Download Cost and Benefit of 100% Renewable Energy by 2050

Running Head: COST AND BENEFIT OF 100% RENEWABLE ENERGY BY 2050
Cost and Benefit of 100% Renewable Energy by 2050
Alexander Faust
Virginia Commonwealth University
1
COST AND BENEFIT OF 100% RENEWABLE ENERGY BY 2050
2
Abstract
My research questions are: How much will renewable energy cost? What are the best sources of
renewable energy? By what year can the United States be entirely dependent on renewable
energy? How long will the world’s fossil fuel reserves last? What is the effect of global warming
on the environment and on the economy? The participants are the government, oil companies,
environmental groups and consumers. My method of implementing 100% renewable energy in
the US is a variety of wind turbines, solar panels, geothermal heat pumps, and hydroelectric
generators. The cost of this projects would be $156 billion over 36 years. Renewable energy has
various economic and environmental benefits. Clean energy will mitigate further climate change
which will in turn prevent droughts, increased chances of wildfires and destruction of crops,
flooding of coastal cities, and starvation. The economic benefits of renewable energy are the
millions of jobs that would be created rebuilding our power grid and a less expensive alternative
to fossil fuels for the consumer. In conclusion, the long-term benefits of renewable energy
exceed the short-term costs to businesses and the government.
COST AND BENEFIT OF 100% RENEWABLE ENERGY BY 2050
3
It is a scientific fact that the burning of fossil fuels from human activity is the main cause
of global warming. It is estimated that by the year 2112, we will have depleted all of our coal,
oil, and natural gas reserves (Chang, 2013). If we are to avoid further global warming and the
inherent probability of an economic disaster when we run out of fossil fuels; we must implement
clean, renewable sources of energy, which will replace our current dependence on fossil fuels
and eliminate CO2 emissions. There are several important questions that we must ask before we
can achieve 100% clean, renewable energy by the year 2050 in the United States. Which sources
of renewable energy will we use and how much will it cost to rebuild the entire power grid? How
long would it take for us to be only reliant on renewable energy? How does climate change affect
our economy? There are many factors that come into play when we begin to discuss the effect of
fossil fuels on our economy and the public. Large oil companies influence our politicians and
energy policies. These corporations only care about their profit margins, and not the economic
and environmental benefit of renewable energy. They are responsible for the lack of political will
that is needed to implement laws to make renewable energy a viable alternative to fossil fuels.
The first step to 100% clean, renewable energy is implementing a power grid that can
support clean energy. The benefit of renewable energy is that wind, water, and solar energy are
39% more efficient to produce; as opposed to burning fossil fuels to generate electricity, where
you have to account for the loss in energy from thermodynamics (Dickerson, 2015). The second
law of thermodynamics states that whenever energy is transferred from one form to another, i.e.
coal to electricity, entropy or the amount of unusable energy increases (Nave). With renewable
energy, all of our power will come in the form of clean electricity and cars with internal
combustion engines will become obsolete, as well as power plants that burn fossil fuels to
COST AND BENEFIT OF 100% RENEWABLE ENERGY BY 2050
4
produce electricity. In 2013, transportation was responsible for 31% of U.S carbon dioxide
emissions (Overview, 2013). This is because the exhaust of a gasoline powered vehicle releases
carbon dioxide as well as other harmful toxins into the air, while an electric car produces zero
pollutants and are more efficient at converting energy than gasoline powered vehicles. In fact, a
traditional car only converts 17%-21% of the energy in gasoline to power at the wheels, while an
electric car can convert about 59%-62% of electrical energy to power (All-Electric).
If we continue to use fossil fuels, the estimated power demand for the United States by
2050 is 2.261 TW, but if we switch to only using renewable energy our power demand will go
down to 1.591 TW (Dickerson, 2015). To put the difference in energy demand into perspective,
the largest nuclear power plant in the world, the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa in Japan, can produce
7,965 megawatts of power. The energy saved by using renewable energy is 0.67 terawatts or
670,000 megawatts, which is the equivalent of 84 Kashiwazaki power plants. It is almost certain
that once traditional sources of non-renewable energy such as oil, coal, and natural gas run out,
we will start using more nuclear power. The downside to increasing our dependence on nuclear
power would be the nuclear waste generated from uranium-235, the main source of heat in a
nuclear power plant. With this many nuclear power plants there is a high possibility of another
nuclear power plant disaster similar to the one that happened at the Fukushima Nuclear Power
Plant in 2011 (Top, 2013).
