I have 50 Rooftop Solar Panels for 2 Houses. In Groningen Nederland. Make a lot of Money. No Energy Bill for 12 years now. People save Money with Rooftop Solar, no Gas.
@@TheBooban 50 panels at 100 Euro (and dropping) a piece is 5K euros. They last 25 years, that's 200 Euros per year. I'm also from NL, have 10 panels and make 800 euros a year (after my own energy usage has been deducted). Generally in NL you recoop your investment within 3 years (I did). And those numbers are assuming that the energy prices will stay the same; when they rise, you recoop even faster.
Well, if they do, it's because they save paying an artificially inflated price for electricity, while others do pay the inflated price and/or they're not paying their fair share into keeping electricity available for consumption 24/7.
I would love to do this in the United States, but for some reason we can't just order the solar panels ourselves and install them.We have to be under a contract with a company by law
Canada Quebec province has been 99% renewable energy for many years. Mainly hydro and now added wind few years ago and scaling up. One of the cheapest electricity price in the world.
I doubt that very much. Electricity from renewable sources perhaps, but 99% renewable energy? No certainly not. How do you guys drive over there? What do you heat your houses with in winter?
@@hvh377 Electricity generation it says can't you read? It does NOT include gasoline/natueral gas duh........heat their homes with electricity. You need a new renewable brain.
Installed 13.2 kW solar PV system in 2012 and two Powerwall batteries in 2018, and have been net positive for 12+ years now exporting ~50% of our excess solar back to grid and actually operate as a microgrid for 8+ months of the year in Edmonds, WA. Thanks for doing positive stories like this. Love your channel/content!
No one would have done this to "save the planet", it's just cheaper and dropping in price while other methods continue to go up in cost. Adding storage is going to make these new methods very stable and easy to manage. The world we be awash in battery production soon and grid storage will begin to roll out. It's the combination of cars and grid storage that has given battery makers confidence to scale up.
Unfortunately last year Costa Rica increased its use of diesel, due to the drop in water levels available for Hydro. Out bills have just increased mainly because of the cost of burning that diesel. Unfortunately when you couple that with ICE's latest DISINCENTIVES for solar installations, Costa Rica is destined to slip down the chart, rather than maintain its lofty heights. It's such a shame and a typical short sighted approach to power generation. One of the sunniest countries in Central America, with great Solar potential is being denied its ability to be self sufficient because of the incestuous relationship between ICE (the ironically named Electric Company) and their master, the government.
87% of electricity in British Columbia Canada is from hydro-electric generation, and that number will be over 90% when the site-c generator comes online; 0% is from coal or nuclear.
I doubt it. For most countries, their electricity use is a small fraction of their energy use. I will believe there is a short list of countries who actually have their electricity almost entirely from renewable sources, but I doubt there are any countries actually using 100% renewable energy.
Unfortunately last year Costa Rica increased its use of diesel, due to the drop in water levels available for Hydro. Out bills have just increased mainly because of the cost of burning that diesel. Unfortunately when you couple that with ICE's latest DISINCENTIVES for solar installations, Costa Rica is destined to slip down the chart, rather than maintain its lofty heights. It's such a shame and a typical short sighted approach to power generation. One of the sunniest countries in Central America, with great Solar potential is being denied its ability to be self sufficient because of the incestuous relationship between ICE (the ironically named Electric Company) and their master, the government.
I'm surprised that Costa Rica is not on your list. On the IEA website that you cite in the video, it shows that Costa Rica produced ~100% of its electricity through renewable generation. 72.9% Hydro 12.6% Geothermal 12.4% Wind 1.5% Biofuels 0.64% Solar
Man Costa Rica punches above its weight. They have better health outcomes than many places in the USA, for what 1/50th, of the cost? Great coffee too. ;^)
Unfortunately last year Costa Rica increased its use of diesel, due to the drop in water levels available for Hydro. Out bills have just increased mainly because of the cost of burning that diesel. Unfortunately when you couple that with ICE's latest DISINCENTIVES for solar installations, Costa Rica is destined to slip down the chart, rather than maintain its lofty heights. It's such a shame and a typical short sighted approach to power generation. One of the sunniest countries in Central America, with great Solar potential is being denied its ability to be self sufficient because of the incestuous relationship between ICE (the ironically named Electric Company) and their master, the government.
I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been told that it’s not possible to run a grid without gas or coal…. Not possible until people start doing it, I guess.
@@FabioCapelaHydro is base load and constant, just like coal and gas and nuclear and geothermal. Wind and solar are both intermittent which are not suitable for grid supply by themselves. Gas and batteries and to a lesser extent hydro are fast start peakers. A grid requires peakers for grid stability. Otherwise load shedding, brownouts, generation shut-downs, equipment damage and long power cuts
The naysayers - most of them fossil fuel industry sponsored or inspired - said that it was impossible. Whereas, converting to 100% renewable electricity, and then, (virtually) 100% renewable power is technically the lowest hanging fruit of the urgent challenge of environmental sustainability. That’s not to say that it is ‘easy.’ The only real barrier is political - to overcome the fossil fuel industry disinformation, and most significantly: to circumvent the fossil fuel funded political class - e.g. Putin’s Russia, Saudi Arabia etc.. Whether those states will give up their addiction to fossil fuel money is another matter altogether, as so many of them are on the dysfunctional spectrum.
And of the seven countries that made 99+%, FIVE were due purely to hydroelectric, ONE was due purely to hydroelectric and geothermal, and NONE of them got more than 4% total from wind and solar. In other words, the common denominator was unique geography which does NOT translate to other countries. The same situation applies to Norway, with about 10% from combined wind and solar, and about 88% from hydroelectricity. So the big takeaway from this video is live in a country with lots of hydroelectricity.
In recent weeks, Portugal has produced more renewable electricity than it consumes. Portugal even exports electricity to Spain because it produces too much with the help of dams. Some gas-fired power stations continue to produce marginally for technical reasons, but everything the Portuguese consume comes from renewable sources. And the prices of these renewables are so low that producers are already worried because they sell clean electricity at very low prices.
These 8 countries that generate over 99% electricity from renewable energy need to go EV then that will be protecting there GDP. For instant If Australia converts to 100% EV we improve our GDP by app $24 Billion as we import most of our Fossil Fuel.
It would be better if you were making EVs domestically, but since you’re already importing all new cars it won’t hurt too much to accelerate that with more new EVs phasing out old ICE cars at a faster rate then natural replacement of the car fleet.
@@willeisinga2089Ethiopia has one of the lowest car ownership rate in the world, around 2 cars for every 1000 inhabitants. Car ownership is limited to the ruling elite and if they want to buy more expensive EVs it will just mean more of their fellow citizens will go hungry
@@willeisinga2089I'm not sure whether switching to renewable energy sources worldwide is helping Australia's GDP in the long run. Australia's -number 1- number 2 (after iron ore) export product is coal.
That's fantastic news! It's so encouraging to see the global shift towards renewable energy gaining momentum. It's a testament to our collective efforts in prioritizing sustainability and reducing our carbon footprint. Knowing that eight countries have reached this milestone is not only inspiring but also serves as a beacon of hope for others to follow suit. It's a reminder that with determination and innovation, we can create a brighter, greener future for generations to come.
Heat pumps and electric cars are cheap then too, if you use solar. But even without PV my electric car cost sbout u Euro/100 kilometers in my country Germany.
California is still dependent on electricity imported from other states. California Energy Commission figures for 2022 show 204,049 GWh produced in state, imports from neighbouring states were 93,483 GWh.
According to the Scottish Government, renewable technologies generated the equivalent of 113% of Scotland’s overall electricity consumption in 2022, new statistics show.
While it's easier for these smaller countries to get to this place, it will be much more effective when the big population countries start to get near this percentage.
