Global Renewable power spending has been virtually flat for seven years and most countries will need expensive grid upgrades to handle more solar and wind

Global investment in renewable energy (Solar, Wind, Hydro and biofuel) edged up 2% in 2017 to $279.8 billion, taking cumulative investment since 2010 to $2.2 trillion. The level of global renewable power spending has been virtually flat for seven years. There has been an increase in overall installed renewable power each year because of the dropping prices. A 2% increase in spending has resulted in 10% increase in global installations from 2016 to 2017.

A record 157 gigawatts of renewable power capacity was commissioned in 2017, up from 143GW in 2016. This was more than the 70GW of net fossil fuel generating capacity added last year. However, the installed fossil fuel power generates more kilowatt hours because of the low capacity factors of solar and wind power.

Solar alone accounted for 98GW, or 38% of the net new power capacity coming on stream during 2017.

China spent $126.6 billion on renewable power. This was the highest figure ever and more than 45% of the global total. China 53GW installed with solar investment of $86.5 billion, up 58%. Renewable energy investment in the U.S. was down 6% at $40.5 billion. Europe had a decline of 36% to $40.9 billion. The biggest reason was a fall of 65% in U.K. Investment to $7.6 billion, reflecting an end to subsidies for onshore wind and utility-scale solar. Germany also saw a drop in investment, of 35% to $10.4 billion.

Within five years most countries will need expensive energy grid investment to handle more solar and wind

In some European countries (Ireland, Germany and the United Kingdom), the share of wind and solar in total generation will exceed 25%. In China, India and Brazil, the share of variable generation is expected to double to over 10% in just five years. The increased share of solar and wind means the energy grids will require upgrades, reinforcement and interconnections, storage, demand-side response and other flexible supply to accommodate the higher levels of solar and wind.

Solar power is generating about one terawatt hour per gigawatt of installed power.

162 thoughts on “Global Renewable power spending has been virtually flat for seven years and most countries will need expensive grid upgrades to handle more solar and wind”

  1. But if renewable energy is more economical than traditional power then why would the rate of investment stagnate while prices slowly drop? Wouldn’t it be displacing traditional power generation? Hmmmm most mysterious.

  2. What! The NBF Solartards on here SAID that this wouldn’t happen. That Solar would overtake everything else by 2025 and other such garbage! Some of them still on here do so. They drink more Kool-Aide than a Musk Fluffer does, I swear! Too bad Mr Reality just peegasmed into their picnic basket, eh?

  3. But if renewable energy is more economical than traditional power then why would the rate of investment stagnate while prices slowly drop? Wouldn’t it be displacing traditional power generation?Hmmmm most mysterious.

  4. What! The NBF Solartards on here SAID that this wouldn’t happen. That Solar would overtake everything else by 2025 and other such garbage!Some of them still on here do so. They drink more Kool-Aide than a Musk Fluffer does I swear!Too bad Mr Reality just peegasmed into their picnic basket eh?

  5. Worldwide growth of photovoltaics Year-end 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016[7] 2017[8] 2018F Cumulative 100.5 138.9 178.4 229.3 306.5 401.5 ~508 Annual new 30.0 38.4 40.1 50.9 76.8 95 106[9] Cume growth 43% 38% 28% 29% 32% 31% 27% So solar is not only growing, it is [b]exponentially[/b] growing

  6. Not mysterious at all. It is written clearly “There has been an increase in overall installed renewable power each year because of the dropping prices. A 2% increase in spending has resulted in 10% increase in global installations from 2016 to 2017.” Cant you read? 🙂

  7. I’m starting to think you are confusing your comment boxes. This one is Next Big Future. The OTHER window is Kinkyperverts com

  8. Worldwide growth of photovoltaicsYear-end 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016[7] 2017[8] 2018FCumulative 100.5 138.9 178.4 229.3 306.5 401.5 ~508Annual new 30.0 38.4 40.1 50.9 76.8 95 106[9]Cume growth 43{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} 38{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} 28{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} 29{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} 32{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} 31{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} 27{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12}So solar is not only growing it is [b]exponentially[/b] growing

  9. Not mysterious at all. It is written clearly There has been an increase in overall installed renewable power each year because of the dropping prices. A 2{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} increase in spending has resulted in 10{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} increase in global installations from 2016 to 2017.”” Cant you read? :)”””

  10. I’m starting to think you are confusing your comment boxes. This one is Next Big Future. The OTHER window is Kinkyperverts com

  11. Most new power plants are solar or wind. Sooner or later coal and gas power plants will be priced out of the market. This won’t happen by 2025. More likely by 2045.

  12. No really. Companies don’t like spending capital or even worst borrowing money. Utilities build power plants and sign power buying contracts only when they have to.

  13. Flat investment on renewable provide exponential growth of renewable because the cost of renewable is becoming exponentially cheaper.

  14. It should be noted that expensive energy grid upgrade will be need to handle extra power no matter what the source of power is.

  15. The price of the grid and storage components of renewable energy are also going down and their financial impact may be just as minimal as the renewable energy sources has been, in the face of the predictions. I also see Electric car battery playing a huge leveler, just by getting a good rate to charge when there is a surplus supply of electricity.

