TheShepherds Flat Wind Farm is an 845megawatt (MW) wind farm in the U.S. state ofOregon.The 550 MWDesert Sunlight Solar Farm in CaliforniaTheThree Gorges Dam on theYangtze River, ChinaThe Nesjavellir Geothermal Power Plant inÞingvellir, IcelandThe 392 MWIvanpah Solar Power Facility in California: The facility's three towers. Construction of the Salt Tanks, which provide efficientthermal energy storage[1] so that output can be provided after the sun goes down, and output can be scheduled to meet demand requirements.[2] The 280 MWSolana Generating Station is designed to provide six hours of energy storage. This allows the plant to generate about 38 percent of its rated capacity over the course of a year.[3]Comparing trends in worldwide energy use. The growth of renewable energy to 2015 is the green line.[4]
Research into this topic is fairly new, with few studies published before 2009, but has gained increasing attention in recent years. A cross-sectoral, holistic approach is seen as an important feature of 100% renewable energy systems and is based on the assumption "that the best solutions can be found only if one focuses on the synergies between the sectors" of the energy system such as electricity, heat, transport or industry.[5]
No uniform definition for 100% renewable energy systems has been adopted across the published literature.[5]
Recent studies show that a globaltransition to 100% renewable energy across all sectors – power, heat, transport and desalination well before 2050 is feasible.[6][7][8][9] According to a review of the 181peer-reviewed papers on 100% renewable energy that were published until 2018, "[t]he great majority of all publications highlights the technical feasibility and economic viability of 100% RE systems."[5] A review of 97 papers published since 2004 and focusing on islands concluded that across the studies 100% renewable energy was found to be "technically feasible and economically viable."[10] A 2022review found that the main conclusion of most of the literature in the field is that 100% renewables is feasible worldwide at low cost.[11]
Existing technologies, including storage, are capable of generating a secure energy supply at every hour throughout the year. The sustainable energy system is more efficient and cost effective than the existing system.[12] TheUnited NationsIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stated in their2011 report that there is little that limits integratingrenewable technologies for satisfying the total global energy demand.
Mark Z. Jacobson, professor of civil and environmental engineering atStanford University and director of its Atmosphere and Energy program, says that producing all new energy withwind power,solar power, andhydropower by 2030 is feasible, and that existing energy supply arrangements could be replaced by 2050.[13] Barriers to implementing the renewable energy plan are seen to be "primarily social and political, not technological or economic".[14] Jacobson says thatenergy costs today with a wind, solar, and water system should be similar to today's energy costs from other optimally cost-effective strategies.[15] The main obstacle against this scenario is the lack of political will.[16] His conclusions have been disputed by other researchers.[17] Jacobson published a response that disputed the piece point by point[18] and claimed that the authors were motivated by allegiance to energy technologies that the 2015 paper excluded.[17]
Jacobson says thatenergy costs today with a wind, solar, and water system should be similar to today's energy costs from other optimally cost-effective strategies and he has rebutted their criticisms.[19][20][18] A followup paper was published by Jacobson and others in 2022, in which paths to 100% renewable energy by 2035 and 2050 were developed for 145 countries.[21] The study concluded that a wind-water-solar (WWS) based system "requires less energy, costs less, and creates more jobs than business as usual". The cost reduction was primarily due to the substantial (-56.4%) decrease in overall energy demand thanks to the increased efficiency of relying on renewable electricity for all energy needs.
In 2014, renewable sources such as wind,geothermal,solar,biomass, and burnt waste provided 19% of the total energy consumed worldwide, with roughly half of that coming from traditional use of biomass.[22] The largest sector in terms of energy consumption is electricity with a renewable share of 22.8%, most of it coming from hydropower with a share of 16.6%, followed by wind with 3.1%.[22] As of 2018[update], according toREN21, transformation is picking up speed in the power sector, but urgent action is required in heating, cooling and transport.[23]
There are many places around the world with grids that are run almost exclusively on renewable energy(seebelow). At the national level, at least 30 nations already have renewable energy contributing more than 20% of the energy supply.[24]Renewable energy use has grown more quickly than even advocates anticipated.[25] As of 2019[update], however, it needs to grow six times faster to limit global warming to 2 °C (3.6 °F).[26]
100% renewable energy is an energy system where all energy use is sourced fromrenewable energy sources. The endeavor to use 100% renewable energy for electricity, heating/cooling and transport is motivated byglobal warming, pollution and other environmental issues, as well as economic andenergy security concerns. Shifting the total globalprimary energy supply to renewable sources requires a transition of the energy system, since most of today's energy is derived from non-renewablefossil fuels.
