Is it feasible to replace fossil fuel with renewable Energy 100 percent?
Name
Institutional affiliation
Contents
Tables of Figures
Executive summary
The purpose of this project is to determine the feasibility of replacing fossil fuel with renewable Energy 100 percent. Recently, there have been significant concerns regarding the negative impacts of fossil fuels on the environment. The heavy usage of fossil fuels has been known to cause global warming and many health issues. Consequently, several environmental groups globally have endorsed 100 percent clean and renewable energy, such as solar energy, wind energy, geothermal, and hydroelectric. This recommendation seeks to eliminate the problem caused by fossil fuels, which include oil, coal, and natural gases. However, while renewable energy technology is environmentally friendly, it may be difficult to replace fossil fuels 100 percent with current heavy dependence on fossil fuels. The feasibility study will be conducted using secondary data sources. The information from the past studies which will be obtained from peer-reviewed resources. Changing to renewable Energy 100 percent may be a good move; however, the costs involved are enormous. For instance, this transition will require electrification of the transport system. With the current status globally, this may be impossible because the costs involved in electrifying the passenger rail system alone is very high. Moreover, the geographical space required to accommodate the production of renewable energy is also huge. Based on the feasibility criteria, which are: ecological, social, and economical, the report concludes that it may be challenging to ensure a 100 percent transition. This is because the production of renewable energy itself will require the use of fossil fuel and massive usage of natural resources, which may create other environmental issues
Introduction
Background
Due to the negative impacts of fossil fuels on the environment over the past decades, various environmental groups globally have recommended a 100 percent shift to renewable energy. This means the total elimination of fossil fuels as sources of energy. In the year 2014, Western Europe invested hugely on renewable energy in an attempt to replace fossil fuels. It was expected that by the end of the same year, the renewable energy generating capacity would be 216 GW (Lyman, 2016). This was about 22 percent of the country’s energy capacity. However, the actual energy output for that year was only 3.8 percent of the entire country’s energy requirements (Lyman, 2016). This was attributed to the intermitted nature of the production of clean energy. The production costs for renewable energy was also enormous. For instance, the cost of clean energy production was 30 times the production of fossil fuels (Lyman, 2016).
The move towards renewable is positive; however, we cannot hide the fact that the energy share of fossil fuels in the global mix is more than 82 percent based on the 2013 World Energy Outlook report. This is the same amount of fossil fuel energy production for the past 25 years. In the year 2035, it is expected that the shift to renewable energy will only reduce fossil fuel energy production to 75 percent (Wharton University of Pennsylvania, 2015).
The current energy sector in countries such as Canada, the US, and even globally heavily relies on fossil fuels. The current renewable energy sources also make up only a third of the global energy requirements. The table below shows the percentage of the renewable and non-renewable used in the US (figure1).
In the table, it is essential to note that the percentage of fossil fuel energy used is about 81.8 percent of the total energy. In terms of electricity generation, fossil fuel produced about 65.8 percent in the year 2013 compared to electricity generated by renewable energy sources (Lyman, 2016). The graph below shows the comparison of electricity produced by both non-renewable and clean energy.
Advocated plan
Currently, it is difficult to achieve the 100 percent shift to renewable energy globally. The advocated plan is to reduce the use of fossil fuels by replacing them with renewable energy without negatively affecting the economy and social aspects (Wharton University of Pennsylvania, 2015). To make the shift feasible, the whole process should be broken down into stages using a systematic, planned approach. The plan should include the targeted boundaries and timeframes of what should be achieved with the specific boundaries. Otherwise, changing the whole process at once is a daunting target.
Reaching the 100 percent shift would involve developing renewable energy opportunities into plans (Frost, 2018). The opportunities can be divided into three major areas. The areas may be Reduce, produce, and Purchase. The division of these areas will make it easier for the nations to assess the capacity and the economic impacts of the actions implemented in each area. The reduction phase would involve looking for ways to reduce the energy demand in cost-effective ways, such as upgrading the technology and ensuring energy efficiency. Reducing the energy demand would make it easier to shift to an alternative energy source. The production phase would involve developing more renewable energy projects while considering energy demands. The purchase phase would involve buying energy from the accredited Green Energy producers. The implementation of this plan has helped in reducing the use of fossil fuel energies in developing nations such as the US and Canada (Lyman, 2016).
