All wesk examples to prove that the energy transition is in place. We burn more wood today than ever. Coal use has grown unabated even after oil became the new energy form. Oil demand is growing even though natural gas is becoming the new energy currency.
Globally 620 EJ of energy was consumed in 2023. Growth was equal to 12.5 EJ of which 1/3 or 4.8 EJ was supplied by solar+wind+batteries and the rest by fossil fuels. That's the math that matters. Reducing or eliminating thermal coal (metallurgical coal use is not addressed by S+W+B) in Europe and the US is a strawman argument when China specifically or GLOBAL coal use generally increases. You are using the strawmans arguments, not Yergin.
You confusingly (or intentionally) use the terms power (or electricity) and energy interchangeably. The former is a subset of the latter. Electricity or power is about 18% of total energy and S+W+B only address power/electricity and road fuel (not ALL fuels although it is the majority).
S+W+B first need to supply ALL GLOBAL ENERGY demand growth (which it has never done and only covered about 33% of the growth in 2023) before there can be talks of an energy TRANSITION. And we would require at least 2 TW of new solar deployments per year to achieve that. Last year we probably installed about 600 GW of new solar.
We have not TRANSITIONED from wood to coal to oil (to nuclear or hydro) to gas. All these energy forms have been ADDITIVE. There has never been an energy transition in the world. Only a fossil fuel adoption since the first industrial revolution.
"no one expects the Spanish (blackout)....." to paraphrase. Had nothing to do with solar as the sun was brightly shining, maybe not enough windmills, not enough water behind dams, not enough battery storage. TBD>
I am visiting Colombia after a hiatus of two years.
I wish electrotech were here like you describe. Instead,over the past two years, the population of gasoline-powered motorcycles and the level of their emissions has boomed.
The only electrotech in sight is phones, chargers, and light switches with a rare agricultural solar panel.
Interesting article! I think the energy transition is unfolding both quicker and slower than generally understood, which is also why narratives flip so quickly. While it's certainly happening fast in the power sector, the technologies to drive decarbonisation at scale in heavier industries are simply not there yet. From a strategic perspective, the question is whether one wishes to extract rents as long as possible and undermine future competitiveness (apparently the new US position), or take a leap of faith and invest in what will effectively become the energy of the future. For those interested, I talk some more about some of the economics of the energy transition here: https://powerecon.substack.com/p/2-is-the-energy-transition-for-real
Yes, great article. I do think we have crossed a major threshold with costs of clean energy, with wind and solar and battery and heat pump developers rising to the challenges and delivering above and beyond all but the most outrageously optimistic expectations. So much cause for optimism and so unexpected.
Nothing will be - can be - the same after that tipping point got crossed; it just may take a while for some of the assumptions and perceptions about RE to be updated.
The politics on the other hand keeps surprising with the depths of corrupt fossil fuel money influence and how low our 'leaders' will stoop to save fossil fuels from global warming and renewable energy, given an abundance of baksheesh.
Without the RE/electrotech revolution, without the discovery that clean can be and will be cheaper than dirty - so much cheaper that even with the biggest energy subsidy of all (the enduring amnesty on accumulating climate costs) they have already become the most built new energies - I doubt we would be making any inroads at all.
The Doubt, Deny, Delay defenders of fossil fuels from global warming were so convinced solar and wind and batteries and heat pumps and etc were, (much like nuclear), incapable of ever competing on cost (and therefore could never be a threat to fossil fuels) they gave clean energy R&D enough rope... and that helped to lift clean energy to viability.
All wesk examples to prove that the energy transition is in place. We burn more wood today than ever. Coal use has grown unabated even after oil became the new energy form. Oil demand is growing even though natural gas is becoming the new energy currency.
Globally 620 EJ of energy was consumed in 2023. Growth was equal to 12.5 EJ of which 1/3 or 4.8 EJ was supplied by solar+wind+batteries and the rest by fossil fuels. That's the math that matters. Reducing or eliminating thermal coal (metallurgical coal use is not addressed by S+W+B) in Europe and the US is a strawman argument when China specifically or GLOBAL coal use generally increases. You are using the strawmans arguments, not Yergin.
You confusingly (or intentionally) use the terms power (or electricity) and energy interchangeably. The former is a subset of the latter. Electricity or power is about 18% of total energy and S+W+B only address power/electricity and road fuel (not ALL fuels although it is the majority).
S+W+B first need to supply ALL GLOBAL ENERGY demand growth (which it has never done and only covered about 33% of the growth in 2023) before there can be talks of an energy TRANSITION. And we would require at least 2 TW of new solar deployments per year to achieve that. Last year we probably installed about 600 GW of new solar.
We have not TRANSITIONED from wood to coal to oil (to nuclear or hydro) to gas. All these energy forms have been ADDITIVE. There has never been an energy transition in the world. Only a fossil fuel adoption since the first industrial revolution.
Great article!
"no one expects the Spanish (blackout)....." to paraphrase. Had nothing to do with solar as the sun was brightly shining, maybe not enough windmills, not enough water behind dams, not enough battery storage. TBD>
this is such a good encouragement for all of us who is working in the greentech or cleantech industry, so thanks a lot for this.
I am visiting Colombia after a hiatus of two years.
I wish electrotech were here like you describe. Instead,over the past two years, the population of gasoline-powered motorcycles and the level of their emissions has boomed.
The only electrotech in sight is phones, chargers, and light switches with a rare agricultural solar panel.
Interesting article! I think the energy transition is unfolding both quicker and slower than generally understood, which is also why narratives flip so quickly. While it's certainly happening fast in the power sector, the technologies to drive decarbonisation at scale in heavier industries are simply not there yet. From a strategic perspective, the question is whether one wishes to extract rents as long as possible and undermine future competitiveness (apparently the new US position), or take a leap of faith and invest in what will effectively become the energy of the future. For those interested, I talk some more about some of the economics of the energy transition here: https://powerecon.substack.com/p/2-is-the-energy-transition-for-real
Yes, great article. I do think we have crossed a major threshold with costs of clean energy, with wind and solar and battery and heat pump developers rising to the challenges and delivering above and beyond all but the most outrageously optimistic expectations. So much cause for optimism and so unexpected.
Nothing will be - can be - the same after that tipping point got crossed; it just may take a while for some of the assumptions and perceptions about RE to be updated.
The politics on the other hand keeps surprising with the depths of corrupt fossil fuel money influence and how low our 'leaders' will stoop to save fossil fuels from global warming and renewable energy, given an abundance of baksheesh.
Without the RE/electrotech revolution, without the discovery that clean can be and will be cheaper than dirty - so much cheaper that even with the biggest energy subsidy of all (the enduring amnesty on accumulating climate costs) they have already become the most built new energies - I doubt we would be making any inroads at all.
The Doubt, Deny, Delay defenders of fossil fuels from global warming were so convinced solar and wind and batteries and heat pumps and etc were, (much like nuclear), incapable of ever competing on cost (and therefore could never be a threat to fossil fuels) they gave clean energy R&D enough rope... and that helped to lift clean energy to viability.