“We are entering a new epoch comparable to the Industrial Revolution.” These words are from a lead strategist for a British nonprofit think tank focused on climate change. The company, Carbon Tracker, had just issued a report claiming, among other things, that “clean renewables will fight catastrophic climate change and free the planet from deadly pollution.”
Here, in Cape May County, we are seeing the unfolding of an aggressive campaign to meet the governor’s goal for 100% clean energy by 2050. Ocean Wind I is just the beginning of a series of wind farms that will traverse the New Jersey coast with the intent of providing 7,500 megawatts of energy by 2035.
That level of change will bring with it considerable disruption. The public is told it is all necessary if we are to avert the worst impacts of carbon–induced climate change. Yet, the public is never given the big picture. We don’t have the vision before our eyes that makes the disruption more palatable. Even if we accept the fact that reducing carbon emissions is critical to our future, aren’t we deserving of a vision of this future, one that shows what the energy portfolio will look like by 2035, 2050, or 2100?
In broad terms, we know the goals include turning to electricity as the economy’s dominant energy source and making the production of the needed electricity green through the heavy development of renewable energy sources. The press is on to make wind and solar the predominant sources of this new electrified world.
Where are we now? Coal-fired power peaked in 2007 and has declined as a source of America’s domestic electricity production. It still accounts for around 23% of the electricity in use. Data on energy production in 2021 shows coal is beaten out only by natural gas, which drives 38% of electric production. These are the two major sources of CO2 emissions. That still means that the electric grid is dependent on fossil fuels for over 60% of its generation.
Next comes the elephant in the room that no one talks about, nuclear power. In 2021, nuclear capacity accounts for about 19% of electricity generated in the U.S. According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), a part of the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. has 93 operating commercial reactors at 55 power plants in 28 states. New Jersey has three operating reactors, with two of them located in nearby Salem County. There are another three nuclear facilities undergoing decommissioning, including the plant at Oyster Creek that is scheduled to be one of the onshore connection points for wind farm energy to the electric grid.
Water power follows at 6% of electricity generated. Wind and solar are relatively small players today despite the plans for rapid growth as sources of energy. Wind accounts for about 10% and solar 3% of electric generation.
So, how do we get where the state and the federal government says we need to be? All the hype today is on expanding the role of wind and solar as energy sources. Yet, as former Obama Energy Secretary Steven Chu says, “They’ll be times when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine.” He goes on to say that “we will need some power that we can actually turn on and dispatch at will. That leaves two choices: Either fossil fuel or nuclear.”
However, nuclear sourced power is headed in the opposite direction. Again, the EIA tells us that nuclear electricity generation peaked in 2012 and that combined generation capacity has dropped about 7% since then. The average age of nuclear reactors is 40 years. The newest reactor to come online was in 2016 and it was the first since 1996. Nuclear power is now getting new bipartisan support in Washington,but reactors are still headed for decommissioning faster than new ones are coming online or even being planned.
Roughly one-third of the states who responded to a recent AP survey say they have no plans to incorporate nuclear power in their energy goals. The plan, to the degree that one can use that word, is to lean heavily on renewables and look for breakthroughs in energy storage and for large investments in high-voltage interstate transmission to have an area where the wind is blowing support and area where it is not.
If we need to achieve carbon–free electricity production, how do we expect to get to this nirvana in the timeframes our political leaders are setting? We need to be shown the plan. We need to see that the disruption that must accompany this level to transition is justified not just by broad statements about carbon emissions and climate change threats, but also by a realistic and achievable alternative to our current matrix of energy production and use.
We are told by some analysts that real-world constraints on renewable energy sources require the use of technology that does not yet exist. We are told by others, like the think tank Carbon Tracker, that “the world does not need to exploit its entire renewable resource – just 1% is enough to replace all fossil fuel usage.”
The public needs to hear from those leading the charge to transition the country’s energy profile. That includes Gov. Murphy, who is driving energy change by executive order.
We need to know the plan. That goes beyond hearing that Ocean Wind I will produce 1,100 megawatts from its turbine farm. We need to hear what the future profile for energy will look like in 2035, 2050 and 2,100. How much will depend on renewables? What role will nuclear power play? What is the realistic goal for reducing the 60% dependence on fossil fuels in electric generation?
The public must make the sacrifices. The public must ultimately pay for the needed investments. The public deserves to hear the plan if there is one.
———
From the Bible:
Commit to the Lord whatever you do, and he will establish your plans. — Proverbs 16:3