It's just a matter of scale, bigger countries have more land to play with, there's no technical reason why they can't do the same, it's just a matter of having the political will to make it happen, but either way, over the next decade or so, we are likely going to get some bigger countries generating most if not all the electrical energy, especially in Europe by renewable means. Anyway, renewables has never really been the issue, having a buffer with batteries is where it gets complicated, you need a big enough energy storage as renewables is inconsistent.
well these are just lies by omission, for instance it is true that Congo gets 96% of it's electricity from two hydroelectric dams but less than 10% of the population in Congo has access to electricity and in the energy mix of Congo the hydro power is just 2.5%. So, yes, they have electricity from renewables but is not a lot and is from hydro which is a century old method and those dams are there from 1972 and 1982 respectively, so , they are not there because some green deal, they were built before.
Brazil should cross the 90% renewables threshold this year, and is planning to reach 95% renewables in the next few years as fossil fuel thermal power (gas and coal) that is used mostly as backup generation in case of droughts (as most of Brazil's electricity is hydropower) gets phased out. It's a pretty big country. China generates about 40% of its electricity without fossil fuels (i.e., from renewables plus nuclear), but at the rate China is installing new renewable generation this should change fairly quickly; three years ago only 30% of China's electricity wasn't generated from fossil fuels, and the rate of change seems to be accelerating. And any change in the carbon intensity of China's power generation has a huge effect, as China is, by far, the country that generates and uses the most electricity in the world (though if you measure electricity used per capita it's still well below the developed countries).
California has set a new record by going for several months now on electricity only from renewables. California has 39 million people, and uses a lot of energy. New car sales are also over 25% BEV.
Yes, these near ground wind turbines would work perfectly on a windmill. To do the integration you just have to see how it can help about the traditional windmill faster. Yes the vertical windmill can help move the horizontal windmill. So both can work together making both stronger and they can produce lots of energy even when there's almost no wind... But you have to integrate them where they help each other moves. Push pull system.
I’ve travel the USA. I’ve observed the last two years large solar fields built everywhere. The latest one is in West Memphis Arkansas is possibly 2 square miles in size. Government subsidies funded for sure!
Annual US subsidy of petrol and co: somewhere between 10-50B. The tax code is full of such subsidies and the amount depends on how you interpret it. Globally its estimated that subsidies of petrol fuel are about 7% of world GDP in 2022 (an increase from previous years). US subsidy of ALL renewables were about 15B in 2022. About 70-80% of global subsidies are for fossil fuels according to the International Renewable Energy Agency, the remaining 20-30% is for renewables.
Last year I drove 4 hours from my location to visit my daughter in Savannah, GA. I was amazed how many solar farms were there compared to when last I made the trip. I have always said, Solar is the biggest no brainer in the history of man. However in the US politics over takes science and the drum beat is still drill baby drill - I just don't get it. We use to lead the world in innovation now we lead in conspiracies and donor based politics. Nice to see the rest of the world moving forward in a positive energy way to save the planet.
The UK generates quite a lot of green electricity but we still rely for 75% on total energy used on fossil fuels. Heating and transportation is almost exclusively fossil fuelled.
From next year heat pumps will be required on all new builds in the UK, so things are starting to move in the right direction, despite Sunak’s best efforts to throw climate action into reverse.
@@philiptaylor7902 I think that edict has been postponed. I have an air heat pump. It is great. But the MSM is fighting tooth and nail to preserve gas boilers. The truth is we don't have enough wind farms and the National Grid is insufficient to transport the electricity - even if we had it. Unfortunately wind farms have tripled in cost in the last 5 years so there is little prospect of rapidly moving away from fossil fuels. I think the UK will be reliant on fossil fuels for another 20 years minimum. For this reason we should exploit the North Sea and frack in preference to buying off Saudi Arabia or some other pariah State.
Depleted oil wells are a potential source of geothermal energy. Many deep wells already encounter significant ground heat. By drilling the abandoned oil wells deeper and using fracking, water can be pumped down one well and evacuated by a nearby well. It's a new technology that needs development effort. The geothermal heat is down there - no question about that. Texas is a location of this type of research. A concern is the hot water can be corrosive which can cause high ongoing maintenance cost. The best geothermsl sites in the U.S. are west of the Missisippi river, often where water needed for this type of project is a limited resource, but the water need not be potable. The material from below can be a pollutant so handling spills is a potential environmental cost.
Forget fracking, it's downright dangerous. Here in western Canada it's used by fossil fuel chasers to force upthe very dredges of old and obsolete wells causing earthquakes and trouble , which the industry then works toignore and deny.
As a Norwegian, i wonder where the 1,6% made from fossil fuel comes from? Smaler generators at off-grid building sites? Surplus electrisity imported at night, from coal powered or nucular plants outside Norway? Or is it the smal coal powered plant at the Svalbard islands, delivering electricity to the 2417 souls living at 78 degre north in Longyearbyen, that are close to the northpole, and where it is total darknes for 4 months every winter. On 19 of October 2023 the coal powered powerstation was shut down and replaced with a new one runing on Diesel.
I don't know where the stat "90% of world lives on the sunbelt." Most of China is not on the Sunbelt, Japan, Russia, Korea, Northern Europe etc About 90% of the world's population live above the equator. Maybe that is where the stat is coming from.
It's a vague term thrown out by solar advocates to imply that most of the world could run off of solar electricity. In reality, many places are cloudy, and not suitable for economical solar energy. Peter Zeihan has global maps on his website that shows where solar and wind are actually economically viable.
Don't forget that in many of these countries electricity is only a part of overall energy usage. For example, in the UK, I consume 10 x more kWh of gas in my home for heating and cooking than the kWh of electricity.
And exactly that's the reason why heating should be done by Heatpumps, they save up to 85% Energy, same for electric cars, every EV on the road reduces primary energy consumption by twice as much as the EV itself needs.
@@chriswilliams8607 Yep. A lot of energy is used to pump oil, transport it, refine, transport and distribute the resulting fuel, and finally pump it into a car; shutting down the part of the oil industry that handles gasoline and diesel for cars (and perhaps trucks) would save an unbelievable amount of electricity and shipping fuel. If I remember correctly, someone once did the math and if we decommissioned all installations used by the oil industry and used their area for solar and wind it would cover most of the global energy need, including the energy needs for sea and air transport when we finally get to electrifying those sectors.
Okay this is a bit of an unfair stat and needs clarity: Dams, Dams, Dams . . . Dams are the forgotten renewable energy source that has been around for hundred of years. Some countries are blessed with viable hydrio schemes and most are not. . . . Here is a crazy stat: In the Canadian province of Quebec, 100% of their energy comes from Dams. They do have a few Wind farms and solar farms where energy transmission is to expensive from the Dams. Aberta is the Canadian leading province in Renewable Wind and Solar but for all their amazing progress in Wind and Solar they still get 97% of their energy from carbon emitting oil, gas and coal burning.
As for Norway "Hydropower is still the mainstay of the Norwegian electricity system. At the beginning of 2023, there were 1 769 hydropower plants in Norway, with a combined installed capacity of 33 691 MW. In a normal year, the Norwegian hydropower plants produce 136.49 TWh, which is about 88% of Norway’s total power production."
Not much options for expanding hydropower so to decarbonise the whole economy there needs to be more solar, wind and maybe nuclear. I hope we build a bunch of floating wind power plants around the old existing oil rigs. Some of them even have a beefy electricity cable to land already, so good opportunity to reuse infrastructure. There’s even talk of sending hydrogen rather than natural gas to Germany over existing pipes (for industry, not for cars)
Rooftop solar is the only investment returning a tax free 10% return (often much higher), backed up by a 20-25 year panel warranty and equipment is secured by homeowners insurance. If you could buy a bond that payed out a tax free interest rate of 10% for 20-25years and was 100% insured from loss, most asset allocators would take that option for a portion of their portfolio. It’s a great investment (I’ve done it 2x on two homes) and it just keeps getting better every year ignoring the tax incentive savings entirely. Don’t like making or saving money? Don’t do it. Add an EV to a solar powered home (even partially solar) and you supercharge that tax free 10% return to include gas savings. After all, you are getting electricity at 50% or less than what the utilities are selling it for and you’ve locked in your electricity cost for 20-25 (or more) years at some % so you don’t have to worry about opec changing oil prices. An EV saves thousands of dollars over gasoline each year so the 10% return from solar panels can easily jump to a tax free 20% or more. And who wouldn’t want to own their own gas station with a tax free ROI?
