Pops wrote:We can hope. Looking at the CA RPS report, they expect most growth to come from PV to get to 33% by 2020. Not exactly sure why they don't include BIG hydro in that chart?
Yeah California went for the route of heavy investments in Solar PV. But they are not indicative of global renewable growth. For the world as a whole, hydro and wind will still be growing strong by 2020.
global renewable electricity generation is projected to grow by almost 45%, or 2,245 TWh, to over 7,310 TWh in 2020 (+5.4% per year). Hydropower, including output from pumped storage, represents about 37% of total growth, followed by onshore wind at 31% of total growth.
Medium-Term Market ReportAs to why big hydro is not included, it's a combination of not wanting to include hydro because of the environmental damage it does. And the second reason has to do with renewable energy targets. If you included hydro, many states would already qualify and it would discourage the build out of non hydro renewable.
In general, hydropower is not even considered a renewable energy in most states or, for the most part, by the federal government. It comes with some “pretty significant environmental baggage. The reluctance to call hydropower a renewable energy is based on the impact of dams on fisheries and water flows.” Several large dams block migrating fish from reaching their spawning grounds. Dam reservoirs impact flows, temperatures and silt loads of rivers and streams. Over the years, these factors have drastically reduced fish populations.
That’s why hydropower doesn’t count toward utilities’ renewable energy mandates in most states—that, and the fact that there is already so much hydro out there. More than 30 states have renewable portfolio standards (RPS) that require utilities to generate a percentage of their power from renewable sources. Counting all hydropower would significantly lessen the impact of these standards, particularly in states where hydropower already provides a substantial amount of electricity. In those states, experts say, counting it would discourage the development of new renewable sources. Similarly, if hydropower were classified as renewable, some states would have to reset their targets and those might end up unrealistically high.
California, the second-largest U.S. hydroelectric producer, set goals for renewable energy sources in 2002 and 2011. Utilities in that state will be required to generate a third of their power from such sources by 2020. But the state set a limit on the inclusion of hydropower. It allows utilities to count only the hydropower produced by smaller hydropower projects—those capable of producing 30 megawatts or less—toward the renewable mandate.
Last year, a bill in the California State Assembly proposed allowing utilities to count large hydropower facilities as well. The Sierra Club and a nonprofit watchdog called The Utility Reform Network (TURN) opposed the bill. TURN wrote that the reversal “would effectively reduce the RPS targets for utilities with existing large hydroelectric generation in their portfolios and significantly undermine the impact of the RPS program on the development of new renewable energy projects in California and the West.” Ultimately, the bill failed to make it out of committee.
Is Hydropower a Renewable Energy or Not?BTW, the IEA link above had other for the change in electricity generation 2012-2013. I must have made a math error somewhere. IEA data shows renewables rising 240 TWh, not 383 TWh. BP data is in the same ballpark. Further, the total electricity increase was larger: 762 TWh vs 506 TWh. This means fossil fuels still generated the majority of new electricity in 2013. My bad.
The oil barrel is half-full.