Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower
 

2007: Did We Reach the Tipping Point?

By Stephen Lacey, Staff Writer
January 7, 2008   |   25 Comments

Do you like this news?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Feed   Share
 
"I haven't been calling renewable energy 'alternative' for years...This is an industry that is proving itself in markets around the world."

--Michael Liebrich, CEO, New Energy Finance
25 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 25
January 7, 2008
Both the rounding of the numbers and the omission of other sources of renewable energy are the cause of the number differences.
Comment
2 of 25
<p>Missing about 9 GW!?</p><p>Doing the math, based on the numbers reported&nbsp;with reference to REN21 (not available on-line), for renweable energy installed capacities we have 39.24% for wind, 30.8% for small-hydro, 18.6% for bio-mass, 4.2% for geo-thermal and 3.4% for PV, when total is 237 GW. based on these numbers we are missing about 9GW (or 3.8%). Either it is coming from other renewable sources? or the rounding of numbers for GW renewables is the source of the deficciency?</p>
Comment
3 of 25
January 9, 2008
A Big hoorah to Duncan,. God I love it when he rants,.. Also just wanted to know,..did any one see that Bush senior put up a windmill at Kenny bunkport? Well he did....You cant make this stuff up!!&nbsp; Oh an one more thing; Solar power being from the SUN IS NOW AND WILL ALWAYS BE (CONVENTIONAL ENERGY) THE FIRST AND PUREST FORM GOD GAVE US ALL....KEEPING CAVE MEN WARM LONG BEFORE WE STRUCK OIL OR DUG UP COAL///HECK EVEN BEFORS HUMANS DISCOVERED FIRE.
Comment
4 of 25
January 9, 2008
<span><font size="2"><font face="Courier New">It is not clear why the article omitted full-scale hydro from the &quot;renewables&quot; list - unless it is only discussing so-called &quot;new&quot; renewables.<span>&nbsp; </span></font></font></span><span><font size="2"><font face="Courier New">Here in New Zealand (1st 1/4 2007 data) 66% of electricity generated (not generating capacity, note) was from hydro and wind (most of it hydro).<span>&nbsp; </span>Geothermal (6%) and biomass generation brings the total to 74%.<span>&nbsp; </span>Total annual consumption for NZ (year ending March 2007) was 40,146 GWh.</font></font></span><span><font size="2"><font face="Courier New">Data is from the Aug 2007 &quot;Energy Watch&quot; journal (see www.energywatch.org.nz).</font></font></span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman'">Fastest growing sector is wind (in GWh/year terms not just in % increase of that sector).<span>&nbsp; </span>Second would be geothermal.</span>
Comment
5 of 25
January 9, 2008
<p>Oh ya, if&nbsp;industry can rely on subsidies to guarantee a much larger future growth, then there will also be more competition. Prices will come down, RE will become mainstream, and THEN will there be more subsidies, just like the fossils...</p><p>Robert</p>
Comment
6 of 25
January 9, 2008
I believe that RE has to be subsidized AT LEAST to the point that fossils and nuclear recieve. I'm afraid to search that one for fear of becoming totally disgusted... Just about all major advances were subsidized. Why should any aspect of RE such as supercapacitors, concentrated thermal, thin film, ect be left alone. At that rate, they will NEVER compete.
Comment
7 of 25
January 9, 2008
The comment on solar-thermal was right on, but the best use of solar-thermal isn't being pushed. That is, directly using the hot liquid to heat and cool. Almost all the peak energy used in California is for air conditioning, which tracks solar insolation one-to-one. We should be seeing mall parking lots covered with solar troughs. As to the tipping point? It will come when RE is directly competitive with NRE - without taxes, rebates, etc.
Comment
8 of 25
January 9, 2008
how about solar thermal. At this time it is the most effective and efficient solar technology available for commercial and industrial applications. Granted ,it is not sexy. It is the workhorse of solar technology and on large applications, where solar can do the most good, it can do the job without a lot of government incentives.&nbsp; another question, why don&quot;t members of the solar community ever challenge , in public, the statements by spokespersons for the non renewable energy industry that without gov&quot;t subsidies renewables are not cost effective. I am asking right now ,over the last 40 years how much money has the non rewable energy industry received in subsidies? My guess is hundreds of billions at a minimum. Hidden and not hidden. If renewables had received that kind of support, think whwere we could be now. Not in the desert fighting over oil.
Comment
9 of 25
January 9, 2008
<p>Check out sciam.com and their solar&nbsp;America debate... Most seem to want solar.</p><p>All I know is that the RE energy sector, although small, has high yearly growth rates, and will surpass all others if&nbsp;OIL is around long enough to power such a transition.</p><p>Hopefully, the CIGS based film will require less than a micron since at that rate, it seems that there ISN'T enough of indium to even cover a thousand sq miles...</p>
Comment
10 of 25
January 9, 2008
<p>Cool,</p><p>Great!</p>
Comment
11 of 25
January 9, 2008
<p>John --</p><p>A new function on our website allows people to delete their own comments. If you don't like what you've written, you can just click on that &quot;Delete this Comment&quot; option and it will be gone. Of course, only you and REAccess staff can see that option on your comment. Others will not be able to delete what you've posted. </p><p>-- Stephen Lacey</p>
Comment
12 of 25
January 9, 2008
Why is there a &quot;Delete this Comment&quot; on my last comment?&nbsp;
Comment
13 of 25
January 9, 2008
<p>Jim,</p><p>Great Rant!&nbsp; Love it!&nbsp; You are right on.&nbsp; I live around the Dallas area, so I get it.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>
Comment
14 of 25
January 9, 2008
<p>Richard,</p><p>&nbsp;What is the source of your 18,000 billion kWh figure of annual electric energy use?</p><p>&nbsp;Thanks!</p>
Comment
15 of 25
January 9, 2008
