Abstract

Fossil fuels account for nearly 80% of the world’s energy production. Their usage causes severe environmental issues, such as global warming, because of the greenhouse gas emissions they induce. There also exist in a finite quantity, and thus the supply will eventually deplete.

For those two main reasons, we need today to develop efficient harvesting of alternative energies, from renewable sources. Renewable energies are by definition infinite, as their sources replenish themselves. Such sources are, for instance: sunlight, the wind, tides…

But the renewable quality of an energy source is not enough to solve the environmental problems we have to face. Those alternative energies also need to be sustainable – that is, to be both economically and environmentally viable on the long term. Sustainable energies, or clean energies, are the answer to the multiple issues that have to be faced this century. Not all renewable energies are sustainable – most of them have environmental impact on various levels. Not all of them are technologically mature, or economically viable either.

Ireland, as well as France, only have a small share of their energy produced from clean renewable sources. Their investments are far from those of the world leading countries, such as Germany, despite common goals set by the European Union. However, the sustainable energy market and research are developing, supported by policies on various scales. Greenhouse gas emissions are decreasing, and the share of sustainable energies in those states’ productions are growing. This process needs to be continued and even accelerated. The current financial crisis must not stop the effort in that direction. Some countries, like Germany, Norway or Sweden, have shown that this is viable and feasible. We need to follow those examples.

Note: bibliography references will be signaled by a ^[1] in the text; words defined in the glossary will be signaled by a *, but only at their first appearance.

Background and context

In 2011, global energy consumption saw a growth of over 5% ^[1]. This trend has not changed for 30 years, except for 2009, the only year that saw the energy consumption decrease (by 1.1%) in the last three decades, because of the economic crisis. Western countries needs are ever-growing, and at the same time, China’s and India’s intense development continues.

As for 2010, 16% of global energy consumption comes for renewable* sources. 10% comes from the biomass*, mainly used for heating, and 3.4% from hydroelectricity. Concerning electricity, renewable sources account for 19% of the world’s generation, with 16% coming from hydroelectricity.^[2]

The rest of the world’s energy consumption comes from non-renewable sources. In 2008, the world produced 143851 TWh*^[3], and their sources are show in the next graph:

Source: ^[3]

As can be seen in the graph above, fossil fuels remain the main source of energy: coal, oil and gas combined represent 82% of the world’s energy production. And with fossil fuels consumption come greenhouse gas* emissions. In the European Union, for instance, the use of energy accounts for 79% of greenhouse gas emissions ^[4].

Environmental concerns are a major issue in today’s international relations. Global warming*, for instance, has been a very important subject for more than three decades now, with for example Margaret Thatcher reducing the use of coal in electricity generation in the 1980s. Everybody knows the Kyoto protocol*, which was signed in 1997 and aimed at reducing the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. This agreement may not have been very successful – as the recent negociations at Durban can illustrate –, it is a sign that the existence of the problem is acknowledge by the international community. Greenhouse gas emissions are not the only environmental problem, far from there, but they are easily linked to the world’s energy consumption. This is why I will mainly consider this specific issue in this document.

Environmental issues are very real and concrete: global warming can hardly be denied, animal species go extinct at an alarming rate^[5] that may be the highest in Earth’s history, Greenland ice sheet is melting, etc. A debate still exists on the degree of humankind’s responsibility for this situation, but this is not the subject of this document. The fact that human activity is at least partly causing climate change and is having huge consequences on the ecosystem cannot be denied anymore.

This is why developed and developing countries need to find a way to conciliate their growth and environmental imperatives. The concept of sustainable* development must become a priority in every country’s long-term planning, but also in its short-term policy.

This document will focus on how Ireland can adopt a sustainable energy strategy for the future.

Introduction

Today’s energy production is not sustainable.

From a quantitative point of view, this statement means that humankind will not be able to keep producing 143851 TWh every year, using fossil fuels to produce 82% of it (using 2008’s energy consumption figures). This fact has inspired some theories, for instance Olduvai’s ^[6]: an industrial civilization would have a 100 years life expectancy, after which it would collapse, as it would not be able to keep up with its growing energy needs. The quantitative point of view of the non-sustainability of today’s energy production leads to a conclusion: if we want to keep meeting our growing demands, we will need to rely on renewable energy sources very soon.

But the quantitative point of view of this non-sustainability is not the only one. Another one is the environmental point of view. Greenhouse gas emissions have consequences on the climate, on animal wildlife, and more generally on the global ecosystem. Other forms of pollutions caused by humankind’s energy production and consumption also have consequences. For these reasons, we cannot keep using polluting energy sources to meet our ever-growing needs.

Other points of view exist on this statement: today’s energy production is not sustainable in terms of security of supply (limited reserves of oil, for instance), or in terms of cost (as oil depletion approaches, its cost increases).

