10 ms·
> Albania, Bhutan, Nepal, Paraguay, Iceland, Ethiopia and the Democratic Republic of Congo produced more than 99.7 per cent of the electricity they consumed usi
by phtrivier 6mo ago
> Albania, Bhutan, Nepal, Paraguay, Iceland, Ethiopia and the Democratic Republic of Congo produced more than 99.7 per cent of the electricity they consumed using geothermal, hydro, solar or wind power.
Let's head to electricitymaps.com !
Albania (https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/AL/live/fifteen_minutes https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/AL/live/fifteen_min...)
- On 2026-04-12 16:45 GMT+2, 22,67% of electricity consumed by Albania is imported from Greece, which generates 22% of its electricity from gas. Interestingly, Albania exports about as much to Montenegro as it imports from Greece.
Bhutan:
- 100% hydro, makes perfect sense
Nepal:
- 98% hydro, a bit of solar for good measure
Iceland:
- 70% hydro, 30% geo
Paraguay:
- 99,9% hydro
Ethiopia:
- 96,4% hydro
DRC
- 99.6% hydro
So, the lessons for all other countries in the world is pretty clear: grow yourselves some mountains, dig yourselves a big river, and dam, baby, dam !!
(I'm kidding, but I'm sure someone has a pie-in-the-sky geoengineering startup about to disrupt topography using either AI, blockchain, or both.)
- KellyCriterion 6mo agowasnt New Zealand also already far up beyond 90% renewable electricity a couple of years ago?
- direwolf20 6mo agoThey are blessed with all three of hydro, geothermal, and wind.
- bogeholm 6mo agoDo we have many countries around where wind is not a thing?
- peterashford 6mo agoAnd sun isn't uncommon. I was chatting with a person in Auckland, NZ. He said it was a cloudly day and he was producing much more solar power than he needed. His take: the panels are the cheapest part of the system so they just over-provisioned. We can all do that - it aint hard
- aitchnyu 6mo agoOur rainy day production is still a fifth * of our peak in Kerala, India. Wish all inverters support 5x overprovisioning, current ones support 1.5x and suffer lower life. Seems 1.1x is the recommended provisioning guideline. * UK internet stranger said he gets negligible output when it rains
- peterashford 6mo agoThanks for the feedback about inverters - I was unaware.
- devilbunny 6mo agoI'd imagine quite a lot of smaller ones don't have anything. Take a look at https://energy.usgs.gov/uswtdb/viewer/ https://energy.usgs.gov/uswtdb/viewer/ and notice that huge swaths of the US have almost no wind turbines.
- jacquesm 6mo agoAnd have either a small population or a very low per-person energy budget. But: 7 isn't the number that matters, what matters is that next year it will be 8 or 9. That would be worth documenting.
- tyfon 6mo agoThere are a few countries just below as well like Norway with about 98% renewables in 2024 [1]. The gas power plant is mostly up north powering the gas compressors that fill LNG ships headed for Europe and the coal I think is for Svalbard but that mine/plant closed in 2025 [2]. [1] https://www.nve.no/energi/energisystem/energibruk/stroemdeklarasjoner/ https://www.nve.no/energi/energisystem/energibruk/stroemdekl... [2] https://www.nrk.no/tromsogfinnmark/norges-siste-kullgruve-pa-svalbard-stenges-1.17473482 https://www.nrk.no/tromsogfinnmark/norges-siste-kullgruve-pa...
- Thlom 6mo agoNorwegian electricity prodcution in February this year was 98,8% hydro and wind and 1,1% thermal (mainly gas). I guess the last 0,1% might be the diesel powered generator on Svalbard (the coal one was turned off 3 years ago).
- ZeroGravitas 6mo agoWith modern tech, these 100% renewable electricity countries have effectively overshot. Many other countries would be better off getting to 85% and then shifting to focusing more on EV and heat pump uptake to get the best bang per buck.
