The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Saturday, May 25, 2013
  • Sections
    • Home
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Solar
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Wind
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Geothermal
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Bio
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Hydro
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Careers
    • Companies
      • Company Directory
      • Press Releases
      • Products
      • Events Calendar
      • White Papers
    • Webcasts
      • Upcoming Webcasts
      • Featured Webcasts
      • Archived Webcasts
      • Events Calendar
    • White Papers
    • Magazines
      • Renewable Energy World
      • Wind Technology
      • Large Scale Solar
      • Hydro Review
      • HRW - Hydro Review Worldwide
      • Renewable Energy World (North America Edition)
      • Photovoltaics World
    • Awards
  • Account
    • Sign In
    • Register
  • Search
Don't Miss The Great Solar Debate: Where Does the Global Solar Industry Stand? Click Here to Register! ×

Why the Energy Transition is Longer Than We Admit

Stephen Lacey
April 22, 2010  |  9 Comments

Like many in the renewable energy industry, I'm an optimist. I also believe that by setting big goals – things like a 20% wind penetration by 2030 or even Al Gore's 100% renewable electricity by 2020 target – we help drive the public discourse about our energy future toward renewables.

Surely that's a good thing. But are we being disingenuous when we set such goals?

There are endless theoretical studies out there showing how we can digitize our entire grid, put solar on every rooftop or switch our fuel system to natural gas and biofuels. Pick your favorite technology and you'll find a study supporting its rapid mass-adoption.

While these studies “prove” such a transition can be done in a short period of time, they often neglect the historical context of previous transitions.

Switching from one energy source to another takes a long time. And many energy experts would say that this latest transition from fossil resources to renewables is no different. Although it might feel like a new, urgent time, a broader historical look shows that it's very similar to all other previous energy transitions.

“It's taken between 50 and 70 years for a resource to reach a large penetration. When you look at the money, the infrastructure, the regulation, the technologies, it takes many decades for any fuel source to make a large impact,” says Vaclav Smil, a distinguished professor at the University of Manitoba who writes extensively on this exact topic. ::continue::

Smil's expertise spans across many different areas, including energy, environmental issues, population growth, and economics. He's written 19 books on the history of energy, food, politics and global catastrophes.

His most recent book, Energy Transitions, examines the characteristics of major energy shifts in modern times. While each shift took place within a different socio-economic context, they all had one thing in common – they were very slow.

After reading much of his work, I spoke with him about whether this transition is different, especially given new macro-drivers like climate change, globalization and the internet. His answer was sobering.

“There's no doubt that it's different today,” he says. “But the often-neglected factor is how much energy we need to substitute compared with previous transitions. It's far greater than at any other time.”

In the late 1800's, when the combustion of coal overtook biomass, total global energy use was about 500 million tons of oil equivalent. In 2010, it would take nearly 4.5 billion tons of oil equivalent to replace 50% of global fossil energy consumption with renewables. Renewables also typically have a much lower EROI than coal and oil (although the gap is closing). That means it will take a lot more power plants and fuel production facilities to get the same amount of energy.

A more distributed energy infrastructure based on renewables is not only doable, it's desirable. Even the traditional energy players support these new sources of energy. But many of those same oil, coal and gas companies have made infrastructure investments that will take decades to pay off. It would be silly to think they'd abandon those assets outright.

These factors make the transition to renewables long and meticulous, not immediate and revolutionary, says Smil. After all, non-hydro renewables still only make up around 2.5% of global electricity consumption. It took 50 years for natural gas to reach 10% of the global energy mix from the time of early commercial production, and it took the nuclear industry 27 years to reach that level.

“We should absolutely be working toward integrating renewables. The more the better. But let's be realistic, this is a multi-decade approach and it can not be accomplished in one or even two decades,” says Smil.

Depending on how you look at it, this argument could either be refreshing or depressing. I personally find it to be both.

The need for a mass penetration of cleaner, renewable sources of energy is clear. But while big goals like “100% renewable by 2020” sound good, they don't really give the enormity of the task much justice.