Renewable energies are thus necessary to ensure the future energy supply. To meet our growing demands, it is vital to develop technologies to harvest “endless” energy. But renewable does not mean sustainable; for instance, biomass is a form of renewable energy, but produces air pollution, in some cases at levels above those from fossil fuel sources such as coal^[7].

In this document, I will study the main sources of renewable energy, pointing out which are sustainable (or “green”*) and which are not. Ireland’s and France’s potential and strategies will then be detailed, and compared to international best practice. I will finally establish a roadmap that could be applied by Ireland to ensure a sustainable development and energy production.

Energy sources review

Methodology

In this part, I will review the main sources of renewable energy and their harvesting technologies. The different criteria that I will use will be:

· Environmental impact, mainly in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, but with notes about other forms of pollution;

· Security of supply;

· Cost.

The purpose of this review is to establish a list of sustainable and renewable energy sources with enough potential to ensure Ireland’s energy supply. This list will be used to draw our roadmap, but also as a reference when analyzing Ireland’s and France’s current energy strategy.

My source for energy costs is the bibliography reference ^[10] from the Energy Information Administration of the US Department of Energy. It is the average cost in US dollars per megaWattHour (MWh), for a plant that would enter service in 2016.

Note about greenhouse gases

The greenhouse effect is the fact that the thermal radiation from the Earth’s surface is absorbed by the atmospheric gases and re-radiated in all directions. Being re-radiated in all directions, part of this radiation’s energy is transferred back to the surface, increasing the average surface temperature. This causes a warmer temperature than if solar radiation was the only heating mechanism.

Greenhouse gases include, but are not limited to (by order of contribution to the greenhouse effect):

· water vapor;

· carbon dioxide (CO2);

· nitrous oxide (N2O);

· methane (CH4);

· and ozone (03).

Those gases are present in the atmosphere, partly because of human activity, but also partly for natural reasons. The contribution of a gas to the greenhouse effect depends on many parameters: the wavelength of the considered radiation, whether the sky is cloudy or clear, etc. Details are out of this document’s range but can be found in bibliography references ^[8] and ^[9].

Solar

The energy source is the sun itself. It emits radiation whose energy that can be harvested in different ways. The first, most basic way is just to let objects be heated by the sun, for instance to dry wet clothes. I will consider the two prominent technologies used today: solar thermal and solar photovoltaic.

For both, the supply is secure, because the resource – sunlight – does not need to be imported. However, it is irregular, as sunlight is not available at night (and, some people would say, not a lot of it is available during the day, in Ireland).

Thermal

Solar thermal energy, or STE, consists in heating a plate to harvest the sun’s energy. Three types of collectors exist:

· low-temperature are flat plates, generally used to heat swimming pools;

· medium-temperature are flat plates, generally used for heating water or air for commercial or residential use;

· high-temperature collectors use mirrors and lenses to concentrate the sunlight, and are generally used to produce electricity.

STE is much more efficient than solar photovoltaic energy: conversion from solar energy to electricity can reach an efficiency of 31.25% ^[11]. Storage can be a challenge; however, this is not the subject of this study.

The average cost is 311.8 USD/MWh^[10]. It is the highest of the technologies cited in this review.

This technology is “green”, which means its environmental impact is very low, during its operation. The problems involve how the harvesting collectors are manufactured, installed and eventually disposed of. Thus, the question is: what is the fossil fuel equivalent of the manufacture, installation, operation, and disposition of a solar thermal plant? The answer depends on the technology used and on the climate; however, it is generally favorable to the solar systems in applications where they are cost-effective. It is also improving with each generation of the technology. For instance, solar water heaters can generate 8 times more hot water per unit of fossil energy than an electric water heating system ^[12].

Another problem can be the amount of land required to install solar power plants: approximately 1 square kilometer for every 20 to 60 megawatts ^[12], which can cause problems with wildlife. It is however not specific to solar plants: coal plants require as much land. Also, large centralized plants are far from being the best option to harvest solar energy, as sunlight is dispersed.

Photovoltaic

Photovoltaics, or PV, consists in generating electrical power with solar radiation, exploiting the photovoltaic effect with semiconductors. The photovoltaic effect is the creation of an electrical current or voltage in a material, upon exposure to light. More details is given in the bibliography reference ^[13]. Solar panels are installed on the roofs of buildings, for instance, where they will optimize the exposure to the sun. They are composed of multiple solar cells, which are composed of materials such as silicon (in different forms), cadmium, and others. This energy’s market is growing fast, allowing for technology development and price reduction.

The market’s average efficiency of solar cells is of 12 to 18%. The company Sunpower produces cells with an energy conversion ratio (electrical energy produced divided by solar energy received) of 20% [14].

The average cost is 210.70 USD/MWh ^[10].

This technology is “green” during its operation too. However, materials used in solar cells can create health hazards for people coming into contact with them during manufacture (for instance, arsenic and cadmium). Silicon can also be dangerous if breathed as dust. Also, there is a small but existing danger that dangerous fumes can be released by burning solar panels.

