7 ms·

CO2 emissions from electricity generation in 2015 were lowest since 1993

113 points by Osiris30 10y ago

sliverstorm 10y ago
demand for electricity remained relatively flat over the previous decade. To me, that might be the best news in the whole press release.
- toomuchtodo 10y ago
  Aging population, efficiency, etc. Peak energy (consumption) has been reached in the first world.
  - danieltillett 10y ago
    I think you left out de-industrialisation as one of the major causes.
    - toomuchtodo 10y ago
      Thanks for adding that, although I think textiles are the majority of energy intensive manufacturing (which, of course, has moved overseas). http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=13431 http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=13431
  - ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
    Society has yet to grasp the ramifications of stagnant to declining populations in almost all of the first world and China. Capitalism and the fractional reserve banking systems dominating the world depend upon constant expansion, long story short we face a demographic nightmare generations in the making. The citizens are best represented as Wiley Coyote who's run off the edge of the cliff but hasn't looked down.
    - toomuchtodo 10y ago
      Agreed! Although, I'd say we as a society have the opportunity to live relatively scarcity-free in the not too distance future (enough food, energy, clothing, shelter for everyone); we must decide if we'll embrace the opportunity.
      - ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
        Absolutely, the not too distant future is going to be interesting one way or the other, it is too late to change the inevitability of demographics and the subsequent bubble they've produced. Of course the truth will get you down votes on hacker news
      - dragonwriter 10y ago
        > Although, I'd say we as a society have the opportunity to live relatively scarcity-free in the not too distance future (enough food, energy, clothing, shelter for everyone) For centuries its been true that every generation has had the resources to live "relatively scarcity-free" in terms of having the resources to provide enough food, energy, clothing, and shelter for everyone, based on the standards of a time in the not too distant (from the point under consideration) past. The problem has always been: (1) Resource distribution, (2) Standards moving forward over time. I don't see much prospect of that changing in the not too distant future.
  - LrnByTeach 10y ago
    First world may have reached Peak energy for NOW . I predict after 2025, once Self driving ELECTRIC Cars/trucks are Norm and Industrial Robots make great strides with the New deep learning AI, resulting in general purpose Industrial Robots to do jobs in Construction & Agriculture etc.. Energy consumption going to increase at a RAPID rate. On Kardashev Scale of Type I,II,III Civilizations, It is estimated "we Planet Earth" will reach Type I status in 100–200 years. The GOOD News is from NOW On, all the New Energy production is from Renewables (mostly Solar ) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale The Kardashev scale is a method of measuring a civilization's level of technological advancement, based on the amount of energy a civilization is able to utilize.
    - toomuchtodo 10y ago
      I only see energy use going up if we discover the ability to perform molecular assembly. If that occurs, yeah, energy use would skyrocket, but it would all hopefully be clean energy at that point. Even if you were to replace everyone in manufacturing, construction, etc with robotics, and replace all ICE vehicles with electric vehicles, you wouldn't see an enormous increase in energy use. The US DOE showed several years ago that almost 80% of vehicles could move over to the electric grid with existing base load generation. I stand by my previous statement that developed country energy consumption has peaked.
      - LrnByTeach 10y ago
        >almost 80% of vehicles could move over to the electric grid with existing base load generation. hmm... I am little surprised with that DOE math. Avarage US Houldhold use 900 KWh per month as per link below. Electric car takes a total of 425 KWh to re-charge per month ( based on 1000 miles driven per month, see my own Nissan LEAF calc. below) So by 2025-30 when USA Electric vehicles are 25% (of Total vehicles), USA grid needs 12.5% increase in base load. When 80% are EV, then US need 40% increase in base load. ---- How much electricity does an American home use? https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=97&t=3 https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=97&t=3 In 2014, the average annual electricity consumption for a U.S. residential utility customer was 10,932 kilowatthours (kWh), an average of 911 kWh per month. ---- Here is my household Electricity consumption monthly breakdown in Kwh (from my Utility PG&E monthly bill) - I drive Nissan LEAF 100% Electric car about 1000 miles per month ( typical US avg.) Nissan LEAF re-charge* : 425 Kwh ( monthly total ) other household electrify: 400 Kwh ( I am low on household Kwh use, that is why I took US Avg 900 Kwh in above Calc.) * The fact that I re-charge Nissan LEAF only After 11 PM to get Off Peak rate of 11 cents Kwh, my Utility Bill show "Off Peak Kwh used in a month" , that is how I know exact KWh used for my Nissan LEAF re-charging.
phaemon 10y ago
Note that this is in the USA, not the world.
mikegioia 10y ago
I think this is wonderful, but this chart [1] seems to indicate that the decrease in coal use is really only replaced by the increase in natural gas. Natural gas seems to release less CO2 than coal burning, but it would be much nicer to see the nuclear and renewables climbing at a faster rate. Hopefully the 2015->2025 trend is far better. [1] http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/images/2016.05.13/chart3.png http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/images/2016.05.13/chart3.pn...
- matt_wulfeck 10y ago
  I noticed the same thing. You could say it's because natural gas has become a cheaper fuel alternative to coal, or that the world is more interested in burning cleaner fuels. Perhaps it's a bit of both.
  - Gibbon1 10y ago
    Definitely natural gas is cheaper. And also world leaders are starting to get spooked by global warming. Fear trumps banal economics.
- m0th87 10y ago
  Natural gas releases less CO2, but it releases more methane in the shipment process, which is far more potent as a climate change agent than CO2. Depending on which estimates you buy into on the amount of methane lost, natural gas may be worse than coal for climate change.
  - sliverstorm 10y ago
    There's still other reasons natural gas is a better fuel, though. Plants come on & offline more quickly, there's no need for emissions scrubbers & no truly noxious combustion byproducts. There's also no steam output or water consumption, though as there is still waste heat maybe that doesn't matter. There's also potential to get natural gas plants up to 60-80% efficient, which means still less CO2 production compared to a 30-40% for coal.
nostromo 10y ago
This is great news, but people should understand that this is largely being driven by fracking, not renewables, so it's not without environmental consequence. (Fracking lowered the price of natural gas in the US tremendously, which has made it more cost effective compared to coal.) Also, as the US moves away from coal and towards natural gas, we haven't exactly left our coal in the ground -- we've just increased exports so it is consumed abroad.
- catawbasam 10y ago
  US coal exports are dropping. According to the EIA, we exported 97,256,746 tons in 2014 but only 73,957,888 tons in 2015, a drop of 24% source: https://www.eia.gov/coal/production/quarterly/pdf/t7p01p1.pdf https://www.eia.gov/coal/production/quarterly/pdf/t7p01p1.pd...
  - toomuchtodo 10y ago
    China's coal imports have fallen off a cliff: http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/new-china-energy-data-coal-imports-down-a-further-10-30570 http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/new-china-energy-data-coal-i... http://www.reuters.com/article/china-economy-trade-coal-idUSL3N14X1TC20160113 http://www.reuters.com/article/china-economy-trade-coal-idUS... http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-13/china-coal-imports-crash-as-economy-slows-amid-clean-power-shift http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-13/china-coal... China is also going head long into renewables: http://cleantechnica.com/2016/03/06/china-renewable-growth-soars-fossil-fuel-use-declines/ http://cleantechnica.com/2016/03/06/china-renewable-growth-s...
  - nostromo 10y ago
    Zoom out a bit and look at the broader trend. Coal exports were at record highs for several years, but have indeed come down a bit since China's economy slowed.
- NickM 10y ago
  Increased efficiency is definitely a contributing factor as well. It's very inspiring to see that our population and economy have both grown, yet demand for electricity has remained flat.

113 points by Osiris30 10y ago

demand for electricity remained relatively flat over the previous decade. To me, that might be the best news in the whole press release.

toomuchtodo 10y ago
Aging population, efficiency, etc. Peak energy (consumption) has been reached in the first world.
- danieltillett 10y ago
  I think you left out de-industrialisation as one of the major causes.
  - toomuchtodo 10y ago
    Thanks for adding that, although I think textiles are the majority of energy intensive manufacturing (which, of course, has moved overseas). http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=13431 http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=13431
- ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
  Society has yet to grasp the ramifications of stagnant to declining populations in almost all of the first world and China. Capitalism and the fractional reserve banking systems dominating the world depend upon constant expansion, long story short we face a demographic nightmare generations in the making. The citizens are best represented as Wiley Coyote who's run off the edge of the cliff but hasn't looked down.
  - toomuchtodo 10y ago
    Agreed! Although, I'd say we as a society have the opportunity to live relatively scarcity-free in the not too distance future (enough food, energy, clothing, shelter for everyone); we must decide if we'll embrace the opportunity.
    - ZoeZoeBee 10y ago
      Absolutely, the not too distant future is going to be interesting one way or the other, it is too late to change the inevitability of demographics and the subsequent bubble they've produced. Of course the truth will get you down votes on hacker news
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      > Although, I'd say we as a society have the opportunity to live relatively scarcity-free in the not too distance future (enough food, energy, clothing, shelter for everyone) For centuries its been true that every generation has had the resources to live "relatively scarcity-free" in terms of having the resources to provide enough food, energy, clothing, and shelter for everyone, based on the standards of a time in the not too distant (from the point under consideration) past. The problem has always been: (1) Resource distribution, (2) Standards moving forward over time. I don't see much prospect of that changing in the not too distant future.
- LrnByTeach 10y ago
  First world may have reached Peak energy for NOW . I predict after 2025, once Self driving ELECTRIC Cars/trucks are Norm and Industrial Robots make great strides with the New deep learning AI, resulting in general purpose Industrial Robots to do jobs in Construction & Agriculture etc.. Energy consumption going to increase at a RAPID rate. On Kardashev Scale of Type I,II,III Civilizations, It is estimated "we Planet Earth" will reach Type I status in 100–200 years. The GOOD News is from NOW On, all the New Energy production is from Renewables (mostly Solar ) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale The Kardashev scale is a method of measuring a civilization's level of technological advancement, based on the amount of energy a civilization is able to utilize.
  - toomuchtodo 10y ago
    I only see energy use going up if we discover the ability to perform molecular assembly. If that occurs, yeah, energy use would skyrocket, but it would all hopefully be clean energy at that point. Even if you were to replace everyone in manufacturing, construction, etc with robotics, and replace all ICE vehicles with electric vehicles, you wouldn't see an enormous increase in energy use. The US DOE showed several years ago that almost 80% of vehicles could move over to the electric grid with existing base load generation. I stand by my previous statement that developed country energy consumption has peaked.
    - LrnByTeach 10y ago
      >almost 80% of vehicles could move over to the electric grid with existing base load generation. hmm... I am little surprised with that DOE math. Avarage US Houldhold use 900 KWh per month as per link below. Electric car takes a total of 425 KWh to re-charge per month ( based on 1000 miles driven per month, see my own Nissan LEAF calc. below) So by 2025-30 when USA Electric vehicles are 25% (of Total vehicles), USA grid needs 12.5% increase in base load. When 80% are EV, then US need 40% increase in base load. ---- How much electricity does an American home use? https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=97&t=3 https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=97&t=3 In 2014, the average annual electricity consumption for a U.S. residential utility customer was 10,932 kilowatthours (kWh), an average of 911 kWh per month. ---- Here is my household Electricity consumption monthly breakdown in Kwh (from my Utility PG&E monthly bill) - I drive Nissan LEAF 100% Electric car about 1000 miles per month ( typical US avg.) Nissan LEAF re-charge* : 425 Kwh ( monthly total ) other household electrify: 400 Kwh ( I am low on household Kwh use, that is why I took US Avg 900 Kwh in above Calc.) * The fact that I re-charge Nissan LEAF only After 11 PM to get Off Peak rate of 11 cents Kwh, my Utility Bill show "Off Peak Kwh used in a month" , that is how I know exact KWh used for my Nissan LEAF re-charging.

