100% renewable energy

100% renewable energy means getting all energy from renewable resources. The endeavor to use 100% renewable energy for electricity, heating, cooling and transport is motivated by climate change, pollution and other environmental issues, as well as economic and energy security concerns. Shifting the total global primary energy supply to renewable sources requires a transition of the energy system, since most of today's energy is derived from non-renewable fossil fuels.

The Shepherds Flat Wind Farm is an 845 megawatt (MW) wind farm in the U.S. state of Oregon.
The 550 MW Desert Sunlight Solar Farm in California.
The Three Gorges Dam on the Yangtze River, China.
The Nesjavellir Geothermal Power Plant in Þingvellir, Iceland
The 392 MW Ivanpah Solar Power Facility in California: The facility's three towers.
Construction of the Salt Tanks, which provide efficient thermal energy storage[1] so that output can be provided after the sun goes down, and output can be scheduled to meet demand requirements.[2] The 280 MW Solana Generating Station is designed to provide six hours of energy storage. This allows the plant to generate about 38 percent of its rated capacity over the course of a year.[3]
Comparing trends in worldwide energy use, the growth of renewable energy to 2015 is the green line[4]

Research into this topic is fairly new, with very few studies published before 2009, but has gained increasing attention in recent years. The majority of studies show that a global transition to 100% renewable energy across all sectors – power, heat, transport and desalination – is feasible and economically viable.[5][6][7][8] A cross-sectoral, holistic approach is seen as an important feature of 100% renewable energy systems and is based on the assumption "that the best solutions can be found only if one focuses on the synergies between the sectors" of the energy system such as electricity, heat, transport or industry.[9]

The main barriers to the widespread implementation of large-scale renewable energy and low-carbon energy strategies are seen to be primarily social and political rather than technological or economic.[10] According to the 2013 Post Carbon Pathways report, which reviewed many international studies, the key roadblocks are: climate change denial, the fossil fuels lobby, political inaction, unsustainable energy consumption, outdated energy infrastructure, and financial constraints.[11]


No uniform definition for 100% renewable energy systems has been adopted across the published literature.[9]

Recent studies show that a global transition to 100% renewable energy across all sectors – power, heat, transport and desalination well before 2050 is feasible.[5][6][7][8] According to a review of the 181 peer-reviewed papers on 100% renewable energy that were published until 2018, "[t]he great majority of all publications highlights the technical feasibility and economic viability of 100% RE systems."[9] A review of 97 papers published since 2004 and focusing on islands concluded that across the studies 100% renewable energy was found to be "technically feasible and economically viable."[12] A 2022 review found that the main conclusion of most of the literature in the field is that 100% renewables is feasible worldwide at low cost.[13]

Existing technologies, including storage, are capable of generating a secure energy supply at every hour throughout the year. The sustainable energy system is more efficient and cost effective than the existing system.[14] The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stated in their 2011 report that there is little that limits integrating renewable technologies for satisfying the total global energy demand.

Mark Z. Jacobson, professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford University and director of its Atmosphere and Energy program, says that producing all new energy with wind power, solar power, and hydropower by 2030 is feasible, and that existing energy supply arrangements could be replaced by 2050.[15] Although disputed by other researchers, Jacobson says that energy costs today with a wind, solar, and water system should be similar to today's energy costs from other optimally cost-effective strategies and he has rebutted their criticisms.[16][17][18] A followup paper was published by Jacobson and others in 2022, in which paths to 100% renewable energy by 2035 and 2050 were developed for 145 countries.[19] The study concluded that a wind-water-solar (WWS) based system "requires less energy, costs less, and creates more jobs than business as usual". The cost reduction was primarily due to the substantial (-56.4%) decrease in overall energy demand thanks to the increased efficiency of relying on renewable electricity for all energy needs.

In 2014, renewable sources such as wind, geothermal, solar, biomass, and burnt waste provided 19% of the total energy consumed worldwide, with roughly half of that coming from traditional use of biomass.[20] The largest sector in terms of energy consumption is electricity with a renewable share of 22.8%, most of it coming from hydropower with a share of 16.6%, followed by wind with 3.1%.[20] As of 2018, according to REN21, transformation is picking up speed in the power sector, but urgent action is required in heating, cooling and transport.[21]

There are many places around the world with grids that are run almost exclusively on renewable energy (see below). At the national level, at least 30 nations already have renewable energy contributing more than 20% of the energy supply.[22] Renewable energy use has grown more quickly than even advocates anticipated.[23] As of 2019, however, it needs to grow six times faster to limit global warming to 2 °C (3.6 °F).[24]


Using 100% renewable energy was first suggested in a paper in Science[25] published in 1975 by Danish physicist Bent Sørensen, which was followed by several other proposals.[26] In 1976, energy policy analyst Amory Lovins coined the term "soft energy path" to describe an alternative future where energy efficiency and appropriate renewable energy sources steadily replace a centralized energy system based on fossil and nuclear fuels.[27]

Timeline of selected key milestones of 100% renewable energy systems research[13]

In 1998, the first detailed analysis of scenarios with high shares of renewables were published. These were followed by the first detailed 100% scenarios. In 2006, a PhD thesis was published by Czisch in which it was shown that in a 100% renewable scenario energy supply could match demand in every hour of the year in Europe and North Africa. In the same year, Danish Energy professor Henrik Lund published a first paper[28] in which he addresses the optimal combination of renewables, which was followed by several other papers on the transition to 100% renewable energy in Denmark. Since then, Lund has been publishing several papers on 100% renewable energy. After 2009, publications began to rise steeply, covering 100% scenarios for countries in Europe, America, Australia and other parts of the world.[26]

Development of peer-reviewed journal articles based on 100% RE system analyses for concrete geographic entities[13]

Even in the early 21st century, it was extraordinary for scientists and decision-makers to consider the concept of 100% renewable electricity. However, renewable energy progress has been so rapid that things have totally changed since then:[29]

Solar photovoltaic modules have dropped about 75 percent in price. Current scientific and technological advances in the laboratory suggest that they will soon be less expensive than the cost of installation of a photovoltaic system on residential or commercial buildings. On-shore wind power is spreading over all continents and is economically competitive with fossil and nuclear power in several regions. Concentrated solar thermal power (CST) with thermal storage has moved from the demonstration stage of maturity to the limited commercial stage and still has the potential for further cost reductions of about 50 percent.[29]

Renewable energy use has grown much faster than even advocates had anticipated.[23] Wind turbines generate 39[30] percent of Danish electricity, and Denmark has many biogas digesters and waste-to-energy plants as well. Together, wind and biomass provide 44% of the electricity consumed by the country's six million inhabitants. In 2010, Portugal's 10 million people produced more than half their electricity from indigenous renewable energy resources. Spain's 40 million inhabitants meet one-third of their electrical needs from renewables.[23]

Renewable energy has a history of strong public support. In America, for example, a 2013 Gallup survey showed that two in three Americans want the U.S. to increase domestic energy production using solar power (76%), wind power (71%), and natural gas (65%). Far fewer want more petroleum production (46%) and more nuclear power (37%). Least favored is coal, with about one in three Americans favouring it.[31]

REN21 says renewable energy already plays a significant role and there are many policy targets that aim to increase this:

At the national level, at least 30 nations around the world already have renewable energy contributing more than 20% of energy supply. National renewable energy markets are projected to continue to grow strongly in the coming decade and beyond, and some 120 countries have various policy targets for longer-term shares of renewable energy, including a binding 20% by 2020 target for the European Union. Some countries have much higher long-term policy targets of up to 100% renewables. Outside Europe, a diverse group of 20 or more other countries target renewable energy shares in the 2020–2030 time frame that range from 10% to 50%.[32]

Supporters of 100% renewable energy do not consider nuclear power as renewable or sustainable due to perceived risks of disasters and high-level waste management, and consider carbon capture and storage to have limited safe storage potential.[26] These constraints have also led to an interest in 100% renewable energy. A well established body of academic literature has been written over the past decade[when?], evaluating scenarios for 100% renewable energy for various geographical areas. In recent years[when?], more detailed analyses have emerged from government and industry sources.[33] The incentive to use 100% renewable energy is created by global warming and ecological as well as economic concerns, post peak oil.

The first country to propose 100% renewable energy was Iceland, in 1998.[34] Proposals have been made for Japan in 2003,[35] and for Australia in 2011.[36] Albania, Iceland, and Paraguay obtain essentially all of their electricity from renewable sources (Albania and Paraguay 100% from hydroelectricity, Iceland 72% hydro and 28% geothermal).[37] Norway obtains nearly all of its electricity from renewable sources (97 percent from hydropower).[38] Iceland proposed using hydrogen for transportation and its fishing fleet. Australia proposed biofuel for those elements of transportation not easily converted to electricity. The road map for the United States,[39][40] commitment by Denmark,[41] and Vision 2050 for Europe set a 2050 timeline for converting to 100% renewable energy,[42] later reduced to 2040 in 2011.[43] Zero Carbon Britain 2030 proposes eliminating carbon emissions in Britain by 2030 by transitioning to renewable energy.[44] In 2015, Hawaii enacted a law that the Renewable Portfolio Standard shall be 100 percent by 2045. This is often confused with renewable energy. If electricity produced on the grid is 65 GWh from fossil fuel and 35 GWh from renewable energy and rooftop off grid solar produces 80 GWh of renewable energy, then the total renewable energy is 115 GWh and the total electricity on the grid is 100 GWh. Then the RPS is 115 percent.[45]

Cities like Paris and Strasbourg in France, planned to use 100% renewable energy by 2050.[46][47]

Similarly, in the United States, the independent National Research Council has noted that "sufficient domestic renewable resources exist to allow renewable electricity to play a significant role in future electricity generation and thus help confront issues related to climate change, energy security, and the escalation of energy costs ... Renewable energy is an attractive option because renewable resources available in the United States, taken collectively, can supply significantly greater amounts of electricity than the total current or projected domestic demand."[48]

It is estimated that the world will spend an extra $8 trillion over the next 25 years to prolong the use of non-renewable resources, a cost that would be eliminated by transitioning instead to 100% renewable energy.[49] Research that has been published in Energy Policy suggests that converting the entire world to 100% renewable energy by 2050 is both possible and affordable, but requires political support.[50][51] It would require building many more wind turbines and solar power systems but wouldn't utilize bioenergy. Other changes involve use of electric cars and the development of enhanced transmission grids and storage.[52][53] As part of the Paris Agreement, countries periodically update their climate change targets for the future, by 2018 no G20 country had committed to a 100% renewable target.[54]

Until 2018, there were 181 peer-reviewed papers on 100% renewable energy. In the same year, 100% renewable energy was also mentioned in the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C as a potential means to "expand the range of 1.5 °C pathways", if the findings can be corroborated.[9]

As of 2021, wind and solar were consistently increasing their share worldwide, but still represented just 5% of global primary energy consumption. A report by J.P. Morgan Asset Management (the biggest lender to fossil fuels in the world) analyzed renewable energy forecasts made by eight scientists and research bodies (including Bent Sorensen, Mark Z. Jacobson, Amory Lovins) between 1970 and 2020 and claimed that all of them were unrealistically optimistic as they ignored "energy density, intermittency and the complex realities of incumbent energy systems".[55][56]

Places with near 100% renewable electricityEdit

The following places meet 90% or more of their average yearly electricity demand with renewable energy (incomplete list):

Place Population Electricity Source(s)
  Albania 2,821,977 (2011) Hydroelectric. [37]
Aller-Leine Valley,   Germany 75,000 (2012) 63.5% wind, 30% biogas, 10.7% hydro, 3.1% solar [57][58]
Aspen,   Colorado,   United States 6,658 (2010) Hydroelectric, wind and solar and geothermal [59]
  Bhutan 727,145 (2017) Largely hydroelectricity; exports 70% of its production due to excess energy generated; no fossil fuel power plants. [60]
Burlington,   Vermont,   United States 42,417 (2010) 35.3% hydro, 35.3% wood, 27.9% wind, 1.4% solar photovoltaic [61]
  British Columbia,   Canada 4,700,000 (2017) 97% hydroelectric [62][63]
Centralia,   Washington,   United States 17,216 90.6% hydro, 7.9% nuclear [64]
Chelan Cty.,   Washington,   United States 76,533 95.7% hydro [64]
  Costa Rica 4,857,000 99% renewable electricity. Hydroelectric (90%), geothermal, wind (and others) [65]
  Democratic Republic of the Congo 84,000,000 Almost 100% hydro, but only 9% have access to electricity. [66][67]
Douglas Cty.,   Washington,   United States 41,945 100% hydro [64]
  Ethiopia 109,224,414 (2018) Mostly hydroelectricity (>90%). Smaller quantities of wind, solar, and geothermal. 45% of the population has access to electricity As of 2018, and there is a 100% access target set in 2017 for 2025. [68]
Georgetown,   Texas,   United States 70,000 100% - 154MW solar and wind balanced with grid connection [69]
Greensburg,   Kansas,   United States 1400 100% - wind balanced with grid connection [59][70]
  Iceland 329,100 72% hydroelectricity, 28% geothermal, wind, and solar power, less than 0.1% combustible fuel (off-grid diesel) [71]
Kodiak Island,   Alaska,   United States 13,448 80.9% hydroelectricity, 19.8% wind power, 0.3% diesel generator [72]
  Lower Austria,   Austria 1,612,000 63% hydroelectricity, 26% wind, 9% biomass, 2% solar [73]
  Manitoba,   Canada 1,278,365 97% hydroelectricity, 3% wind, <1% petroleum (diesel in four off-grid communities), <1% natural gas [74]
  Norway 5,140,000 96% hydroelectricity, 2% combustible fuel, 2% geothermal, wind, and solar [71]
  Newfoundland and Labrador,   Canada 525,604 95% hydroelectricity [75]
Palo Alto,   California,   United States 66,000 50% hydro, rest a combination of solar, wind and biogas [76]
  Paraguay 7,010,000 Electricity sector in Paraguay is 100% hydroelectricity, about 90% of which is exported, remaining 10% covers domestic demand [77]
Pend Oreille Cty.,   Washington,   United States 13,354 97.1% hydro [64]
  Quebec,   Canada 8,200,000 99% renewable electricity is the main energy used in Quebec (41%), followed by oil (38%) and natural gas (10%) [78]
Samsø,   Denmark 3,806 net greater than 100% wind power and biomass, connected to mainland for balance and backup power [79][80]
  Scotland 5,510,000 (2022) 97% of electricity (2020) produced from renewables, mainly wind followed by hydroelectric. [81]
Seattle,   Washington,   United States 724,745 86% hydroelectricity, 7% wind, 1% biogas [82][64]
South Island,   New Zealand 1,115,000 98.2% hydroelectricity and 1.6% wind. Around one-fifth of generation is exported to the North Island. [83]
Tacoma,   Washington,   United States 208,100 85% hydro, 6% wind [64]
  Tajikistan 8,734,951 (2016) Hydropower supplies nearly 100 percent of Tajikistan's electricity. [84]
  Tasmania,   Australia 515,000 Hydropower supplies 100 percent of Tasmania's electricity. (Pending legislation plans for %200 renewable power by 2040, with the remainder to be sent to mainland Australia via submarine power cables) [85][86]
Tau,   American Samoa 873 (2000) ~100% solar power, with battery backup [87]
Tilos,   Greece 400 (winter), 3,000 (summer) 100% wind and solar power, with battery backup [88]
  Tokelau,   New Zealand 1,411 100% solar power, with battery backup [89]
  Uruguay 3,300,000 (2013) 94.5% renewable electricity; wind power (and biomass and solar power) is used to stretch hydroelectricity reserves into the dry season [90]
Wildpoldsried,   Bavaria,   Germany 2,512 (2013) 500% wind, solar, hydro [91]
  Yukon,   Canada 35,874 94% hydroelectricity [92]

Some other places have high percentages, for example the electricity sector in Denmark, as of 2014, is 45% wind power, with plans in place to reach 85%. The electricity sector in Canada and the electricity sector in New Zealand have even higher percentages of renewables (mostly hydro), 65% and 75% respectively, and Austria is approaching 70%.[93] As of 2015, the electricity sector in Germany sometimes meets almost 100% of the electricity demand with PV and wind power, and renewable electricity is over 25%.[94][95] Albania has 94.8% of installed capacity as hydroelectric, 5.2% diesel generator; but Albania imports 39% of its electricity.[96][97] In 2016, Portugal achieved 100% renewable electricity for four days between 7 and 11 May, partly because efficient energy use had reduced electricity demand.[98] France and Sweden have low carbon intensity, since they predominantly use a mixture of nuclear power and hydroelectricity. In 2018 Scotland met 76% of their demand from renewable sources.[99][100]

Although electricity is currently around a quarter of world energy supply and consumption; primary energy use is expected to decrease with renewable energy deployment as electricity use increases, as it is likely to be combined with some degree of further electrification.[101][102] For example, electric cars achieve much better fuel efficiency than fossil fuel cars, and another example is renewable heat such as in the case of Denmark, which is proposing to move to greater use of heat pumps for heating buildings to provide multiple kilowatts of heat per kilowatt of electricity.

100% clean electricityEdit

Other electricity generating sources are considered clean, though not necessarily renewable, as they also do not emit carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases and air pollutants. The largest of these is nuclear energy, which produces no emissions. Some argue that transitioning to 100% renewable energy would be too slow to limit climate change, and that closing down nuclear power stations is a mistake.[103][104] Carbon capture and storage projects may still use coal or natural gas but capture carbon dioxide for storage or alternative uses. Pathways to eliminate greenhouse gases may include these in addition to renewable energy to save money,[105] or to avoid shutting down existing plants and allow for flexibility in designing a carbon-free electric grid.

In 2018, California passed SB 100, which mandates 100% clean, carbon-free by 2045, including a 60% renewable electricity goal by 2030.[106][107] 2019 legislation in Washington also requires 100% clean electricity by 2045, eliminating coal by 2025.[108] Further states and territories to require 100% carbon-free electricity are Hawaii, Maine, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Virginia, Puerto Rico, and Washington, DC.[109]


According to Mark Z. Jacobson, the most significant barriers to the widespread implementation of large-scale renewable energy and low carbon energy strategies, at the pace required to prevent runaway climate change, are primarily political and not technological.[10][dubious ] According to the 2013 Post Carbon Pathways report, which reviewed many international studies, the key roadblocks are:[11]

In 2011, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, some of the world's leading climate researchers selected by the United Nations, said "as infrastructure and energy systems develop, in spite of the complexities, there are few, if any, fundamental technological limits to integrating a portfolio of renewable energy technologies to meet a majority share of total energy demand in locations where suitable renewable resources exist or can be supplied".[110] IPCC scenarios "generally indicate that growth in renewable energy will be widespread around the world".[111] The IPCC said that if governments were supportive, and the full complement of renewable energy technologies were deployed, renewable energy supply could account for almost 80% of the world's energy use within forty years.[112] Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the IPCC, said the necessary investment in renewables would cost only about 1% of global GDP annually. This approach could contain greenhouse gas levels to less than 450 parts per million, the safe level beyond which climate change becomes catastrophic and irreversible.[112]

Stephen W. Pacala and Robert H. Socolow have developed a series of "climate stabilization wedges" that can allow societies to maintain their quality of life while avoiding catastrophic climate change, and "renewable energy sources", in aggregate, constitute the largest number of their "wedges".[113]

Lack of urgency and coordinationEdit

Lester R. Brown founder and president of the Earth Policy Institute, a nonprofit research organization based in Washington, D.C., says a rapid transition to 100% renewable energy is both possible and necessary. Brown compares with the U.S. entry into World War II and the subsequent rapid mobilization and transformation of the US industry and economy. A quick transition to 100% renewable energy and saving of our civilization is proposed by Brown to follow an approach with similar urgency.[114]

Systemic barriersEdit

In 1999 American academic Dr. Gregory Unruh published a dissertation identifying the systemic barriers to the adoption and diffusion of renewable energy technologies. This theoretical framework was called Carbon Lock-in and pointed to the creation of self-reinforcing feedbacks that arise through the co-evolution of large technological systems, like electricity and transportation networks, with the social and political institutions that support and benefit from system growth. Once established, these techno-institutional complexes[115] become "locked-in" and resist efforts to transform them towards more environmentally sustainable systems based on renewable sources.

