The Cost Of Renewables Continues To Plummet
According to a new report from the Institute of New Economic Thinking at the University of Oxford, previous estimates about how quickly the price of renewables will fall have consistently underestimated reality (We think they are pointing their fingers at the International Energy Agency here.)
Here’s the first few paragraphs of the report:
“Rapidly decarbonizing the global energy system is critical for addressing climate change, but concerns about costs have been a barrier to implementation. Most energy economy models have historically underestimated deployment rates for renewable energy technologies and overestimated their costs. The problems with these models have stimulated calls for better approaches and recent reports have made progress in this direction.
“Here we take a new approach based on probabilistic cost forecasting methods that made reliable predictions when they were empirically tested on more than 50 technologies. We use these methods to estimate future energy system costs and find that, compared to continuing with a fossil fuel based system, a rapid green energy transition will likely result in overall net savings of many trillions of dollars (emphasis added) — even without accounting for climate damages or co-benefits of climate policy.
“We show that if solar photovoltaics, wind, batteries and hydrogen electrolyzers continue to follow their current exponentially increasing deployment trends for another decade, we achieve a near-net-zero emissions energy system within twenty-five years. In contrast, a slower transition (which involves deployment growth trends that are lower than current rates) is more expensive and a nuclear driven transition is far more expensive.
“If non-energy sources of carbon emissions such as agriculture are brought under control, our analysis indicates that a rapid green energy transition would likely generate considerable economic savings while also meeting the 1.5 degrees Paris Agreement target.
“Future energy system costs will be determined by a combination of technologies that produce, store and distribute energy. Their costs and deployment will change with time due to innovation, economic competition, public policy, concerns about climate change and other factors.”
“It’s not just good news for renewables. It’s good news for the planet,” co-author Matthew Ives, a senior researcher at the Oxford Martin Post-Carbon Transition Program, tells ArsTechnica. “The energy transition is also going to save us money. We should be doing it anyway.”
“Our approach is based on two key design principles: 1) include only the minimal set of variables necessary to represent most of the global energy system, and the most important cost and production dynamics, and 2) ensure all assumptions and dynamics are technically realistic and closely tied to empirical evidence. This means that we focus on energy technologies that have been in commercial use for sufficient time to develop a reliable historical record.
“We choose a level of model granularity well suited to the probabilistic forecasting methods used, i.e. one that allows accurate model calibration, and ensures overall cost reduction trends associated with cumulative production are captured for each technology. Our model design can be run on a laptop, is easy to understand and interpret, and allows us to calibrate all components against historical data so that the model is firmly empirically grounded. The historical data does not exist to do this on a more granular level.”
Omitted Technologies
“Consistent with our two design principles, we have deliberately omitted several minor energy technologies. Co-generation of heat, traditional biomass, marine energy, solar thermal energy, and geothermal energy were omitted either due to insufficient historical data or because they have not exhibited significant historical cost improvements, or both.
“Liquid biofuels were also excluded because any significant expansion would have high environmental costs. Finally, carbon capture and storage in conjunction with fossil fuels was omitted because i) it is currently a very small, low growth sector, ii) it has exhibited no promising cost improvements so far in its 50 year history, and iii) the cost of fossil fuels provides a hard lower bound on the cost of providing energy via fossil fuels with CCS. This means that within a few decades, electricity produced with CCS will likely not be competitive even if CCS is free.” (emphasis added)
Massive Storage Capacity
“Since renewables are intermittent, storage is essential. In the Fast Transition scenario we have allocated so much storage capacity using batteries and P2X fuels that the entire global energy system could be run for a month without any sun or wind. This is a sensible choice because both batteries and electrolyzers have highly favorable trends for cost and production.
“From 1995 to 2018 the production of lithium ion batteries increased at 30% per year, while costs dropped at 12% per year, giving an experience curve comparable to that of solar PV. Currently, about 60% of the cost of electrolytic hydrogen is electricity, and hydrogen is around 80% of the cost of ammonia, so these automatically take advantage of the high progress rates for solar PV and wind.”
Final Energy
“To understand these scenarios it is important to distinguish final energy — which is the energy delivered for use in sectors of the economy — from useful energy, which is the portion of final energy used to perform energy services, such as heat, light and kinetic energy.
“Fossil fuels tend to have large conversion losses in comparison to electricity, which means that significantly more final energy needs to be produced to obtain a given amount of useful energy. Switching to energy carriers with higher conversion efficiencies (e.g. moving to electric vehicles) significantly reduces final energy consumption.
“Our Fast Transition scenario assumes that eventually almost all energy services originate with electricity generated by solar PV and wind, making and burning P2X fuels or using batteries when it is impractical to use renewables directly. The Fast Transition substantially increases the role of electricity in the energy system.”
The INET report focuses mainly on the process of technological advancement, which is part of what has made renewables cheaper. Renewables have routinely performed beyond the expectations of previous papers. “They’ve been getting these forecasts wrong for quite some time,” Ives said. “You can see we’ve consistently broken through those forecasts again and again.”
Rather than a plateau on renewable energy costs, Ives said the greater likelihood is that the prices will decrease slower once things like solar and wind end up dominating the market. At that point, technological advances may very well still happen, but they might not be rolled out as frequently as they are now. “It’s the deployment that slows it down,” Ives says.
Michael Taylor, senior analyst at IRENA, agrees. He tells ArsTechnica his organization found that the cost reduction drivers — improved technology, supply chains, scalability, and manufacturing processes — for solar and wind are likely to continue at least for the next 10 to 15 years. With regard to previous forecasts, he says, “I would expect they’re overly pessimistic.”
Unforeseen issues such as the global pandemic and supply chain woes could slow the decline in the cost of renewables, as well as other barriers such as oil and gas subsidies, public opinion, permitting, and political considerations. “Just on purely economic grounds, there are increasing benefits to consumers to be had by accelerating the roll out of renewable power generation,” Taylor says. “We encourage policymakers to look very seriously at trying to remove the barriers that currently exist.”
The Takeaway
The report from the Institute of New Economic Thinking is a breath of fresh air. In particular, it explodes all the tripe being trotted out by fossil fuel companies to justify the continued use of their products. Carbon Capture? Pure baloney, a chimera they can hide behind while the continue their relentless greenwashing campaigns.
INET envisions consumers saving trillions of dollars as renewable energy takes over from thermal generation. The bottom line is we must stop burning fossil fuels as soon as possible if we want to keep the Earth habitable for humans. This report comes just in time for the COP 26 climate conference in Glasgow. In a rational world, global leaders would seize upon it as justification for moving forward aggressively with favorable renewable energy policies.
That’s unlikely. Those political leaders are beholden to fossil fuel companies, so expect a lot of rending of garments and gnashing of teeth as they try to spin their way out of the obvious. The only thing we as renewable energy advocates can hope for is that the price of renewables will get so low that anyone with the acumen of kumquat will have to recognize the truth. Ultimately, those free market imperatives reactionaries are so fond of will drive a stake through the heart of their beloved fossil fuel industry. We can’t wait!
Appreciate CleanTechnica’s originality? Consider becoming a CleanTechnica Member, Supporter, Technician, or Ambassador — or a patron on Patreon.
The new Chevy Bolt EV is set to enter production later this year, with one fewer shift, following GM’s reduction in production plans at several US plants. Apart from the Bolt, GM promised a new family of affordable EVs. Are those, too, now at risk?
GM says more affordable EVs are coming, but when?
GM remained the number two EV maker in the US after back-to-back record sales months in July and August. However, with the $7,500 federal tax credit set to expire at the end of the month, the company expects a slowdown.
On Thursday, GM sent a note to employees at its Spring Hill plant in Tennessee, outlining plans to reduce output of two Cadillac electric SUVs, the Lyriq and Vistiq.
A source close to the matter confirmed the news to Reuters, saying the production halt will begin in December. GM will significantly reduce output during the first five months of 2026, according to the source.
GM is also delaying the second shift at its Fairfax Assembly Plant in Kansas City, where the new Chevy Bolt is slated to enter production later this year. The Bolt will be the first of a new series of affordable EVs that GM intends to build in Kansas.
However, those too, may now be in jeopardy. According to local news outlets, GM Korea Technical Research Center (GMTCK), a spin-off of GM’s Korean subsidiary, was recently cut out of a secret small EV project it was developing.
GMTCK president Brian McMurray reportedly announced internally last month during a trip to the US that the project was cancelled and only 30% to 40% complete.
A GM Korea spokesperson clarified that “the EV project being led by GMTCK was a global undertaking, not undertaken solely by GM Korea. The spokesperson added, “The project itself has not been canceled; the role of the Korean team has simply changed.”