  16. Most new power plants are solar or wind. Sooner or later coal and gas power plants will be priced out of the market. This won’t happen by 2025. More likely by 2045.

  17. No really. Companies don’t like spending capital or even worst borrowing money. Utilities build power plants and sign power buying contracts only when they have to.

  18. Flat investment on renewable provide exponential growth of renewable because the cost of renewable is becoming exponentially cheaper.

  19. It should be noted that expensive energy grid upgrade will be need to handle extra power no matter what the source of power is.

  20. The price of the grid and storage components of renewable energy are also going down and their financial impact may be just as minimal as the renewable energy sources has been in the face of the predictions. I also see Electric car battery playing a huge leveler just by getting a good rate to charge when there is a surplus supply of electricity.

  21. I would say around 2025 Solar and wind are getting cheaper and cheaper by the year and they are already better than coal

  22. False Most of the things you have said are false, Power generation has been growing in Germany recently, yet coal and lignite have been stagnant or decreasing slowly Unfrtunately, i can not link the site , just google global renewable germany cleanenergywire and com

  23. 43% at the start of your series and 27% at the end doesn’t sound like exponential growth to me. It sounds like an industry running into constraints – as they all must do, eventually. Trouble is, solar is meeting them at less than one percent of world energy use. Fossil fuels are also hitting constraints – not of supply, but from their downstream effects – but that’s when they’ve been providing ~ 80% of the world’s energy throughout a century of enormous expansion.

  24. Not so – Germany’s electricity consumption has been stagnant or falling since 2007, total energy consumption since 2000, yet they’re having to spend billions on new high voltage lines to carry northern wind power to southern industries. If they were serious about climate change, they’d be spending far more than that to store the wind power for the frequent calm periods, but they’re just making their lignite burners ramp faster, instead. Proponents of an all-renewable grid claim that wind power can be imported to calm regions from elsewhere. ( That’s clearly impracticable for solar – not even Russia can ship power across that many time zones.) A high pressure weather system is usually about a thousand miles across, which would imply basically one continent relying for nearly all its power on weather, infrastructure, and co-operativeness in an adjacent continent. Mitteleuropa would need it breezy in North Africa, Turkey, or Russia, and vice versa. Most large countries today make over 85% of their power inside their own borders, so that would be an enormous grid expansion.

  25. I would say around 2025 Solar and wind are getting cheaper and cheaper by the year and they are already better than coal

  26. ?? Going from 100 to 508 GWh is a 43{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} growth? Whch kind of logic are you using?

  27. False Most of the things you have said are false Power generation has been growing in Germany recently yet coal and lignite have been stagnant or decreasing slowly Unfrtunately i can not link the site just google global renewable germany cleanenergywire and com

  28. 43{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} at the start of your series and 27{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} at the end doesn’t sound like exponential growth to me. It sounds like an industry running into constraints – as they all must do eventually. Trouble is solar is meeting them at less than one percent of world energy use. Fossil fuels are also hitting constraints – not of supply but from their downstream effects – but that’s when they’ve been providing ~ 80{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of the world’s energy throughout a century of enormous expansion.

  29. Not so – Germany’s electricity consumption has been stagnant or falling since 2007 total energy consumption since 2000 yet they’re having to spend billions on new high voltage lines to carry northern wind power to southern industries. If they were serious about climate change they’d be spending far more than that to store the wind power for the frequent calm periods but they’re just making their lignite burners ramp faster instead. Proponents of an all-renewable grid claim that wind power can be imported to calm regions from elsewhere. ( That’s clearly impracticable for solar – not even Russia can ship power across that many time zones.) A high pressure weather system is usually about a thousand miles across which would imply basically one continent relying for nearly all its power on weather infrastructure and co-operativeness in an adjacent continent. Mitteleuropa would need it breezy in North Africa Turkey or Russia and vice versa. Most large countries today make over 85{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of their power inside their own borders so that would be an enormous grid expansion.

  30. You are confusing the increase in the rate of growth (acceleration , that is) with increase of the installed base. There has been no increase in the rate of growth (as I said, the label “exponentially” should not have been intended literally) but there has been a strong growth , a wild one, in the installed base From 100 to 500 GW in just SIX YEARS! This is 5 x growth in 5 yeas. An enormous growth In 2013 solar generated 1.3%, in 2018 probably around 2%. If the installed base keeps growing 30% per year, in 5 – 10 years we will have 10% or more of solar . Just do the math, if you can Assuming a conservative 20% growth of the installed base of solar/total electricity consumption 2018 2% 2019 2.4 2020 2.88 2021 3.456 2022 4.1472 2023 4.97664 2024 5.971968 2025 7.1663616 2026 8.59963392 2027 10.319560704 2028 12.3834728448 2029 14.86016741376 2030 17.832200896512 2031 21.3986410758144 2032 25.6783692909773 2033 30.8140431491727 We will reach a 30% of electricity by solar in just 15 years!

