The Viability of Germany’s Energiewende: Mark Jacobson Answers 3 Questions

[GliderGuider]

14. Actually, I didn't. Here's the graphic proof of what I'm saying

This graph is derived from the BP data set that I normally use. The original figures are all consumption in mtoe, so capacity factors are taken out of the picture for all sources. Just the consumed energy is counted.

• The black line shows the year over year (yoy) growth in primary energy.
  
• The red line is the portion of the primary energy growth that came from fossil fuels (oil, gas and coal) .
  
• The green line is the portion of the primary energy growth that came from non-fossil sources (nuclear, hydro and renewables).
  
• The red plus the green line equals the black line.

The problem I'm pointing to is that that low-carbon sources over this 22 year period provided on average just one sixth of the total yoy growth in primary energy (0.3%). The most they ever contributed was 0.7%. Fossil fuel averaged 5 times the low-carbon contribution to the growth of primary energy, with a max of 5%. As you can see from the non-averaged plots, all energy demand growth over about 0.5% has been fulfilled by fossil fuels.

I don't know what will happen in the future, but this is what the last 22 years have looked like. I know you expect this picture to change radically very soon, but I don't. I see an energy and economic environment that has a lot of inertia due to its current size. As long as the economy keeps demanding more energy growth than renewables can fulfill, they will never, ever catch up. That means that for the foreseeable future, unless there is a global economic crash, CO2 levels will keep rising.