The new electric car, dubbed “Fun Family,” was scheduled to launch under the Chevy and Buick brands, using a single platform. Production was expected to begin in 2027 with deliveries starting in 2028.
GM Korea exports over 90% of the vehicles it makes to the US, but with the new auto tariffs, the subsidiary is expected to play a drastically smaller role, if any at all. The news is fueling the ongoing rumors that GM could withdraw from Korea altogether.
In addition to the tariffs, South Korea’s recently passed “Yellow Envelope Law” could make it even more difficult for GM with new labor laws.
Will this impact the affordable EVs GM is promising to launch in the US? They are scheduled to be built in Kansas, but with the R&D Center, GM’s second largest globally, following the US, claiming to be excluded from a major global EV project, it can’t be a good sign.
In the meantime, GM already has one of the most affordable electric vehicles in the US, the Chevy Equinox EV. Starting at under $35,000, the company calls it “America’s most affordable” EV with over 315 miles of range.
With the $7,500 federal tax credit still available, GM is promoting Chevy Equinox EV leases for under $250 a month. Nowadays, it’s hard to find any vehicle for under that.
Source: Newsworks Korea
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Connecticut and Rhode Island are suing the Trump administration to overturn its “baseless” decision to halt Revolution Wind, a nearly completed offshore wind farm set to deliver clean power to New England.
Attorneys General William Tong of Connecticut and Peter Neronha of Rhode Island announced Thursday that they’ll file suit in Rhode Island federal court to overturn the August 22 stop-work order from the Bureau of Ocean and Energy Management (BOEM). The order abruptly shut down construction without citing any violation of law or safety threats. Instead, BOEM vaguely referred to “concerns” under its Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act authority, offering no explanation.
Revolution Wind is 15 nautical miles off Rhode Island and expected to come online in 2026. Once complete, the $6 billion project would supply 350,000 homes with electricity and save ratepayers in Connecticut and Rhode Island hundreds of millions of dollars over 20 years. The project supports more than 2,500 jobs across the US, including over 1,000 union construction jobs, and has already cleared every required state and federal review. Construction is already 80% complete.
The lawsuit, to be filed against the Department of the Interior, BOEM, and their nominated leaders, argues that the stop-work order violates the Administrative Procedure Act and the agency’s authority under OCSLA. The complaint says the government’s action is arbitrary, capricious, and undermines both states’ legal and financial commitments.
“Revolution Wind is fully permitted, nearly complete, and months from providing enough American-made, clean, affordable energy to power 350,000 homes. Now, with zero justification, Trump wants to mothball the project, send workers home, and saddle Connecticut families with millions of dollars in higher energy costs,” Tong said. “This kind of erratic and reckless governing is blatantly illegal, and we’re suing to stop it.”
Neronha added, “With Revolution Wind, we have an opportunity to create good-paying jobs for Rhode Islanders, enhance energy reliability, and ensure energy cost savings while protecting our environment. And yet, this stop-work order is not even the latest development in this administration’s all-out assault on wind energy. Just yesterday, we learned of reports that the Administration is pulling in staff from several different unrelated federal agencies, including Health and Human Services, to do its bidding. This is bizarre, this is unlawful, this is potentially devastating, and we won’t stand by and watch it happen.”
Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont said the administration has offered no explanation nearly two weeks after the order. “We hoped to work with the Administration to lower energy costs, strengthen grid reliability, create jobs, and drive economic growth, but only if they share those goals. But if they do not, we will act to preserve this vital project and protect the energy future of Connecticut and the entire New England region,” he said.
Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) called the shutdown “insane, illogical, and illegal,” while Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) said, “The Revolution Wind project has already made it through exhaustive reviews by multiple federal agencies, and I doubt Trump’s flimsy excuses for scuttling this project will stand up to legal scrutiny.”
Danish renewables developer Ørsted, which owns a 50% share in Revolution Wind, also announced Thursday that it’s suing the Trump administration in a bid to restart construction on the blocked wind farm.
Read more: Trump’s latest offshore wind cancellation is a threat to the grid – ISO New England
The 30% federal solar tax credit is ending this year. If you’ve ever considered going solar, now’s the time to act. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Canada is “reviewing” its current 100% tariff on Chinese EVs, which could potentially give another entry point for the inexpensive, advanced vehicles into the North American market.
The strange part? The review is being pushed for, mainly, by the premiers of right-leaning provinces. And it has everything to do with your cooking oil.
