Tech | December 01, 2011 | 40 comments

One Third of World’s Energy Could Be Solar by 2060, Predicts Historically Conservative IEA

source: http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/12/01/379550/one-third-world-energy-solar-2060-iea/

Image
JanforGore
The International Energy Agency is notoriously conservative on projections for renewable energy. The agency has embraced the need for more clean electricity and fuels to address climate change and peak oil, but its outlook for the future is usually far more conservative than how reality plays out.

So when an official at the IEA says we could get up to one third of our global energy supply from solar photovoltaics, concentrating solar power, and solar hot water by 2060, that’s a fairly big piece of news. But even that projection may be conservative.

Speaking to Bloomberg News, the head of IEA’s renewable energy unit explained said he thought the target is feasible:

“The strength of solar is the incredible variety and flexibility of applications, from small scale to big scale,” Paolo Frankl, the agency’s head of renewable energy, said in a telephone interview yesterday.

Economic activity will shift toward the sunnier zones around the equator by 2050, making solar energy a viable power source for most of the global economy, the report said. Those regions will be home to almost 80 percent of the human race by the middle of the century, compared with about 70 percent today, and their energy needs will be higher as living standards in countries such as Brazil and India approach those of the U.S. and Europe.

The IEA is clearly responding to the fast-changing world of solar energy. It has released a new publication, Solar Energy Perspectives, that mirrors one of its flagship research products, Energy Technology Perspectives.

But in its recent World Energy Outlook, IEA barely gave solar much attention. The organization predicted fairly modest growth in the solar PV and CSP sector through 2035, with a projection that it would only make up 4.5% of electricity supply.

While solar only makes up a fraction of the global electricity supply today, the downward cost curve of technologies is pushing it toward a breaking point. By sometime in 2012, the installed cost of a crystalline-silicon solar PV system over 1 MW in the U.S. could dip to around $2.50 a watt. At around 2$ a watt we could cost-competitively meet around 30% of global electricity supply, says solar expert and Carbon War Room CEO Jigar Shah.

Shah believes solar can reach a 5% penetration level in the U.S. by 2020, with cost reductions coming mostly from innovations in hardware and installation, not dramatic improvements in the lab.

While the IEA is far less ambitious in its projections, the agency seems to agree that a “systems-based approach” to manufacturing and installation will be the key driver to reaching high penetration levels of different solar technologies. And rather than focus on specific subsidies for solar in the long-term, IEA says the most important incentive will be a price on carbon.

Solar is clearly proving itself without a price on carbon. With an effective pricing regime in place, a 30% penetration would almost certainly be low.

More at the link
  1. groups:
    Tech,   Green,   Earth and Science,   Earth Care,   1 more
  2. tags:
    Environment,  Earth,  Future,  Renewable Energy,  4 more
  3.     
    |

40 comments // One Third of World’s Energy Could Be Solar by 2060, Predicts Historically Conservative IEA

  • covelogibbs
  • Gravity_Man
    • 0
      Gravity_Man  
    • Image

    • This world isn't happy with fast answers. It has to struggle against the driving rain for years & DECADES so they can say WE DID IT, not "God" made the principles for my wondrous engine designs to work (Tesla's, Sweet's, and so on).

      Any man who solves the problem using principles established during Creation gets bypassed, artificially proving there is no God who looked out for us during the Creative Days... looking forward to the day we would need His Engines.

      This attempt to keep God locked in a closet will not work out well. No one likes being locked in a closet. The time for Him to allow them to do this is drawing to an end. If we however were to join God in the closet things would be going a great deal more pleasantly.

      Jesus is on the way.

      World Energy solved without Crude Oil => http://current.com/technology/92858210_ocean-energy-fishing-8-tons-per-square-in...

      World Engine Fuel solved without Crude Oil => http://current.com/green/93390416_fuel-pumps-whatre-those-daddy-child-we-stopped...

      Crude Oil combustion engines were never needed. Mankind has been struggling, & struggling, & struggling, surrounded by all manner of zero-pollution engine systems even more than the two above, SINCE FOREVER. Outside the garden we struggled against a driving rain biting our skin WHEN IN FACT THERE WAS NO DRIVING RAIN.

    • 6 months ago
  • covelogibbs
  • artemis6
  • Ambill94
  • JustZ
    • 0
      JustZ  

    • Wow; now just throw in a kick to the head and I'm there! This is ridiculous.

