Solar panels are installed at the Solar Farm at the University of California, Merced, in Merced, California, on August 17, 2022.
The production of electricity to power homes and businesses contributes significantly to climate change. In the United States, one-quarter of greenhouse gas emissions come from electricity generation, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.
Solar panels and wind farms can produce electricity without emitting any greenhouse gas emissions. So can nuclear power plants, although today’s power plants create long-lasting radioactive waste, which has no permanent storage.
related investing news
But America’s electric sector is still dependent on fossil fuels. In 2021, 61 percent of electricity generation came from burning coal, natural gas, or oil. Only 20 percent of U. Read also : Inflation reduction bill to give the U.S. solar energy industry much-needed growth.S. electricity comes from renewable sources, mostly wind, hydro and solar, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Another 19 percent comes from nuclear power.
The contribution of renewable energy sources has been steadily increasing since the 1990s, and the growth rate has accelerated. For example, wind power provided just 2.8 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity in 1990, doubling to 5.6 billion in 2000. But it has skyrocketed since then, rising to 94.6 billion in 2010 and 379.8 billion in 2021.
That’s progress, but it’s not happening fast enough to eliminate the worst consequences of climate change for our descendants.
“We must eliminate global greenhouse gas emissions by 2050,” philanthropist and technologist Bill Gates wrote in his 2023 annual letter. “Extreme weather is already causing more suffering, and if we don’t get to zero emissions, our grandchildren will grow up in a dramatically worse world.”
And the problem is actually bigger than it seems.
“We don’t just need to generate as much electricity as we have now, but three times more,” says Saul Griffith, an entrepreneur who sold companies to Google and Autodesk and has written books on mass electrification. To get to zero emissions, all cars and heating and furnace systems will have to be powered by electricity, Griffith said. Electricity is not necessarily clean, but at least it can be, unlike gas stoves or gasoline cars.
The technology to generate electricity using wind and solar has been around for decades. So why isn’t the electricity grid already 100% powered by renewable sources? And what will it take to get there?
The economics of power generation
First of all, renewable energy sources have only recently become cost-competitive with fossil fuels for electricity production. Read also : Salt makes solar thermal power more cost-effective. Even then, prices depend on location, Paul Denholm of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory told CNBC.
In sunny California and Arizona, solar is often the cheapest option, while in places like Maine, solar is just on the edge of being the cheapest energy source, Denholm said. In windy places like North Dakota, wind power is competitive with fossil fuels, but in the Southeast, it’s still close.
Then there is the cost of transitioning the current electricity generation infrastructure, which is built around burning fossil fuels.
“You have an existing plant, it’s paid off. Now you need renewables to be cheaper than running that plant to actually retire the old plant,” Denholm explained. “You need new renewables to be cheaper just in the variable costs or operating costs of that plant.”
There are places where this is true, but it is not universally so.
“Primarily, it takes a long time to turn around the capital of a multi-trillion dollar industry,” Denholm said. “We just have a huge amount of old equipment. And it takes a while to turn it all around.”
Intermittency and transmission
One of the biggest obstacles to a 100% renewable grid is the intermittency of many renewable energy sources. The wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t always shine — and the windiest and sunniest places aren’t near all of the country’s major population centers.
Wind resources in the United States, according to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, a national laboratory of the US Department of Energy.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, a national laboratory of the US Department of Energy.
The solution is a combination of batteries to store excess energy for times when production is low, and transmission lines to transfer energy to where it is needed.
Long-lasting batteries are under development, but Denholm said much progress can be made with simple batteries that store energy for a few hours.
“One of the biggest problems right now is switching a little bit of solar, for example, from say 11 a.m. and noon to peak demand at 6 p.m. or 7 p.m. So you really only need a few hours of battery,” Denholm told CNBC. “You can actually fill that with conventional lithium-ion batteries. This is very close to the type of batteries that are put in cars today. You can go really far with that.”
Until now, battery consumption has been low because wind and solar power are primarily used to buffer the grid when energy sources are low, rather than as a primary source. For the first 20% to 40% of the region’s electricity to come from wind and solar, battery storage is not needed, Denholm said. When the penetration of renewable energy sources starts to reach closer to 50%, then battery storage is needed. And building and installing all those batteries will take time and money.
Solar resources in the United States, according to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, a national laboratory of the US Department of Energy.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, a national laboratory of the US Department of Energy.
Transmission lines are another limiting factor.
“We’ve been able to do a fair amount of wind and solar without adding new transmission, but we’re really pushing the limits, especially for wind, because there’s not a lot of transmission that’s in places that are super windy,” Denholm said. that we absolutely have to build more transmission to take advantage of those super-high-quality wind sources, especially in the middle of the country.”
