Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Power

The World Saw a Record 9.6% Growth In Renewables In 2022 (electrek.co) 133

By the end of 2022, global renewable generation capacity amounted to 3,372 gigawatts (GW), growing the stock of renewable power by 295 GW or 9.6%, according to the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). Renewables produced an overwhelming 83% of all power capacity added last year. Electrek reports: Renewable Capacity Statistics 2023, released today by IRENA, shows that renewable energy continues to grow at record levels despite global uncertainties, confirming the downward trend of fossil fuels. While many countries increased their renewable capacity in 2022, the significant growth of renewables is concentrated in Asia, the US, and Europe. IRENA reports that almost half of all new capacity in 2022 was added in Asia, resulting in a total of 1.63 terawatts (TW) of renewable capacity by 2022. China was the largest contributor, adding 141 GW to Asia's new capacity.

Renewables in Europe and North America grew by 57.3 GW and 29.1 GW, respectively. Africa saw an increase of 2.7 GW, slightly above 2021. Oceania continued its double-digit growth with an expansion of 5.2 GW, and South America had a capacity expansion of 18.2 GW. The Middle East recorded its highest increase in renewables on record, with 3.2 GW of new capacity added in 2022, an increase of 12.8%. Although hydropower accounted for the largest share of the global total renewable generation capacity with 1,250 GW, solar and wind continued to dominate new generating capacity. Together, both technologies contributed 90% to the share of all new renewable capacity in 2022. Solar led with a 22% (191 GW) increase, followed by wind, which increased its generating capacity by 9% (75 GW).

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The World Saw a Record 9.6% Growth In Renewables In 2022

Comments Filter:
  • Incredible (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Joce640k ( 829181 ) on Tuesday March 21, 2023 @09:07PM (#63389433) Homepage

    It's amazing what happens if we actually get up and do something instead of sitting on computers and saying it'll never work.

    • Re:Incredible (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Powercntrl ( 458442 ) on Tuesday March 21, 2023 @09:19PM (#63389451) Homepage

      It's amazing what happens if we actually get up and do something instead of sitting on computers and saying it'll never work.

      It's Economics 101 at this point. If you're in the business of selling electricity, you can transition to renewable energy sources, no longer have to buy fossil fuels and yet still sell the resulting electricity at full market rates. It's basically like if Walmart could invest in Star Trek replicator technology to stock their stores.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @05:42AM (#63390133) Homepage Journal

        The problem is that the fossil fuel suppliers don't want to give up their revenue stream, or write off all the investment they put into finding and extracting that fuel.

        • by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @07:08AM (#63390239)

          The problem is that the fossil fuel suppliers don't want to give up their revenue stream, or write off all the investment they put into finding and extracting that fuel.

          Perhaps. But markets don't care about any of that.

          The FF producers will have to cut their prices to compete and the highest-price producers will become unprofitable and shut down.

          This is already happening. The highest-cost oil is offshore and Arctic, or even worse, offshore in the Arctic. Many offshore and Arctic projects have been canceled.

        • by DanielRavenNest ( 107550 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @02:39PM (#63391589)

          EVs are expected to be 13-14 million units this year, about 20% of world car sales. Once ICE production falls below ICE scrapping of old ones, petroleum demand will fall, no matter the suppliers want. Taking 20 years as a typical life of a car, world sales were 50 million a year back then. If EV sales get to 20 million, we will reach the tipping point and the ICE fleet will start declining.

          As far as coal in the US, that is already down 60% for electricity, and the technology for steelmaking is shifting slowly way from it. This has already forced every major coal company into bankruptcy or restructuring. The forecast for the coming 12 months shows mostly coal plants retiring. Again, nobody cares what Big Coal wants. We're not going to be buying any by the end of the decade. The UK has already reached effectively zero coal for power.

      • by fred6666 ( 4718031 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @09:58AM (#63390681)

        It's amazing what happens if we actually get up and do something instead of sitting on computers and saying it'll never work.

        It's Economics 101 at this point. If you're in the business of selling electricity, you can transition to renewable energy sources, no longer have to buy fossil fuels and yet still sell the resulting electricity at full market rates. It's basically like if Walmart could invest in Star Trek replicator technology to stock their stores.

        Renewables wouldn't be that much interesting without environmental regulations and carbon taxes.
        So yes, the market works, but there need to be a price on pollution for it to work.
        Allowing to pollute other's air for free is not a good idea and never will be.

