such as yieldcos and green bonds are allowing India’s private sector to shift its focus from coal to solar.


cleantechnica

55 Solar Cities to be Developed in India

As many as 55 cities in 27 states and union territories are currently being developed as solar or green cities, parliament was told today.

So far, 55 existing cities in 27 states/UTs are being developed as solar cities in the country under 'Development of Solar Cities programme', Power and New and Renewable Energy Minister Piyush Goyal told the Lok Sabha in a written reply.

The new and renewable energy ministry has been implementing the programme under which a total of 60 cities and towns are proposed to be supported for development as "solar or green cities".


ndtv
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby Graeme » Fri 24 Jul 2015, 19:23:06

India's clean energy targets way ahead of others: UN official

India can lead the world in the area of sustainable energy from renewable sources, as its clean energy target is way ahead of the UN global goal, senior official of the United Nations said today.

"We believe that India can lead the world. Your (India's) targets here and some of the progress you are making here is way ahead of UN global targets. But of course, there is a lot more work to do," United Nations Under Secretary General and CEO for 'SE4ALL' initiative, Kandeh K Yumkella, said.


indiatimes
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby Graeme » Sat 25 Jul 2015, 19:36:56

Vancouver’s 100% Renewable Energy Goal

As we reported back in April, Vancouver’s City Council has voted to transition 100% to renewable energy (not just electricity, but all energy). Deputy City Manager Sadhu Johnston discussed this plan and plenty of positive clean energy Vancouver initiatives in this final Renewable Cities PechaKucha presentation:

Some of the highlights from Sadhu’s presentation include the fact that the city has seen a 6% decrease in greenhouse gas emissions while seeing a 30% increase in its population and a 20% increase in its number of jobs. The city also has 98% greenhouse gas–free electricity, and 31% renewable electricity.

Some of the key ways Sadhu noted they could hit 100% renewable energy were by:

building the city so that people could walk places
adding bike infrastructure (Vancouver had a 400% increase in the morning bike commute on the route pictured below when they added that protected bike lane)
electrifying public transit, and incentivizing a switch to electric cars and trucks
greening building codes
using district energy systems and better using sewage and waste heat for energy


cleantechnica

The following is a very interesting discussion by commentator from FOE on the topic of green growth or steady state:

Green growth or steady state? Rival visions of a green economy

Sooner or later, humanity will have to accept the constraints of a finite world, writes Guy Shrubsole. But two rival economic visions offer conflicting paths to sustainability. In fact, it's time to stop arguing and get on with it - going for green growth in the near term, while aiming for a deeper societal transformation.

But where political establishments are adamant they can be addressed through a process of 'green growth', others insist this is a nonsense, a contradiction in terms - and that only through replacing growth with a steady-state economy can we be sustainable. So who's right?

In what follows, I try to summarise the best arguments and counter-arguments put forward by the two sides. This is a vast and complicated subject, so I don't pretend to be comprehensive, or conclusive. But as Rio approaches, I hope this can help kick off a deeper discussion about what remains the most fundamental faultline in environmentalism.


I'm forced to conclude in a way that I find very unsatisfactory: by sitting on the fence. I'm not convinced that either side - green growthers or steady-statists - has yet won the argument, even after forty years of doing battle.

The historical evidence for green growth is threadbare, even nonexistent - though this should give no one, not even the steady-statists, any cause for pleasure. What's more, we can't assume the past will determine the future (in this debate, if it does, we're stuffed either way). Rather, the two sides ought to take one another far more seriously, and see the merits of a combined programme for transition.

To address our failure to achieve green growth means, on the one hand, investing far more in green technologies and doing everything in our power to decouple emissions from growth.


theecologist

Kenya announces 1-Gigawatt solar energy deal, will cost a record $2.2 billion
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby Graeme » Sun 26 Jul 2015, 18:42:08

Clean Energy Gives Rise To Robust Economies, Says Steyer

As we noted in a sister article on Friday (“Climate Change Issues May Decide 2016 US Election”), NextGen Climate has come out with a thought-provoking white paper called “The Economic Case For Clean Energy.” Its context mirrors and supports the gist of remarks by Tom Steyer, president and 2013 founder of the group, that challenge American politicians to step up to the plate when it comes to climate change.