The U.S. transmission system is built for electricity capacity that is already on the grid, and building new transmission lines spanning hundreds of miles can take 10 to 15 years, said John Moura, director of reliability assessment at North American Electric Reliability Corp. he told CNBC. “The type of transmission we’re talking about here are 1,000 [or] 2,000-mile long, big projects.”
Currently, when a utility wants to add electricity to an existing grid, it must pay for an upgraded transmission line and interconnection, where multiple local grids are connected. Those network upgrades are expensive and the permitting process is slow.
Several components of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act signed into law in November 2021 gave the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission much stronger permitting authority, transmission analyst Rob Gramlich told CNBC. However, some key rule changes did not make it to the finish line. This year’s Inflation Reduction Act did not include a carryover tax credit, and efforts by Sen. Joe Manchin, D.-W.Va., to reform licenses have so far failed.
“Transmission was not meaningfully addressed in the 117th Congress. There’s a lot of unfinished business on the transmission front, for sure,” Gramlich told CNBC.
Placing power lines underground is another option, but this is prohibitively expensive.
“Your classic, vintage, big overhead power lines are pretty much the only thing we’re likely to see for at least the next decade or two,” Denholm said.
Land requirements? Not that big a deal
One often-cited concern is that 100% renewables will require vast tracts of land covered in solar panels or wind farms.
But “it’s definitely not a challenge,” Moura said.
A total of 0.84 percent of US land would be needed to support a fully renewable energy system, Stanford professor Mark Jacobson told CNBC. By comparison, the fossil fuel industry occupies 1.3 percent of US land.
“Wind power, tidal power and offshore wave power are not taking up any new land. Rooftop photovoltaics are not taking up any new land,” he said.
So really, the only new land would be needed for utility-run solar facilities and onshore wind turbines.
But many people are hesitant to embrace a new way of working when they can’t see what the future will look like, and when maintaining the status quo is the path of least resistance, according to Griffith, an advocate of mass electrification
“The biggest obstacle is a lack of imagination,” Griffith told CNBC in a video interview from Australia, where he currently lives. “So everybody’s like, ‘Well, I’m not really willing to do this, because I don’t know what it’s going to look like. And it might be scary.'”
So what would a world with 100% renewable energy look like, according to Griffith?
“It will look like every house has solar power on its roof. There will be solar power above every parking structure. Some roads will probably have solar panels erected in the middle of the road. And every time you go for a drive in the countryside, you’ll see wind somewhere on the horizon.” , Griffith said.
“And otherwise, the future will look similar.”
‘The right thing to do is not the easy thing to do’
Firm and consistent federal government rules are another drawback in the US, and it comes down to politics.
“In Norway, you can’t buy a petrol vehicle after 2025. That creates a huge uncertainty in the market. Everyone knows when it’s going to happen, what you have to do,” Griffith said.
The August 2022 Inflation Relief Act was full of incentives to push renewables forward, but it didn’t set firm dates for fossil fuel production to end.
“It doesn’t really send a clear signal to utilities that, ‘No, you can no longer install natural gas lines to heat homes. No, you can’t do this or that or that.’ So I think more regulatory, legislative certainty would help America a lot,” Griffith said.
Until then, it will still be cheaper and easier to keep doing things the same old way.
Saul Griffith’s Electric Home in San Francisco.
Griffith has lived in the US for more than two decades and built an all-electric house in San Francisco starting in 2014. It took him eight years and cost an extra $80,000 compared to building a traditional house, he said.
“There’s a kind of inertia and bureaucracy at every level of the system as well,” Griffith said. “And then even after I’ve finished and built that house, it’s hard to get involved. There are people who are really skilled at maintaining a digital electric house [but] there’s still no software that makes it easy. Several startups are working on it.. . It’s like the early days of the cell phone.”
Even incremental repairs are more difficult to do with an all-electric home.
“If you call a contractor and say, ‘I’d like to install an induction cooktop, I’d like to take the gas out of the kitchen,’ the contractor will probably say, ‘You’re crazy, buy natural gas instead.’ Or if you call them at midnight and say, ‘My water heater’s gone, can you replace it with an electric heat pump,’ which would be the right choice for the climate and even the economy, the contractor will say, ‘No, no, no, there I’ll get natural gas in the morning, but I’ll need a heat pump for six weeks,’ Griffith said.
“So we have a lack of skills and capacity and supply chain for all these things, which means the right thing is not an easy thing,” he said.
In Australia, more than 30 percent of homes have rooftop solar, and it’s “the cheapest energy mankind has ever had,” Griffith said. In the US, only about 1 to 2 percent of homes have rooftop solar.