    • by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @03:24AM (#63389965)

      It's amazing what happens if we actually get up and do something instead of sitting on computers and saying it'll never work.

      Unfortunately we are very easy to please with big numbers. These sound good but it's a drop int he bucket compared to what we need.

      • by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @07:54AM (#63390351)

        These sound good but it's a drop int he bucket compared to what we need.

        Not at all. This is big progress. 10% compounded will double renewables by 2030.

        As solar and wind prices continue to fall, the installation pace will likely rise even faster.

        Renewables are mostly replacing old, inefficient, and dirty generators. Coal, not gas, so there is a disproportionate reduction in CO2.

        • by DanielRavenNest ( 107550 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @03:02PM (#63391663)

          The solar supply chain is already building enough capacity to double last year's deliveries (to 400 GW/year), and has plans to expand to 1100 GW/year a few years farther out. Capacity doesn't equal production, since factories on the whole don't run at 100% all the time. But capacity has to be larger than demand, or you are leaving sales on the table.

        • by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Thursday March 23, 2023 @04:04AM (#63392675)

          Not at all. This is big progress. 10% compounded will double renewables by 2030.

          Exactly. Compounded will double renewables by 2030. That should take us from "pathetically small" to "meh, but still widely missed the target".

          Renewables are mostly replacing old, inefficient, and dirty generators.

          And that's where you're wrong. The largest portion of renewable investment, especially in China isn't replacing any demand, it's addressing increased demand. China (and other parts of the world) very much replace existing demand with like for like energy systems. Which is what that favourite anti-China talking point of "OMG THEY ARE STILL BUILDING SOO MUCH COAL" is very much true while at the same time their coal consumption hasn't increased in a decade, and why emissions aren't actually going down.

  • by BrendaEM ( 871664 ) on Tuesday March 21, 2023 @09:45PM (#63389499) Homepage
    So says the oil producing states.
  • by GotNoRice ( 7207988 ) on Tuesday March 21, 2023 @10:19PM (#63389557)
    How much "capacity" do those solar panels add at night? Or even on a cloudy day? How much "capacity" do those wind farms add when there is no wind? I'm not against any of these technologies but we have to be realistic about their limitations. In many markets, peak hours are 4pm-9pm and in the winter the sun sets at 4:30pm - those solar panels aren't helping much.
    • by DI4BL0S ( 1399393 ) on Tuesday March 21, 2023 @10:37PM (#63389581)
      I have this wildly crazy idea, but maybe, just maybe, we could adept to what is available.. and not deplete until nothing's left? And with a bit of creativity we can get some lvl of reserve through storage, and require less nation wide energy storage by making sure each household store what it needs to get through those dips. Saying 6pm-9pm is my peak is like saying, but my car runs on fuel, how are you gona fix that with these superchargers.
    • Re:Capacity WHEN? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by angel'o'sphere ( 80593 ) <angelo.schneider @ o o m e n t o r .de> on Tuesday March 21, 2023 @11:12PM (#63389649) Journal

      So, you have 10 coal plants.
      During peak time all 10 are running at full power.

      So at night, 4 or 5 are running at full power, and the other idle in a *keep me warm state* at roughly 30%.

      Now, you replace 3 of those coal plants with solar.

      Suddenly, during day time at peak only 7 coal plants have to run. Wow, that was a no brainer right?

      And at night: wow, the same coal plants running before are running. That was a no brainer, too, right?

      How dumb are you anti renewables people? Every jotta of energy you do not produce from coal is good. Does not matter if it is day or night: dumbass

    • by Smidge204 ( 605297 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @02:50AM (#63389919) Journal

      Oh shit you're right! I don't know how anyone didn't realize this before... solar panels don't work great at night! Someone better tell all these companies who have spent years in planning and millions - possibly billions - building out solar PV that their shit won't work after sundown!

      Someone get GotNoRice a Nobel Prize for this discovery! This changes everything!

