Renewables to grow nearly 207 percent by 2030 says report

wpsedgwick

(130 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-29-10 11:38 AM
Original message

Renewables to grow nearly 207 percent by 2030 says report

Source: Examiner

The percentage of U.S. electricity produced by non-hydro renewable energy sources will increase from 4 percent in 2009 to 12.3 percent in 2030, according to the �Annual Energy Outlook 2010" released by DOE�s Energy Information Administration (EIA).

The report predicts that renewable energy technologies (excluding hydropower) will represent 41 percent of the new electricity capacity built between 2008 and 2035.

Read more: http://www.examiner.com/x-42287-Chicago-Green-Technology-Examiner~y2010m5d29-Renewables-to-grow-nearly-207-percent-by-2030-says-report

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Radical Activist

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-29-10 11:57 AM
Response to Original message

1. It needs to grow faster than that.

The idea that they believe biofuels will be the fastest growing "renewable" is both discouraging and probably unrealistic. These are the kind of estimates I would expect from industry trade groups, not Obama's DOE.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

joanmj

(186 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-29-10 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #1

2. I agree.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

kristopher

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-29-10 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #1

4. The EIA's forecasts suck.

They have ALWAYS dramatically underestimated growth in the renewable sector. This past decade they were routinely forecasting 2% per year growth when the trend was between 25-50% per year growth.

I've been tracking their numbers for about a decade and I learned early on to disregard their predictions; so I was happy to read this from Joe Romm as it demonstrated it was routine and deliberate:

"Significantly, the EIA, which is the DOE�s independent analytical arm, is no fan of safe sources of energy that never run out. When I was at the DOE in the mid-1990s, we uncovered a key reason there was so little wind in EIA�s modeling of federal climate action: Their original forecast had in fact shown a huge upsurge, so the EIA analysts tweaked the model to artificially suppress wind. And today, the EIA is run by my old friend, Howard Gruenspecht, who was a Bush Sr. holdover at DOE�s office of policy when I started there in 1992 and a Bush, Jr. appointee at EIA. He ain�t progressive. Obama should replace him. But I digress...."

http://climateprogress.org/2009/05/18/eia-stimulus-wind-power-renewable-energy/

Howard Gruenspecht is still there as Acting Director.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Radical Activist

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-29-10 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #4

5. That explains much.

And doesn't surprise me at all.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

anthroguy101

(250 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-29-10 02:00 PM
Response to Original message

3. Looks like the free market works this time!

Sorry Repukes, but we're moving towards a cleaner power grid whether you like it or not. Even if there is no energy policy, there is nothing to stop its growth. There is a demand and it will continue to grow, though I do agree that it needs to grow FASTER!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

NickB79

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-29-10 11:06 PM
Response to Original message

6. So only half of all NEW electricity capacity added to the system will be from renewables by 2035

And half of it will still be fossil fuels.

And the current fossil-fuel-burning plants we currently operate WILL STILL BE RUNNING.

Am I reading that correctly?

Unless we start installing so much renewable energy that we can start closing coal and gas plants IMMEDIATELY, we will be unable to control global warming enough to prevent a global mass extinction.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

depakid

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-29-10 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #6

7. "Am I reading that correctly?" Yep- more filthy coal

unless one replaces it with Gen IV nuclear.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Mon May 13th 2024, 09:25 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.