4 replies to this topic

[E3 wise]

By Ken Bossong, SUN DAY Campaign

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- According to the most recent issue of the "Monthly Energy Review" by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), with data through September 30, 2011, renewable energy sources continue to expand rapidly while substantially outpacing the growth rates of fossil fuels and nuclear power.

  For the first nine months of 2011, renewable energy sources (i.e., biomass/biofuels, geothermal, solar, water, wind) provided 11.95% of domestic U.S. energy production. That compares to 10.85% for the same period in 2010 and 10.33% in 2009. By comparison, nuclear power provided just 10.62% of the nation's energy production in the first three quarters of 2011 -- i.e., 11.10% less than renewables.

Looking at all energy sectors (e.g., electricity, transportation, thermal), renewable energy output, including hydropower, grew by 14.44% in 2011 compared to 2010. Among the renewable energy sources, conventional hydropower provided 4.35% of domestic energy production during the first nine months of 2011, followed by biomass (3.15%), biofuels (2.57%), wind (1.45%), geothermal (0.29%), and solar (0.15%).

On the consumption side, which includes oil and other energy imports, renewable sources accounted for 9.35% of total U.S. energy use during the first nine months of 2011.)
Looking at just the electricity sector, according to the latest issue of EIA’s "Electric Power Monthly," with data through September 30, 2011, renewable energy sources (i.e., biomass, geothermal, solar, water wind) provided 12.73% of net U.S. electrical generation. This represents an increase of 24.73% compared to the same nine-month period in 2010. By comparison, electrical generation from coal dropped by 4.2% while nuclear output declined by 2.8%. Natural gas electrical generation rose by 1.6%.

Conventional hydropower accounted for 8.21% of net electrical generation during the first nine months of 2011 — an increase of 29.6% compared to 2010. Non-hydro renewables accounted for 4.52% of net electrical generation (wind - 2.73%, biomass — 1.34%, geothermal - 0.40%, solar - 0.05%). Compared to the first three quarters of 2010, solar-generated electricity expanded in 2011 by 46.5%; wind by 27.1%, geothermal by 9.4%, and biomass by 1.3%.

“Notwithstanding the recession of the past three years, renewable energy sources have experienced explosive rates of growth that other industries can only envy,” said Ken Bossong, Executive Director of the SUN DAY Campaign. “The investments in sustainable energy made by the federal government as well as state and private funders have paid off handsomely underscoring the short-sightedness of emerging proposals to cut back on or discontinue such support.”

The U.S. Energy Information Administration released its most recent "Monthly Energy Review" on December 23, 2011.  It can be found here.  The relevant charts from which the data above are extrapolated are Tables 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, and 10.1.  EIA released its most recent "Electric Power Monthly" on December 16, 2011 here. The relevant charts are Tables 1.1, ES1.A, ES1.B, and 1.1.A.

  The SUN DAY Campaign is a non-profit research and educational organization founded in 1993 to promote sustainable energy technologies as cost-effective alternatives to nuclear power and fossil fuels. Sponsored by The Sustainable Energy Coalition.

Shared by E3wise

[still learning]

Explosive growth?
The words of a marketeer/cheerleader seems to me.

When you look at what is in the EIA report referred to at :http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/index.cfm#summary I don't see reason for most of us to cheer, considering how far the US needs to go.

Explosive growth?  A ladyfinger firecracker maybe.

[E3 wise]

You know I am going to have to agree to disagree with you on this and I will tell you why.

  #1 We used more alternative energy than nuclear energy in 2011, that’s huge. Nuclear often touted as the way to provide energy with no green house gases, if you forget about the nuclear waste that is being stored on site that is literally putting our planet at risk for hundreds of thousands of year.   Nuclear power is a major provider of energy and Alternative energy is surpassing it.

  #2 And I have to say this is a personal view.  My company and I am currently under contract, working on 34 Alternative Energy site designs right now, they are specific to the sites being developed so I do not want to make generalities, however after almost 28 years in the Energy business I can tell you that 2011 was the first year in which I was finally able to tell my staff, we have turned the corner. In 1991 we had just 12 projects with only 3 in the United States.  By 2001 we had 18 with 6 in the United States.   In years past Germany, England, Spain, Chile and many others were more interested in energy independence than the United States.

   Now utilities here are getting on board and you know why? Economic viability and competiveness.  On average when oil reaches $ 88 a barrel wind is cheaper, at $93 a barrel Solar is cheaper.  So anytime there is a middle east hiccup oil prices spike.  Utilities are in the business of selling electrons, now even with lower subsidies; they can produce their energy and not have to worry every time Iran threatens to close the straits of Hormuz.

    Is it enough- no but it’s getting better all the time, I have been an Eco Warrior since 1971- I was involved with demonstrations for clean Air and Water and Saving Habitats in California, Texas, Oregon, Michigan and  Washington DC under Nixon-  In 1975-76 we worked on our first wind and solar projects in California.  Everyone told us we were crazy, Alternative Energy would never compete with Fossil fuels, well guess what baby its competing now and more is coming, think of it more wind installed in a three month period in 2011 then all of 2009, I’m sorry but to me that’s huge.

[still learning]

E3 wise, apparently we can read the same report and react differently and use different words to describe what we read.

Respomding to the points in your last post....

1  You apparently include hydropower when you use the phrase "alternative energy."  I don't think most people do.  Hydro is renewable, sure, but alternative?
That renewable energy (including hydropower) surpassed nuclear in the EIA report has about as much to do with a decline in nuclear electricity generation as it does with renewables increase, which was mostly a hydropower increase.
See http://www.eia.gov/t...dex.cfm#summary and  http://www.eia.gov/e...pdf/execsum.pdf  and http://www.renewable...xplosive-growth  

That you view renewables exceeding nuclear as a major plus ("that's huge") is OK, but that's a regard that I don't share.  My concern is displacing fossil fuels.

2  It's good that the business that you are in is doing well.

One of the the EIA reports shows that solar electricity generation grew 33% in the US between 2010 and 2011.  Impressive.  A cause for celebration if you are in the business.  Explosive growth.  Grew from 138 to 183 gigawatt-hours.
US total electricity generated actually declined from  346,045 to 337,606. gigawatt-hours.
Solar electricity grew from 0.0399% to 0.0542% of total US electricity.  
Wind electricity generated declined slightly according to the report.

Utilities getting onboard with renewables because of competitive price? In the continental US?  You cite rising petroleum prices as a factor.  I didn't think there was much oil fired electricity generation left in the lower 48.  Hawaii and other islands, sure.

"Competing now":  What will it cost a utility to generate a kilowatt-hour of renewable electricity, new construction, unsubsidized?

California has several utitility scale solar electricity projects started, but we have a legislated renewable energy requirement.  Not exactly a subsidy, not a "carrot," but the utilities will be fined in the event of non compliance, a "stick."

[gangandealer]

In my opinion, we have used less nuclear energy and way more alternative energy, which is a huge breakthrough