      Or maybe - just maybe - your concerns are not actually concerning to people who know more about the situation than you do. When there are a whole lot of people doing something you're convinced can't be done, you should entertain the possibility that you are under/misinformed (and maybe the places you get your information are not very reliable, or possibly have an agenda to actively keep you misinformed)
      =Smidge=

      • by GotNoRice ( 7207988 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @04:42AM (#63390069)
        Is it "misinformation" when I look at my own power-bill here in California and see that I'm being charged $.48/kWh while people in the southern US are paying a quarter of that or less? Is the "Made in China" label on the Solar Panels also "misinformation"? Hey maybe we can buy batteries from China also to fix the problem? Nothing wrong with making your power infrastructure reliant on a totalitarian dictatorship during a time of deteriorating international relations, right? I'm not advocating for fossil fuels. Nuclear is by far the best option, that provides consistent power 24 hours a day with zero greenhouse emissions, if people can simply shed their unfounded fears about it.
    • by Barsteward ( 969998 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @04:00AM (#63390017)
      another one with a tired old trope who thinks he's spotted something no-one else has. Solar is not the only solution even though you are trying to make it so. do some research into wind, storage etc - its a transition and it takes time to implement and the tech available today will probably be very out of date in 10 years time with the speed of development
      • by blahabl ( 7651114 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @08:40AM (#63390467)
        Yes, always the response to very valid concern of time-shifting energy is some handwaving about wind (because as we all know the fourth law of thermodynamics says that when there's no sun there'll always be wind and vice versa), and some magic pixie fairy dust technology that is just around the corner that'll fix it, I promise! Only 10 years from now!
    • by nospam007 ( 722110 ) * on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @05:09AM (#63390097)

      "How much "capacity" do those solar panels add at night? Or even on a cloudy day? How much "capacity" do those wind farms add when there is no wind? "

      You forgot to ask:
      How much capacity have those tide-generators when the Moon is on vacation?

      • by DanielRavenNest ( 107550 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @03:15PM (#63391709)

        Or for that matter how much does Hoover Dam produce when Lake Mead is empty, like now. Solar and wind by themselves are not enough. You need a diverse range of energy sources, and a strong enough grid to move the power to where it is needed. Right now, transmission lines are the limiting factor. They take a long time to build, because everybody along the route objects.

  • by stanbrown ( 724448 ) on Tuesday March 21, 2023 @10:32PM (#63389573) Homepage

    I believe these numbers are based on capacity. I would love to see a comparison of actual generate MWH for nonrenewables versus their rated capacity as a comparison to the units being shut down. I believe most of the 2 major sources of renewables (wind and solar) almost never actually achieve their rated maximum capacity, and the percent of actual generated to their rate capacity is remarkably low, as they are both mostly only available at least part of the time.

    • If you believe it is based on "capacity", why do you not simply read the article summary?

      The rest of your post: (*facepalm*) Yes, a PV solar plant does not produce *any* energy at night. We all knew that. Thanx for reminding us. Hint: in most parts of the world, people sleep at night. The only power they use is for fridges and street lights - wow - Oh! Lord! Please let it rain brains!

      • by sonlas ( 10282912 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @04:52AM (#63390083)

        Yes, a PV solar plant does not produce *any* energy at night. We all knew that. Thanx for reminding us. Hint: in most parts of the world, people sleep at night. The only power they use is for fridges and street lights - wow

        It is a bit more complicated than that.

        First there is the season distribution: 2/3 of the energy produced by solar panels is produced during spring-summer (because longer days and better light conditions, i.e., less clouds). Which leaves only 1/3 for autumn/winter. Here is a source [thesolarnerd.com], you can find plenty others.
        Guess what: we need more energy in winter, because this is when people turn their heater on. And as we push more and more for heat pumps, which is a good thing as it can be powered without burning fossil fuels, we need more and more electricity in winter. As we transition to EV, it will also lead to more electricity needed in winter for that: for instance, I am using my bike a lot to commute in spring/summer/even autumn, but I use my EV more in winter because of the weather conditions.

        Secondly, there is the time of day distribution: in winter there are usually two power spikes (here is the data for France for instance [rte-france.com], I don't really expect it to be different in most modern countries as it is based on pretty standard human behavior). One between 6-9am, because people wake up, heat their house, turn their TV/other stuff on, etc... And then another one between 6-9pm, when people go home, heat their house again, turn on their appliances, etc... At those hours, solar panel produce next to nothing.

        Of course, that problem (the one about time of day distribution) could be slightly fixed by adding storage capacity, but your post didn't mention that.

        Thus the answer by a past president from France regarding solar panels, during a series of questions by the National Assembly around the loss of energy generation independance: "the problem with solar panels is that they produce a lot of electricity when you don't need it".

        They are part of the solution, not a fix-all answer.

        • Guess what: we need more energy in winter, because this is when people turn their heater on.

          Depends where you're located. Many places are hot, so during summer they operate AC to cool down and during winter just operate less AC.

          Solaris panels will work better in these countries, since the peak demand coincides with peak sun.

          • by sonlas ( 10282912 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @07:22AM (#63390267)

            Depends where you're located. Many places are hot, so during summer they operate AC to cool down and during winter just operate less AC.

            Solaris panels will work better in these countries, since the peak demand coincides with peak sun.

            True enough, however peak energy demand is in Winter for most, if not all, of northern hemisphere. So generally speaking (at least for 87% of the population by raw estimates), winter is still gonna be a problem.

            If you wanted to refute my point though, you could have linked this study [carbonbrief.org] from 2017, saying that peak demand might shift to summer for some European countries. However, the devil is in the details: in that scenario, the peak would happen in summer (because of climate change), but we would still need roughly the same amount of energy in winter, because those winters would be as cold, if not with colder episodes. So at that point, solar panels would become a way to smooth the load in summer, but still not provide a reliable solution for winters.

        • by jbengt ( 874751 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @08:40AM (#63390465)

          Secondly, there is the time of day distribution: in winter there are usually two power spikes (here is the data for France for instance [rte-france.com]

          I can also provide a link. [eia.gov] Here's a quote from that which gives a more general perspective than your link, at least for the US:

          Total U.S. hourly electricity load is generally highest in the summer months when demand peaks in the afternoon as households and businesses are using air conditioning on hot days. During the winter months, hourly electricity load is less variable but peaks in both the morning and the evening.

          Note, overall for the US, electricity usage peaks in the summer, and that peak is in the afternoon when solar is available. The double daily peak is in the winter, but is lower than the summer peak. So even though solar won't contribute that much to the daily peak requirements in the winter, it's still useful for trimming the yearly peaks.
          Now I'm not saying that solar is the economical solution to provide all the power needed, since you would have to greatly overprovision solar and add a lot of storage, but it can contribute to the overall goal of getting off of fossil fuels.

          • by sonlas ( 10282912 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @09:14AM (#63390557)

            Interesting perspective. I remember that the few times I visited the US, I was kinda baffled by how much people were using AC, even during days I considered as "midly hot". To the point I was sometimes feeling cold, and had to put on some extra clothes. I guess another way to trim the yearly summer peaks would be to cut back on the usage of AC, when it's not really needed. And I guess the debate about what means "not really needed" could be a passionate one too!

            but it can contribute to the overall goal of getting off of fossil fuels.

            Indeed, as I like to say we don't have the luxury anymore to be picky about which low-carbon electricity source is better or not. Wind/solar, hydro, nuclear are all options we need to leverage.

        • It is a bit more complicated than that.
          No it is not more complicated - unless you want to make it so.

          In most parts of the world night power consumption is not even half of day times.
          So to make it simple: if you produce 50% of daytime needs with solar power and the other 50% with "conventional" power: you still have that conventional power at night to produce all the power you need.

          Every damn energy company switching out coal for solar knows that. Only /. the Yahoos, don't.

          Was that simple enough? /. idiots thing solar plants are build by multi billionaire idiots, and not by simple people who produce solar power and sell it when it is most needed: at day time.

          Everyone building a solar plant is a complete moron: obviously he is not making any money at night, what a dumbass. You know, I'm a moron, too. I make no money at night either. Either I make love. Or drink a beer or sleep. Must make me the biggest moron on the planet.

          • by sonlas ( 10282912 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @09:28AM (#63390613)

            This is a good example of strawman fallacy here. You make an argument I didn't make, and then proceed to make it look silly.

            6-9am and 5-9pm peaks is not night time (in the sense that most people are not sleeping then), and during winter, you don't get electricity from solar panels at those hours of day.

            No idea why you kept on ranting about other stuff in your post: of course switchout out from coal is a good thing, of course solar panels are useful (to a certain extent, that's my point), and of course, some countries (like the US apparently, read the other thread) have different peak electricity profiles.

            Must make me the biggest moron on the planet.

            See? We finally agree on something. Time to move on now.

      • by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @08:06AM (#63390379)

        Hint: in most parts of the world, people sleep at night. The only power they use is for fridges and street lights

        That is somewhat true now but will change as we transition from fossil fuel furnaces to electric heat pumps.

      • by sonlas ( 10282912 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @12:19PM (#63391143)

        If you believe it is based on "capacity", why do you not simply read the article summary?

        Let's rephrase what the parent posted: the growth is about 295GW of added capacity.
        Solar capacity factor [iea.org] is ~10-20%, and wind is ~23-44% for onshore wind farms.

        • And what has that to do with each other?

          I can easy build a solar plant that has a capacity factor of 50%. I place it at the equator and make it sun tracking and it produces 50% of the time 100% of its capacity energy. Boing: so simple.

          So? What is your damn problem? No one is asking about how much power 10 coal plants are actually producing, or nukes or gas.

          Because: it makes no sense. Do you know e.g. what the difference between base laod and peak load in e.g. countries like Germany and France are? Nope? Guessed so. You probably do not even know what "base load" means.

          If someone builds up 10GW solar power: it is his problem how to make money from it. Not yours. And pointing out its "capacity factor" is only 10%-20% makes you look super stupid: as you do not know where and how he has built that plant. Again: it is his business how much energy he actually produces and how and when and for what price he sells it.

          If I put a 2 MW solar plant on my roof and produce roughly 2MW from 11:00 to 13:00, I only need to care how I can sell those 2MW in those 2h.

          I'm not planning or pretending to sell any energy from 23:00 to 1:00 at night. Dumbass.

    • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @04:17AM (#63390037)

      Considering how prices are set in the electricity market, if this is capacity, given the current price schemes, I'd expect that growth to be actually higher.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @05:44AM (#63390135) Homepage Journal

      It all depends on the type of renewable energy, where it is located, and what it is for.

      Offshore wind is now exceeding 50% capacity factor, rivalling nuclear in Europe.

      Some renewable energy is also not supposed to have a high capacity factor. They are currently looking at building new hydro in Scotland, designed to time-shift very large amounts of energy via pumped storage. In other words it's only supposed to work half the time.

  • by will_die ( 586523 ) on Tuesday March 21, 2023 @11:03PM (#63389631) Homepage
    For India coal usage increased by 9% for 2022.
    Globally the increase of coal was over 2%. Guess which one is keeping more people alive and feed.
  • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @04:14AM (#63390031)

    I don't know about your country, in mine, the price for electricity is set by the most expensive power plant that is used. That means that if you have 4 power plants and need the power of 3, the 3 cheapest ones get to deliver, the fourth does not, but the price that all the 3 get is set by the most expensive one of those three.

    Now let's take a look at the price of power generation. And especially what changed last year.

    Gas used to be a fairly cheap power provider. That changed dramatically last year as probably everyone noticed. Gas jumped from one of the cheapest forms of power to the most expensive one. And took that spot from exactly these contenders: Renewables.

    Solar and wind are clean and nice and all, but they are one thing not: Cheap to produce. And they also have another not so great disadvantage for a producer: You can't just switch that plant on and off however you want. They are great basic load providers but very poor peak load providers. In that pricing model, though, they would have been the peak providers, because at times of low consumption, they'd be pushed out the top end of the power delivery system, being too expensive for their electricity to be required. But you can only produce power with wind if it's blowing and sun if it's shining, it's not like you can switch wind and sun on and off as you please.

    That changed big time with gas prices hitting the ceiling last year. Suddenly, they were basic providers. With gas being the peak load. Which is actually not that bad at all, gas turbines can very easily be throttled as demand dictates. Not only that, but suddenly you got more money for your wind power than you minimally needed to run them, so suddenly building those wind power plants because interesting even without subsidies.

  • by sometimesblue ( 6685784 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @06:50AM (#63390207)
    In the UK we're at 55 degrees north, as far north as Newfoundland and Labrador. Yet solar power is now so cheap to install that farmers are wanting to replace the crop fields with endless coverage of panels. The locals aren't happy, the spuds must flow. But if a field of panels even on our cold, murky island is more profitable than a field of turnips, what are you gonna do?
    • by RotateLeftByte ( 797477 ) on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @07:44AM (#63390327)

      There is an upside from covering a field with solar.

      Not growing things for a few years would allow the soil to recover from overuse of fertilisers. Then if those solar panels are built at least 5ft off the ground, you could graze sheep underneath. At least, the ground isn't permanently lost as it would be if the likkle boxes that we call houses are built on the land.

  • Great news. Maybe the world can put off building more nuclear fission power plants and hold out for fusion.

Suggest you just sit there and wait till life gets easier.

Working...