Time to retire the term ‘renewable energy’ from serious discussion and energy policy directives
Posted on February 5, 2024 by curryja | 104 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.
https://judithcurry.com/2024/02/05/time-to-retire-the-term-renewable-energy-from-serious-discussion-and-energy-policy-directives/