According to theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change there are few fundamental technological limits to integrating a portfolio of renewable energy technologies to meet most of total global energy demand.Renewable energy use has grown more quickly than even advocates anticipated.[27] As of 2019[update], however, it needs to grow six times faster to limit global warming to 2 °C (3.6 °F).[28]
As of 2018[update] according toREN21 transformation is picking up speed in the power sector, but urgent action is required in heating, cooling and transport.[29] There are many places around the world with grids that are run almost exclusively on renewable energy. At the national level, at least 30 nations already have renewable energy contributing more than 20% of the energy supply.[30]
According to a review of the 181peer-reviewed papers on 100% renewable energy published until 2018, "[t]he great majority of all publications highlights the technical feasibility and economic viability of 100% RE systems." While there are still many publications that focus on electricity only, there is a growing number of papers that cover different energy sectors andsector-coupled, integrated energy systems. This cross-sectoral, holistic approach is seen as an important feature of 100% renewable energy systems and is based on the assumption "that the best solutions can be found only if one focuses on the synergies between the sectors" of the energy system such as electricity, heat, transport or industry.[31]
Similarly, in the United States, the independentNational Research Council has noted that "sufficient domestic renewable resources exist to allow renewable electricity to play a significant role in futureelectricity generation and thus help confront issues related to climate change, energy security, and the escalation of energy costs ... Renewable energy is an attractive option because renewable resources available in the United States, taken collectively, can supply significantly greater amounts of electricity than the total current or projected domestic demand."[33]
The main barriers to the widespread implementation of large-scale renewable energy and low-carbon energy strategies are political rather than technological. According to the 2013Post Carbon Pathways report, which reviewed many international studies, the key roadblocks are:climate change denial, thefossil fuels lobby, political inaction,unsustainable energy consumption, outdatedenergy infrastructure, and financial constraints.[34]
Studies have shown that Southeast Asia countries could achieve almost 100% renewable elecitricity based on solar, wind, and off-river pumped hydro energy storage at a competitive LCOE of around US$55–115/MWh.[35]
Using 100% renewable energy was first suggested in a paper inScience[36] published in 1975 by Danish physicistBent Sørensen, which was followed by several other proposals.[37] In 1976,energy policy analystAmory Lovins coined the term "soft energy path" to describe an alternative future whereenergy efficiency and appropriate renewable energy sources steadily replace a centralized energy system based on fossil and nuclear fuels.[38]
Timeline of selected key milestones of 100% renewable energy systems research[11]
In 1998, the first detailed analysis of scenarios with high shares of renewables were published. These were followed by the first detailed 100% scenarios. In 2006, a PhD thesis was published by Czisch in which it was shown that in a 100% renewable scenario energy supply could match demand in every hour of the year in Europe and North Africa. In the same year, Danish Energy professorHenrik Lund published a first paper[39] in which he addresses the optimal combination of renewables, which was followed by several other papers on thetransition to 100% renewable energy in Denmark. Since then, Lund has been publishing several papers on 100% renewable energy. After 2009, publications began to rise steeply, covering 100% scenarios for countries in Europe, America, Australia and other parts of the world.[37]
Development of peer-reviewed journal articles based on 100% RE system analyses for concrete geographic entities[11]
Even in the early 21st century, it was extraordinary for scientists and decision-makers to consider the concept of 100% renewable electricity. However, renewable energy progress has been so rapid that things have totally changed since then:[40]
Solar photovoltaic modules have dropped about 75 percent in price. Current scientific and technological advances in the laboratory suggest that they may become less expensive than the cost of installation of a photovoltaic system on residential or commercial buildings. On-shore wind power is spreading over all continents and is economically competitive with fossil and nuclear power in several regions.Concentrated solar thermal power (CST) withthermal storage has moved from the demonstration stage of maturity to the limited commercial stage and still has the potential for further cost reductions of about 50 percent.[40]
Renewable energy use has grown much faster than even advocates had anticipated.[25]Wind turbines generate 39[41] percent of Danish electricity, and Denmark has manybiogas digesters andwaste-to-energy plants as well. Together, wind and biomass provide 44% of the electricity consumed by the country's six million inhabitants. In 2010, Portugal's 10 million people produced more than half their electricity from indigenous renewable energy resources. Spain's 40 million inhabitants meet one-third of their electrical needs from renewables.[25]
Renewable energy has a history of strong public support. In America, for example, a 2013Gallup survey showed that two in three Americans want the U.S. to increase domestic energy production using solar power (76%), wind power (71%), and natural gas (65%). Far fewer want more petroleum production (46%) and more nuclear power (37%). Least favored is coal, with about one in three Americans favouring it.[42]
REN21 says renewable energy already plays a significant role and there are many policy targets that aim to increase this:
At the national level, at least 30 nations around the world already have renewable energy contributing more than 20% of energy supply. National renewable energy markets are projected to continue to grow strongly in the coming decade and beyond, and some 120 countries have various policy targets for longer-term shares of renewable energy, including a binding 20% by 2020 target for the European Union. Some countries have much higher long-term policy targets of up to 100% renewables. Outside Europe, a diverse group of 20 or more other countries target renewable energy shares in the 2020–2030 time frame that range from 10% to 50%.[43]
Supporters of 100% renewable energy do not considernuclear power as renewable orsustainable due toperceived risks of disasters andhigh-level waste management, and considercarbon capture and storage to have limited safe storage potential.[37] These constraints have also led to an interest in 100% renewable energy. A well established body of academic literature has been written over the past decade[when?], evaluating scenarios for 100% renewable energy for various geographical areas. In recent years[when?], more detailed analyses have emerged from government and industry sources.[44] The incentive to use 100% renewable energy is created byglobal warming and ecological as well as economic concerns, postpeak oil.
The first country to propose 100% renewable energy wasIceland, in 1998.[45] Proposals have been made for Japan in 2003,[46] and for Australia in 2011.[47]Albania, Iceland, and Paraguay obtain essentially all of their electricity from renewable sources (Albania and Paraguay 100% fromhydroelectricity, Iceland 72% hydro and 28% geothermal).[48] Norway obtains nearly all of its electricity from renewable sources (97 percent from hydropower).[49] Iceland proposed using hydrogen for transportation and its fishing fleet. Australia proposed biofuel for those elements of transportation not easily converted to electricity. The road map for the United States,[50][51] commitment by Denmark,[52] and Vision 2050 for Europe set a 2050 timeline for converting to 100% renewable energy,[53] later reduced to 2040 in 2011.[54] Zero Carbon Britain 2030 proposes eliminating carbon emissions in Britain by 2030 by transitioning to renewable energy.[55] In 2015, Hawaii enacted a law that the Renewable Portfolio Standard shall be 100 percent by 2045. This is often confused with renewable energy. If electricity produced on the grid is 65 GWh from fossil fuel and 35 GWh from renewable energy and rooftop off grid solar produces 80 GWh of renewable energy, then the total renewable energy is 115 GWh and the total electricity on the grid is 100 GWh. Then the RPS is 115 percent.[56]
Cities likeParis andStrasbourg in France, planned to use 100% renewable energy by 2050.[57][58]
Similarly, in the United States, the independentNational Research Council has noted that "sufficient domestic renewable resources exist to allow renewable electricity to play a significant role in future electricity generation and thus help confront issues related to climate change, energy security, and the escalation of energy costs ... Renewable energy is an attractive option because renewable resources available in the United States, taken collectively, can supply significantly greater amounts of electricity than the total current or projected domestic demand."[59]
It is estimated that the world will spend an extra $8 trillion over the next 25 years to prolong the use of non-renewable resources, a cost that would be eliminated by transitioning instead to 100% renewable energy.[60] Research that has been published inEnergy Policy suggests that converting the entire world to 100% renewable energy by 2050 is both possible and affordable, but requires political support.[61][62] It would require building many morewind turbines and solar power systems but wouldn't utilizebioenergy. Other changes involve use ofelectric cars and the development of enhanced transmission grids and storage.[63][64] As part of theParis Agreement, countries periodically update their climate change targets for the future, by 2018 noG20 country had committed to a 100% renewable target.[65]
Until 2018, there were 181 peer-reviewed papers on 100% renewable energy. In the same year, 100% renewable energy was also mentioned in theSpecial Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C as a potential means to "expand the range of 1.5 °C pathways", if the findings can be corroborated.[5]
World total primary energy consumption by type in 2020[66]
As of 2021, wind and solar were consistently increasing their share worldwide, but still represented just 5% of global primary energy consumption, albeit far more ofuseful energy consumption. A report byJ.P. Morgan Asset Management (the biggest lender to fossil fuels in the world) analyzed renewable energy forecasts made by eight scientists and research bodies (includingBent Sorensen, Mark Z. Jacobson, Amory Lovins) between 1970 and 2020 and claimed that all of them were unrealistically optimistic as they ignored "energy density, intermittency and the complex realities of incumbent energy systems".[67][68]
Tasmania: Hydropower supplies 100 percent of Tasmania's electricity. (Pending legislation plans for %200 renewable power by 2040, with the remainder to be sent to mainland Australia viasubmarine power cables)[70][71]
Samsø: Net greater than 100% wind power and biomass, connected to mainland for balance and backup power[83][84]
Ethiopia: Mostly hydroelectricity (>90%). Smaller quantities of wind, solar, and geothermal. 45% of the population has access to electricity As of 2018[update], and there is a 100% access target set in 2017 for 2025.[85]
Uruguay: 94.5% renewable electricity; wind power (and biomass and solar power) is used to stretch hydroelectricity reserves into the dry season[106]
Some other places have high percentages, for example theelectricity sector in Denmark, as of 2014[update], is 45% wind power, with plans in place to reach 85%. Theelectricity sector in Canada and theelectricity sector in New Zealand have even higher percentages of renewables (mostly hydro), 65% and 75% respectively, and Austria is approaching 70%.[107] As of 2015[update], theelectricity sector in Germany sometimes meets almost 100% of the electricity demand with PV and wind power, and renewable electricity is over 25%.[108][109]Albania has 94.8% of installed capacity as hydroelectric, 5.2% diesel generator; but Albania imports 39% of its electricity.[110][111] In 2016, Portugal achieved 100% renewable electricity for four days between 7 and 11 May, partly becauseefficient energy use had reduced electricity demand.[112] France and Sweden have low carbon intensity, since they predominantly use a mixture of nuclear power and hydroelectricity. In 2018 Scotland met 76% of their demand from renewable sources.[113][114]
Although electricity is currently around a quarter ofworld energy supply and consumption; primary energy use is expected to decrease with renewable energy deployment as electricity use increases, as it is likely to be combined with some degree of further electrification.[115][116] For example,electric cars achieve much betterfuel efficiency than fossil fuel cars, and another example isrenewable heat such as in the case of Denmark, which is proposing to move to greater use of heat pumps for heating buildings to provide multiple kilowatts of heat per kilowatt of electricity.
Other electricity generating sources are considered clean, though not necessarily renewable, as they also do not emit carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases and air pollutants. The largest of these is nuclear energy, which produces no emissions. Some argue that transitioning to 100% renewable energy would be too slow tolimit climate change, and that closing downnuclear power stations is a mistake.[117][118]Carbon capture and storage projects may still use coal or natural gas but capture carbon dioxide for storage or alternative uses. Pathways to eliminate greenhouse gases may include these in addition to renewable energy to save money,[119] or to avoid shutting down existing plants and allow for flexibility in designing a carbon-free electric grid.
In 2018, California passed SB 100, which mandates 100% clean, carbon-free by 2045, including a 60% renewable electricity goal by 2030.[120][121] 2019 legislation inWashington also requires 100% clean electricity by 2045, eliminating coal by 2025.[122] Further states and territories to require 100% carbon-free electricity are Hawaii, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Virginia, Puerto Rico, and Washington, DC.[123] According to a study by Global Energy Monitor, China is expected to generate 1,200 gigawatts of renewable energy (wind and solar) by 2025.[124]
According to Mark Z. Jacobson, the most significant barriers to the widespread implementation of large-scale renewable energy and low carbon energy strategies, at the pace required to preventrunaway climate change, are primarily political and not technological.[125][dubious –discuss] According to the 2013Post Carbon Pathways report, which reviewed many international studies, the key roadblocks are:[126]
In 2011, theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, some of the world's leading climate researchers selected by the United Nations, said "as infrastructure and energy systems develop, in spite of the complexities, there are few, if any, fundamental technological limits to integrating a portfolio of renewable energy technologies to meet a majority share of total energy demand in locations where suitable renewable resources exist or can be supplied".[127] IPCC scenarios "generally indicate that growth in renewable energy will be widespread around the world".[128] The IPCC said that if governments were supportive, and the full complement of renewable energy technologies were deployed, renewable energy supply could account for almost 80% of the world's energy use within forty years.[129]Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the IPCC, said the necessary investment in renewables would cost only about 1% of global GDP annually. This approach could contain greenhouse gas levels to less than 450 parts per million, the safe level beyond which climate change becomes catastrophic and irreversible.[129]
Stephen W. Pacala andRobert H. Socolow have developed a series of "climate stabilization wedges" that can allow societies to maintain their quality of life while avoiding catastrophic climate change, and "renewable energy sources", in aggregate, constitute the largest number of their "wedges".[130]
Lester R. Brown founder and president of theEarth Policy Institute, a nonprofit research organization based in Washington, D.C., says a rapid transition to 100% renewable energy is both possible and necessary. Brown compares with the U.S. entry into World War II and the subsequent rapid mobilization and transformation of the US industry and economy. A quick transition to 100% renewable energy and saving of our civilization is proposed by Brown to follow an approach with similar urgency.[131]
According toWorld Bank the "below 2°C" climate scenario requires 3 billions of tonnes of metals and minerals by 2050. Supply of mined resources such as zinc, molybdenum, silver, nickel, copper must increase by up to 500%.[132] A 2018 study analysed the metal requirements to transition the global energy system up to 2060. Currently used battery technologies and known reserves are not compatible with the transition scenario as a result of insufficientcobalt andlithium reserves. Batteries containing less or no cobalt are feasible. Lithium is much more difficult to replace with maintained performance and cost.[133]
A review suggests large institutions are prone to resisting "the challenge of 100% RE scenarios based on the dogma that the world cannot do without fossil fuels and nuclear energy". Institutions that have received extensive criticism include theInternational Energy Agency and theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, with the latter also being criticized for not including studies on 100% RE systems in their IPCC reports.[11]
A report found that China is about to produce "almost 95% of the world's polysilicon and the ingots and wafers" of the solar panel supply chain, with this level of concentration in any global supply chain "would represent a considerable vulnerability".[134]
diversification of (nonsynchronous) renewables[136][135]
super grids[135][137] (due to foreign unique capacities/resources for generation and storage) and strengthening interconnections[11] and larger grids in general (due to differences in weather or daytime)
curtailing excess generation[135] andpower-to-X (e.g. producing green hydrogen immediately when there is abundant energy)[11]
Monitoring and/or controlling energy use that is noncritical during periods of peak power consumption, and returning their function during nonpeak hours, such as for residential devices (like washing machines)[145]
Optimizing the interaction between electricity, heat, transport, and industry[11]
In 2013, Smil analyzed proposals to depend on wind and solar-generated electricity including the proposals of Jacobson and colleagues, and writing in an issue ofSpectrum prepared by theInstitute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, he identified numerous points of concern, such as cost, intermittent power supply, growingNIMBYism, and a lack of infrastructure as negative factors and said that "History and a consideration of the technical requirements show that the problem is much greater than these advocates have supposed."[155][156] Smil and Hansen are concerned about thevariable output of solar and wind power. According to Amory Lovins theelectricity grid alone can compensate for variability, just as it routinely backs up nonworking coal-fired and nuclear plants with working ones.[157]
