Low oil prices aren’t working against solar (probably)

In the United States, reducing electricity probably won't lead to a significant reduction in direct oil consumption. Instead (in terms of fossil fuels) it is more likely to reduce your consumption of coal and natural gas.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


In the United States, reducing electricity probably won’t lead to a significant reduction in direct oil consumption. Instead (in terms of fossil fuels) it is more likely to reduce your consumption of coal and natural gas. In turn, low oil prices aren't necessarily working against solar deployment in a direct sense.

The United States uses just under 100 quadrillion british thermal units (quads) of energy each year. Of those 100 quads, almost 40% is used for electricity generation. However, less than 1% of that electricity is generated using petroleum. According to Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's latest "Estimated U.S. Energy Use" graphics and data from the Energy Information Administration, 39% of electricity in the United States is generated using coal. Another 46% is generated using natural gas (27%) and nuclear power (19%). Hydroelectric power (7%) and wind (4%) are also significant contributors.

However, while crude oil and solar power are not direct substitutes, the cost of oil is frequently viewed as an overall indicator of energy prices. In turn, when oil prices drop, solar's perceived value could as well. Furthermore, coal and natural gas are direct substitutes for solar power in power generation (ignoring environmental concerns, government policies, etc) and the cost of these two fossil fuels could be directly influenced by oil prices.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


But, moving forward, government policies and concerns regarding the environmental and health impacts of fossil fuel use as well as advances in energy storage technology development could still drive solar power forward in 2015. Recent data published by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) show that solar installations increase the value of homes across multiple markets in the US, providing another incentive for residential solar installations.

In her article on solar as an energy gamechanger, Plugged In's Sheril Kirshenbaum stated that "What happens over the coming decades? I suspect utility companies will have to change their business model–because solar is changing the game."

For now, one will have to wait to see what 2014 and 2015 data reveal.

Photo Credit: Graphic by LLNL, published 2014.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe