Renewable
energies are becoming globally more competitive. And an increasing number of
studies are showing they have an economical edge, especially if environmental
and health costs are taken into account.
Deutsche Welle, 30 Jan 2015
In Germany
there is much discussion around renewable energies and cost. Fans of
conventional energy sources hope to slow the rapid expansion of wind and solar
power since, they say, the cost of renewable energies is too high.
The forum
Green Budget Germany (FÖS) has now put forward a comprehensive study that
compared all power technologies in Germany, including all known costs.
Germany's energy cooperative Greenpeace Energy had commissioned the study.
Things
considered were overall expenses, as well as "other effects from using
conventional energies including costly consequences - for example,
environmental and climate damage," said study leader Swantje Küchler from
FÖS.
In the case
of nuclear power, the damages after a possible nuclear accident were also taken
into account. So far, the risks for large accidents worldwide have been carried
by the general public, as power plant operators usually don't have the
appropriate liability insurance.
Most bang
for your buck
In the
overall assessment, wind and solar power gave the most bang for your buck,
according to calculations by FÖS. In 2014 electricity from wind and large solar
power plants cost Germany between five and 10 euro cents per kilowatt-hour
(kWh). In contrast, the cost of electricity from natural gas, coal or lignite
power plants was distinctly higher - between 11 to 17 cents per kWh.
Particularly
expensive in comparison was nuclear power. Even though no new nuclear power
plants will be built in Germany, with the last reactors expected to shut down
in 2022, scientists contemplated the cost of nuclear energy from fictitious new
power plants. That, plus the potential harms to the environment and human
health arising from accidents, raised the total cost of nuclear power to
between 19 to 50 cents per kWh.
A need for
transparency
Energy
scientists from other institutions felt vindicated by the study.
"The
results are basically consistent with our studies, which show that conventional
energies are significantly more expensive than renewables," said Claudia
Kemfert of the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW).
 |
| Swantje Küchler introduces the FÖS studie in Berlin. |
Consequently,
experts are calling for honesty and transparency in the debate, in which all
costs should be taken into account.
"The
problem is the high costs of coal and nuclear power are hidden from customers,
who pay for them indirectly. We wanted to fix this grievance," said Marcel
Keiffenheim of Greenpeace Energy.
Also, the
study provided good evidence to "promote the development of renewable
energies as soon as possible for economic reasons."
Tackling
global climate change with renewables
The
International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) in Abu Dhabi arrived at similar
results in its most recent study Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2014. They
found the generation of electricity from fossil fuels took a toll on human
health and climate and added up to 11 cents per kWh.
 |
| IRENA is headquartered in oil-rich Abu Dhabi. |
Since the
cost of renewables in recent years has plunged worldwide, there is now "a
historic opportunity to build a clean and sustainable energy supply and, therefore,
prevent catastrophic climate change in an affordable way," according to
Adnan Z. Amin, Director-General of IRENA.
At the same
time, the march to renewables created "new jobs and reduced the import
bills for fuels."
Above all,
wind energy in many places in the world is economically competitive, often
being cheaper than fossil fuels. According to an IRENA study, some windy places
can already produce a kWh of power for four cents.
But the
average production cost for wind power varies across regions. In China and
Asia, it would cost around five or six; in North America, around six; and in
Africa, around seven cents per kWh.
IRENA also
saw much potential in the falling prices of solar power - particularly cheap in
sunny countries. In the Middle East, operators of solar parks, or photovoltaic
power stations, said they already generated electricity for five cents per kWh.
Renewables
should also be helpful for the approximately 1.3 billion people who have up to
now lived without electricity. According to IRENA's report, renewables in this
case were the cheapest energy source, especially in comparison to diesel.
With a new online platform, the international agency hopes to strengthen the push for
renewable energies, for which worldwide data are now available.
Related Articles:
Japan prepares to mark three years since devastating quake
California calls on pension funds to divest from coal in climate change push - New
UK Health sector should divest from fossil fuels, medical groups say - New
At least one major oil company will turn its back on fossil fuels, says scientist
California calls on pension funds to divest from coal in climate change push - New
UK Health sector should divest from fossil fuels, medical groups say - New
At least one major oil company will turn its back on fossil fuels, says scientist
 |
One of the wealthiest men in the U.S., Warren Buffett said Monday
that he would double his renewable energy investments. Video screenshot: Georgetown University/YouTube |
"Recalibration of Free Choice"– Mar 3, 2012 (Kryon Channelling by Lee Caroll) - (Subjects: (Old) Souls, Midpoint on 21-12-2012, Shift of Human Consciousness, Black & White vs. Color, 1 - Spirituality (Religions) shifting, Loose a Pope “soon”, 2 - Humans will change react to drama, 3 - Civilizations/Population on Earth, 4 - Alternate energy sources (Geothermal, Tidal (Paddle wheels), Wind), 5 – Financials Institutes/concepts will change (Integrity – Ethical) , 6 - News/Media/TV to change, 7 – Big Pharmaceutical company will collapse “soon”, (Keep people sick), (Integrity – Ethical) 8 – Wars will be over on Earth, Global Unity, … etc.) - (Text version)
“… 4 - Energy (again)
The natural resources of the planet are finite and will not support the continuation of what you've been doing. We've been saying this for a decade. Watch for increased science and increased funding for alternate ways of creating electricity (finally). Watch for the very companies who have the most to lose being the ones who fund it. It is the beginning of a full realization that a change of thinking is at hand. You can take things from Gaia that are energy, instead of physical resources. We speak yet again about geothermal, about tidal, about wind. Again, we plead with you not to over-engineer this. For one of the things that Human Beings do in a technological age is to over-engineer simple things. Look at nuclear - the most over-engineered and expensive steam engine in existence!
Your current ideas of capturing energy from tidal and wave motion don't have to be technical marvels. Think paddle wheel on a pier with waves, which will create energy in both directions [waves coming and going] tied to a generator that can power dozens of neighborhoods, not full cities. Think simple and decentralize the idea of utilities. The same goes for wind and geothermal. Think of utilities for groups of homes in a cluster. You won't have a grid failure if there is no grid. This is the way of the future, and you'll be more inclined to have it sooner than later if you do this, and it won't cost as much.
Water
Water
We've told you that one of the greatest natural resources of the planet, which is going to shift and change and be mysterious to you, is fresh water. It's going to be the next gold, dear ones. So, we have also given you some hints and examples and again we plead: Even before the potentials of running out of it, learn how to desalinate water in real time without heat. It's there, it's doable, and some already have it in the lab. This will create inexpensive fresh water for the planet.
There is a change of attitude that is starting to occur. Slowly you're starting to see it and the only thing getting in the way of it are those companies with the big money who currently have the old system. That's starting to change as well. For the big money always wants to invest in what it knows is coming next, but it wants to create what is coming next within the framework of what it has "on the shelf." What is on the shelf is oil, coal, dams, and non-renewable resource usage. It hasn't changed much in the last 100 years, has it? Now you will see a change of free choice. You're going to see decisions made in the boardrooms that would have curled the toes of those two generations ago. Now "the worst thing they could do" might become "the best thing they could do." That, dear ones, is a change of free choice concept. When the thinkers of tomorrow see options that were never options before, that is a shift. That was number four. ….”
No comments:
Post a Comment