🌅Very clear explanation of Solar PV R.O.I. I add 1. it's also 'Positive Cash Flow' from day 1! 2. After payoff of initial investment, it's Profit!💰 For the owner of the source of their energy, Nothing beats free 'fuel' energy source!🗽
@@dzcav3 subsidies are irrelevant to the returns - add those in an the returns are far greater, in the 15% range. But it does not work in perhaps 15% of populated areas, and it wasn’t designed to. But they do use it in Antarctica, so there’s something.
The Canadian province of Alberta has the greatest wind power potential in the country. It is also the biggest producer of fossil fuel in the nation. Sadly, it ultra right wing government has put severe restrictions on the development of renewables, and the future of the industry is in doubt.
Alberta also has terrible restrictions on rooftop solar which is a blatant attempt to make it unviable for citizens and businesses so they stay reliant on grid provided electricity.
Here in Canada we have so much renewable hydropower that we have surely been exporting more than our total consumption for decades now. Quebec and Labrador have been our A team there but here in Ontario, Niagara falls really got the whole electricity thing going for the world, now didn't it? Unlike many countries on that list, we are an advanced economy and have been for quite some time now
So that is why it is important that business and individuals invest in solar with battery storage systems themselves. It will relieve the grid of the massive growth a country need to keep up with demand.
Great job to these countries. Albania - 99+% hydro Bhutan - 99+% hydro Nepal - 99+% hydro Paraguay - 99+% hydro Iceland - 70% hydro. Only other major contributor geothermal. Ethiopia - 96% hydro, 4% wind DRC - 96% hydro. Other sources were too small to be noted. A sad footnote is the bulk of DRC's "renewable" energy is from the burning of biomass, which produces as much CO2 equivalent as the dirtiest coal. Also, 19% of the population has access to electricity. The government hopes to increase this percentage to 32% by 2030.
Biomass can be an issue if you are cutting down vegetation or growing crops in order to feed the biomass power generation. If you are using biomass waste - like, for example, bio residue from processing crops - then it's effectively carbon-free power, because if the waste was instead discarded it would generate the same CO2 emissions as it decomposed anyway.
@FabioCapela you're not wrong. The co2 emissions remain the same, and from what I can conclude from the reporting, the biomass in this case is primarily charcoal for cooking and heating. Which brings up many non climate change concerns for the people locally.
@@carrdoug99 That, unfortunately, equates to cutting down vegetation, making it very environmentally *un*friendly. And yeah, charcoal for cooking and heating can be dangerous for a number of reasons, including how it generates enough carbon monoxide to be dangerous in enclosed spaces.
The most important thing is to locate yourself in a low-population country with huge amounts of dammable rivers available. The rest of the planet is not so fortunate.
Solars big problem is ot puts out much less in the winter than the summer. That statement on California is very misleading since they ran on 100% solar for a few hours per day not entire days.
@smalldogstudio You can find it online. However, just think about it there is no way solar provides power at night. So it only provided 100% during peak solar output which was about 6 hours per day
So summer when there is air conditioning demand it puts out more, than winter when there is less AC demand. OK. Can also put on rooftop solar which simultaneously reduces AC requirements for the building it is on. Sorry this problem has already been assessed and dealt with by engineers and it turns out it is not a problem.
@5353Jumper As we push to go all electric EVs and heating will increase nighttime electric use. Especially during winter when solar output is diminished. My solar averages over 50 kwh per day in June/July and around 6 in December
A note on the report about California being 100% renewable for 25 out of 32 days (the number of days varies by news agency). The renewables involved, of course, were hydro, geothermal, wind & solar. The headline is quite misleading. From the report. "Supply exceeded demand for 0.25 (15 minutes) to 6 hours per day). There was no day when renewables supplied 100% of supply for an entire day (or even close to it).
So there are new ways to improve energy generating capabilities from existing windmill. That even with no wind the windmill runs.... And capturing other things like static energy and many other forms of energy. And yes, at the top of the windmill, having solar panels, even the shaft of the windmill can be wrapped in solar panels. Even if you have horizontal and vertical working together, that's when they're wind.Then my system works when there's no wind and the solar panels wrapped around the shaft and at top and maybe on the blades can further generate energy.....
Wind is great for now but I think it will diminish to solar over time. Windmills are mechanical, PV is not. Just like ICE vs. BEV, the less mechanical the more opportunity for steep cost declines. Solar will just be much cheaper and use fewer resources. Batteries are very important, as well.
@@Simon-dm8zv Why if solar is way cheaper and we have more than enough very cheap stationary storage? It's like hydro...good for now but too expensive and environmentally harmful to keep around in a decade or so.
@@TheBooban At our local solar plant they have the goats coming in once in a while. And the funny thing was , a Conservative local Minister of parliament thought the solar plant was bankrupt and put that in her media release. The stupid women never checked to get her facts right.
Ahh yes of course. Some of them seem to be acting like greenhouses in the dryer regions, offering shade to microorganisms, undergrowth and small creatures.
Vegetation below the solar panels helps control the panel temperature and actually increases power generation. Not to mention that if you space the panels a bit more than usual, losing roughly 20% of the panel ground coverage (and, thus, produced energy), the area below the panels receives enough sunlight that it can be used to grow certain crops, including pasture for grazing animals, with almost as much productivity as if the panels weren't there (an arrangement called agrivoltaics).
Even if the climate change doom stories are wrong (and I don’t think that they are) this trend is giving each country energy independence and rapidly reducing pollution, so its win win (or wind wind)!
You need to include Tesla in your robotics list. All of the other manufacturers are going to have trouble scaling production. Tesla can get to 1M/yr in 18-24 months. They're solving actuator production now.
Spain, the sunniest country in Europe lags behind the UK and Germany in solar power thanks to our conservative governments that tune the market to please the energy oligopoly. Even so, more and more days electicity prices are negative. Sadly, electrification of transport is marginal. A shame.
What about island nations? Theoretically they could switch faster, right? I heard a lot about Costa Rica. But I expect people who pass through to reach Panama would mean Panama would also go renewable at roughly the same time.
But these 2 gentlemen could work with you to creative revolutionary.New system for windmills and can be applied to existing windmills converting them into a multi source Generation system.
Costa Rica? In 2016 they were at 98%! I thought by now it would have hit 100%. 65% was from Hydro electric and the balance was from geothermal and wind. I thought they might add a bit more geo thermal and that would do it. What has happened?
How can solar be cheaper than wind when it only provides power for half the year? With overcapacity maybe two thirds of the year. The fair comparison would be solar with overcapacity and energy storage vs wind, and Im not so sure that then solar is really cheaper
Shhh! Don't mention that around here! :D Yes, in non-sunbelt countries, solar goes hand-in-hand with gas, because we sometimes have periods of days or even weeks with no wind and little sun. The true cost of solar and wind in those countries really ought to reflect that, but it would be hard to calculate.
You're not sure because you've not looked for data. You can find it out by googling the research and national reports but the Engineering with Rosie channel has done that work already. Yes, solar and wind really are cheaper, even with the costs of backups.
@@tony0x48It 's _because_ you have gas to use as well, that solar is relatively cheap. It's when you have to take measures to fill the gaps when gas goes away, that solar (or renewable energy in general) becomes very expensive.
its not a competition by day. Its a question of what mix covers your needs most cost-effectively across the entire year. This surely depends on how much offgrid storage there is.
Wind farms are considered good if they return 30% over the course of a year. The power output is worked out over a year; I believe it is 30% of power output if it was running 24/7.
The average US home consumes 30 KWH per day. A backup storage battery of 10 KWH would suffice as a restricted use power source or as a supplement when the grid is maxed out.
Norway uses hydro power, import some and export some power. Not so much wind power and that is mainly because we have a group of people making noise and threats against wind power. Probably funded by the oil business. The demand of oil is in free fall and they are fighting to keep up the fight against all green power they can see. The newest thing is mentally illness due to have seen a wind mill. Demanding money for lower life quality than expected.
Crisp report Sam and glad to hear every word. WOW! Except for politics and warmongers everything appears to be becoming better for the future overall. 2024 is not going to be a pretty year methinks in respect of World-wide events. But glad to know there are folks out there shoring up energy accessibility and doing what they can to make our stressed-out planet a better place to be. All kudos to them.
For countries with public healthcare, the savings from less treatment for car pollution caused diseases alone more than compensate for all lost revenue from fuel taxes.
Norway was the only rich country on this list and that’s because it has lots of hydro and not wind and solar. If you want to be poor going to renewables will guarantee that you stay poor. Just ask Germany which is on the brink of economic collapse because it destroyed itself with high cost renewables and shutdown their nuclear plants. France has 70% nuclear and half the energy cost of Germany. Economic success is totally dependent on cheap, reliable and abundant energy. Renewables provide non of these.
You can find that information in no time at the Web sites of organisations such as the IEA, Renew Economy and similar. It's old news now that renewables are cheaper and their cost continues to keep dropping. While fossil fuel based energy generation is increasing in cost.
@@BrentonSmythesfieldsaye “. . . a naïve observer might conclude that the rising share of new renewables (solar and wind) will usher in an era of falling electricity prices. But in reality, the opposite has been true.” Vaclav Smil, Numbers Don’t Lie, p.172 Costs for real-world electrical grids have to include transmission and back-up costs for the intermittent solar and wind.
@@dzcav3 Of course electricity prices are not going down. They have been going up and the reason is well understood within commerce and the energy sector. We are in a progressive systemic energy transition, not a scenario where all of a sudden we turn fossil fuels off, then magically switch on 100% renewable energy utopia and suddenly electrcity prices are cheaper. While we need to keep legacy fossil fuel generation going in what turns out to be unfavourable efficiency operating modes, while the renewable energy sector progresses and matures, the fossil fuel generation is going to add expense to it's production due to that inefficiency. This inefficiency cost of fossil fuel generation are having a negating effect on the cheap wholesale generation of renewable energy. That inefficiency cost is passed onto the consumer unsurprisingly. One of the required components of renewable energy systems is storage, which has catching up to do. Storage at scale has the ability to negate the need for fossil fuel based generation and hence cost can come down then. This is well documented in energy sector business and assosciation organisations assessment and reporting literature all around the world. AEMO in Australia has explained this clearly on numerous ocassions. Vaclav is welcome to his perspective, everyone seems to have them, often while ignoring the actual operations on the ground. On top of all that, what always gets dropped in these "cost" narratives, is that we have a serious problem to solve in everyones interest. By continually burning stuff we are not solving that problem, we are making it worse. For the last couple of centuries we have obviously been operating on credit and payment is now falling well overdue. People are sooking about that.
As long as countries have a form of energy such as hydro, geothermo, gas, coal or nuclear to back them up and have batteries to smooth it out, renewables will work.
100% "sustainable" economies produce....nothing. Try smelting iron (you know bridges), aluminum (ah, aircraft), with solar or wind. No can do. I use solar to charge laptop batteries. Cute. But my house: mains. Cheaper. Electricity 101: Volts * Amps = Power (Watts).
Not exactly right. Germany imports nuclear when it is cheaper to import than to produce electricity by themselves. Nuclear has been 1.5% of all electricity in 2023, while a total of 6% electrcity was imported. 50% of the imported electricity was from renewable sources.
Countries that are titans of industry and manufacturing. 😂 German manufacturing is running to China and US as fast as can because electricity costs are insanely high after the US blew up the Nordstream pipeline.
Because ICE cars aren't the biggest problem. We can live with ICE cars, we can't live with out farming land because it being destroyed by solar panels and windmills.. Nuclear is clean energy it needs to be the push for clean energy.
The big oil propaganda has a lot of money to throw around for lobbying the MSM, Politicians etc, it's causing the slow down of adoption but these Luddites cant stop progress
not everybody lives in the land of make believe that's why. EVs are expensive toys for urban dwellers, there are only 2 genders and there is no climate emergency. Facts.
wind power is trash. to many moving parts and maintenance involved for the output. if you are gonna have that many moving parts, it needs to have the output of hydro to be reasonable.
People that are interested in promoting large uses of electricity are interested in making grid electricity cheap and reliable. It makes no sense why why somebody that calls themselves the Electric Viking wants to make electricity cost prohibitive and unreliable with appalling erratic and expensive wind and solar wild AC generated electricity. Grid electricity should be going down in relative cost with increases in productivity and technology while disturbing the air and water environment less.
I have 50 Rooftop Solar Panels for 2 Houses. In Groningen Nederland. Make a lot of Money. No Energy Bill for 12 years now. People save Money with Rooftop Solar, no Gas.
When will you replace those solar panels? And what will that cost?
@@TheBooban Solar panels have 25 years warranty (I installed them at my home, too).
@@TheBooban 50 panels at 100 Euro (and dropping) a piece is 5K euros. They last 25 years, that's 200 Euros per year. I'm also from NL, have 10 panels and make 800 euros a year (after my own energy usage has been deducted). Generally in NL you recoop your investment within 3 years (I did). And those numbers are assuming that the energy prices will stay the same; when they rise, you recoop even faster.
Well, if they do, it's because they save paying an artificially inflated price for electricity, while others do pay the inflated price and/or they're not paying their fair share into keeping electricity available for consumption 24/7.
I would love to do this in the United States, but for some reason we can't just order the solar panels ourselves and install them.We have to be under a contract with a company by law
Canada Quebec province has been 99% renewable energy for many years. Mainly hydro and now added wind few years ago and scaling up. One of the cheapest electricity price in the world.
Hydro. That’s it right there. Knew there was a traditional source in there.
Like Tasmania as a part of Australia has huge hydro
I doubt Quebec has 99% renewable energy. Nowhere near probably....
I doubt that very much. Electricity from renewable sources perhaps, but 99% renewable energy? No certainly not. How do you guys drive over there? What do you heat your houses with in winter?
@@hvh377 Electricity generation it says can't you read? It does NOT include gasoline/natueral gas duh........heat their homes with electricity. You need a new renewable brain.
Installed 13.2 kW solar PV system in 2012 and two Powerwall batteries in 2018, and have been net positive for 12+ years now exporting ~50% of our excess solar back to grid and actually operate as a microgrid for 8+ months of the year in Edmonds, WA. Thanks for doing positive stories like this. Love your channel/content!
How much did you spend on all those solar panels and batteries?
No one would have done this to "save the planet", it's just cheaper and dropping in price while other methods continue to go up in cost. Adding storage is going to make these new methods very stable and easy to manage. The world we be awash in battery production soon and grid storage will begin to roll out. It's the combination of cars and grid storage that has given battery makers confidence to scale up.
Thanks Tesla!
VIKING YOU FORGOT COSTA RICA weve been doing that for over a decade!
I was going to bring up Costa Rica too but I saw your comment first.
Unfortunately last year Costa Rica increased its use of diesel, due to the drop in water levels available for Hydro. Out bills have just increased mainly because of the cost of burning that diesel. Unfortunately when you couple that with ICE's latest DISINCENTIVES for solar installations, Costa Rica is destined to slip down the chart, rather than maintain its lofty heights. It's such a shame and a typical short sighted approach to power generation. One of the sunniest countries in Central America, with great Solar potential is being denied its ability to be self sufficient because of the incestuous relationship between ICE (the ironically named Electric Company) and their master, the government.
Yes, but Costa Rica has no heavy industry, which uses masses of energy. Great for lights and the little fridge but can'r do heavy stuff.
@@jgarbo3541 Are you serious, or are you trying to be funny?
@@simonpaine2347 When I was there all I saw were dilettantes in short skirts (with grey eyes), no industry, except "Fincas".
87% of electricity in British Columbia Canada is from hydro-electric generation, and that number will be over 90% when the site-c generator comes online; 0% is from coal or nuclear.
Costa Rica has had 99% renewable energy for years as well
I doubt it. For most countries, their electricity use is a small fraction of their energy use. I will believe there is a short list of countries who actually have their electricity almost entirely from renewable sources, but I doubt there are any countries actually using 100% renewable energy.
@@hvh377 F****ng entitled opinionists are destroying democracies in the world. FIND THE FACTS! Only facts matter, not your useless opinion
@@hvh377if you doubt it, then google it, is a fact, might have been missed by Vikings because we've been doing it for the longest
@@hvh377it is quite obvious that we are talking here of electricity generation, not of the entire energy usage… at least not yet!
Unfortunately last year Costa Rica increased its use of diesel, due to the drop in water levels available for Hydro. Out bills have just increased mainly because of the cost of burning that diesel. Unfortunately when you couple that with ICE's latest DISINCENTIVES for solar installations, Costa Rica is destined to slip down the chart, rather than maintain its lofty heights. It's such a shame and a typical short sighted approach to power generation. One of the sunniest countries in Central America, with great Solar potential is being denied its ability to be self sufficient because of the incestuous relationship between ICE (the ironically named Electric Company) and their master, the government.
I'm surprised that Costa Rica is not on your list.
On the IEA website that you cite in the video, it shows that Costa Rica produced ~100% of its electricity through renewable generation.
72.9% Hydro
12.6% Geothermal
12.4% Wind
1.5% Biofuels
0.64% Solar
Man Costa Rica punches above its weight. They have better health outcomes than many places in the USA, for what 1/50th, of the cost? Great coffee too. ;^)
Unfortunately last year Costa Rica increased its use of diesel, due to the drop in water levels available for Hydro. Out bills have just increased mainly because of the cost of burning that diesel. Unfortunately when you couple that with ICE's latest DISINCENTIVES for solar installations, Costa Rica is destined to slip down the chart, rather than maintain its lofty heights. It's such a shame and a typical short sighted approach to power generation. One of the sunniest countries in Central America, with great Solar potential is being denied its ability to be self sufficient because of the incestuous relationship between ICE (the ironically named Electric Company) and their master, the government.
I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been told that it’s not possible to run a grid without gas or coal…. Not possible until people start doing it, I guess.
Tell that to Brazil. It's been using renewables (hydropower) as its electric grid cornerstone since at least the early 80s, if not earlier.
@@FabioCapelaHydro is base load and constant, just like coal and gas and nuclear and geothermal. Wind and solar are both intermittent which are not suitable for grid supply by themselves. Gas and batteries and to a lesser extent hydro are fast start peakers. A grid requires peakers for grid stability. Otherwise load shedding, brownouts, generation shut-downs, equipment damage and long power cuts
The naysayers - most of them fossil fuel industry sponsored or inspired - said that it was impossible. Whereas, converting to 100% renewable electricity, and then, (virtually) 100% renewable power is technically the lowest hanging fruit of the urgent challenge of environmental sustainability. That’s not to say that it is ‘easy.’ The only real barrier is political - to overcome the fossil fuel industry disinformation, and most significantly: to circumvent the fossil fuel funded political class - e.g. Putin’s Russia, Saudi Arabia etc.. Whether those states will give up their addiction to fossil fuel money is another matter altogether, as so many of them are on the dysfunctional spectrum.
And of the seven countries that made 99+%, FIVE were due purely to hydroelectric, ONE was due purely to hydroelectric and geothermal, and NONE of them got more than 4% total from wind and solar. In other words, the common denominator was unique geography which does NOT translate to other countries. The same situation applies to Norway, with about 10% from combined wind and solar, and about 88% from hydroelectricity.
So the big takeaway from this video is live in a country with lots of hydroelectricity.
@@dzcav3 Excellent. That’ll do nicely while they build up solar and wind capacity.
I'd love to see a yearly updated list for renewable electricity share in all countries of the world!
Well done to the countries doing this, and I hope to see many more added to the list in the next few years.
In recent weeks, Portugal has produced more renewable electricity than it consumes. Portugal even exports electricity to Spain because it produces too much with the help of dams.
Some gas-fired power stations continue to produce marginally for technical reasons, but everything the Portuguese consume comes from renewable sources.
And the prices of these renewables are so low that producers are already worried because they sell clean electricity at very low prices.
These 8 countries that generate over 99% electricity from renewable energy need to go EV then that will be protecting there GDP. For instant If Australia converts to 100% EV we improve our GDP by app $24 Billion as we import most of our Fossil Fuel.
Yes. Ethiopia banned import ICE Cars. EV Only. Australia can do that. Make 24 Billion Dollars a Year.
It would be better if you were making EVs domestically, but since you’re already importing all new cars it won’t hurt too much to accelerate that with more new EVs phasing out old ICE cars at a faster rate then natural replacement of the car fleet.
@@willeisinga2089Ethiopia has one of the lowest car ownership rate in the world, around 2 cars for every 1000 inhabitants. Car ownership is limited to the ruling elite and if they want to buy more expensive EVs it will just mean more of their fellow citizens will go hungry
@@willeisinga2089I'm not sure whether switching to renewable energy sources worldwide is helping Australia's GDP in the long run. Australia's -number 1- number 2 (after iron ore) export product is coal.
@@hvh377 Our number one is iron ore , number two is coal , for making steel and electricity...and it will remain in demand for decades to come.
Uruguay is also now over 98%!
That's fantastic news! It's so encouraging to see the global shift towards renewable energy gaining momentum. It's a testament to our collective efforts in prioritizing sustainability and reducing our carbon footprint. Knowing that eight countries have reached this milestone is not only inspiring but also serves as a beacon of hope for others to follow suit. It's a reminder that with determination and innovation, we can create a brighter, greener future for generations to come.
Heat pumps and electric cars are cheap then too, if you use solar. But even without PV my electric car cost sbout u Euro/100 kilometers in my country Germany.
California is still dependent on electricity imported from other states. California Energy Commission figures for 2022 show 204,049 GWh produced in state, imports from neighbouring states were 93,483 GWh.
Uruguay, (my country) generates 98% of its electricity by renewables, so so close....
According to the Scottish Government, renewable technologies generated the equivalent of 113% of Scotland’s overall electricity consumption in 2022, new statistics show.
A lot of great engineering from Scotland over the years. That's why they made Scotty Scottish in the original Star Trek.
While it's easier for these smaller countries to get to this place,
it will be much more effective when the big population countries start to get near this percentage.
Effective at what ?
It's just a matter of scale, bigger countries have more land to play with, there's no technical reason why they can't do the same, it's just a matter of having the political will to make it happen, but either way, over the next decade or so, we are likely going to get some bigger countries generating most if not all the electrical energy, especially in Europe by renewable means.
Anyway, renewables has never really been the issue, having a buffer with batteries is where it gets complicated, you need a big enough energy storage as renewables is inconsistent.
well these are just lies by omission, for instance it is true that Congo gets 96% of it's electricity from two hydroelectric dams but less than 10% of the population in Congo has access to electricity and in the energy mix of Congo the hydro power is just 2.5%. So, yes, they have electricity from renewables but is not a lot and is from hydro which is a century old method and those dams are there from 1972 and 1982 respectively, so , they are not there because some green deal, they were built before.
Brazil should cross the 90% renewables threshold this year, and is planning to reach 95% renewables in the next few years as fossil fuel thermal power (gas and coal) that is used mostly as backup generation in case of droughts (as most of Brazil's electricity is hydropower) gets phased out. It's a pretty big country.
China generates about 40% of its electricity without fossil fuels (i.e., from renewables plus nuclear), but at the rate China is installing new renewable generation this should change fairly quickly; three years ago only 30% of China's electricity wasn't generated from fossil fuels, and the rate of change seems to be accelerating. And any change in the carbon intensity of China's power generation has a huge effect, as China is, by far, the country that generates and uses the most electricity in the world (though if you measure electricity used per capita it's still well below the developed countries).
California has set a new record by going for several months now on electricity only from renewables.
California has 39 million people, and uses a lot of energy.
New car sales are also over 25% BEV.
Yes, these near ground wind turbines would work perfectly on a windmill. To do the integration you just have to see how it can help about the traditional windmill faster. Yes the vertical windmill can help move the horizontal windmill. So both can work together making both stronger and they can produce lots of energy even when there's almost no wind... But you have to integrate them where they help each other moves. Push pull system.
Costa Rica!!!
I’ve travel the USA. I’ve observed the last two years large solar fields built everywhere. The latest one is in West Memphis Arkansas is possibly 2 square miles in size. Government subsidies funded for sure!
They dont need subsidies, unlike the vast subsidies that oil gets, as solar is so cheap and profitable
Annual US subsidy of petrol and co: somewhere between 10-50B. The tax code is full of such subsidies and the amount depends on how you interpret it. Globally its estimated that subsidies of petrol fuel are about 7% of world GDP in 2022 (an increase from previous years). US subsidy of ALL renewables were about 15B in 2022. About 70-80% of global subsidies are for fossil fuels according to the International Renewable Energy Agency, the remaining 20-30% is for renewables.
Last year I drove 4 hours from my location to visit my daughter in Savannah, GA. I was amazed how many solar farms were there compared to when last I made the trip. I have always said, Solar is the biggest no brainer in the history of man. However in the US politics over takes science and the drum beat is still drill baby drill - I just don't get it. We use to lead the world in innovation now we lead in conspiracies and donor based politics. Nice to see the rest of the world moving forward in a positive energy way to save the planet.
Return on investment for solar farms is 10-20%
@@FredPlanatia Indeed, and add unpriced externalities as yet another subsidy for petroleum.
Respect Mother Nature...She will always win💯✌️😬👍
This channel is so good and upbeat!
Sounds bloody great
The UK generates quite a lot of green electricity but we still rely for 75% on total energy used on fossil fuels. Heating and transportation is almost exclusively fossil fuelled.
From next year heat pumps will be required on all new builds in the UK, so things are starting to move in the right direction, despite Sunak’s best efforts to throw climate action into reverse.
@@philiptaylor7902 I think that edict has been postponed. I have an air heat pump. It is great. But the MSM is fighting tooth and nail to preserve gas boilers. The truth is we don't have enough wind farms and the National Grid is insufficient to transport the electricity - even if we had it. Unfortunately wind farms have tripled in cost in the last 5 years so there is little prospect of rapidly moving away from fossil fuels. I think the UK will be reliant on fossil fuels for another 20 years minimum. For this reason we should exploit the North Sea and frack in preference to buying off Saudi Arabia or some other pariah State.
Depleted oil wells are a potential source of geothermal energy. Many deep wells already encounter significant ground heat. By drilling the abandoned oil wells deeper and using fracking, water can be pumped down one well and evacuated by a nearby well. It's a new technology that needs development effort. The geothermal heat is down there - no question about that. Texas is a location of this type of research.
A concern is the hot water can be corrosive which can cause high ongoing maintenance cost.
The best geothermsl sites in the U.S. are west of the Missisippi river, often where water needed for this type of project is a limited resource, but the water need not be potable. The material from below can be a pollutant so handling spills is a potential environmental cost.
Forget fracking, it's downright dangerous. Here in western Canada it's used by fossil fuel chasers to force upthe very dredges of old and obsolete wells causing earthquakes and trouble , which the industry then works toignore and deny.
As a Norwegian, i wonder where the 1,6% made from fossil fuel comes from? Smaler generators at off-grid building sites? Surplus electrisity imported at night, from coal powered or nucular plants outside Norway? Or is it the smal coal powered plant at the Svalbard islands, delivering electricity to the 2417 souls living at 78 degre north in Longyearbyen, that are close to the northpole, and where it is total darknes for 4 months every winter. On 19 of October 2023 the coal powered powerstation was shut down and replaced with a new one runing on Diesel.
I don't know where the stat "90% of world lives on the sunbelt." Most of China is not on the Sunbelt, Japan, Russia, Korea, Northern Europe etc About 90% of the world's population live above the equator. Maybe that is where the stat is coming from.
I was wondering about that. You missed the northern US BTW and anyone living north of them.
It's a vague term thrown out by solar advocates to imply that most of the world could run off of solar electricity. In reality, many places are cloudy, and not suitable for economical solar energy. Peter Zeihan has global maps on his website that shows where solar and wind are actually economically viable.
Don't forget that in many of these countries electricity is only a part of overall energy usage. For example, in the UK, I consume 10 x more kWh of gas in my home for heating and cooking than the kWh of electricity.
And exactly that's the reason why heating should be done by Heatpumps, they save up to 85% Energy, same for electric cars, every EV on the road reduces primary energy consumption by twice as much as the EV itself needs.
@@chriswilliams8607 Yep. A lot of energy is used to pump oil, transport it, refine, transport and distribute the resulting fuel, and finally pump it into a car; shutting down the part of the oil industry that handles gasoline and diesel for cars (and perhaps trucks) would save an unbelievable amount of electricity and shipping fuel.
If I remember correctly, someone once did the math and if we decommissioned all installations used by the oil industry and used their area for solar and wind it would cover most of the global energy need, including the energy needs for sea and air transport when we finally get to electrifying those sectors.
I don't have gas, nor oil. Buy a heat pump.
@@Muppetkeeper I'm not rich like you.
@@FabioCapela absolutely correct!
Okay this is a bit of an unfair stat and needs clarity: Dams, Dams, Dams
.
.
.
Dams are the forgotten renewable energy source that has been around for hundred of years. Some countries are blessed with viable hydrio schemes and most are not.
.
.
.
Here is a crazy stat: In the Canadian province of Quebec, 100% of their energy comes from Dams. They do have a few Wind farms and solar farms where energy transmission is to expensive from the Dams. Aberta is the Canadian leading province in Renewable Wind and Solar but for all their amazing progress in Wind and Solar they still get 97% of their energy from carbon emitting oil, gas and coal burning.
As for Norway "Hydropower is still the mainstay of the Norwegian electricity system. At the beginning of 2023, there were 1 769 hydropower plants in Norway, with a combined installed capacity of 33 691 MW. In a normal year, the Norwegian hydropower plants produce 136.49 TWh, which is about 88% of Norway’s total power production."
Not much options for expanding hydropower so to decarbonise the whole economy there needs to be more solar, wind and maybe nuclear.
I hope we build a bunch of floating wind power plants around the old existing oil rigs. Some of them even have a beefy electricity cable to land already, so good opportunity to reuse infrastructure.
There’s even talk of sending hydrogen rather than natural gas to Germany over existing pipes (for industry, not for cars)
@@auspiciouslywild H2 needs to be generated in place for industry. Transporting it makes no sense, nor does building new nuclear.
Rooftop solar is the only investment returning a tax free 10% return (often much higher), backed up by a 20-25 year panel warranty and equipment is secured by homeowners insurance. If you could buy a bond that payed out a tax free interest rate of 10% for 20-25years and was 100% insured from loss, most asset allocators would take that option for a portion of their portfolio. It’s a great investment (I’ve done it 2x on two homes) and it just keeps getting better every year ignoring the tax incentive savings entirely. Don’t like making or saving money? Don’t do it.
Add an EV to a solar powered home (even partially solar) and you supercharge that tax free 10% return to include gas savings. After all, you are getting electricity at 50% or less than what the utilities are selling it for and you’ve locked in your electricity cost for 20-25 (or more) years at some % so you don’t have to worry about opec changing oil prices. An EV saves thousands of dollars over gasoline each year so the 10% return from solar panels can easily jump to a tax free 20% or more. And who wouldn’t want to own their own gas station with a tax free ROI?
🌅Very clear explanation of Solar PV R.O.I. I add 1. it's also 'Positive Cash Flow' from day 1! 2. After payoff of initial investment, it's Profit!💰 For the owner of the source of their energy, Nothing beats free 'fuel' energy source!🗽
This only works in certain locations and includes huge tax subsidies.
@@dzcav3 subsidies are irrelevant to the returns - add those in an the returns are far greater, in the 15% range. But it does not work in perhaps 15% of populated areas, and it wasn’t designed to. But they do use it in Antarctica, so there’s something.
The Canadian province of Alberta has the greatest wind power potential in the country. It is also the biggest producer of fossil fuel in the nation. Sadly, it ultra right wing government has put severe restrictions on the development of renewables, and the future of the industry is in doubt.
Danielle Smith is the biggest problem.
Alberta also has terrible restrictions on rooftop solar which is a blatant attempt to make it unviable for citizens and businesses so they stay reliant on grid provided electricity.
Here in Canada we have so much renewable hydropower that we have surely been exporting more than our total consumption for decades now. Quebec and Labrador have been our A team there but here in Ontario, Niagara falls really got the whole electricity thing going for the world, now didn't it?
Unlike many countries on that list, we are an advanced economy and have been for quite some time now
URUGUAY is 99% too!
Uruguay has a good portion of their electricity from hydroelectric and wind.
So that is why it is important that business and individuals invest in solar with battery storage systems themselves. It will relieve the grid of the massive growth a country need to keep up with demand.
Great job to these countries.
Albania - 99+% hydro
Bhutan - 99+% hydro
Nepal - 99+% hydro
Paraguay - 99+% hydro
Iceland - 70% hydro. Only other major contributor geothermal.
Ethiopia - 96% hydro, 4% wind
DRC - 96% hydro. Other sources were too small to be noted. A sad footnote is the bulk of DRC's "renewable" energy is from the burning of biomass, which produces as much CO2 equivalent as the dirtiest coal. Also, 19% of the population has access to electricity. The government hopes to increase this percentage to 32% by 2030.
Biomass can be an issue if you are cutting down vegetation or growing crops in order to feed the biomass power generation.
If you are using biomass waste - like, for example, bio residue from processing crops - then it's effectively carbon-free power, because if the waste was instead discarded it would generate the same CO2 emissions as it decomposed anyway.
@FabioCapela you're not wrong. The co2 emissions remain the same, and from what I can conclude from the reporting, the biomass in this case is primarily charcoal for cooking and heating. Which brings up many non climate change concerns for the people locally.
@@carrdoug99 That, unfortunately, equates to cutting down vegetation, making it very environmentally *un*friendly. And yeah, charcoal for cooking and heating can be dangerous for a number of reasons, including how it generates enough carbon monoxide to be dangerous in enclosed spaces.
@FabioCapela 1st thing I thought of when I learned this was what does the TB Incident rate look like. No surprise, it's very high.
The most important thing is to locate yourself in a low-population country with huge amounts of dammable rivers available. The rest of the planet is not so fortunate.
Solars big problem is ot puts out much less in the winter than the summer. That statement on California is very misleading since they ran on 100% solar for a few hours per day not entire days.
Misleading? I’ve seen multiple articles supporting this statement on California and makes sense.. can you show media otherwise?
@@smalldogstudio I would suggest the EIA website, where you can get relatively impartial statistics, not the MSM solar fanboy headlines.
@smalldogstudio You can find it online. However, just think about it there is no way solar provides power at night. So it only provided 100% during peak solar output which was about 6 hours per day
So summer when there is air conditioning demand it puts out more, than winter when there is less AC demand. OK.
Can also put on rooftop solar which simultaneously reduces AC requirements for the building it is on.
Sorry this problem has already been assessed and dealt with by engineers and it turns out it is not a problem.
@5353Jumper As we push to go all electric EVs and heating will increase nighttime electric use. Especially during winter when solar output is diminished. My solar averages over 50 kwh per day in June/July and around 6 in December
A note on the report about California being 100% renewable for 25 out of 32 days (the number of days varies by news agency). The renewables involved, of course, were hydro, geothermal, wind & solar. The headline is quite misleading. From the report. "Supply exceeded demand for 0.25 (15 minutes) to 6 hours per day). There was no day when renewables supplied 100% of supply for an entire day (or even close to it).
So there are new ways to improve energy generating capabilities from existing windmill. That even with no wind the windmill runs.... And capturing other things like static energy and many other forms of energy. And yes, at the top of the windmill, having solar panels, even the shaft of the windmill can be wrapped in solar panels. Even if you have horizontal and vertical working together, that's when they're wind.Then my system works when there's no wind and the solar panels wrapped around the shaft and at top and maybe on the blades can further generate energy.....
Wind is great for now but I think it will diminish to solar over time. Windmills are mechanical, PV is not. Just like ICE vs. BEV, the less mechanical the more opportunity for steep cost declines. Solar will just be much cheaper and use fewer resources. Batteries are very important, as well.
Not at all. Wind and solar are very complementary. We need both.
@@Simon-dm8zv Why if solar is way cheaper and we have more than enough very cheap stationary storage? It's like hydro...good for now but too expensive and environmentally harmful to keep around in a decade or so.
What's also interesting is the green foliage that grows around the base of these solar panels.
They have to wash them. So i guess thats why.
@@TheBooban At our local solar plant they have the goats coming in once in a while. And the funny thing was , a Conservative local Minister of parliament thought the solar plant was bankrupt and put that in her media release. The stupid women never checked to get her facts right.
Ahh yes of course. Some of them seem to be acting like greenhouses in the dryer regions, offering shade to microorganisms, undergrowth and small creatures.
Maybe an opportunity to grow turf or others for lawns and sports fields.
Vegetation below the solar panels helps control the panel temperature and actually increases power generation. Not to mention that if you space the panels a bit more than usual, losing roughly 20% of the panel ground coverage (and, thus, produced energy), the area below the panels receives enough sunlight that it can be used to grow certain crops, including pasture for grazing animals, with almost as much productivity as if the panels weren't there (an arrangement called agrivoltaics).
THANKS SAM 🤗 FOR SHARING THE GREAT NEWS…WHAT ABOUT COSTA RICO 🤔💚💚💚
South Africa is not mentioned as well, in fact, we are forgotten too
8 countries that most of whom get their electricity from hydro and aren’t industrialized.
Atleast they are exporting surplus electricity
This is so great to see.
Thank you
Electrical energy is only 16% of UK energy use, solar and wind is less than 4% of world energy use.
Scotland too. Even though we're part of the UK. We are a country.
It would be so helpful if you could link to the reports that you cite, otherwise it's just your words, opinions or interpretations.
I think you left out Costa Rica..... 99.8% renewable electricity in 2020...
Great job norway !
I'd like to know more about this Ethiopia stat. Their population is 127 million. So that's quite a feat.
Even if the climate change doom stories are wrong (and I don’t think that they are) this trend is giving each country energy independence and rapidly reducing pollution, so its win win (or wind wind)!
This is a good pub quiz question.
You need to include Tesla in your robotics list. All of the other manufacturers are going to have trouble scaling production. Tesla can get to 1M/yr in 18-24 months. They're solving actuator production now.
Spain, the sunniest country in Europe lags behind the UK and Germany in solar power thanks to our conservative governments that tune the market to please the energy oligopoly.
Even so, more and more days electicity prices are negative. Sadly, electrification of transport is marginal.
A shame.
A good mix of renewables lessens the need for gigantean batteries.
What about island nations?
Theoretically they could switch faster, right?
I heard a lot about Costa Rica. But I expect people who pass through to reach Panama would mean Panama would also go renewable at roughly the same time.
Yep, just drive out all the industry that needs reliable energy and you can have 100% super-random energy generation.
But these 2 gentlemen could work with you to creative revolutionary.New system for windmills and can be applied to existing windmills converting them into a multi source Generation system.
Norway grows rich on oil and gas revenues
The UK set a new record for carbon intensity on April 15th this year - 19gCO2/kWh (just for an hour, sure).
In 2008, 495g/kWh was normal.
Costa Rica? In 2016 they were at 98%! I thought by now it would have hit 100%. 65% was from Hydro electric and the balance was from geothermal and wind. I thought they might add a bit more geo thermal and that would do it. What has happened?
If you can add Norway, you can add Costa Rica & make in 9 countries that run on renewables for 99% of the year. ;-)
👏👏👏👏👏👏👍😎💯💯💯
It is so exciting!!
Morocco also gets a lot of energy from solar, I think.
