[Graeme]

Renewables can fill 80 percent electricity demand in U.S. in 2050

In the United States, renewable energy sources could supply 80 percent of electricity demand in 2050 just by using technologies commercially available today. That is the word from a new report from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Renewable Electricity Futures Study (RE Futures). The report offers a detailed focus on the extent to which U.S. electricity needs can be supplied by renewable energy sources, including biomass, geothermal, hydropower, solar, and wind.


The lineup of renewable electricity technologies is discussed from a national perspective. The study’s overall position is that a future U.S. electricity system largely powered by renewable sources is possible and that further work is warranted to investigate “this clean generation pathway.“
Reaching an 80 percent-renewables goal by 2050, says the study, will involve fifty percent of electricity coming from wind and photovoltaics. “The analysis treats a variety of scenarios with prescribed levels of renewable electricity generation in 2050, from 30% to 90%, with a focus on 80% (with nearly 50% from variable wind and solar photovoltaic generation).”

A diverse mix of renewable energy resources, such as geothermal, solar, wind and wave energy, can support multiple combinations of renewable technologies. The results would be meaningful reductions in electric sector greenhouse gas emissions and water use. The study finds no geographical gaps in achieving the 2050 goal. "All regions of the United States could contribute substantial renewable electricity supply in 2050, consistent with their local renewable resource base."

phys.org

[Graeme]

Are we wildly underestimating solar and wind power?

Right now, renewable energy sources like solar and wind still provide just a small fraction of the world’s electricity. But they’re growing fast. Very fast. Three new pieces of evidence suggest that many policymakers may be drastically underestimating just how quickly wind and solar are expanding.
1) Solar is growing exponentially. Let’s start with this chart from Gregor MacDonald, using data from BP’s 2012 Statistical Review of World Energy, showing that global use of solar power has grown exponentially in the past few years. Watch that graph go parabolic:

Across the globe, 55 terawatt-hours of solar power had been installed by the end of 2011. That may not seem like much in itself — the United States by itself, after all, needed about one hundred times that much power in 2011. But solar has been growing at a stunning rate, as panels keep getting dramatically cheaper. If these exponential growth rates, MacDonald notes, solar could provide nearly 10 percent of the world’s electricity by 2018.
2) Official agencies keep underestimating the growth rate of renewables. Perhaps MacDonald’s predictions sound like a wild fantasy. After all, the International Energy Agency is forecasting that solar will catch on much more slowly — providing a mere 4.5 percent of the world’s electricity by 2035. But here’s the hitch: The IEA has almost always underestimated how quickly wind and solar can grow.

Want proof? Check out this new report from the Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century. Sure, that’s not an unbiased source. But all the report does is compare past predictions about renewables by official government forecasters with reality. And the forecasters have consistently been too pessimistic. For instance, back in 2000, the IEA’s World Energy Outlook predicted that non-hydro sources of renewable energy would make up 3 percent of global energy by the year 2020. The world reached that point in 2008, well ahead of schedule.

washingtonpost

[seenmostofit]

Are we wildly underestimating solar and wind power?

Based on that graph, I'm guessing the answer is HOLY CRAP YES!! Fortunately, everyone around here understands the exponential function and can take one look at that graph and arrive at the same answer I just did.

[ralfy]

The catch is an energy trap:

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/201 ... ergy-trap/

[Serial_Worrier]

Cornucopian bullshit.

[seenmostofit]

Cornucopian bullshit.

""The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function."

So no, not BS, just...exponential growth. Once upon a time it was good enough for oil, now it is apparently good enough for other stuff.

[TheAntiDoomer]

Cornucopian bullshit.

LOL I guess that is why you are he serial "worrier". Relax dude the exponential function is awesome, so crack a beer and enjoy the technocopia coming your way.

[Dismayed]

"Cornucopian bullshit."

Wow, what a deep and insightful analysis. I'm sure you'll win over a lot of people to your thoughtful viewpoint.

