Geologist, energy expert, and PBS host of Energy Switch, Scott Tinker likes to point out that it is possible to be completely factual without being factually complete. This is an important consideration when evaluating statements and arguments. Tinker notes:
“A realistic and factually complete (not just completely
factual…) energy understanding is vital for policy makers, corporate leaders,
educators, and the broader public.”
“When evaluating energy, we’ve got to widen the aperture.
Energy underpins everything in our lives, and it’s not simple. Simplistic
approaches like clean or dirty, good or bad — these are binary choices that
don’t exist. We’re being made to think they do, but they don’t exist today.
We’ve got to wait and then think critically.”
I can think of
some examples in energy and environmental debates where factual completeness is
lacking. One is simply how different energy source outputs are measured. I am
referring to capacity. A 100 MW solar farm will produce less energy than a
100MW wind farm and both will produce less energy than a 100MW gas combustion
turbine. Unfortunately, capacity is often used as the measure of output when it
is really only the measure of output when those resources are operating. Wind
output varies by wind speed which changes daily and seasonally. Solar output
varies by cloudiness and daylight time. Thus, we have to multiply those
capacities by the amount of time they can be online. The result is known as
capacity factor, or utilization rate. We can regard the capacity factor in two
ways. First, we can assume what the capacity factor is when those resources are
online as much as possible, or the maximum capacity factor. Second, we can
count the actual utilization rates. A gas turbine or engine may be online up to
100% of the time, but that is rare, especially if that resource is used to back up other resources when demand is high. Thus, we can compare natural gas,
coal, or nuclear resources online time (which can theoretically operate 100% of
the time) to renewables online time. The U.S. natural gas fleet had an average
capacity factor/utilization rate of 57% in 2022. However, many of those
resources were offline or throttled down when not needed so they were not
operated at the utilization rate at which they are capable. While it is true to
say that wind has an average capacity factor of 33% and natural gas is at 57%,
it is more factually complete to note that wind has a theoretical limit of a
few percentage points higher than 33% while natural gas has a theoretical limit
closer to 100%. Since they don’t have fuel costs, wind and solar are preferred
when they are available. However, their costs were paid upfront. They have much
higher upfront costs per output than natural gas.
Capacity factors for selected energy sources in the United
States in 2023
An important part
of Tinker and company’s work at the Switch Energy Alliance (SEA) is energy
education and that education needs to favor factual completeness. Jennifer
Smith, Senior Fellow at Switch Energy Alliance, told Linda Hsieh, editor and
publisher of Drilling Contractor Magazine:
“We have to differentiate between being ‘completely factual’
and ‘factually complete,’ she said. “It’s completely factual that solar and
wind have grown dramatically year over year for the past two years, but it’s a
more factually complete statement to also say that they remain under 6% of the
total resources used.”
Factual completeness is important when considering pledges
to decarbonize. We are not almost there. Our efforts are just a drop in the
bucket. In fact, we are not quite keeping up with demand growth. We are close
though. At some point, some regions will be able to say that all energy demand
growth is being provided by low-carbon sources and some limited places can say
it now, but as a whole we are still far off from that point. Reconsideration of
net-zero by 2050 pledges are occurring. Will we be able to decarbonize energy
by 2050? No one really knows but right now it seems unlikely that in less than
25 years we will be able to do so. There are wildcards that could make it
happen. The big one is technology, both new technology and upgrading existing
technology. However, right now it appears that the net-zero by 2050 aspiration
is unrealistic. Energy Secretary Chris Wright went so far as to call the goal
“sinister” which is overkill and an unnecessary statement. While it may create
some problems as we come to realize the difficulty of reaching it, there is no
reason to demonize it. It’s OK to have aspirations but we must distinguish them
from the realities on the ground. Tinker noted in a 2021 discussion at the
Energy Workforce and Technology Council:
“The sun and the wind are renewable, but the wind turbines,
solar panels, and batteries aren’t,” Tinker said. “Let’s be completely factual
and factually complete: There’s no truly renewable energy. It all comes from
the earth. We make it and dump it back into the earth or into the atmosphere.”
Tinker noted in a
piece for LP Gas Magazine:
“In fact, “Solar and wind are the fastest-growing energy
sources,” he adds, calling the statement completely factual.
“What would make it factually complete, Tinker asks? Scaling
renewable production against the world’s energy consumption and seeing how the
renewable sources don’t keep up with energy demand.”
References:
The
dual challenge: Reframing the debate on energy, environment. Brian Richesson.
LP Gas Magazine. July 15, 2022. The
dual challenge: Reframing the debate on energy, environment - LP Gas
Council
Hosts Dr. Scott Tinker for Engaging Discussion on the Future of Energy. Energy,
Workforce, and Technology Council. October 6, 2021. Council
Hosts Dr. Scott Tinker for Engaging Discussion on the Future of Energy - Energy
Workforce & Technology Council
Striving
for ‘factually complete,’ not just ‘completely factual’. Linda Hsieh. Drilling
Contractor. October 22, 2024. Striving
for ‘factually complete,’ not just ‘completely factual’ - Drilling Contractor
Inspiring
An Energy Educated Future. Switch Energy Alliance. Switch Energy Alliance
No comments:
Post a Comment