Study: wind and solar can power most of the United States

Wind, solar, and storage could meet 90–100% of America’s electricity needs

Wind turbines and solar panels. Photograph: Alamy

In order to combat climate change, we need to rapidly move from fossil fuel energy to clean, renewable energy. The two energy sources I am most interested in are wind and solar power; however, there are other sources that have great potential.

Some people doubt how much wind and solar can supply to a country’s electricity grid. This is a particularly challenging question to answer in part because both solar power and wind power fluctuate in both space and time. We all know solar panels work well during the day, when the sun shines – they don’t work so well at night. And wind turbines only send electrons when the wind is blowing.

Fortunately, these two sources of energy fluctuate in ways that complement each other. For instance, solar power generation is highest in the summer and lowest in the winter. Wind power is greatest in the spring and fall. Wind turbines work at night when solar panels are dormant. So, can these complementing variations help balance out the power that the two technologies can provide?

This question was addressed in a very recent paper published in the journal Energy and Environmental Science. The author list included Dr. Ken Caldeira, who is extremely well known for his years of work in environmental science and energy.

The authors analyzed 36 years of hourly weather data (1980–2015) in the US. They calculated the available wind and solar power over this time period and also included the electrical demand in the US and its variation throughout the year.

With this information, the researchers considered two scenarios. In scenario 1, they imagined wind and solar installations that would be sufficient to supply 100% of the US electrical needs. In the second scenario, the installations would be over-designed; capable of providing 150% of the total U.S. electrical need. But the authors recognize that just because a solar panel or a wind turbine can provide all our energy, it doesn’t mean that will happen in reality. It goes back to the prior discussion that sometimes the wind just doesn’t blow, and sometimes the sun isn’t shining.

With these two scenarios, the authors then considered different mixes of power, from all solar to all wind. They also included the effect of aggregation area, that is, what sized regions are used to generate power. Is your power coming from wind and solar in your neighborhood, your city, your state or your region?

The authors found that with 100% power capacity and no mechanism to store energy, a wind-heavy portfolio is best (about 75% wind, 25% solar) and using large aggregate regions is optimal. It is possible to supply about 75-80% of US electrical needs. If the system were designed with excess capacity (the 150% case), the US could meet about 90% of its needs with wind and solar power.

The authors recognized that sometimes these systems generate too much power to be used. Under this situation, you could store the energy for later use. Imagine a solar panel generating excess energy during the day and able to store that power for night use. Power can be stored in several ways, for example in batteries or by pumping water into elevated tanks and then letting the water fall at night and turn a turbine.

The authors modified their study to allow up to 12 hours of US energy storage. They then found that the 100% capacity system fared even better (about 90% of the country’s energy) and the optimal balance was now more solar (approximately 70% solar and 30% wind). For the over-capacity system, the authors found that virtually all the country’s power needs could be met with wind, solar, and storage.

This study considered only wind and solar. If other sources, such as hydroelectricity, biofuels, or even nuclear power were added, it would be relatively straightforward to reach 100% clean energy. Furthermore, people are learning to use energy more wisely, either by using more efficient products or purchasing electricity during off-peak hours. These behavioral changes can also help us reach a 100% clean energy target.

The point is, the use of clean energy to power an entire country (or a group of countries) is achievable. It’s no longer viable to say “we can’t.”

Investing in Solar and Wind

Investing in Solar and Wind in a Coal and Oil Moment

A Smoky Hills Wind Farm turbine seen from the St. Paul’s Lutheran Church schoolhouse in Ellsworth, Kan. Wind provided almost 30 percent of electricity in Kansas in 2016.

Alternative energy investments like wind and solar power have not performed well in recent years. To make matters worse, the Trump administration has opted for a resurgence of coal and other carbon fuels, not an emphasis on alternative energy.

Yet there is a reasonable argument that the outlook for investing in renewable energy may actually be quite good.

For one thing, wind and solar power have been rapidly winning market acceptance. Last year, the installed capacity of solar power in the United States nearly doubled. And wind is now being harnessed to produce 5.5 percent of America’s electricity, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Five states draw at least 20 percent of their electricity needs from wind. Kansas, for example, relied on wind for less than 1 percent of its electric power as recently as 2005. By 2016, wind produced 29.6 percent of its electric power, according to government figures.

Intriguingly, all five of the most wind-dependent states — Kansas, Iowa, Oklahoma, North Dakota and South Dakota — are traditional Republican strongholds. “The windiest places in the country are all red states,” said Garvin Jabusch, a manager of the Shelton Green Alpha mutual fund.

And the solar industry now employs over 260,000 workers nationwide, many of them in states that have leaned Republican. Texas, Florida, Arizona and North Carolina are among the largest solar employers.

The reliance of these states on wind and solar could foreshadow continuing support for alternative energy within sectors of the Republican party, despite the pro-fossil-fuel stance of the president. Along with Gina M. Raimondo, the Democratic governor of Rhode Island, Sam Brownback, the Republican governor of Kansas, recently wrote a letter to President Trump that said “expanding renewable energy production is one of the best ways to meet the country’s growing demand for energy.” And, the governors added, “The nation’s wind and solar resources are transforming low-income rural areas in ways not seen since the passage of the Homestead Act over 150 years ago.”

Ryan Issakainen, exchange-traded fund strategist and senior vice president at First Trust Bank, said that such sentiments could maintain policy support for solar and wind power. “Policies that favor coal over other sources would be sound in places like West Virginia,” he said. “But if you’re in the middle part of the country where you’ve got more opportunity for wind power, you’re not going to be supportive of pro-coal policies.”

Edward Guinness, portfolio manager of theGuinness Atkinson Alternative Energy fund, went further, saying, “I think the presence of wind and solar production in red states could splinter the G.O.P. on Trump’s plans.”

Still, solar’s recent past has been miserable for many investors. The Guggenheim Global Solar ETF has lost over 24 percent a year over the last three years, according to Morningstar. Wind has fared better, but with an annual total return of 4.95 percent the last three years First Trust Global Wind Energy ETF has lagged in an exuberant bull market. The Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index, for example, gained over 10 percent a year in the same period.

But for solar power, the fundamental economic outlook may conceivably be improving. “The reason solar stocks have done poorly is a big oversupply of panels, which drove down the price,” said Richard Asplund, research director for the MAC Solar Index, the tracking index for the Guggenheim Solar fund. “Pricing looks better for this year and next.”

The Guinness Atkinson fund, loaded with Chinese solar panel producers, has suffered large losses the last three years. But it was up nearly 5 percent in the first quarter.

Mr. Guinness says that investors have been too gloomy. “The sentiment on the sector is terrible,” he said. Negative sentiment has produced valuations “as low as we’ve seen” by measures like price to book, Mr. Guinness said.

Wind turbines at the Smoky Hills Wind Farm in Kansas.

CHRISTOPHER SMITH FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES

Part of the problem, he said, is that solar power has been widely viewed as a heavily subsidized market. But the latest extension of the federal Investment Tax Credit phases out solar subsidies for homes by 2021.

Solar power will soon have to compete without government support, Mr. Guinness said, but he’s untroubled by the switch. “We’re excited about the transition from a government market to a nonsubsidized market,” he said.

Such excitement may be difficult to sustain in the wake of recent Trump actions. On March 28, the president signed an executive order to initiate a rewrite of President Obama’s Clean Power Plan, an initiative designed to speed utility conversion from coal. Under that plan, renewable energy sources were projected to become more important than coal and second only to natural gas in electricity generation by 2030, said Chris Namovicz, lead renewable energy analyst at the U.S. Energy Information Administration. If the Clean Power Plan is really abandoned, he said, “in 2040, renewables will still be third, behind both coal and natural gas.”

Rolling back the plan entirely will be difficult, and Mr. Jabusch, who runs the Shelton Green Alpha fund, remains optimistic about the sector. His fund returned 8.51 percent in the 12 months through March 31. He estimates that 20 to 24 percent of his portfolio is typically invested in companies involved with renewable energy.

Mr. Jabusch is particularly bullish on solar power. “I think solar has been mispriced,” he said. While falling prices have hurt panel producers, he said, price declines have expanded the market, and low valuations represent an enormous buying opportunity. “The solar companies could be 10-baggers over the next decade,” investments that could increase tenfold, Mr. Jabusch said, borrowing a term from Peter Lynch, the Fidelity mutual fund manager.

Mr. Jabusch said he favors companies like 8Point3 Energy Partners, which offers a yield of roughly 8 percent, and JA Solar Holdings Company, which derives most of its revenues from Europe and Asia and is, in his view, attractively priced.

Mr. Asplund, the research director for the MAC Solar Index, argues that even if the Trump administration’s energy policies pose a problem, solar power investments can still prosper. “The solar industry is a global industry,” he said. “U.S. installations are less than one-quarter of global. Trump is a negative for solar, but Trump by himself isn’t going to kill the solar business.”

Wind power's decreasing cost makes it more competitive with other energy sources

WASHINGTON, August 11 (UPI) - Wind energy is cheaper than ever before in the United States and advances in turbine technology have helped make America the No. 1 global producer of wind energy, according to a new Energy Department report.

The news came Monday on the heels of President Barack Obama's signature Clean Power Plan and aims to make the case for his administration's continued push toward more renewable energy. The plan set state-by-state standards for carbon dioxide emissions that were more stringent than expected, with a 32 percent reduction nationally by 2030.

Wind power's decreasing cost makes it more competitive with other energy sources, especially on the Midwestern plains, where windy days are frequent and construction costs are often lower, said Ryan Wiser, co-author of the Energy Department's 2014 Wind Technologies Market Report.

The price of wind power last year was 2.35 cents per kilowatt-hour, less than half of the cost in 2009 when prices peaked at 7 cents per kwh.

The cost of installing wind turbines has declined and productivity has increased as the wind energy industry matures. Competition among companies like General Electric and Siemens has grown and manufacturing has become more efficient, according to Wiser, a senior scientist at Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory. Longer blades generate more power, and they're being used more widely as the cost of production and installation go down.

Access to wind helps, too.

"We have a really darned good wind resource in the U.S., really second to almost no other country on a worldwide basis," Wiser said.

"The cost of wind energy has reached a point where it's a viable economic choice for these companies as well," he added, referring to power companies' opting to purchase wind energy. "They can potentially save money on these wind energy contracts...," he said in a phone interview Monday.

The U.S. ranked first in the world for energy production in 2014, according to the Energy Department report. It was second to China for capacity.

But the U.S. still ranks below many European nations for the proportion of wind the country relies on for its total energy consumption. The U.S. got just 4.9 percent of its total energy consumed in 2014 from wind.

"Well it's a start, right?" Wiser said. "To put that into a little bit of context, hydro power generation in the U.S. represents roughly six percent of our electricity generation. So wind energy is approaching the same scale as hydro power."

And American wind projects are more efficient than their Chinese counterparts. The electric grid in China cannot always handle all of the energy China is capable of generating, Wiser said.

Technological advances have boosted the output of wind energy in recent years. Taller hubs and longer blades in particular are the biggest improvements that help generate more power.

In a sign of the industry's growth, U.S. exports of turbine blades and power storage equipment rose from $16 million in 2007 to $488 million in 2014, the report says.

The government report projects a rosy outlook for wind project financing through 2016. Production tax credits will likely be available through next year but not beyond, unless they are renewed by Congress.

"With the PTC [tax credit] now expired and its renewal uncertain, however, wind deployment beyond 2016 is also uncertain," said a spokeswoman for the Energy Department, adding that the carbon-cutting Clean Power Plan might create new markets for wind energy.