Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumNREL: 100% Clean Electricity by 2035 Study
(Please note. This is a publication by The National Renewable Energy Laboratory - NREL. Copyright concerns are nil.)
This is the goal. No major technological breakthroughs are required, just commitment and a lot of work. Four paths are explored. Pick your favorite, or a combination.
https://www.nrel.gov/analysis/100-percent-clean-electricity-by-2035-study.html
An NREL study shows there are multiple pathways to 100% clean electricity by 2035 that would produce significant benefits exceeding the additional power system costs.
For the study, funded by the U.S. Department of Energys Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, NREL modeled technology deployment, costs, benefits, and challenges to decarbonize the U.S. power sector by 2035, evaluating a range of future scenarios to achieve a net-zero power grid by 2035.
The exact technology mix and costs will be determined by research and development, among other factors, over the next decade. The results are published in Examining Supply-Side Options To Achieve 100% Clean Electricity by 2035.
Scenario Approach
To examine what it would take to achieve a net-zero U.S. power grid by 2035, NREL leveraged decades of research on high-renewable power systems, from the Renewable Electricity Futures Study, to the Storage Futures Study, to the Los Angeles 100% Renewable Energy Study, to the Electrification Futures Study, and more.
NREL used its publicly available flagship Regional Energy Deployment System capacity expansion model to study supply-side scenarios representing a range of possible pathways to a net-zero power grid by 2035from the most to the least optimistic availability and costs of technologies.
The scenarios apply a carbon constraint to:
- Achieve 100% clean electricity by 2035 under accelerated demand electrification
- Reduce economywide, energy-related emissions by 62% in 2035 relative to 2005 levelsa steppingstone to economywide decarbonization by 2050.
Key Findings
Technology Deployment Must Rapidly Scale Up
In all modeled scenarios, new clean energy technologies are deployed at an unprecedented scale and rate to achieve 100% clean electricity by 2035. As modeled, wind and solar energy provide 60%80% of generation in the least-cost electricity mix in 2035, and the overall generation capacity grows to roughly three times the 2020 level by 2035including a combined 2 terawatts of wind and solar.
To achieve those levels would require rapid and sustained growth in installations of solar and wind generation capacity. If there are challenges with siting and land use to be able to deploy this new generation capacity and associated transmission, nuclear capacity helps make up the difference and more than doubles todays installed capacity by 2035.
Across the four scenarios, 58 gigawatts of new hydropower and 35 gigawatts of new geothermal capacity are also deployed by 2035. Diurnal storage (212 hours of capacity) also increases across all scenarios, with 120350 gigawatts deployed by 2035 to ensure demand for electricity is met during all hours of the year.
Seasonal storage becomes important when clean electricity makes up about 80%95% of generation and there is a multiday to seasonal mismatch of variable renewable supply and demand. Across the scenarios, seasonal capacity in 2035 ranges about 100680 gigawatts.
Significant additional research is needed to understand the manufacturing and supply chain associated with the unprecedent deployment envisioned in the scenarios.
Download Infographic. (PDF) View Data.
Significant Additional Transmission Capacity
In all scenarios, significant transmission is also added in many locations, mostly to deliver energy from wind-rich regions to major load centers in the eastern United States. As modeled, the total transmission capacity in 2035 is one to almost three times todays capacity, which would require between 1,400 and 10,100 miles of new high-capacity lines per year, assuming new construction starts in 2026.
Climate and Health Benefits of Decarbonization Offset the Costs
NREL finds in all modeled scenarios the health and climate benefits associated with fewer emissions offset the power system costs to get to 100% clean electricity.
Decarbonizing the power grid by 2035 could total $330 billion to $740 billion in additional power system costs, depending on restrictions on new transmission and other infrastructure development. However, there is substantial reduction in petroleum use in transportation and natural gas in buildings and industry by 2035. As a result, up to 130,000 premature deaths are avoided by 2035, which could save between $390 billion to $400 billion in avoided mortality costs.
When factoring in the avoided cost of damage from floods, drought, wildfires, and hurricanes due to climate change, the United States could save over an additional $1.2 trilliontotaling an overall net benefit to society ranging from $920 billion to $1.2 trillion.
Necessary Actions To Achieve 100% Clean Electricity
The transition to a 100% clean electricity U.S. power system will require more than reduced technology costs. Several key actions will need to take place in the coming decade:
- Dramatic acceleration of electrification and increased efficiency in demand
- New energy infrastructure installed rapidly throughout the country
- Expanded clean technology manufacturing and the supply chain
- Continued research, development, demonstration, and deployment to bring emerging technologies to the market.
Failing to achieve any of the key actions could increase the difficulty of realizing the scenarios outlined in the study.
texasfiddler
(1,993 posts)I believe smaller gen IV nuclear will become more accepted through necessity.
OKIsItJustMe
(19,938 posts)If there are challenges with siting and land use to be able to deploy this new generation capacity and associated transmission,
I dont think Gen IV reactors will be deployed in this time frame (were talking about 13 years here.) I think Small Modular Reactors are more likely.
texasfiddler
(1,993 posts)I meant SMR. I might get to work on some ancillary parts of the xEnergy / Dow project coming up. X-energys Xe-100 is considered a Gen IV reactor, but it is an advanced SMR. Looking forward to it.
OKIsItJustMe
(19,938 posts)World Nuclear Association: Generation IV Nuclear Reactors
Mostly, it means newer technology than Generation III, which, itself is an arbitrary designation.
World Nuclear Association: Advanced Nuclear Power Reactors
Several generations of reactors are commonly distinguished. Generation I reactors were developed in 1950-60s, and the last one shut down in the UK in 2015. Generation II reactors are typified by the present US and French fleets and most in operation elsewhere. So-called Generation III (and III+) are the advanced reactors discussed in this paper, though the distinction from Generation II is arbitrary. The first ones are in operation in Japan and others are under construction in several countries. Generation IV designs are still on the drawing board and will not be operational before the 2020s.
The Xe-100 may be considered a Gen IV reactor, by virtue of it being a newer design.