By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Renewable energy sources surpassed coal as the primary global electricity source for the first half of the year, driven by substantial growth in solar and wind power, according to Ember. While overall electricity demand continues to rise, the surge in renewables has met this demand, even slightly reducing coal and gas usage. However, a mixed global landscape exists, as developing nations, particularly China, lead the clean energy transition, whereas wealthier nations like the US and EU are increasingly reliant on fossil fuels. Solar power, the largest contributor to renewable growth, has experienced dramatic cost reductions, especially in lower-income countries. Consequently, China’s dominance in clean tech exports continues to grow, with electric vehicles and batteries now surpassing the value of solar panel exports.
Read the original article here
Renewables overtake coal as the world’s biggest source of electricity – it’s a headline that’s hard to ignore, right? It’s like a major shift in the energy landscape, a turning point we’ve been inching towards for a while. The interesting part is, it’s a bit of a quiet revolution. You wouldn’t necessarily know it from the rhetoric. Some people will likely be thrilled, and others… well, let’s just say some folks are less enthusiastic.
However, let’s get one thing straight: the term “renewables” covers a lot of ground. We’re talking about hydropower, nuclear power (which, by the way, some people consider “renewable” due to its carbon-free nature), solar, and wind. The combination of solar and wind alone represents roughly 10% of total electricity generated globally. Hydropower and nuclear power contribute significantly to the renewables figure, accounting for around 40% of the total amount generated.
Of course, you immediately think of the practicalities. Take those arguments, the one I heard about coal being “cleaner” than solar. It’s important to remember that coal has some undeniable downsides. Think about the water usage, the land impact from mining and ash storage, and, of course, the waste – tons of toxic ash, mercury, and other nasty byproducts. On the other hand, renewable sources are continuing to refine themselves.
The truth is that the energy sector as a whole still has a long way to go. Although we see coal’s decline, fossil fuels overall account for a whopping 80% of global energy consumption. Demand keeps growing faster than our ability to build all the clean infrastructure, so it’s still a bit of a temporary win.
But here’s an even bigger issue that everyone seems to dodge: the full life-cycle. Making solar panels and batteries, for example, requires resources – mining, manufacturing, transportation. If most panels come from, say, China, a lot of energy is expended just getting them to their destination. The fact is that even with improvements in technology, burning carbon to generate electricity is inherently dirty because it always produces CO₂.
A key point to remember is that the energy used to manufacture solar panels and batteries is increasingly coming from renewables, making their lifecycle emissions drop further. This is a massive, ongoing process.
So, what about nuclear? It’s a tough one. Existing nuclear plants are fantastic, and it makes sense to keep them running as long as possible. However, building new nuclear plants is incredibly expensive and takes a lot of time. Renewables are much cheaper and faster to deploy. It’s perfectly valid to look at the pros and cons of both nuclear and renewables and decide that renewables are simply superior based on things like economics and speed of deployment.
The reality is that renewables alone will not solve climate change. We need to deploy them, and they will help, but the situation remains very complex.