The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Wednesday, May 22, 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? ×

Now Re-elected, President Obama Should Examine US Renewable Rank

Paul Gipe, Contributor
November 15, 2012  |  13 Comments

In his stirring acceptance speech, re-elected President Barack Obama noted that climate change would be on the agenda in his second administration — despite its marked absence during the campaign.

Obama then tried to unify a divided country by closing with a popular American rallying cry of how the US "is the greatest nation on earth" and our best days as a nation are yet to come.

Considering the resounding defeat of the fossil-fuel industry's propaganda campaign against President Obama, and his new found interest in climate change, just where does the US rank relative to its development of renewable energy?

Yes, the US has more installed renewable energy generating capacity than many other countries. But the US is also a large country and is one of the world's most populous. Yet, relative to its population, the US is well behind in the development of its solar, wind, biogas, and geothermal energy compared to that in many other countries.

Solar

What prompted the following comparison of renewable energy development per capita, was the surprising announcement by Renewables International that the Czech Republic had reached the threshold of 2,000 MW of installed solar photovoltaic (solar PV) capacity. This development had been preceded earlier this year by the unexpected success of solar PV in Great Britain where 1,300 MW had been installed due to their wildly popular feed-in tariff. And then this week came reports that Australia, another unknown market for solar PV, had surpassed 2,000 MW of installed capacity.

These events call into question just what the renewable industry and, more importantly, what the American renewable trade press call a success.

Consider for example, the news from Australia. If estimates of installed capacity by mid-year are correct, Australia will have caught up with California in total installed solar PV and will substantially have surpassed California in solar PV installed per capita (0.8 kW per capita vs. 0.5 kW per capita). This is nothing short of remarkable.

A combination of conditions makes these events seem unlikely. Australia is dominated by the fossil-fuel industry: the country is a major exporter of coal, mostly to Asia. Britain is notably cloudy, wet, and windy and the ruling conservative coalition has a penchant for fossil fuels and nuclear over renewables. And if one was to believe all the dire trade news, solar PV in the Czech Republic was dead — and buried.

In looking at selected markets for solar PV worldwide, the accomplishments of several countries stand out relative to the US. Most well known are Germany and Italy.

Up to mid-2012, Germany had installed 20 times more solar PV capacity per capita than the entire US; Italy had installed 14 times more per capita.

The solar industry in the US is on track to have its best year ever as huge new central-station solar power plants are coming on line. Analysts expect the US to install 3,500 MW of new solar PV this year. Even so, Germany will install twice as much at a fraction of the cost as the US, and Italy will install far more than the US on a population adjusted basis.

While Italy remains second fiddle to Germany in total installations worldwide, growth of new solar PV installations continued robustly with nearly 2,500 MW installed in the first half of 2012. If growth continues at this pace, Italy could install as much if not more solar PV capacity in absolute terms as the US this year.

Due to falling hardware prices, feed-in tariffs have been cut dramatically in the Czech Republic, Germany, Italy, Greece, and France. These countries all have substantial fleets of PV systems already in operation, and more capacity is continuing to be installed despite the lower tariffs.

The Czech Republic, the poster child for government reaction to stop a booming solar sector, has nine times more solar PV capacity than the US and, as noted, will exceed 2,000 MW of total installed capacity by the end of 2012.

Spain, similarly afflicted with a reactionary attempt to rein in massive solar PV development, still has five time more solar PV per capita as the US.

But, it's the Australian market that has taken analysts by surprise. With its federal system, each state, as well as the capital territory have their own solar policy, making it difficult for the trade press to follow the pace of development.

The Australian solar boom has been powered by a mix of policies among the different states: feed-in tariffs, capital subsidies, and net metering. Some jurisdictions have used feed-in tariffs in combination with capital subsidies. No one should be surprised that a boom was the result.

The Czech Republic, Spain, Greece, and Australia all have installed more solar PV capacity per capita than the one-time green powerhouse of California.

New Jersey has installed almost twice as much solar PV capacity per capita as California. Despite New Jersey's success, recent American press reports continue to label California as a "green leader". Could regional bias be at work? What makes California "greener" than New Jersey in reference to solar PV?

And in the "great white north," the province of Ontario, Canada has installed as much solar PV per capita as California after only a few short years of Ontario's troubled feed-in tariff program.

Another unsung success story is solar PV in France, a country more associated with nuclear power than with solar energy. France has installed almost as much solar PV per capita as California. In 2012, France has nearly doubled total installed solar PV capacity from 1,500 MW to nearly 3,000 MW by mid-year. Is pro-nuclear France greener than anti-nuclear California?

Admittedly, new contracts have ground to a halt in France after the previous government of Nicolas Sarkozy effectively strangled new solar development. Despite President Sarkozy's attempt to kill the solar industry, there is a substantial backlog of projects--more than 1,500 MW--that will come on line in the coming months. Thus, France will continue to rival California in solar PV capacity per capita well into 2013 and possibly beyond.