Required mineralsEdit

According to World Bank the "below 2°C" climate scenario requires 3 billions of tonnes of metals and minerals by 2050. Supply of mined resources such as zinc, molybdenum, silver, nickel, copper must increase by up to 500%.[116] A 2018 study analysed the metal requirements to transition the global energy system up to 2060. Currently used battery technologies and known reserves are not compatible with the transition scenario as a result of insufficient cobalt and lithium reserves. Batteries containing less or no cobalt are feasible. Lithium is much more difficult to replace with maintained performance and cost.[117]

Institutional inertiaEdit

A review suggests large institutions are prone to resisting "the challenge of 100% RE scenarios based on the dogma that the world cannot do without fossil fuels and nuclear energy". Institutions that have received extensive criticism include the International Energy Agency and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, with the latter also being critized for not including studies on 100% RE systems in their IPCC reports.[13]

Manufacturing concentration in ChinaEdit

A report found that China is about to produce "almost 95% of the world's polysilicon and the ingots and wafers" of the solar panel supply chain, with this level of concentration in any global supply chain "would represent a considerable vulnerability".[118]


One of the main obstacles to 100% renewable energy is the intermittency or variability of renewable energy sources – such as times when sufficient amounts of energy can be generated neither via wind nor via solar power ("Dunkelflauten").

Proposed notable options to manage this intermittency by the time the first transitional period to 100% renewable energy is completed include:

In 2013, Smil analyzed proposals to depend on wind and solar-generated electricity including the proposals of Jacobson and colleagues, and writing in an issue of Spectrum prepared by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, he identified numerous points of concern, such as cost, intermittent power supply, growing NIMBYism, and a lack of infrastructure as negative factors and said that "History and a consideration of the technical requirements show that the problem is much greater than these advocates have supposed."[137][138] Smil and Hansen are concerned about the variable output of solar and wind power. According to Amory Lovins the electricity grid alone can compensate for variability, just as it routinely backs up nonworking coal-fired and nuclear plants with working ones.[139]

In November 2014 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change came out with their fifth report, saying that in the absence of any one technology (such as bioenergy, carbon dioxide capture and storage, nuclear, wind and solar), climate change mitigation costs can increase substantially depending on which technology is absent. For example, it may cost 40% more to reduce carbon emissions without carbon dioxide capture. (Table 3.2)[140] According to a 2018 study, "in the absence of firm low-carbon [dispatchable] resources, the cost of decarbonizing power generation rises rapidly as the emissions limit approaches zero" and a renewable-only generation (with batteries) results in energy prices 42-163% higher in regions with lower VRE availability, and 11-105% higher in regions with higher VRE availability. The study introduced the term "firm low-carbon energy source" (e.g. nuclear, geothermal), which is intended to operate along "fast-burst" sources (e.g. batteries) and "fuel saving" (VRE).[141]

The International Energy Agency says that there has been too much attention on issue of the variability of renewable electricity production.[142] The issue of intermittent supply applies to popular renewable technologies, mainly wind power and solar photovoltaics, and its significance depends on a range of factors that include the market penetration of the renewables concerned, the balance of plant and the wider connectivity of the system, as well as the demand side flexibility. Variability is rarely a barrier to increased renewable energy deployment when dispatchable generation such as hydroelectricity or solar thermal storage is also available. But at high levels of market penetration it requires careful analysis and management, and additional costs may be required for back-up or system modification.[142] Renewable electricity supply in the 20-50+% penetration range has already been implemented in several European systems, albeit in the context of an integrated European grid system:[143]

Seasonal energy storageEdit

Hydropower is currently the only large scale low-carbon seasonal energy storage. In countries with high variation in energy demand by season (for example the UK uses far more gas for heating in the winter than it uses electricity) but lacking hydropower electrical interconnectors to countries with lots of hydropower (e.g. UK - Norway), electricity from hydropower is likely to be insufficient and development of a hydrogen economy would likely be needed: this is being trialled in the UK and 8 TWh of inter-seasonal hydrogen energy storage has been proposed.[144]

In Australia, as well as storing renewable energy as hydrogen, it is also proposed to be exported in the form of ammonia.[145]

Open research questionsEdit

A review identified major gaps and neglected aspects – open research questions – in the 100% RE literature. These include:[13]

A multi-scalar policy mix for reducing vulnerability to low-carbon transitions.[146]
100% RE system analyses per country (global and regional studies are not included)[13]
  • Coupling of energy system models and integrated assessment models
  • Holistic analysis of material criticality for 100% RE systems, with consideration of recycling
  • Impact of inter-annual resource variations and respective inter-annual storage demand
  • District heating and cooling in transition scenarios
  • Increased geo-spatial resolution and coverage of global 100% RE system analyses
  • Including off-grid solutions or a transition of off-grid and on-grid solutions in comprehensive energy system transition pathways
  • Societal risks and issues of the transition, including linking it to energy security and consequences for peace and stability, and maximum area availability in societies
  • Model intercomparisons of analyses
  • Various questions for design particulars of intermittency management
  • Issues of equity, environmental issues, community wellbeing, energy justice, social acceptance, and good governance – research on how to make RE technologies more equitable, accountable, and just, which may help to both contextualize and manage this potential barrier (including policy mechanisms)

Plans and modelsEdit

Name of Plan Organization Regional Scale Publication (year) Warming Target Timescale Total Investments Number of Jobs Total CO2 Emissions

(gt CO2)

Primary Energy Supply


Final Energy Demand (GW) Energy Sources at End of Timeline
Solar Wind Biomass Hydro Other
Project Drawdown[147] (Global) Project Drawdown Global Living 1.5-2C N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Princeton Net-Zero by 2050[148] (USA) Princeton USA 2020 N/A 2020-2050 5910 8.5 million 78 20465.29121 14582.09104 29% 53% 17% 1% 0%
Carbon-Neutral Pathways for the United States: Central[149] (USA) University of San Francisco / UC Berkeley USA 2021 2, 1.5, 1C no target Decarbonization: 600/Yr 0 0 15190 0 34% 64% 0% 2% 0%
Carbon-Neutral Pathways for the United States: 100% RE[149] (USA) University of San Francisco / UC Berkeley Global 2021 2C, 1.5C, and 1C 2070 0.2-1.2% of annual GDP 0 74.8 15190 0 0% Several different scenarios clearly laid out in SI 0% 0% 0%
Achieving the Paris Climate Agreement Goals Global and Regional 100% Renewable Energy Scenarios with Non-energy GHG Pathways for +1.5 °C and +2 °C[150] (Global) University of Technology Sydney - Institute for Sustainable Futures USA 2019 1.5 C by 2050 2020-2050 63500 (total investments from 2015 to 2020) 47.8 million 450 114444 70277 32% 17% 14% 2% 0%
Designing a Model for the Global Energy System—GENeSYS-MOD: An Application of the Open-Source Energy Modeling System (OSeMOSYS)[151] (Global) Workgroup for Infrastructure and Policy, TU Berlin Global 2017 650 Gt of CO2 (compared to the predicted 550-1300 emitted between 2011 and 2050) / 1.5-2 C

(section 3.5)

2020-2050 N/A N/A 519 N/A 97575 23% 36% 32% 8% 0%
Global Energy System Based on 100% Renewable Energy[152] LUT University Global 2019 net-zero emissions by 2050 2050 7200 35 million 115 141189 134018 72% 18% 6% 3% 0%
Energy System Model (GENeSYS-MOD)[153] (Mexico) DIW Berlin, Cide Mexico Mexico 2019 Full decaronization of the energy system by 2050. n/a n/a 7.16 for renewable target and 12 for national target. P. 15 n/a 320.73 GW for national target, 842.89, GW 100% renewables 78% 22% 0% <1% 0%
Energy System Model (GENeSYS-MOD) - 100% RE Scenario[153] DIW Berlin, Cide Mexico Mexico Full decaronization of the energy system by 2050. N/A N/A 7.16 N/A 8835.914153 58% 27% 15% 1% 0%
Transformation towards a Renewable Energy System in Brazil and Mexico—Technological and Structural Options for Latin America[154] Mexico 2018 70-95% emissions reduction N/A 0 0 0 0 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Advanced Energy [r]evolution[155] Greenpeace Global 2021 >2 degrees 48 0 0 0 149722.222 32% 32% 1% 1% 34%
Basic Energy [r]evolution[155] Greenpeace Global >2 degrees 64.6 0 0 0 80277.7778 16% 30% 4% 10% 38%
100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World[156] Stanford Global/intern. 2017 Net Zero by 2050 124700 24262122 N/A N/A N/A 58% 37% 0% 4% -36%
Full energy sector transition towards 100% renewable energy supply: Integrating power, heat, transport and industry sectors including desalination[157] LUT University Global 2020 Net Zero by 2050 2050
Zero air pollution and zero carbon from all energy at low cost and without blackouts in variable weather throughout the U.S. with 100% wind-water-solar and storage[131] Stanford USA 2021 Net Zero by 2050 2050
Solar PV and wind electricity generation in (TWh per yr) in global 100% RE scenarios in the year 2050[13]
Global 100% RE system analyses[13]

Recent developmentsEdit

The Fourth Revolution: Energy is a German documentary film released in 2010. It shows the vision of a global society, which lives in a world where the energy is produced 100% with renewable energies, showing a complete reconstruction of the economy, to reach this goal. In 2011, Hermann Scheer wrote the book The Energy Imperative: 100 Percent Renewable Now, published by Routledge.

Reinventing Fire is a book by Amory Lovins released in October 2011. By combining reduced energy use with energy efficiency gains, Lovins says that there will be a $5 trillion saving and a faster-growing economy. This can all be done with the profitable commercialization of existing energy-saving technologies, through market forces, led by business.[158] Former US president Bill Clinton says the book is a "wise, detailed and comprehensive blueprint".[159] The first paragraph of the preface says:

Imagine fuel without fear. No climate change. No oil spills, dead coal miners, dirty air, devastated lands, lost wildlife. No energy poverty. No oil-fed wars, tyrannies, or terrorists. Nothing to run out. Nothing to cut off. Nothing to worry about. Just energy abundance, benign and affordable, for all, for ever.[160]

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has said that there are few fundamental technological limits to integrating a portfolio of renewable energy technologies to meet most of total global energy demand. In a 2011 review of 164 recent scenarios of future renewable energy growth, the report noted that the majority expected renewable sources to supply more than 17% of total energy by 2030, and 27% by 2050; the highest forecast projected 43% supplied by renewables by 2030 and 77% by 2050.[110]

In 2011, the International Energy Agency has said that solar energy technologies, in its many forms, can make considerable contributions to solving some of the most urgent problems the world now faces:[161]

The development of affordable, inexhaustible and clean solar energy technologies will have huge longer-term benefits. It will increase countries' energy security through reliance on an indigenous, inexhaustible and mostly import-independent resource, enhance sustainability, reduce pollution, lower the costs of mitigating climate change, and keep fossil fuel prices lower than otherwise. These advantages are global. Hence the additional costs of the incentives for early deployment should be considered learning investments; they must be wisely spent and need to be widely shared.[161]

In 2011, the refereed journal Energy Policy published two articles by Mark Z. Jacobson, a professor of engineering at Stanford University, and research scientist Mark A. Delucchi, about changing our energy supply mix and "Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power". The articles analyze the feasibility of providing worldwide energy for electric power, transportation, and heating/cooling from wind, water, and sunlight (WWS), which are safe clean options. In Part I, Jacobson and Delucchi discuss WWS energy system characteristics, aspects of energy demand, WWS resource availability, WWS devices needed, and material requirements.[162] They estimate that 3,800,000 5 MW wind turbines, 5350 100 MW geothermal power plants, and 270 new 1300 MW hydroelectric power plants would be required. In terms of solar power, an additional 49,000 300 MW concentrating solar plants, 40,000 300 MW solar photovoltaic power plants, and 1.7 billion 3 kW rooftop photovoltaic systems would also be needed. Such an extensive WWS infrastructure could decrease world power demand by 30%.[162] In Part II, Jacobson and Delucchi address variability of supply, system economics, and energy policy initiatives associated with a WWS system. The authors advocate producing all new energy with WWS by 2030 and replacing existing energy supply arrangements by 2050. Barriers to implementing the renewable energy plan are seen to be "primarily social and political, not technological or economic". Energy costs with a WWS system should be similar to today's energy costs.[16]

In general, Jacobson has said wind, water and solar technologies can provide 100 percent of the world's energy, eliminating all fossil fuels.[163] He advocates a "smart mix" of renewable energy sources to reliably meet electricity demand:

Because the wind blows during stormy conditions when the sun does not shine and the sun often shines on calm days with little wind, combining wind and solar can go a long way toward meeting demand, especially when geothermal provides a steady base and hydroelectric can be called on to fill in the gaps.[164]

A 2012 study by the University of Delaware for a 72 GW system considered 28 billion combinations of renewable energy and storage and found the most cost-effective, for the PJM Interconnection, would use 17 GW of solar, 68 GW of offshore wind, and 115 GW of onshore wind, although at times as much as three times the demand would be provided. 0.1% of the time would require generation from other sources.[165]

In March 2012, Denmark's parliament agreed on a comprehensive new set promotional programs for energy efficiency and renewable energy aimed at reaching 100 percent of electricity, heat and fuels from renewables by 2050.[166] IRENEC is an annual conference on 100% renewable energy started in 2011 by Eurosolar Turkey. The 2013 conference was in Istanbul.[167][168]

More recently, Jacobson and his colleagues have developed detailed proposals for switching to 100% renewable energy produced by wind, water and sunlight, for New York,[169] California[170] and Washington[171] states, by 2050. As of 2014, a more expansive new plan for the 50 states has been drawn up, which includes an online interactive map showing the renewable resource potential of each of the 50 states. The 50-state plan is part of The Solutions Project, an independent outreach effort led by Jacobson, actor Mark Ruffalo, and film director Josh Fox.[172]

As of 2014, many detailed assessments show that the energy service needs of a world enjoying radically higher levels of wellbeing, can be economically met entirely through the diverse currently available technological and organizational innovations around wind, solar, biomass, biofuel, hydro, ocean and geothermal energy. Debate over detailed plans remain, but transformations in global energy services based entirely around renewable energy are in principle technically practicable, economically feasible, socially viable, and so realisable. This prospect underpins the ambitious commitment by Germany, one of the world's most successful industrial economies, to undertake a major energy transition, Energiewende.[173]

In 2015 a study was published in Energy and Environmental Science that describes a pathway to 100% renewable energy in the United States by 2050 without using biomass. Implementation of this roadmap is regarded as both environmentally and economically feasible and reasonable, as by 2050 it would save about $600 Billion Dollars health costs a year due to reduced air pollution and $3.3 Trillion global warming costs. This would translate in yearly cost savings per head of around $8300 compared to a business as usual pathway. According to that study, barriers that could hamper implementation are neither technical nor economic but social and political, as most people didn't know that benefits from such a transformation far exceeded the costs.[174]

In June 2017, twenty-one researchers published an article in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America rejecting Jacobson's earlier PNAS article, accusing him of modeling errors and of using invalid modeling tools.[175][176] They further asserted he made implausible assumptions through his reliance upon increasing national energy storage from 43 minutes to 7 weeks, increasing hydrogen production by 100,000%, and increasing hydropower by the equivalent of 600 Hoover Dams.[175] Article authors David G. Victor called Jacobson's work "dangerous" and Ken Caldeira emphasized that increasing hydropower output by 1,300 gigawatts, a 25% increase, is the equivalent flow of 100 Mississippi Rivers.[175] Jacobson published a response in the same issue of the PNAS and also authored a blog post where he asserted the researchers were advocates of the fossil fuel industry.[175][177][178] Another study published in 2017 confirmed the earlier results for a 100% renewable power system for North America, without changes in hydropower assumptions, but with more realistic emphasis on a balanced storage portfolio, in particular seasonal storage, and for competitive economics.[179]

Grid integration simulationEdit

In 2015, Jacobson and Delucchi, together with Mary Cameron and Bethany Frew, examined with computer simulation (Loadmatch), in more detail how a wind-water-solar (WWS) system can track the energy demand from minute to minute. This turned out to be possible in the United States for 6 years, including WWS variability by extreme weather events.[180] In 2017, the plan was further developed for 139 countries by a team of 27 researchers[181] and in 2018, Jacobson and Delucchi with Mary Cameron and Brian Mathiesen published the Loadmatch results for 20 regions in which the 139 countries in the world are divided. According to this research, a WWS system can follow the demand in all regions.[182]

The program Loadmatch receives as input estimated series, per half minute during 2050–2055, of

  • the energy demand
  • the intermittent wind and solar energy supply predicted with a 3D global climate / weather model GATOR-GCMOM[183]
  • the hydropower, geothermal, tidal and wave energy

and specifications of

  • the capacities and maximum loading / unloading speeds of the different types of storage
  • losses due to storage, transport, distribution and maintenance
  • a demand-supply management system (smart grid).

The program has been carried out for each region 10-20 times with adapted input for the storage capacities, until a solution was found in which the energy demand was followed, per half minute for 5 years, with low costs.

The WWS system is assumed to connect in the electric network

World China United States Europe Africa
Supply 2018[184] 860 244 92 169 24
Supply 2050 12040 3223 1400 1157 580
Unused supply 2215 598 336 84 40
Transmission loss 807 221 98 77 37
Other loss 325 76 24 56 22
End-use 8693 2327 939 940 482
Storage (TWh) 1279 321 664 109

In 2020, Jacobson clarified in a textbook[185] computer simulation results of a WWS energy system. To match demand with supply every minute more solar and wind farms and high-voltage lines must be installed than to match year-averaged demand and supply. Oversizing (also in a conventional energy system) ensures that the demand can be followed during peak hours, but causes unused supply during off-peak hours. In a WWS system, more energy exchange between areas leads to more transmission loss. The table shows WWS supply, unused supply, losses and end-use, in GW average power to reliably supply the world and four major regions with energy by 2050. See textbook Table 8.10; energy in TWh is divided by 26.3 kh (1000 hours) to get power in GW. The bottom row is the storage capacity of pumped hydro plants (Table 8.7).