Method of Analysis
There have been various studies conducted to assess the feasibility of the 100 percent shift to renewable energy. For the method of analysis in this report, the study outcomes in the secondary sources were analyzed. This involves analyzing the study results in the peer-reviewed articles to find out what the researchers discovered regarding the feasibility of the 100 percent shift to renewable energy. The sources were obtained from the school library and the online platform and were published not more than five years ago to avoid using outdated information. Based on the studies conducted in the three secondary sources that were analyzed, it was discovered that although renewable energy is environmentally friendly, the 100 percent shift currently is not feasible. As such, there is a need for proper planning that will not cause more economic and environmental issues.
Feasibility Criteria
Carefully thought considerations were put on the table before deciding whether or not the proposal was feasible. It is worth noting that there is an increasing dependency on fossil fuel the world over, and getting to change the trends and statics would present a daunting task. Moreover, fossil fuels drive more than 60 percent of the world economy, with many businesses entirely directly relying on the consumption of fossil fuel. On the other hand, the benefits that come with the adoption of renewable energy are numerous, ranging from reduced carbon emission, alternative livelihood, and reduced global warming and climate change. However, the realization of a 100 percent transition to renewable energy may not come easy. Therefore, careful analysis of the tradeoffs needs to ensure gradually transition while ensuring a few steps and progress are achieved. In a nutshell, some of the reasons include fragmentation of policy-making bodies, lack of commitment by multinationals to adopt renewable energy and penetrability of innovation. Positively, environmentalists and ecologists have assisted in creating the narrative of a better world with the transition to renewable energy. This proposal has looked into multi-dimensional and cross-cutting tradeoffs, including political will, technological feasibility, social aspects of the renewables, economic factors, among many considerations.
Technological feasibility
Science and technology have transformed the world and economy by offering a formidable solution to very persistent problems. In particular, science and technology have provided practical solutions such as designing clean and efficient energy systems with minimal environmental impact—notable breakthrough innovation including electric trains, wind turbines, electric cars, and solar panels. In as much as science and technology have proved critical in the contemporary world, the rate of technology deployment and market penetrability of commercialization innovated products continues to be a major challenge towards realizing 100 % transition from fossil fuel to clean and renewable energy sources (Lyman, 2016). Interestingly, it is largely unknown to many audiences the vast scope of energy consumption in the world. According to Lyman (2016), obtaining one year the amount of energy held in a single cubic mile of oil, each year for next 50 years will warrant a whopping 32850 wind turbines, 52 nuclear power plants, 91 250 000 solar panels, 104 coal-fired plants, and 4 Three Georges Dams.
Consequently, unwavering commitment in terms of political support and finances will enable the scientific community and manufacturing sector to deliver the breakthrough in achieving 100% fossil fuel replacement. The trickledown effect of scientific discoveries to many parts of the world, especially the developing world, poses enormous hurdles in achieving 100% fossil fuel replacement (Lyman, 2016). The implication of replacing a single cubic mile of oil in a world so much dependent on oil will require real-time and up to date innovation that will penetrate the market and meet the needs of the people with reliability. Compliance with such a measure will not be possible any time soon, even with much confidence in science and technology. Moreover, to deploy such intervention would mean the allocation of more than 1. 1 trillion Euros. In Europe alone, such investments cost more than 1.1 trillion Euros (Lyman, 2016).
Political will
The costs associated with the transition to 100 % fossil fuel-free societies have far-reaching consequences on the implementation and the consent of the people. As earlier discussed, the costs of implement renewable energy come with heavy budgetary allocation running to tunes of trillions of Euros in the case of European Union nations(Lyman, 2016). According to Friends of science .com, it is highly unlikely that the government would wish to incur such humongous expenditure and overburden the taxpayers without experiencing strong opposition.
The advocacy position and prescription being proposed by environmentalists the world over not seem outrageous to the developing countries but near impossible. Most developing countries are still struggling to meet the basic needs of its population, let alone the energy needs with nearly a better chunk of the population barely in possession of most modern and efficient energy sources (Lyman, 2016). Most likely, the developed nations will take serious the provisions of International Energy Agency and WWW energy roadmaps because of their enormous wealth and well of citizens. The success of the 100% transition from the reliance on fossil fuel will mean that the developed nation will have to dig deeper into their pockets to fund such projects in the developing world. It will not seem prudent for the developing world to be forced on non-priority areas when they have not achieved much in other socio-economic spheres. When it comes to funding for renewable energy projects in developing nations, it is done on a very limited scale, thereby dimming the hopes of a fossil fuel-free future in the developing world.
Economic dimension
It is worth noting the influence of price factor when it comes to choosing between renewable energy and fossil fuel in the global market forces. In the past decade, the cost of crude oil has dwindled considerably with a retailing at nearly below 130 dollars to $40 a barrel (Lyman, 2016). In an economic environment where cheaper alternatives of energy are available will mean that business will go for opportunity cost and resorted to forms of energy that will give them maximum returns. The further drops in prices of coal and gas have made hydrocarbons have a competitive edge over the clean and renewable energy sources. Besides, the impacts of renewables on reliability and systems have been overlooked. It is not certain that the increase in renewable energy will directly translate to a proportional share of electricity generation. There exists a notion that renewables will benefit from the increased output of energy generation over time, and thus the unit price of energy will break even. The high cost of investment of renewable energy hopes to bank on the Levelized Cost of energy generation in comparison to alternative sources of energy ((Lyman, 2016).
Social dimension
Although renewable energy offers new jobs and environmentally friendly benefits such as reduced emission and disease-free environment, the externality of implementing and running of renewable energy plants is worth noting. These projects will create few jobs and change in lifestyle but, at the same time, will compete for space for housing and food production. Moreover, the geographical space required to accommodate the production of renewable energy is also huge. For example, it is expected that to accommodate about 46,480 solar PV plants alone; it will require about 650,720 square miles (Lyman, 2016). In the US, this is equivalent to the size of Texas, California, Arizona, and Nevada, all combined.
Moreover, the transition process may require the diversion to biofuels. This may put more pressure on food security, especially in developed nations. Since the demand for crops used in making biofuels will increase, this will cause a rise in the cost of food. Also, it may be difficult to ensure a 100 percent transition because of the production of renewable. A good number will get employment opportunities; however, unforeseen consequences of implementing such projects in developing nations will cause not only food insecurity but also spiraling effects such as informal settlements around the project, theft, and antisocial behavior.
Conclusion
After conducting the research, it is clear that replacing fossil fuel with renewable energy is currently not feasible. The high energy demand globally makes it challenging to make the 100 percent shift. The available renewable energy sources cannot meet the high energy demands. Moreover, it is not economically viable to replace fossil fuel 100 percent. This is attributed to the fact that the use of renewable energy in huge industries and transport sectors would be too costly and unaffordable to some individuals. Moreover, it may cause other environmental problems such as food shortage. This is especially true since some renewable energy, such as biofuel, will put pressure on crops. Moreover, the immediate shift will make many people lose employment.
Recommendations
Since the issues of fossil fuel are global problems, the immediate 100 percent replacement fossil fuel would not be feasible. As such, realistically, it would require long-term planning. For now, fossil fuel should be used since the percentage of renewable energy production is too small to meet the high demand globally. Even though the 100 percent shift would be beneficial to the environment, other sectors may be affected. As we slowly shift to clean energy, it is recommended to ensure that the economy is not negatively affected. This implies that there need to analyze the current and future energy demand to implement a sustainable measure as far as shifting to renewable energy is concerned. Moreover, there should be measures put in place to ensure that the shift does not cause more social and environmental issues such as food security in the future.
Glossary
Fossil fuel: A type of fuel that was formed from the remains of living organisms many years ago.
Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE): A measure of the cost of energy generation system over time per-unit price at which energy must be generated from a specific energy source.
Renewable Energy: Also called green energy is a form of energy obtained from non-depleted sources such as sun.
Frost, D. (2018). How to achieve 100 percent renewable energy. 100% Renewables.
https://100percentrenewables.com.au/publications/achieve-100-percent-renewable-energy/
Lyman, R. (2016). Why renewable energy cannot Replace Fossil Fuels by 2050. Friends of Science.https://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/Renewable-energy-cannot-replace-FF_Lyman.pdf
Wharton University of Pennsylvania. (2015). Can the world run on renewable energy? Wharton University of Pennsylvania. https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/can-the-world-run-on-renewable-energy/