Jump to content

As Solar Hits Record Highs Call For 100% Renewables By 2050


skews13
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

Solar-Roof-Potential.jpg?1482129683

 

As of last month, there were some 1.1 million residential rooftop solar power systems keeping the televisions, refrigerators, computers, stoves, and lights on throughout the United States. In California, the solar leader, about 600,000 homes have installed such systems. And here, as well as elsewhere in the nation, the speed with which new systems are being put into operation is remarkable. Although utility-scale solar systems—solar farms—generate the larger portion of electricity we get from the sun, about 30 percent now comes from these rooftop systems.

 

 

solar_heater_florida_1930s.jpg?148212260

A solar thermal system for heating water on a Miami roof in the 1930s.

 

Last quarter alone, the industry installed 4.1 gigawatts of solar electricity systems, the best quarter ever. Of that about 2 gigawatts were rooftop systems, what is called “distributed solar.” By the end of this year, the nation will have about 43 gigawatts of solar capacity installed, about 4 percent of total U.S. electricity-generating capacity from all sources. A gigawatt of solar capacity can power between 164,000 and 180,000 homes and reduce carbon emissions by 41.7 million metric tons annually.

 

For all of 2016, 26 gigawatts from various sources were added to the nation’s electrical capacity. None of it was coal, and solar was the leading source. Together with wind, a smidgen of hydro, and the first nuclear plant coming on line in a very long time, two-thirds of those gigawatts were without carbon emissions.

 

In the 19th Century, heating water was a laborious and dirty business, mostly accomplished by burning wood or coal on a cook stove and hauling it to wherever it was needed. That’s exactly how it was done in the house where I was born and lived my first eight years. Carried in buckets from a pump in the yard and heated on a cast-iron stove. Affluent city dwellers at the time heated their water with gas made from coal. But with the patenting of a practical solar water heater in 1891 and subsequent improvements, many people in sunny regions chose that more efficient and much cleaner method.

solar_hot_water_heater.jpg?1482122480

By the turn of the century a third of the homes in Pasadena, California, had solar thermal panels heating their water, half the homes by 1930. Between 1920 and 1941, Miami installed as many as 60,000 solar water heaters and there were a few thousand in other parts of the state. In California, however, cheap natural gas put the the companies that made the solar heaters out of business by the mid-1930s.

 

In Florida, the price of copper used in piping the solar heaters soared during World War II and rationing made obtaining the metal at any price hard to find. After the war, electric heaters, sold below cost by the state’s power and light utilities to encourage people to use more electricity, soon took over the Florida market.

 

By the 1970s, few of the remaining rooftop solar thermal panels were more than relics, long out of use.

 

But the Arab oil embargoes of those years spurred the U.S. government to look for alternatives, including solar. A key energy initiative of the Jimmy Carter administration in 1977 was the Solar Energy Research Institute, which is now the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, based in Golden, Colorado. (Full Disclosure: I worked there for three years until President Reagan gutted SERI’s budget in 1981.)

 

While staffers at SERI dreamed of a day when every home and factory roof in America was covered with a different type of solar panel—the electricity-producing kind—the photovoltaic cells needed to generate sun power in those days were a hundred times more expensive than they are today. Part of SERI’s charge was to research methods of reducing those costs.

 

At the same time, through its regional SUN Power centers, the institute encouraged Americans to put efficient solar thermal water heaters on their roofs. It was a good plan except that too many fly-by-night operators installed crap systems, tainting the reputation of the whole industry. Even though there were perfectly good systems to be had, by 2007, fewer than 1,000 solar water heaters were being installed in California each year.

 

Solar cells were still five times more expensive than they are now, so it was easy to find plenty of naysayers claiming solar would never produce significant amounts of electricity.

 

But solar PV installations took off that year. In the decade since then their cost in the United States has plunged more than 70 percent. Every year more solar is being installed than the last. Since 2010, installations—on residential and commercial rooftops as well as solar farms—have grown 15-fold.

 

So much has the price fallen that, in ever more U.S. markets, electricity generated from rooftop solar PV systems now beats the price paid buying it from the grid. Including federal and states incentives (where the latter exist) the average savings on electricity from installing a solar PV system is now $20,000 over 20 years. Internationally, too, solar now beats all fossil fuels, including natural gas, as the cheapest new source of electricity.

PV_chart.png?1482128414
By the end of this year, U.S. solar power capacity, both utility scale and rooftop installations, is expected to reach 44 gigawatts, enough to provide electricity for about 8 million average homes.

