Can We Reach 100% Renewable Energy?

Movements pushing for 100% renewables are gaining momentum. Stanford's Mark Z. Jacobson says we have the technology to get there

[peterjol]

We don't even need more JOBS ..it simply has to be made financially worthwhile for people to start sharing the jobs we do NEED people to do and we can ALL start enjoying our lives working LESS...what the hell is the use of all these robots and technology if we can never enjoy working any

[heroes]

Even if climate change was not man made renewable energy is still a good idea. It is cleaner & has the potential to afford people more independence because they will be able to produce their own energy.

[BudahOfBirmingham]

As others have pointed out in these comments, in order to get to 100% renewables we must first get rid of our lousy political systems which favour the status quo of reliance on fossil fuels and keeping rich corporations happy. Budah of Birmingham

[Amadeus]

Its inevitable. The powers that shouldn't be are working hard to stop it from happening, but they have already reached the beginning of the end. Renewables are already cheaper in some cases and more independent in some cases. Its only going to get more efficient as Fossil Fuels get more and more expensive the deeper that we need to dig...

[dylanoldenburg]

Meanwhile, they're fracking in poor neighbourhoods in LA county

[DiscipleOfHeavyMeta]

Yes, but not with capitalism as the dominant economic system. A transition to socialism is imperative to reach 100% renewable energy.

[amandaharig]

This is the first news segment on this topic, even in The Real News Network, that I finished watching and actually felt hopeful afterward. Hopeful, not optimistic.

Thank you for this interview, thank you for bringing on this guest and thank you for your journalistic diligence. You're one of a handful.

Cheers, TRNN.

[superdoubt]

One hundred percent may be possible but I don't think it'll happen without a grid scale battery, like that which Donald Sadoway of MIT is trying to market. Lithium batteries are not grid scale, they're expensive, and must be replaced as they degrade quickly.

[maunaowakea]

We will reach 1.5C by 2030 even if we went to 100% clean energy tomorrow.

[amania]

A very important discussion, as they say "There is no planet B", so we all need to take care of it very dearly.
Thanks for the Real Journalism.

[quittenfee]

Reducing overall energy consumption is a vital step to reach the goal of climate nutral living, and reducing pointless consumption of goods just to create profits for companies.

[robertjackson]

Coal has oil world subsidies are $7.2 Trillion yearly. According to IMF

[avitalaviya]

yes! we can reach 100% renewables by 2060 completely!!

[nolan]

I hate how these renewable deals exclude all the options. Just because there are issues with some options does not mean that you cut research, subsidies and spending in them, which could make them safe, cost competitive and sustainable. Energy reclamation from waste and nuclear are excellent technologies, and even if current versions of their technologies may have hurdles or be expensive, it does not mean that this represents the ultimate potential of these technologies.

Also, creating more employment positions in the energy sector is actually a bad thing. More people in the energy sector means more expensive energy and a less competitive economy. The goal should instead be to reduce overall employment positions in this sector while providing reliable and clean energy.

[mikeharvey]

A bit long for some but why didn't we know this fuel industry? Can burning trash be used to smelt iron?

[sanjuansteve]

We should all be using electric vehicles charged from the excess power generated from our home, business and covered parking rooftop solar arrays making nearly everything we do 100% solar powered.
The cost per distance driven is ridiculously cheap when you are your own solar fuel station (less than $0.01 USD per mile)! #nobrainer
We cannot afford to continue to burn fossil fuels!

[darkone]

Yes you can if you try globally in ten years

[ronaldgarrison]

It's beginning to look as if the real urgency for converting to renewables is to stop the millions of deaths annually from air pollution, including indoor air pollution in places where there is little or no electricity. What everyone seems to be ignoring about CO2 is that it can be removed from the air. It will be expensive and take a hell of a lot of energy, but renewable energy is just what will make all that affordable. CO2 removal is feasible, AND it will be NECESSARY. Convert to renewables ASAP. Then remove the excess carbon. The really dire forecasts about CO2 assume no carbon removal. But we can do it. Convert to renewables A.S.A.P. Let's get rid of those particulates. I'm in favor of people having clean air to breathe.

[markschuette]

the core of any "alt. green energy" plan NEEDS to start with energy efficiency! meaning we cannot sustain our current volume of energy use! we need to cut down our energy use by 50% then the renewables can provide the rest. yes that means sacrifice and investing hugely in infrastructure so we as citizens have green choices. this will be the largest challenge we've ever tackled! scary but necessary.

[robertbrown]

The storage problem is still a major problem with this scheme, especially providing enough storage to cope with the 30% to 40% baseload requirement which only coal and nuclear, and to lesser extent hydrogen, currently provide. Then there is the perhaps double to triple the amount of electricity that will be required to run an electrified transport and industrial sector. The largest mega battery in the world is only capable of powering 50000 plus homes for a maximum of 4 hours. To assume that sufficient renewable baseload power will be available without a massive amount of nuclear is a matter of faith, not science since the technology and practical application of that technology is still a long way off given the IPCC timeframe of zero emissions by 2050 and a 45% reduction in 12 years.