Reality and renewable energy

There has been little to no critical assessments from the media of President Barack Obama’s pledge to “double this nation’s supply of renewable energy in the next three years.”

Now comes Robert Bryce who provides an incredible amount of context to what President Obama’s pledge really means in terms of energy independence.

The bottom line is that doubling of renewable energy in the next three years means nothing, according to Bryce, the managing editor of “Energy Tribune,” and author of “Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusions of ‘Energy Independence.’”

Bryce is not opposed to renewable energy. He has solar panels on his Texas home that generate about one-third of the power his family of five uses.

“But the problem of scale means that these hydrocarbons just won’t go away. Sure, Mr. Obama can double the output from solar and wind. And then double it again. And again. And again. But getting from 76,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day to something close to the 47.4 million barrels of oil equivalent per day needed to keep the U.S. economy running is going to take a long, long time. It would be refreshing if the president or perhaps a few of the Democrats on Capitol Hill would admit that fact,” Bryce notes in the article.

Following are key statements Bryce noted in his recent opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal:

• By promising to double our supply of renewables, Mr. Obama is only trying to keep pace with his predecessor. Yes, that’s right: From 2005 to 2007, the former Texas oil man oversaw a near-doubling of the electrical output from solar and wind power. And between 2007 and 2008, output from those sources grew by another 30%.

• The latest data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration show that total solar and wind output for 2008 will likely be about 45,493,000 megawatt-hours. That sounds significant until you consider this number: 4,118,198,000 megawatt-hours. That’s the total amount of electricity generated during the rolling 12-month period that ended last November. Solar and wind, in other words, produce about 1.1% of America’s total electricity consumption.

• For the sake of convenience, let’s convert the energy produced by U.S. wind and solar installations into oil equivalents. The conversion of electricity into oil terms is straightforward: one barrel of oil contains the energy equivalent of 1.64 megawatt-hours of electricity. Thus, 45,493,000 megawatt-hours divided by 1.64 megawatt-hours per barrel of oil equals 27.7 million barrels of oil equivalent from solar and wind for all of 2008. Now divide that 27.7 million barrels by 365 days and you find that solar and wind sources are providing the equivalent of 76,000 barrels of oil per day. America’s total primary energy use is about 47.4 million barrels of oil equivalent per day.

• Here’s another way to consider the 76,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day that come from solar and wind: It’s approximately equal to the raw energy output of one average-sized coal mine.

• During his address to Congress, Mr. Obama did not mention coal — the fuel that provides nearly a quarter of total primary energy and about half of America’s electricity — except to say that the U.S. should develop "clean coal."

• He didn’t mention nuclear power, only "nuclear proliferation," even though nuclear power is likely the best long-term solution to policy makers’ desire to cut U.S. carbon emissions.

• He didn’t mention natural gas, even though it provides about 25% of America’s total primary energy needs. Furthermore, the U.S. has huge quantities of gas, and it’s the only fuel source that can provide the stand-by generation capacity needed for wind and solar installations.