“In order to address climate change,” the report says, “we must find common-sense, economical solutions to reduce carbon pollution by building a clean energy economy.” It’s short (16 pages), sweet (24 respectable references), and to the point (8 very focused graphics).


Image

Backing up this assertion and graphic, the authors point out that trends in steeply declining renewable prices are projected to continue far into the 21st century, with zero fuel costs. If government leaders move as quickly as possible to create a level playing field for all energy sources, they say, and if industry decisionmakers pursue investments with long-term profit models, the United States can be the global energy leader of the 21st century.


cleantechnica
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby Graeme » Wed 29 Jul 2015, 00:57:40

Renewables = 98% Of New US Electricity Generation Capacity In June

Adding rooftop solar electricity generation capacity to FERC’s monthly report on new electricity generation capacity, here’s CleanTechnica‘s latest update on new US electricity generation capacity.

For the month of June, the story is that 44% of new capacity came from wind power, 41.5% came from solar power, 13% came from biomass, and 2% came from natural gas.

For January through June, the renewable share drops a bit. All renewables came to 78.4%, with almost all of that from solar and wind (75% of the total). Natural gas jumped up to 21.4%.

Of course, the story gets a lot worse when you look at total electricity generation capacity. Solar and wind together come to 7.6%, and all renewables come to 18%. Still, it was nice to see that more coal capacity was retired in June and some oil capacity was also retired. According to my calculations, coal capacity is actually down to 26.6%

Here are charts and a table if you want to dig further:


cleantechnica
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby poppy090 » Thu 06 Aug 2015, 03:28:17

ralfy wrote:
Graeme wrote:100% Renewable Energy — How To Get There (Video)

Continuing this series on Renewable Cities PechaKucha presentations, Mark Z Jacobson, a legend in the world of renewable energy research, gave an excellent, information-packed presentation on the opening night of the Renewable Cities Global Learning Forum (see our Renewable Cities archives here).

I love that he started by highlighting the insane health costs of burning fossil fuels, noting that “air pollution kills 4–7 million people prematurely each year,” with about 20% of those people being children under the age of 5 years old. Insane. It was particularly interesting seeing the image of a 1970s nonsmoking LA teenager’s lungs, which had suffered the equivalent of smoking two packs of cigarettes per day. Air pollution in much of the world today is comparable to LA in the 1970s….

Of course, Mark also highlighted global warming, which could even dwarf the negative effects of air pollution.

One of Mark’s big projects has been finding out how the world could switch 100% renewable energy using existing technology (and note that this is in reference to all human energy usage, not just electricity). You can see a quick run-through of the general plan in the presentation below. Enjoy!


cleantechnica


Many of the vehicles, components, machines, etc., mentioned require fossil fuels for mining, manufacturing, and shipping. Even underdeveloped infrastructure in most parts of the world will require the same.

Yes,that's raisonly....
poppy090
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu 06 Aug 2015, 03:24:16

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby Subjectivist » Fri 28 Oct 2016, 11:24:21

I don't think there can be economic growth in the modern sense from renewable energy, the eroei just isn't high enough.
II Chronicles 7:14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
Subjectivist
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4701
Joined: Sat 28 Aug 2010, 07:38:26
Location: Northwest Ohio

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby Tanada » Sun 17 Dec 2017, 14:32:46

Graeme wrote:Why Renewable Energy Is Attracting the Smart Money

Dr. Kent Moors writes: While everyone's been fixated on oil, renewable energy has been gathering some serious steam.

Led by solar power, worldwide capital investment in "clean" energy surged by more than 16% last year.