In November 2014 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change came out with theirfifth report, saying that in the absence of any one technology (such as bioenergy,carbon dioxide capture and storage, nuclear, wind and solar), climate change mitigation costs can increase substantially depending on which technology is absent. For example, it may cost 40% more to reduce carbon emissions without carbon dioxide capture. (Table 3.2)[158] According to a 2018 study, "in the absence of firm low-carbon[dispatchable] resources, the cost of decarbonizing power generation rises rapidly as the emissions limit approaches zero" and a renewable-only generation (with batteries) results in energy prices 42-163% higher in regions with lower VRE availability, and 11-105% higher in regions with higher VRE availability. The study introduced the term "firm low-carbon energy source" (e.g.nuclear, geothermal), which is intended to operate along "fast-burst" sources (e.g. batteries) and "fuel saving" (VRE).[159]
TheInternational Energy Agency says that there has been too much attention on issue of the variability of renewable electricity production.[160] The issue ofintermittent supply applies to popular renewable technologies, mainly wind power andsolar photovoltaics, and its significance depends on a range of factors that include the market penetration of the renewables concerned, the balance of plant and the wider connectivity of the system, as well as the demand side flexibility. Variability is rarely a barrier to increased renewable energy deployment whendispatchable generation such as hydroelectricity or solar thermal storage is also available. But at high levels of market penetration it requires careful analysis and management, and additional costs may be required for back-up or system modification.[160] Renewable electricity supply in the 20-50+% penetration range has already been implemented in several European systems, albeit in the context of an integrated European grid system:[161]
Hydropower is currently the only large scale low-carbon seasonal energy storage. In countries with high variation in energy demand by season (for example the UK uses far more gas for heating in the winter than it uses electricity) but lacking hydropowerelectrical interconnectors to countries with lots of hydropower (e.g. UK - Norway), electricity from hydropower is likely to be insufficient and development of ahydrogen economy would likely be needed: this is being trialled in the UK and 8 TWh of inter-seasonal hydrogen energy storage has been proposed.[162]
In Australia, as well as storing renewable energy as hydrogen, it is also proposed to be exported in the form ofammonia.[163] This project has been cancelled.
McKinsey estimates that it will cost 7.5% of global domestic product between 2021 and 2050 to achieve net zero (not 100% renewable, which will be more expensive).[164] Current spending is just over half of this.
Holistic analysis of material criticality for 100% RE systems, with consideration ofrecycling
Impact of inter-annual resource variations and respective inter-annual storage demand
District heating and cooling in transition scenarios
Increased geo-spatial resolution and coverage of global 100% RE system analyses
Includingoff-grid solutions or a transition of off-grid and on-grid solutions in comprehensive energy system transition pathways
Societal risks and issues of the transition, including linking it to energy security and consequences for peace and stability, and maximum area availability in societies
Model intercomparisons of analyses
Various questions for design particulars of intermittency management
Issues of equity, environmental issues, community wellbeing, energy justice, social acceptance, and good governance – research on how to make RE technologies more equitable, accountable, and just, which may help to both contextualize and manage this potential barrier (includingpolicy mechanisms)
Carbon-Neutral Pathways for the United States: Central[168] (USA)
University of San Francisco / UC Berkeley
USA
2021
2, 1.5, 1C
no target
Decarbonization: 600/Yr
0
0
15190
0
34%
64%
0%
2%
0%
Carbon-Neutral Pathways for the United States: 100% RE[168] (USA)
University of San Francisco / UC Berkeley
Global
2021
2C, 1.5C, and 1C
2070
0.2-1.2% of annual GDP
0
74.8
15190
0
0%
Several different scenarios clearly laid out in SI
0%
0%
0%
Achieving the Paris Climate Agreement Goals Global and Regional 100% Renewable Energy Scenarios with Non-energy GHG Pathways for +1.5 °C and +2 °C[7] (Global)
University of Technology Sydney - Institute for Sustainable Futures
USA
2019
1.5 C by 2050
2020-2050
63500 (total investments from 2015 to 2020)
47.8 million
450
114444
70277
32%
17%
14%
2%
0%
Designing a Model for the Global Energy System—GENeSYS-MOD: An Application of the Open-Source Energy Modeling System (OSeMOSYS)[169] (Global)
Workgroup for Infrastructure and Policy, TU Berlin
Global
2017
650 Gt of CO2 (compared to the predicted 550-1300 emitted between 2011 and 2050) / 1.5-2 C
(section 3.5)
2020-2050
N/A
N/A
519
N/A
97575
23%
36%
32%
8%
0%
Global Energy System Based on 100% Renewable Energy[170]
100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World[174]
Stanford
Global/intern.
2017
Net Zero by 2050
124700
24262122
N/A
N/A
N/A
58%
37%
0%
4%
-36%
Full energy sector transition towards 100% renewable energy supply: Integrating power, heat, transport and industry sectors including desalination[175]
LUT University
Global
2020
Net Zero by 2050
2050
Zero air pollution and zero carbon from all energy at low cost and without blackouts in variable weather throughout the U.S. with 100% wind-water-solar and storage[149]
Stanford
USA
2021
Net Zero by 2050
2050
Solar PV and wind electricity generation in (TWh per yr) in global 100% RE scenarios in the year 2050[11]Global 100% RE system analyses[11]
The Fourth Revolution: Energy is a Germandocumentary film released in 2010. It shows the vision of a global society, which lives in a world where the energy is produced 100% with renewable energies, showing a complete reconstruction of the economy to reach this goal. In 2011,Hermann Scheer wrote the bookThe Energy Imperative: 100 Percent Renewable Now, published by Routledge.
