Renewable energy sources are now used for a third of the world's electricity needs

[Alfonso Maruccia]

Something to look forward to: A new report from an independent global energy think tank paints a decidedly optimistic picture for the future of energy. According to Ember, renewable sources have reached record rates in electricity generation, significantly reducing emissions in some of the world's most energy-hungry regions.

Ember has just released its latest Global Electricity Review, a report detailing the use of renewable and fossil fuel sources in generating electric energy for various needs of individuals and businesses. In it, the non-profit UK organization says renewable energy sources accounted for more than a third of electricity generated in 2023.

With the report, the group aims to provide the first "comprehensive overview" of changes in electricity generation over the past year. Data indicates that 2023 was a pivotal year for renewable sources as solar and wind sources saw growth rates of 23 percent and 10 percent, respectively. Conversely, fossil sources experienced only a 0.8 percent increase in electricity generation.

Ember's report gathered data from 215 different countries, including the latest available data for 80 countries representing 92 percent of global electricity demand. Data from 13 geographic and economic regions, such as Asia, Africa, the EU, and the G7, is also included.

For the first time, Ember is providing access to its comprehensive dataset free of charge.

Ember states that the undeniable growth of renewable sources, particularly solar energy, will propel the world towards a "new era" where fossil fuel generation becomes less prominent.

The report highlights that renewable sources for electricity generation only accounted for 19 percent of the global market in 2000, whereas they now surpass 30 percent. However, hydropower sources hit a five-year low in 2023, with coal and other fossil fuel sources compensating for it, thus preventing a further reduction in greenhouse emissions.

Global electricity demand increased by 2.2 percent in 2023, with Ember forecasting even higher demand for 2024. Over the next decade, the energy transition is expected to enter a new phase characterized by a "permanent" decline in fossil fuels and decreasing emissions. Ember predicts that the power sector will be the first to decarbonize, although fossil sources such as oil, gas, and coal still dominate the world's primary energy consumption.

Permalink to story:

Renewable energy sources are now used for a third of the world's electricity needs

 

[The Talking Tech]

And yet nonbelievers still have the nerv to keep investing on fossil fuels.

Sadly those are the very same people having kids of their own.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

And yet nonbelievers still have the nerv to keep investing on fossil fuels.

Sadly those are the very same people having kids of their own.

Believe it or not, sometimes the sun doesnt shine, and the wind doesnt blow! You still need baseline power during those times so you can post on /r/childfree about how totally not mad you are at regular people leading regular lives ; - )

 

[GodisanAtheist]

I'll follow the script and say its a shame nuclear power has been so demonized, its a relatively clean source of baseload power production.

Hopefully commercial fusion shows up sooner rather than later and we can plow headfirst and unimpeded into the singularity.

 

[MasterAce]

Seems like they just plug in some average value for wind power and completely ignore the times when it doesnt wind. Electricity prices go trough the roof when it doesnt wind, and still its somehow the best thing ever

 

[NumberNine]

This is what I like to see. Bigger batteries, more renewables, better tech, less excuses.

You wanna see a do or die situation?
This is it. You are living it.

 

[p51d007]

And what is the cost to the environment, to dispose of the old windmill blades, the batteries once they wear out, the old solar panels? Not to mention the cost to mine the materials to build these things. Wind/solar is a nice "boost" when demand isn't high, but nothing can beat a GENERATOR at peak demand. Just pull the nuclear rods out a bit more, crank up the heat of LP gas, coal or oil for the generators.
The sun doesn't shine 24/7 and the wind doesn't blow 24/7.

 

[scavengerspc]

And what is the cost to the environment, to dispose of the old windmill blades, the batteries once they wear out, the old solar panels?

The bare minimum.
Even the oldest photovoltaic cell in a panel can be repurposed.

And I'm not sure of any rare Earth hazardous material in a windmill or solar panel.
Though I'm open to learn.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

The bare minimum.
Even the oldest photovoltaic cell in a panel can be repurposed.

And I'm not sure of any rare Earth hazardous material in a windmill or solar panel.
Though I'm open to learn.

"can be repurposed" does NOT mean "will be repurposed". Much of this material will end up in landfills, or "recycled", like most electronics, by being shipped to the third world and burned.

https://www.wired.com/story/solar-panels-are-starting-to-die-leaving-behind-toxic-trash/

Also, LOL on the lack of heavy metals. "Solar panel waste can include heavy metals such as silver, lead, arsenic and cadmium that – at certain levels – may be classified as hazardous waste."

https://scdhec.gov/sites/default/files/Library/OR-1695.pdf

Wind turbine blades are made of a vinyl composite. This cannot be recycled. This cannot be reused, They must be buried. In landfills. So "green"!

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/feat...be-recycled-so-they-re-piling-up-in-landfills

Let's also not forget that wind turbines used toxic, carcinogenic lubricant which must be replaced regularly and cannot be recycled easily, and the production of solar panels produces toxic runoff, and since most are made overseas, there are no environmental controls involved, that stuff gets dumped right into the pacific ocean. "The solar industry, like other electronic industries, relies on many well-known toxic chemicals. For solar, these include arsenic, cadmium telluride, gallium arsenide, hexafluoroethane, hydrofluoric acid, lead, and polyvinyl fluoride, putting frontline workers and communities at risk to toxic chemical exposure."

https://www.corebuffalo.org/impact-of-solar-panel-manufacturing

"To give you the gist of it, this study, conducted by environmental journalists who favor nuclear power found that solar panels (over their lifetime) create somewhere in the region of 300 times more toxic waste per unit of energy than nuclear power plants. "

https://interestingengineering.com/...gy-paradox-solar-panels-and-their-toxic-waste

Solar and wind are not "green", unless the only pollution you think of is CO2. We have simply taken the neoliberal approach of shipping it all to some dirty 3rd world country nobody cares about so we can virtue signal about how clean we are. Since the Climate Change industrial complex has become a full on multi billion dollar Death Cult, that decrys you as an evil, nasty CONSERVATIVE if you dare question their numbers or methods (or their constant predictions that Florida will be underwater), we have charged headfirst into a toxic ineffective future where coal and natural gas are required to be built, in bigger numbers, and maintained far past their service life to even out the power from the inconsistent green garbage we have been presented, while ignoring the easiest short term answer.

I'll follow the script and say its a shame nuclear power has been so demonized, its a relatively clean source of baseload power production.

Hopefully commercial fusion shows up sooner rather than later and we can plow headfirst and unimpeded into the singularity.

BRING. BACK. NUCLEAR.

Besides, with gen IV breeder reactors and Thorium plants, the amount of waste products is microscopic compared to our current obsolete gen II designs. We could have fixed this issue decades ago, had it not been for the very environmental groups that want to be "green" opposing nuclear at every turn. As a bonus, it's CHEAP. Living somewhere with a nuke plant, we have some of the cheapest electricity in the US. Every cheap region int he US is nuclear backed. The "green" markets, like california? The most expensive.

 

[RudyBob]

Sadly those are the very same people having kids of their own.

Has to be the most depressing comment I have read here.

 

[scavengerspc]

"can be repurposed" does NOT mean "will be repurposed". Much of this material will end up in landfills, or "recycled", like most electronics, by being shipped to the third world and burned.

https://www.wired.com/story/solar-panels-are-starting-to-die-leaving-behind-toxic-trash/

Also, LOL on the lack of heavy metals. "Solar panel waste can include heavy metals such as silver, lead, arsenic and cadmium that – at certain levels – may be classified as hazardous waste."

https://scdhec.gov/sites/default/files/Library/OR-1695.pdf

Wind turbine blades are made of a vinyl composite. This cannot be recycled. This cannot be reused, They must be buried. In landfills. So "green"!

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/feat...be-recycled-so-they-re-piling-up-in-landfills

Let's also not forget that wind turbines used toxic, carcinogenic lubricant which must be replaced regularly and cannot be recycled easily, and the production of solar panels produces toxic runoff, and since most are made overseas, there are no environmental controls involved, that stuff gets dumped right into the pacific ocean. "The solar industry, like other electronic industries, relies on many well-known toxic chemicals. For solar, these include arsenic, cadmium telluride, gallium arsenide, hexafluoroethane, hydrofluoric acid, lead, and polyvinyl fluoride, putting frontline workers and communities at risk to toxic chemical exposure."

https://www.corebuffalo.org/impact-of-solar-panel-manufacturing

"To give you the gist of it, this study, conducted by environmental journalists who favor nuclear power found that solar panels (over their lifetime) create somewhere in the region of 300 times more toxic waste per unit of energy than nuclear power plants. "

https://interestingengineering.com/...gy-paradox-solar-panels-and-their-toxic-waste

Solar and wind are not "green", unless the only pollution you think of is CO2. We have simply taken the neoliberal approach of shipping it all to some dirty 3rd world country nobody cares about so we can virtue signal about how clean we are. Since the Climate Change industrial complex has become a full on multi billion dollar Death Cult, that decrys you as an evil, nasty CONSERVATIVE if you dare question their numbers or methods (or their constant predictions that Florida will be underwater), we have charged headfirst into a toxic ineffective future where coal and natural gas are required to be built, in bigger numbers, and maintained far past their service life to even out the power from the inconsistent green garbage we have been presented, while ignoring the easiest short term answer.

BRING. BACK. NUCLEAR.

Besides, with gen IV breeder reactors and Thorium plants, the amount of waste products is microscopic compared to our current obsolete gen II designs. We could have fixed this issue decades ago, had it not been for the very environmental groups that want to be "green" opposing nuclear at every turn. As a bonus, it's CHEAP. Living somewhere with a nuke plant, we have some of the cheapest electricity in the US. Every cheap region int he US is nuclear backed. The "green" markets, like california? The most expensive.

I thought you might find these articles interesting:

Can wind turbine blades be recycled? | What happens to old wind turbine blades? | National Grid Group

While wind power can generate clean, cheap, zero carbon electricity, what happens to old wind turbine blades and can they be recycled at the end of their operational lives?

www.nationalgrid.com

Understanding Solar Panel Recycling and Disposal in the US

Solar panels can be partially recycled in the US. Learn about solar panel disposal and what happens when they reach end-of-life.

www.bostonsolar.us

And as I have said before, I'm a 2 thumbs up kind of guy for nuclear.
And I am following the small, localized options very closely.

Of course, if you are truly worried about spent materials, then that presents a new challenge with all those plants.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

Hmmm....for some reason, Techspot seems to have censored data from the very source they provided for this story. No worries! I have a copy of it! Surely it was a MISTAKE to delete pertinent information....right? You wouldnt be deleting posts again that disagree with The Message, right?


Solar and Wind have not disturbed the fossil fuel market, they have been used in place of the decimated nuclear power industry. Coal has gone down 2.5% since 2000. Nat Gas has gone UP 4.5%. Nuclear and hydro combined have gone DOWN 7.6% and 3% respectively. The total for fossil fuels worldwide was 64.67% in 2000 and 60.65% in 2023. The growth of solar has been entirely absorbed by the shutdown of nuclear and hydro, as has a good chunk of wind power. Technically, yes, "renewables" now make up 30%, but at the cost of nuclear power moreso then fossil power.

Realistically, "green" energy has only grown 4%, not 11% as the renewable claim would lead you to believe, as the offset is from previous green sources.

The good news is that the US has decommissioned far more coal then other parts of the world. The bad news is that, while solar and wind have grown, NatGas has taken a far larger share of the pie, because the sun does not always shine, and the wind doesnt always blow.

Pro tip for Environmentalists: you'd have more support if you discussed these findings in civil discussion instead of censoring data you dont like.

I thought you might find these articles interesting:

Can wind turbine blades be recycled? | What happens to old wind turbine blades? | National Grid Group

While wind power can generate clean, cheap, zero carbon electricity, what happens to old wind turbine blades and can they be recycled at the end of their operational lives?

www.nationalgrid.com

Understanding Solar Panel Recycling and Disposal in the US

Solar panels can be partially recycled in the US. Learn about solar panel disposal and what happens when they reach end-of-life.

www.bostonsolar.us

And as I have said before, I'm a 2 thumbs up kind of guy for nuclear.
And I am following the small, localized options very closely.

Of course, if you are truly worried about spent materials, then that presents a new challenge with all those plants.

Oh sure, there's lots of possibilities of what they CAN do. But, as with recycling electronics in the western world, whether it WILL be done in any real capacity beyond the camera photo ops is unlikely. I have 0 faith that we'll responsibly recycle this stuff instead of either burying it or shipping it to Bangladesh to be melted down in open fire pits.

I think, realistically, the environmental impact from disposal of "green" tech will be far higher then many believe. Sure, it saves CO2, but heavy metal poisoning cannot be resolved by growing trees. We know this stuff is already pouring into the Pacific via the Yangtze river and into the air via open burn pits.

Regardless if they do fix the recycling problem or not, it doesnt change the fact that you really need baseline, and solar/wind just doesnt cut it. The people in charge, however, really dont seem interested in fixing either issue.

 

[toooooot]

Reminder, still need to find a simple and safe way to recycle those big boys.
Same goes for solar panels. There got to be tens of millions that are waiting to be buried already.

 

[noel24]

Manufactured in China using coal, from materials mined by child slaves in Africa. Meanwhile My electricity bill rises up another time, as the government was postponing building the nuclear power plant for the last 30 years, following this f*ckup in Chornobyl.
Greta is laughing all the way to the bank.

 

[noblody]

The goal should be to clean the energy sector. the energy production has increased a lot since 2000, but unfortunately, with all the efforts to generate clean(er) energy the amount of energy from gas and coal has also increased. The hard part is still to come, where we need to store the energy so I'm not
so optimistic about the reduction of coal/gas

 

[Endymio]

And yet nonbelievers still have the nerv to keep investing on fossil fuels.

Probably because the nonbelievers of your religion understand technology. The toughest problem a utility firm faces isn't generating the raw power, it's matching supply to demand in real time, second by second. Wind and solar always generate either too little or too much -- and one is just as bad as the other. You can't build a stable power grid around such sources ... which is why nations like Germany are only now able to operate by buying and selling vast amounts of power to their less-"renewable" neighbors like Poland. A trick that only works when those neighbors don't follow your path. And even then, Germany's push has driven it from the cheapest electricity in Europe to one of the most expensive ... and brought back the specter of electricity blackouts, something Germany hasn't experienced since right after WWII.

 

[The Talking Tech]

Has to be the most depressing comment I have read here.

Well the truth is often depressing to those that don't want to accept it.

 

[Zsoltblabla]

I'll follow the script and say its a shame nuclear power has been so demonized, its a relatively clean source of baseload power production.

Hopefully commercial fusion shows up sooner rather than later and we can plow headfirst and unimpeded into the singularity.

Nuclear power is safe and limitless.
Trouble is it negates the need for oil. No oil = mo profit for big oil/ big pharma/ and no profit from endless wars…. We cant have that

 

[Zsoltblabla]

And yet nonbelievers still have the nerv to keep investing on fossil fuels.

Sadly those are the very same people having kids of their own.

And yet, people freeze to death in their own homes now. Great to have energy that is 20 times more expensive then our parents used to pay for.

 

[Uncle Al]

I have to say I doubt the authors figures. I think it's more like 1/6th since there are still so many countries relying on fossil fuels and no mention of nuclear, which is again on the rise due to newer & safer designs not to mention the first of many fusion reactors coming on line.

 

[Cabuzzi]

Probably because the nonbelievers of your religion understand technology. The toughest problem a utility firm faces isn't generating the raw power, it's matching supply to demand in real time, second by second. Wind and solar always generate either too little or too much -- and one is just as bad as the other. You can't build a stable power grid around such sources ... which is why nations like Germany are only now able to operate by buying and selling vast amounts of power to their less-"renewable" neighbors like Poland. A trick that only works when those neighbors don't follow your path. And even then, Germany's push has driven it from the cheapest electricity in Europe to one of the most expensive ... and brought back the specter of electricity blackouts, something Germany hasn't experienced since right after WWII.

As usual, the comments have more relevant information than the article itself. The cult of climate change are truly those who believe CO2 is the cause of the earth warming the miniscule amount it actually is, is caused 100% by man. Those who repeat "the science is settled" like a religious mantra cannot answer one simple question: "If the science is settled, as you say, what percentage of climate change is caused by man, and what percentage is caused by the changes in the sun?".

Make no mistake, climate change is a cult that is literally responsible for the deaths of people who can no longer afford electricity in the "greenest" countries. This is about one thing and one thing only... control. Stop reading articles like this and start doing research that isn't confirmation bias. It's getting harder and harder to find contrary information to climate changes since scientists who are interested in the truth are being defunded, shamed, and cancelled. The only money in scientific research now is to tow the narrative and completely throw out the scientific method.

Fully expecting this comment to be deleted, but will be happy if discourse is allowed.

 

[RudyBob]

Well the truth was is often depressing to those that don't want to accept it.

Bringing children into the world is our purpose. That's what I accept. What I don't accept is nihilism from depressed people

 

[michalcz]

Factorio taught me nuclear power is the best.

 

[bwbeam]

The bare minimum.
Even the oldest photovoltaic cell in a panel can be repurposed.

And I'm not sure of any rare Earth hazardous material in a windmill or solar panel.
Though I'm open to learn.

what about the almost 80 gallons of oil each of these large wind turbine use?

 

[richalone442]

Why do I have this deep down inside feeling, that this is pure bunk.
We are an oil based civilization, everything is plastic, look around you....
It's a shame Nuclear energy failed politically here in the USA, we could been almost carbon neutral, and may have completed work on Fusion Reactors by now.
Lastly, There must be a better way to move energy around, than with metal wires.