In fact, spending on renewable energy was so strong in 2014, some have begun to label the recent rush into renewables as a "turning point" in the energy balance.

According to a report last week from Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF), the total invested in renewable power jumped to $310 billion, just $17 billion shy of the all-time record in 2011.

The global renewable picture is very uneven. While new projects have moved forward in the Middle East and certain parts of Asia, the biggest move has been largely spearheaded by solar power investment in the United States and China.

Meanwhile, had it not been for some large-scale offshore wind farms in Europe, investment there would have been in negative territory. And in Australia, where there had been signs of a major initiative, lack of government support has resulted in an absolute contraction in support for renewables.

In all, solar investment rose by 25%, while wind power rose 11% to account for a third of all investment in 2014. Meanwhile, energy efficiency and electric vehicles rose 10%, including the $2.3 billion raised by Tesla Motors Inc. (Nasdaq: TSLA). On the downside, biofuels investments fell 7% and biomass and incinerator projects attracted 10% less financing.


marketoracle


The incinerator power story is becoming clearer as time passes. This story is a prime example of how the NIMBY effect is causing headaches no matter who tries to take a step forward to a better future. It isn't really a story about Incinerator created pollution, though that is the mask it wears, it is a story about political siting decisions and their perceived impact on the poor who live in the city. If the city had contracted for the trash to be incinerated at a facility far enough away to not be highly visible to the city residents then nobody would lift an eyebrow or even shrug over the emissions levels supposedly due to this facility, but because it is located near poor neighborhoods it is seen as an in your face pollution problem. Meanwhile the incinerator is offsetting a great deal of land fill expense and providing useful energy to the city power grid, but those advantages are brushed aside in favor of the NIMBY factor, and the green dream that people can recycle their way to a perfect world.

How a trash incinerator, Baltimore's biggest polluter, became 'green' energy

A trash incinerator in Southwest Baltimore is the city’s largest single source of air pollution. But a state law has nonetheless allowed it to collect roughly $10 million in subsidies over the past six years through a program intended to promote green energy.

Few commuters who pass the imposing white smokestack on Interstate 95 have any idea that the plant burns their household waste, that their electric bills help to maintain it, or that it releases thousands of pounds of greenhouse gases and toxic substances — carbon dioxide, hydrochloric acid, formaldehyde among them — into the air every year.

Wheelabrator Baltimore gets the subsidies because lawmakers agreed in 2011 to classify trash as one of the most environmentally friendly sources of renewable power, on par with wind energy.

The waste-to-energy industry helped write the legislation that awarded it the coveted renewable label that qualifies incinerators for the subsidies. Maryland is one of fewer than a dozen states to reward trash-burning in the same way as it does windmills.

Critics say that’s just one example of how Maryland’s renewable energy incentive program is like the federal tax code: It’s full of breaks and handouts that might have made sense at one time, but have now grown out of control.

Some also question whether burning black liquor — a waste product from paper mills — should qualify as renewable energy eligible for money under the program. A paper mill in Western Maryland and others across the Southeastern United States have collected $60 million from Maryland’s electricity ratepayers.

While there is broad support in Maryland and other states for building a clean and renewable energy supply, the debate shows disagreement over how to get there. Politicians generally support efforts to reduce the fossil fuel emissions that are causing the climate to change. But they have been unable to come to a consensus on just what should be counted as green energy.

Del. Jeff Waldstreicher has sponsored legislation to stop rewarding renewable but dirty fuels and focus on truly green energy.

“Each of these elements individually was well-intentioned when it was put in the renewable-portfolio standard,” the Montgomery County Democrat says. “Cumulatively, we see it might not be as renewable as we originally thought.”

Burning trash to create energy was once widely viewed as a savior, a technology that would make productive use of waste while reducing reliance on environmentally unfriendly landfills. The approach was endorsed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under President Barack Obama. And Wheelabrator, the New Hampshire company that owns and operates the plant that overlooks Russell Street, emphasizes that it has met and exceeded hundreds of air quality standards.

