Posted on 12/11/2018 2:35:23 PM PST by yesthatjallen
In the name of protecting the environment, some public and political leaders want most of our electrical energy to come from renewables.
The reality is that wind and solar combined supply only 17 percent of electricity-generating capacity in the U.S. and even less globally. This has not deterred environmental organizations and some members of Congress from raising public expectations about renewables. A group of Democrats, led by Rep.-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), is floating the idea of a “Green New Deal” calling for a transition to 100 percent renewable power.
At the same time, 29 states are pressing ahead with renewable portfolio standards requiring utilities to produce designated levels of electricity from renewables.
Not only are renewable portfolio standards expensive and a burden on consumers, new research from the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) shows they don’t always work in reducing carbon emissions. This is because there is enormous uncertainty about how quickly renewable systems can be built, what the cost will be and what the consequences will be for the electricity network.
Worries about climate change don’t translate into solutions unless there is a realistic prospect of success in the U.S. and globally.
Those who disparage the use of coal forget that it accounts for 30 percent of America’s electricity generation and more than 40 percent of the world’s electricity supply. The implications of coal’s continuing importance in the United States and globally are enormous.
Abandoning coal to reduce emissions would not only be economically ruinous in large parts of the world, but simply impossible. The idea of expecting countries like China and India to quit the very fuel they continue to lean on for a secure supply of electricity makes no sense. Nor would it be wise to ban the construction of new coal plants in the United States.
Because coal is the world’s energy mainstay, now is the time to reassess old ways of thinking about coal-fueled power plants. Recognizing coal’s importance, the Trump administration has rolled back an Obama-era regulation that required new coal plants to include systems for the capture and sequestration of carbon emissions. The technology for carbon storage has yet to be developed and demonstrated. If and when carbon storage becomes available, the decision to use the process — which greatly increases the cost of coal generation — should be made by electricity companies, not the government.
The United States holds the key to harnessing advanced coal technologies that could reduce global carbon emissions by as much as 21 percent, according to the National Mining Association. That’s equivalent to all of India’s energy-related carbon emissions. One innovative technology converts carbon emissions at a coal plant into useful products like reinforced concrete. Another is ultra-supercritical coal technology, a more efficient process for generating electricity that emits significantly less carbon than a conventional coal plant.
But improvements to date in coal technology have barely scratched the surface of what is possible. Government energy research and development should focus on the kind of forward-looking, targeted coal technologies that boost plant efficiency and lower carbon emissions.
None of these ideas promise to restore the environment to pre-industrial purity. Neither will a mistaken policy of raising public expectations about renewable resources. The United States can play a major role in the growing international market for new generating capacity by providing advanced technology for many new coal plants needed over the next few decades.
Economic reality — not wishful thinking about costly green power — ought to influence decisions vital to the future of the United States and the world.
Renewables are far from a cure-all. Most experts agree that an all-of-the-above approach to limiting carbon emissions — including nuclear power, natural gas and advanced coal technology — is the answer, if we expect to keep global warming under 2 degrees Celsius in line with the Paris climate accord.
It’s time to drop unrealistic expectations about renewables and instead embrace technological changes in our use of major energy sources to ensure that we can maintain a livable environment.
J. Winston Porter, Ph.D., is a national energy and environmental consultant, based in Atlanta, GA. He is a former assistant administrator of the EPA in Washington DC.
Liberals will never drop unrealistic expectations of renewables.
Basically.
When liberals and progressives gain power.
You will freeze hungry in the dark.
Unless part of the anointed 1% overlords
Liberals will never understand reality. When they do, they cease being liberals.
Actually 17% is a lot more than I would have guessed. I suspect that “other renewables” includes hydro. Wind and solar are probably about 1% together.
Why do the liberals oppose nuclear? Nuclear does not produce any of the dreaded green house gases.
Ping.
I live in Georgetown, TX. Full renewables. And now fully screwed:
Georgetown officials will try to renegotiate the city’s renewable energy contracts and find other cost cuts after a late-summer drop in energy market prices lost the city’s utility $6.84 million.
That percentage may well represent nameplate capacity at full load, not actual power delivered on average.
What ever happened to the Thorium reactor enthusiasm?
I think you’re right. Even this pro “green” article says only 8% in 2017. https://www.windpowermonthly.com/article/1495871/wind-solar-produce-8-us-generation-2017
8% or 17% doesn’t really matter because of the general rule that electricity has to be consumed near where it’s produced. That’s easy enough for a power plant running on coal or gas, which can be easily built anywhere. Wind and solar are trickier because you need just the right conditions (sun, wind, land) to produce. So that’s great for areas that have all three but not so great for the rest of us who are not near those wind and solar energy producing areas.
Most efficient use of solar would be 1000s of little self generating and self renewing solar panels that store energy in their support structure......mmmmm that would be a tree—->wood.....what a concept....just charged my outside wood burning furnace....hickory and maple....
Iowa, Kansas, and Okla are up of 30% windpower. Texas is 18%
The prices will continue to fall and renewables will be implemented elsewhere.
The price of offshore wind has fallen so the north and mid atlantic states will be installing windmills there over the next 10 years.
The article points out that 29 states have renewable electricity standards. Iowa's first renewable standard was in 1984. In Texas it was 1999. New York cranked theirs up to 50% in 2015 based on installing the offshore turbines
Same with the car batteries. They were over $1000/kwh in 2010 and are now $200/kwh and will continue to fall.
Because of exactly that and it works. The entire debate is a scam. You cannot appease a liberal, the entire scam is simply a degrowth movement in the name of “environmentalism.”
Me too, I can’t believe its actually that high.
I seriously doubt that it's that high.
You’re correct. Here’s a link to the official statistics. Hydro is the largest single renewable source of electricity. Wind and solar together total 7.6% of the sources for electric generation.
https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3
This is why they don’t teach math in school anymore - to keep the commie’s useful idiots useful.
I’ve told many a dummy that green bs can only meet 10-20% of the demand. Blank stares of mathematical incomprehension.
But see what happens when a power outage extends beyond 24 hours.
Imagine only having power 3-6 days a month.
Hydro and wood - both renewable.
Sensible people would take a look at how that worked out for Spain when they tried going 100% green. Then again, no one has ever accused the libtards of being sensible.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.