Alternative . Renewable . Energy

Renewable energy growth

An article on investing in renewable energy portfolios makes an observation about renewable energy growth trends...

Renewable energy, however, is becoming increasingly important, faster than many people realize. In Denmark, for example, over 20% of power usage today comes from wind power alone. In Germany, over 6% of total usage comes from wind. Currently US wind energy capacity, at about 6,500 megawatts (an amount equivalent to the usage of about 1.5 million average American households) lags Germany's 15,000 MW of wind power. In comparison to the US the EU as a whole has over five times the US capacity, about 30,000 MW. But the US Department of Energy has recently announced a plan that will require 5% of US energy consumption to come from wind by 2020. While government initiatives, especially in the energy sector, have a reputation for derailing, renewable domestic power production is conservatively expected to grow at least 1.5% per year, a higher growth rate than any other domestic energy source. Political will or technological innovation may triple this rate.

--

Wind energy = manufacturing jobs?

Here's a post from Geoff at the Alternative Energy Law Blog echoing my earlier post about alternative energy investment and job creation. This time it's specific to wind power.

He points to a report from the Renewable Energy Policy Project on wind energy development and its impact on manufacturing jobs.

The report, Wind Turbine Development: Location of Manfacturing Activity, draws an important comparison between potential new jobs and recent national job loses, noting that increased investment in wind turbine technology could result in thousands of new jobs in the regions of the U.S. that have been hardest hit by manufacturing job losses.

Geoff also points to a press release on the report from the American Wind Energy Association, which offers these figures:

Boosting U.S. wind energy installations to approximately eight times today's levels could create 150,000 manufacturing jobs nationwide, with most jobs being added in the 20 states that have lost the most over the past three years, according to a report released today by the Renewable Energy Policy Project (REPP).

Of course, the trouble with reports like these is that they are put out by groups with an agenda (calling to mind Mark Twain's observation on the three kinds of lies, "lies, damned lies, and statistics). But even taking the figures with a grain of salt, it still offers up some interesting possibilities

--

Global energy facts and figures

Some interesting facts and figures from an article on the global energy situation:

World commercial energy demand, overall, is well over 90% based on non-renewable and environmentally damaging fossil fuels (only 8% is hydropower based, while capital intensive nuclear power depends entirely on non-renewable uranium, thorium and other minerals).

The current ‘oil price crisis’ in reality reflects an emerging and permanent supply crisis for oil and gas (which currently provide about 65% of world commercial energy

Soon after the present and short-term ‘price crisis’ ... which can only intensify in the 2005-2008 period ... and within at most 10 years, both oil supply and natural gas supply will enter into constant and terminal decline, due to physical depletion.

Worldwide oil depletion is now running at about 1.25-1.5 million barrels/day (Mbd) of capacity lost each year, and net additions to world oil production capacity are small, slow, high cost, and irregular.

In many non-OECD countries experiencing fast industrial and economic growth, typical annual growth rates of demand are 5%-9% for oil, and 8%-12% for gas.

World demand growth is admitted by the IEA to be running at 3%/year or more...

Overall and in fact, Kyoto Treaty implementation starting in about 2008 will result in only marginal, or no total and overall reduction of world fossil energy consumption by 2020-2030.

In the near-term, certainly to 2010-2015, world total fossil energy demand will likely increase even faster than today, because of accelerated ‘conventional’ economic development by the newly emerging industrial superpowers, China and India, and several other large population, fast growing economies such as Brazil, Pakistan and Turkey.

Current and conventional urban-industrial economic infrastructures are close to 100% dependent on oil and gas energy, thermal electricity, and hydrocarbon based raw materials, as well as derived products (for example gas and oil-based fertilizers and insecticides for food production, materials utilized for building, and energy needs of operating ‘conventional’ habitat and transport systems).

--

Renewable energy = more jobs, cost savings?

A joint report from labor and environmental advocates suggests that an increased focus on renewable energy development can both create jobs and save money for consumers. The report, with the catchy title Smarter, Cleaner, Stronger: Secure Jobs, Clean Environment, and Less Foreign Oil, outlines their findings on both a national and a state by state level.

According to their projections, if their suggestions are implemented, by 2025 the U.S. will benefit by:

- 1.4 million additional new jobs created
- Average household saving on energy bills of $1,275 per year
- Reduced dependence on foreign oil, strengthening national and economic security for all Americans

There are a lot more details in the report, but here's the basic jist of it.

How does it work? By harnessing the innovative spirit that makes our economy the most dynamic in the world. The key is a comprehensive policy package combining the best elements of market-based incentives and technology-policy approaches, to

- Accelerate the implementation of existing clean, energy-efficient technologies,
- Stimulate the development of renewable domestic energy sources, and
- Promote research and development on efficient new technologies.

Investment in efficient, clean energy technologies lowers business costs and boosts the productivity and competitiveness of American industry, shifting wasted resources into productive output. That means faster economic growth, more jobs, and higher wages.

The plan includes more than 50 individual incentives for better, more efficient technology. Most of them were taken from Scenarios for a Clean Energy Future (CEF).iThe CEF report is the product of a massive multi-year effort by the national laboratories of the U.S. Department of Energy to develop a consensus national energy strategy based on sound science and consistent economic assumptions.

The Smarter, Cleaner, Stronger plan includes policies to promote smarter, cleaner, more efficient energy in every sector of the economy: industry, buildings, transportation and electric generation. Industry can improve performance while cutting costs through better manufacturing processes, more efficient motors, industry agreements, and other policies. Homes and commercial buildings lower their energy bills through better building codes and building upgrades, and stronger equipment and appliance standards.

--

Renewable energy investment creates more jobs

A post on the Science Blog points to a report issued by researchers at the University of California, Berkely that says that investment in renewable energy creates more jobs than investment in fossil-fuels.

"Across a broad range of scenarios, the renewable energy sector generates more jobs per average megawatt of power installed, and per unit of energy produced, than the fossil fuel-based energy sector," the report concludes. "All states of the Union stand to gain in terms of net employment from the implementation of a portfolio of clean energy policies at the federal level."

--

Economic benefits of energy efficiency research eclipses fossil fuels programs

I ran across a research paper called Energy Research at DOE: Was It Worth It? Energy Efficiency and Fossil Energy Research 1978 to 2000 and found some interesting stats.

It looked at the benefits that came out of both the U.S. Department of Energy's Fossil Energy and its Energy Efficiency research. The findings seem to speak pretty loudly in favor of energy efficiency, just from a pure bottom line perspective.

The study looks at the research done from 1978 to 2000. It looks as though the money put into energy efficiency research yielded $23 billion in net realized economic benefits, while the fossil energy programs weighed in with a whopping $.3 billion in net realized economic benefits.

Energy efficiency research
$7 billion in cost
$30 billion in total realized economic benefits
Net: $23 billion

Fossil energy programs
$10.5 billion in cost
$10.8 billion in total realized economic benefits
Net: $.3 billion

This is from page 63 in the right hand column.