“We work proactively and continuously to maintain a state-of-the-art facility,” Wheelabrator spokeswoman Michelle Nadeau says. “Protecting public health and the environment is our highest priority.”

But because the Baltimore incinerator is the source of so much of the city’s pollution — it produced 82 percent of the sulfur dioxide and 64 percent of the nitrogen oxides emitted by smokestacks within city limits in 2014, according to the EPA — it is getting more scrutiny. Some want to cut its subsidies off.

State environmental officials are working with Wheelabrator to reduce the incinerator’s emissions — they note that a comparable facility in Montgomery County produces less than half as much nitrogen oxide. Baltimore City Council members are also exploring whether more can and should be done to reduce dependence on the incinerator and protect the community from its emissions.

And some residents are mobilizing to move Baltimore toward a “zero-waste” future — increasing recycling and composting to reduce the amount of garbage the city produces — in hopes of eventually cutting off the incinerator’s fuel supply.

For every ton of trash it burns, it emits about a ton of carbon dioxide, the chief greenhouse gas. It also generates steam that is used to heat and cool buildings across downtown. (It was that loop of steam pipes that exploded beneath Eutaw Street this summer.)

The incinerator opened in 1985. James Alston, who grew up in Westport, remembers watching it rise over his neighborhood.

It was one more smokestack in a neighborhood where everybody’s parents put on their blue uniforms and walked to work in factories. Alston’s father worked at St. Joseph Paper Co.; his mother worked for a succession of glass makers.

It wasn’t until Alston was in his 30s, when he took a community college course on community activism and got involved in a neighborhood group, that Alston began to think about all the pollution that had surrounded him his whole life.

The average life expectancies for babies born to families in Cherry Hill, Curtis Bay and Brooklyn are all less than 70, according to the city health department, a decade less than the statewide average. In Westport, residents are more than twice as likely to die of lung cancer than those in the Guilford or Homeland neighborhoods of North Baltimore.

To be sure, those estimates are influenced by a multitude of factors. And it’s difficult to link an individual cancer or illness directly to any one specific cause. But local groups believe the Wheelabrator incinerator is affecting the community’s health. The Chesapeake Bay Foundation estimated this month that the facility’s emissions cost Maryland $21.8 million in health care expenses annually.

Wheelabrator officials say that the incinerator is “in full compliance with stringent state and federal air, water and solid waste regulations” and that its permits “have been maintained and renewed without exception.”

When the Wheelabrator facility was built in the 1980s, incineration was viewed as an environmentally friendly alternative to landfills. But by the time the state moved to offer renewable power a boost, its “green” luster had faded. So when the state subsidy program started in 2004, trash incinerators were ranked in a lower tier of renewable energy below wind, solar and geothermal power. In that lesser category, state lawmakers committed to providing incentives only through 2018.

But by 2011, industry officials and their lobbyists were arguing that waste-to-energy should be moved up to a higher tier, with wind and geothermal power.

If they could succeed in moving incinerators to that category, the facilities would qualify for millions of dollars in subsidies — money coming from ratepayers’ electricity bills. Allies in the General Assembly introduced legislation to help them.

State Sen. Thomas “Mac” Middleton, the Charles County Democrat who chairs the chamber’s finance committee, sponsored the Senate version. He was joined by colleagues including fellow Democrat Catherine Pugh, then a state senator, now Baltimore’s mayor.

Middleton says he understands environmentalists’ opposition to burning trash. But he says the state cannot rely on wind and solar alone to meet its energy needs.

His argument was buoyed by the EPA assessment that waste-to-energy plants are better for the environment than landfills. Landfills produce more methane, which is twice as potent a greenhouse gas as carbon dioxide.

“They studied it, and their research showed it should be a designated Tier 1 renewable energy source,” Middleton said recently. “That’s good enough for me.”