- jacquesm 6mo agoQuite a few developed countries have privatized their electrical grids. The effects - predictable - were rent seeking behavior without the necessary investments to remain future proof. This is now catching up with us in a big way, the electrification is going to lag behind considerably on account of this. I wrote about that in 2016, https://jacquesmattheij.com/the-problem-with-evs/ https://jacquesmattheij.com/the-problem-with-evs/ , and even though the situation has improved it has not improved as much as it should have. This is quite frustrating because it is blindingly obvious to me that we will need to do better but given the profit angle it remains to be seen if these private entities will now do what's right for all of us. So far the signs are not good. Instead of embracing small scale generation utilities are fighting netmetering laws where ever they can (usually under the guise of not everybody being able to have solar, which is true, but which is not the real reason behind their objections). They're dragging their heels on expansion and modernization of grid infrastructure and the government(s) seem to be powerless to force the now out-of-control entities to live up to their responsibilities. Couple that with the AI power hungry data centers and the stage is set for a lot of misery. Personally I think privatizing the electrical grid was a massive mistake. The market effects have not really happened, all that happened is that the money that should have gone into new infra has been spent on yachts and other shiny rock goodies.
- WinstonSmith84 6mo agofun fact for Paraguay: the Itaipu Dam is one of the largest in the world located between Brazil and Paraguay, where each country gets 50% of the production. But 50% of that production for Paraguay, a country of 7 millions inhabitants, means that it cannot consume that much, so it's essentially reselling that energy to Brazil, a country with 30x more inhabitants. Paraguay only uses about 1/3 of its share (and thus resells 2/3 to Brazil).
- neves 6mo agoAnd it means that it has been oil free since the 70's. Brazil, a continental country, has more than 80% of its energy from renewables
- ptman 6mo agoOil free for electricity generation. The media in my country (Finland) also likes to brag about 90+% fossil-free electricity generation. But electricity is under half (30%?40%?) and the rest of that energy isn't fossil-free.
- ZeroGravitas 6mo agoFinland has electricified 40% of primary energy which is pretty much world leading (Sweden and Norway are 50%). European average is 19%. Largest chunk left is transport which can mostly be electrified now. Industrial and home heat too. There are hard to electrify sections in both but overall it's fairly obvious what to do next. And the easy parts eliminate 3 or 4 units of primary energy for every one they replace, so even 40% primary energy is way over 50% toward the finish line of electrifying all the useful stuff. I think it's also an interesting question as to whether countries that use a lot of electricity have lower per kWh prices because they spread the fixed costs further.
- sumea 6mo agoYes, ground transport (except long distance trucks) can be electrified now. In principle, most homes could be heated with electricity if we had means to store all the "excess" wind energy or waste heat from e.g. datacenters and use it in district heating. The technology for heat storage is mostly ready but the capacity is not. But would it be easy or obvious what to do next? Absolutely not. Everything is simple if you have pockets full of money, live in temperate climates and do not rely on energy intensive (and hard to electrify) industries like the Nordic countries. For example, about 25 per cent of the total energy consumption in Finland is used to heat buildings. Wood burning is about half of the total heating in distric heating systems which account about half of the total heating for buildings. Also heat-storing fireplaces are still a small but a crucial part of the total picture. A lot of extra energy capacity is needed just make sure you stay alive during the coldest months even if some of the systems fail. Nordic countries have cheap electricity mostly for two reasons: very stable interconnected electric grid and lots of different renewable energy sources. Arguably, hydropower is the most important because it can stabilize the intermittent wind power which in many places we have more than enough already. Nuclear energy is also a major part of electricity production in Sweden and Finland. And yet our electric grid or electricity production capacity is far from ready to handle even the more realistic dreams of "full electrification" we are told in the media. It will take many years just to get the grid ready. And what happens if the stablest renewable, hydropower, fails? We might find it out this year as hydropower reserves in Norway are at the lowest level in 20 years. Hydro generates about 90% of Norway's total electricity.
- input_sh 6mo agoI guess somewhat of a fun fact: Albania has rented(!) two floating(!) oil-powered power plants near the city of Vlöre that are there in case of emergency. The last time they were really needed was in 2022 (if I remember correctly), but these days they're not turned on any more than they need to be to make sure they're operating properly. That very expensive backup system is basically the only non-renewable source in the whole country, and most of the time it's just sitting there doing nothing. Being powered almost entirely by hydro means that the system is highly susceptible to droughts, so then they either have to spin up those oil plants from time to time or import electricity from abroad. I think it's also worth pointing out that nothing really changed because of climate change, the decision to rely on hydro was made in the 90s. The country used to have its own oil power plant that it heavily relied on before that decision, which slowly produced less and less until it was shut down for good in 2007. Some images of it from 2019: https://www.oneman-onemap.com/en/2019/06/26/the-abandoned-power-plant-in-fier/ https://www.oneman-onemap.com/en/2019/06/26/the-abandoned-po...
