It is a myth that switching to safe, renewable energy would mean an unreliable U.S. power supply that also is too expensive to afford.
That is the major conclusion of a new report prepared for the Civil Society Institute (CSI), a nonprofit think tank. The study details a future with more energy efficiency and renewable energy and less reliance on coal and nuclear power.
The report outlines a realistic transition to a cleaner energy future that would result in a net savings of $83 billion over the next 40 years. The report also details other major benefits, including: the avoidance of tens of thousands of premature deaths due to pollution; the creation of hundreds of thousands of new jobs; sharp cuts in carbon pollution; and significant cuts in water consumption for power production.
The findings are particularly significant in view of the fact that a strong majority of Americans want the U.S. to make the investments needed to be a clean energy leader on a global basis. More than three in four Americans (77 percent)—including 65 percent of Republicans, 75 percent of independents, 88 percent of Democrats, and 56 percent of Tea Party members—agree with the following statement:
“The U.S. needs to be a clean energy technology leader and it should invest in the research and domestic manufacturing of wind, solar and energy efficiency technologies.” (For details on this November 3, 2011 CSI national opinion survey, see www.civilsocietyinstitute.org/media/110311release.cfm.)
Key highlights of the new report include the following:
• Due in part to a significantly increased emphasis on energy efficiency, power sector carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 2020 would fall 25 percent below 2010 levels; by 2050, such pollution would be 81 percent below 2010 levels. Under status quo trends, CO2 emissions would grow 28 percent from current levels by 2050.
• The steep health and environmental (including water use) impacts of coal-fired electricity are dramatically reduced and, by 2050, eliminated altogether when all such facilities are retired. For example, over 50,000 premature deaths are avoided relative to status quo trends linked to pollution from coal-fired plants.
• The construction and operation of the new power plants in the first decade would create roughly 3.1 million new job-years—the equivalent of 310,000 people employed for the entire decade.
• Natural gas use in 2050 would be reduced 28 percent from projected levels for 2050.
• By retiring about one quarter of the existing fleet of nuclear power reactors and not building any new ones, the risks associated with nuclear power generation and the nuclear fuel cycle are reduced considerably.
CSI President Pam Solo said: “The truth is that America can and should embrace a workable and cost-effective future that is built on safe, renewable energy. Not only is it feasible and less expensive to do so, but we really have no other choice as a nation, given the concerns about coal emissions, natural gas ‘fracking,’ and nuclear reactor safety.”
“There are indications now that the cost of replacing coal with clean energy is falling,” said Bruce Biewald, president of Synapse Energy Economics, which prepared the report for CSI. “The current and projected price of coal has increased, and the price of photovoltaic systems has fallen sharply since 2009, a result of unprecedented growth in this sector globally.
“Further, the financial community is placing higher risk premiums on technologies with carbon emissions, making renewable energy and efficiency more attractive.”