 

​At last count, the U.S. solar industry employs 209,000 people nationwide. That’s more than the number of workers in the oil and gas extraction business and three times the number employed in coal mining today. And there is no end in sight for that growth. A new solar installation is activated every 1.6 minutes in the U.S. today.

 

In 2015, solar, together with wind power—which is also falling in price, is being installed at an accelerating pace, and employs 88,000 workers—generated 5 percent of the nation’s electricity.

 

Together, in 2005 there were 10 gigawatts of wind and solar capacity on line in the U.S. This year, the total is more than 110 gigawatts. That speed of growth would have been fantastic 30 years ago. Today, given what we know about climate change, it’s not fast enough.

 

Spurred by government policies, the pace could be greatly accelerated. In fact, it has to be more than “could be.” The current trend would give us 15 percent of our electricity from solar and wind by 2030.

 

However, to fulfill the U.S. pledge made in the Paris climate pact, Energy Innovation’s Policy Simulator recommends policies that would put the nation at 33 percent by 2030. Meanwhile, California, by far the current state leader in solar, has set a goal of 50 percent renewables by 2030—including solar, wind, water and geothermal. It has also set a goal for energy storage, which is essential given the intermittent nature of solar and wind.

Wind_chart.png?1482128481
Installed wind capacity is expected to be about 83 gigawatts by the end of 2016. In 2006, the total was 11.5 gigawatts.But, the Solutions Project, co-founded by Mark Ruffalo and Marco Krapels, has an even greater goal—100 percent renewables by 2050.

 

And while it no doubt produces eyerolls in the naysayers’ crowd (even though investors are leaning more and more toward solar and wind), two U.S. senators—Democrats Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Jeff Merkley of Oregon—introduced a Senate resolution in early December calling for exactly that, powering the U.S. with 100 percent renewables within 33 years:

 

Here’s Markey:

Their resolution, of course, has zero chance of being passed in the next two to four years given the heavy load of senators who deny the knowledge climate science has provided us while ignoring the huge number of jobs a renewables-only economy would produce. As for the incoming Trump administration, it is brimful of climate science deniers, too.

 

“As a technological giant, the United States must continue to lead the clean energy revolution. The question is no longer if we can power our country with 100 percent renewable energy, it’s when and how we will make the transition. Moving to 100 percent clean energy will power job creation that is good for all creation. We can and will meet this goal and now, more than ever, it is critical that we stand up and fight for our clean energy future. I thank Senator Merkley for his partnership introducing this resolution that sets out the bold goal of generating 100 percent renewable energy by the year 2050.”

 

Those obstacles should not make progressives surrender in what is an existential fight. If we are to ameliorate the impacts of climate change, and create millions of new jobs, we have to change numerous policies, including those related to energy.

 

Unable to do so at the federal level until the climate numbskulls are outnumbered in Congress and tossed out of the executive branch, we should in the meantime focus on changing as many state policies as we can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Their resolution, of course, has zero chance of being passed in the next two to four years given the heavy load of senators who deny the knowledge climate science has provided us while ignoring the huge number of jobs a renewables-only economy would produce.

 

 

 

the ""conservatives""....taking America back 50 years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Solar-Roof-Potential.jpg?1482129683

 

As of last month, there were some 1.1 million residential rooftop solar power systems keeping the televisions, refrigerators, computers, stoves, and lights on throughout the United States. In California, the solar leader, about 600,000 homes have installed such systems. And here, as well as elsewhere in the nation, the speed with which new systems are being put into operation is remarkable. Although utility-scale solar systems—solar farms—generate the larger portion of electricity we get from the sun, about 30 percent now comes from these rooftop systems.

 

 

solar_heater_florida_1930s.jpg?148212260

A solar thermal system for heating water on a Miami roof in the 1930s.

 

Last quarter alone, the industry installed 4.1 gigawatts of solar electricity systems, the best quarter ever. Of that about 2 gigawatts were rooftop systems, what is called “distributed solar.” By the end of this year, the nation will have about 43 gigawatts of solar capacity installed, about 4 percent of total U.S. electricity-generating capacity from all sources. A gigawatt of solar capacity can power between 164,000 and 180,000 homes and reduce carbon emissions by 41.7 million metric tons annually.

 

For all of 2016, 26 gigawatts from various sources were added to the nation’s electrical capacity. None of it was coal, and solar was the leading source. Together with wind, a smidgen of hydro, and the first nuclear plant coming on line in a very long time, two-thirds of those gigawatts were without carbon emissions.

