state

More Solar And Wind Power In The U.S.

January 2, 2020 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, both wind and solar power are contributing more and more to total electrical generation in the United States. For the first 8 months of 2019, the combination of wind and solar power accounted for almost 10% of U.S. electrical generation.

Solar, including small-scale PV systems on home rooftops, grew by almost 14% compared to the first eight months of 2018 and accounted for more than 2.7% of total electrical output. In fact, small-scale solar generation increased by 19% and provided nearly a third of all the solar power in the country.

Wind energy in the U.S. increased by 4.4%, accounting for almost 7% of the country’s electricity.

Overall, renewable energy sources – which include biomass, geothermal, hydropower, solar, and wind – accounted for 18.49% of net domestic electrical generation during the first 8 months of 2019. The non-hydro renewable sources actually accounted for over 11% of total electricity production and saw a year-over-year growth of 6%.

Outside of renewables, nuclear-generated electricity declined by 0.6% and coal power dropped by almost 14%. Much of the coal generation was replaced by natural gas, which grew by 6.5% compared to the previous year.

Renewables now accounting for nearly 20% of overall electricity generation in the US represents significant progress. But the variations by state continue to be substantial. For example, while Vermont gets 99% of its power from renewables, Ohio gets only 2%.

**********

Web Links

Solar and wind energy provide almost 10 percent of total generation in the US in 2019

Photo, posted April 8, 2019, courtesy of City of St. Pete via Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

The Cost Of Rising Seas

October 1, 2019 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

Coastal cities in the United States are grappling with the need for extensive infrastructure projects to protect against rising seas and worsening storms. The cost of these projects will be enormous, and it is unclear how to pay to them.

Boston has many neighborhoods in low-lying areas, and it is estimated that $2.4 billion will be needed to protect the city from flooding. The city abandoned plans to build a harbor barrier that would have cost $6 to $12 billion because it was economically unfeasible.

Charleston, South Caroline needs $2 billion to reduce flooding that occurs regularly during high tides. The Houston, Texas area needs $30 billion to provide protection against a 100-year flood. Hurricane Harvey caused $125 billion in damages in Texas in 2017. New York City is considering a $10 billion storm surge barrier and floodgates to shield parts of the city from rising waters.

Florida faces the greatest exposure to flooding with an estimated $76 billion in costs to address some of its problems.

At the federal level, multiple agencies represent potential funding sources, but none offer the kind of money required to address the need. This places a heavy burden on state and local governments. Various states have passed legislation related to shoreline resiliency and flood abatement, but relatively little funding has been approved. Some bond measures have passed, but the totals are small compared with what is needed.

Educating people about the costs of not doing anything or not doing enough soon enough is essential. As Hurricane Katrina demonstrated, not spending a large amount of money on resilience can result in having to spend a colossal amount of money on recovery.

**********

Web Links

Who Will Pay for the Huge Costs of Holding Back Rising Seas?

Photo, posted December 26, 2013, courtesy of Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

New York Offshore Wind

September 18, 2019 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

New York has passed ambitious legislation to reduce the carbon emissions that cause climate change, but the state needs to start taking action to make those reductions possible. One such action it has taken is an agreement that will enable the construction of two large offshore wind projects.

The projects are to be built off the coast of Long Island. One will be 14 miles south of Jones Beach and the other 30 miles north of Montauk. The wind farms will be built by a division of Equinor, a major Danish energy company, and a joint venture between Orsted, another Danish company, and Eversource Energy, an American firm.

The two New York wind farms are expected to be operational within the next five years and have the capacity to produce 1,700 megawatts of electricity. That is about 20% of Governor Andrew Cuomo’s overall goal for offshore wind.

Wind farms are a major energy source in the United States, now providing about 7% of the country’s electricity. That compares with only 2% in 2010. But nearly all American wind turbines are on land. There is only one small offshore wind farm in the US off the coast of Rhode Island. Things are very different in Europe. For example, Britain expects to get 10% of its electricity from offshore wind next year, which is up from less than 1% in 2010.

Developers of offshore wind farms have struggled to gain a foothold in the US. Some projects have foundered because of cost issues, but others have faced opposition from politicians and coastal-property owners. But assuming the New York wind projects clear permitting and environmental hurdles, offshore wind may finally be on the move in the US.

**********

Web Links

New York Awards Offshore Wind Contracts in Bid to Reduce Emissions

Photo, posted May 22, 2007, courtesy of Flickr.

Earth Wise is a production of WAMC Northeast Public Radio.

Climate Change And Insurance

May 17, 2019 By EarthWise Leave a Comment

While there are still some people who remain dubious about the reality of climate change, insurance companies are not among them. And, in fact, insurers are warning that climate change could make coverage for ordinary people unaffordable.

Munich Reinsurance, the world’s largest reinsurance firm, blamed global warming for $24 billion in losses from California’s recent wildfires. Such costs could soon be widely felt as premium rises are already under discussion with insurance companies having clients in vulnerable parts of the state.

With the risk from wildfires, flooding, storms and hail increasing, the only sustainable option for the insurance industry is to adjust risk prices accordingly. Ultimately, this may become a social issue. Affordability of insurance is critical because if rates go up too much, many people on low and average incomes in some regions may no longer be able to buy insurance.

The great majority of California’s 20 worst forest fires since the 1930’s has occurred since the year 2000 driven by abnormally high summer temperatures and persistent drought. The reinsurance giant analyzed decades of data with climate models and concluded that the fires are likely driven by climate change.

It isn’t just wildfires. Insurance premiums are also being adjusted in regions facing an increased threat from severe convective storms whose energy and severity are driven by global warming. These include parts of Germany, Austria, France, southwest Italy, and the U.S. Midwest.

Linking extreme weather events to climate change is a bit like attributing the performance of a steroid-using athlete to drug use. The connections are clearer in patterns than in individual disasters. But the pattern these days is pretty clear.

**********