See alsoEdit


  1. ^ Wright, Matthew; Hearps, Patrick; et al. Australian Sustainable Energy: Zero Carbon Australia Stationary Energy Plan Archived 24 November 2015 at the Wayback Machine, Energy Research Institute, University of Melbourne, October 2010, p. 33. Retrieved from BeyondZeroEmissions.org website.
  2. ^ Innovation in Concentrating Thermal Solar Power (CSP), RenewableEnergyFocus.com website.
  3. ^ Stern, Ray (10 October 2013). "Solana: 10 Facts You Didn't Know About the Concentrated Solar Power Plant Near Gila Bend". Phoenix New Times.
  4. ^ Statistical Review of World Energy, Workbook (xlsx), London, 2016
  5. ^ a b Bogdanov, Dmitrii; Gulagi, Ashish; Fasihi, Mahdi; Breyer, Christian (1 February 2021). "Full energy sector transition towards 100% renewable energy supply: Integrating power, heat, transport and industry sectors including desalination". Applied Energy. 283: 116273. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.116273. ISSN 0306-2619.
  6. ^ a b Teske, Sven, ed. (2019). Achieving the Paris Climate Agreement Goals. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-05843-2. ISBN 978-3-030-05842-5. S2CID 198078901.
  7. ^ a b "Cheap, safe 100% renewable energy possible before 2050, says Finnish uni study". Yle Uutiset. 12 April 2019. Retrieved 18 June 2021.
  8. ^ a b Gulagi, Ashish; Alcanzare, Myron; Bogdanov, Dmitrii; Esparcia, Eugene; Ocon, Joey; Breyer, Christian (1 July 2021). "Transition pathway towards 100% renewable energy across the sectors of power, heat, transport, and desalination for the Philippines". Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 144: 110934. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2021.110934. ISSN 1364-0321.
  9. ^ a b c d Hansen, Kenneth; et al. (2019). "Status and perspectives on 100% renewable energy systems". Energy. 175: 471–480. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2019.03.092. The great majority of all publications highlights the technical feasibility and economic viability of 100% RE systems.
  10. ^ a b Koumoundouros, Tessa (27 December 2019). "Stanford Researchers Have an Exciting Plan to Tackle The Climate Emergency Worldwide". ScienceAlert. Retrieved 5 January 2020.
  11. ^ a b Wiseman, John; et al. (April 2013). "Post Carbon Pathways" (PDF). University of Melbourne.
  12. ^ Meschede, Henning; Bertheau, Paul; Khalili, Siavash; Breyer, Christian (24 June 2022). "A review of 100% renewable energy scenarios on islands". WIREs Energy and Environment. doi:10.1002/wene.450. ISSN 2041-8396. S2CID 250061841.
  13. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o Breyer, Christian; Khalili, Siavash; Bogdanov, Dmitrii; Ram, Manish; Oyewo, Ayobami Solomon; Aghahosseini, Arman; Gulagi, Ashish; Solomon, A. A.; Keiner, Dominik; Lopez, Gabriel; Østergaard, Poul Alberg; Lund, Henrik; Mathiesen, Brian V.; Jacobson, Mark Z.; Victoria, Marta; Teske, Sven; Pregger, Thomas; Fthenakis, Vasilis; Raugei, Marco; Holttinen, Hannele; Bardi, Ugo; Hoekstra, Auke; Sovacool, Benjamin K. (2022). "On the History and Future of 100% Renewable Energy Systems Research". IEEE Access. 10: 78176–78218. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402. ISSN 2169-3536.   Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
  14. ^ Ram, M.; Bogdanov, D.; Aghahosseini, A.; Gulagi, A. (2019). Global Energy System based on 100% Renewable Energy – Power, Heat, Transport and Desalination Sectors (PDF). Lappeenranta University of Technology | Energy Watch Group. ISBN 978-952-335-339-8. ISSN 2243-3376.
  15. ^ Jacobson, Mark Z.; Delucchi, Mark A.; Cameron, Mary A.; Coughlin, Stephen J.; Hay, Catherine A.; Manogaran, Indu Priya; Shu, Yanbo; Krauland, Anna-Katharina von (20 December 2019). "Impacts of Green New Deal Energy Plans on Grid Stability, Costs, Jobs, Health, and Climate in 143 Countries". One Earth. 1 (4): 449–463. Bibcode:2019AGUFMPA32A..01J. doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2019.12.003. ISSN 2590-3330.
  16. ^ a b Delucchi, Mark A; Jacobson, Mark Z (2011). "Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part II: Reliability, system and transmission costs, and policies". Energy Policy. 39 (3): 1170–90. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.11.045.
  17. ^ "Scientists Sharply Rebut Influential Renewable-Energy Plan".
  18. ^ Frew, Bethany A.; Cameron, Mary A.; Delucchi, Mark A.; Jacobson, Mark Z. (27 June 2017). "The United States can keep the grid stable at low cost with 100% clean, renewable energy in all sectors despite inaccurate claims". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 114 (26): E5021–E5023. Bibcode:2017PNAS..114E5021J. doi:10.1073/pnas.1708069114. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 5495290. PMID 28630350.
  19. ^ Jacobson, Mark Z.; von Krauland, Anna-Katharina; Coughlin, Stephen J.; Dukas, Emily; Nelson, Alexander J. H.; Palmer, Frances C.; Rasmussen, Kylie R. (2022). "Low-cost solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy insecurity for 145 countries". Energy & Environmental Science: 10.1039.D2EE00722C. doi:10.1039/D2EE00722C. ISSN 1754-5692. S2CID 250126767.
  20. ^ a b Armaroli, Nicola; Balzani, Vincenzo (2016). "Solar Electricity and Solar Fuels: Status and Perspectives in the Context of the Energy Transition". Chemistry – A European Journal. 22 (1): 32–57. doi:10.1002/chem.201503580. PMID 26584653.
  21. ^ "Renewables Global Status Report". REN21. Retrieved 15 May 2019.
  22. ^ Ritchie, Hannah; Roser, Max (17 December 2020). "Renewable Energy". Our World in Data.
  23. ^ a b c Gipe, Paul (4 April 2013). "100 Percent Renewable Vision Building". Renewable Energy World.
  24. ^ "Global energy transformation: A roadmap to 2050 (2019 edition)". Archived from the original on 18 April 2019. Retrieved 21 April 2019.
  25. ^ Sørensen, Bent (25 July 1975). "A plan is outlined according to which solar and wind energy would supply Denmark's needs by the year 2050". Science. 189 (4199): 255–260. Bibcode:1975Sci...189..255S. doi:10.1126/science.189.4199.255. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 17813696. S2CID 220099848.
  26. ^ a b c Hohmeyer, Olav H; Bohm, Sönke (2015). "Trends toward 100% renewable electricity supply in Germany and Europe: A paradigm shift in energy policies". Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment. 4: 74–97. doi:10.1002/wene.128. S2CID 109863320.
  27. ^ Green, Joshua (July–August 2009). "The Elusive Green Economy". The Atlantic.
  28. ^ Lund, Henrik (2006). "Large-scale integration of optimal combinations of PV, wind and wave power into the electricity supply". Renewable Energy. 31 (4): 503–515. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2005.04.008.
  29. ^ a b Diesendorf, Mark (4 April 2013). "Another Myth Busted on the Road to 100% Renewable Electricity". Reneweconomy.com.au.
  30. ^ "Elproduktion". www.energinet.dk. Archived from the original on 2 March 2016. Retrieved 21 February 2016.
  31. ^ Jacobe, Dennis (9 April 2013). "Americans Want More Emphasis on Solar, Wind, Natural Gas". Renewable Energy World.
  32. ^ Renewables Global Futures Report 2013 (PDF) (Report). REN21, Institute for Sustainable Energy Policies. 2013.
  33. ^ Elliston, Ben; MacGill, Iain; Diesendorf, Mark (2013). "Least cost 100% renewable electricity scenarios in the Australian National Electricity Market". Energy Policy. 59: 270–82. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.03.038.
  34. ^ "Implementation of Green Bookkeeping at Reykjavik Energy" (PDF). Rio02.com. Archived from the original (PDF) on 17 June 2012. Retrieved 1 November 2012.
  35. ^ "Energy Rich Japan". Energyrichjapan.info. Retrieved 1 November 2012.
  36. ^ "Zero Carbon Australia Stationary Energy Plan" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 23 May 2012. Retrieved 1 November 2012.
  37. ^ a b US EIA, International energy statistics data for 2011.
  38. ^ US EIA, Norway, updated 2014.
  39. ^ "A Roadmap for U.S. Energy Policy". Ieer.org. 13 March 2012. Retrieved 1 November 2012.
  40. ^ "A Road Map for U.S. Energy Policy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 13 September 2012. Retrieved 1 November 2012.
  41. ^ Carrasco, Alicia (9 April 2012). "Denmark commits to 100% renewable energy". Emeter.com. Archived from the original on 13 June 2012. Retrieved 1 November 2012.
  42. ^ "Vision 2050". Inforse.org. 2 December 2010. Retrieved 1 November 2012.
  43. ^ "EU Sustainable Energy Vision 2040". Inforse.org. 2 December 2010. Retrieved 1 November 2012.
  44. ^ "Zero Carbon World". Zerocarbonbritain.org. 9 November 2011. Archived from the original on 17 October 2012. Retrieved 1 November 2012.
  45. ^ "HECO asserts Hawaii's renewable energy requirement can exceed 100%".
  46. ^ Roger, Simon (21 March 2018). "Un plan climat met Paris sur la voie de la neutralité carbone". Le Monde.fr.
  47. ^ "L'Eurométropole de Strasbourg dévoile son plan climat 2030". 6 November 2017.
  48. ^ National Research Council (2010). Electricity from Renewable Resources: Status, Prospects, and Impediments. National Academies of Science. p. 4. ISBN 9780309137089.
  49. ^ "Has the World Already Passed "Peak Oil"?". News.nationalgeographic.com. 9 November 2010. Retrieved 1 November 2012.
  50. ^ "Global Energy System based on 100% Renewable Energy - Power Sector". ResearchGate. Retrieved 19 February 2019.
  51. ^ "Avoiding blackouts with 100% renewable energy". Stanford News. 8 February 2018. Retrieved 19 February 2019.
  52. ^ Jacobson, Mark Z.; Delucchi, Mark A. (2011). "Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part I: Technologies, energy resources, quantities and areas of infrastructure, and materials". Energy Policy. 39 (3): 1154–1169. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.11.040.
  53. ^ Delucchi, Mark A.; Jacobson, Mark Z. (2011). "Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part II: Reliability, system and transmission costs, and policies". Energy Policy. 39 (3): 1170–1190. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.11.045.
  54. ^ Brown to Green Report 2018, p21
  55. ^ Cembalest, Michael (2021). "2021 Annual Energy Paper" (PDF). J.P. Morgan Asset Management. Archived (PDF) from the original on 24 June 2021. Retrieved 16 June 2021. Alt URL
  56. ^ Nauman, Billy (6 October 2020). "JPMorgan Chase promises to shift portfolio away from fossil fuels". Financial Times. Retrieved 12 September 2021.
  57. ^ "Aller-Leine-Tal". Kommunal Erneuerbar. August 2012.
  58. ^ "Cort-Brün Voige, Aller Leine Tal". Go 100% Renewable Energy.
  59. ^ a b "Aspen is third U.S. city to reach 100% renewable energy". The Aspen Times. Archived from the original on 5 September 2015. Retrieved 6 September 2015.
  60. ^ "Bhutan: a proactive sustainability and renewable energy leader • BiogasWorld". BiogasWorld. 25 February 2016. Retrieved 4 August 2018.
  61. ^ "Our Energy Portfolio". Burlington Electric Department.
  62. ^ "Provincial and Territorial Energy Profiles – British Columbia". Canada Energy Regulator. 17 March 2021. Retrieved 23 June 2021.
  63. ^ BC Hydro Annual Report 2014 (PDF) (Report). BC Hydro for Generations, British Columbia. 2014. p. 30. Retrieved 10 August 2021.
  64. ^ a b c d e f "Washington State Electric Utility Fuel Mix Disclosure Reports For Calendar Year 2018" (PDF). Washington State Department of Commerce. October 2019. Retrieved 30 January 2020.
  65. ^ "Costa Rica Is 99% Powered By Renewable Energy - MetaEfficient". MetaEfficient. 8 April 2008. Retrieved 23 November 2015.
  66. ^ "Power Africa in Democratic Republic of the Congo | Power Africa | U.S. Agency for International Development". www.usaid.gov. 16 April 2020. Retrieved 23 June 2021.
  67. ^ "Democratic Republic of the Congo - Countries & Regions". IEA. Retrieved 23 June 2021.
  68. ^ "POWER AFRICA IN ETHIOPIA | Power Africa | U.S. Agency for International Development". www.usaid.gov. 26 May 2021. Retrieved 20 September 2021.
  69. ^ "Georgetown's energy 100 percent renewable with solar plant – City of Georgetown Texas".
  70. ^ Guevara-Stone, Laurie (10 September 2013). "A High-Renewables Tomorrow, Today: Greensburg, Kansas". RMI Outlet. Archived from the original on 6 September 2015. Retrieved 6 September 2015.
  71. ^ a b International Energy Agency, December 2014 Archived 31 July 2018 at the Wayback Machine, Monthly electricity statistics, data for January through December 2014.
  72. ^ Kodiak Electric Association, Statistics Archived 22 July 2015 at the Wayback Machine, accessed 21 July 2015.
  73. ^ "Lower Austria Claims 100% Renewable Electricity - CleanTechnica". cleantechnica.com. 11 November 2015.
  74. ^ "Provincial and Territorial Energy Profiles – Manitoba". Canada Energy Regulator. 2018. Retrieved 28 February 2021.
  75. ^ "Provincial and Territorial Energy Profiles – Newfoundland and Labrador". Government of Canada. 8 April 2020.
  76. ^ "Palo Alto switches to 100% renewables – at a cost of $3 a year". 23 July 2013.
  77. ^ "'IRENA (2015), Renewable Energy Policy Brief: Paraguay; IRENA, Abu Dhabi'" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 16 September 2017. Retrieved 16 September 2017.
  78. ^ "Hydro-Québec's Electricity Facts: Energy Supplies and Air Emissions" (PDF). Hydro-Québec. 2013. Archived from the original (PDF) on 6 March 2016. Retrieved 30 January 2016.
  79. ^ "Denmark's Wind of Change". Time. Archived from the original on 5 January 2013. Retrieved 14 November 2013.
  80. ^ Kolbert, Elizabeth (30 June 2008). "The Island in the Wind". Newyorker.com. Retrieved 14 November 2013.
  81. ^ "Renewables met 97% of Scotland's electricity demand in 2020". BBC News. 25 March 2021. Retrieved 26 March 2021.
  82. ^ "Seattle City Light | Power Mix". seattle.gov. Retrieved 31 July 2018.
  83. ^ "Energy in New Zealand 2015". Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. Archived from the original on 15 February 2016. Retrieved 23 February 2016.
  84. ^ "Tajikistan | International Hydropower Association". hydropower.org. Retrieved 16 November 2018.
  85. ^ "Tasmania is now powered entirely by renewable energy". weforum.org. 9 December 2020. Retrieved 11 January 2021.
  86. ^ "Morrison steps in to take majority stake in Marinus Link project". reneweconomy.com.au. 15 December 2020. Retrieved 11 January 2021.
  87. ^ "Tesla runs an entire island on solar power".
  88. ^ Mier, Iliana. "A small Greek island will become the first in the Mediterranean to run solely on wind and solar power after its businesses have been hindered by blackouts". Business Insider.
  89. ^ "Tokelau islands shift to solar energy". 7 November 2012 – via www.bbc.com.
  90. ^ Watts, Jonathan (3 December 2015). "Uruguay makes dramatic shift to nearly 95% electricity from clean energy". The Guardian.
  91. ^ "Germany's renewable energy experiment comes at a cost". Financial Times. 15 September 2013.
  92. ^ "Provincial and Territorial Energy Profiles – Yukon". Government of Canada. 8 April 2020.
  93. ^ Werber, Cassie (6 November 2015). "Austria's largest state now gets 100% of its electricity from renewables".
  94. ^ "Renewables cover almost 100% of German demand". RenewEconomy. 26 August 2015.
  95. ^ "Electricity – Renewable Energies in the first half of 2012" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 10 October 2012. Retrieved 1 September 2015.
  96. ^ Albania, CIA World Factbook.
  97. ^ "Electricity production, consumption and market overview - Statistics Explained". ec.europa.eu.
  98. ^ Embrace the change, Editorial, Nature Energy, 7 June 2016.
  99. ^ "Renewable Energy Facts & Statistics | Scottish Renewables". www.scottishrenewables.com.
  100. ^ "Scotland renewable energy generation reaches record levels". www.power-technology.com. 29 March 2019.
  101. ^ Jacobson, Mark Z.; et al. (2015). "100% clean and renewable wind, water, and sunlight (WWS) all-sector energy roadmaps for the 50 United States". Energy and Environmental Science. 8 (7): 2093–2117. doi:10.1039/c5ee01283j. S2CID 97348845.
  102. ^ Vad Mathiesen, Brian; et al. (2015). "Smart Energy Systems for coherent 100% renewable energy and transport solutions. In". Applied Energy. 145: 139–154. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.075.
  103. ^ "Nuclear power must be well regulated, not ditched". The Economist. 6 March 2021. ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved 31 January 2022.
  104. ^ McDonnell, Tim (3 January 2022). "Germany's exit from nuclear energy will make its power dirtier and more expensive". Quartz. Retrieved 31 January 2022.
  105. ^ Modelling 2050: Electricity System Analysis (PDF) (Report). Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. the additional renewable capacity required to replace unabated gas generation during periods of low renewable output either increases systems costs more than using additional nuclear and/or gas CCUS to do the same thing, or is not achievable within the build limits used in this modelling
  106. ^ Spector, Julian (29 August 2018). "California Assembly Passes Historic 100% Carbon-Free Electricity Bill". greentechmedia.com. Retrieved 4 February 2019.
  107. ^ Roberts, David (31 August 2018). "California just adopted its boldest energy target yet: 100% clean electricity". Vox. Retrieved 4 February 2019.
  108. ^ "Inslee wants 100 percent clean energy in Washington by 2045". KING. Retrieved 4 February 2019.
  109. ^ "100 Percent Renewable Energy Targets by State | EnergySage". Solar News. 2 May 2019. Retrieved 20 October 2019.
  110. ^ a b IPCC (2011). "Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation" (PDF). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. p. 17. Archived from the original (PDF) on 11 January 2014. Retrieved 4 July 2013.
