• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Most of The World Could Be 100% Powered With Renewables by 2050

IEA is underestimating the potential of renewable energy. For example, that their own report show that renewables accounted for almost two-thirds of net new power capacity around the world in 2016.

https://www.iea.org/publications/renewables2017/

That at the same time developing countries sees the great potential of renewable energy, for example that they invested more in renewable energy than developed countries in 2016.

Developing world invests more in renewable energy than rich countries for first time, new study says | The Independent

There you for example have India that plans to have 60% of electricity capacity from non-fossil fuels by 2027.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/21/india-renewable-energy-paris-climate-summit-target

While the cost of renewable energy continues to drop.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...ble-energy-costs-leads-to-record-global-boost

Years ago, I was talking with a guy who helping Eastern Europe after the fall of the Soviet Union.
The telephone infrastructure in many places was from the 1940's and had seen little improvement.
He was telling me it was economical to set up cell phone towers, rather than try to fix the wired infrastructure.
While the voice quality at the time was less than wired in the west, it was better and more reliable than the system in place.
While the first world countries would not accept anything less than full on demand power,
someone who is getting electricity for the first time, might see the poor duty cycle of renewable,
as an enormous improvement.
Going backwards is difficult to accept, moving forward is always an improvement.
 
[h=2]German solar: 10 hours of sun in December makes 40 Gigawatts of nothing[/h]
From Pierre Gosselin at No Tricks Zone:
Germany needs 80GW of electricity. It has 40GW of installed solar PV.
See the graph: The red line is what the country used, and the orange bumps are the solar contribution.
Clearly, solar power will take over the world.

In December, Germany got ten hours of sunlight. That’s not a daily figure, that’s the whole month. So in summer on a sunny day, solar PV can make half the electricity the nation needs for lunch. In winter, almost nothing. From fifty percent, to five percent.
Imagine what kind of havoc this kind of energy flux can do. Not one piece of baseload capital equipment can be retired, despite the fact that half of it is randomly unprofitable depending on cloud cover. Solar PV eats away the low cost competitive advantage. Capital sits there unused, spinning on standby, while wages, interest, and other costs keep accruing. So hapless baseload suppliers charge more for the hours that they do run, making electricity more expensive.
They just need batteries with three months supply. It will be fine once Germany turns the state of Thuringia into a redox unit.

Read about it: Dark Days For German Solar Power, Country Saw Only 10 Hours Of Sun In All Of December!
It’s rare for Germans to botch up an engineering task on quite this scale.





 
[h=2]German solar: 10 hours of sun in December makes 40 Gigawatts of nothing[/h]
From Pierre Gosselin at No Tricks Zone:
Germany needs 80GW of electricity. It has 40GW of installed solar PV.
See the graph: The red line is what the country used, and the orange bumps are the solar contribution.
Clearly, solar power will take over the world.

In December, Germany got ten hours of sunlight. That’s not a daily figure, that’s the whole month. So in summer on a sunny day, solar PV can make half the electricity the nation needs for lunch. In winter, almost nothing. From fifty percent, to five percent.
Imagine what kind of havoc this kind of energy flux can do. Not one piece of baseload capital equipment can be retired, despite the fact that half of it is randomly unprofitable depending on cloud cover. Solar PV eats away the low cost competitive advantage. Capital sits there unused, spinning on standby, while wages, interest, and other costs keep accruing. So hapless baseload suppliers charge more for the hours that they do run, making electricity more expensive.
They just need batteries with three months supply. It will be fine once Germany turns the state of Thuringia into a redox unit.

Read about it: Dark Days For German Solar Power, Country Saw Only 10 Hours Of Sun In All Of December!
It’s rare for Germans to botch up an engineering task on quite this scale.






Believe it or not, nobody expected solar power to make much of a contribution in mid-winter. That is why Germany also has lots of wind generators :roll:
 
Actually, it's why Germany is boosting coal again.

Germany isn't boosting coal:

gross-power-production-germany-1990-2016-new.png
 
Germany isn't boosting coal:
You may remember this thread.

In the article linked below the author bemoans the fact that Germany is emitting more CO2 than ever despite its pronouncements about the climate.

But It’s not so much hypocrisy on Germany’s part as a lack of a good strategy.

Experts told them that they could go all renewable energy, but it did’t work. They were forced to build more coal plants to avoid blackouts, returning to nuclear being politically impossible.

That makes 4 nations that have failed in efforts to go full renewable; Germany, Japan, Spain, and Australia. And Japan is also building more coal plants.http://http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/11/13/germany-is-a-coal-burning-gas-guzzling-climate-change-hypocrite/
 
You may remember this thread.

In the article linked below the author bemoans the fact that Germany is emitting more CO2 than ever despite its pronouncements about the climate.

But It’s not so much hypocrisy on Germany’s part as a lack of a good strategy.

Experts told them that they could go all renewable energy, but it did’t work. They were forced to build more coal plants to avoid blackouts, returning to nuclear being politically impossible.

That makes 4 nations that have failed in efforts to go full renewable; Germany, Japan, Spain, and Australia. And Japan is also building more coal plants.http://http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/11/13/germany-is-a-coal-burning-gas-guzzling-climate-change-hypocrite/

Yes, you lied. Germany is not emitting more CO2 than ever.
 
Yes, you lied. Germany is not emitting more CO2 than ever.

From the link:

". . . Yet Germany’s image as selfless defender of the climate, which was once largely deserved, is now a transparent fiction. Germany has fallen badly behind on its pledges to sink its own greenhouse gas pollutants. In fact, Germany’s carbon emissions haven’t declined for nearly a decade and the German Environment Agency calculated that Germany emitted 906 million tons of CO2 in 2016 — the highest in Europe — compared to 902 million in 2015. And 2017’s interim numbers suggest emissions are going to tick up again this year. . . ."
 
Coal / natural gas
[h=1]CO2-Consuming Fossil Fuel Combustion[/h]Guest post by David Middleton “The CDCL process is the most advanced and cost-effective approach to carbon capture we have reviewed to date and are committed to supporting its commercial viability through large-scale pilot plant design and feasibility studies. With the continued success of collaborative development program with Ohio State, B&W believes CDCL has potential…
 
Coal / natural gas
[h=1]CO2-Consuming Fossil Fuel Combustion[/h]Guest post by David Middleton “The CDCL process is the most advanced and cost-effective approach to carbon capture we have reviewed to date and are committed to supporting its commercial viability through large-scale pilot plant design and feasibility studies. With the continued success of collaborative development program with Ohio State, B&W believes CDCL has potential…

I don't quite get what they are doing, but it sounds interesting.
Coal contains a lot of carbon by weight, I wonder where all that carbon is collecting?
 
From the link:

". . . Yet Germany’s image as selfless defender of the climate, which was once largely deserved, is now a transparent fiction. Germany has fallen badly behind on its pledges to sink its own greenhouse gas pollutants. In fact, Germany’s carbon emissions haven’t declined for nearly a decade and the German Environment Agency calculated that Germany emitted 906 million tons of CO2 in 2016 — the highest in Europe — compared to 902 million in 2015. And 2017’s interim numbers suggest emissions are going to tick up again this year. . . ."

Nearly a decade is not "ever". It is simply a lie to say that Germany is emitting more CO2 than ever. Why do you keep lying?
 
Nearly a decade is not "ever". It is simply a lie to say that Germany is emitting more CO2 than ever. Why do you keep lying?

"Than ever" was a mistake for which I apologize. Should have said Germany is ramping up CO2 emissions.

[h=3]German carbon emissions rise in 2016 despite coal use drop | Clean ...[/h]https://www.cleanenergywire.org/.../german-carbon-emissions-rise-2016-despite-coal-...



Dec 20, 2016 - German energy-related CO₂ emissions rose almost 1 percent in 2016, despite a fall in coal use and the ongoing expansion of renewable energy sources, ... The head of Germany's utilities lobby BDEW told journalists at the association's year-end media conference that too much focus was on long-term ...




[h=3]Why Aren't Renewables Decreasing Germany's Carbon Emissions?[/h]https://www.forbes.com/.../why-arent-renewables-decreasing-germanys-carbon-emissi...



Oct 10, 2017 - Germany is in-between with 50% fossil fuel. Carbon dioxide emitted in metric tons (t) per person per year for the U.S., Germany and France from 2006 to 2015.



 
Years ago, I was talking with a guy who helping Eastern Europe after the fall of the Soviet Union.
The telephone infrastructure in many places was from the 1940's and had seen little improvement.
He was telling me it was economical to set up cell phone towers, rather than try to fix the wired infrastructure.
While the voice quality at the time was less than wired in the west, it was better and more reliable than the system in place.
While the first world countries would not accept anything less than full on demand power,
someone who is getting electricity for the first time, might see the poor duty cycle of renewable,
as an enormous improvement.
Going backwards is difficult to accept, moving forward is always an improvement.

If you look at countries like China and India, they have a long experience of using coal plants, but more and more are choosing renewables as a better option.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/08/how-china-is-leading-the-renewable-energy-revolution

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/21/india-renewable-energy-paris-climate-summit-target

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/09/170925111614.htm

While globally renewables accounted for almost two-thirds of net new power capacity around the world in 2016.

https://www.iea.org/publications/renewables2017/

Renewables can also be a way to kick start development in developing countries and help the poorest people in the world gain access to electricity.

40 Companies & Organizations Bringing Solar Power to the Developing World
 
Last edited:
Believe it or not, nobody expected solar power to make much of a contribution in mid-winter. That is why Germany also has lots of wind generators :roll:

In Sweden we will have a intersting experiment with an off the grid house in Skellefteå, that will get power and heat only from solar power. That the house will have batteries for short term storage and produce hydrogen for long time storage for the dark and cold winters. There Skellefteå is as far north as southern Alaska. That the experiment will really test how far both solar power and storage technology have come.

https://translate.google.se/transla...s-anpassat-for-kallt-klimat-909484&edit-text=

There are also many other ways to match electric power supply with demand.

In that study, it was found that matching large differences between high electrical demand and low renewable supply could be realized largely by using a combination of either (1) substantial CSP storage plus batteries with zero change in existing hydropower annual energy output or peak power discharge rate, (2) modest CSP storage with no batteries and zero change in the existing hydropower annual energy output but a substantial increase in hydropower’s peak discharge rate, (3) increases in CSP-storage, batteries, and heat pumps, but no thermal energy storage and no increase in hydropower’s peak discharge rate or annual energy output, or (4) a combination of (1), (2), and (3). Thus, there were multiple solutions for matching peak demand with supply 100% of the time for 5 years without bioenergy, nuclear, power, fossil fuels with carbon capture, or natural gas.

https://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/CountriesWWS.pdf (Page 9)
 
Last edited:
Renewables can also be a way to kick start development in developing countries and help the poorest people in the world gain access to electricity.
This is what I am saying, if someone does not have electricity, adding even poor duty cycle electricity is a vast
improvement in their lifestyle. Solar was a benefit and economically viable to people off the grid,
long before it became viable for grid attachment, because they had few other choices.
Renewables will have a tougher time filling the expectations of people who are used to on demand grid electricity.
 
[h=2]Renewables rise and Australians are get poorer — “Bill Shock” and falling living standards[/h]
Strangely, the more free, clean, green energy we get the more household incomes fail to keep up with inflation. Who would have thought that using inefficient energy in an artificial government-picks-the-winner market could possibly reduce our living standards?
Of course, this is not all due to electricity efficiency and pricing. Bill Shock only affects things that need to heat, cool or move.
[h=3]Bill Shock as Standard of Living Slumps[/h]David Uren, The Australian

Australians have endured their longest period of falling living standards in more than a quarter of a century as growth in costs outstripped earnings for the fifth consecutive quarter, leaving households worse off than they were six years ago.
After allowing for inflation, taxes and interest costs, average household incomes dropped 1.6 per cent in the year to September, capping a sustained fall in *living standards that has not been seen since the 1990-91 recession.
Economists say more than half the cost increases for households are being driven by electricity, rent, health, new housing and tobacco, while modest wage rises are being partially absorbed by workers being pushed into higher tax brackets.



Energy prices feed into every other cost. Even the value of a house depends on the capacity people have to pay off their mortgage. Higher electricity bills means more expensive food, smaller profit margins, reduced consumer spending, and fewer jobs.
The energy transition we-didn’t need-to-have has a hidden price.
PS: Can anyone find or create a graph of employment in the renewables energy industry in Australia that is up to date?
*The Kyoto Agreement date is just a marker, and indicator of a new government that put “climate change” as a much higher priority. All subsequent governments largely shared that priority. The RET has become increasingly important as the percentage of renewables required to meet the target has risen every year. Rudd was elected in Nov 2007. March 2008 was the point when electricity prices started rising faster than inflation.
[h=3]At what point did “Bill Shock” begin?[/h]From this post: Labor wants to waste $100b to make Australian energy 50% renewable, more expensive, by 2030
Electricity prices in Australia. The Carbon Tax was introduced July 2012.