- direwolf20 6mo agoAnd this is an expected problem with renewables that can be engineered around. It's unlikely the whole world has a drought at once during a calm night, so developing ways to transmit power long distances will be important.
- pstuart 6mo agoWhich absolutely should be done, but having energy sovereignty is never a bad thing.
- izacus 6mo agoHaving a continent-wide draught (or cold winter or other weather effect) is rather common though. Just a few years back Europe had a massive issue where draught caused both drop of hydro production and cooling for French nukes, causing energy prices to spike.
- Moldoteck 6mo ago
- WarmWash 6mo agoI'm wondering how this picture holds up if we include cooking and water heating.
- BigGreenJorts 6mo agoAnd cars. Lots of diesel in Albania.
- justsomehnguy 6mo agoFor some it's an eye-opening experience when they compare the states which are the most vocal about going solar and have a look onto the solar map of the world. Or then they talk about how some countries have miraculous levels of an energy independence and social services and then look at their total population.
- ffsm8 6mo agoTbf, solar has gotten so much more effective/cost efficient in the last 12-24 months that it's beating pretty much everything aside from hydro in the cost efficiency department at this point - including (most of) northern Europe and Canada. Most data you find will be using data that's massively out of date and be off by at least 2x though... I had another facepalm moment when I read about EU planning to go nuclear again. That would've been amazing and smart in 2015 - but now? Yeah, it's dumb af. And that's coming from a German living at the northern end of the country.
- mono442 6mo agoCan batteries store enough energy for dunkelflaute in winter? I don't think it's possible with the current technology.
- Moldoteck 6mo agoIt's not. Germany would need an insane amount, about 3twh based on recent data and much more looking at 30y weather data
- marcosdumay 6mo agoBatteries can store as much energy as you are willing to buy.
- dalyons 6mo agoI mean, who cares? Fire up the gas plants in the one week a year you have weather anomalies. We’d still be 90+% carbon free which would be incredible. The last gap can be solved at a later point as technology evolves
- tootie 6mo agoI think they missed Uruguay which is a similar case. They have also traditionally benefitted from a hydro able to cover 80-90% most of their needs but they made a concerted effort to fill the entire remaining gap with wind and solar.
- ZeroGravitas 6mo agoRecent video by someone from Puerto Rico comparing their island's renewables with Uruguay and interviewing the guy in charge of their renewables rollout: https://youtu.be/TsmlyqZJOug https://youtu.be/TsmlyqZJOug
- happosai 6mo agoWell hydropower is the "easy" level of the decarbonization game. So it's not really surprising first countries to leave fossil fuels behind are also countries with mountains and rivers.
- ignoramous 6mo ago> not really surprising first countries to leave fossil fuels behind are also countries with mountains and rivers What's surprising is countries sharing natural resources are among the pioneers, despite the geopolitical implication... like Ethiopia testing the Egyptian waters by building dams on the Nile.
- hunterpayne 6mo agoMaybe you should lookup when these damns were built. I wouldn't be surprised if in 1970 there were also 9 countries who didn't use any FFs. Same 9 countries of course. If you can build hydro you do. Problem is, we already have them everywhere they can be. And even now, hydro is only about 10% of all electric power production worldwide.
- ignoramous 6mo agoGreat Ethiopian Renaissance Dam opened in 2023 seemingly beginning construction when Egypt was at its weakest post Arab Spring [0]. [0] Ethiopia outfoxes Egypt over the Nile's waters with its mighty dam, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz71zndj001o https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz71zndj001o (2025).
- JoBrad 6mo agoOr, more charitably: use the Strangler Fig method to modernize your systems, and start with low-hanging fruit.
- jordanbaucke 6mo ago[dead]
- LastTrain 6mo agoThey worked within the constraints of their own topography - good and bad - to make it work. That is too hard for everyone else?
- phtrivier 6mo agoIt is indeed harder if you topography writes off certain kind of electricity production. But of course, good for them that they used their mountains / rivers ! All all power to them to electrify their economies if they have surplus ! And even better if they can use some reservoirs and pump to store, because it means they can diversify their productions by adding wind / solar and store a lot, until batteries of seasonal scale become more widespread.
- geoduck14 6mo ago>So, the lessons for all other countries in the world is pretty clear: grow yourselves some mountains, dig yourselves a big river, and dam, baby, dam !! It is a relief that Environmentalists have decided that hydro counts as "renewable" energy! When I was in school, hydro was considered really bad for the environment, and projects like the Hoover dam and Yangzie River dam were "not helping"
- psychoslave 6mo agoThey certainly can be disastrous in ecological terms, and will disrupt all biotopes along the concerned water flows. But it's extremely renewable none the less.
- peterashford 6mo agoIts local environmental damage versus global environmental gains
- krupan 6mo agoSame as nuclear, right?
- hunterpayne 6mo agoNo, you don't have to change any ecosystems to build a NPP. No idea why you would think that in the first place really.
- krupan 6mo agoTo be clear, I'm in favor of nuclear, but people attack it saying it does change the local ecosystem (heating up water for cooling and pumping the warm water into rivers, and of course the nuclear waste). Here we just had someone say that hydro is fine because it only changes the local ecosystem so I jumped on that line of reasoning. I would argue with you that nuclear changes the local ecosystem way, way less than a dam does and so it's even better.
- Sharlin 6mo agoI guess if you're not allowed to use solar in the form of chemical potentials frozen long ago into carbon-y molecules buried underground, the second best thing is to use solar in the form of gravitational potential stored in water molecules that's constantly getting replenished because the planet just happens to work like that.
- Flere-Imsaho 6mo agoHydro electricity is also one of the most dangerous forms of energy production: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Banqiao_Dam_failure (This is the worst disaster, but could put Chernobyl to shame?) Full list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_hydroelectric_power_station_failures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_hydroelectric_power_st...
- iso1631 6mo agoWell most dangerous apart from coal, oil, gas, biomass? https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rates-from-energy-production-per-twh https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rates-from-energy-p... And that's before you bring into the deaths due to climate change
- Flere-Imsaho 6mo agoI should have pre-fixed it with "out of renewable energy".
- lxgr 6mo agoSure, if you consider only local dangers and don't care at all about regional or global externalities.
- iso1631 6mo agoYes, there are no global externalities from coal, oil and gas...
- _blk 6mo agoMakes me wonder why solar is not on the list.. I thought all gore said that was gonna solve all energy problems. (Of course not, he's a politician, but I'd have expected to at least see it with some relevant percentage in the African countries) Or could it be that solar is distributed enough to not appear because it's set up directly by/with the consumer rather than the grid producer?
- littlestymaar 6mo ago> So, the lessons for all other countries in the world is pretty clear: grow yourselves some mountains, dig yourselves a big river, and dam, baby, dam !! Came to say that, every time you'll see a country running on 100% renewables for an extended period, it's going to be hydro, because it's the only controllable supply among renewables (with geothermal as well, but it's been so niche so far I put it aside, but I hope it will change). Unfortunately most of the hype and investments go to solar and wind power, which fundamentally don't offer the same capabilities. (Solar is fine as long as you're in q sunny place that is not in Europe though because it can be predictable enough to be relied on, but Solar in above 40° North and wind are borderline scams at this point).
- jmyeet 6mo agoUltragrav (YC S27). We plan on generating the geographic tyranny of who has rivers and mountains and who doesn't by seeking to use ultrasonic audio to disrupt gravity so you don't have to hear it. We're hiring in Kansas city, KS. In all seriousness, thereis of course a list on Wikipedia of countries by renewable electricity production [1]. China leads here but also has 1.4B people and still has significant coal usage and oil and gas imports. But they're working really hard to wean themselves off of fossil fuels while still rapidly industrializing. China does have mountains and has built the Three Gorges Dam, which is just massive and produces ~22GW. They're building a dam that'll produce almost three times as much power, the Medog Hydropower Station [2], which is planned for ~60GW. The part that annoys me about a lot of developed nations is that they engage in greenwashing by simply exporting their emissions to poorer countries eg [3]. Let's at least be honest about what fossil fuels we continue to use and the emissions we indirectly create. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_renewable_electricity_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_renewable... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medog_Hydropower_Station https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medog_Hydropower_Station [3]: https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/4/18/15331040/emissions-outsourcing-carbon-leakage https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/4/18/1533104...
- 3abiton 6mo ago> So, the lessons for all other countries in the world is pretty clear: grow yourselves some mountains, dig yourselves a big river, and dam, baby, dam !! You're forgetting corruption. Many countries can easily go 100% renewable, but there is no profit for dictators/politicians to do so. Most of africa, or the middle east, yet you still have many regions without electricity or water, so that people worry about food for tomorrow instead of better governance in the future.