The news of the review came yesterday from the National Post, who confirmed with Canada’s national finance minister that “officials are currently undertaking work on this review, including an assessment of China’s policies and trade practices, and whether the scope of the surtaxes, as well as the surtax rate, remain appropriate.”
Canada currently has a 100% tariff (surtax) on Chinese EVs and a 25% tariff on Chinese steel and aluminum, implemented last October. Canada’s tariffs came after similar tariffs implemented by US President Biden, though they were justified by claiming that China engages in unfair competition in EVs.
The country does have a significant auto industry, with about 10% of Canada’s exports consisting of cars, trucks and the parts and accessories for each. This auto industry is heavily tied with the US auto industry, which is centered in Detroit, a literal stone’s throw away from the Canadian border.
As a result, Canada followed the US’ lead with tariffs, recognizing that our two countries, historically tied together by the close trade and cultural relationships across the longest border on Earth should be on the same page about an industry that is shared and important to each of us (nevermind that the US tariffs were dumb to begin with).
A souring US-Canada relationship
But since then, things have changed. A contentious election in the US led to the dumbest person on the planet squatting in an office that he is Constitutionally barred from holding, and after that election the ignoramus in question illegally imposed even dumber tariffs on China and the rest of the world.
The same ignoramus also made numerous threats against Canada’s sovereignty and targeted the country with tariffs despite the close relationship between the US and Canada.
This caused disruption in Canada’s auto industry, including immediate job losses and a scramble to beg for exemptions for the industry that has long-benefitted from free cross-border movement of supplies. (Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney today cited US tariffs as his reason for delaying Canada’s EV transition, showing how the actions of US republicans aren’t just poisoning Americans, but Canadians as well.
All told, all of this nonsense had the primary effect of swinging a sure-bet election for Canada’s right-wing into a solid win for the incumbent Liberal party.
And it has left Canadians thinking more about their own national identity, and searching to establish some independence from the United States of America’s whims on the International stage.
It’s all about cooking oil
With the US-Canada relationship already soured, China struck a characteristically surgical blow. In response to Canada’s tariffs on EVs, China announced it would impose heavy tariffs of 76% on… canola. Yes, the thing that’s in your cooking oil.
Canada is the world’s top producer of canola, ahead of China. And China is the world’s top consumer of canola (though US is Canada’s largest buyer of canola). So, China’s move removes a big market for Canadian farmers and disrupts the global canola market significantly. It’s estimated this has cost Western Canadian farmers nearly a billion dollars already (China did a similar move in 2018 with a soybean tariff on the US).
Now here’s the rub: Western Canada is the more rural part of the country, with giant plains provinces like Saskatchewan and Alberta whose primary industries are farming and oil. That’s where the canola is grown. These provinces, predictably, are pretty conservative. And they’re mad about these tariffs.
Canada’s right-wing leads charge for Chinese EVs
And so, the right-wing premiers of both Saskatchewan and Alberta have recently demanded that the Canadian government remove tariffs on Chinese EVs, in the hope that it would get China to remove the tariffs that are currently ruining Canada’s canola farmers. Saskatchewan’s premier is even heading to China right now to negotiate.
From the US, this seems counterintuitive – why would the right-wing be asking for more EVs, when the right wing in the US is so stupidly against improving our transportation options.
And it even seems counterintuitive from the Canadian perspective, as the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan both have ridiculous registration taxes for electric cars, where EVs suffer high opposition due to the prominence of the oil industry in the each of them. Alberta, in particular, is often referred to as the “Texas of Canada,” and has a brewing separatist movement, some members of which want Alberta to join the USA. So how’s that for an inversion of expectations.
But as a result of the US’ haphazard tariff nonsense, its own allies in Canada (even specifically those in the Canadian right wing) have been pushed towards a deeper relationship with China, with Canadian PM Carney stating this week “there may be areas where… we can expand the commercial relationship with things that China does well.”
And the charge by right-wing premiers seems to be working. After yesterday’s announcement of the Canadian federal government’s “review” of Chinese EV tariffs, and the impending trip to China by Canadian trade officials and Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe, China delayed the imposition of canola tariffs just today.
So, Canadian farmers get some breathing room – and depending on the results of the tariff “review,” if they end up getting access to cheap Chinese EVs, they might breathe more freely in more ways than one.
The 30% federal solar tax credit is ending this year. If you’ve ever considered going solar, now’s the time to act. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment11 months agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024