PRAGUE – Many today believe that renewable energy will let us get off fossil fuels soon. Unfortunately, the facts say otherwise.
According to International Energy Agency data, 13.12 per cent of the world’s energy came from renewables in 1971, the first year that the IEA reported global statistics. In 2011, renewables’ share was actually lower, at 12.99 per cent. Yet a new survey shows that Americans believe that the share of renewables in 2035 will be 30.2 per cent. In reality, it will likely be 14.5 per cent.
Solar and wind energy account for a trivial proportion of current renewables – about one-third of one percentage point. The vast majority comes from biomass, or wood and plant material – humanity’s oldest energy source. While biomass is renewable, it is often neither good nor sustainable.
Burning wood in pre-industrial Western Europe caused massive deforestation, as is occurring in much of the developing world today. The indoor air pollution that biomass produces kills more than three million people annually. Likewise, modern energy crops increase deforestation, displace agriculture, and push up food prices.
The most renewables-intensive places in the world are also the poorest. Africa gets almost 50 per cent of its energy from renewables, compared to just eight per cent for the OECD. Even the European OECD countries, at 11.8 per cent, are below the global average.
The reality is that humanity has spent recent centuries getting away from renewables. In 1800, the world obtained 94 per cent of its energy from renewable sources. That figure has been declining ever since.
The momentous move toward fossil fuels has done a lot of good. Compared to 250 years ago, the average person in the United Kingdom today has access to 50 times more power, travels 250 times farther, and has 37,500 times more light. Incomes have increased 20-fold.
The switch to fossil fuels has also had tremendous environmental benefits.. Kerosene saved the whales (which had been hunted almost to extinction to provide supposedly “renewable” whale oil for lighting). Coal saved Europe’s forests. With electrification, indoor air pollution, which is much more dangerous than outdoor air pollution, disappeared in most of the developed world.
And there is one environmental benefit that is often overlooked: in 1910, more than 30 per cent of farmland in the United States was used to produce fodder for horses and mules. Tractors and cars eradicated this huge demand on farmland (while ridding cities of manure pollution).
Of course, fossil fuels brought their own environmental problems. And, while technological innovations like scrubbers on smokestacks and catalytic converters on cars have reduced local air pollution substantially, the problem of CO₂ emissions remains. Indeed, it is the main reason for the world’s clamor for a return to renewables.
To be sure, wind and solar have increased dramatically. Since 1990, wind-generated power has grown 26 per cent per year and solar a phenomenal 48 per cent. But the growth has been from almost nothing to slightly more than almost nothing. In 1990, wind produced 0.0038 per cent of the world’s energy; it is now producing 0.29 per cent. Solar-electric power has gone from essentially zero to 0.04 per cent.
Yes, Denmark gets a record 34 per cent of its electricity from wind. But electricity accounts for only 18 per cent of its final energy use.
Europe now gets one per cent of its energy from wind – less than before industrialization, when cozy windmills contributed about two per cent (and ships’ sails provided another one per cent). The UK set its record for wind power in 1804, when its share reached 2.5 per cent – almost three times its level today.
Moreover, solar and wind will still contribute very little in the coming decades. In the IEA’s optimistic scenario, which assumes that the world’s governments will fulfill all of their green promises, wind will provide 1.34 per cent of global energy by 2035, while solar will provide 0.42 per cent. Global renewables will most likely increase by roughly 1.5 percentage points, to 14.5 per cent by 2035. Under unrealistically optimistic assumptions, the share could increase five percentage points, to 17.9 per cent.
So we are nowhere near switching back to renewables anytime soon. In the US, renewables accounted for 9.3 per cent of energy production in 1949. President Barack Obama’s administration expects that number, almost a century later, to increase slightly, to 10.8 per cent by 2040. In China, renewables’ share in energy production dropped from 40 per cent in 1971 to 11 per cent today; in 2035, it will likely be just 9 per cent.
Yet we are paying through the nose for these renewables. In the last 12 years, the world has invested $1.6 trillion in clean energy. By 2020, the effort to increase reliance on renewables will cost the European Union alone $250 billion annually.
Spain now pays almost one per cent of its GDP in subsidies for renewables, which is more than it spends on higher education. At the end of the century, Spain’s massive investment will have postponed global warming by 62 hours.
Current green energy policies are failing for a simple reason: renewables are far too expensive. Sometimes people claim that renewables are actually cheaper. But if renewables were cheaper, they wouldn’t need subsidies, and we wouldn’t need climate policies.
Former US Vice President Al Gore’s climate adviser, Jim Hansen, put it bluntly: “Suggesting that renewables will let us phase rapidly off fossil fuels in the United States, China, India, or the world as a whole is almost the equivalent of believing in the Easter Bunny and [the] Tooth Fairy.”
The solution is to innovate the price of renewables downward. We need a dramatic increase in funding for research and development to make the next generations of wind, solar, and biomass energy cheaper and more effective.
Consider China. Despite the country’s massive investment in solar and wind, it mostly sells solar panels to Western countries at subsidized prices. Wind makes up just 0.2 per cent of China’s energy, and solar accounts for 0.01 per cent.
Meanwhile, China has 68 per cent of the world’s solar water heaters on rooftops, because it is a smart and cheap technology. It needs no subsidies, and it produces 50 times more energy than all of China’s solar panels..
When green renewables are cheaper than fossil fuels, they will take over the world. Instead of believing in the Tooth Fairy, we should start investing in green R&D.
Bjørn Lomborg, an adjunct professor at the Copenhagen Business School, founded and directs the Copenhagen Consensus Center. He is the author of The Skeptical Environmentalist and Cool It. This post originally appeared here.
Thanks for reading to the end of this story!
We would be grateful if you would consider joining as a member of The EB Circle. This helps to keep our stories and resources free for all, and it also supports independent journalism dedicated to sustainable development. It only costs as little as S$5 a month, and you would be helping to make a big difference.