      In 50 years, there better be many more on solar than one third or boats will replace cars for commuting after the sea level rises due to the remaining two thirds continuing to suck on fossil fuel's toxic tit.

    • 6 months ago
  • AreOh
    • +2
      AreOh  

    • Declarations like this annoy me. We put a man on the moon 40 years ago, but we're 40+ years away from making solar energy our staple, and that is supposed to make us happy. To put it mildly, it doesn't.

      Let's be honest. The only reason why this hasn't happened is because their are groups of people that do not want it to happen. And that's it.

      Silly humans.

    • 6 months ago
  • JustZ
    • 0
      JustZ  
    • AreOh:

      Touche'! Me too. We can do soooooooooooo much better- soooooo much sooner, if the oil pimps could just be put out of business for good.

      BUT you protest, what about all the jobs lost when there's no use for fossil fuels any longer? Well, it comes down to priorities. Either your industry converts to renewable energy OR it's time for you all to find something else to do for a living because, unless you know something we don't... this is the only place any of us have to live and it's being poisoned by your products.

    • 6 months ago
  • Gravity_Man
    • 0
      Gravity_Man  
    • JustZ:

      If it wasn't for Earth's Moon being locked in Earth orbit they have a super powerful propulsion engine that makes the Moon a dandy traveling gypsies spaceship. Little pushes over to Mars... nah. Wow, if they could only heat the earth enough to make the nuclear pile core explode... nah.

      HAHAHAHAHAHA

    • 6 months ago
  • squarethecircle
    • +1
      squarethecircle  

    • how we apply tech has to be addressed as well. As we wake up to realize the abundance of energy around us we realize also that as said resource is something everyone has need of, it can be gathered in multiple ways and need not be used as a form of control ever again.

      localized diversity can go hand in hand with "we are all in it together"...time to start living smarter, better lives

    • 6 months ago
  • Gravity_Man
  • squarethecircle
  • Gravity_Man
    • +1
      Gravity_Man  
    • squarethecircle:

      Water holds more heat than solid concrete. Bet ya din't know that one. If you lay a sheet of black plastic on top a pool of water it makes an awesome Solar~Attracting & Energy storage medium. The BTU's transfer via direct contact into the water.

      Run a few air pipes around in the water you have an air blast generator. I made one once (1981) but it was too small, and the water got algae in it. Ya need to add something toxic, like a bit of antifreeze. Back then relatives looked at me like hmm, like now, Crazy! HAHAHA

      Not a single relative had the brains God gave a salamander to realize if they joined me we'd own the world today. You can't sell food to a full customer. People who have a job are blinded by the job. Ya hafta find people who are HUNGRY.

    • 6 months ago
  • squarethecircle
  • DanCastro
    • +2
      DanCastro  

    • If it is now possible to drive from SF to LA, why so long? I'I'll bet if we took the oil subsidy money & put it info green, it cold b much sooner!

    • 6 months ago
  • squarethecircle
  • entropyincarnate
  • infiniteblackbox
  • JanforGore
    • +1
      JanforGore  
    • infiniteblackbox:

      CalgarC - we can't wait that long for just 1/3 of the world to get there... we need all of us to get there and to get there sooner

      JanforGore - I agree, and the timeframe is about five years. And we could do it if we really wanted to.

      I think if you read our responses you would know how we feel. And to add to your response, if people would stop being gluttonous about their consumption we might put a dent in the balance sheets of oil companies. And if more people were vocal about demanding solutions to climate change instead of treating it as a non issue, we may have gotten to the point we needed to get to twenty years ago.

    • 6 months ago
  • Gravity_Man
  • infiniteblackbox
    • 0
      infiniteblackbox  
    • JanforGore:

      sry
      I have unconsciously conditioned myself not to read the responses in these threads because they are usually inane diatribe.
      Arrogant.
      I know.
      I should have known better with one of your threads.
      I remember clearly solar being touted in the 70s as a clean and viable energy source.
      Bureaucracy and shear greed has kept it down. We should have reached this milestone in the 90s.
      Americans will not give up their oil.
      It is too easy.

