RICHMOND, Va. – All 50 states and 139 countries can shift to 100 percent wind, water and solar power by 2050, according to a new analysis from Stanford University.

The research shows that, factoring in the health and climate-related costs of air pollution, the transition would save money and spark more employment.

Stanford engineering professor Mark Jacobson says when all costs are included, wind is now the cheapest energy source in the U.S. – even without subsidies – and solar is nearly as cheap.

Jacobson says that could mean faster economic growth.

"By transitioning, we'd create two million more jobs, both construction and permanent operation jobs, than we would lose," he maintains.

Critics of renewable energy argue it would raise the price of electricity. Jacobson says that's only true if you ignore the negative health impacts of air pollution.

According to the research, savings from reducing pollution could cover the cost of Virginia's transition in as little as four years.

Diplomats from around the world are in climate talks in Paris this week.

Electricity generated by an older coal plant can sell for as little as 3 cents per kilowatt-hour, in part because those facilities are paid for and have, until now, dodged some pollution rules.

But Jacobson says power from a newer coal plant with updated pollution controls is closer to 11 cents per kilowatt-hour, compared to 4 to 7 cents for wind or solar power.

Jacobson says there are some important costs that renewables avoid.

"Asthma, cardiovascular disease, respiratory illness,” he points out. “Climate problems getting worse, international conflicts growing because we still have fights over fuels that are overseas."

Jacobson says the analysis was done to show the transition is possible, both in terms of technology and the economy.

He adds people may not realize much of the change is already under way – in part, because using small scale methods like rooftop solar are cheaper than extending the power grid.

"Right now, there's a huge growth of electricity generation through solar, in Africa for example, where villages that previously had no access to energy now have access to photovoltaics," he stresses.




get more stories like this via email

Connecticut is the subject of an offshore wind study which aims to identify supply chain opportunities for the state and the Northeast region.

Connecticut is committed to creating 100% zero-carbon electricity by 2040. So far, it has procurements for 1.5 gigawatts of offshore wind. The state's first offshore wind farm will be operational next year.

Kristin Urbach, executive director of the Connecticut Wind Collaborative, said the study can explore many offshore wind priorities.

"To pinpoint areas where supply chains currently fall short to propose actionable items to strengthen it," Urbach explained. "Also to boost our local economic growth with the support of local manufacturers for its infrastructure development while promoting job creation and sustainable growth in Connecticut."

Urbach pointed out the state can fill supply chain gaps by utilizing the 12,000-person shipbuilding and repair industry. Some experts believe tapping into this workforce can build up offshore wind development.

Connecticut's offshore wind future is strained. Gov. Ned Lamont paused a multistate deal, delaying Connecticut's ability to reach its 2030 goals. The study's findings will be released next spring.

Similar studies are underway in Louisiana, Maine, and South Carolina. Like them, Connecticut can generate sizable amounts of offshore wind power.

Courtney Durham Shane, senior climate mitigation officer for the Pew Charitable Trusts, said offshore wind has quickly become a lucrative business nationwide.

"The United States has already seen $25 billion in offshore wind supply chain investment to date," Durham Shane noted. "Projections are showing that there could be upwards of $100 billion in private investment and nearly 50,000 jobs that are up for grabs domestically."

The New London State Pier terminal became the first East Coast offshore wind marshaling terminal with unobstructed ocean access. It can speed along the staging and assembly of several states' offshore wind projects. New York State's first offshore wind farm created 75 jobs at the facility, a number which is slated to double.

Major electric grid operator PJM Interconnection estimates it'll cost more than $14 billion to provide electricity for 2025-2026, up from $2.2 billion last year.

That price tag has advocates worried about rising utility bills and public health impacts, partly because of PJM's continued use of gas and coal.

Marcia Dinkins is the founder and executive director of the Black Appalachian Coalition and a member of Black Women for Change.

She said people in the company's 13-state region - including West Virginia and the Ohio Valley - have higher rates of cancer, developmental delays, premature birth, and death from the continued reliance on coal.

"We're seeing high rates of asthma and chronic illness," said Dinkins. "Families are already struggling with access to affordable health care."

PJM says increased usage, power plant shutdowns, and increased operation costs are all driving up the cost of electricity.

Mountain state ratepayers saw a 90% increase in average residential electricity bills between 2005 and 2020 - higher than all states except one, according to Conservation West Virginia.

Dinkins explained that grid operators use the capacity auction process to make sure there's enough power available to meet future demand.

"And so at the risk of the everyday citizen," said Dinkins, "this increase through their process becomes a burden to the people living in West Virginia or along the Ohio Valley."

A Pew Research Center survey from last year found 67% of Americans say the U.S. should prioritize developing alternative energy sources, such as solar and wind.

But just 31% say they are ready to phase out the use of oil, coal and natural gas completely.

Minnesota's solar energy outlook took a big step forward this week with a new project coming online, bringing the conversation back into focus about the state's carbon-free electricity goal.

Billed as one of the nation's largest solar operations, Xcel Energy said phase one of its Sherco facility is now delivering power to customers around the upper Midwest. Officials said it is generating more than 220 megawatts of low-cost solar power and is expected to top 700 megawatts once the other two phases are complete.

Bria Shea, regional vice president of regulatory planning and policy for Xcel Energy, said the facility complements the company's long-standing efforts to build up wind energy capacity.

"We've made a lot of progress already but the Sherco solar project will certainly help us go even further," Shea explained.

Under Minnesota law, regional utilities are required to produce 100% carbon-free electricity by 2040. Shea pointed out Xcel is at 65% and the company feels confident about meeting the goal.

The state as a whole is at 54% and experts said with some urgency, closing the remaining gap is within reach. However, some advocates noted the process has left the door open for sources which are not truly carbon-free.

Jessica Hellmann, executive director of the University of Minnesota's Institute on the Environment, is among those who feel the state is on the right path for emission reductions in the power sector. She said a diverse energy portfolio will still be needed, along with smart management of cleaner sources. Hellman sees carbon sequestration playing a role in this balancing act.

"There's some cool science that's being done on that topic right now," Hellmann contended. "Balancing of emissions and sequestration for a small percentage of our portfolio is most definitely doable."

In the end though, Hellmann stressed sources like wind and solar need to be the top priority. In some cases, taxpayers and ratepayers are asked to help pay for these investments. But she pointed out the technologies are becoming cheaper and there will be a payoff when the connection between fossil fuels and climate change is factored in.

"Smaller climate change, smaller damages, smaller costs to manage that," Hellmann emphasized, as opposed to "larger climate change, more damage, more costs."


get more stories like this via email