One of the most surprising successes has been Denmark. In less than one year, Denmark has installed nearly 100 MW of solar PV through a traditional subsidy program. The rapid growth of solar in Denmark has surprised everyone, including the Danes. While small in absolute terms, Denmark has leapt ahead of the US in solar PV per capita after only a few months even though the US has been developing solar energy for decades.

Viewing Page 1 of 2

  • Next Page

13 Comments

Register To Comment
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
November 21, 2012
"Obama won by a small difference of individual votes. This demonstrates dissatisfaction with his rule of almost half of the American people" says Dede.

Really? When a sitting President in a mediocre economy wins re-election by large electoral margin, by large margins of women, by large margins of minorities that are becoming non-minorities, by large majorities of the young, etc. -- and loses a majority white, older males in states of the former Confederacy, that "demonstrates dissatisfaction with his rule"?

Let's see what the "majority" assessment of Congress was & remains, Dede? Does 4:1 disapproval of such a body represent "dissatisfaction with" its rule? Does adding more members of the President's party in both Houses mean "dissatisfaction with his rule" Dede?

Just trying to get a handle on the odd logic you're spinning wildly with here, Dede. It's kinda like trying to follow the twists of reality we get from Fox News. Auditioning?
;]
Dedetizadora Desentupidora
Dedetizadora Desentupidora
November 21, 2012
Barack Obama won by a small difference of individual votes. This demonstrates dissatisfaction with his rule of almost half of the American people. I'm hoping, however, for Obama to take the reins of the economy, because U.S. growth produces positive effects in Brazil and much of the world.

Thank you,
Dedetizadora
http://www.ddribeira.com.br
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
November 17, 2012
BobW, no matter how you try to spin it, windmills, with their 700-ton/MW peak fossil-fuel-processing limitation may make profits for you, but, for the world, they're just wasteful and inefficient. You should be able to figure this out.

I suggest reading the Forbes piece on the subject of all power generation systems, as well as specific analyses of wind, like Hargraves' www.thoriumenergycheaperthancoal.com/ p132 on.

Indeed the CO2 burden of wind's high resource dependency on construction and high maintenance per MWHr makes clear why DG PV, hydro or nuclear have far smaller Carbon debts.

And, spending $10-15B on a 2GWe, 24/7 plant that runs for 40+ years making >$1B/year on just power sales (ignoring isotope, desalination, carbon-neutral-fuel... sales) makes a stock of thousands of windmills, each needed repeated service within 20 years, plus backup systems for storage/power-fill, plus transmission & conversion losses, plus environmental losses -- well, it becomes a silly comparison, eh?

You can deny it all you want, but just because wind is your business doesn't mean your words are accurate.
;]
Bob Wallace
Bob Wallace
November 16, 2012
Alex, I'll give you a quick reply but I'm not going to get caught up in another of your ridiculous discussions.

For the most part new nuclear is being built only where government money is being used (China,Iran, and Saudi Arabia, for example). Those also happen to be places where citizens have little to no ability to object and if the project needs more concrete/steel/labor/whatever the government can simply say 'do it'.

You can try to make a pro-nuclear argument based on how things work in totalitarian country and attempt to convince others that we could do the same here, but it would only make you look foolish.

The facts are right in your face. John Rowe, the recently retired head of Exelon has made a very clear statement that building new nuclear in the US is not feasible. No one from any other utility argued with him. The industry is telling us that some of the existing, paid off reactors cannot compete in today's utility market.

--

BTW, your carbon tax claim is more of your foolishness. The lifetime CO2 footprint of nuclear is significantly higher than wind.

Now, go ahead with your pretend doctor stuff....
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
November 16, 2012
BobW, you might want to look beyond your limitations, and around the world, where nuclear plants are indeed being built and cheaper than coal, etc. The reason is simple -- EROI on 'renewables' is falsified, while EROI on combustion is simply scandalous.

The Saudis & Abu Dhabians, for example, are having Chinese & Koreans built them nukes fast, so they can sell their oil to us instead of burning it to refrigerate their indoor ski slopes or desalinate their water.

A nuke plant generates over $500M/year in power sales per reactor and runs for decades. That's lots more $ coming in than go out, even if the reactor isn't re-commissioned with newer, more efficient designs.

And, if there were a real Carbon tax, even wind farms would have to pay more than nukes.
;]
Bob Wallace
Bob Wallace
November 16, 2012
The US utility industry has found that new nuclear is too expensive to consider unless customers are forced to contribute their money to help build the reactor and then can be forced to pay high rates for the electricity produced as is happening in Georgia. And that is with taxpayer risk assumption during construction and in the event of a catastrophic failure.

It's even the case that existing, paid off nuclear plants are finding it hard, even impossible, to stay in business when faced with the competitive price of natural gas and wind generation. The Kewaunee, Wisconsin reactor is closing down in the next couple of months. Oyster Creek will close in about six years rather than spend what is required to rebuild its cooling tower. Discussions are underway about whether or not to spend the money required to repair San Onofre and Crystal River or to leave them down.

There are some who talk about some sort of affordable nuclear plant that could be built and revive the nuclear industry. But when opportunities to build these 'fabulous' plants appear no company has stepped forward and offered to build one. Wishing does not make things true.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/24/business/energy-environment/economics-forcing-some-nuclear-plants-into-retirement.html?_r=1
Diego Matter
Diego Matter
November 16, 2012
"Denmark has leapt ahead of the US in solar PV per capita after only a few months even though the US has been developing solar energy for decades."

That says it all.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
November 16, 2012
Aha, Explorer, note that I fully agree with DG PV. But also note that nuclear power, as we now use it, is based on a 1946-patent. We do, at least, require decommissioning per kW installed for it, which is better than any 'renewables'. And the spent-fuel storage issue is actually not an issue, if we were to move ahead with newer reactor designs, which actually can use the >90% of spent fuel that's not "spent".

;]
Paul Hanly
Paul Hanly
November 16, 2012
If subsidies (including free government caps on liabiity and government covering costs of disasters) and decommissioning and waste storage were properly taken into account, no current commercial technology nuclear power station would be built anywhere.

Demand management through time of day tolling by smart meters to limit demand at peak times
1. makes rooftop solar PV extremely competitive in many areas,
2. reduces peak demand,
3. makes the cost of additional large capacity redundant,
4. makes the cost of additional distribution capacity for peak loads from centralised generators like coal redundant
5. increases energy distribution efficiency by strongly encouraging moving load out of peak periods eg for swimming pool chlorination using salt at night rather than during the day.
6. Provides localised sources of power in case of transmission failure or generator failure/destruction/attack
7. Provides houses with increased daytime security of supply during peak demand brownouts.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
November 16, 2012
It's always interesting how folks love to report fantasies, such as "installed MW", or, supposedly, "installed MW/capita". Maybe because the average power actually delivered is so low?

And, the subsidies per capita are nowhere. And the fabrication/installation Carbon debt is nowhere, nor are de-commissioning & other environmental costs.

The perennial ~10% loss from 'farms' due to transmission/conversion and the cost of new/upgraded transmission are also conveniently omitted.

So, it's no wonder that 'renewables' promoted/documented this way draw laughter from some and denial of subsidy from others.

This is one reason why successes with local solar PV/hot-water (DG) are mounting. With >2% pf all world land covered by human structures, there's more space for local solar (distributed generation) than needed for peak daytime loads. This is why efforts by Calif. municipal entities and the "million solar homes" initiative are moving rapidly ahead.

Indeed, there's no need for wind/solar 'farms' at all, and certainly no need for biogas/mass except to burn effluent from necessary sewage/bio-waste digesters.

It's been taking a while to unveil the facts about various alleged 'green' power sources, but the hype is indeed falling away fast -- from wind, biomass, etc. So yes, the President can and should do the right things to promote real 'renewables' and stop the fakes that simply beg for subsidies from the many to serve their few invested.
Bob Wallace
Bob Wallace
November 16, 2012
"his new found interest in climate change"

Really, Paul? Did you sleep through the first four years? You missed doubling CAFE standards, closing the least efficient/most polluting coal plants, all those presidential visits to wind and solar installations/factories, subsidy money going to renewable energy and EV battery factories, ...?

When running in general elections one has to get to the middle and even grab a bit of the other candidate's side of the middle. Otherwise you're the loser. In order to grab a hunk of the middle you have to minimize the issues that might cost you "middle" votes.

How about those of us wanting to see more support for renewable energy give some love to those who have given us some? It's more likely that they'll do more to please us if we're nice to them rather than dump on them.
Tor 'Solar Fred' Valenza
Tor 'Solar Fred' Valenza
November 16, 2012
Great thoughts and data here, Paul. Thanks for sharing.
Anumakonda Jagadeesh
Anumakonda Jagadeesh
November 15, 2012
I am sure President Barack Obama will support Renewable Energy usage on a massive scale in US since it also controls Climate Change. Already US is a major Wind Power country and also Solar Power is expanding in US.

Dr.A.Jagadeesh Nellore(AP),India
E-mail: anumakonda.jagadeesh@gmail.com

Add Your Comments

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

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
Paul Gipe

Paul Gipe

Paul Gipe has written extensively about renewable energy for both the popular and trade press. He has also lectured widely on wind energy and how to minimize its impact on the environment and the communities of which it is a part. For his...
  • About
  • Articles
  • Contact
  • FOLLOW
  • CONTACT
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Editors' Picks

  • America's Real Problem with Solar Energy
  • EU Debate Over Climate Change Policy Could Dampen Renewable Energy Growth
  • Massachusetts Resets Its Solar Energy Bar, Four Years Early

Most Commented

  • 17
    The Economic Case for Divesting from Fossil Fuels
  • 12
    Breakdown: Penetration of Renewable Energy in Selected Markets
  • 12
    Fracking and Solar: Friends, Foes or the Bridge to Clean Energy Adoption?
  • 5
    Renewable Energy Research Initiative Launched in UK

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • Able Energy Co.
  • Active Communications International
  • Brightergy
  • DNV KEMA Energy & Sustainability
  • The Stella Group, Ltd.
  • Panasonic Eco Solutions North America
  • Renewables Academy AG (RENAC)
  • Helios Solar Works
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