-->
-->
-->
Elizabeth Rosenthal wrote an article, “Life
After Oil and Gas,” published in the NY Times Sunday Review of March 24,
2013. She begins by questioning the
mantra that we need fossil
fuels. She cites examples of countries
like, Iceland, Norway, Canada, Sweden, and others that now generate over 50% of
their electricity from renewable resources and conveys the impression that
renewables are a lot closer at hand, and more could and should be done.
I certainly do not disagree with the need to
transition to renewables, but as I have maintained, it will take many decades
of consistent effort to achieve any significant market penetration. There are several points that I would like to
make with respect to the article to rectify the impression the article
conveys.
First, while electricity production consumes a
substantial portion (30-40%) of primary energy use, it by no means consumes all.
By offering examples of renewable electricity
and questioning the need for fossil energy,
the article conflates the two. Even in
Iceland they drive their cars and trucks with oil! Second, the countries that generate most of
their electricity from renewable resources rely mainly on large hydroelectric
power. For Iceland, which generates 100% of its electricity from renewables,
geothermal adds 25% to the 75% from hydro.
Both hydro and geothermal systems produce power that can serve as base
load, which is not true for the wind and PV systems.
A second point worth noting is that the overall
energy consumption in the countries with high renewables component tends to be
small. Per capita energy consumption in Iceland is high, but the total energy
use in Iceland is less than 0.25% of the US consumption and the country is not
even listed in the BP Statistical Review of World Energy. Denmark uses about 1%
of the US energy, while Sweden and Norway consume about 2% of the US energy
use. Germany, which is considerably
larger economy and uses about 25% of the US energy, has aggressively supported
renewables through feed-in tariffs is now generating 13% of its electricity—which comprises 17% of total primary energy—from renewable resources: 30% hydro , 63% wind, and 7% solar.
However, as noted towards the end of the article by Rosenthal, it is re-evaluating its policy
towards renewable energy, which has increased the cost of power, in the face of
economic uncertainty. It is one thing to
achieve high renewables percentages when the overall demand is limited, but
quite another to do it on a massive scale.
An important lesson that we can draw from the
success of Nordic countries is that we should make best use of the resources
available. Denmark finds itself conveniently situated between Norway, with a
lot of hydroelectricity and Germany with a fairly substantial demand. Denmark
has installed almost 4 GW of wind power, and when there is excess power
available it can easily send it to Germany, and in times of low demand send it
to Norway for storage as pumped hydro.
Now that’s taking full advantage of one’s situation.
No comments:
Post a Comment