US renewable energy plan 'shortsighted'

US renewable energy plan 'shortsighted'

Shortsighted and misguided. That's what a study by MIT researcher Michael Hogan makes of the aggressive and well-intentioned renewable energy goals set by 26 US states.

In the absence of a strong national plan on how to wean the country from fossil fuels, individual states have enacted their own renewable portfolio standards (RPS) that require electric utilities to obtain a certain percentage of their power from renewable sources by a certain date. For example, Colorado and New Mexico have both mandated that 20% of their electric supply should be renewables sourced by 2020.

But, until now, it seems nobody has examined these goals to see if they really offer the best solution.

The problem, Hogan argues in his recent master's thesis is that these short-term requirements promote terrestrial wind farms, a mature technology, at the exclusion of less mature technologies such as solar, offshore wind, and geothermal approaches.

By not encouraging such diverse energy sources, states are delaying the development of a wider portfolio of renewables that could provide greater and more stable power supplies in the long run.

"The short-term inducements are causing us to choose easy technology choices that may not be the best way to switch long-term to renewable energy," says Hogan's professor, Lawrence Susskind.

A key problem with current inducements is that goals are set for total renewable energy production over the course of a year, with no premium on when the energy is produced. Wind turbines might produce a lot of power overall, but their intermittent nature means coal power plants are still needed no matter how many turbines are installed.

A third of the US's C02 emissions come from its 620 coal-fired plants and unless they can be replaced by renewables, Hogan writes, "nothing else matters."

Stable base-load renewable energy is, of course, a holy grail that scores of engineers are working to develop.
Hogan's answer is to mandate that certain percentages of electricity are generated by specific types of renewables in different regions, such as offshore wind in the northeast where breezes are constant, and solar thermal with thermal storage in the sunnier southwest.

While I think he's right on in pointing out the error of current goals, I fear mandating certain technologies that still aren't proven could also backfire if they don't pan out.

Susskind, for his part, says its time for federal leadership to whip the US renewable policies into shape.

"26 states is laudable, but it should be all states, and it should be long term," he says.

Phil McKenna, New Scientist contributor