Reinventing Fire is a book by Amory Lovins released in October 2011. Lovins claims that combining reduced energy use withenergy efficiency gains would result in a $5 trillion saving and a faster-growing economy. This can all be done with the profitable commercialization of existing energy-saving technologies, through market forces, led by business.[176] Former US presidentBill Clinton says the book is a "wise, detailed and comprehensive blueprint".[177] The first paragraph of the preface says:
Imagine fuel without fear. No climate change. No oil spills, dead coal miners, dirty air, devastated lands, lost wildlife. Noenergy poverty. No oil-fed wars, tyrannies, or terrorists. Nothing to run out. Nothing to cut off. Nothing to worry about. Just energy abundance, benign and affordable, for all, for ever.[178]
TheIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has said that there are few fundamental technological limits to integrating a portfolio of renewable energy technologies to meet most of total global energy demand. In a 2011 review of 164 recent scenarios of future renewable energy growth, the report noted that the majority expected renewable sources to supply more than 17% of total energy by 2030, and 27% by 2050; the highest forecast projected 43% supplied by renewables by 2030 and 77% by 2050.[127]
In 2011, theInternational Energy Agency has said thatsolar energy technologies, in its many forms, can make considerable contributions to solving some of the most urgent problems the world now faces:[179]
The development of affordable, inexhaustible and clean solar energy technologies will have huge longer-term benefits. It will increase countries' energy security through reliance on an indigenous, inexhaustible and mostly import-independent resource, enhance sustainability, reduce pollution, lower the costs of mitigating climate change, and keep fossil fuel prices lower than otherwise. These advantages are global. Hence the additional costs of the incentives for early deployment should be considered learning investments; they must be wisely spent and need to be widely shared.[179]
In 2011, the refereed journalEnergy Policy published two articles by Mark Z. Jacobson, a professor of engineering atStanford University, and research scientist Mark A. Delucchi, about changing the energy supply mix and "Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power". The articles analyze the feasibility of providing worldwide energy for electric power, transportation, and heating/cooling from wind, water, and sunlight (WWS), which are safe clean options. In Part I, Jacobson and Delucchi discuss WWS energy system characteristics, aspects of energy demand, WWS resource availability, WWS devices needed, and material requirements.[180] They estimate that 3,800,000 5 MWwind turbines, 5350 100 MWgeothermal power plants, and 270 new 1300 MWhydroelectric power plants would be required. In terms ofsolar power, an additional 49,000 300 MWconcentrating solar plants, 40,000 300 MWsolar photovoltaic power plants, and 1.7 billion 3 kW rooftop photovoltaic systems would also be needed. Such an extensive WWS infrastructure could decrease world power demand by 30%.[180] In Part II, Jacobson and Delucchi address variability of supply, system economics, and energy policy initiatives associated with a WWS system. The authors advocate producing all new energy with WWS by 2030 and replacing existing energy supply arrangements by 2050. Barriers to implementing the renewable energy plan are seen to be "primarily social and political, not technological or economic". Energy costs with a WWS system should be similar to today's energy costs.[19]
In general, Jacobson has said wind, water and solar technologies can provide 100 percent of the world's energy, eliminating allfossil fuels.[181] He advocates a "smart mix" of renewable energy sources to reliably meet electricity demand:
Because the wind blows during stormy conditions when the sun does not shine and the sun often shines on calm days with little wind, combining wind and solar can go a long way toward meeting demand, especially when geothermal provides a steady base and hydroelectric can be called on to fill in the gaps.[182]
A 2012 study by theUniversity of Delaware for a 72 GW system considered 28 billion combinations of renewable energy and storage and found the most cost-effective, for thePJM Interconnection, would use 17 GW of solar, 68 GW ofoffshore wind, and 115 GW of onshore wind, although at times as much as three times the demand would be provided. 0.1% of the time would require generation from other sources.[183]
In March 2012, Denmark's parliament agreed on a comprehensive new set of promotional programs for energy efficiency and renewable energy aimed at reaching 100 percent of electricity, heat and fuels from renewables by 2050.[184]IRENEC is an annual conference on 100% renewable energy started in 2011 byEurosolar Turkey. The 2013 conference was in Istanbul.[185][186]
More recently, Jacobson and his colleagues have developed detailed proposals for switching to 100% renewable energy produced by wind, water and sunlight, for New York,[187] California[188] and Washington[189] states, by 2050. As of 2014[update], a more expansive new plan for the 50 states has been drawn up, which includes an online interactive map showing the renewable resource potential of each of the 50 states. The 50-state plan is part ofThe Solutions Project, an independent outreach effort led by Jacobson, actorMark Ruffalo, and film directorJosh Fox.[190]
As of 2014[update], many detailed assessments show that the energy service needs of a world enjoying radically higher levels of wellbeing can be economically met entirely through the diverse currently available technological and organizational innovations around wind, solar, biomass, biofuel, hydroelectric, oceanic and geothermal energy. Debate over detailed plans remain, but transformations in global energy services based entirely around renewable energy are in principle technically practicable, economically feasible, socially viable, and so realisable. This prospect underpins the ambitious commitment by Germany, one of the world's most successful industrial economies, to undertake a majorenergy transition,Energiewende.[191]