 

In the 19th Century, heating water was a laborious and dirty business, mostly accomplished by burning wood or coal on a cook stove and hauling it to wherever it was needed. That’s exactly how it was done in the house where I was born and lived my first eight years. Carried in buckets from a pump in the yard and heated on a cast-iron stove. Affluent city dwellers at the time heated their water with gas made from coal. But with the patenting of a practical solar water heater in 1891 and subsequent improvements, many people in sunny regions chose that more efficient and much cleaner method.

solar_hot_water_heater.jpg?1482122480

By the turn of the century a third of the homes in Pasadena, California, had solar thermal panels heating their water, half the homes by 1930. Between 1920 and 1941, Miami installed as many as 60,000 solar water heaters and there were a few thousand in other parts of the state. In California, however, cheap natural gas put the the companies that made the solar heaters out of business by the mid-1930s.

 

In Florida, the price of copper used in piping the solar heaters soared during World War II and rationing made obtaining the metal at any price hard to find. After the war, electric heaters, sold below cost by the state’s power and light utilities to encourage people to use more electricity, soon took over the Florida market.

 

By the 1970s, few of the remaining rooftop solar thermal panels were more than relics, long out of use.

 

But the Arab oil embargoes of those years spurred the U.S. government to look for alternatives, including solar. A key energy initiative of the Jimmy Carter administration in 1977 was the Solar Energy Research Institute, which is now the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, based in Golden, Colorado. (Full Disclosure: I worked there for three years until President Reagan gutted SERI’s budget in 1981.)

 

While staffers at SERI dreamed of a day when every home and factory roof in America was covered with a different type of solar panel—the electricity-producing kind—the photovoltaic cells needed to generate sun power in those days were a hundred times more expensive than they are today. Part of SERI’s charge was to research methods of reducing those costs.

 

At the same time, through its regional SUN Power centers, the institute encouraged Americans to put efficient solar thermal water heaters on their roofs. It was a good plan except that too many fly-by-night operators installed crap systems, tainting the reputation of the whole industry. Even though there were perfectly good systems to be had, by 2007, fewer than 1,000 solar water heaters were being installed in California each year.

 

Solar cells were still five times more expensive than they are now, so it was easy to find plenty of naysayers claiming solar would never produce significant amounts of electricity.

 

But solar PV installations took off that year. In the decade since then their cost in the United States has plunged more than 70 percent. Every year more solar is being installed than the last. Since 2010, installations—on residential and commercial rooftops as well as solar farms—have grown 15-fold.

 

So much has the price fallen that, in ever more U.S. markets, electricity generated from rooftop solar PV systems now beats the price paid buying it from the grid. Including federal and states incentives (where the latter exist) the average savings on electricity from installing a solar PV system is now $20,000 over 20 years. Internationally, too, solar now beats all fossil fuels, including natural gas, as the cheapest new source of electricity.

PV_chart.png?1482128414
By the end of this year, U.S. solar power capacity, both utility scale and rooftop installations, is expected to reach 44 gigawatts, enough to provide electricity for about 8 million average homes.

 

​At last count, the U.S. solar industry employs 209,000 people nationwide. That’s more than the number of workers in the oil and gas extraction business and three times the number employed in coal mining today. And there is no end in sight for that growth. A new solar installation is activated every 1.6 minutes in the U.S. today.

 

In 2015, solar, together with wind power—which is also falling in price, is being installed at an accelerating pace, and employs 88,000 workers—generated 5 percent of the nation’s electricity.

 

Together, in 2005 there were 10 gigawatts of wind and solar capacity on line in the U.S. This year, the total is more than 110 gigawatts. That speed of growth would have been fantastic 30 years ago. Today, given what we know about climate change, it’s not fast enough.

 

Spurred by government policies, the pace could be greatly accelerated. In fact, it has to be more than “could be.” The current trend would give us 15 percent of our electricity from solar and wind by 2030.

 

However, to fulfill the U.S. pledge made in the Paris climate pact, Energy Innovation’s Policy Simulator recommends policies that would put the nation at 33 percent by 2030. Meanwhile, California, by far the current state leader in solar, has set a goal of 50 percent renewables by 2030—including solar, wind, water and geothermal. It has also set a goal for energy storage, which is essential given the intermittent nature of solar and wind.

