As we continue to debate what the future mix of grid generation will be, we should also critique projections of grid demand that suggest the largest share of future generation will continue to derive primarily from central power sources. Distributed resources like on-site wind, solar, and energy efficiency are filling U.S. power needs in greater amounts every year while also offsetting central generation requirements. The structure of our system is changing in ways many policymakers and investors are not seeing. It would be a mistake to underestimate the potential of clean energy.
In 2015, the Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) figures were challenged by the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) after SEIA calculated solar generation is actually 50% higher than EIA’s numbers. This difference is attributed to EIA’s data collection practices, which excluded 700,000 behind the meter solar installations included in a collaborative analysis by SEIA and kWh Analytics. Another problem with the agency’s numbers is that “EIA assumes renewable growth will lag once subsidies end after 2020” dramatically underestimating the future expansion of renewables.
Bloomberg New Energy Finance’s findings also exceed EIA’s projections with some analysts predicting wind and solar reaching 30% of total U.S. generation in the next 10 years. This growth of wind and solar is driven in part by corporations buying renewable energy, not simply to meet sustainability targets but also to reduce utility expense. An Edison Electric Institute whitepaper reported nearly half of Fortune 500 companies and 60% of Fortune 100 companies now have climate and clean energy goals suggesting a substantial expansion of distributed generation.
Finally, according to ACEEE, a well-designed set of efficiency policies could help the United States avoid a total of 800 power plants by 2030. In fact, efficiency is responsible for the greatest reduction in CO2 emissions over the last 10 years.
Government forecasters are not the only parties underestimating the potential of clean energy. Outside private sector projections of renewable market share have consistently undershoot the rate of change. The most… Read more »
I agree with Mr. Pope’s analysis above, up to a point. It’s certainly true that increasing contributions from intermittent wind and solar resources — whether central or distributed — lead… Read more »
The backup issue to intermittent generation has raised a lot of questions that you have detailed well and, as you say, there are new ways to deal with it. A… Read more »
The NREL study that you’re referring to, Jane, is (in my opinion) misleading, almost to the point of being unethical. It’s conflating — more or less deliberately, as far as… Read more »
I am not sure I understand your complaint about the NREL findings. They claim to be further ahead predicting changes in wind, into a 5 minute window, and can more… Read more »
Just to be absolutely clear, it’s NREL’s ERGIS report (Eastern Renewable Generation Integration Study) that we’re talking about, is it not? “A new NREL elaborate study says that wind and solar… Read more »
Yes, the 30% renewable NREL has determined can be absorbed should have been part of the sentence you crititize. And … I agree that “the study simply found that with… Read more »
Mr. Pope’s analysis needs to be expanded further to take a longer view of things. How much will all the new wind and solar energy sources cost, including the cost… Read more »
Herschel: A carbon tax is not needed to subsidize renewables. The carbon tax corrects for the market failure caused by the price of fossil fuels not including all of their… Read more »
Dan: I have no doubt that a fee and dividend process, if the fees are high enough, can drive fossil energy out of business ” The power to tax is… Read more »
Herschel: I’m not anti-nuclear, I’m anti-CO2. So I’m fine with the concept of nuclear power plants. But nuclear has a number of problems right now. It is expensive to build,… Read more »
I see the discussion has centered a bit on costs, projections of which, by the EIA, are still a topic of contention. I have raised the issue because I think… Read more »
Jane: You are right to push for more realistic numbers from EIA for renewable energy. As to the future for centralized power plants i am far less concerned about their… Read more »
Herschel, Yes, We will have a mix of centralized and distributed energy, and as we increase on-site generation and efficient buildings we reduce the grid demand. That is what is… Read more »
Jane: What you seem to be saying is that, in the summer time, if you build enough offshore wind turbines and couple them with enough solar energy systems you might… Read more »
Herschel, “With the exception of summer, all peak-time demand for Virginia to Maine can be satisfied with OWE in the waters off those states.” (wind Energ. 2013; 16:977–997) Researchers claim… Read more »
Jane: Thank you for the link to the Perez paper. I’ve looked it over and do not yet fully understand their terminology. I’ve got more work to do, but I’m… Read more »
Herschel, Yes, a mix is the way I see it .. me and RMI who thinks that if we don’t move faster more people will want to go off grid… Read more »
The discussion should not be focussed on purely photovoltaics and wind. On the building side we have building-based efficiency – essentially energy generators – solar water heating, solar-driven-absorption cooling, solar… Read more »
Scott, You are right to emphasize the efficiency measures. Efficiency has been given short shrift in terms of the impact efficiency measures can make. Some utility people tend to think… Read more »