The Renewable Energy Fallacy

Abu Dhabi recently hosted the “World Future Energy Summit” held between January 16 till 19. The summit, according to the organisation, is “the world’s foremost annual meeting committed to advancing future energy, energy efficiency and clean technologies by engaging political, business, finance, academic and industry leaders to drive innovation, business and investment opportunities in response to the growing need for sustainable energy.”

Some of the statistics pertaining to the event are impressive: 26,391 attendees; 137 countries represented; 35 official delegations; 160 keynote and expert speakers; and 600 exhibiting companies from 38 countries. The latter number is interesting because it highlights the extent to which the issue of energy is deeply intertwined with business interests.

As is usual in such events renewable energy – so called because it relies on natural energy flows and sources in the environment, which, since they are continuously replenished, will never run out – occupies centre stage. It is a given that oil is a finite resource, and that the reliance on hydrocarbon sources of energy is not good for the planet. Thus renewable sources – solar and wind particularly – are our only hope from extinction.

This has become such a deeply held and entrenched belief that it is almost inconceivable that this can be criticized in any serious way. Yet, the UK based Adam Smith Institute – a highly respected think-tank – has done precisely that. It published a report titled “Renewable energy: Vision or mirage?” In it the authors of this report make quite a compelling case defying conventional wisdom.

Given the institute’s locale the focus is on UK based policies but it is of relevance for other countries as well. The report argues that the UK government’s focus on renewable energy sources is “misguided.” Moreover, the UK’s plans for renewables are “unrealistic, and these technologies cannot provide the secure energy supply the country needs.” It is observed that a continuation of present policies will lead to what the authors describe as an “energy crisis” by the middle of this decade.

They base their conclusions on a number of key points, which are detailed and carefully researched in the 134-page report.

First, wind and solar power do little to reduce carbon emissions, as they need large-scale back up generating capacity to compensate for their intermittency (not being continuously available).

Second, intermittency means that renewable technologies are incapable of making a major contribution to energy security.

It is also noted that the Renewable Energy Roadmap for 2020 (UK) is hugely overambitious. Renewable energy generation is currently 28 per cent below its already reduced target. Subsidising renewable energy also comes at a cost to consumers who pay for it through higher electricity prices. Based on these observations, nuclear and gas are the most viable energy sources to avoid a capacity crisis in the near future.

So what about the harbingers of a better and cleaner future such as wind farms, those giant propeller shaped turbines. As the report notes to achieve current targets for wind turbines for 2020, almost 5 wind turbines must be installed every working day, with the majority of them offshore, which seems unrealistic. Moreover irrespective of how much wind capacity is added, there is no way of storing the energy long enough to avoid the need for backup generators. Additionally, the operational life for wind turbines is just 20 years. This is much shorter than for coal, gas or nuclear and is another factor making wind power an expensive option. Thus wind power is “inefficient” and is not “as green” as is commonly thought.

The same criticism is also directed at solar energy given its high cost, the requirement for a large land area making them difficult to build, and of course the UK’s high latitude and lack of sufficient sun exposure. Within desert climates the latter is obviously not a significant factor, nor the existence of plenty of land to build solar farms.

The report attributes the focus on renewable energy as being primarily an expression of the power of the ‘green lobby’, environmentalists and the like, who are pressuring governments into accepting their call for investment in such technologies at face value without questioning of any kind.

These are sobering issues and should be debated at length. Clearly more work needs to be done with respect to preserving our environment, searching for alternative energy sources and promoting energy conservation. Yet as the Adam Smith report suggests one needs to question what is referred to as ‘received wisdom’ – otherwise we may end up wasting valuable resources.

Email the writer: