Page:Quantifying a realistic, worldwide wind and solar electricity supply.pdf/1

 Global Environmental Change 31 (2015) 239–252

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Global Environmental Change journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/gloenvcha

Quantifying a realistic, worldwide wind and solar electricity supply Yvonne Y. Deng a,*, Martin Haigh b, Willemijn Pouwels c, Lou Ramaekers c, Ruut Brandsma c, Sven Schimschar d, Jan Gro¨zinger d, David de Jager c a

Ecofys UK, 1 Alie Street, London E1 8DE, UK Shell Scenarios Team, Shell International, Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, UK c Ecofys Netherlands, Kanaalweg15-G, 3526 KL Utrecht, The Netherlands d Ecofys Germany, Am Wassermann 36, 50829 Ko¨ln, Germany b

A R T I C L E I N F O

A B S T R A C T

Article history: Received 28 April 2014 Received in revised form 8 November 2014 Accepted 13 January 2015 Available online 17 April 2015

Nearly all long-term energy projections rely heavily on renewable energy sources on the assumption of abundance. Yet, already today, wind and solar projects can encounter local objections and competition with other uses. This paper presents the ranges of realistic potential supply for solar and wind electricity, using a 1 km2 grid level analysis covering the whole world at country level. In addition, the potential for building-based solar electricity is assessed. We ﬁnd that long-term combined potentials range between 730 and 3700 EJ/a worldwide, depending crucially on the acceptable share of land—up to 3.5% of total (non-ice covered) land on earth. Realistic potentials account for limitations such as land-use competition and acceptance, together with resource quality and remoteness as proxies for cost. Today’s electricity demand (65 EJ/a) is well covered by the range, but constraints may occur in the long run locally. Amongst large countries, Nigeria and India may need imports to meet electricity demand. ß 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Keywords: Potential Renewable Energy GIS Global

1. Introduction Faced with the twin challenge of energy security and the largely unmitigated externalities of conventional energy sources, and buoyed by the economic co-beneﬁts and continuing increase in cost-competitiveness of renewables (IEA RETD, 2012), most governments are formulating policy frameworks which encourage a high penetration of renewable power sources in the medium- to long-term. Renewables face many challenges and uncertainties as they grow and become integrated into the energy system. Yet projections often assume that the resource base provides no limitation, notably for wind or solar energy. To test this assumption, we have conducted a detailed, global analysis to provide credible, practical, realistic and consistent potentials for electricity from solar and wind sources, using the highest resolution datasets that are publicly available. We not only take into account technological development but also attempt to address implementation constraints such as grid connection, competition with other uses or possible local opposition. Most signiﬁcantly we try to quantify real availability of these surfaces, beyond simple technical or geographic limitations, using an availability factor.

E-mail address: y.deng@ecofys.com (Y.Y. Deng). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.01.005 0959-3780/ß 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
 * Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 20 7423 0984; Fax: +44 20 7423 0971.

We stress that we do not present a full energy system analysis here as is done typical energy analysis studies (IEA, 2012a; GEA, 2012; Lund and Mathiesen, 2009; Deng et al., 2012; Shell, 2013), but rather a detailed quantiﬁcation of technical resource potentials which are used as an input to such analyses. For example, the results of this study have been used as a key input for the renewable energy projections in Shell’s (2013) New Lens Scenarios. The IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation summarised the existing body of work on renewable energy potentials. It highlighted the difﬁculty of comparing different studies varying in geographic scope, technology scope and approach (Edenhofer et al., 2011). The surveyed studies (Krewitt et al., 2009; REN21, 2008; UNDP et al., 2000; Hofman et al., 2002; Trieb et al., 2009; EEA, 2009; Siegfriedsen et al., 2003; DLR, 2006; Defaix, 2009; Hoogwijk, 2004; de Vries et al., 2007; Zhou et al., 2009; Denholm and Margolis, 2008; Schwartz et al., 2010; Jacobson and Delucci, 2011) are frequently cited, but most of them: � are primarily meta-analyses themselves (Krewitt et al., 2009; REN21, 2008; UNDP et al., 2000), or � assess only a single or a handful of related technologies (Hofman et al., 2002; Trieb et al., 2009; EEA, 2009; Siegfriedsen et al., 2003; DLR, 2006; Defaix, 2009) or