  31. I don’t feel sorry for fools who spew some nonsense and then label anyone not agreeing with it a hater. If there’s no increase in the rate of growth then it’s not exponential an that’s that. So it’s not been growing a “friggin lot”. It’s showing a decrease in growth… Especially considering it’s joke of a market share. A quick peek at wikipeda: “In 2016, after another year of rapid growth, solar generated 1.3% of global power” ( https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/renewable-energy/solar-energy.html )

  32. I was not talking about the rate of growth growing (which would mean an acceleration), but the installed base which has been growing *a FRIKKING lot* in the past years Year-end 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016[7] 2017[8] 2018F Cumulative 100.5 138.9 178.4 229.3 306.5 401.5 ~508 .. and sorry for the solar haters like you

  33. Wow. That’s some silly nonsense… (with a definition you you pulled out of your butt) So, no it isn’t but, it’s even wrong with your BS definition. The rate of growth didn’t even increase it decreased. And that’s neither exponentially nor “wildly” fast growth.

  34. Esponential growth not in a strictly mathemathically meaning, but with a larger meaning . Let` s saying it is growing “wildly fast” if you allow me to say so

  35. You are confusing the increase in the rate of growth (acceleration that is) with increase of the installed base. There has been no increase in the rate of growth (as I said the label exponentially”” should not have been intended literally) but there has been a strong growth “” a wild one in the installed base From 100 to 500 GW in just SIX YEARS! This is 5 x growth in 5 yeas. An enormous growth In 2013 solar generated 1.3{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} in 2018 probably around 2{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12}. If the installed base keeps growing 30{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} per year in 5 – 10 years we will have 10{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} or more of solar . Just do the math”” if you can Assuming a conservative 20{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} growth of the installed base of solar/total electricity consumption 2018 2{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12}2019 2.42020 2.882021 3.4562022 4.14722023 4.976642024 5.9719682025 7.16636162026 8.599633922027 10.3195607042028 12.38347284482029 14.860167413762030 17.8322008965122031 21.39864107581442032 25.67836929097732033 30.8140431491727We will reach a 30{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of electricity by solar in just 15 years!”””

  36. I don’t feel sorry for fools who spew some nonsense and then label anyone not agreeing with it a hater.If there’s no increase in the rate of growth then it’s not exponential an that’s that. So it’s not been growing a friggin lot””. It’s showing a decrease in growth…Especially considering it’s joke of a market share. A quick peek at wikipeda: “”””In 2016″” after another year of rapid growth”” solar generated 1.3{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of global power”””” ( https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/renewable-energy/solar-energy.html )”””

  37. I was not talking about the rate of growth growing (which would mean an acceleration) but the installed base which has been growing *a FRIKKING lot* in the past years Year-end 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016[7] 2017[8] 2018F Cumulative 100.5 138.9 178.4 229.3 306.5 401.5 ~508 .. and sorry for the solar haters like you

  38. Wow. That’s some silly nonsense… (with a definition you you pulled out of your butt)So no it isn’t but it’s even wrong with your BS definition. The rate of growth didn’t even increase it decreased. And that’s neither exponentially nor wildly”” fast growth.”””

  39. Esponential growth not in a strictly mathemathically meaning but with a larger meaning . Let` s saying it is growing wildly fast”” if you allow me to say so”””

  40. Notably, these are grid investments that, by tying together the grid over ever larger areas, increase the risk of really widespread outages. Pretty much the exact opposite of what we should be doing to make the grid more reliable. Imagine that new long distance high voltage line, when the next CME hits. It will just be a better antenna to direct that power where it will do the most damage.

  41. Warren, you’re just flinging around words like apes fling shit, and with about as much thought. The article above states new renewable capacity is twice that of new fossil capacity (157 vs 70 GW). That’s a dramatic reversal from 10-15 years ago. But new installations are a small fraction of total installed capacity, so that changes more slowly. I don’t recall anyone here saying solar would overtake everything else by 2025. If you have such a source, please give it to us.

  42. The world only has so much to spend each year on new renewable projects. That number appears to be $275 billion a year. It has to compete with all other capital investment for other purposes

  43. Notably these are grid investments that by tying together the grid over ever larger areas increase the risk of really widespread outages. Pretty much the exact opposite of what we should be doing to make the grid more reliable.Imagine that new long distance high voltage line when the next CME hits. It will just be a better antenna to direct that power where it will do the most damage.

  44. Warren you’re just flinging around words like apes fling shit and with about as much thought.The article above states new renewable capacity is twice that of new fossil capacity (157 vs 70 GW). That’s a dramatic reversal from 10-15 years ago. But new installations are a small fraction of total installed capacity so that changes more slowly.I don’t recall anyone here saying solar would overtake everything else by 2025. If you have such a source please give it to us.

  45. The world only has so much to spend each year on new renewable projects. That number appears to be $275 billion a year. It has to compete with all other capital investment for other purposes

  46. The total reserve is dependent on cost of extraction. Once cost of extraction is more than the cost of renewable it is game over.

  47. They might also sell their capacity and their power. During the daily twin peaks most of the cars should be parked. Just taking a bit off the peak is worth a lot of money.

  48. I disagree. Especially when there are nations that get 100% of their power from renewable like Costa Rica and Paraguay.

  49. What I stated is that any additional growth in generation will require additional growth in the grid. Germany does not fulfill the initial condition so my statement does not apply to them. As for Germany they decided that they would place there wind towers off shore because that location would give them more reliable power. Germany current problem is that they decided to shutdown their nuclear power plants quickly. It wasn’t because they decided to go renewable. That they could have done at a less rapid pace and just add renewable as nuclear and fossil plants reach their end of life.

  50. The total reserve is dependent on cost of extraction. Once cost of extraction is more than the cost of renewable it is game over.

  51. They might also sell their capacity and their power. During the daily twin peaks most of the cars should be parked. Just taking a bit off the peak is worth a lot of money.

  52. I disagree. Especially when there are nations that get 100{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of their power from renewable like Costa Rica and Paraguay.

  53. What I stated is that any additional growth in generation will require additional growth in the grid. Germany does not fulfill the initial condition so my statement does not apply to them. As for Germany they decided that they would place there wind towers off shore because that location would give them more reliable power. Germany current problem is that they decided to shutdown their nuclear power plants quickly. It wasn’t because they decided to go renewable. That they could have done at a less rapid pace and just add renewable as nuclear and fossil plants reach their end of life.

  54. And it might as well be configured to take maximum advantage of any present or future rènewable energy infrastructure.

  55. I can’t comment on the grids of other regions or countries, but I know I’ve been reading about the US grid and its slow decent into a patchwork of bandaids fixes and obsolescence for about two decades now. Either way, the grid needs to be updated and rethought-out for use in our 21st century power needs and reality. That means spending money on it either way.

  56. It sounds like an industry running into constraints” As I point out with great regularity you can’t have exponential growth unless you are also exponentially growing the plants that produce panels. Each plant has a fixed production limit. “43% at the start of your series and 27%” Years 1 & 2 are larger than years 3,4,5,6…

  57. Must be an evil conspiracy of a drop of rationality.” Or as the article points out installation is directly tied to subsidies.

  58. And how much does it cost to wire all the parking lots and maintain all the chargers in all the parking lots? Why duplicate chargers at home and at lots? Why make daytime “peak” power consumption even worse by introducing a massive strain on the grid which needs to run AC units as well as charge cars? Charge the cars at night.

  59. Solar: 98GW of capacity added per year 98GW * 0.20 capacity factor * 24 hours * 365.25 days/year = 172,000 GWhr/year 172,000 / (1GW * 0.94 capacity factor * 24 hours * 356.25 days/year) = 21 1GW nuclear reactors Not too bad for solar but not that large of a number in the grand scheme of things. I recall that Japan Steel Works could produce 10 RPVs per year on their own (not counting Russia, China, Korea, France).

  60. We have a power grid that works just fine right now with traditional power sources. Maybe we should focus on replacing the 500MW methane and coal plants with something carbon free, cheap, and 95% availability?

  61. Companies don’t like spending capital or even worst borrowing money.” Only when there is no ROI. US power companies seemed super eager to borrow and spend untold billions to retrofit coal fired power plants to be natural gas power plants. They did that because methane is actually cheaper than coal. If renewable energy was cheaper than coal then it would be displacing it at a similar rate.

  62. And it might as well be configured to take maximum advantage of any present or future rènewable energy infrastructure.

  63. I can’t comment on the grids of other regions or countries but I know I’ve been reading about the US grid and its slow decent into a patchwork of bandaids fixes and obsolescence for about two decades now. Either way the grid needs to be updated and rethought-out for use in our 21st century power needs and reality. That means spending money on it either way.

  64. It sounds like an industry running into constraints””As I point out with great regularity you can’t have exponential growth unless you are also exponentially growing the plants that produce panels. Each plant has a fixed production limit.””””43{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} at the start of your series and 27{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12}””””Years 1 & 2 are larger than years 3″”45″”6…”””

  65. Must be an evil conspiracy of a drop of rationality.””Or as the article points out installation is directly tied to subsidies.”””

  66. And how much does it cost to wire all the parking lots and maintain all the chargers in all the parking lots? Why duplicate chargers at home and at lots?Why make daytime peak”” power consumption even worse by introducing a massive strain on the grid which needs to run AC units as well as charge cars?Charge the cars at night.”””

  67. Solar: 98GW of capacity added per year98GW * 0.20 capacity factor * 24 hours * 365.25 days/year = 172000 GWhr/year172000 / (1GW * 0.94 capacity factor * 24 hours * 356.25 days/year) = 21 1GW nuclear reactorsNot too bad for solar but not that large of a number in the grand scheme of things. I recall that Japan Steel Works could produce 10 RPVs per year on their own (not counting Russia China Korea France).

  68. We have a power grid that works just fine right now with traditional power sources. Maybe we should focus on replacing the 500MW methane and coal plants with something carbon free cheap and 95{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} availability?

  69. Companies don’t like spending capital or even worst borrowing money.””Only when there is no ROI. US power companies seemed super eager to borrow and spend untold billions to retrofit coal fired power plants to be natural gas power plants. They did that because methane is actually cheaper than coal. If renewable energy was cheaper than coal then it would be displacing it at a similar rate.”””

  70. Irrelevant. Small countries with convenient hydropower. Same for iceland and geothermal. There won’t be magically more hydropower to exploit…

  71. ‘Solar and wind are getting cheaper and cheaper by the year and they are already better than coal’ At the moment here it’s dark, and the wind is below cut-in speed for a wind turbine over the whole country. Things that actually work are usually regarded as better than things that don’t work.

