2015: A Good Year for Reducing Carbon Emissions

By Nick Lawton, Staff Attorney

This year, the United States may achieve the most significant decline in carbon emissions in the nation’s history, according to a new white paper from Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF), Medium-term Outlook for US Power: 2015 = Deepest De-Carbonization Ever. BNEF attributes the coming de-carbonization to three factors: the growth of renewable energy, the retirement of coal plants, and the replacement of coal with natural gas. This blog post argues that this year’s anticipated decline in carbon emissions is really part of a much greater, much more significant trend: The United States has begun the transition from fossil fuels to renewables.

Coal-To-Gas is Tepid Progress

BNEF is correct that closing coal plants and replacing them with natural gas facilities can lower emissions of carbon dioxide at the power plant level. For this reason, natural gas sometimes receives praise for being a “bridge fuel” that can ease a transition toward renewable energy. However, the natural gas “bridge” lacks a solid foundation for two essential reasons.

First, extracting and refining natural gas leads to “fugitive” methane emissions before natural gas ever reaches a power plant. Because methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide (25 times more powerful), these fugitive methane emissions can more than offset any reduced carbon emissions at the power-plant level. In fact, Robert Howarth, a scholar at Cornell University, found that “both shale gas and conventional natural gas have a larger [greenhouse gas footprint] than do coal or oil, for any possible use of natural gas.” In other words, despite reduced emissions from power plants themselves, upstream methane emissions mean that switching from coal to gas may not be a net climate benefit at all.

Second, any commitments we make to natural gas now are likely to lock us into an unsustainable pattern of greenhouse gas emissions for decades. The U.S. Department of Energy projects that natural gas-fired power plants are likely to have a 30-year useful life. When approving new gas plants, state regulators generally commit to allowing a utility to recover the total construction cost, plus profit, over the plant’s useful life. In effect, approval of new natural gas plants can guarantee that we continue to emit harmful greenhouse gases for decades to come.

But Renewables are a Hot Market

Renewable energy offers a better solution, and recent trends provide reasons for hope. 2014 witnessed the most effective investments in renewable energy around the world. BNEF expects a record level of 18.5 GW of renewable energy development in the United States in 2015. A new study from the Rocky Mountain Institute, The Economics of Load Defection, foresees a sea change in how Americans generate electricity: “Over time, as retail electricity prices from the grid increase and solar and battery costs decrease, customers logically reduce their grid purchases until the grid takes a backup-only role.” Distributed solar power and energy storage will likely become the primary source of electricity for most American consumers, meaning that investments in large, long-lived fossil fuel power plants will likely prove unnecessary and short-sighted.

According to a new survey from SolarCity, U.S. Homeowners on Clean Energy: A National Survey, Americans overwhelmingly support the transition away from fossil fuels and toward renewable energy. A resounding 87% majority agreed that renewable energy is important to America’s energy future, and 50% ranked solar power as the most important new energy source. When asked about federal tax credits for wind and solar energy, a whopping 74% backed continuation of these policies. Moreover, while renewable energy is often cast as a Democratic favorite, a Yale survey of Republican voters demonstrates that the support for a transition to renewable energy crosses party lines. 77% of surveyed Republicans believe that the United States should use more renewable energy, and 64% believe that the United States should take action to reduce fossil fuel use.

Continued Policy Progress is Necessary

In the United States, energy choices are policy choices. The United States has never had a free market for electricity; government regulators have always made the decisions that determine how we generate energy. The policy choices we make today will determine how clean our energy sources are tomorrow. Some policies are clearly helping. The federal Investment Tax Credit and Production Tax Credit for renewable energy have driven investment in solar and wind energy—although uncertainty about renewing those credits has also driven a boom-and-bust investment pattern. Congress should extend those tax credits to provide a solid foundation for continued market growth. Republicans in Congress especially should listen to their constituents—Yale’s survey of Republican voters found that a majority felt that elected officials neither listen to nor care about their constituents’ opinions on energy issues. At the state level, renewable portfolio standards have very successfully driven renewable energy development at low cost. States should continue to expand these successful policies. And at the local level, cities can help too. Georgetown, Texas recently aimed to become 100% powered by renewable energy (as did Vancouver, BC). At the local, state, and federal level, policymakers are making progress. If we continue to make policy progress, this year’s decline in carbon emissions will be just the beginning of a trend toward a truly clean energy grid.

Coal Plant Retirements Present an Opportunity to Transition to a More Sustainable Energy Grid

By Amelia Schlusser, Staff Attorney

American Electric Power (AEP)—one of the United States’ largest electric utilities—recently announced that it will close seven coal-fired power plants by the end of May. AEP also plans to convert an additional two plants to run on natural gas. According to ClimateWire, these plant closures and conversions will eliminate 6,000 megawatts of coal-fired power capacity in the eastern United States.

While the AEP plant closures should curb air pollution and help the utility comply with federal air pollution regulations, the announcement has also sparked renewed hostility towards the Obama Administration’s efforts to control greenhouse gas emissions. The Intelligencer/Wheeling News-Register cited the closures as evidence of the “dire consequences” of President Obama’s “war on coal.”

It is true that AEP’s coal-plant retirements will have some negative impacts on a localized level; the utility announced that it is laying off more than 250 employees at six of the plants. It is also true that the financial outlook for the coal-fired power industry looks increasingly grim. However, reducing fossil fuel consumption presents a welcome opportunity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, protect public health, and promote economic growth in the U.S. by transitioning to a renewable energy grid.

According to a recent Duke University study, the U.S. coal industry lost more than 49,000 jobs between 2008 and 2012. During that same period, job growth in the renewable energy sector increased dramatically. The Solar Foundation found that the U.S. solar industry gained 81,000 jobs between 2010 and 2014. According to Environmental Entrepreneurs, the U.S. created almost 80,000 clean energy and clean transportation jobs in 2013 and an additional 47,000 jobs in 2014. On a national scale, these job increases more than offset the job losses associated with reductions in coal-fired generation. And a recent report by the New Climate Institute concluded that if the U.S. obtains 100% of its electricity from renewable sources by 2050, we would prevent 27,000 premature deaths a year due to air pollution and create 650,000 full time-equivalent jobs in the renewable energy sector.

States are starting to acknowledge the economic benefits associated with renewable energy. This week, for example, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo announced a $160 million program to increase renewable energy development in the state. Governor Cuomo anticipates that this investment will have a positive impact on the state’s economy—the governor’s office estimated that every $1 spent on renewable energy in New York generates an estimated $3 in economic benefits for the state. And earlier this year California Governor Jerry Brown called for the state to obtain 50% of its electricity from renewable sources by 2030, which appears to be an attainable goal.

Transitioning to a green energy system will provide numerous economic, environmental, and societal benefits for the U.S., but we must ensure that we have strong, legally defensible policies in place to facilitate this transition. In addition to implementing strong renewable portfolio standards and offering economic incentives for renewable energy development, states should take a proactive role in encouraging utilities to replace aging fossil fuel units with renewable generation. AEP’s coal plant retirements present a rare opportunity to replace fossil fuel generation with clean, renewable resources, and regulators in Ohio, West Virginia, Virginia, and Indiana should encourage the utility to replace these seven coal plants with renewable resources. Ensuring that renewable energy replaces closed coal plants will help these states enjoy the kind of job growth much of the nation is already experiencing.

Global Renewable Energy Investment Soars

By Nick Lawton, Staff Attorney

Global spending on renewable energy hit $270 billion in 2014, reflecting significant growth since last year, according to Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2014, a new report from the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). The report excludes large-scale hydroelectric power, focusing instead on solar power, wind, biomass, biofuels, geothermal, and small-scale hydro. Wind and solar power were the leaders both in terms of new capacity and financing. More generally, renewable energy accounted for nearly half of all net generating capacity added in 2014. However, the report also notes that spending on renewable energy is still lower than overall investment in fossil fuels and that reaching 20% of global energy generation at the current rates will take until 2030.

Renewable Energy Growth

The $270 billion investment in new renewable energy in 2014 is a 3-year high that shows 17% growth over 2013. Although investment in 2014 is $9 billion shy of the all-time record investment in 2011, the rapidly declining price of solar and wind power means that last year’s investment was more productive. In fact, the amount of wind and solar installed reached 95 gigawatts (GW). This record figure is significantly higher than the 70 GW installed in 2011. In short, renewable energy is continuing to offer more bang for the buck.

Renewable energy investment is starting to become more equitably spread across the world as well. Investment in developing countries grew by 36% since 2013, reaching $131.3 billion. In contrast, investment in developed countries was only slightly greater, at $138.9 billion, and grew much more slowly, up only 3% since last year. Because a major goal for climate change mitigation is economic development without large-scale carbon emissions, this record investment in renewable energy in developing countries is excellent news for the world.

China was the largest market for renewable energy by far, with $83 billion invested. That figure reflects an incredible 39% growth since last year. This year, China accounted for roughly 30% of global investment in renewables. The United States took second place, with a total investment of $38.3 billion, but as a region Europe pulled ahead with an investment of $57.5 billion.

Overall, renewable energy accounted for 48% of new generating capacity in 2014. In terms of capacity, this means that renewables now account for 15% of global generation. In terms of actual energy generated, the figure is somewhat lower, with renewables supplying 9.1% of global energy, an all-time high that reflects consistent annual growth and represents an impressive global achievement.