Great news
How can solar be cheaper than wind when it only provides power for half the year? With overcapacity maybe two thirds of the year. The fair comparison would be solar with overcapacity and energy storage vs wind, and Im not so sure that then solar is really cheaper
Shhh! Don't mention that around here! :D
Yes, in non-sunbelt countries, solar goes hand-in-hand with gas, because we sometimes have periods of days or even weeks with no wind and little sun. The true cost of solar and wind in those countries really ought to reflect that, but it would be hard to calculate.
You're not sure because you've not looked for data.
You can find it out by googling the research and national reports but the Engineering with Rosie channel has done that work already.
Yes, solar and wind really are cheaper, even with the costs of backups.
@@tony0x48It 's _because_ you have gas to use as well, that solar is relatively cheap. It's when you have to take measures to fill the gaps when gas goes away, that solar (or renewable energy in general) becomes very expensive.
its not a competition by day. Its a question of what mix covers your needs most cost-effectively across the entire year. This surely depends on how much offgrid storage there is.
Wind farms are considered good if they return 30% over the course of a year. The power output is worked out over a year; I believe it is 30% of power output if it was running 24/7.
Does some positive changes are seen on our climate of this?
The average US home consumes 30 KWH per day. A backup storage battery of 10 KWH would suffice as a restricted use power source or as a supplement when the grid is maxed out.
We use 15 to 25kw a day, and 1 powerwall2 is nowhere near enough, so upper solar to 20kw this week, will get second battery too.
@@corblimey8729kWh
Dogger Bank Windfarm isn't operational yet.
Pretty easy when your country is the size of a state in the USA and your population is the size of just one major city in the US.
Alaska is a the size of Western Europe.
@kokofan50 Yes, but you are splitting hairs here.
Great vid.
Norway uses hydro power, import some and export some power. Not so much wind power and that is mainly because we have a group of people making noise and threats against wind power. Probably funded by the oil business. The demand of oil is in free fall and they are fighting to keep up the fight against all green power they can see. The newest thing is mentally illness due to have seen a wind mill. Demanding money for lower life quality than expected.
Crisp report Sam and glad to hear every word. WOW! Except for politics and warmongers everything appears to be becoming better for the future overall. 2024 is not going to be a pretty year methinks in respect of World-wide events. But glad to know there are folks out there shoring up energy accessibility and doing what they can to make our stressed-out planet a better place to be. All kudos to them.
100% saving on imported fuel.
Never mind the savings on spare parts, oil, brake pads etc…
Big savings on less cancer treatments, allergies & asthma.
For countries with public healthcare, the savings from less treatment for car pollution caused diseases alone more than compensate for all lost revenue from fuel taxes.
You said in 5 years, Germany will be almost 100% renewable? April 2029 right? See you in 5.
Norway are at 98% but still moving ahead to install offshore wind to go over 100%.
This is the attitude.
Norway was the only rich country on this list and that’s because it has lots of hydro and not wind and solar. If you want to be poor going to renewables will guarantee that you stay poor. Just ask Germany which is on the brink of economic collapse because it destroyed itself with high cost renewables and shutdown their nuclear plants. France has 70% nuclear and half the energy cost of Germany. Economic success is totally dependent on cheap, reliable and abundant energy. Renewables provide non of these.
I guess we just have to Terra form Earth from here.
What are the difference in annual costs for the new renewables vs using fossil fuels?
You can find that information in no time at the Web sites of organisations such as the IEA, Renew Economy and similar. It's old news now that renewables are cheaper and their cost continues to keep dropping. While fossil fuel based energy generation is increasing in cost.
@@BrentonSmythesfieldsaye “. . . a naïve observer might conclude that the rising share of new renewables (solar and wind) will usher in an era of falling electricity prices. But in reality, the opposite has been true.” Vaclav Smil, Numbers Don’t Lie, p.172
Costs for real-world electrical grids have to include transmission and back-up costs for the intermittent solar and wind.
@@dzcav3 Of course electricity prices are not going down. They have been going up and the reason is well understood within commerce and the energy sector. We are in a progressive systemic energy transition, not a scenario where all of a sudden we turn fossil fuels off, then magically switch on 100% renewable energy utopia and suddenly electrcity prices are cheaper. While we need to keep legacy fossil fuel generation going in what turns out to be unfavourable efficiency operating modes, while the renewable energy sector progresses and matures, the fossil fuel generation is going to add expense to it's production due to that inefficiency. This inefficiency cost of fossil fuel generation are having a negating effect on the cheap wholesale generation of renewable energy. That inefficiency cost is passed onto the consumer unsurprisingly. One of the required components of renewable energy systems is storage, which has catching up to do. Storage at scale has the ability to negate the need for fossil fuel based generation and hence cost can come down then.
This is well documented in energy sector business and assosciation organisations assessment and reporting literature all around the world. AEMO in Australia has explained this clearly on numerous ocassions. Vaclav is welcome to his perspective, everyone seems to have them, often while ignoring the actual operations on the ground.
On top of all that, what always gets dropped in these "cost" narratives, is that we have a serious problem to solve in everyones interest. By continually burning stuff we are not solving that problem, we are making it worse. For the last couple of centuries we have obviously been operating on credit and payment is now falling well overdue. People are sooking about that.
@@dzcav3 Refer to my previous post. The energy sector participants that I referred in part to, explains why costs are what they are at this time.
Almost afternoon mate
As long as countries have a form of energy such as hydro, geothermo, gas, coal or nuclear to back them up and have batteries to smooth it out, renewables will work.
Small countries, with huge hydroelectric power resources, of course they can make 90%. Scale is the challenge.
100% "sustainable" economies produce....nothing. Try smelting iron (you know bridges), aluminum (ah, aircraft), with solar or wind. No can do. I use solar to charge laptop batteries. Cute. But my house: mains. Cheaper.
Electricity 101: Volts * Amps = Power (Watts).
Well, so the German antinuclear panic might have been a good thing after all....
No, C02 emissions of the energy sector would only be a quarter if the nuclear plants would have been kept online
world biggest Solar park in india Bhadla Solar Park is the largest solar farm in the world years 2020
until 1 hailstorm hits it.
Hypocrites all over the world
So do they get 100% from hydro when its not wind and sun?
Yes but if there is no Hydro they import electricity from neighboring countries or they start up their gas plants.
All african counties should be doing this
Don't miss the elephant in the room
Someone please tell Dutton ffs
Germany exports wind energy when it has a surplus and imports nuclear energy when it has poor wind generation.
As does the UK. Also imports hydro from Norway.
well they need the wind, Biden blew up Nord-Stream and they just took it.
Yes , and it has also re-started coal plants to make extra power.
@@Leonardo555ZZZZ That's more to deal with shifting away from Russian energy then it is with renewable.
Not exactly right. Germany imports nuclear when it is cheaper to import than to produce electricity by themselves. Nuclear has been 1.5% of all electricity in 2023, while a total of 6% electrcity was imported. 50% of the imported electricity was from renewable sources.
Countries that are titans of industry and manufacturing. 😂
German manufacturing is running to China and US as fast as can because electricity costs are insanely high after the US blew up the Nordstream pipeline.
Therefore why to hell are there still so many people defending ICE cars? Simply sad
ICE is convenient, it's what they're used to and manufacturers have sunk billions into ICE.
Because ICE cars aren't the biggest problem. We can live with ICE cars, we can't live with out farming land because it being destroyed by solar panels and windmills.. Nuclear is clean energy it needs to be the push for clean energy.
The big oil propaganda has a lot of money to throw around for lobbying the MSM, Politicians etc, it's causing the slow down of adoption but these Luddites cant stop progress
not everybody lives in the land of make believe that's why. EVs are expensive toys for urban dwellers, there are only 2 genders and there is no climate emergency. Facts.
wind power is trash. to many moving parts and maintenance involved for the output. if you are gonna have that many moving parts, it needs to have the output of hydro to be reasonable.
People that are interested in promoting large uses of electricity are interested in making grid electricity cheap and reliable. It makes no sense why why somebody that calls themselves the Electric Viking wants to make electricity cost prohibitive and unreliable with appalling erratic and expensive wind and solar wild AC generated electricity. Grid electricity should be going down in relative cost with increases in productivity and technology while disturbing the air and water environment less.
But not from solar or wind, Hydro electric.