Wind_chart.png?1482128481
Installed wind capacity is expected to be about 83 gigawatts by the end of 2016. In 2006, the total was 11.5 gigawatts.But, the Solutions Project, co-founded by Mark Ruffalo and Marco Krapels, has an even greater goal—100 percent renewables by 2050.

 

And while it no doubt produces eyerolls in the naysayers’ crowd (even though investors are leaning more and more toward solar and wind), two U.S. senators—Democrats Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Jeff Merkley of Oregon—introduced a Senate resolution in early December calling for exactly that, powering the U.S. with 100 percent renewables within 33 years:

 

Here’s Markey:

Their resolution, of course, has zero chance of being passed in the next two to four years given the heavy load of senators who deny the knowledge climate science has provided us while ignoring the huge number of jobs a renewables-only economy would produce. As for the incoming Trump administration, it is brimful of climate science deniers, too.

 

“As a technological giant, the United States must continue to lead the clean energy revolution. The question is no longer if we can power our country with 100 percent renewable energy, it’s when and how we will make the transition. Moving to 100 percent clean energy will power job creation that is good for all creation. We can and will meet this goal and now, more than ever, it is critical that we stand up and fight for our clean energy future. I thank Senator Merkley for his partnership introducing this resolution that sets out the bold goal of generating 100 percent renewable energy by the year 2050.”

 

Those obstacles should not make progressives surrender in what is an existential fight. If we are to ameliorate the impacts of climate change, and create millions of new jobs, we have to change numerous policies, including those related to energy.

 

Unable to do so at the federal level until the climate numbskulls are outnumbered in Congress and tossed out of the executive branch, we should in the meantime focus on changing as many state policies as we can.

 

Why can't you just let people freely choose to install solar panels or not? It's this approach that really turns me off to progressive agendas. If it is a good idea, it shouldn't need the force of government to coerce people to comply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why can't you just let people freely choose to install solar panels or not? It's this approach that really turns me off to progressive agendas. If it is a good idea, it shouldn't need the force of government to coerce people to comply.

This has nothing to do with coercion. State utilities themselves are converting their generation plants from coal to natural gas, and incorporating generated electricity from solar, and wind farms being sold into the grid.

 

The decision to install a PV system for your individual use, will always be your decision.

 

What will not be your decision is how the utility that you purchase power from now generates that power you purchase.

 

That is what is meant by achieving 100% renewables.

Their resolution, of course, has zero chance of being passed in the next two to four years given the heavy load of senators who deny the knowledge climate science has provided us while ignoring the huge number of jobs a renewables-only economy would produce.

 

 

 

the ""conservatives""....taking America back 50 years

Take climate change out of the equation. This is the only argument that has to be made. Make Republicans in Congress argue against permanent jobs in their states.

 

At last count, the U.S. solar industry employs 209,000 people nationwide. That’s more than the number of workers in the oil and gas extraction business and three times the number employed in coal mining today. And there is no end in sight for that growth. A new solar installation is activated every 1.6 minutes in the U.S. today.

 

This is the only argument that has to be made. Make Republicans in Congress argue against permanent jobs in their states.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not what the OP is saying.

 

Read the last 2 paragraphs.

The arguments based upon the reasoning of the two Senators wanting legislation for committing to renewables is their argument, not mine.

 

My argument is based solely for the purpose of millions of construction, and maintenance jobs that are permanent jobs, that cannot be outsourced, or downsized for the purpose of maximizing profits for shareholders.

 

Those farms have to be built by American workers, and maintained by American workers.

 

They can't be sent to China or Mexico.

 

State utilities, as well as the private ones in all 50 states are converting to natural gas, even if they have not yet started to incorporate solar, and wind generated power into their grid.

 

Bottom line. Coal jobs are not coming back to rust belt, and appalacia America, no matter who is President, or is the majority in Congress, for the simple fact that the natural gas being purchased for plant generation, is from very red states like the Dakota's Oklahoma, Wyoming, and Montana. Not from any blue states that has been sold to Trump supporters as a bill of goods.

 

Solar and wind is a growing industry, that is the future of power generation, and creates more jobs for people in the states, and will be voted for, and accepted at the state level, so Congress who is heavily lobbied by the oil and coal industries, aren't going to be able to continue to stem the tied of renewables, as all of those unemployed workers in those red states will be more than happy to have those jobs come to their states.

 

Nobody is going to be supporting Exxon Mobil drilling oil for the Russians in the Arctic, while renewable solar and wind jobs are advertising for people to fill out applications for good paying jobs where they live, and politicians in those states can continue taking lobbying money from them, while their citizens remain long term unemployed at their peril.

