Author Topic: Time to retire the term ‘renewable energy’ from serious discussion and energy policy directives  (Read 262 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rangerrebew

  • TBR Contributor
  • *****
  • Posts: 176,780
Time to retire the term ‘renewable energy’ from serious discussion and energy policy directives
Posted on February 5, 2024 by curryja | 23 Comments
by Russell Schussler (Planning Engineer)

Part I: Renewable energy as a grouping lacks coherence


This series will look in depth at the inherent and emerging flaws within the renewable/nonrenewable framework for classifying generating energy resources. It may have made sense 50 years ago to speak in terms of renewable and non-renewable resources when thinking of future energy needs and plans. That basic conceptualization helped promote change and thinking about the impact of generation resources on the environment.  But we are now far removed from the 1970’s.  Current calls for major changes in the electric supply system, such as Net-Zero, envision sweeping change.  Broad system efforts to address environmental concerns while meeting energy needs call for a more sophisticated understanding than can be supported by a dichotomy between “renewable” and “non-renewable” resources.

Neither “renewables” or “non-renewables” are coherent groupings for an energy resource typology.  Similarities between resources in different groupings can be strong and within group differences can be large.  Most statements made in reference to generic “renewables” are either trivial or misleading.  Policy and legislation favoring renewables over other generation resources can encourage poor resource choices and hinder good resource alternatives.

It might be expected that those who are concerned about C02 emissions, those concerned about nuclear power, and those more broadly identifying with environmental movements might take exception with this proposal. But any serious proponents of net-zero or of major energy transitions should be in favor of more clarity and increased precision when undertaking serious discussions. Many environmentalists have grave concerns with expanded hydro and biomass-based generation, for example.  This series will discuss later how “non-renewable” resources might be the cleanest and greenest proposals in many instances. Furthermore, the case against burning fossil fuels is more strongly made based on current environmental concerns, not based on fears that that such resources might run out hundreds of years from now.

https://judithcurry.com/2024/02/05/time-to-retire-the-term-renewable-energy-from-serious-discussion-and-energy-policy-directives/
The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth.  George Washington - Farewell Address