  111. ^ IPCC (2011). "Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation" (PDF). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. p. 22. Archived from the original (PDF) on 11 January 2014. Retrieved 4 July 2013.
  112. ^ a b Harvey, Fiona (9 May 2011). "Renewable energy can power the world, says landmark IPCC study". The Guardian. London.
  113. ^ Pacala, S; Socolow, R (2004). "Stabilization Wedges: Solving the Climate Problem for the Next 50 Years with Current Technologies". Science. 305 (5686): 968–72. Bibcode:2004Sci...305..968P. CiteSeerX doi:10.1126/science.1100103. PMID 15310891. S2CID 2203046.
  114. ^ Brown, Lester R. (2009). "Plan B 4.0, Mobilizing to Save Civilization" (PDF). Earth Policy Institute.
  115. ^ "Microsoft Word - Lock-in_Foxon_final.doc" (PDF). Retrieved 25 July 2018.
  116. ^ Bromby, Robin (2 June 2020). "Needed by 2050: 3 billion tonnes of metals to generate clean energy". Small Caps. Retrieved 19 June 2020.
  117. ^ Månberger, André; Stenqvist, Björn (1 August 2018). "Global metal flows in the renewable energy transition: Exploring the effects of substitutes, technological mix and development". Energy Policy. 119: 226–241. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2018.04.056. ISSN 0301-4215.
  118. ^ Binnie, Isla (7 July 2022). "IEA warns global solar supply chains are too concentrated in China". Reuters. Retrieved 1 September 2022.
  119. ^ a b c d e f McPherson, Madeleine; Karney, Bryan (1 November 2017). "A scenario based approach to designing electricity grids with high variable renewable energy penetrations in Ontario, Canada: Development and application of the SILVER model". Energy. 138: 185–196. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2017.07.027. ISSN 0360-5442. Several flexibility options have been proposed to facilitate VRE integration, including interconnecting geographically dispersed resources, interconnecting different VRE types, building flexible and dispatchable generation assets, shifting flexible loads through demand response, shifting electricity generation through storage, curtailing excess generation, interconnections to the transport or heating energy sectors, and improving VRE forecasting methodologies (Delucchi and Jacobson 2011). Previous VRE integration studies have considered different combinations of balancing options, but few have considered all flexibility options simultaneously.
  120. ^ Crespo, Diego (25 July 2019). "STE can replace coal, nuclear and early gas as demonstrated in an hourly simulation over 4 years in the Spanish electricity mix". AIP Conference Proceedings. SOLARPACES 2018: International Conference on Concentrating Solar Power and Chemical Energy Systems. 2126 (1): 130003. Bibcode:2019AIPC.2126m0003C. doi:10.1063/1.5117645. ISSN 0094-243X. S2CID 201317957.
  121. ^ Benasla, Mokhtar; Hess, Denis; Allaoui, Tayeb; Brahami, Mostefa; Denaï, Mouloud (1 April 2019). "The transition towards a sustainable energy system in Europe: What role can North Africa's solar resources play?". Energy Strategy Reviews. 24: 1–13. doi:10.1016/j.esr.2019.01.007. ISSN 2211-467X. S2CID 169342098.
  122. ^ Kulasekara, Hasal; Seynulabdeen, Vaithehi (September 2019). "A Review of Geothermal Energy for Future Power Generation". 2019 5th International Conference on Advances in Electrical Engineering (ICAEE): 223–228. doi:10.1109/ICAEE48663.2019.8975470.
  123. ^ "UK vehicle-to-grid trial finds economic potential but 'hardware costs still too high'". Energy Storage News. 8 June 2021. Retrieved 24 December 2021.
  124. ^ "Electric cars: Ofgem plans easier way for drivers to sell energy back to grid". the Guardian. 4 September 2021. Retrieved 24 December 2021.
  125. ^ "Scheduling energy a key to the smart grid". College of Engineering. Retrieved 25 January 2022.
  126. ^ "Smart scheduling for big computing tasks cuts emissions up to a third". New Scientist. Retrieved 25 January 2022.
  127. ^ Sayed, K.; Gabbar, H. A. (1 January 2017). "Chapter 18 - SCADA and smart energy grid control automation". Smart Energy Grid Engineering. Academic Press: 481–514. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-805343-0.00018-8. ISBN 9780128053430.
  128. ^ Arbabzadeh, Maryam; Sioshansi, Ramteen; Johnson, Jeremiah X.; Keoleian, Gregory A. (30 July 2019). "The role of energy storage in deep decarbonization of electricity production". Nature Communications. 10 (1): 3413. Bibcode:2019NatCo..10.3413A. doi:10.1038/s41467-019-11161-5. ISSN 2041-1723. PMC 6667472. PMID 31363084.
  129. ^ Ayodele, T. R.; Ogunjuyigbe, A. S. O. (1 April 2015). "Mitigation of wind power intermittency: Storage technology approach". Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 44: 447–456. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.12.034. ISSN 1364-0321.
  130. ^ McPherson, Madeleine; Tahseen, Samiha (15 February 2018). "Deploying storage assets to facilitate variable renewable energy integration: The impacts of grid flexibility, renewable penetration, and market structure". Energy. 145: 856–870. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2018.01.002. ISSN 0360-5442.
  131. ^ a b Jacobson, Mark Z.; von Krauland, Anna-Katharina; Coughlin, Stephen J.; Palmer, Frances C.; Smith, Miles M. (1 January 2022). "Zero air pollution and zero carbon from all energy at low cost and without blackouts in variable weather throughout the U.S. with 100% wind-water-solar and storage". Renewable Energy. 184: 430–442. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2021.11.067. ISSN 0960-1481. S2CID 244820608.
  132. ^ Hunt, Julian David; Zakeri, Behnam; Nascimento, Andreas; Garnier, Bruno; Pereira, Márcio Giannini; Bellezoni, Rodrigo Augusto; de Assis Brasil Weber, Natália; Schneider, Paulo Smith; Machado, Pedro Paulo Bezerra; Ramos, Dorel Soares (1 December 2020). "High velocity seawater air-conditioning with thermal energy storage and its operation with intermittent renewable energies". Energy Efficiency. 13 (8): 1825–1840. doi:10.1007/s12053-020-09905-0. ISSN 1570-6478. S2CID 225063420.
  133. ^ Gils, Hans Christian (2015). "Balancing of intermittent renewable power generation by demand response and thermal energy storage". doi:10.18419/opus-6888. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  134. ^ Li, Gang; Zheng, Xuefei (1 September 2016). "Thermal energy storage system integration forms for a sustainable future". Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 62: 736–757. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.04.076. ISSN 1364-0321.
  135. ^ MacFarlane, Douglas R.; Cherepanov, Pavel V.; Choi, Jaecheol; Suryanto, Bryan H. R.; Hodgetts, Rebecca Y.; Bakker, Jacinta M.; Ferrero Vallana, Federico M.; Simonov, Alexandr N. (17 June 2020). "A Roadmap to the Ammonia Economy". Joule. 4 (6): 1186–1205. doi:10.1016/j.joule.2020.04.004. ISSN 2542-4351. S2CID 218945723.
  136. ^ Oliveira, Alexandra M; Beswick, Rebecca R; Yan, Yushan (1 September 2021). "A green hydrogen economy for a renewable energy society". Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering. 33: 100701. doi:10.1016/j.coche.2021.100701. ISSN 2211-3398.
  137. ^ "Nuclear energy and climate change: Environmentalists debate how to stop global warming". Slate Magazine. 14 January 2013.
  138. ^ Smil, Vaclav (28 June 2012). "A Skeptic Looks at Alternative Energy". ieee.org. Archived from the original on 20 March 2019. Retrieved 4 July 2013.
  139. ^ Lovins, Amory (March–April 2012). "A Farewell to Fossil Fuels". Foreign Affairs. 329 (March/April 2012): 1292–1294. Bibcode:2010Sci...329.1292H. doi:10.1126/science.1195449. PMID 20829473. S2CID 206529026.
  140. ^ "IPCC – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change". ipcc.ch.
  141. ^ Sepulveda, Nestor A.; Jenkins, Jesse D.; De Sisternes, Fernando J.; Lester, Richard K. (21 November 2018). "The Role of Firm Low-Carbon Electricity Resources in Deep Decarbonization of Power Generation". Joule. 2 (11): 2403–2420. doi:10.1016/j.joule.2018.08.006. ISSN 2542-4351.
  142. ^ a b "Contribution of Renewables to Energy Security" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2 May 2019. Retrieved 20 April 2014.
  143. ^ Amory Lovins (2011). Reinventing Fire, Chelsea Green Publishing, p. 199.
  144. ^ "Engineers publish £22bn blueprint for UK to take global lead on hydrogen heating". The Chemical Engineer. 27 November 2018.
  145. ^ "What would Australia look like powered by 100% renewable energy?". The Guardian. 27 January 2019. Retrieved 28 January 2019.
  146. ^ Sovacool, Benjamin K.; Turnheim, Bruno; Hook, Andrew; Brock, Andrea; Martiskainen, Mari (1 January 2021). "Dispossessed by decarbonisation: Reducing vulnerability, injustice, and inequality in the lived experience of low-carbon pathways". World Development. 137: 105116. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105116. ISSN 0305-750X.
