Posted by:

Big Gav

Posts

About

About Big Gav:

See entire profile »

Comments

Connect

Please login or register to connect with this user.

European Commission Projects 80% Renewable Energy by 2050

Like it?

Posted November 18, 2009 with 133 reads

Keywords: energy, european commission, Politics & Legislation, renewables

comments

REW reports that confidence in rolling out renewable energy projects in Europe remains high - European Commission Projects 80% Renewable Energy by 2050.

More than 550 high-level political decision makers at EU, national and regional level, representatives of the renewable energy industry, NGOs and scientists gathered in Brussels for the 3rd European Renewable Energy Policy Conference, organized by EREC as an official event of the Swedish EU Presidency. The conference showed a broad consensus that renewable energy will be the mainstream source of Europe's energy supply by 2050. ...

Looking at 2050, Christopher Jones, Director for New & Renewable Energy Sources at the European Commission, referred to a share of 80% renewable energy in final energy consumption in Europe. The Commission’s views were echoed by several Members of European Parliament present as well as by the industry.

» Login or register now to comment!

» Already a member? Login now to comment!

» Not a member? Register to comment!

Like it?

RodAdams said:

Nathan - just because decisions are being made to buy non-nuclear alternatives to fossil fuel now does not mean that they will continue to be made as the cost becomes more apparent. Feed in tariffs, for example are pretty painless when the portion of the bill devoted to renewables is tiny, but if renewable production grows, those tariffs can add substantially to the bill for all other customers.

Pumped hydro storage works in very limited situations and requires both an elevated reservoir and a very low cost source of excess electricity that is available for a reasonably lengthy period of time without interruption. Just imagine what can happen if the pumps get the water flowing on a long path uphill and then must be shut off for a time. Gravity works.

BTW - there is no reason to call a marketing ploy a conspiracy. I have no doubt at all that people who are interested in building markets for natural gas will do everything in their power to encourage the development of unreliable energy sources that require a back-up power supply that can spin up rapidly. I also have no doubt that marketers of natural gas will take action to discourage and "damn with faint praise" nuclear energy system that reduce demand for their product.

In fact, I am pretty darned sure that one of the reasons that Germany had agreed to shut down its 17 well built nuclear plants - until recently - was that the former chancellor (Gerhard Schroder) was thinking ahead to his future employment. He took a job with Gazprom to head the effort to build a pipeline directly from Russia to Germany through the Baltic Sea within one month of losing the election in 2005.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/09/AR2005120901755.html

That is not an accusation of a criminal conspiracy, just an observation of normal business behavior to work to spread FUD about a competitor and to reward politicians that set up the rules in your favor.

Rod Adams

Publisher, Atomic Insights

» Login or register now to comment!

Sat, 2009-11-21 10:38 — RodAdams

Like it?

Nathan Wilson said:

Rod, I agree that renewables energy systems are now and will continue to be more expensive than both fossil fuel and nuclear alternatives.

My point was that I think the Europeans are on a path to buy them anyway. Technologies like desert solar thermal, long distance power transmission, and pumped hydro storage really work; their only problem is the high cost.

Of course I could be wrong, the whole thing could just be a conspiracy to buy Russian natural gas. The real test of their commitment to renewables is whether or not they are building storage. In the US we have built exactly zero in the last few decades.

» Login or register now to comment!

Fri, 2009-11-20 22:59 — Nathan Wilson

Like it?

RodAdams said:

Nathan - what makes you think that renewable energy sources are going to fall in price? Is that just some kind of displaced faith in the idea that "Moore's law" type advances are always available in any kind of technology or do you know something about a technological road map that provides an opportunity for cost reducing design choices?

I have surveyed the technology pretty carefully. Unless there are step reductions in the unit cost of labor, steel, concrete, copper, land, transmission lines, and transportation, there are no paths that I can see that will substantially reduce the cost of building renewable energy facilities that remain idle for between 65-90% of their operating lives.

Without direct government payments and very favorable tax treatment, no one would be investing in such facilities. Their COST is simply untenable and their production levels do not pay the bills left over from their construction, much less the bills required to keep them in operating condition.

In contrast, most critically thinking nuclear trained people can point to dozens, if not hundreds of ways where cost has been artificially added to nuclear energy production facilities. All of those are opportunities for future cost reductions, especially when combined with known techniques like series production instead of "one of a kind" facilities.

Rod Adams

Publisher, Atomic Insights

Host and producer, The Atomic Show Podcast

» Login or register now to comment!

Thu, 2009-11-19 02:55 — RodAdams

Like it?

Nathan Wilson said:

Sure it's possible. If they don't mind paying a high price for their energy (and apparently they don't), and if they don't mind importing their energy from the Middle East and North Africa, it should be perfectly possible.

However, if renewables don't fall in price to match fossil fuels (so far they haven't), then their grand ideas won't spread to developing nations (the other 90% of humanity), and all of their sacrifices will be for naught.

» Login or register now to comment!

Wed, 2009-11-18 22:07 — Nathan Wilson

Like it?

CharlesBarton said:

Nothing better illustrates the profound confusion our current energy situation has created. 80% European energy from renewables by 2050? The European Commission is stark raving mad! No way. Just ask David McKay or as he is now know, Sir David.

http://www.withouthotair.com/endorsements.html

» Login or register now to comment!

Wed, 2009-11-18 14:39 — CharlesBarton

Please note: Your first comment as a registered user will be held for moderation up to 24 hours (usually less). For more information about comments on our site, please read our FAQ and terms of use.