Source: Parliamentary Library
Note the inflexion point:


h/t TdeF
[h=3]Sources:[/h]Australian Household Income: ABS, 6523.0 – Household Income and Wealth, Australia, 2015-16
Solar and Wind Generation from Prof Ray Wills page.




 
Your own link say that electricity is just one of many household costs. Also, the cost of energy and electricity is not the only factor that affects energy costs for households.

For example, if you look at Europe and other places with cold winters, well build houses with good insulation a important factor for household’s energy cost. For example, that British household spend a lot more on energy compared to German and many other European households. Because of lack of housing regulation that makes British houses drafty and in need of a lot of heating. Also Britian doesn't have the same welfare state so they have the highest percent of population in energy poverty.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ.../uk-homes-most-expensive-heat-eu-fuel-poverty

While in Sweden we are building passive houses that needs little or no heating even during the cold Swedish winters.

https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/sweden-passive-housing-co2-reduction-targets

There I also presume that there are building technics that can reduce the need for AC in countries with hot weather.

When it comes to electricity prices in Australia they have aging and failing coal plants.

Power plant failures push state's energy grid close to the edge in November heat

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...utages-in-record-time/?utm_term=.0d5a9383a5ad

Also, the federal Australian government have a long history of supporting the coal industry. For example, spending a lot of money on the failed Carbon Capture Technology.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...tralia-ends-while-bad-news-for-coal-continues

While the increase in renewable energy will lead to price reduction according to a Frontier Economics’ modelling commissioned by the pro coal Australian federal government.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...olesale-electricity-price-in-australia-report
 
Last edited:
This is what I am saying, if someone does not have electricity, adding even poor duty cycle electricity is a vast
improvement in their lifestyle. Solar was a benefit and economically viable to people off the grid,
long before it became viable for grid attachment, because they had few other choices.
Renewables will have a tougher time filling the expectations of people who are used to on demand grid electricity.

As I wrote there are many ways to regulate supply and where are an increase of renewables all around the world leading to renewable was almost two-thirds of net new power capacity globally.

While the cost renewables countinue to drop.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...ble-energy-costs-leads-to-record-global-boost
 
As I wrote there are many ways to regulate supply and where are an increase of renewables all around the world leading to renewable was almost two-thirds of net new power capacity globally.

While the cost renewables countinue to drop.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...ble-energy-costs-leads-to-record-global-boost

Capacity is not the same as amount of power generated.

Having a wind power plant that might produce 100kW whch might be at the time you want it is not the same as having a coal powered power plant that will generate power when you want it.
 
Capacity is not the same as amount of power generated.

Having a wind power plant that might produce 100kW whch might be at the time you want it is not the same as having a coal powered power plant that will generate power when you want it.

You can get more steady and reliable output from off shore windfarms. While solar panels produce electricity during daytime when it’s greatest demand for electricity.

Also, the increase in renewables have led to that energy related carbon dioxide emissions were flat for a third straight year in 2016 even as the global economy grew.

https://www.iea.org/newsroom/energysnapshots/global-carbon-dioxide-emissions-1980-2016.html

While global demand for coal fell for second year in a row in 2016.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...and-falls-2016-second-year-in-row-fossil-fuel
 
You can get more steady and reliable output from off shore windfarms. While solar panels produce electricity during daytime when it’s greatest demand for electricity.

Also, the increase in renewables have led to that energy related carbon dioxide emissions were flat for a third straight year in 2016 even as the global economy grew.

https://www.iea.org/newsroom/energysnapshots/global-carbon-dioxide-emissions-1980-2016.html

While global demand for coal fell for second year in a row in 2016.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...and-falls-2016-second-year-in-row-fossil-fuel

Mostly that is because gas fired power stations produce 50% of the CO2 for the same power output.
 
[h=1]Germany to abandon climate target[/h]Posted on 08 Jan 18 by PAUL MATTHEWS 4 Comments
According to Reuters and Spiegel, the Grand Coalition of the CDU and SPD currently being formed in Germany is abandoning the emissions target of a reduction of 40% below 1990 levels by 2020. It had been obvious for some time that the target was not going to be met. This is a big humiliation for …
 
I can see it now: A windmill on every car, truck, train, plane, ship, submarine, tank, half-track and humvee.

LOL!!!

France has this one right: France derives about 75% of its electricity from nuclear energy. We could have done that. Now let's see, who stopped that from happening............
 
Back
Top Bottom