Wind

Wind energy can be harvested in many different ways, to harvest different types of energy. Sails are used on boats to propel them; windmills generate mechanical power, and wind turbines generate electricity. I will focus on the latter technology.

Wind turbines can be installed offshore or in rural areas. They are sometimes grouped in wind farms. The energy produced increases dramatically when the wind speed increases (the energy is related to the cube of the wind speed). This is why offshore wind farms can produce more energy: higher wind speeds are available. Wind is a secure source of energy, but is also irregular (less than the sun).

The conversion efficiency of wind turbines varies with the wind speed, depending on the wind turbine conception. It can vary from 0 to 59%, the Betz limit – theoretical maximum efficiency of a wind turbine ^[15]. The wind speed varying with the time of day, and the time of the year, an important figure is the capacity factor*.The average capacity factor of wind turbines achieved by new turbines was around 36% in 2005 ^[16].

The average cost of wind energy is 97 USD/MWh for wind turbines installed in land, and 243.2 USD/MWh for offshore wind turbines.

This technology is green; it is actually one of the “greenest”. No air or water pollution is produced, no dangerous material or substances are used, and there is no public safety hazard. They, however, can have an impact on wildlife (bird deaths from collisions have been reported), and turbines can be noisy. Also, a theory suggests that generating electricity from large-scale wind farms could actually influence climate ^[17] and cause a temperature raise in regions where those farms are implanted.

Hydropower

Just like the wind, moving water yields energy. However, the water is a lot denser than the air (832 times more), so even at lower speeds, water can hold more energy than the air. Water energy can be harvested in many forms: from the tides of a sea, or from falling water, using a dam, among others. I will only develop the first two.

Both are secure and regular (for dams) or at least predictable (for tides).

The average cost of hydropower is quite low: 86.4 USD/MWh ^[10]. Tidal energy is more expensive than dams, however I don’t have precise figures for each one of them.

Dams and tidal energy harvesting systems don’t produce air or water pollution. However they do have environmental impacts. Dams damage the ecosystem and wildlife where they are installed, and cause loss of land. Tidal systems have an impact on the aquatic ecosystems, on the seabed… Those consequences depend on the technology used, and are very difficult to predict. They need to be assessed for every area where a system in installed ^[18].

Tidal

Tidal energy harvesting consists in converting the energy of tides into electricity. Tides are more predictable than wind or sunlight, which is a good thing when it comes to connecting it to the grid.

The two main methods to generate electricity from the tides are:

· tidal barrages, which act like “tidal dams”. They use the potential energy in the difference of height between the high and low phases of the tides;

· tidal stream generators, which are similar to wind turbines. They use the kinetic energy in the moving water of the tides to power turbines. Their environmental impact on the aquatic ecosystem is a lot smaller than the one of tidal barrages.

More details on those methods can be found in bibliographical references ^[19] and ^[20]. A new technique, called Shrouded Tidal Turbine, is developing rapidly due to its potential power production: 3 to 4 times more compared to tidal stream generators. It is also usable in lower flows areas ^[21].

Dams

Dams produce electricity by harvesting kinetic energy of falling or flowing water. When a dam is built, a watercourse’s flow is blocked; the water stores potential energy. By letting a part of the water flow through the dam, its potential energy is transformed into kinetic energy, which can be then harvested by a turbine. Different kinds of dams exist: conventional, pumped-storage, run-of-the-river… Each is adapted for specific circumstances.

Dams also need an appropriate site to be built upon. The lack of which is causing, for instance, the development of dams to become very problematic in the US ^[12].

Nuclear

There are two sources of nuclear power.

The first is nuclear fusion, the reaction that exists in stars, which currently remains unusable on Earth, with current technologies, as they are not economical. It would however be a clean energy, and could supply the world’s energy needs for millions of years. The basic idea is to take small atoms, mainly isotopes of hydrogen called deuterium and tritium, or helium, and make them merge into a single atom. The fusion releases energy, if the two atoms are light enough; if the atoms are too heavy, the fusion consumes energy. Its main fuel, deuterium, can be found in 1 in 6500 hydrogen atoms in seawater.

The second source of nuclear power is nuclear fission. It consists in a large atom splitting into two smaller ones, releasing energy in the process. This process in used in the current nuclear plants. The most common fuels are isotopes of uranium and plutonium. Nuclear fission has a few drawbacks: it generates radioactive waste, can be quite dangerous (as the dramatic case of the Fukushima plant illustrates), but also: it is not really renewable, as uranium is a finite resource. Just as peak oil will happen, uranium peak will certainly happen too (some pessimistic predictions place it as soon as 2035 ^[22]), even if some optimistic predictions think it may never happen. Nuclear fusion is renewable, but nuclear fission is not.

The cost of nuclear energy is 113.9 USD/MWh. The supply is very regular but most countries rely on uranium imports, so it is not a secure energy.

Biomass

Biomass is organic material, which may or may not be transformed into biofuel, and is then combusted to produce and harvest energy. The main sources of biomass energy are wood under various forms, and biofuels obtained from numerous types of plants.

Biomass is a secure energy: it can be grown locally. It is also renewable. However, it is not green: it produces air pollution (carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and other particles), and has consequences on the ground on which the biomass is grown. The impact depends on how carefully the resource is managed. Still, regarding greenhouse gases, the CO2 produced by burning biomass could by nearly the same as the amount required to replenish the plants grown to produce the biomass, if used in a sustainable way. Biomass contribution to global warming would then be zero ^[12].

The average cost of biomass energy is 112.5 USD/MWh.

Geothermal

Geothermal energy is the energy stored and radiated by the Earth. Earth’s core is hotter than Earth’s surface, causing conduction a thermal energy towards the surface. This energy can be harvested by exploiting this temperature gradient, using heat collectors (heat pumps, for instance). Among the harvestable sources of geothermal energies are: trapped hot water, hot rocks, magma; hot springs can also be directly exploited without needing to drill into the ground.

Geothermal energy is renewable, as the heat extracted is only a small fraction of the Earth’s internal heat. Local source can however come to depletion and must be monitored.

Geothermal energy is also secured and regular, as Earth’s thermal radiation is constant. It is actually decreasing, but on geological time scale; hence, it is infinite at human’s perception.

The average cost of geothermal energy is 101.7 USD/MWh, which is quite low. In the past, it was limited to areas near tectonic plate boundaries, but recent technological development increased the potential range of exploitable sites, so this energy has quite a lot of potential.

Still, water drawn from deep earth carry greenhouse gases, like CO2 or methane. So geothermal energy production does contribute to global warming: current plants emit about 122 kg of CO2 per MWh of electricity produced ^[23], a fraction of fossil fuel emissions: 758 kg of CO2 per MWh for oil ^[24] for instance. Toxic chemicals might also be carried in trace amounts.

Conclusion

In conclusion, renewable does not necessarily mean environmentally sustainable. Biomass, hydropower and geothermal energy, for instance, can have serious environmental impacts. If carefully planned, monitored and used, that impact can be minimized and even cancelled, like CO2 emission of biomass utilization can be cancelled out by the CO2 consumption of the plants grown. A lot of study still has to be done to determine precisely the impact of every harvesting technology, and it strongly depends on the local environment and geography.

Still, most renewable energy sources contribute less to global warming and greenhouse gas emission than non-renewable sources like fossil fuels. Cost can be a limiting factor to renewable energy production development, in some cases, but some technologies are mature and cost effective, and future ones (like nuclear fusion) have a gigantic potential.

I will now expose the energy strategies took by Ireland and by France, my native country, and then compare them to the international best practice.

Energy strategies

Roads taken by Ireland and France

France

France relies very heavily on nuclear energy: 40% of its energy supply was nuclear in 2004 ^[24], and 75% of its electricity production. Here is France’s primary energy supply in 2004:

And here is France’s domestic production:

France’s nuclear electricity production is much higher than the EU’s average of 31%. This comes from historical political reasons – during the Cold War, the general de Gaulle wanted to insure France’s energetic independence. This principle remained very strongly attached to France’s energy strategy.

Still, most of the nuclear fuel is imported; so is most of France’s oil, coal and gas (only 2% of the consumed gas is produced in France).

Here is France’s renewable energy production mix:

Biomass is the most important renewable energy source, with a cumulated part of 57% (counting wood and biofuels). Then come hydropower and wind. Solar actually has a very small part (less than 0.3%).

France is the EU’s second biggest producer of renewable energies, thanks to its wood and hydroelectric resources ^{[26] [FR]}. It has the biggest forest of Western Europe, and its wind potential is the second biggest in Europe after the United Kingdom’s; offshore wind farming is also possible because of its overseas territories and vast littoral. In 2008, renewable represented 13.9% of France’s primary energy production ^{[26] [FR]}, with 19 Mtep*.

France’s energetic policy was fixed in july of 2005 by the “loi de programme” (litteraly, “programme law”) number 2005-781 detailing the main objectives for the years to come. The main axes are the reduction of the greenhouse gas emissions and of the energy intensity*, and the increase of the part of produced and consumed energy from renewable sources.

The research on energy efficiency is subsidized, as well as on biofuels, geological storage of CO2, solar photovoltaic, hydrogen and fuel cells, energy storage, and development of the vegetal chemistry and bioenergy. Taxes reductions are offered for people deploying renewable energy harvesting at home. EDF* also has to buy electricity produced by companies or people using renewable sources to higher prices than the market price. EDF also has to offer the possibility to its consumers to choose the source of the electricity they consume.

The programme law and other national objectives put the highlight on biomass and wind energy, and on encouraging people and companies to produce energy from renewable sources.

Because of France’s important nuclear production, it has one of the EU’s lowest CO2 per capita emissions ^[25]. Important research centers and testing plants on fusion nuclear power are being built in France, like ITER*. Even if renewable energy development is encouraged, France’s energetic policy remains strongly attached to the nuclear energy.

Ireland

Here is Ireland’s primary energy supply in 2004 ^[27]:

And now in 2009 ^[28]:

Oil remains the major source of energy for Ireland, followed by natural gas and coal. The part of renewable energy has considerably grown: it doubled since 1990 ^[28]. The main sources of renewable energy in Ireland are the wind, then the biomass, hydropower, and finally biofuels ^[28].

Concerning electricity, renewables account for 14.2% of 2009’s production ^[29], the second biggest source after gas (tied with coal).

In recent years, Ireland’s energy needs have grown (+51% between 1990 and 2004 ^[30]), while domestic production has decreased; this resulted in an augmentation of energy imports. Ireland is strongly dependant on oil imports, as it accounts for 55% of its energy supply, and on gas imports, as it is the major source of electricity production. Those imports come mainly from the UK.

Despite a significant increase in wind power capacity, Ireland is still above the EU average of CO2 emissions ^[30]: in 2004, Ireland’s emissions were 10589 kg/capita, and EU’s average was 8180.

Ireland’s strategy regarding renewable energies is supported by a list of policy measures ^[28]:

· a carbon tax is enforced since 2010: €15 per tonne of C02, to improve the cost competitiveness of renewable energy;

· the EU emissions trading scheme is in operation since January 2005;

· many programs of grid connection for renewable energy generators, small scale electricity generation and overall upgrade of the grid have been developed over the years;

· development of biomass and biofuels is supported by the Bioenergy Establishment Scheme, the Bioenergy Action Plan, the Biofuels Mineral Oil Tax Relief, etc;

· fiscal and financial support is also given, through the Accelerated Capital Allowance Scheme, financial support for electric and hybrid vehicles, the Business Expansion Scheme, and the Corporate Tax Relief for Investment in Renewable Energy Generation;

· finally, research is also supported by the SEAI*’s Renewable Energy Research, Development and Demonstration programme, the Irish Energy Research Council, the Science Foundation Ireland and the Charles Parsons Energy Research Awards.

Ireland’s goal is to have renewable energy sources account for 16% of its energy supply by 2020. The provisional figure for 2009 was 4.7%. The wind is the fastest growing source of renewable energy, with 10% of all electricity production in 2009 ^[28].

International best practice

To identify “international best practice”, different aspects have to be considered. Among them, I chose to highlight: financial investment, renewable energy production capacity, greenhouse gas emissions per capita, and clean energy policies.

Investments

211 billion dollars in total have been invested in renewable energies in 2010 ^[31], including reported asset finance, venture capital, private investment, public markets, and research and development. The top countries are:

· China, with 50 billion dollars, biggest investor for the second year in a row. Wind power is its main focus;

· Germany, with 41 billion dollars, mainly focused on small-scale projects (34.3 billion dollars), like rooftop solar photovoltaic;

· The United States with 30 billion dollars, mainly focused on wind power and financial new investment;

· Italy, with 14 billion dollars, increasing their investment by 248%;

· Brazil, with 7 billion dollars, mainly focusing on biofuels.

It is interesting to remark that developing economies invest in renewable energies just as much as developed countries.

It is also worth noticing that Germany, with a considerably smaller economy and population than China or the United States, invest almost the same amount of money than those two countries. German efforts toward renewable energies are remarkable. Also, their choice to invest in small-scale projects, like solar rooftop panels, is very smart, considering that it is the best way to accommodate big cities and clean energy. Taking this small-scale approach allows for urban optimization of energy production and consumption.

Policies

Clean energy policies have different scales: international (like EU-wide targets), countries, states or provinces, even cities. However, regardless of the scale, the number of entities that fix such targets and enforce new policies has been constantly increasing. As of 2011, 119 countries have a national renewable energy policy, and 98 of those have national targets. Some countries focus on large-scale projects, like France and its nuclear power plants; other countries prefer small-scales projects, like Germany and its strong solar PV investment.

Such policies play a major role in developing the renewable energies market and investments. The main targets of those policies are heating, transport, urbanism and electricity. The main kinds of targets are: penetration of renewable energy (percentage of final energy coming from renewable sources) and power generation.

Within the EU, Finland and Sweden have met their 2020 targets by 2010, showing their serious implication in energizing their renewable energy production.

Different forms of policies exist, each having their efficiency and drawbacks. The success of a policy depends on its design as well as on its implementation; this is why the policies are regularly revised and redesigned, to account for the observations about their success. The three different categories are:

· Public financing, with public investment, grants, or competitive bidding;

· Fiscal incentives, with tax credits or cuts, energy production payment, or subsidies;

· Regulatory policies, with quota obligations, feed-in tariffs, and other mandates.

Choosing which kind of policy to implement is a question of strategy. The United States have a lot of fiscal incentives enforced, for instance. There is no real “best practice”, only local successes that occurred for a number of reasons and could not necessarily be copied at other locations.

A last form of encouragement is the renewable energy awards, such as the Ashden Award for Renewable Energy or the Energy Globe Award. They are not awarded by countries but by NGOs or independent agencies, so they are not really policies. However, they reward innovation, development and research on renewable energies, and thus support the dynamism that is strongly needed in this field.

Production capacity

Regarding the existing electric power capacity (excluding hydropower) the top countries are ^[32]:

· The United States, with 56 gigawatts of power capacity, mainly wind power (40 gigawatts) and biomass (10 gigawatts);

· China, with 50 gigawatts, mainly wind (45 gigawatts);

· Germany, with 49 gigawatts, mainly focused between wind (27 gigawatts) and solar PV (17.3 gigawatts);

· Spain, with 26 gigawatts, 21 of which are produced by wind power;

· India, with 16 gigawatts, 13 of which are from wind power;

A few remarks can be made about those figures. First of all, it is not surprising to find the United States and China on the top, considering their size, both economically and demographically. Germany and Spain do not have such a strong economy – Spain especially is currently going through hard times. As such, their important production capacity is all the more remarkable.

A trend that can be seen in the repartition of the energy sources: biomass has a stronger share in developing countries, whereas solar photovoltaic is more developed in richer countries. Wind power is the most developed source of renewable energy regardless of the size of the economy.

I will not list the countries by share of primary energy produced from energy sources, as a lot of small countries have a very high percentage (80% or higher), due to the fact that they have a very small domestic production and a very small demand. I will however make a few notes:

· the average of the EU-27* is 8.2%;

· Among the developed countries that have a high score are Brazil (47%), Norway (46%), Sweden (32%), Finland (25%), Portugal (20%), and Denmark (18%).

· Among the countries listed above, Norway and Brazil do not have official energy targets. The others do, through the EU targets; Sweden and Finland have their own targets, set higher than those of the EU.

Greenhouse gas emissions per capita

For that indicator also, a lot of smaller, less developed countries have the best scores, as they have a very low energy production, or at least a low production per capita.

Here is a list of developed countries with low greenhouse gas emissions:

· Brazil, with growing emissions, reaching 1.9 tons of CO2 per capita in 2008;

· Sweden, with 5.3 tons of CO2 per capita, and those emissions are decreasing every year;

· Portugal, with 5.3 tons of CO2 per capita; and decreasing too;

· China, with 5.3 tons per capita too, but with increasing emissions;

· France, with 6.1 tons of CO2 per capita, a figure slowly decreasing over time;

For France, this number is quite surprising, considering that this country isn’t among the countries with a high share of renewable energy production, unlike the others. It is actually explained by the very important share of nuclear power production.

China’s low emissions per capita can be explained by the huge population of the country, and by the fact that a good part of the population lives in a rural environment, and hence with very little energy produced per capita. Their emissions are increasing, despite their huge investments in renewable energies, because the country’s economy and industry are growing very fast. The same can be said for Brazil: despite their investment, the country’s growth results in an energy production growing faster than the clean energy production. Also, production of energy from some CO2-producing renewable sources obviously emits more CO2 than no production at all. So even if Brazil or China were only building renewable energy harvesting plants, their CO2 emissions would grow.

Some countries that appeared in the top for investments and for production capacity do not appear here, like Germany or the USA for instance. This is explained by the fact that those countries had a very important energy production and consumption before they started to migrate towards renewable, clean energy production. Such “inertia” is long to overcome and reverse. Germany still has relatively low emissions, with 9.6 tons of CO2 per capita; the United States however have a very high score of 17.5 tons of CO2 per capita.

Benchmark

I will now quickly compare Ireland’s situation to the one of a similar country: Germany. Both countries are in the EU and thus have the same targets, fixed by the European rulers. Germany has a bigger economy, but has a comparable population – it is significantly superior to Ireland’s, but still less than China’s population would be, for instance. Both countries have a similar geographical environment, and a similar climate. I chose Germany as a reference because, as it can be seen in the above study of the international best practice, this country is one of the international references when it comes to clean energies.

Here is a table comparing a few figures for both countries ^[34]:

The share of renewable sources in Germany’s energy production reached 20% in the first half of 2011 ^[35].

As can be seen in the above graph, a relatively low share of Ireland’s energy supply comes from renewable sources. This was detailed previously, when I exposed Ireland’s energetic strategy. CO2 emissions per capita remain on a par with Germany’s, despite of Germany’s larger share of renewable energies, because of the bigger german industry.

Both german and irish emissions have been decreasing in the past years. German emissions are below 1990 levels, the reference year of most targets – they actually have been decreasing since that year. Irish emissions have grown between 1990 and 2001, and have been slowly decreasing since, with a stagnation period between 2005 and 2007.

