The Cost of 100% renewables: The Jacobson et al. 2018 Study
Proponents of a global transition to 100% renewable energy point to a number of studies which claim to show that such a transition is feasible, and arguably the most influential of these is the study of Jacobson et al. 2017, an updated 2018 version of which is now available. Jacobson’s methodology is far too complex to be reviewed here, and besides Clack et al. 2017 have already reviewed it. This post therefore summarizes what the Jacobson study says will be needed in the way of new generation, energy storage etc. to convert the world’s energy sector – electricity, transportation, industry, agriculture, the lot – to 100% wind, water and sunlight power (WWS) by 2050. Among other things it calls for a thirty-fold expansion in total world WWS capacity, including a seventy-fold increase in wind + solar capacity, and up to 16,000 terawatt-hours of energy storage. And the cost? Well, a few trillion here, a few trillion there, and pretty soon we‘re talking real money.
The updated Jacobson et al. 2018 study (hereafter J2018) is available in preprint form here. A hat-tip to correspondent “Zigak” for providing this unpaywalled link.
J2018 is more than just another renewable energy study. It’s a blueprint for transitioning the entire global economy to 100% renewables by 2050. The complexities involved in achieving such a conversion are of course enormous, and the way j2018 handles them is far beyond my capacity to summarize here. Clack et al. 2017 have nevertheless reviewed them, and their criticisms of Jacobson’s methodology are provided here for anyone who may be interested in a more detailed analysis of specifics.
But what has not so far come through – and this applies whether J2018’s plan works or not – is the sheer scale of J2018’s proposals. What might be required in the way of new capacity, new generation, new energy storage etc.?
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