- hunterpayne 6mo ago"Many countries can easily go 100% renewable" Sorry but no. There are several major issues with that if you want your power to stay on all the time. Storage would be needed which even for the smallest countries on this list would require over a years worth of worldwide battery production. And grid stabilization would be almost impossible and that's just for starters. All 9 of these countries are mostly hydro. The renewables in this case are almost incidental. Also these dams were built decades ago for reasons that have nothing to do with the environment.
- dagurp 6mo agoIceland has been selling credits aggressively so my electric bill will include nuclear and coal power
- lostlogin 6mo ago> 22,67% of electricity consumed by Albania is imported from Greece, which generates 22% of its electricity from gas. Interestingly, Albania exports about as much to Montenegro as it imports from Greece. There is solar on my roof. It makes about 125% what we use, but we import power from the grid every day, usually early am before the sun is up, or most days in winter. In summer we are fully charged and exporting from about 1pm-6pm, with the line out maxed (at a pitiful 5kW, screw you Vector. New Zealand). I’d guess Albania has the same issue when it isn’t sunny.
- imadhiskenderbe 6mo agoIt is similar but not because of the sun. It produces around 99% from hydro which means that sometimes during the year it overproduces and sells it and when there is less water they have to buy some.
- cm2187 6mo agoAlso half of these countries have frequent outages. Not sure it is much of an example for anyone else (though I frequently hear experts advocating for outages in western countries, i.e. you won't be able to run your washing machine when you need it, it will be up to how much electricity there in the grid - they call that progress).
- indigo945 6mo ago(I'm kidding, but I'm sure someone has a pie-in-the-sky geoengineering startup about to disrupt topography using either AI, blockchain, or both.) Well, there was that plan to use scores of nuclear bombs to alter the geography of Egypt in such a way that the Mediterranean could be drained into the Qattara Basin [1]. I think the story is somewhat well-known now, but it proves, at least, that pie-in-the-sky geoengineering startups are not a phenomenon unique to the 21st century. And given that nuclear bombs essentially were the blockchain of the 1950s, that is altogether unsurprising. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression_Project#Friedrich_Bassler https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qattara_Depression_Project#Fri...
- whatsupdog 6mo ago> And given that nuclear bombs essentially were the blockchain of the 1950s They were not destructive enough.
- valgaze 6mo agohttps://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/453701 https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/453701 “Use of Nuclear Explosions for Excavation of Sea-Level Canal Across the Negev Desert”
- harrouet 6mo ago100% Writing such an article without mentioning nuclear power is a sign of dishonesty. Wind and solar can't live alone, since they only operate when nature wants it. Perfect match for hydro, but we don't all live in the Hymalaya. Most (e.g. Germany) burn gas and coal to supplement. Nuclear is the only tech suited for decarbonation, and once you have it, you don't need solar and power because 95% of the cost is in the construction. Since you'll build it to sustain peak demand, wind or solar are just extra costs.
- tracker1 6mo agoI'm with you... beyond that, there's a lot of other costs involved with solar and in particular wind. Least of which is disposal/recycling on top of the materials and transport for assembly. I think that especially in areas that don't have extreme storms or earthquakes, that nuclear is the most sane answer for electricity generation. I think another pressing issue would be a resurgence of natural airflow usage from underground exchanges instead of relying solely on air conditioning.
- harrouet 6mo agoTotally agreed. The fallacy comes from the fact that few people know how to dimension an infrastructure. When you want electricity 24x7, you have to engineer the infra for peak demand. In Europe where I live, it is during winter around 6pm. It's night, and many times we have high pressure with no wind (inland). Since hydro is reserved to particular land topologies, most countries have coal and gas ready to kick-in. France chose nuclear, which has proved to be a clear winner. Meanwhile Germany spent €500B (read it twice: €500B) and has got one of the most carbonated electricity generation -- at a high cost.
- kilzimir 6mo agoPortugal doesn't have any mountains and most of the electricity still comes from hydro! (Not saying you can build hydro everywhere, but you certainly don't need the Himalayas)
- pelasaco 6mo agowondering why isn't Brazil in this list https://www.iea.org/countries/brazil https://www.iea.org/countries/brazil
- sourcegrift 6mo agoWhy biased against. Clouds, SSR, and quantum?
- tim333 6mo agoA jolly pie-in-the-sky one is to dam the red sea which could produce 50 GW. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Sea_Dam https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Sea_Dam)
- weezing 6mo ago>So, the lessons for all other countries in the world is pretty clear: grow yourselves some mountains, dig yourselves a big river, and dam, baby, dam !! And have basically no meaningful industry and small population.