Unlike fossil fuels, renewable energy is cheaper and safer; the number of deaths caused
by air pollution every year is 44,367, but with clean energy this number is expected to decrease
drastically. Future energy costs will also decrease substantially, from 10.4￠/kWh to 8.5￠/kWh,
COST AND BENEFIT OF 100% RENEWABLE ENERGY BY 2050
5
averaging a savings of $444 per a person in energy costs annually. When you add up the amount
of money saved in health care, energy, and climate costs, it comes out to around $8,020 per
person. It is estimated that a project of this size would create over 5 million construction and
operation jobs that would last 40 consecutive years. The American people stand to benefit from
renewable energy, because of lower health care and energy costs, as well as the increase in job
opportunities. (Dickerson, 2015).
The different ways of harnessing renewable energy consist of rooftop and utility-scale
solar panels, onshore and offshore wind farms, geothermal heat pumps, and hydroelectric
generators. Half of our power would have to come from wind energy, and the other half would
comprise mostly of solar power, with a small percentage of geothermal and hydroelectric power.
States along the northeast coast can take advantage of the high annual wind capacity factor,
while southern states can capitalize on the large amount of natural sunlight by building solar
panels. While changing the entire power grid has a large upfront cost, the long term benefit of
renewable energy is that once the wind turbines and solar panels are built, they can freely
harness unlimited wind and solar energy and pay for themselves in just a few years. As fossil
fuels become scarcer, the price of harnessing it will only increase; unlike renewable energy
which has stable energy costs (Dickerson, 2015).
The price of completely switching to renewable energy worldwide is estimated to cost
$29.46 trillion (Chang, 2013). While wealthier nations could afford such a high price tag for
clean energy, smaller countries will have trouble paying for the high initial cost of infrastructure.
Nevertheless, most wealthy countries are highly industrialized and contribute the majority to
global CO2 emissions, so the carbon footprint of less wealthy and industrialized countries is
relatively insignificant in the grand scheme of things. Currently, the United States is responsible
COST AND BENEFIT OF 100% RENEWABLE ENERGY BY 2050
6
for 18% of the world's total energy consumption, so our share of the $29.46 trillion cost would
be $5.3 trillion or $156 billion a year over 34 years. To put this number into perspective, $156
billion is 40% of what we spent importing oil in 2013 (Ecodad, 2014), and only be 1.4% of the
discretionary spending budget for the federal government in 2015 (Office, 2015). With these
numbers we can see that transitioning to 100% renewable energy is economically feasible by the
year 2050. The benefits of this would be creating millions of jobs, lowering our demand for
energy and the long term costs of production, and mitigating climate change. This would
outweigh the initial cost in equipment, labor and the economic implications that it will have on
some businesses in the energy sector.
Switching to an all-electric power grid may hurt businesses in the energy sector in the
short term. However, the long term effects from global warming will decrease economic
efficiency severely. Researchers at UC Berkeley and Stanford studied the relationship between
temperature and economic performance over the last 50 years. The study found that a majority of
countries have a specific temperature where economic performance stopped increasing, that
temperature is 55 degrees Fahrenheit. If a country passes this temperature threshold, their
economic performance tends to decrease (Geiling, 2015).
Countries that have naturally warmer climates experience a bigger drop in economic
performance for every degree it gets warmer, compared to every degree it gets colder. Since
cooler climates are associated with faster economic growth, it makes sense that countries in
North America, Europe, and northern Asian are generally wealthier. If global temperatures
continue to rise, researchers found that 77 percent of countries in the world will experience a
decrease in per capita income, with global income dropping by 23 percent in 2100. The
wealthiest 20 percent of nations can expect a slight increase in work efficiency over the next few
COST AND BENEFIT OF 100% RENEWABLE ENERGY BY 2050
7
years as global temperatures continue to rise beneath the threshold. The poorest 40 percent of
nations will experience a 75 percent decline in average income in 2100. This data does not mean
that wealthier countries are immune to the effects of global warming, but that the wealthiest
countries typically have a lower average temperature to begin with, so it will take longer for the
effects of global warming to take place. These results would only occur if nothing is done to stop
climate change, but as more nations are starting to rely less on fossil fuels, the likelihood of this
outcome by 2100 is small (Geiling, 2015). Although, if we continue burning fossil fuels at an
increasing rate, global temperature will rise by 35.24 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100 and our
economic efficiency will decrease substantially. As a result of this temperature increase, sea
levels will increase 20 inches by the year 2100 (Fifth, 2013). Higher ocean levels and global
temperature will cause widespread droughts, increased chances of wildfires and destruction of
crops, flooding of coastal cities, and it will leave millions of people starving (Baehr, 2014).
Lobbyist for big oil companies spend tens of millions of dollars in political contributions
every year. These political contributions are responsible for the lack of support for clean energy
in our government. During George W Bush’s Presidency, the country’s energy policy was
heavily influenced by large oil companies that had strong ties to the administration and millions
of dollars in contributions to political campaigns. Both the president and vice president were
former oil executives, which is one of the reasons the administration approved billions of dollars
in tax cuts and subsidies for the oil industry. The oil and gas industry spent $393.2 million during
the Bush administration lobbying the federal government and contributed over $82 million in
donations to candidates, parties, and political action committees (Mayer, 2008).
