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.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe