Slashdot Mirror
Renewable Energy Policies Actually Work (arstechnica.com)
Renewable energy use and reduced energy use overall have helped carbon emissions remain flat or below average as the global economy continued to grow over the years. But, as new research has found, government policy also appears to play a large role. Slashdot reader AmiMoJo shares a report from Ars Technica: The researchers started by identifying countries that show a "peak and decline" pattern of carbon emissions since the 1990s. They came up with 18, all but one of them in Europe -- the exception is the United States. For comparison, they created two different control groups of 30 countries, neither of which has seen emissions decline. One group saw high GDP growth, while the second saw moderate economic growth; in the past, these would have been associated with corresponding changes in emissions. Within each country, the researchers looked into whether there were government energy policies that could influence the trajectory of emissions. They also examined four items that could drive changes in emissions: total energy use, share of energy provided by fossil fuels, the carbon intensity of the overall energy mix, and efficiency (as measured by energy losses during use). On average, emissions in the decline group dropped by 2.4 percent over the decade between 2005 and 2015.
Half of this drop came from lowering the percentage of fossil fuels used, with renewables making a large contribution; another 35 percent came from a drop in energy use. But the most significant factor varied from country to country. Austria, Finland, and Sweden saw a drop in the share of fossil fuels within their energy mix. In contrast, a drop in total energy use was the biggest factor for France, Ireland, the Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom. The U.S. was an odd one out, with all four possible factors playing significant roles in causing emissions to drop. For the two control groups, however, there was a single dominant factor: total energy use counted for 75 and 80 percent of the change in the low- and high-economic growth groups, respectively. But there was considerably more variability in the low-economic growth group. All of the high-growth group saw increased energy use contribute 60 percent of the growth in emissions or more. In contrast, some of the low-growth group actually saw their energy use drop. So why are some countries so successful at dropping their emissions? Part of it is likely to be economic growth, but the biggest reason may have to do with government policies. "By 2015, the countries in the group that saw declining emissions had an average of 35 policies that promoted renewable energy and another 23 that promoted energy efficiency," reports Ars Technica. "Both of those numbers are significantly higher than the averages for the control groups. And there's evidence that these policies are effective. The number of pro-efficiency policies correlated with the drop in energy use, while the number of renewable policies correlated with the drop in the share of fossil fuels."
Half of this drop came from lowering the percentage of fossil fuels used, with renewables making a large contribution; another 35 percent came from a drop in energy use. But the most significant factor varied from country to country. Austria, Finland, and Sweden saw a drop in the share of fossil fuels within their energy mix. In contrast, a drop in total energy use was the biggest factor for France, Ireland, the Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom. The U.S. was an odd one out, with all four possible factors playing significant roles in causing emissions to drop. For the two control groups, however, there was a single dominant factor: total energy use counted for 75 and 80 percent of the change in the low- and high-economic growth groups, respectively. But there was considerably more variability in the low-economic growth group. All of the high-growth group saw increased energy use contribute 60 percent of the growth in emissions or more. In contrast, some of the low-growth group actually saw their energy use drop. So why are some countries so successful at dropping their emissions? Part of it is likely to be economic growth, but the biggest reason may have to do with government policies. "By 2015, the countries in the group that saw declining emissions had an average of 35 policies that promoted renewable energy and another 23 that promoted energy efficiency," reports Ars Technica. "Both of those numbers are significantly higher than the averages for the control groups. And there's evidence that these policies are effective. The number of pro-efficiency policies correlated with the drop in energy use, while the number of renewable policies correlated with the drop in the share of fossil fuels."
Seems like a lot of effort creating specific conditions to try and make leftist policies look effective... why would anyone doubt the findings.
Really what is up with this endless damn stream of propaganda here on slashdot.
Apparently a site that was originally focused on computer tech and Linux in particular, has morphed into the hobby horse of people in a doomsday cult.
I live in South Australia and buy power from the grid, and I think I would have noticed if this were true as presented here.
The referenced article appears to refer to wholesale spot prices - the electricity market in Australia is, through an artificial market created in the wake of privatization, structured as wholesale provider (usually, generators) selling to retail entities, that then sell power to end users. Consumers sign up for an "agreed tariff" contract arrangement with a pricing structure at least as opaque as any mobile phone regime, and retailers buy off the wholesalers at spot prices that vary more or less minute by minute, depending on demand. Those wholesale prices do routinely spike and crash over the course of a day - especially during summer - as factories start up and shut down, people turn their air conditioners on and off, and so on. It doesn't help that power is distributed across different timezones - SA users routinely use power generated in Victoria, and vice versa, which itself creates artificially high peaks and troughs.
It also doesn't help that politics gets involved - most providers see the writing on the wall and are trying to transition away from coal-based generation, but with a major coal industry to support they've seen significant push-back from government, which last year proposed putting out to tender the construction of new coal-based generation, because private industry wasn't willing to undertake it in a free market.
Because stating that renewables are not currently competitive and sufficient is the exact same thing as writing them off. Try real arguments instead of hyperbole.
Really? https://www.bloomberg.com/news... ... that was three years ago and Bloomberg is hardly a bastion of tree hugging libtardism.