"There are idiot. Look around!"
~ Larry Summers

[cephalotus]

The catch is an energy trap:

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/201 ... ergy-trap/

From your link:

"...
Let’s say that our nation (or world) uses 100 units of fossil fuel energy one year, and expects to get only 98 units the following year. We need to come up with 2 units of replacement energy within a year’s time to fill the gap. If, for example, the replacement:

■has an EROEI of 10:1;
■requires most of the energy investment up front (solar panel or wind turbine manufacture, nuclear plant construction, etc.);
■and will last 40 years,
then we need an up-front energy investment amounting to 4 year’s worth of the new source’s output energy. Since we require an output of 2 units of energy to fill the gap, we will need 8 units of energy to bring the resource into use.

Of the 100 units of total energy resource in place in year one, only 92 are available for use—looking suddenly like an 8% decline. If we sit on our hands and do not launch a replacement infrastructure, we would have 98 units available for use next year. It’s still a decline, but a 2% decline is more palatable than an effective 8% decline. Since each subsequent year expects a similar fossil fuel decline, the game repeats. Where is the incentive to launch a new infrastructure? This is why I call it a trap.

..."

My answer is based on 3 minutes with an Excel sheet:

If you have 100 units of energy in year 0 you could use 1 unit to make solar panels during year 0. So in the year 0 you would have 99 units available instead of 100 units.

BUT: That 1 unit senergy invested in solar from year 0 will produce 0.25 units of energy in year 1, year 2, in year 3,... until year 40.

The same happens with 1.1 additional unit solar built in year 1, 1.21 units solar in year 2 and so on... (10% anual solar growth rate)

Now look what happens to the available units of energy in the standard szenario(-2%/a) or in the solar szenario(-2%/a, built 1 units solar in year 0, with a solar built growth rate of 10%, 1 unit energy invested in solar will give you 0.25 units energy for 40 years)

year 0: standard: 100.0 units, solar: 99.0 units
year 1: standard: 98.0 units, solar: 97.2 units
year 2: standard: 96.0 units, solar: 95.4 units
year 5: standard: 90.4 units, solar: 90.3 units
year 10: standard: 81.7 units, solar: 83.1 units
year 20: standard: 66.8 units, solar: 74.4 units
year 30: standard: 54.4 units, solar: 78.2 units
year 40: standard: 44.6 units, solar: 110.0 units

This is the math that tells you why you should invest in solar/renewables NOW and why you can't wait until you run out of energy. It also tells you why the trap is not going solar, but doing nothing.

best regards

[ralfy]

The trap is not going solar or not just doing nothing but the energy that needs to be invested in the move to renewable sources.

[roccman]

Renewables can fill 80 percent electricity demand in U.S. in 2050

In the United States, renewable energy sources could supply 80 percent of electricity demand in 2050 just by using technologies commercially available today. That is the word from a new report from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Renewable Electricity Futures Study (RE Futures). The report offers a detailed focus on the extent to which U.S. electricity needs can be supplied by renewable energy sources, including biomass, geothermal, hydropower, solar, and wind.


The lineup of renewable electricity technologies is discussed from a national perspective. The study’s overall position is that a future U.S. electricity system largely powered by renewable sources is possible and that further work is warranted to investigate “this clean generation pathway.“
Reaching an 80 percent-renewables goal by 2050, says the study, will involve fifty percent of electricity coming from wind and photovoltaics. “The analysis treats a variety of scenarios with prescribed levels of renewable electricity generation in 2050, from 30% to 90%, with a focus on 80% (with nearly 50% from variable wind and solar photovoltaic generation).”

A diverse mix of renewable energy resources, such as geothermal, solar, wind and wave energy, can support multiple combinations of renewable technologies. The results would be meaningful reductions in electric sector greenhouse gas emissions and water use. The study finds no geographical gaps in achieving the 2050 goal. "All regions of the United States could contribute substantial renewable electricity supply in 2050, consistent with their local renewable resource base."

phys.org

i just spent the last week in San Fran (the solar capital of NA) - and you would think the entire industry is imploding - the big three (sun ed/sun power/ first solar) are laying off folk by the boat loads...electic utilities are loath to sign another contract for solar (they REALLY don't want solar on their lines, but that is an entirely different story)...financing is a trick at best for only a small amount of "shovel ready" projects...transmission is constrained and warranty issues are arising at break neck speed for projects already in the ground.

so - the linked article is great window dressing, but not reality.