  72. You wrote “ut they’re just making their lignite burners ramp faster, instead. ” This is a lie Ditto

  73. No, it’s game over when Earth’s climate goes outside the range where civilisation can continue. CO2 is largely from coal burning, which is still going up, worldwide, and is projected to be able to last at current rates for several centuries.Germany and Italy, Europe’s largest renewable exponents, still get more power from coal than from solar. Coal use in India is rising fast, in China it’s slowed a little. America started switching to gas, though just lately that has reversed slightly, but methane venting from the supply chain may mean that gas is as bad as coal.

  74. Here’s the link. From a base of 100% in 1990, electricity consumption had climbed to 113.5% in 2007, was still at 109.4 % in 2017. Greenhouse gas emissions had dropped to 72.5 % of 1990 levels by 2009, were still at 72.3 % in 2017. https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-consumption-and-power-mix-chart They’ve spent 150 billion euro running in place, climate wise. They have got rid of half the nuclear reactors, that were hanging over their heads like a very blunt sword of Damocles.

  75. Irrelevant. Small countries with convenient hydropower. Same for iceland and geothermal.There won’t be magically more hydropower to exploit…

  76. ‘Solar and wind are getting cheaper and cheaper by the year and they are already better than coal’ At the moment here it’s dark and the wind is below cut-in speed for a wind turbine over the whole country. Things that actually work are usually regarded as better than things that don’t work.

  77. You wrote ut they’re just making their lignite burners ramp faster” instead. “”This is a lie Ditto”””

  78. No it’s game over when Earth’s climate goes outside the range where civilisation can continue. CO2 is largely from coal burning which is still going up worldwide and is projected to be able to last at current rates for several centuries.Germany and Italy Europe’s largest renewable exponents still get more power from coal than from solar. Coal use in India is rising fast in China it’s slowed a little. America started switching to gas though just lately that has reversed slightly but methane venting from the supply chain may mean that gas is as bad as coal.

  79. Here’s the link. From a base of 100{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} in 1990 electricity consumption had climbed to 113.5{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} in 2007 was still at 109.4 {22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} in 2017. Greenhouse gas emissions had dropped to 72.5 {22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of 1990 levels by 2009 were still at 72.3 {22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} in 2017. https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-consumption-and-power-mix-chartThey've spent 150 billion euro running in place climate wise. They have got rid of half the nuclear reactors that were hanging over their heads like a very blunt sword of Damocles.

  80. Your fond of tossing the ‘liar’ label around. https://www.energy-charts.de/power_de.htm?source=all-sources&year=2018&week=33 You can see Braunkohle and Steinkohle ramping up on either side of the noon solar pulse. If you click on ‘ Import / Export’ you can also see a good proportion of that solar surplus exported for the first half of the week, then not so much as the wind drops off. Who do you think they’ll export that to, if all the surrounding countries also max out on solar power ? Daylight hours aren’t very different across the EU, and wind, though not so synchronised, is still positively correlated from the Pyrenees to Poland. If hydro and biomass can’t fill the gaps now, how will they be enough to do so when renewables are supposed to power the whole grid ? http://euanmearns.com/wind-blowing-nowhere/

  81. If there are no more liveable lands (drought, fires, floods) due to climate change, where will we all go? If we don’t invest in renewable energy, we won’t have anywhere left to go.

  82. Your fond of tossing the ‘liar’ label around. https://www.energy-charts.de/power_de.htm?source=all-sources&year=2018&week=33You can see Braunkohle and Steinkohle ramping up on either side of the noon solar pulse. If you click on ‘ Import / Export’ you can also see a good proportion of that solar surplus exported for the first half of the week then not so much as the wind drops off. Who do you think they’ll export that to if all the surrounding countries also max out on solar power ? Daylight hours aren’t very different across the EU and wind though not so synchronised is still positively correlated from the Pyrenees to Poland. If hydro and biomass can’t fill the gaps now how will they be enough to do so when renewables are supposed to power the whole grid ?http://euanmearns.com/wind-blowing-nowhere/

  83. If there are no more liveable lands (drought fires floods) due to climate change where will we all go? If we don’t invest in renewable energy we won’t have anywhere left to go.

  84. I have already clarified the question of the “exponential” above, that is, please do not bother me on this anymore. True, it is not GWh but GWp, which would mean around 500,000 GWh per year (or slightly more) or about 500TWh Still a 5x increase in 6 years, and this, yes, is frikking fast I am sure that growth on solar will not continue at this rate forever, it may end when 100% or quite so of the electricity produced comes from solar, which may be closer than you think dude

  85. You wrote “but they’re just making their lignite burners ramp faster, instead. ” This is factually untrue. If the word “liar” is too harsh for your ears, let` s call you an imprecise writer. As for how to store capacity, this is a totaly different matter Energy storage is becoming inceasingly cheap

  86. Have you got your units right ? One nuclear plant – 1.3 Gigawatt – could make 508 GWh in about two weeks, and Germany has shut down ten of them, most a bit smaller, since 2011. Seven more to go. Did you mean Terawatt hours ? That’s a thousand times more. And ‘ exponential ‘ doesn’t mean ‘ really really fast ‘, it means the rate of growth is increasing. Which it isn’t. Even if it was, compound growth like that will only continue for a finite period. A bacterial culture might be doubling every hour, but before it takes over the universe, somebody will get sick of it and flush it down the sink. Solar grew fast, under subsidies, in Spain and Italy, till people noticed that their subsidy costs were also growing exponentially. Then it stopped.

  87. I have already clarified the question of the exponential”” above”” that is please do not bother me on this anymore. True it is not GWh but GWp which would mean around 500000 GWh per year (or slightly more) or about 500TWh Still a 5x increase in 6 years and this yes is frikking fast I am sure that growth on solar will not continue at this rate forever it may end when 100{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} or quite so of the electricity produced comes from solar”” which may be closer than you think dude”””

  88. You wrotebut they’re just making their lignite burners ramp faster” instead. “”This is factually untrue. If the word “”””liar”””” is too harsh for your ears”” let` s call you an imprecise writer. As for how to store capacity”” this is a totaly different matter Energy storage is becoming inceasingly cheap”””

  89. Have you got your units right ? One nuclear plant – 1.3 Gigawatt – could make 508 GWh in about two weeks and Germany has shut down ten of them most a bit smaller since 2011. Seven more to go. Did you mean Terawatt hours ? That’s a thousand times more. And ‘ exponential ‘ doesn’t mean ‘ really really fast ‘ it means the rate of growth is increasing. Which it isn’t. Even if it was compound growth like that will only continue for a finite period. A bacterial culture might be doubling every hour but before it takes over the universe somebody will get sick of it and flush it down the sink. Solar grew fast under subsidies in Spain and Italy till people noticed that their subsidy costs were also growing exponentially. Then it stopped.

  90. Biomass, wind and solar, should be excluded from the tools against Climate Change, they are useless placebos at reducing emissions and are causing the electricity prices to skyrocket. Mother nature(natural landscapes, birds, bats and other endangered species) will thank us. “The ones that went with nuclear and hydro decarbonized. The ones that went with wind and solar failed and keep failing.” “While nuclear and hydro are strongly correlated with decarbonization of energy at aggregated national levels, solar and wind are not.” “Unless you are blessed with lots of hydro or geothermal, only nuclear can eliminate CO2.” “The IEA says that the world has already developed ~1/2 of its hydroelectric potential. And since that only services ~6% of total CURRENT energy demand

  91. Biomass wind and solar should be excluded from the tools against Climate Change they are useless placebos at reducing emissions and are causing the electricity prices to skyrocket. Mother nature(natural landscapes birds bats and other endangered species) will thank us.The ones that went with nuclear and hydro decarbonized. The ones that went with wind and solar failed and keep failing.””””””While nuclear and hydro are strongly correlated with decarbonization of energy at aggregated national levels”””” solar and wind are not.””””””””Unless you are blessed with lots of hydro or geothermal”””” only nuclear can eliminate CO2.””””””””The IEA says that the world has already developed ~1/2 of its hydroelectric potential. And since that only services ~6{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} of total CURRENT energy demand”””””””

  92. Biomass, wind and solar, should be excluded from the tools against Climate Change, they are useless placebos at reducing emissions and are causing the electricity prices to skyrocket. Mother nature(natural landscapes, birds, bats and other endangered species) will thank us.
    “The ones that went with nuclear and hydro decarbonized. The ones that went with wind and solar failed and keep failing.”
    “While nuclear and hydro are strongly correlated with decarbonization of energy at aggregated national levels, solar and wind are not.”
    “Unless you are blessed with lots of hydro or geothermal, only nuclear can eliminate CO2.”
    “The IEA says that the world has already developed ~1/2 of its hydroelectric potential. And since that only services ~6% of total CURRENT energy demand”

  93. I have already clarified the question of the “exponential” above, that is, please do not bother me on this anymore.
    True, it is not GWh but GWp, which would mean around 500,000 GWh per year (or slightly more) or about 500TWh
    Still a 5x increase in 6 years, and this, yes, is frikking fast
    I am sure that growth on solar will not continue at this rate forever, it may end when 100% or quite so of the electricity produced comes from solar, which may be closer than you think dude

  94. You wrote
    “but they’re just making their lignite burners ramp faster, instead. ”
    This is factually untrue.
    If the word “liar” is too harsh for your ears, let` s call you an imprecise writer.

    As for how to store capacity, this is a totaly different matter
    Energy storage is becoming inceasingly cheap

  95. Have you got your units right ? One nuclear plant – 1.3 Gigawatt – could make 508 GWh in about two weeks, and Germany has shut down ten of them, most a bit smaller, since 2011. Seven more to go. Did you mean Terawatt hours ? That’s a thousand times more.
    And ‘ exponential ‘ doesn’t mean ‘ really really fast ‘, it means the rate of growth is increasing. Which it isn’t. Even if it was, compound growth like that will only continue for a finite period. A bacterial culture might be doubling every hour, but before it takes over the universe, somebody will get sick of it and flush it down the sink. Solar grew fast, under subsidies, in Spain and Italy, till people noticed that their subsidy costs were also growing exponentially. Then it stopped.