With that said, not many things so large just “happen.” It will take an incredible about of drive to bring renewables to scale. And setting the bar high – even sometimes unrealistically high – is an important part of creating the needed momentum.

The information and views expressed in this blog post are solely those of the author and not necessarily those of RenewableEnergyWorld.com or the companies that advertise on this Web site and other publications. This blog was posted directly by the author and was not reviewed for accuracy, spelling or grammar.

9 Comments

Register To Comment
Muhammad Makki
Muhammad Makki
May 6, 2010
Although the transition process as you mentioned is painful plus not easy, but we need to realize this that we have to start from somewhere. Possibly we need to put huge capital investments which will ensure sustainable development in long run. We cannot deny that we are still living in a hydrocarbon dominated era, and conventional resources are meant to be finished.
Want to learn more about balanced energy for America? Visit www.consumerenergyalliance.org to get involved, discover CEA's mission and sign up for our informative newsletter.
Douglas Prince
Douglas Prince
May 6, 2010
You can have all the policy measures and goal setting you want, but that's not what will decide the Big Picture here. The fact is we are running out of cheap oil. Period. I'm sure many of you read the articles. It could be by 2020, or 2015, or even by 2014 according to the Kuwaitis. Personally, when the Arabs start talking Peak Oil, my colon tightens. After all, they should know, right?
When we see oil start hitting $100 a barrel again, and gas hits $4.00, then $5.00, then up to around $17.00 a gallon by 2017, trust me, they'll be a lot more than policy being discussed.
I just hope somebody gets off their ass and does something. Talk is cheap, but when this shit hits the fan, the whole world is gonna be fertilized.
Garth Barker
Garth Barker
May 6, 2010
There are a lot more factors today that either spur or retard technology advancement in the energy realm; most of these are societal rather than technical. The environmental organizations are now attacking placement of solar farms just as much as they are wind farms, add NIMBYism (not in my back yard) factors and you have much slower progress than is possible. The current administration and the Washington DC atmosphere certainly aren't helping move energy independence progress forward.
Kristine Perez
Kristine Perez
April 26, 2010
As long as we are trying to transition into renewable energy, i think that is what matters most. Solar has gone a long way. And whether it'll take longer that it is expected, it is a start. Go green! :)

Kristine
www.sunetric.com
Steve Nelson
Steve Nelson
April 26, 2010
It's an important reality check that we not get carried away by unrealistic expectations for the transition to renewables, like Al Gore's "100% renewable electricity by 2020." Can that happen in 10 years? No way. Nor is there justification for pursuing a 100% substitution, versus a more realistic target of a "significant" (to be defined) contribution from renewables. Nonetheless, the rate of change today is much faster than in the horse-and-buggy era, so we ought not be discouraged by academic comparisons to technology adoption curves in the 19th and early 20th centuries.

I also want to underscore George Reynoldson's comment about the importance of goal-setting and leadership from the top. Like him, I was there in 1977 when President Carter created the Department of Energy, which funded four regional centers to foster public awareness and adoption of renewables (I worked at the center which served the Northeast). Despite, or maybe because of, our demonstrable successes, Reagan terminated the program on Christmas Eve 1981, and his successors largely ignored energy until gasoline prices spiked in 2008.

Unlike 1981, when much of the renewables industry collapsed in the wake of Reagan's action, today the industry is on far solider footing, and enjoys greater public and political support. But leadership from President Obama and Congress will be vital in the coming weeks and months to implement a pricing/market mechanism for carbon.
Warren Schirtzinger
Warren Schirtzinger
April 26, 2010
Hi Stephen!

One of the measures of product adoption that some people find useful is this:

"typically one-half of the product lifecycle expires before substantial growth begins to occur. So if a product or technology has a 100-year lifecycle, the mainstream portion of the market won't "kick in" until about 50 years have passed."

Obviously there are many technologies that have very short lifecycles. But that 50% point always seems to apply.

