If the world covered every suitable roof with solar panels, it could supply 2/3 of humanity’s total electricity consumption – allowing the globe to transition completely off of fossil electricity generation, according to a new study out of the University of Sussex.
The study examined satellite data to determine the total suitable roof area around the planet which could be used for rooftop solar panels. It took into account roof slope, shading from other buildings, and so on.
It found that rooftop solar could provide a total of 19,483TWh of electricity, which is about 2/3 of global electricity use (which was 29,664TWh in 2023).
This total is actually more than the amount of electricity the world currently generates from fossil fuels – that number was 17,718TWh in 2024, driven mostly by coal and methane, two highly polluting sources.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Thus, if all of the world’s roofs were covered with solar panels, all of current fossil fuel electricity generation could be eliminated, taking a big chunk out of the unhealthy pollution created by human activities.
Certain regions are seen as more ripe for deployment of solar panels, like East Asia which has a large percentage of the world’s building stock (due to the region’s high population), and Africa where despite low housing stock, solar penetration is currently very low and solar capacity is high.
In total, the study says that this move alone could reduce global temperatures by 0.13C. While that number doesn’t seem too large, it’s a big chunk of the 1.5C warming “budget” that scientists have determined the world has to work with – and every bit of movement past that number risks additional cascading effects that will make the world less livable for humans and other species, and cause more catastrophic effects like we’re already seeing as a result of the fossil fuel industry’s operations around the globe.
The study does include a caveat that as world temperatures continue to rise, this could make certain types of solar panels less effective, leading to a drop in total generation capacity. Thus, the more we confront climate change now, the more effective this tactic will be.
However, this effect is also balanced by the potential of solar panels to be deployed more effectively by optimizing tilt angles. The study’s base case assumes flat horizontal installations – but if optimal tilt angles or solar tracking was used, the panels could be up to 39% more effective. This means if the world covered every roof with sun-tracking panels, it couldn’t just cover 2/3 of electricity production, but all of it.
It also doesn’t cover the potential of large grid-tied solar projects, just rooftops. If we used certain desert land for solar plants (which could regenerate desertified locales), that only adds to the world’s solar potential.
But we have only compared these numbers to current electricity use. The world does use energy for lots of other things – and one of the largest chunks of this is oil for transportation. As global transportation shifts rapidly to electrification, this will mean electricity use will go up significantly (though total energy use for transportation will go down – since EVs are much more efficient than gas cars).
So while rooftop solar may be enough for our current electricity needs in an ideal situation where every rooftop is covered, there will still be other sources needed to cover the rest of the shifting landscape of electricity use. Ideally, those sources will be clean – which shouldn’t be hard, given that renewables are cheaper than fossil generation.
Further, solar is less suitable in some areas than others, and for certain tasks (such as the obvious nighttime electricity use), so electricity storage (either provided by EVs, home battery systems, or grid storage) or other low-carbon generation methods like wind, hydro or nuclear still have a place, particularly in instances when they have cost advantages.
This study provides that news, showing that the roofs above our heads, which currently provide no active benefit (beyond the passive benefits of heat retention, shelter from elements and so on), could be leveraged without having to build any additional structures or use any additional land, and could cover a huge portion of our current energy use.
It’s something that has been estimated by advocates many times before, but now we have a study showing just how effective rooftop solar can be.
Not to mention that it can help you save money on your energy bills, while you contribute to solving the biggest problem humanity has ever had to confront (and hey, lookie here, Electrek even has a handy affiliate link to help you find out how much money you can save… isn’t that nice!)
If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. 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. – ad*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
An Exxon Mobil gas station in Lorton, Virginia, US, on Monday, Oct. 27, 2025.
Luke Johnson | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Exxon Mobil on Friday reported third quarter earnings that fell year over year, as oil prices tumbled due in large part to OPEC+ increasing production.
Exxon’s net income fell 12% to $7.55 billion, or $1.76 per share, compared to $8.6 billion, or $1.92 per share, in the year ago period. Excluding one-time items, the oil major posted earnings per share of $1.88.
U.S. crude oil prices have fallen about 16% this year as OPEC+ is increasing production and President Donald Trump’s tariffs have the market worried about an economic slowdown.
Exxon shares were down more than 1% in premarket trading.
Here is what Exxon reported for the third quarter compared with what Wall Street was expecting, based on a survey of analysts by LSEG:
Earnings per share: $1.88 adjusted.
Revenue: $85.3 billion, vs. $87.7 billion expected
CEO Darren Woods said Exxon posted its highest earnings per share compared to similar quarters when oil prices were falling. Profits also took a hit due to bottom-of-cycle margins in its chemicals business.
However, production in Exxon’s lucrative offshore assets in the South American nation of Guyana hit a quarterly record of more than 700,000 barrels per day. Its assets in the Permian Basin also set a production record of nearly 1.7 million bpd.
Overall, Exxon produced 4.77 million bpd in the quarter.
Exxon’s production business recorded earnings of $5.68 billion, while its refining business posted a profit of $1.8 billion. Its chemicals product business saw earnings of $515 million.
The oil major’s capital expenditures stand at about $21 billion so far this year. It expects spending in 2025 to come in slightly below the lower end of its guidance range of $27 billion to $29 billion.
Exxon gave back $9.4 billion to shareholders in the quarter and raised its fourth-quarter dividend to $1.03 per share.
Signage outside the Chevron Corp. headquarters in Houston, Texas, US, on Wednesday, Oct. 8, 2025.
Mark Felix | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Chevron on Friday reported third-quarter financial results that beat Wall Street estimates, as the company achieved record production due in part to its acquisition of Hess Corporation.
The oil major’s net income declined 21% to $3.54 billion, or $1.82 per share, compared with $4.49 billion, or $2.48 per share, in the same period last year. Its earnings decreased year over year due to falling oil prices and a $235 million loss on transaction costs associated with the Hess acquisition.
Excluding costs associated with Hess and foreign currency impacts, Chevron earned $1.85 per share, beating Wall Street estimates of $1.71 per share.
Here is what Chevron reported for the third quarter compared with what Wall Street was expecting, based on a survey of analysts by LSEG:
Earnings per share: $1.85 adjusted vs. $1.71 expected
Revenue: $49.73 billion vs. $49.01 billion expected
U.S. crude oil prices have fallen about 16% this year as OPEC+ increases production and President Donald Trump’s tariffs have the market worried about an economic slowdown.
Even with lower prices, Chevron pumped a record 4.1 million barrels per day, a 21% increase compared with the same period last year. Higher production came from the Hess acquisition, the Permian Basin, the Gulf of Mexico and Kazakhstan, according to the company.
Chevron’s U.S. production business posted a profit of $1.28 billion, down 34% compared with $1.95 billion in the third quarter of 2024. It pumped 2 million barrels per day, up 27% from 1.6 million bpd in year-ago period.
International production recorded earnings of $2 billion, down 24% compared with $2.64 billion in the same quarter last year. Production increased 16% to 2 million bpd compared with 1.76 million bpd in the year-ago period.
Profits increased more than 300% to $638 million in Chevron’s downstream U.S. refining business, compared with $146 million in the third quarter of 2024. International refining posted earnings of $499 million, up 11% from $449 million in the year-ago period. Refining profits increased year over year due to higher margins on product sales.
Capital expenditures increased 7% to $4.4 billion over the year-ago quarter due to spending on legacy Hess assets. Chevron’s adjusted free cash flow increased about 50% to $7 billion over the year-ago period.
California’s ambitious statewide electric bicycle incentive program is officially dead – and it didn’t even get a funeral. After years of buildup, delays, and surging public interest, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has quietly ended the program, rolling the remaining $17 million of the original $30 million budget into its “Clean Cars 4 All” initiative without even making an official announcement.
The California E-Bike Incentive Project was originally hailed as a groundbreaking effort to make electric bikes affordable for low-income residents. Vouchers – not rebates – were designed to let buyers walk into a participating shop and ride out without covering the full price upfront. Base vouchers were worth $1,000, with up to $2,500 available for those purchasing cargo or adaptive e-bikes in priority communities. It was a model that other states were watching closely.
But from the outset, the program was plagued by setbacks. Years of delays meant the first vouchers weren’t distributed until late 2024, and even then, only after a chaotic launch that saw the website crash under the weight of tens of thousands of applicants vying for just 1,500 vouchers. A second launch attempt in April 2025 failed completely, locking out eligible users. While a final distribution round in May went more smoothly, an estimated 90% of eligible applicants were turned away due to limited supply.
To make matters worse, the program’s administrator, Pedal Ahead, came under fire for questionable practices in San Diego, further undermining confidence.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Now, with no formal announcement or update on the program’s official website, CARB has quietly absorbed the funds into its Clean Cars 4 All program.
Electrek’s Take
This is an enormous letdown.
The California E-Bike Incentive Project had the potential to reshape car-heavy communities by giving low-income Californians access to clean, affordable micromobility. Instead, it was starved by mismanagement and then cannibalized to prop up car-centric policy.
It’s not that electric cars don’t deserve support, but this move reflects a broader failure of imagination. If we want a future with fewer cars, not just cleaner ones, then we need to start funding real alternatives. This was a huge missed opportunity to invest in a more livable California.