In 2015 a study was published inEnergy and Environmental Science that describes a pathway to 100% renewable energy in the United States by 2050 without using biomass. Implementation of this roadmap is regarded as both environmentally and economically feasible and reasonable, as by 2050 it would save about $600 billion ofhealth costs a year due to reducedair pollution and $3.3 trillion global warming costs. This would translate in yearly cost savings per head of around $8300 compared to a business as usual pathway. According to that study, barriers that could hamper implementation are neither technical nor economic but social and political, as most people didn't know that benefits from such a transformation far exceeded the costs.[192]
In June 2017, twenty-one researchers published an article in theProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America rejecting Jacobson's earlierPNAS article, accusing him of modeling errors and of using invalid modeling tools.[193][194] They further asserted he made implausible assumptions through his reliance upon increasing nationalenergy storage from 43 minutes to 7 weeks, increasinghydrogen production by 100,000%, and increasinghydropower by the equivalent of 600Hoover Dams.[193] Article authorsDavid G. Victor called Jacobson's work "dangerous" andKen Caldeira emphasized that increasing hydropower output by 1,300 gigawatts, a 25% increase, is the equivalent flow of 100Mississippi Rivers.[193] Jacobson published a response in the same issue of thePNAS and also authored a blog post where he asserted the researchers were advocates of the fossil fuel industry.[193][195][196] Another study published in 2017 confirmed the earlier results for a 100% renewable power system for North America, without changes in hydropower assumptions, but with more realistic emphasis on a balanced storage portfolio, in particular seasonal storage, and for competitive economics.[197]
In 2015, Jacobson and Delucchi, together with Mary Cameron and Bethany Frew, examined with computer simulation (Loadmatch), in more detail how a wind-water-solar (WWS) system can track the energy demand from minute to minute. This turned out to be possible in the United States for 6 years, including WWS variability by extreme weather events.[198]In 2017, the plan was further developed for 139 countries by a team of 27 researchers[199] and in 2018, Jacobson and Delucchi with Mary Cameron and Brian Mathiesen published the Loadmatch results for 20 regions in which the 139 countries in the world are divided. According to this research, a WWS system can follow the demand in all regions.[200]
The program Loadmatch receives as input estimated series, per half minute during 2050–2055, of
the energy demand
the intermittent wind and solar energy supply predicted with a 3D global climate / weather model GATOR-GCMOM[201]
the hydropower, geothermal, tidal and wave energy
and specifications of
the capacities and maximum loading / unloading speeds of the different types of storage
losses due to storage, transport, distribution and maintenance
The program has been carried out for each region 10-20 times with adapted input for the storage capacities, until a solution was found in which the energy demand was followed, per half minute for 5 years, with low costs.
The WWS system is assumed to connect in the electric network
In 2020, Jacobson clarified in a textbook[203] computer simulation results of a WWS energy system.To match demand with supply every minute more solar and wind farms and high-voltage lines must be installed than to match year-averaged demand and supply. Oversizing (also in a conventional energy system) ensures that the demand can be followed during peak hours, but causes unused supply during off-peak hours. In a WWS system, more energy exchange between areas leads to more transmission loss. The table shows WWS supply, unused supply, losses and end-use, in GW average power to reliably supply the world and four major regions with energy by 2050. See textbook Table 8.10; energy in TWh is divided by 26.3 kh (1000 hours) to get power in GW. The bottom row is the storage capacity of pumped hydro plants (Table 8.7).
^Delucchi, Mark A; Jacobson, Mark Z (2011). "Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part II: Reliability, system and transmission costs, and policies".Energy Policy.39 (3):1170–90.Bibcode:2011EnPol..39.1170D.doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.11.045.
^John Wiseman; et al. (April 2013)."Post Carbon Pathways"(PDF).University of Melbourne.Archived(PDF) from the original on 24 May 2020. Retrieved26 June 2020.
^abcHohmeyer, Olav H; Bohm, Sönke (2015). "Trends toward 100% renewable electricity supply in Germany and Europe: A paradigm shift in energy policies".Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment.4 (1):74–97.Bibcode:2015WIREE...4...74H.doi:10.1002/wene.128.S2CID109863320.
^Elliston, Ben; MacGill, Iain; Diesendorf, Mark (2013). "Least cost 100% renewable electricity scenarios in the Australian National Electricity Market".Energy Policy.59:270–82.Bibcode:2013EnPol..59..270E.doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.03.038.
^abInternational Energy Agency,December 2014Archived 31 July 2018 at theWayback Machine, Monthly electricity statistics, data for January through December 2014.
^Modelling 2050: Electricity System Analysis(PDF) (Report).Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.the additional renewable capacity required to replace unabated gas generation during periods of low renewable output either increases systems costs more than using additional nuclear and/or gas CCUS to do the same thing, or is not achievable within the build limits used in this modelling
^abcdefMcPherson, Madeleine; Karney, Bryan (1 November 2017). "A scenario based approach to designing electricity grids with high variable renewable energy penetrations in Ontario, Canada: Development and application of the SILVER model".Energy.138:185–196.Bibcode:2017Ene...138..185M.doi:10.1016/j.energy.2017.07.027.ISSN0360-5442.Several flexibility options have been proposed to facilitate VRE integration, including interconnecting geographically dispersed resources, interconnecting different VRE types, building flexible and dispatchable generation assets, shifting flexible loads through demand response, shifting electricity generation through storage, curtailing excess generation, interconnections to the transport or heating energy sectors, and improving VRE forecasting methodologies (Delucchi and Jacobson 2011). Previous VRE integration studies have considered different combinations of balancing options, but few have considered all flexibility options simultaneously.
^Kulasekara, Hasal; Seynulabdeen, Vaithehi (September 2019). "A Review of Geothermal Energy for Future Power Generation".2019 5th International Conference on Advances in Electrical Engineering (ICAEE). pp. 223–228.doi:10.1109/ICAEE48663.2019.8975470.ISBN978-1-7281-4934-9.S2CID210992606.
^McPherson, Madeleine; Tahseen, Samiha (15 February 2018). "Deploying storage assets to facilitate variable renewable energy integration: The impacts of grid flexibility, renewable penetration, and market structure".Energy.145:856–870.Bibcode:2018Ene...145..856M.doi:10.1016/j.energy.2018.01.002.ISSN0360-5442.
^Gils, Hans Christian (2015),Balancing of intermittent renewable power generation by demand response and thermal energy storage (doctoralThesis),doi:10.18419/opus-6888
^Jacobson, Mark Z; Delucchi, Mark A; Bazouin, Guillaume; Bauer, Zack A. F; Heavey, Christa C; Fisher, Emma; Morris, Sean B; Piekutowski, Diniana J. Y; Vencill, Taylor A; Yeskoo, Tim W (2015). "100% clean and renewable wind, water, and sunlight (WWS) all-sector energy roadmaps for the 50 United States".Energy & Environmental Science.8 (7):2093–117.doi:10.1039/C5EE01283J.S2CID97348845.
^Jacobson, Mark Z; Delucchi, Mark A; Bauer, Zack A.F; Goodman, Savannah C; Chapman, William E; Cameron, Mary A; Bozonnat, Cedric; Chobadi, Liat; Clonts, Hailey A; Enevoldsen, Peter; Erwin, Jenny R; Fobi, Simone N; Goldstrom, Owen K; Hennessy, Eleanor M; Liu, Jingyi; Lo, Jonathan; Meyer, Clayton B; Morris, Sean B; Moy, Kevin R; O'Neill, Patrick L; Petkov, Ivalin; Redfern, Stephanie; Schucker, Robin; Sontag, Michael A; Wang, Jingfan; Weiner, Eric; Yachanin, Alexander S (2017)."100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World".Joule.1 (1):108–21.Bibcode:2017Joule...1..108J.doi:10.1016/j.joule.2017.07.005.
^Jacobson, Mark Z; Delucchi, Mark A; Cameron, Mary A; Mathiesen, Brian V (2018). "Matching demand with supply at low cost in 139 countries among 20 world regions with 100% intermittent wind, water, and sunlight (WWS) for all purposes".Renewable Energy.123:236–48.Bibcode:2018REne..123..236J.doi:10.1016/j.renene.2018.02.009.S2CID46784278.
Albert, Barbara (2017).Energy Unlimited: Four Steps to 100% Renewable Energy.
Bogdanov, Dmitrii; Breyer, Christian (2016). "North-East Asian Super Grid for 100% renewable energy supply: Optimal mix of energy technologies for electricity, gas and heat supply options".Energy Conversion and Management.110:176–190.Bibcode:2016ECM...112..176B.doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2016.01.019.
Hohmeyer, Olav; Bohm, Sönke (2015). "Trends toward 100% renewable electricity supply in Germany and Europe: a paradigm shift in energy policies. In".Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment.4 (1):74–97.Bibcode:2015WIREE...4...74H.doi:10.1002/wene.128.S2CID109863320.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Albania: Hydroelectric[48]
American Samoa
Australia
Austria
Bhutan: Largely hydroelectricity; exports 70% of its production due to excess energy generated; no fossil fuel power plants.[73]
Canada
Costa Rica: 99% renewable electricity. Hydroelectric (90%), geothermal, wind (and others)[80]
Democratic Republic of the Congo: Almost 100% hydro, but only 9% have access to electricity.[81][82]
Denmark
Ethiopia: Mostly hydroelectricity (>90%). Smaller quantities of wind, solar, and geothermal. 45% of the population has access to electricity As of 2018[update], and there is a 100% access target set in 2017 for 2025.[85]
Germany
Greece
Iceland: 72% hydroelectricity, 28% geothermal, wind, and solar power, less than 0.1% combustible fuel (off-grid diesel)[90]
Norway: 96% hydroelectricity, 2% combustible fuel, 2% geothermal, wind, and solar[90]
New Zealand
Paraguay:Electricity sector in Paraguay is 100% hydroelectricity, about 90% of which is exported, remaining 10% covers domestic demand[94]
Tajikistan: Hydropower supplies nearly 100 percent of Tajikistan's electricity.[95]
United Kingdom
United States
Uruguay: 94.5% renewable electricity; wind power (and biomass and solar power) is used to stretch hydroelectricity reserves into the dry season[106]
_in_global_100%2525_RE_scenarios_in_the_year_2050.gif)
Text was copied from this source, which is available under aCreative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