  147. ^ "Electricity @ProjectDrawdown". Project Drawdown. 5 February 2020.
  148. ^ Larson, Eric (15 December 2020). "Net-Zero America: Potential Pathways Infrastructure and Impacts" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2 March 2021. Retrieved 29 March 2021.
  149. ^ a b Williams, James H.; Jones, Ryan A.; Haley, Ben; Kwok, Gabe; Hargreaves, Jeremy; Farbes, Jamil; Torn, Margaret S. (2021). "Carbon-Neutral Pathways for the United States". AGU Advances. 2 (1): e2020AV000284. Bibcode:2021AGUA....200284W. doi:10.1029/2020AV000284. ISSN 2576-604X.
  150. ^ Teske, Sven, ed. (2019). Achieving the Paris Climate Agreement Goals. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-05843-2. ISBN 978-3-030-05842-5. S2CID 198078901. Archived from the original on 23 November 2021. Retrieved 29 March 2021.
  151. ^ Löffler, Konstantin; Hainsch, Karlo; Burandt, Thorsten; Oei, Pao-Yu; Kemfert, Claudia; Von Hirschhausen, Christian (October 2017). "Designing a Model for the Global Energy System—GENeSYS-MOD: An Application of the Open-Source Energy Modeling System (OSeMOSYS)". Energies. 10 (10): 1468. doi:10.3390/en10101468.
  152. ^ "Global Energy System Based on 100% Renewable Energy" (PDF). April 2019. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 April 2021. Retrieved 29 March 2021.
  153. ^ a b Sarmiento, Luis; Burandt, Thorsten; Löffler, Konstantin; Oei, Pao-Yu (January 2019). "Analyzing Scenarios for the Integration of Renewable Energy Sources in the Mexican Energy System—An Application of the Global Energy System Model (GENeSYS-MOD)". Energies. 12 (17): 3270. doi:10.3390/en12173270.
  154. ^ Simon, Sonja; Naegler, Tobias; Gils, Hans Christian (April 2018). "Transformation towards a Renewable Energy System in Brazil and Mexico—Technological and Structural Options for Latin America". Energies. 11 (4): 907. doi:10.3390/en11040907.
  155. ^ a b "Energy [R]evolution 2015". Issuu. Archived from the original on 19 January 2021. Retrieved 30 March 2021.
  156. ^ Jacobson, Mark Z.; Delucchi, Mark A.; Bauer, Zach A.F.; Wang, Jingfan; Weiner, Eric; Yachanin, Alexander S. (6 September 2017). "100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World" (PDF). Elsevier Inc. Archived (PDF) from the original on 28 March 2021. Retrieved 30 March 2021.
  157. ^ Bogdanov, Dmitrii; Gulagi, Ashish; Fasihi, Mahdi; Breyer, Christian (1 February 2021). "Full energy sector transition towards 100% renewable energy supply: Integrating power, heat, transport and industry sectors including desalination". Applied Energy. 283: 116273. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.116273. ISSN 0306-2619. S2CID 229427360.
  158. ^ Aston, Adam (16 March 2012). "Amory Lovins on 'Reinventing Fire' with convergence and innovation". Greenbiz.
  159. ^ Wald, Matthew (27 October 2011). "Fossil Fuels as the Whale Oil of the Future". New York Times.
  160. ^ Elkington, John (21 March 2012). "Nine barriers to reinventing capitalism". The Guardian.
  161. ^ a b "Solar Energy Perspectives: Executive Summary" (PDF).
  162. ^ a b Jacobson, Mark Z. & Delucchi, Mark A. (2011). "Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part I: Technologies, energy resources, quantities and areas of infrastructure, and materials" (PDF). Energy Policy. 39 (3): 1154–1169. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.11.040.
  163. ^ Kate Galbraith. 100 Percent Renewables by 2030? Green Inc., 1 December 2009.
  164. ^ Jacobson, Mark Z.; Delucchi, M.A. (November 2009). "A Path to Sustainable Energy by 2030" (PDF). Scientific American. 301 (5): 58–65. Bibcode:2009SciAm.301e..58J. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1109-58. PMID 19873905.
  165. ^ "Wind, solar power paired with storage could be cost-effective way to power grid". UDaily.
  166. ^ Lacey, Stephen (29 March 2012). "A True 'All of the Above' Energy Policy: Denmark Affirms Commitment to 100% Renewable Energy by 2050". Renewable Energy World.
  167. ^ "International 100% Renewable Energy Conference". Irenec2012.com. 26 June 2012. Archived from the original on 22 October 2012. Retrieved 1 November 2012.
  168. ^ "IRENEC 2013". IRENEC 2013. Retrieved 1 November 2012.
  169. ^ Jacobson, Mark Z.; et al. (2013). "Examining the feasibility of converting New York State's all-purpose energy infrastructure to one using wind, water, and sunlight". Energy Policy. 57: 585–601. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.02.036.
  170. ^ Jacobson, Mark Z.; et al. (2014). "A roadmap for repowering California for all purposes with wind, water, and sunlight". Energy. 73: 875–889. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2014.06.099.
  171. ^ Jacobson, Mark Z.; et al. (2016). "A 100% wind, water, sunlight (WWS) all-sector energy plan for Washington State". Renewable Energy. 86: 75–88. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2015.08.003.
  172. ^ Schwarz, Mark (26 February 2014). "Stanford scientist unveils 50-state plan to transform U.S. to renewable energy". Stanford Report.
  173. ^ Stirling, Andy (2014). "Transforming power". Energy Research and Social Science. 1: 83–95. doi:10.1016/j.erss.2014.02.001.
  174. ^ Jacobson, Mark Z; Delucchi, Mark A; Bazouin, Guillaume; Bauer, Zack A. F; Heavey, Christa C; Fisher, Emma; Morris, Sean B; Piekutowski, Diniana J. Y; Vencill, Taylor A; Yeskoo, Tim W (2015). "100% clean and renewable wind, water, and sunlight (WWS) all-sector energy roadmaps for the 50 United States". Energy & Environmental Science. 8 (7): 2093–117. doi:10.1039/C5EE01283J. S2CID 97348845.
  175. ^ a b c d Porter, Eduardo (21 June 2017). "Fisticuffs Over the Route to a Clean-Energy Future". The New York Times. p. B1. Retrieved 4 August 2017.
  176. ^ Clack, Christopher T. M; Qvist, Staffan A; Apt, Jay; Bazilian, Morgan; Brandt, Adam R; Caldeira, Ken; Davis, Steven J; Diakov, Victor; Handschy, Mark A; Hines, Paul D. H; Jaramillo, Paulina; Kammen, Daniel M; Long, Jane C. S; Morgan, M. Granger; Reed, Adam; Sivaram, Varun; Sweeney, James; Tynan, George R; Victor, David G; Weyant, John P; Whitacre, Jay F (2017). "Evaluation of a proposal for reliable low-cost grid power with 100% wind, water, and solar". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 114 (26): 6722–6727. Bibcode:2017PNAS..114.6722C. doi:10.1073/pnas.1610381114. PMC 5495221. PMID 28630353.
  177. ^ Jacobson, Mark Z; Delucchi, Mark A; Cameron, Mary A; Frew, Bethany A (2017). "The United States can keep the grid stable at low cost with 100% clean, renewable energy in all sectors despite inaccurate claims". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 114 (26): E5021–E5023. Bibcode:2017PNAS..114E5021J. doi:10.1073/pnas.1708069114. PMC 5495290. PMID 28630350.
  178. ^ Jacobson, Mark (19 June 2017). "4 Reasons Nuclear and Fossil Fuel Supporters Criticizing 100% Renewable Energy Plan Are Wrong". EcoWatch. Retrieved 4 August 2017.
  179. ^ Aghahosseini, Arman; Bogdanov, Dmitrii; Breyer, Christian (2017). "A Techno-Economic Study of an Entirely Renewable Energy-Based Power Supply for North America for 2030 Conditions". Energies. 10 (8): 1171. doi:10.3390/en10081171.
  180. ^ Jacobson, Mark Z.; Delucchi, Mark A.; Cameron, Mary A.; Frew, Bethany A. (8 December 2015). "Low-cost solution to the grid reliability problem with 100% penetration of intermittent wind, water, and solar for all purposes". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 112 (49): 15060–15065. Bibcode:2015PNAS..11215060J. doi:10.1073/pnas.1510028112. PMC 4679003. PMID 26598655.
  181. ^ Jacobson, Mark Z; Delucchi, Mark A; Bauer, Zack A.F; Goodman, Savannah C; Chapman, William E; Cameron, Mary A; Bozonnat, Cedric; Chobadi, Liat; Clonts, Hailey A; Enevoldsen, Peter; Erwin, Jenny R; Fobi, Simone N; Goldstrom, Owen K; Hennessy, Eleanor M; Liu, Jingyi; Lo, Jonathan; Meyer, Clayton B; Morris, Sean B; Moy, Kevin R; O'Neill, Patrick L; Petkov, Ivalin; Redfern, Stephanie; Schucker, Robin; Sontag, Michael A; Wang, Jingfan; Weiner, Eric; Yachanin, Alexander S (2017). "100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World". Joule. 1: 108–21. doi:10.1016/j.joule.2017.07.005.
  182. ^ Jacobson, Mark Z; Delucchi, Mark A; Cameron, Mary A; Mathiesen, Brian V (2018). "Matching demand with supply at low cost in 139 countries among 20 world regions with 100% intermittent wind, water, and sunlight (WWS) for all purposes". Renewable Energy. 123: 236–48. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2018.02.009. S2CID 46784278.
  183. ^ "Data" (PDF). web.stanford.edu.
  184. ^ https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tables?country=WORLD&energy=Balances&year=2018 Add Hydro and Wind,solar,etc. production and use 1 Mtoe = 1,327 GWy to convert to GW
  185. ^ M Z Jacobson, 100% Clean, Renewable Energy and Storage for Everything, Cambridge University Press 2020

Further readingEdit

External linksEdit