phaemon 10y ago

Note that this is in the USA, not the world.

mikegioia 10y ago

I think this is wonderful, but this chart [1] seems to indicate that the decrease in coal use is really only replaced by the increase in natural gas. Natural gas seems to release less CO2 than coal burning, but it would be much nicer to see the nuclear and renewables climbing at a faster rate. Hopefully the 2015->2025 trend is far better. [1] http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/images/2016.05.13/chart3.png http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/images/2016.05.13/chart3.pn...

matt_wulfeck 10y ago
I noticed the same thing. You could say it's because natural gas has become a cheaper fuel alternative to coal, or that the world is more interested in burning cleaner fuels. Perhaps it's a bit of both.
- Gibbon1 10y ago
  Definitely natural gas is cheaper. And also world leaders are starting to get spooked by global warming. Fear trumps banal economics.
m0th87 10y ago
Natural gas releases less CO2, but it releases more methane in the shipment process, which is far more potent as a climate change agent than CO2. Depending on which estimates you buy into on the amount of methane lost, natural gas may be worse than coal for climate change.
- sliverstorm 10y ago
  There's still other reasons natural gas is a better fuel, though. Plants come on & offline more quickly, there's no need for emissions scrubbers & no truly noxious combustion byproducts. There's also no steam output or water consumption, though as there is still waste heat maybe that doesn't matter. There's also potential to get natural gas plants up to 60-80% efficient, which means still less CO2 production compared to a 30-40% for coal.

nostromo 10y ago

This is great news, but people should understand that this is largely being driven by fracking, not renewables, so it's not without environmental consequence. (Fracking lowered the price of natural gas in the US tremendously, which has made it more cost effective compared to coal.) Also, as the US moves away from coal and towards natural gas, we haven't exactly left our coal in the ground -- we've just increased exports so it is consumed abroad.

catawbasam 10y ago
US coal exports are dropping. According to the EIA, we exported 97,256,746 tons in 2014 but only 73,957,888 tons in 2015, a drop of 24% source: https://www.eia.gov/coal/production/quarterly/pdf/t7p01p1.pdf https://www.eia.gov/coal/production/quarterly/pdf/t7p01p1.pd...
- toomuchtodo 10y ago
  China's coal imports have fallen off a cliff: http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/new-china-energy-data-coal-imports-down-a-further-10-30570 http://reneweconomy.com.au/2016/new-china-energy-data-coal-i... http://www.reuters.com/article/china-economy-trade-coal-idUSL3N14X1TC20160113 http://www.reuters.com/article/china-economy-trade-coal-idUS... http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-13/china-coal-imports-crash-as-economy-slows-amid-clean-power-shift http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-13/china-coal... China is also going head long into renewables: http://cleantechnica.com/2016/03/06/china-renewable-growth-soars-fossil-fuel-use-declines/ http://cleantechnica.com/2016/03/06/china-renewable-growth-s...
- nostromo 10y ago
  Zoom out a bit and look at the broader trend. Coal exports were at record highs for several years, but have indeed come down a bit since China's economy slowed.
NickM 10y ago
Increased efficiency is definitely a contributing factor as well. It's very inspiring to see that our population and economy have both grown, yet demand for electricity has remained flat.