At a March 2011 hearing of Middleton’s committee, proponents argued that there will always be trash to burn, and offering renewable subsidies to incinerators could give the state an economic boost. At the time, there were three trash-to-energy incinerators in Maryland: the Wheelabrator Baltimore facility, the one in rural Montgomery County, and another in Aberdeen.

An agency that helps counties handle their refuse was working with Frederick County to build a fourth incinerator south of Frederick, and a New York-based power company was proposing a fifth, in the Fairfield area of South Baltimore. Supporters said each could bring hundreds of new jobs to the state.

Energy Answers International wanted to build an incinerator in Fairfield on the site of a shuttered chemical plant. The facility could qualify for subsidies from Maryland ratepayers if lawmakers added three words to the bill: “Refuse-derived fuel.” That was the name of its main energy source, made from processed trash.

Legislators acquiesced.

Gov. Martin O’Malley’s administration was among the bill’s supporters, though it would separately come out against black liquor, the waste product burned by paper mills. The administration argued that it set back greenhouse reduction goals.

Kathy Magruder, executive director of Maryland Clean Energy Center, a state agency, argued that declaring trash a renewable resource would create “some tremendous opportunities” to meet the goals of growing the state’s green energy supply, and its green work force.

When it came time to vote, that argument won out — narrowly.

With only three hours to go in the 2011 legislative session, then-state Sen. Brian E. Frosh pleaded with his colleagues to put the legislation on hold, a move that would have effectively killed it. The Montgomery County Democrat and his colleagues had advanced it on preliminary votes, but now he feared the measure would effectively diminish investment that might otherwise be made in wind and solar.

The Senate rejected his pleas and voted 24-20 to move trash up to the highest tier of renewable energy.

“I don’t know if it just wasn’t on anybody’s radar or what,” recalls Frosh, now the state’s attorney general. “I thought we shouldn’t have done it.”

O’Malley signed the legislation in May 2011 after “careful deliberation,” he said at the time. The question, he said, was not whether waste-to-energy generation is better for the environment than a coal plant or a landfill, but whether it was better than both of those evils in combination.

“The answer to that question is a qualified ‘yes,’” he said in a statement announcing his decision.

It seemed a practical, environmentally friendly choice. But to those in the communities around the Baltimore incinerator, the decision seemed to ensure decades of more incinerator pollution — from that facility, and, potentially, the Energy Answers project, as well.

Dangerous pollutants

Emissions from the Wheelabrator incinerator consistently fall within state and federal guidelines. Now state regulators are in the process of reducing the incinerator’s limits for one of its most dangerous pollutants.

The Department of the Environment is expected to tell the incinerator next year to reduce its output of nitrogen oxides by 13 percent, to 150 parts per million. Wheelabrator has agreed to comply.

Nitrogen oxides inflame lung tissue and cause or exacerbate breathing problems, particularly asthma. The particles and other pollutants are often too small to be filtered by the cilia in the upper airways. They make their way deep into the lungs, and eventually the bloodstream.

“It really escapes the body’s ability to cleanse itself,” said Dr. Gwen DuBois, a Baltimore internist who helps lead the group Chesapeake Physicians for Social Responsibility.

Research has shown that these pollutants can lead to heart disease, asthma, and even stroke, which contributed to the death of Alston’s mother.

Wheelabrator officials say they continuously monitor environmental health and safety measures to ensure that their incinerator is complying with regulations and permits. They say they meet or exceed standards in more than 800 different checks every day at the Baltimore facility.

Alston, now 48, lives in his parents’ former home. From the front steps, he has a clear view of the Wheelabrator smokestack half a mile down the hill, billowing steam in front of the downtown skyline.

Alston says he can’t believe that the plant is continuing to pump pollutants into the air that he and his neighbors breathe.

Wheelabrator officials say they’re helping to improve air quality by reducing the use of fossil fuels to produce electricity and heat.

Alston is nonetheless infuriated over the state of his community’s air.

“It’s nothing short of environmental racism.”