 

Renewable energy sources will win out in the end, by attrition, that slowly but surely employs people one at a time in each state as those solar and wind farms are being built.

 

Jobs jobs jobs will be the thing that makes 100% renewables a reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The arguments based upon the reasoning of the two Senators wanting legislation for committing to renewables is their argument, not mine.

 

My argument is based solely for the purpose of millions of construction, and maintenance jobs that are permanent jobs, that cannot be outsourced, or downsized for the purpose of maximizing profits for shareholders.

 

Those farms have to be built by American workers, and maintained by American workers.

 

They can't be sent to China or Mexico.

 

State utilities, as well as the private ones in all 50 states are converting to natural gas, even if they have not yet started to incorporate solar, and wind generated power into their grid.

 

Bottom line. Coal jobs are not coming back to rust belt, and appalacia America, no matter who is President, or is the majority in Congress, for the simple fact that the natural gas being purchased for plant generation, is from very red states like the Dakota's Oklahoma, Wyoming, and Montana. Not from any blue states that has been sold to Trump supporters as a bill of goods.

 

Solar and wind is a growing industry, that is the future of power generation, and creates more jobs for people in the states, and will be voted for, and accepted at the state level, so Congress who is heavily lobbied by the oil and coal industries, aren't going to be able to continue to stem the tied of renewables, as all of those unemployed workers in those red states will be more than happy to have those jobs come to their states.

 

Nobody is going to be supporting Exxon Mobil drilling oil for the Russians in the Arctic, while renewable solar and wind jobs are advertising for people to fill out applications for good paying jobs where they live, and politicians in those states can continue taking lobbying money from them, while their citizens remain long term unemployed at their peril.

 

Renewable energy sources will win out in the end, by attrition, that slowly but surely employs people one at a time in each state as those solar and wind farms are being built.

 

Jobs jobs jobs will be the thing that makes 100% renewables a reality.

I'm fine with it if the "free-market" is doing the dictating and not those two Senators with whom you disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What these MORONS won't admit is that Solar and Wind if being FORCED on the utilities.

 

Yes, FORCED in order to obtain certain benefits and NOT be punished with fines and other government shit coming down on them.

 

Their "energy portfolios" MUST have a certain mix of energy sources OR they get the shit fined out of them.

 

It's NOT free market ANYTHING and that move to natural gas is ANOTHER forcing by government as well.

 

Perhaps you assholes should REALLY think about what you wish for since if they can do it to utilities, they can force their shit right down YOUR throats as well.

 

Remember, that FORCED GOVERNMENT comes at the end of a barrel of a gun. And your demorrhoids want MORE of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What these MORONS won't admit is that Solar and Wind if being FORCED on the utilities.

 

Yes, FORCED in order to obtain certain benefits and NOT be punished with fines and other government shit coming down on them.

 

Their "energy portfolios" MUST have a certain mix of energy sources OR they get the shit fined out of them.

 

It's NOT free market ANYTHING and that move to natural gas is ANOTHER forcing by government as well.

 

Perhaps you assholes should REALLY think about what you wish for since if they can do it to utilities, they can force their shit right down YOUR throats as well.

 

Remember, that FORCED GOVERNMENT comes at the end of a barrel of a gun. And your demorrhoids want MORE of it.

Actually, state utilities are switching to natural gas, because it's cheaper, and creates less maintenance costs on equipment, plus the added benefit of not having to comply with governmental regulations on the storing, and burning of coal, and the waste by product that must be safely stored and discarded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A guest on Hannity the other day said the giant wind mills dont even generate enough energy to pay for their own maintenance...If they weren't heavily subsidized by the Govt (me and you...) they wouldn't exist at all..... Anybody know if this is true....?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, state utilities are switching to natural gas, because it's cheaper, and creates less maintenance costs on equipment, plus the added benefit of not having to comply with governmental regulations on the storing, and burning of coal, and the waste by product that must be safely stored and discarded.

That's what I just said, MORON!!!

 

Government if FORCING utilities to use certain "government approved" energy sources.

God are you FUCKING ASSHOLES THIS FUCKING DENSE???

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A guest on Hannity the other day said the giant wind mills dont even generate enough energy to pay for their own maintenance...If they weren't heavily subsidized by the Govt (me and you...) they wouldn't exist at all..... Anybody know if this is true....?

http://www.newsweek.com/whats-true-cost-wind-power-321480

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's what I just said, MORON!!!