    • 6 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • infiniteblackbox:

      No problem. I actually posted this because the IEA is usually conservative in their projections, so for them to even state this should be noticed. They also just had a report published stating we really only have five years to avoid irreversible climate change. I heartily agree that we need a WW2 effort regarding renewable energy now. I keep thinking how far we could have advanced had we started this even twenty years ago and it is truly frustrating. The stranglehold oil has on every aspect of this society is truly dangerous to our existence. We have to diversify based on that alone even if you ( in general) don't believe in climate change. It's just the obvious next rung on the ladder of evolution to me.

    • 6 months ago
  • infiniteblackbox
    • +1
      infiniteblackbox  
    • Image
    • JanforGore:

      WW2 effort.
      Excellent correlation!
      You would think people would see the depletion of our life sustaining resources and the eminent destruction of our environment much more of a threat to our existence than the Nazi Empire.
      Wonder if there is a way to put an evil human face on those two threats?

    • 6 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • infiniteblackbox:

      Yes, well funny how certain people will mobilize in an instant to support a war effort, but when it comes to saving the sustainability of this planet..... And you put a very good face to the evil that pervades. Heartless ba8sta8d.

    • 6 months ago
  • CalgarC
    • +4
      CalgarC  

    • we can't wait that long for just 1/3 of the world to get there... we need all of us to get there and to get there sooner

    • 6 months ago
  • JanforGore
  • CalgarC
  • Gravity_Man
    • 0
      Gravity_Man  
    • CalgarC:

      You have to aim for the homes, domicile saturation from smaller solar units easily packaged, shipped & setup, aka TURNKEY.

      Take care of the Smallest Common Denominator, Family Units. Everything above that can plod along at whatever snail speed they wish.

      The saucer section needs to separate, carrying the People.

    • 6 months ago
  • CreditFigaro
    • 0
      CreditFigaro  

    • Solar is good stuff. Nuclear is good stuff. Hydro is good stuff. Geothermal has HUGE potential as drilling technologies improve. Fusion... well, I could only wish.

    • 6 months ago
  • JanforGore
  • covelogibbs
  • percipi224
  • JanforGore
    • +3
      JanforGore  
    • percipi224:

      It looks promising. I think I posted about Colorado and their solar farms a while ago, and other states are doing that as well. Unfortunately again, this is what we don't see in the media with the proliferation of oil, natural gas and coal ads.

    • 6 months ago
  • percipi224
    • +2
      percipi224  

    • i stand corrected more like 3.50 a watt, but it takes at least a 10,000 watt system to make it worth it. which is around 30,000 smackers. Colorado Springs has the states first solar garden. You can buy a panel at 550. and get a credit on your electric bill. thats cool. i will try to find that.

    • 6 months ago
  • percipi224
    • +1
      percipi224  

    • btw Jan, you may not have seen my submition regarding the Keystone Pipeline. It is dead. They won't build it. How do I know? My father in law was an exec for Phillips. He retired 10 years ago and has been doing consulting here and there. Recently he was hired by the Canadian co. to do land work from Cushing to Houston. They let him go after the Pres. delayed the pipeline. They bought an existing pipeline from Phillips-Conoco. The country is a maze of old pipelines, all leaking and breaking. So now we have to deal with the fracking gas they need to extract the tar sands oil. If we can curtail the fracking then we can slow them down, but it seems we can't stop the tar sands from being extracted and killing the planet. Speaking of 1% that is about all the folks who are fighting for the planet out of 7 billion.

    • 6 months ago
  • JanforGore
  • JanforGore
  • percipi224
    • 0
      percipi224  

    • two things, 1. the cost per watt is way off, by about 20.00 dollars at this point. And 2. the heavy metals and energy that goes into making the things are a toxic problem. Until you and I can put solar on our roofs for the same cost as shingles, or cars and roads have solar in them and on them? Wind is one of the better ways to make alternate energy. Given the article earlier about Texas is Hell, that would be a great place for solar farms. Another problem is the grid. Its way antique and the solar farms need to be where the grid ain't. I say the IEA is still not the best at determining these things as the author said.

    • 6 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • +3
      JanforGore  

    • "Solar is clearly proving itself without a price on carbon." Imagine humans actually having enough moral will to do what is necessary to transition to a clean energy future. Then we wouldn't have to hear the constant whining of polluters and their minions over having to actually be accountable for using the atmosphere as an open sewer.

    • 6 months ago
  • JanforGore
more from Tech:
from the community

top videos