″Is Renewable Energy Realistic?″

Background:

Many countries in the world have come to an agreement that the world need to set some shared objectives on climatic changes. These set targets need to quickly arrive at full de-carbonization, around 80-100% de-carbonization. In order to achieve deep de-carbonization, electrification need to be employed in abundant amount. Other sources of energy that provides carbon free electricity like wind and sun energy are readily available worldwide. Such energy is not dispatch able because it comes and goes naturally on its own timing. In order to balance such unavoidable variation, we need other dispatch-able carbon free energy sources for grid operators. Fossil fuel and nuclear energy are the probable large sources of carbon free energy that is dispatch able but many people oppose their use.

Current situation:

Deep carbonization has been found to be cheaper when it is done on power plants that are dispatch-able. Based on the studies done by Jenkins and Thernstorm on deep de-carbonization, the model that enhances the least cost to zero carbon electricity finds it cheaper to include nuclear and ccs as opposed to ruling them out. The next review done on this article seeks to conduct a feasibility test for 100 % renewable energy. For all the studies conducted, none qualified these viability assessments because the highest score was 4 out of 7. There is conflicting ideas of energy experts and their models. As much as energy experts are optimistic that a hundred percent renewable energy is realistic and reasonable, the model agrees to the contrary that a hundred percent renewable energy is unrealistic.

Critique:

As much as it is important to achieve deep de-carbonization to produce zero carbon electricity, it is important to be innovating and conduct strategic planning to take care of the available variations.

Cite this page