Growth in Perspective

The figures from 2014 are encouraging but also demonstrate that renewable energy still has ample room to grow. At the current rate of development, it will take until 2030 for renewables to supply 20% of global energy. Investment in renewables is still below investment in fossil fuels, and atmospheric CO₂ concentrations are still rising. Renewable energy offers a way to combat climate change and grow the global economy, but only if nations commit to making serious investments and serious commitments to changing the power grid.

Renewable energy growth rates in different countries offer a powerful lesson on the value of policy. In China and Europe, supportive policies such as feed-in tariffs created growing markets that attracted over half of all global investment. In stark contrast, dithering and uncertainty over a renewable energy target in Australia led investment to plunge from $2.1 billion in 2013 to a mere $330 million in 2014. As U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon noted in his introduction to the report, “Policy uncertainty and other barriers to investment need to be abolished.”

The United States has clear steps it can take to promote a stable policy environment that will grow renewable energy markets. Congress should extend tax credits for renewable energy development. The Environmental Protection Agency should finalize the Clean Power Plan and states should act quickly to develop robust compliance plans. U.S. States should follow the lead of California and Hawaii by expanding Renewable Portfolio Standards. By taking these steps, the United States can guarantee a stable policy framework that will support a strong market for renewable energy. 

A Solution for Mt. Everest’s Trash Problem: Convert Waste into Renewable Energy

By Amelia Schlusser, Staff Attorney

 

The village of Gorak Shep, where the Mt. Everest
Biogas Project hopes to construct an anaerobic
digester. Image credit: McKay Savage, 2007

Mount Everest has received a lot of press lately, largely due to the massive amounts of trash and human waste left behind by hundreds of mountain climbers each year. The world’s highest peak has become “the world’s highest garbage dump,” and as of 2014 climbers are now required to pay a $4,000 garbage deposit, which they can only recover if they carry 17.6 pounds of litter off the mountain.

According to a March 3 Reuters article on the Everest trash problem, human waste is more problematic than other mountaineering trash, because melting snow and ice washes the waste down the mountain and presents a health hazard for people who rely on water from the Everest’s glacier-fed rivers. When you consider that climbers leave behind an estimated 26,500 pounds of human waste on the mountain each year, it is clear that this waste presents a significant problem. Getting the waste off the mountain is only a partial solution, because the area’s villages have no systems in place to process and treat the raw waste they receive.

A group of concerned climbers and activists based out of Seattle have come up with a better solution—to turn the waste into a renewable energy source. The Mt. Everest Biogas Project is currently designing an anaerobic digester that will convert human waste into biogas that the Sherpas can use as a source of renewable energy.

ClimateProgress’ Emily Atkin recently interviewed Gary Porter, the project’s founder, who discussed some of the design challenges associated with constructing an anaerobic digester in the Himalayas. First, anaerobic digesters can only operate within a temperature range between 68 and 86 degrees Fahrenheit. Second, the small village that will host the project is extremely remote, and all equipment and materials must be carried up the mountain by yaks or people. To overcome these barriers, Porter’s team designed a system that will use the village’s existing solar power array and a series of batteries to heat the digester and enable it to operate in the extreme conditions of the Himalayas.

Once operational, the Mt. Everest Biogas Project will exemplify the versatility and accessibility of renewable energy on a global scale. Biogas is a particularly appealing source of energy in the developing world, because anaerobic digesters help mitigate waste disposal needs and improve sanitation while providing electricity. Biogas production can also create valuable byproducts, such as liquid fertilizer. In rural areas, micro-biogas systems help reduce deforestation by replacing wood for heating and cooking. According to a 2011 New York Times article, a home biogas system can reduce firewood consumption by 4.5 tons a year. Some developing countries have made substantial efforts to deploy small-scale biogas systems; Nepal, for example, has helped its citizens construct 300,000 biogas systems around the country (and created an estimated 13,000 jobs in doing so).

Biogas systems also provide valuable sources of renewable energy in the United States. Using anaerobic digestion, wastewater treatment plants, landfills, and agricultural facilities can convert organic waste into renewable energy. By enabling these facilities to generate electricity on-site, biogas systems can significantly reduce a site’s electricity costs. For example, the City of Gresham Wastewater Treatment Plant’s 395 kilowatt (kW) biogas-fired combined heat and power system reduces the facility’s electricity bills by around $20,000 a month, according to a report by the Energy Trust of Oregon. After witnessing the cost savings from this initial system, which was installed in 2005, the Plant decided to invest in a 420 kW solar array and a second 395 kW biogas unit. Once these projects are operational, the Plant estimates that it will save $500,000 a year in electricity costs and generate an additional $250,000 in revenue from waste haulers.

As these examples illustrate, biogas systems can provide clean, renewable energy in a number of contexts worldwide. While generating electricity from organic waste may not have the same charm as generating electricity from the sun or wind, biogas systems can run on a variety of fuel sources and thus provide an alternative resource for areas with limited solar or wind energy potential. The United States has significant biogas potential, and states should adopt policies to incentivize biogas production within their borders.