  96. Your fond of tossing the ‘liar’ label around.
    https://www.energy-charts.de/power_de.htm?source=all-sources&year=2018&week=33
    You can see Braunkohle and Steinkohle ramping up on either side of the noon solar pulse. If you click on ‘ Import / Export’ you can also see a good proportion of that solar surplus exported for the first half of the week, then not so much as the wind drops off. Who do you think they’ll export that to, if all the surrounding countries also max out on solar power ? Daylight hours aren’t very different across the EU, and wind, though not so synchronised, is still positively correlated from the Pyrenees to Poland. If hydro and biomass can’t fill the gaps now, how will they be enough to do so when renewables are supposed to power the whole grid ?
    http://euanmearns.com/wind-blowing-nowhere/

  97. If there are no more liveable lands (drought, fires, floods) due to climate change, where will we all go? If we don’t invest in renewable energy, we won’t have anywhere left to go.

  98. Irrelevant. Small countries with convenient hydropower. Same for iceland and geothermal.
    There won’t be magically more hydropower to exploit…

  99. ‘Solar and wind are getting cheaper and cheaper by the year and they are already better than coal’
    At the moment here it’s dark, and the wind is below cut-in speed for a wind turbine over the whole country. Things that actually work are usually regarded as better than things that don’t work.

  100. No, it’s game over when Earth’s climate goes outside the range where civilisation can continue. CO2 is largely from coal burning, which is still going up, worldwide, and is projected to be able to last at current rates for several centuries.Germany and Italy, Europe’s largest renewable exponents, still get more power from coal than from solar. Coal use in India is rising fast, in China it’s slowed a little. America started switching to gas, though just lately that has reversed slightly, but methane venting from the supply chain may mean that gas is as bad as coal.

  101. Here’s the link. From a base of 100% in 1990, electricity consumption had climbed to 113.5% in 2007, was still at 109.4 % in 2017. Greenhouse gas emissions had dropped to 72.5 % of 1990 levels by 2009, were still at 72.3 % in 2017. https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-consumption-and-power-mix-chart
    They’ve spent 150 billion euro running in place, climate wise. They have got rid of half the nuclear reactors, that were hanging over their heads like a very blunt sword of Damocles.

  102. I can’t comment on the grids of other regions or countries, but I know I’ve been reading about the US grid and its slow decent into a patchwork of bandaids fixes and obsolescence for about two decades now. Either way, the grid needs to be updated and rethought-out for use in our 21st century power needs and reality. That means spending money on it either way.

  103. “It sounds like an industry running into constraints”

    As I point out with great regularity you can’t have exponential growth unless you are also exponentially growing the plants that produce panels. Each plant has a fixed production limit.

    “43% at the start of your series and 27%”

    Years 1 & 2 are larger than years 3,4,5,6…

  104. And how much does it cost to wire all the parking lots and maintain all the chargers in all the parking lots? Why duplicate chargers at home and at lots?

    Why make daytime “peak” power consumption even worse by introducing a massive strain on the grid which needs to run AC units as well as charge cars?

    Charge the cars at night.

  105. Solar: 98GW of capacity added per year
    98GW * 0.20 capacity factor * 24 hours * 365.25 days/year = 172,000 GWhr/year

    172,000 / (1GW * 0.94 capacity factor * 24 hours * 356.25 days/year) = 21 1GW nuclear reactors

    Not too bad for solar but not that large of a number in the grand scheme of things. I recall that Japan Steel Works could produce 10 RPVs per year on their own (not counting Russia, China, Korea, France).

  106. We have a power grid that works just fine right now with traditional power sources. Maybe we should focus on replacing the 500MW methane and coal plants with something carbon free, cheap, and 95% availability?

  107. “Companies don’t like spending capital or even worst borrowing money.”

    Only when there is no ROI. US power companies seemed super eager to borrow and spend untold billions to retrofit coal fired power plants to be natural gas power plants. They did that because methane is actually cheaper than coal. If renewable energy was cheaper than coal then it would be displacing it at a similar rate.

  108. They might also sell their capacity and their power. During the daily twin peaks most of the cars should be parked. Just taking a bit off the peak is worth a lot of money.

  109. What I stated is that any additional growth in generation will require additional growth in the grid. Germany does not fulfill the initial condition so my statement does not apply to them. As for Germany they decided that they would place there wind towers off shore because that location would give them more reliable power.

    Germany current problem is that they decided to shutdown their nuclear power plants quickly. It wasn’t because they decided to go renewable. That they could have done at a less rapid pace and just add renewable as nuclear and fossil plants reach their end of life.

  110. Notably, these are grid investments that, by tying together the grid over ever larger areas, increase the risk of really widespread outages. Pretty much the exact opposite of what we should be doing to make the grid more reliable.

    Imagine that new long distance high voltage line, when the next CME hits. It will just be a better antenna to direct that power where it will do the most damage.

  111. Warren, you’re just flinging around words like apes fling shit, and with about as much thought.

    The article above states new renewable capacity is twice that of new fossil capacity (157 vs 70 GW). That’s a dramatic reversal from 10-15 years ago. But new installations are a small fraction of total installed capacity, so that changes more slowly.

    I don’t recall anyone here saying solar would overtake everything else by 2025. If you have such a source, please give it to us.