 

Government if FORCING utilities to use certain "government approved" energy sources.

God are you FUCKING ASSHOLES THIS FUCKING DENSE???

 

Actually, this is what you said

 

What these MORONS won't admit is that Solar and Wind if being FORCED on the utilities.

Which is not even remotely true

They are switching to natural gas because it is cheaper.

They are buying generated solar and wind power because it is also cheaper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A guest on Hannity the other day said the giant wind mills dont even generate enough energy to pay for their own maintenance...If they weren't heavily subsidized by the Govt (me and you...) they wouldn't exist at all..... Anybody know if this is true....?

Well a guest on Hannity the other day said it, so it must be true right?

 

I guess the manufacturers of the parts who say they can't keep up with orders for the parts must not have gotten the memo from Hannity yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's all even worse.......but thanks.. I don't see how anybody can defend wind power....unless they just don't have an aptitude for math...?

http://www.argosywind.com/

 

http://www.getsmartenergy.com/

 

http://www.swigercoil.com/

 

You're not real bright are you?

 

Ask these people in Ohio if they think their jobs should go away?

 

Please feel free to tell them what you heard on Hannity the other day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.argosywind.com/

http://www.getsmartenergy.com/

http://www.swigercoil.com/

 

You're not real bright are you?

Ask these people in Ohio if they think their jobs should go away?

Please feel free to tell them what you heard on Hannity the other day.

So now it's okay to subsidize big oil energy?

Well a guest on Hannity the other day said it, so it must be true right?

I guess the manufacturers of the parts who say they can't keep up with orders for the parts must not have gotten the memo from Hannity yet.

It is true. Read the link I gave Lisa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well a guest on Hannity the other day said it, so it must be true right?

 

I guess the manufacturers of the parts who say they can't keep up with orders for the parts must not have gotten the memo from Hannity yet.

No........Thats why i asked if it was true...........But now that it has been confirmed...I think we can stop crying about the subsidies going to big oil....?

http://www.argosywind.com/

 

http://www.getsmartenergy.com/

 

http://www.swigercoil.com/

 

You're not real bright are you?

 

Ask these people in Ohio if they think their jobs should go away?

 

Please feel free to tell them what you heard on Hannity the other day.

No....i'm gonna tell them i want part of their check.......i should be first in line to get paid back.... The same as if i ever see somebody driving a Tesla...they at least owe me a ride in it...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, this is what you said

 

What these MORONS won't admit is that Solar and Wind if being FORCED on the utilities.

Which is not even remotely true

They are switching to natural gas because it is cheaper.

They are buying generated solar and wind power because it is also cheaper.

 

You are STILL a fucking MORON. They ARE being FORCED, ASSHOLE!!

 

A renewable portfolio standard (RPS) is a regulatory mandate to increase production of energy from renewable sources such as wind, solar, biomass and other alternatives to fossil and nuclear electric generation. It's also known as a renewable electricity standard.

Background

An RPS is most successful in driving renewable energy projects when combined with the federal production tax credit. States often design them to drive a particular technology by providing "carve out" provisions that mandate a certain percentage of electricity generated comes from a particular technology (e.g. solar or biomass). States can choose to apply the RPS requirement to all its utilities or only the investor owned utilities. States can also define what technologies are eligible to count towards the RPS requirements.

 

http://www.nrel.gov/tech_deployment/state_local_governments/basics_portfolio_standards.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  1.  

    Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in ...

    news.mit.edu/2013/study-air-pollution-causes-200000.....

    Study: Air pollution causes 200,000 early deaths each year in the U.S. ... Of course, there are more deaths in the eastern US because there are more people.

  2.  

    WHO: Air pollution caused one in eight deaths - CNN.com

    www.cnn.com/2014/03/25/health/who-air-pollution-de...

    Mar 24, 2014 · The majority of the deaths associated with air pollution were heart disease, ... About us; Visit CNN; Newsletters; Work for us; Help; Transcripts; License ...

 

7 million premature deaths annually linked to air pollution - WHO

www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2014/air-pollution<...

... underlining that the vast majority of air pollution deaths are due to cardiovascular diseases as follows: ...

 

Air Pollution Is Responsible For 3.3 Million Deaths Every ...

www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/33-million-die-every-year...

Sep 16, 2015 · Air Pollution Is Responsible For 3.3 Million ... The United States, with 54,905 deaths in 2010 from soot ... Air Pollution Air Pollution Deaths Soot Smog ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...