Environmental groups have given nearly 11 times less than the oil industry in political
contributions. The truth of the matter is that environmental groups cannot compete with large oil
COST AND BENEFIT OF 100% RENEWABLE ENERGY BY 2050
8
companies like Exxon Mobil, which brought in almost $40 billion in profit, compared to a
leading environmental group which reported an income of $29 million in 2006. In 2005, the oil
industry spent $63.3 million in lobbying expenditures, which was most likely related to the
Energy Policy Act of 2005, which cut back regulations on the oil industry and saved energy
companies $3.6 billion over a decade. The most likely candidates to receive these contributions
are Republicans from wealthy oil states like Texas, who will likely provide subsidies and tax
breaks for the oil industry (Mayer, 2008).
However, since Democrats took control of Congress in 2006, environmental groups and
alternative energy producers are getting their voices heard. In 2007, a Democratic controlled
Congress passed the Clean Energy Act of 2007 which repealed tax breaks and subsidies for the
oil industry from the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Even though Democrats have been more
successful in pushing clean energy legislation through Congress, they are not impervious to the
oil industry's influence and control. The number of Democrats receiving contributions from the
oil industry increased from 18 percent in the 2006 election cycle to 27 percent in 2007 (Mayer,
2008). In regards to promoting clean energy, it is important that we elect representatives who do
not take political contributions from oil companies and who support legislation for clean,
renewable energy. All of this is completely possible, it just takes a vast majority of political and
social support to make it happen.
In summary, renewable energy is more efficient, cleaner and cost effective power source
than fossil fuels. There are several different sources of renewable energy that can be used
depending on location and climate. Wind and solar are the easiest to mass produce and have the
lowest maintenance costs. The initial costs of implementing equipment to harness wind and solar
power is substantial. However, the long term benefit of harnessing free, unlimited energy makes
COST AND BENEFIT OF 100% RENEWABLE ENERGY BY 2050
9
up for these costs. It is crucial that we start using renewable energy as soon as possible, because
every year global temperatures increase, so do the consequences of global warming. If we are to
create a sustainable and renewable energy source by 2050, it is vital that we have the political
and social support to make it happen.
COST AND BENEFIT OF 100% RENEWABLE ENERGY BY 2050
10
References
All-Electric Vehicles. (n.d.). Retrieved March 29, 2016, from
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/evtech.shtml
Baehr, L. (2014, June 11). 22 Devastating Effects Of Climate Change. Retrieved March 22,
2016, from http://www.businessinsider.com/effects-of-climate-change-2014-6
Chang, E. (2013, September 24). Infographic: How Much it Would Cost for the Entire Planet to
Switch to Renewable Energy. Retrieved March 22, 2016, from
http://inhabitat.com/infographic-how-much-would-it-cost-for-the-entire-planet-to-switchto-renewable-energy/
Dickerson, K. (2015, June 11). Here's exactly what the US needs to do to fix its energy problem.
Retrieved March 17, 2016, from http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-exactly-whatthe-us-needs-to-do-to-fix-its-energy-problem-2015-6
Ecodad. (2014, May 15). How much did the US spend importing oil in 2013? Retrieved March
22, 2016, from http://www.greenlifestylechanges.com/how-much-oil-did-the-us-importin-2013/
Fifth Assessment Report - Climate Change 2013. (2013). Retrieved March 22, 2016, from
http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/
COST AND BENEFIT OF 100% RENEWABLE ENERGY BY 2050
11
Geiling, N. (2015, October 22). The Economic Cost Of Climate Change. Retrieved March 17,
2016, from http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/10/22/3714991/climate-change-worldeconomies-study/
Mayer, L. (2008, August 1). Big Oil, Big Influence. Retrieved March 17, 2016, from
http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/347/oil-politics.html
Nave, R. (n.d.). The Second Law of Thermodynamics. Retrieved March 29, 2016, from
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/seclaw.html
Office of Management and Budget. (2015). Retrieved March 22, 2016, from
https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/
Overview of Greenhouse Gases. (2013). Retrieved March 29, 2016, from
https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/co2.html
Top 10 nuclear power plants by capacity. (2013, September 27). Retrieved March 22, 2016, from
COST AND BENEFIT OF 100% RENEWABLE ENERGY BY 2050
12
http://www.power-technology.com/features/feature-largest-nuclear-power-plants-world/
U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent Statistics and Analysis. (2015,
February 10). Retrieved March 22, 2016, from
https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=87