Thought you might find this interesting.

- Warren
William Fitch
William Fitch
April 24, 2010
Hi:

Nicely said George... I think the conventionals realize now, and for some time, that the RE mosquito will not go away. The have put into place the necessary positioning to control the market and allow it to proceed at a pace that will not harm or cost them any profits in the long run. By controlling the market and allowing some progress at a slow pace, it precludes any big buildup for a massive surge of support.... just keep talking, provide mis-information, make some promises, allow some successes, capitalize on the gains yourself, etc., etc. and a status-quo can be maintained. This is the SOP text book for persistent disruptive situations.

.....Bill
Josh Schellenberg
Josh Schellenberg
April 23, 2010
A recent article in The Economist compared the transition to electric vehicles to the transition from horse and buggy to the automobile. It took 40 years! Even in a case where the automobile was clearly preferable to the horse and buggy, it still took 40 years for the full transition.

As Henry Ford said at the time, "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said 'a faster horse'."
George Reynoldson
George Reynoldson
April 23, 2010
Who sets the goals is critical. When President Carter said in 1977, that energy independence was the equivalent of war, many responded and took the solar jump as part of what seemed like a rather natural career shift. Many home-builders like myself simply researched solar and redesigned new products to fit the new expected paradigm shift.

After the 1980 election all five years of that work became wasted effort as nobody expected to be betrayed by a reversal of government policy much less 30 years of false energy claims by hydrocarbon-nuclear proponents. To me, this article's focus should not be technological change timeliness, but on our 30 year political pendulum. This is because in retrospect driving the renewable technological revolution would have been easy in comparison to overturning the right wing/hydrocarbon dominance by mass media for the last 30 years.

Many then thought (in 1977) that today's US solar water preheating market penetration (slightly more than zilch) was achievable by 1984 and our slightly more a GW of solar electricity (both PV and ST) by 1985. Instead, the US watched Japan, Germany, achieve OUR goals just as we now watch China's accelerating market share WITH disbelief?

Goal setting is irrelevant in this field unless it comes from the top and is firmly codified into law.

Add Your Comments

To add your comments you must sign-in or create a free account.

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
Stephen Lacey

Stephen Lacey

I am a reporter with ClimateProgress.org, a blog published by the Center for American Progress. I am former editor and producer for RenewableEnergyWorld.com, where I contributed stories and hosted the Inside Renewable Energy Podcast. Keep...
  • About
  • Articles
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • FOLLOW
  • CONTACT
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Create a free account and start adding your blogs.

Create an Account

Most Commented

  • 6
    Renewable Energy Research Initiative Launched in UK
  • 3
    French and German Ministers Call for 2030 Renewable Energy Targets
  • 1
    Goldman Sachs to Invest $486 Million in Japan Renewable Energy
  • 1
    Outlook for US Energy Independence Gaining Confidence

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • The Stella Group, Ltd.
  • Natural Power
  • American Council On Renewable Energy (ACORE)
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America
  • Stoel Rives LLP
  • RenewableEnergyWorld.com
  • Rotork plc
  • Green Power Conferences
News
  • Renewable Energy
  • Solar Energy
  • Wind Energy
  • Bioenergy
  • Geothermal Energy
  • Hyrdo Power
  • Blogs
  • Video
  • Finance
Resources
  • Companies
  • Products
  • Careers
  • Events
  • Webcasts
  • White Papers
  • Magazines
  • Press Releases
  • e-Newsletters
Company
  • About Us
  • Our Team
  • Contact Us
  • Advertising & Services
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Site Map
Network Partners - Magazines
  • Hydro Review Magazine
  • Hydro Review Worldwide Magazine
  • Renewable Energy World Magazine
Network Partners - Events
  • Power-Gen International
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India
  • HydroVision International
  • HydroVision Brazil
  • HydroVision India
  • HydroVision Russia
© Copyright 1999-2013 RenewableEnergyWorld.com - All rights reserved.
RenewableEnergyWorld.com - World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for news & Information