  112. The world only has so much to spend each year on new renewable projects. That number appears to be $275 billion a year. It has to compete with all other capital investment for other purposes

  113. You are confusing the increase in the rate of growth (acceleration , that is) with increase of the installed base.
    There has been no increase in the rate of growth (as I said, the label “exponentially” should not have been intended literally) but there has been a strong growth , a wild one, in the installed base
    From 100 to 500 GW in just SIX YEARS! This is 5 x growth in 5 yeas.
    An enormous growth
    In 2013 solar generated 1.3%, in 2018 probably around 2%.
    If the installed base keeps growing 30% per year, in 5 – 10 years we will have 10% or more of solar .
    Just do the math, if you can
    Assuming a conservative 20% growth of the installed base of solar/total electricity consumption

    2018 2%
    2019 2.4
    2020 2.88
    2021 3.456
    2022 4.1472
    2023 4.97664
    2024 5.971968
    2025 7.1663616
    2026 8.59963392
    2027 10.319560704
    2028 12.3834728448
    2029 14.86016741376
    2030 17.832200896512
    2031 21.3986410758144
    2032 25.6783692909773
    2033 30.8140431491727

    We will reach a 30% of electricity by solar in just 15 years!

  114. I don’t feel sorry for fools who spew some nonsense and then label anyone not agreeing with it a hater.
    If there’s no increase in the rate of growth then it’s not exponential an that’s that. So it’s not been growing a “friggin lot”. It’s showing a decrease in growth…
    Especially considering it’s joke of a market share. A quick peek at wikipeda: “In 2016, after another year of rapid growth, solar generated 1.3% of global power” ( https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/renewable-energy/solar-energy.html )

  115. I was not talking about the rate of growth growing (which would mean an acceleration), but the installed base which has been growing *a FRIKKING lot* in the past years

    Year-end 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016[7] 2017[8] 2018F
    Cumulative 100.5 138.9 178.4 229.3 306.5 401.5 ~508

    .. and sorry for the solar haters like you

  116. Wow. That’s some silly nonsense… (with a definition you you pulled out of your butt)

    So, no it isn’t but, it’s even wrong with your BS definition. The rate of growth didn’t even increase it decreased. And that’s neither exponentially nor “wildly” fast growth.

  117. False
    Most of the things you have said are false, Power generation has been growing in Germany recently, yet coal and lignite have been stagnant or decreasing slowly
    Unfrtunately, i can not link the site , just google global renewable germany cleanenergywire and com

  118. 43% at the start of your series and 27% at the end doesn’t sound like exponential growth to me. It sounds like an industry running into constraints – as they all must do, eventually. Trouble is, solar is meeting them at less than one percent of world energy use. Fossil fuels are also hitting constraints – not of supply, but from their downstream effects – but that’s when they’ve been providing ~ 80% of the world’s energy throughout a century of enormous expansion.

  119. Not so – Germany’s electricity consumption has been stagnant or falling since 2007, total energy consumption since 2000, yet they’re having to spend billions on new high voltage lines to carry northern wind power to southern industries. If they were serious about climate change, they’d be spending far more than that to store the wind power for the frequent calm periods, but they’re just making their lignite burners ramp faster, instead.
    Proponents of an all-renewable grid claim that wind power can be imported to calm regions from elsewhere. ( That’s clearly impracticable for solar – not even Russia can ship power across that many time zones.) A high pressure weather system is usually about a thousand miles across, which would imply basically one continent relying for nearly all its power on weather, infrastructure, and co-operativeness in an adjacent continent. Mitteleuropa would need it breezy in North Africa, Turkey, or Russia, and vice versa. Most large countries today make over 85% of their power inside their own borders, so that would be an enormous grid expansion.

  120. Most new power plants are solar or wind. Sooner or later coal and gas power plants will be priced out of the market. This won’t happen by 2025. More likely by 2045.

  121. No really. Companies don’t like spending capital or even worst borrowing money. Utilities build power plants and sign power buying contracts only when they have to.

  122. The price of the grid and storage components of renewable energy are also going down and their financial impact may be just as minimal as the renewable energy sources has been, in the face of the predictions. I also see Electric car battery playing a huge leveler, just by getting a good rate to charge when there is a surplus supply of electricity.

  123. Worldwide growth of photovoltaics
    Year-end 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016[7] 2017[8] 2018F
    Cumulative 100.5 138.9 178.4 229.3 306.5 401.5 ~508
    Annual new 30.0 38.4 40.1 50.9 76.8 95 106[9]
    Cume growth 43% 38% 28% 29% 32% 31% 27%
    So solar is not only growing, it is [b]exponentially[/b] growing

  124. Not mysterious at all. It is written clearly
    “There has been an increase in overall installed renewable power each year because of the dropping prices. A 2% increase in spending has resulted in 10% increase in global installations from 2016 to 2017.”
    Cant you read? 🙂

  125. But if renewable energy is more economical than traditional power then why would the rate of investment stagnate while prices slowly drop? Wouldn’t it be displacing traditional power generation?

    Hmmmm most mysterious.

  126. What! The NBF Solartards on here SAID that this wouldn’t happen. That Solar would overtake everything else by 2025 and other such garbage!

    Some of them still on here do so. They drink more Kool-Aide than a Musk Fluffer does, I swear!

    Too bad Mr Reality just peegasmed into their picnic basket, eh?

Comments are closed.