“It’s more expensive in America than grid electricity. It’s a regulatory problem and a workforce training problem in the US.”
For example, in Australia, Griffith said he can call 10 companies and get 10 quotes for rooftop solar the next day at 65 cents per watt. In California, rooftop solar cost him $5.80 per watt. Even given the generally higher cost of living in San Francisco, “it shouldn’t be 10 times more expensive than in Australia,” he said.
Saul Griffith’s Electric Home in San Francisco.
His view is that in the US everything comes down to regulation and preserving the status quo.
“America thinks it’s all about free markets and anti-regulation, but in fact, it’s the most overregulated, most fucked-up energy market in the world,” Griffith said.
For example, many utility companies provide both electricity and gas to their customers in the US.
“One of their jobs is in conflict with the other and they haven’t resolved it,” Griffith said. “So we’re still behind electric solutions versus natural gas solutions.”
To change all of this, he said, Americans will have to see a better alternative that actually works outside the U.S. — and then push politicians and private industry to do better at home.
“You just have to show that this works somewhere. And when you do, it could unlock the complete political paralysis of America,” Griffith said.
In the US, a successful campaign for rooftop solar will be more about avoiding utility bills and rebelling against utilities and governments than saving the Earth, Griffith added. Given those economic and political realities, he said rooftop solar is more likely to take off first in more conservative states like Texas or Florida.
“It’s going to be a company called Liberation Solar — it’s going to be the largest solar installer in the US.” he said, perhaps only partly joking.
A new analysis of energy research by 23 scientists around the world concluded that the world could reach a 100% renewable energy system by or before 2050.
Is it possible to run the US on renewable energy?
US can get to 100% clean energy with wind, water, solar and zero nuclear, Stanford professor says. Stanford professor Mark Jacobson sees a way for the US to meet its energy needs by 2050 with 100% wind, hydro and solar.
Why hasn’t the US switched to renewable energy? It all comes down to costs and infrastructure. Finally, the biggest obstacle to the development of renewable energy is its cost and logistical barriers. As the infrastructure for renewable energy grows, we will see the popularity and usage grow.
Is it possible for America to be 100% renewable energy? Is it even possible for the entire US to be reliably powered by 100% renewable energy sources? Conclusion: Yes. But the devil is in the details, and debate rages over how to get there.
Can the United States run on renewable energy?
Renewable Energy in the United States In 2022, solar and wind are expected to add more than 60% of utility generation capacity to the US power grid (46% from solar, 17% from wind). The United States is a resource-rich country with abundant sources of renewable energy.
Can the US rely on renewable energy? In 2021, renewable energy sources accounted for about 12.4% of total US primary energy consumption. Renewable energy sources accounted for about 19.8% of the total electricity production in the utility sector. Learn more: What is US electricity generation by energy source?
Can the US run on solar energy?
The abundance and potential of solar energy across the United States is staggering: PV panels on just 22,000 square miles of total land area – roughly the size of Lake Michigan – could provide enough electricity to power the entire United States.
Does Biden support solar energy? The expansion of community solar power is likely necessary to achieve Biden’s climate goals, which include achieving net zero electricity by 2035. This will allow people who rent their homes and have fewer ways to access solar panels or people without the means to finance such investments.
Can the US run on 100% renewable energy? USCA states can meet 100 percent of their electricity consumption with renewable energy by 2035 even with strong increases in demand due to the electrification of transportation and heating. The transition to renewable energy sources brings strong benefits in terms of health, climate, economy and energy affordability.
Can the US run on solar energy?
The abundance and potential of solar energy across the United States is staggering: PV panels on just 22,000 square miles of total land area – roughly the size of Lake Michigan – could provide enough electricity to power the entire United States.
Can the US run on 100% renewable energy? USCA states can meet 100 percent of their electricity consumption with renewable energy by 2035, even with strong increases in demand due to the electrification of transportation and heating. The transition to renewable energy sources brings strong benefits in terms of health, climate, economy and energy affordability.
Does Biden support solar energy?
The expansion of community solar power is likely necessary to achieve Biden’s climate goals, which include achieving net zero electricity by 2035. This will allow people who rent their homes and have fewer ways to access solar panels or people without the means to finance such investments.
What is Biden’s clean energy program? The EECBG program will fund 50 states, five US territories, the District of Columbia, 774 tribes and 1,878 local governments in various capacity-building, planning and infrastructure efforts to reduce carbon emissions and energy use and improve energy efficiency in transportation, construction and others. ..
Will the US government pay for solar panels? Homeowners are eligible for federal tax credits for solar installations, but not free panels or cash incentives.
Why can’t we replace fossil fuels?