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial">Renewable Energy Access, Solar Industry Magazine, Alternative Energy Retailer and numerous other pro-RE journals, print and online, need to become far more outspoken about the official suppression of our industrys growth. Simply standing, hat-in-hand, asking please for more crumbs from the energy subsidy trough doesn&rsquo;t work.<span>&nbsp; </span></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial">Journals should write controversial articles and see who pull their ads and who buys more ad space. It&rsquo;s easy enough to find allies, follow the money.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial">End of rant</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><!--[if !supportEmptyParas]-->&nbsp;<!--[endif]--></p>
Comment
16 of 25
January 9, 2008
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial">Instead, RE pundits sit around and argue over the math used to come up with these paltry totals. That&rsquo;s simply a waste of bandwidth imo.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial">I have had more editorial replies and emails rejected, in the last 6 months, from the FWST than in my entire adult life of letter writing. Papers follow the money; look at who buys full-page ads to see whose money. The news media largely opposes us, the utilities oppose us and the government is simply following the money. </span></p> <span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Arial">(Cont.)</span>
Comment
17 of 25
January 9, 2008
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial">Yes, that Giuliani. Where is the outrage?</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial">The original article stated: &ldquo;&hellip;global public market transactions for renewable energy totaled approximately $17.5 [billion].&rdquo; That sounds impressive until you consider that TXU was bought by <u>Energy Futures Holdings</u> for more than twice that amount last year.<span>&nbsp; </span>And Texas Gov. Rick Perry was pushing for fast-track approval of a dozen new TXU coal burning power plants in Texas.</span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial">We can clearly see who the enemy of RE implementation is. </span></p> <span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Arial">(Cont.)</span>
Comment
18 of 25
January 9, 2008
<p class="MsoNormal">&nbsp;</p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial">Did the public decide it was a waste of money? I seriously doubt it.&nbsp;Where is the follow-up? Where is the questions? </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial">During the 2007- legislative session in Texas, the electric utility TXU had 120 lobbyists registered in the State Capitol according to my sources at the Fort Worth Star Telegram. TREIA had one. <a href="http://www.treia.org/" target="_blank">www.treia.org</a> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial">It took only one (Houston based) lobbying firm, Bracewell &amp; Giuliani, to have almost all of the RE language thrown out of the 2007 federal energy bill. </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial">(Cont.)</span></p>
Comment
19 of 25
January 9, 2008
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial">You are right, John. Texas should be doing much better considering it's almost accidental leadership role in wind power. Clearly, the problem is key government people, state and national, are keeping their foot on the throats of the RE industry, even in states with established RE incentive programs. </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial">I heard hardly a whisper after the headlines: &quot;</span><span style="font-family: Arial">New Jersey's Board of Public Utilities has voted to reject all new applications for solar rebates&rdquo;. D</span><span style="font-family: Arial">id NJ lawmakers just throw up their hands and decide the program was not worth the effort? </span></p> <span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: Arial">(Cont.)</span><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial"></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: Arial"></span></p>
Comment
20 of 25
January 9, 2008
I think Texas is where the tipping point is. Sure, Texas has a lot of wind power resource, but it does not have over 1% of the electric mix. Every place has a good solar resource, some better than others. But, texas has not even got 0.1% of the electric mix with solar. If you bring these renewables into a mainstream Texas you can say the tipping point has been crossed, but until then the weight is still on the other side.
Comment
21 of 25
January 9, 2008
The renewable energy people always talk capacity.&nbsp; Capacity factors on renewables--solar and wind--are very low.&nbsp; Pleast talk about annual energy. not capacity.&nbsp; World-wide annual electric enegy use is about 18,000 billion kWh--what do the renewables bing to the table?&nbsp; Two percent?
Comment
22 of 25
January 10, 2008
The Boston Consulting &quot;experience curve&quot; will bring solar costs down rapidly - when production doubles, prices are cut in half.
Comment
23 of 25
January 10, 2008
The further renewable now under rapid development is marine derived, Wave and Tide. I think tidal generation is closely set to follow wind as the next to be installed. Many countries are actively developing marine energy conversion now.
Comment
24 of 25
January 10, 2008
<p>Everyoneone agrees the sun is great and a wonderful thing. Solar pv is still 3 to 12 times more expensive than oil/wind/hydro/coal. Solar pv is one of the LEAST economical renewable energies. (but it will be cost effective in 1/3/5/10/15 years HA HA)</p><p>Maybe they canceled the subsidies for Solar pv in New Jersey because it was cheaper to buy energy from any other source available and then put the net savings toward future Solar pv purchases. You know when its cheaper and cost effective.&nbsp;</p>
Comment
25 of 25
January 11, 2008
Seems like most writers here write with the authority of a 'self proclaimed expert'. So much moaning over the past and not looking very sharply at the future won't serve our industry very well. Forward thinking all.
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Advertise With Us

Michael Best & Friedrich LLP PLANSEE SE American Electric Technologies, Inc. (AETI) Magnum Energy Inc. ClearEnergy Inc. groSolar Renewable Energy World Europe
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine 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 India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters