OCT 31

The European Renewable Energy Council and Greenpeace believe that 100 percent of the world's energy could come from renewable sources by 2090. They've written up the blueprint in their Energy [R]evolution Report.

The report creates a scenario that includes biomass, geothermal, solar and wind energy providing the bulk of the world's power. While the development of those sources is key, the larger component of the scenario is major increases in efficiency. These gains would be made by instituting rooftop wind and solar so that energy is generated close to the consumer, as well as retrofitting and maximizing the efficiency of buildings, particularly through better insulation. The report claims that the bulk of these changes could be made by 2050.

This projection is exciting to think about, but there is one aspect that could prove unrealistic. The scenario sees an overall drop in energy usage by 2090, while our knowledge of increasing energy usage in developing countries contradicts this possibility. Even if we maximize efficiency, it would be close to impossible for usage to drop within that time frame.

Even so, I think this report is encouraging and is particularly helpful because it provides detailed scenarios on how our current situation could be reversed. But it also further confirms that the path will be hard and dependent on all of us cutting back on our energy use. As we've suspected all along, a quick fix doesn't exist.

via VentureBeat

Comments (11)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

...
written by ALD, October 31, 2008

The report is indeed promising. I calculated and if I live to be approx 114 years old, I could still live to see this happen. I think this report reflects the growing acceptance of the once unpopular idea that change is very necessary if we're going to continue inhabiting this planet.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Andrew, November 01, 2008

I think the good folks at Greenpeace smoke too much of that hemp. Writing reports about what to do for the next 88 years is just dreamy conjecture. Not doing anything useful.

Sigh ...always playing around, chasing radioactive whales in rubber boats, getting over anxious about stuff they can't control. They need to socialize a bit more.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Mostly Efficiency
written by Carl, November 01, 2008

I thought this report was good because it promotes efficiency as the biggest opportunity. If you look at the graphs of the as-usual vs ER scenario, more than half comes from efficiency. I agree with this, as I see there is a huge energy waste now-- an opportunity for the future. Just look at a few examples-- refrigerators use 75% less energy since cost labelling began, new buildings can use 80% less energy than old ones. Desktop computers and servers might use 150W when idle, but could be made to sleep and wake in milliseconds so it uses 97% less power when 97% idle. Too many reports focus on new energy sources (that are even expensive) neglecting relatively cheap efficiency gains. For buildings with a 100 year life, you really need to think about the 2090 time frame.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

promotes efficiency
written by teacher, November 01, 2008

I like your comments Carl, "refrigerators use 75% less energy since cost labelling began" This shows how the marketing of ideas is really important. If people can reduce their fixed energy costs then they will go for it.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Geosimulation games - They're not just f
written by Corban, November 01, 2008

The fastest way to catalyze this shift towards pure sustainability would be to have exemplars of this paradigm, hold them up as the creme de la creme, and make everyone so jealous that they jump on the bandwagon.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Too far...
written by hyperspaced, November 01, 2008

Nobody can predict the energy requirements in 50 years from now. There are too many variables to consider (technological, political, climatological, demographic etc.).

For example, computers will be demanding considerable less energy, nanotechnology will push solar cell efficiencies to the roof, some goverments might "enforce" renewable resources harder than others, climate changes, population on earth approaches 15 billion and many many other. There could be outbursts of diseases (not unlikely) that decimate the population, or the sea-surface rose 10 meters for all we know.

Let's start thinking about what we CAN do N-O-W to save the planet, in order to even start making projections about 2090.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by Clinch, November 02, 2008

Personally, I don't like these kind of things at all, too much speculation and statistics (and most people know, you can make statistics say whatever you want), too many "buzzwords" and quotations, and nothing much that's actually new or useful.

I agree with hyperspaced's sentiments, we don't need plans for the (unpredictable) future, we need action for now.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

...
written by guiness, November 02, 2008

So act now and use the plan to help determine the best payoff for the future. It may not be perfect and the future unpredictable but, because it is internally consistent and quantitative, this kind of scenario/vision is extremely useful. Random independent efforts will add up but not as well as actors thinking about niches, limiting factors and the future.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Good plan but...
written by HankS, November 02, 2008

... can the environment really handle continued abuse over the next 80 years, even if it is *slowly* reduced?

One concern I have for research like this, which more or less promotes long term change, is that people who are not already on the green movement think; "well it's ok then, the next generation will fix these problems for us - I don't have to do anything". Which sabotages the effort being put into public awareness and participation.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Over population is the problem
written by Grechen, November 03, 2008

It is necessary to rapidly reduce the human population to the levels that were extant in the 1950s.

A multi government approach to population reduction is required. Several concurrent large scale conflicts will help more than any pussy livered carbon trading schemes.

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Renewable Energy Isn't The Whole Answer
written by VLanois, November 03, 2008

....it's a great start to help reduce dependence on foreign energy sources et al. However, what good is renewable energy if the electronics/appliances etc still use the same amount of energy? In the US, the Technology CEO Council is trying to get private industry and the government to figure out better ways to make products greener while also looking at other ways to power them. Check out the new site they just launched: behindthegreen.org

• 
• +0
• 
• 

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

Write the displayed characters

Add Comment