The reason why there are no viable alternative or “clean” fuels that can replace fossil fuels is that fossil fuels are extremely energy dense. In addition, it is easy to generate energy from fossil fuels and — more importantly — to capture the energy produced during the burning of fossil fuels.
Why do we still need fossil fuels? We are dependent on these fuels for heating our homes, driving our vehicles, the electrical industry and the production and supply of electricity.
Can fossil fuels ever be replaced? Short answer: yes. The big question: when? A complete transition from fossil fuels to renewable, clean energy will not happen overnight, but the need is becoming increasingly urgent.
What would happen if we replaced fossil fuels? Given that the effects of anthropogenic climate change are becoming more and more powerful, it is clear that reversing them is to a large extent preferable to delaying them. If we stopped using fossil fuels today, warming would certainly slow down, but removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere will eventually have to happen.
What are 3 negative impacts that are caused by renewable resources?
Environmental impacts associated with solar energy can include land use and habitat loss, water use, and the use of hazardous materials in production, although the types of impacts vary greatly depending on the scale of the system and the technology used—photovoltaic (PV) solar cells or concentrated solar thermal …
. Now it’s time to look at some of the disadvantages of renewable energy sources that make their use difficult.
- Renewable energy is not available 24 hours a day. …
- The efficiency of renewable technologies is low. …
- The initial cost of renewable energy is high. …
- Renewable energy sites require a lot of space.
How much land would it take to power the US with wind turbines?
The US consumes a large amount of energy each year. But each wind turbine only takes up about a quarter of an acre of land, so that’s only about 470 square miles of U.S. land mass where the wind turbine would actually be. The US is about 3.8 million square miles, so that’s only about 0.01% of the land mass.
How much wind capacity would the United States need to meet 20% of wind electricity needs by 2030? The 20% wind scenario would require delivery of nearly 1.16 billion MWh of wind energy in 2030, changing US electricity generation as shown in Figure ES-11.
How much land is needed for wind energy? Most wind farm projects require at least 60 hectares of land per megawatt produced; however, only a very small percentage (about 3%) of this land will be used for the installation of wind turbines and other supporting infrastructure.
How many acres of land do you need for a wind turbine?
Area required for a wind farm A single wind turbine can require up to 80 hectares of land, and each turbine will produce around 2.5 MW. Because the wind turbines are so far apart, surface activities such as agriculture can still take place over much of the land.
How much are landowners paid for wind turbines? Wind farm lease terms vary widely, but general rules are: $4,000 to $8,000 per turbine, $3,000 to $4,000 per megawatt of capacity, or 2-4% of gross revenue. Larger turbines should lead to higher payments.
How many turbines fit on one hectare? In practice, the cost of land and supporting infrastructure may force companies to move closer to space turbines. Correction: We previously reported that one hectare can accommodate between 40 and 80 wind turbines.
Is my land good for wind turbines?
How do I know if my land is suitable for wind turbines? Well, the best way to determine if your land is suitable for wind turbines is to see if there are any other turbines in the area. If so, chances are your country could definitely host!
How much do you get paid to install a wind turbine on your property? Wind farm lease terms vary widely, but general rules are: $4,000 to $8,000 per turbine, $3,000 to $4,000 per megawatt of capacity, or 2-4% of gross revenue.
How many wind turbines would it take to power the USA?
To answer that question, AWEA’s manager of industry data analysis, John Hensley, did the following math: 4.082 billion megawatt-hours (average annual U.S. electricity consumption) divided by 7.008 megawatt-hours of annual wind energy production per turbine of wind is equal to approximately 583,000 onshore turbines.
How many wind turbines would it take to power the entire world? Depending on the size of the turbine (larger ones can produce more electricity), we may need fewer wind turbines. If we used only extremely efficient turbines (ie those generating 4 MW of power at 40% capacity), about 1.49 million turbines could supply the world’s electricity consumption.
How many wind turbines should power New York? According to Paul Sclavounos, a professor of mechanical and naval engineering, 4,000 five-megawatt turbines could meet New York City’s average annual electricity consumption.
How many wind turbines would it take to replace oil?
Each wind turbine needs 80 gallons of oil as a lubricant and we are not talking about vegetable oil, this is PAO synthetic oil based on crude… 12,000 gallons. That oil should be changed once a year. It is estimated that just over 3,800 turbines would be needed to power a city the size of New York…
How much oil is in each wind turbine? Check the oil changers on the generally smaller size turbines installed in the mid-1980s hold about 10 gallons of oil or less. Newer, larger machines can hold as much as 60 gallons.
Does it take 60 gallons of oil to lubricate a wind turbine? The turbine has to run continuously for 7 years just to replace the energy that was needed for production. Lasts 3 to 7 years. It takes 60 gallons of oil for lubrication and leaks a lot.