rss
7

Solar, wind could replace all fossil fuels in Australia by 2040

Print Friendly

Solar and wind energy could replace all fossil fuels in Australia by 2040 if their recent rate of deployment is maintained and slightly increased over the next 27 years – delivering the country with a 100% renewable electricity grid “by default” as early as 2040.

The stunning conclusions come from research from Andrew Blakers, the director of the Australian National University’s Centre for Sustainable Energy Systems. It notes that nearly all new electricity generation capacity in recent years has been wind and solar photovoltaics (PV), and demand has also ben falling since 2008.

Blakers says that if this situation continues then Australia will achieve renewable electricity system by 2040, as existing fossil fuel power stations retire at the end of their service lives and are replaced with renewables.

And the cost will be no greater than having fossil fuels because, as Bloomberg New Energy Finance notes, wind is already cheaper than new coal or gas-fired generation and solar soon will be. These are the critical points – because renewables are often painted as expensive when compared to fully-depreciated, 40 years fossil fuel plants. But not compared with the new capacity required to replace ageing fossil fuel fleet.

Blakers says his scenario works even using the more conservative technology cost forecasts prepared by the Bureau of Resource and Energy Economics. These forecasts are being updated, but they came to similar conclusions as BNEF on technology cost trends, just not quite as quickly.

The 100% by 2040 scenario is probably not that much different in scope to current trends. Australia was sitting at around 10 per cent renewables in 2010, and will probably end up with at least 25 per cent by 2020, given current trends on rooftop solar and the fixed 41,000GWh target for large scale renewables.

BNEF this week suggested that could jump to 46% by 2030 as wind and solar replace retiring fossil fuel plant, and the rate of those retirements would likely increase in the following decade. Some retirements could be accelerated as inflexible fossil fuel generation found itself squeezed out of the market by renewables and the emergence of storage options.

The scenario painted by Blakers includes:

  • The currently-declining consumption of electricity stabilises at 2013 levels
  • New capacity to replace retiring fossil fuel power stations at end of system life is exclusively wind and solar i.e. no new gas or coal plant.
  • All existing fossil fuel power stations have retired by 2040
  • Existing hydro and other renewables is maintained but not increased
  • Capacity factors typical of good sites are achieved for wind (35%) and solar (20%). System lifetimes of 30 years are assumed.
  • Wind and PV installation rates of 1 gigawatt (GW) per year each are sufficient to meet the Government’s 2020 renewable energy target. Note that about 1 GW of PV was installed in 2012 and about 1 GW of wind will be installed in 2013.
  • In order to reach 100% renewables by 2040 the following installation rates are needed:
    • Wind: 1 GW per year until 2040; AND
    • Solar: 1 GW per year until 2020, then growing by 10% per year thereafter.

Blakers notes that South Australia already gets 29% of its electricity from wind and PV, and Tasmania gets almost all of its from hydro. ACT plans to get to 90% renewables by 2020.

This graph shows the rate of deployment out to 2040, with solar increasing by 10 per cent per year from 2020.

Screen Shot 2013-07-25 at 11.46.58 PM

While this shows total generating capacity as it grows – in the case of wind and solar – and shrinks in the case of fossil fuels. Note the accelerated decline after 2030.

Screen Shot 2013-07-25 at 11.46.48 PM

 

 

 

RenewEconomy Free Daily Newsletter

Share this:

  • Sid Abma

    While this is all being put into place, lets use Australia’s next best energy source to provide for the country ~ Natural Gas.
    The Solar and Wind are technologies and it’s producing power is coming. For now Australia needs electricity. Natural Gas?

    Is that the next best option? What is the next option?

    Coal power plants? Oil power plants?
    Where are the emission rates from these power plants?

    Where are America’s goals to reduce Global Warming?

    What Energy Source Consumed Efficiently can do more to reduce:
    1) Global Warming?
    2) CO2 Emissions?

    • Bob_Wallace

      What Energy Source Consumed Efficiently can do more to reduce:
      1) Global Warming?
      2) CO2 Emissions?

      Certainly not natural gas or any other fossil fuel.

      We may be forced to use some NG as a placeholder for more affordable storage. Hopefully we will get some better storage options soon so that we can leave that nasty crap underground, along with coal, where it belongs.

      Oh, to answer your question – wind, solar, geothermal, hydro, tidal, wave, biomass and biogas. Sources. We’ve got lots of great sources.

      • Sid Abma

        Natural gas is used for a lot more than producing electricity. Eventually wind and solar will replace natural gas and be able to produce enough electricity. We still need steel and plastics and food and beverages and pharmaceuticals and……………………………………and this takes a lot of heat energy.

        Lets be glad that we have a lot of natural gas, otherwise the option is oil or coal.

        • Bob_Wallace

          We’re already making plastics from biological feedstock.

          We’re making heat with concentrated solar and pulling it from the ground with geothermal wells.

          We can make liquid fuels using atmospheric carbon. We don’t need to de-sequester more carbon.

          You present a dishonest choice of natural gas, coal or oil. We have the option of using none of those.

          • Sid Abma

            Make it happen. I leave you in charge.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Jackson/1469167177 Michael Jackson

    As we’re discovering in the U.S., natural gas has had a devastating impact on freshwater supplies, with increasing risk over time. Given Australia’s drought conditions, taking the risk of rendering increasingly scarce freshwater undrinkable is a really bad idea. Not worth the risk in your beautiful country. Then there are the GHG emissions and air pollution…watch Gasland 1 & 2 (both freely available on YouTube).

  • ralfyman

    What about petrochemicals?