Here is Germany’s primary energy supply in 2009 ^[36]:

And Ireland’s primary energy supply in 2009:

Renewable energies represent a bigger share for Germany. Germany’s main focus for those energies are biomass, and in a lesser extent wind, hydropower and biofuels. It should be noted that the above graphs represent the energy consumption of both countries, not domestic production. Renewables account for a bigger share of energy production for Germany – about 20% in 2011 –, but Germany imports an important part of their energy. Still, Germany’s energy supply mix gives a bigger share to renewable and nuclear energies, resulting in a cleaner energy consumption. Ireland relies mainly on fossil fuels: oil, gas, coal and peat account for about 95% of the primary energy supply.

To conclude that quick benchmark, it can be said that Ireland’s economy, industry and energy needs have grown a lot since 1990 (mainly between 1995 and 2007). With that growth came an increase in energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions… However, for the past few years, Ireland has been investing in decreasing their energy intensity – that is, increasing the efficiency of their energy usage – and in clean energies (mainly wind).

At the same time, Germany has a much heavier industrial past, and was reunited with the eastern Germany Democratic Republic in 1990.

Today, Germany is one of the world’s biggest investors in renewable energies. 20% of their domestic production comes from renewable sources, and some of the leaders in renewable energy harvesting technologies are German. It can be seen when comparing both countries’ energy mixes: the part of renewable and/or clean energies is bigger for Germany.

However, german CO2 emissions per capita are on a par with the irish emissions, as Ireland’s relatively recent development allowed for the construction of efficient infrastructure, as well as a significant development of wind power in Ireland the last few years. On the other hand, Germany’s heavy industry and the still important part of fossil fuels cause an “inertia” that explains their relatively high CO2 emissions.

Conclusion: Clean Energy development roadmap and perspectives

There is no “best” way to develop clean energies, no perfect policy or technology. Numerous parameters must be considered: environmental impact, cost per MWh, security of supply and regularity, practicality considering the situation…

However, a few recommended practices can be listed.

Considering energy sources:

· Develop wind power, as it is one of the greenest sources;

· Develop solar electricity generation with small-scale projects for urban environments (rooftop panels, etc), combined with energy-efficient building design, to decrease energy intensity;

· Develop biomass and biofuels in a sustainable way – as the carbon dioxide consumption of the carbon cycle can cancel the emissions of those energies, if their use is carefully planned.

Considering policies:

· Mixing small-scale projects (like rooftop solar PV) and big-scale ones (like wind farms), to ensure the diversity of energy production and their adaptability to various specific needs and situations, as well as energetic independency;

· Encouraging the development of clean renewable energy markets and research, using different kinds of direct support (funding, subsidies…) and indirect support (tax reliefs, etc);

· Keeping the “cleanness” of the energy sources as a top priority!

Political will is obviously very important. It is important to realize that renewable and clean energies are not only environmentalists’ whims, they are a very concrete and important matter. Global warming and its consequences are very real, and other environmental changes can be observed everywhere, for instance the animal species extinction rate. At the same time, renewable energy harvesting can be done locally, ensuring energetic independency, and allowing for less imports and investment into fossil fuels harvesting. Thus, every euro invested in renewable energies is also euro saved somewhere else, not a “wasted” euro, from a (quite cynical) economical standpoint.

Regarding Ireland, the current situation has two sides. On the first, 95% of the Irish energy supply comes from non-renewable fossil fuels, mostly imported. This causes important CO2 emissions, as well as an energetic dependency to the biggest importers, like the UK. On the other hand, renewable energy production is increasing quickly, mainly from the wind power. Europan Union targets apply to Ireland, and the country is facing significant challenges in meeting them. Those targets are to reach 16% of gross energy consumption to come from renewable energy sources by 2020; in 2008, Ireland’s gross energy consumption came from renewable sources for 3.9% ^[37]. The economical crisis that the country is currently facing does not help the cause of clean energies, obviously. More than ever, political courage is needed to face these issues. The recent Durban negotiations, aiming to revive the Kyoto protocol, show that this matter is still not getting the serious motivation it needs from everyone.

Producing enough energy for tomorrow is useless if there isn’t a world left to live in tomorrow.

Bibliography

1: http://www.enerdata.net/enerdatauk/press-and-publication/publications/g-20-2010-strongly-energy-demand-increase.php

2 : http://www.ren21.net/Portals/97/documents/GSR/GSR2011_Master18.pdf pages 17 and 18

3: http://webbshop.cm.se/System/TemplateView.aspx?p=Energimyndigheten&view=default&cat=/Broschyrer&id=e0a2619a83294099a16519a0b5edd26f table 46: total world energy supply

4: http://eme2.eu/cust/documentrequest.aspx?DocID=148

5: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6502368/#.Tudk51JmzM1

6: http://www.oilcrisis.com/duncan/road2olduvai.pdf

7: http://michiganmessenger.com/33868/proposed-biomass-plant-better-than-coal

8: http://web.archive.org/web/20060330013311/http://www.atmo.arizona.edu/students/courselinks/spring04/atmo451b/pdf/RadiationBudget.pdf

9: http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html

10: http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/electricity_generation.html

11: http://www.sandia.gov/news/resources/releases/2008/solargrid.html

12: http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/technology_and_impacts/impacts/environmental-impacts-of.html

13: http://photovoltaics.sandia.gov/docs/PVFEffIntroduction.htm

14: http://us.sunpowercorp.com/cs/BlobServer?blobkey=id&blobwhere=1300258525337&blobheadername2=Content-Disposition&blobheadername1=Content-Type&blobheadervalue2=inline%3B+filename%3De20_327_ds_en_ltr_w.pdf&blobheadervalue1=application%2Fpdf&blobcol=urldata&blobtable=MungoBlobs

15: http://www.innovateus.net/earth-matters/what-betz-law

16: http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/pdfs/20_percent_wind_2.pdf page 46

17 : http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2010/climate-wind-0312.html

18 : http://www.esru.strath.ac.uk/EandE/Web_sites/01-02/RE_info/Tidal%20Power.htm#envirob2

19 : http://www.soton.ac.uk/promotion/engineering_awards_generator.shtml

20 : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_barrage

21 : http://duelingfuels.com/uncategorized/tidal-stream-systems.php

22: http://groups.google.com/group/fbc-re/msg/99d189c134dadceb?pli=1

23 : http://www.geothermal-energy.org/files-39.html

24 : http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-and-you/affect/air-emissions.html

25 : http://ec.europa.eu/energy/energy_policy/doc/factsheets/mix/mix_fr_en.pdf

26 : http://www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/IMG/spipwwwmedad/pdf/ReferenceS_cle7212c4.pdf, in French.

27 : http://ec.europa.eu/energy/energy_policy/doc/factsheets/mix/mix_ie_en.pdf

28 : http://www.seai.ie/Publications/Statistics_Publications/SEI_Renewable_Energy_2010_Update/RE_in_Ire_2010update.pdf

29: http://www.energycustomers.ie/electricity/index.aspx

30 : http://ec.europa.eu/energy/energy_policy/doc/factsheets/mix/mix_ie_en.pdf

31 : http://www.ren21.net/Portals/97/documents/GSR/GSR2011_Master18.pdf pages 34 to 37

32 : same resource as 31, page 73 (table R4)

33: same resource as 31, page 76 (table R6)

34: http://databank.worldbank.org/ddp/home.do?Step=12&id=4&CNO=2

35 : http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,783314,00.html

36 : https://energypedia.info/index.php/Germany_Country_Situation#Primary_energy_consumption

37: http://www.epa.ie/environmentinfocus/climatechange/

Glossary

Sustainable (development, energy): Adjective describing the capacity for long-term maintenance of said development or energy. This underlies economical and environmental imperatives.

Green: Adjective describing an environmentally-friendly energy source, policy, service…

Greenhouse gas: Gas that absorbs radiation and emits it in all directions. By absorbing the radiations of the Earth and re-emitting a part of it back on the Earth, it contributes to global warming. Such gases include CO2 (carbon dioxide), water vapor, and others.

Kyoto protocol: An international treaty aimed at fighting global warming. Adopted on the 11 December 1997 in the Japanese city of Kyoto; entered into force on February 2005. 191 countries have signed and ratified it as of September 20111. The United States are the only country remaining not to have ratified it.

TWh: Terawatt hour; a unit of energy equal to a thousand billion watts of power expended over a one hour time.

Global warming: The rising of the average temperature of Earth’s atmosphere and oceans. Scientists are today almost universally certain that it is caused by human activities like deforestation or greenhouse gas emissions.

Renewable energy: Energy coming from a natural source which replenishes itself. Such an energy source is then endless – as long as the source exists. Such sources are sunlight, the wind, tides, among others.

Biomass: Energy harvested from biological material, living or recently living. It can be harvested by direct combustion, or after conversion into other energy products such as biofuel.

Energy intensity: Energy intensity is defined by the SEAI as “the amount of energy required to produce some functional output. It represents the inverse of energy productivity.”

Capacity Factor: or Load Factor. Ratio of the actual output of a power plant over its potential output, if operated at full capacity, over a period of time.

Mtep: Megaton Equivalent of Petroleum; also called Mtoe, Megaton Oil Equivalent.

EDF: Electricité de France, France’s biggest energy company, and one of the world’s largest electricity producers.

ITER: Acronym for International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor; international nuclear fusion research project, currently building the most advanced prototypal nuclear fusion reactor in Cadarache, in the south of France.

SEAI: Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, formerly Irish Energy Center; Ireland’s national energy authority.

EU-27: name designing the current European Union of 27 countries.