Global Energy Hunger Leaves Little Room to Displace Dirty Fuels

One of the promises of renewable energy is its ability to displace polluting fossil fuels, but is it fulfilling that pledge? David Biello reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Fifteen terawatts. That's 150 billion 100-watt light bulbs burning 24/7 for a year. Which is how much energy humanity now uses annually.

Most of it is dirty. Burning coal sullies the atmosphere and leaves toxic ash mountains. Natural gas is better for CO2 but not enough to halt global warming. So the hope of man who combat climate change is that alternative energy—electricity from sunshine, wind or low-carbon nuclear—can begin to replace fossil fuels.

And renewables like wind and solar have been booming. There are now nearly 240,000 megawatts worth of wind turbines globally, and the U.S. added nearly 2,000 megawatts of solar in 2011.


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.


Unfortunately, the additional renewables are not helping cut back on fossil fuels much. That's according to an analysis published in the journal Nature Climate Change. In fact, over the last 50 years, adding a unit of alternative energy to the grid displaced a mere one tenth of a unit of fossil fuel-fired power. And those alternative energy additions have been small.

In other words, to get away from fossil fuels requires not just expanding alternatives but also discouraging the use of coal, oil and natural gas. Carbon tax anyone?

—David Biello

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

 

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