Since this is my first posting with CNP, I'll
use it to discuss my approach to understanding
energy and its use in the United States, which
is driven by developments in technology,
markets and government policies. In the coming
years and decades, without some significant
changes to current practices, the domestic and
global impacts of US energy production and
use - security, economic and
environmental - are expected to become
worse. Growing US and global energy
demands need be met, and the anticipated
impacts of global warming must be avoided, all
at an affordable price.
The least expensive and most
effective way to cut energy use, costs and
emissions is to achieve greater energy
efficiency. Simply using less - through
efficiency improvements and conservation
measures - entails the least disruption to
individuals, businesses and governments, and
could provide the greatest financial payoff in
the shortest time. The cheapest energy is
the energy you don't use.
There are also
a number of alternatives to our heavy
reliance on fossil fuels that are designed to
produce energy - specifically electricity -
with fewer emissions than current technologies
and practices. Nuclear energy often tops
the list, in spite of its significant
environmental and security threats. In
addition, there are less well-known options,
such as "combined heat and power" (CHP) systems
- often powered by natural gas - that are
located at sites where the power is used and
can supply electricity with great
efficiency. Both of these alternatives
are believed to offer great potential in
meeting rising US electricity demands.
However, the potential solutions
that have captured the greatest attention in
the United States - far more so than
others - are renewable energy
technologies. The economic, security and
environmental benefits that they offer are both
significant and enticing. This includes
especially solar and wind power, but also
geothermal, hydropower, biofuels, and fuel
cells.
The growth of the solar and wind
industries, along with the rise in investment
capital into emerging technologies, has been
sizable in recent years. Many of these
technologies hold great promise for the future,
and the investments they are attracting are
warranted - for their environmental, financial
and social benefits. Clean energy
technologies can:
- Diminish the
rising level of global demand for fossil fuels
brought about by the growth of China, India and
other developing countries
- Provide
investment and jobs in the United States geared
toward the manufacture, installation, service
and sale of renewable energy products and
services
- In the case of onsite
generation systems (distributed generation),
provide reliable electricity sources for
critical infrastructure such as hospitals, food
supplies and gas station in the event of power
failures, whether from natural disasters,
utility/grid failures, or
terrorism.
- Reduce the level of
greenhouse gas emissions
- And
potentially reduce the need for energy supplies
that come from the Middle East, where political
instability and military conflict create
volatility in oil supplies and
prices.
Currently, however, the
reach of renewable energy is limited. In
spite of the many efforts to promote renewable
sources, they contribute relatively little in
terms of actual energy production in the US,
and of course, they cannot serve as a
substitute for oil, only for fuel used in
generating electricity. Even relatively mature
technologies, such as solar photovoltaics (PV)
and large wind turbines, produce a tiny
fraction of the total US and worldwide energy
supply. Wind turbines supply about 2% of total
US generation, and solar is well under 1%.
Moreover, the reach of renewable energy
technologies is likely to remain limited for a
long time. First, expected growth in
electricity demand high, with the the US
Department of Energy projecting a rise in US
electricity generation from a level of 4
billion gigawatt-hours (GWh) in 2011 to 5
billion GWh in 2035. Fossil fuels will supply a
large proportion of this growth. Second, the
output of renewable technologies is relatively
small per unit compared to fossil fuels and
nuclear power (in other words, you need
hundreds of wind turbines to match the output
of one nuclear plant). And third, the
costs of renewable technologies are still often
relatively expensive compared to fossil fuels,
even with federal and state incentives.
This is the case with regard to upfront capital
costs, cost per unit of energy produced, and
cost per ton of carbon emissions avoided.
Renewables are, admittedly, at a
disadvantage to fossil fuels, which receive
sizable and continuing subsidies. In addition,
many of the costs of fossil fuels are
externalized - in the form of pollution, global
warming, health impacts, and responses to
national and energy security threats (e.g., two
wars involving Iraq since 1991). Nonetheless,
since these costs are likely to remain
externalized, renewable technologies could have
a difficult time becoming cost-competitive.
In other words, the growth in
energy demand, along with capacity and cost
considerations, point to a situation in which
renewable technologies are unlikely to
represent a significant proportion of the US
energy mix for some time. Absent some
significant breakthroughs involving
technological development, market innovations,
or the policies that govern the use and costs
of renewable energy, it is unlikely that
renewable energy will be a major source of
power in the United States for many years or
decades. The United States seems set to
remain on a course where it is dependent upon
fossil fuels, dependent for energy supplies
upon regimes that are political and militarily
unstable, and dependent upon hoping for the
best in a world where rising global demand
seems likely to increase the level of
competition over the world's finite energy
supplies. The future of US energy security, and
by extension, national security, looks fraught
with looming threats.
Printable Version
SUBSCRIBE TO THIS AUTHOR