Incinerator foes gear up

Almost seven years after the industry push in Annapolis, some in the capital are ready to reverse the legislation that classified incinerators as green energy.

A coalition of environmental and public health groups is pitching legislation to grow Maryland’s renewable energy supply, and it’s also calling for ratepayer subsidies to trash incinerators to be phased out.

Middleton, the state senator, has shepherded consensus around renewable energy incentives since they were first created in 2004. He says the issue is too complicated to label incinerators as all bad. Wind and solar power are cleaner, he says, but they’re less reliable. The supply of garbage, in contrast, is endless.

“We ought to be maximizing the energy generated from wind and solar,” he said. “But you’ve got to look at the cost of it and also the practicality of it.”

Opponents say incinerators are falling out of favor. Frederick County backed out of its plans for an incinerator in 2014 over concerns about costs. The Harford County facility closed last year after it lost Aberdeen Proving Ground as a client.

That leaves Wheelabrator Baltimore and the Montgomery County Resource Recovery Facility in Dickerson as the only two trash-to-energy incinerators in Maryland.

In the past year, the Montgomery County incinerator and another in Northern Virginia have been beset by fires that have raged for days.

The Montgomery County Council passed a resolution last month calling for the state to drop incinerators and other dirty energy sources from the renewable power supply, a move that would end the subsidies they receive.

But based on experience, lawmakers don’t expect a simple debate in 2018. Last year, before the legislature voted to expand Maryland’s renewable energy goal from 20 percent of the power supply by 2022 to 25 percent by 2020, the Senate came within one vote of amending the bill to end subsidies for trash incinerators.

State Sen. Michael Hough, the Republican who pushed the amendment, says he’ll keep trying.

Hough, who represents Frederick and Carroll counties, says he can’t believe the measure keeps failing in Democratic Maryland.

“One of the most progressive legislatures in the country shoots this thing down every year,” he says.

A community empowered

In Westport and Curtis Bay, residents are hoping not just to end the subsidies to the Wheelabrator incinerator. They want to shut it down — and they believe they can.

The city is paying Wheelabrator $52 per ton to burn trash this year, according to a fee schedule that rises each year. But the city makes money selling the scrap metal recovered from trash and recycling -- about $20,000 a year, according to budget documents.

Opponents have packed hearings at the Department of the Environment’s headquarters to call on regulators to be aggressive in reducing the incinerator’s output of nitrogen oxides. And they have crowded City Council chambers as council members have passed non-binding resolutions to limit the incinerator pollution and to adopt a zero-waste plan for the city.

Greg Sawtell, an organizer with United Workers in Curtis Bay, says he is seeing a community energized. “It’s like going from passive acceptance to active resistance,” he says.

Still, the region’s dependence on the incinerator complicates their fight. Wheelabrator officials stress that the incinerator “is an important part of Maryland’s environmental and energy infrastructure,” Nadeau said.

The facility processed nearly 723,000 tons of trash last year, and only 161,000 tons of it came from Baltimore City residents. The rest comes from outside the city, diverting waste that could otherwise end up in landfills across the state.

The South Baltimore activists are hoping their pressure can put the incinerator out of business nonetheless. They hope their chance will come in four years — under a contract the city approved in 2011, that’s how much longer Baltimore is locked into burning its trash at the incinerator.


LINK
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17050
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Renewable Energy and Economic Growth Pt. 2

Unread postby GHung » Sun 17 Dec 2017, 18:06:08

If the nimbys don't want so much of their garbage burned (or buried) they can push their local jurisdictions to mandate recycling and cut their own consumption and waste streams. Baltimore doesn't even offer recycling for businesses, and recycles about a measly 20% of their solid wastes.

Trying to put a good spin on burning stuff because it makes electricity, much of which is wasted on superfluous uses like electronic billboards and other discretionary things, won't mean much to our grandkids. Just another once-through use of finite resources with long-lasting bad effects.
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3093
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 16:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

PreviousNext

Return to Economics & Finance

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests