Take the Energy Transition Quiz below!
Dr. Diana Gragg
Questions were still streaming in as the clock ran down on the question-and-answer session following our webinar The Shift to Clean Energy, with Stanford’s Dr. Diana Gragg. Dr. Gragg was kind enough to send written responses by email, however.
Dr. Gragg is the Managing Director of Stanford University’s Explore Energy program and she leads Stanford’s Understand Energy and Integrative Design for Radical Energy Efficiency Learning Hubs, which provide free energy education to the public.
Here she answers questions from people all over the world, both by email and her verbal responses during the Q&A. See the webinar page for details and clips from the presentation.
When you’ve browsed the Q&A, take the Energy Transition Quiz at the end!
Q: What global agencies exist for regulating the equitable extraction, processing and consumption of energy resources?
A: There isn’t one global regulatory agency for this. Players in this space include the WHO, UN, World Bank, etc. Some countries have regional agreements or agreements between countries that try to address portions of this, but mostly it is done country by country – so a lot of variability on how well this is done.
Q: If energy transition is considered a sustainable solution, why is it so expensive? What aspects of this process make up most of the cost?
A: Expensive is relative! Fossil fuels enjoy a long history of a variety of subsidies, both implicit and explicit. (Examples of subsidies include countries that subsidize domestic production of oil for energy security goals or being able to emit carbon dioxide without paying for the impacts of climate change). So to address the underlying question you’re asking – we first would have to price in the externalities of the use of energy resources to truly talk about how expensive one form is compared to another.
Generally speaking, I think we do a pretty poor job of incorporating externalities like air pollution, land use, water pollution, human health impacts, etc., into the private cost of energy resources, so the private costs are artificially low and the true costs are born by society. However, even with this uneven playing field, solar and wind energy are the cheapest form of new electricity in 2/3rds of the world by population. Another aspect to think about when you want to talk about cost is to think about “to whom” is it expensive.
Back to the fossil fuel example, the cost of the health burden on certain communities isn’t born by the private actor who is utilizing, for example, diesel for their car and getting the benefit for the energy service. So you can see how complicated this landscape really is when you start looking at it from a systems perspective.
Q: Among the renewable resources (solar, wind, hydro, nuclear, geothermal), which one has the most potential for rapid expansion in the next decade?
A: I’d first say I don’t like to make predictions, because humans have a history of underestimating the potential for growth and change! But with that caveat:
- I’d expect solar to keep growing at a breakneck pace because it is modular and getting cheaper
- I’m excited about the prospect of the growth of geothermal because of technology advancements in that space – but it still faces high upfront costs and permitting barriers that make it challenging. It’s definitely an area I’m watching!
- Hydro is going to get even tougher because climate change is changing our weather patterns (more droughts, moving where rain occurs) – so it’s harder to invest in a large scale hydro facility when the water might not be available in a decade. Some countries like Costa Rica that depend heavily on hydro are already experiencing the challenges of water shortages on their power system.
Demand for electricity is going to grow in the next decade – so there is some question about how fast renewable resources can grow, and will they continue to grow faster than electricity demand (in other words, will they just be additive or will they actually replace existing fossil fuel resources). It will be something to watch.
Q: What do you think of hydrogen production from electrolysis? And hydrogen fuel cells as a clean-energy solution?
A: I used to work for the chemical industry in a chlorine production facility, and we make chlorine in basically the same way (only you’re using an electrolyzer on salt water instead of fresh water). Hydrogen was one of the by-products. Just to say I have some experience in this space.
It will depend on the use of the hydrogen, whether it can be economical, because different markets will have different price points. I think the biggest potential for green hydrogen (electrolysis by renewables) as a tool for decarbonization are in industry and as long-term energy storage.
In industry, green hydrogen can replace natural gas for many high temperature processes. However, without some sort of regulation or a price on carbon, green hydrogen will have a tough time competing with natural gas, so there needs to be some policy push to encourage industry to make the switch. Decarbonized steel manufacturing, for example, is looking into using green hydrogen.
Long-term (seasonal) energy storage is another possible use-case for green hydrogen (make hydrogen with excess solar PV in the summer, use it in the winter to make electricity through a fuel cell). But costs need to come way down, and electricity markets need to be updated to properly value this type of energy storage and the service it provides to support renewable integration and grid reliability.
I do not see a lot of potential for hydrogen as a transportation fuel in the personal vehicle market. Batteries have really beat it out. It sill has some potential in long-range heavy-duty road transport or shipping (likely as a carrier like ammonia, not as hydrogen/fuel cell), but the “winner” remains to be seen. Batteries could still end up dominating those spaces too, depending on advancements in range and charge time and weight.
Q: Do microgrids help to reduce energy usage and emissions?
A: Not necessarily, it depends what makes up the microgrid and how it is used. A microgrid that is connected to a large scale grid, but can decouple if the larger grid goes down, can help improve reliability of the grid for the area covered by the microgrid (something that towns in California are investigating to be more resilient to wildfire risk / grid loss).
If a microgrid is made up of renewables and batteries, then it is a zero-emission option that would reduce emissions compared to a fossil-fueled system. However, microgrids can also be made up of fossil-fueled sources like diesel generators, so they’re not inherently cleaner.
Q: Is there any growth in the biogas / biomethane space? Do you think it’s something valuable to drive investment into?
A: Biogas needs to be able to compete with natural gas to truly see growth. That comes with driving down the costs of biogas and incorporating more of the externalities into the private cost of natural gas (like a carbon tax).
Biogas made from waste materials like manure, municipal solid waste or human sewage is a good resource because of its co-benefits (reducing smells, it gets created anyway so we might as well use it for energy instead of just venting it, capturing and using it reduces air pollution, etc). However, it can be hard to make these systems scalable and economic.
The flip side—burning biomass (even a relatively clean form like biogas)—is still burning things for energy, with the associated greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution. Biogas is a much cleaner-burning fuel than solid biomass, but still has emissions.
So, in short, I think it’s a challenging space. We should make use of waste streams to create biogas. I don’t think we should be utilizing food crops to create biogas (or any biomass-based resource).
We have more on the website about biomass and biofuels (which biogas is a type of biofuel) if you want to dig in more!
Q: From a systemic change perspective, how can we accelerate the adoption of frameworks that bring together integrative design, efficient energy systems, and carbon markets? And what measurements or indicators should we prioritize to track real progress in the shift to clean energy? For example, in ASEAN markets perhaps.
A; This is a great question! Something we work on a lot in the School of Sustainability at Stanford is SPEED and SCALE. Just like your question.
My efforts for this center around education, how we can we disseminate the information in ways to make it easy for people to learn it and use it everywhere. This is just one piece. Policy, grassroots, consulting, etc., all of these are areas that need to be involved to scale the adoption of these frameworks.
Amory Lovins has been working on spreading the word on integrative design and energy efficient systems for decades – and has made a lot of progress – but there is always more to do.
The ultimate measurements or indicators depend on the context, but include things like how many humans have safe and secure energy access, are we seeing reductions in the mortality from air pollution from our energy system / energy services, are we seeing a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, etc.
Q: Which skills should today’s engineering students develop if they want to work in the global clean energy sector in the next 5–10 years?
A: There are SO MANY, this is tough to say. We need it all. Much of the work is on the implementation side—project management, systems thinking, integrative design, energy efficiency—all of these skills are needed in this sector.
There are also technical skills needed in particular spaces, like:
- Geothermal has some challenges that still need technical solutions, including understanding and imaging the subsurface better
- Battery chemistry needs to continue to evolve to be lighter, more energy dense, less precious metals, more sustainably sourced, better recycling systems
- The built environment will continue to grow significantly, so there is a lot of need for civil engineering and integrative design / energy-efficiency skills in that space
- Land-use planning for the built environment with the transportation sector will need to be integrated in smarter ways, etc, etc, etc.
I’d say develop skills you find interesting and inspire you, and those skills can be used for these clean energy transitions. We like to say any job is a sustainability job.
Q: If we are considering the electrification of everything as a form of optimizing energy efficiency, what would be the best feasible source of the electric energy, considering that most of the electricity is produced from fossil fuels that are exacerbating climate change?
A: We have so many options for electricity. This is one of the advantages—diversifying our options! Wind, solar, geothermal, nuclear, hydro, etc. We don’t want to pick just one, we want a diversity of options.
In the past decade, we’ve been implementing renewable energy faster than we’ve grown electricity demand, so we’ve been decarbonizing our electricity system already. The question is whether we can maintain that pace with the expected growth in electricity demand.
Q: Do you see thin film solar cells increasing in popularity in low-income communities in the future and what limitations are associated with its implementation?
A: Today’s thin film solar cells are more likely to be used at the utility scale than in communities. That’s because they’re less efficient per area, and when you’re looking at solar production on homes or buildings, you want to maximize the amount of electricity production you can get for your roof area. In other words, you’re space-limited, so you want the most efficient solar cells. The efforts for building-integrated solar are still ongoing, but pretty small scale. They tend to be less efficient and more expensive, so they just aren’t competitive yet.
At the utility scale, usually you have plenty of space, so thin film makes more sense. Thin film also tend to maintain their efficiency better when they get hot – great for large scale solar projects.
Q: How will the extractive industries have to change to provide the minerals and natural resources we need for the energy transition?
A: There are so many ways they should change, including reducing the negative impacts on the environment and on people. Extraction will have to increase, so it should be done in the most responsible way possible.
The minerals and other natural resources we need are going to evolve over time as technologies change. Thinking of batteries, for example, different chemistries are being explored that would require less precious metals or lower impact materials (like iron-air, for example).
Q: What role do you see carbon markets and renewable financing playing in accelerating the adoption of clean energy globally?
A: I would say these are big players. Carbon markets less so, I think. I would go check out Stripe or Frontier, where they’re doing voluntary carbon markets and really trying to drive capital and investment to carbon.
If you had asked me 20 years ago when I really started working in this space, I would have said, Oh my gosh, carbon capture is just so expensive. We have so many other options. I think now we’re just so far into the climate challenge that we can’t ignore some of these more expensive options. Even things like direct air capture, which is kind of the hardest from a chemical engineering standpoint. You know, the air is about 0.04% CO2. That’s a really hard separation challenge in order to get that carbon out of air. And if we’re successful, then it’ll just get even harder. But I would say that we’re already seeing the impacts from climate change and we have to look at everything we can do.
So those are really important. Whether it’s government or private, investing is going to be different in terms of accelerating that adoption in all places all over the world.
Q: Recently Kenya launched the National REDD+ registry, becoming the first African country to establish a centralized system for tracking carbon credits and deforestation reduction projects. How does such a registry strengthen climate resilience in the face of climate risks? And how do carbon credit ratings help ensure funding supports high-impact projects that drive emission reduction and sustainable development?
A: First, before I answer your question, I want to say that Kenya has also done some amazing things in geothermal. The biggest challenge with geothermal is the upfront drilling to find the resource. That’s the capital-intensive part, the most expensive part and the most risky part. It’s the part that is challenging for private investors. And Kenya has done an amazing job at de-risking that upfront part. They’ve done a lot of the exploration themselves and then made that available to developers. Kenya’s geothermal industry is growing right now in terms of their geothermal facilities, and it provides a substantial portion of their electricity.
(Back to the question), one of the great things Kenya is doing is they have centralized tracking for carbon credits and deforestation. Transparency helps with decision making. And if we’re talking about externalities, we need to talk about what those externalities are. Even if you’re not pricing them in, you have to have a way of recognizing them in order for you to measure the impact of of those in decision-making. If they’re trusted, carbon credit ratings can really drive investment toward things that reduce emissions, because now you have a measure of externalities from our fossil fuels. In a lot of places worldwide it’s free to emit carbon. And if it’s free, people aren’t going to invest in carbon reduction. So there has to be some way of highlighting it, forcing it, costing it, in something like that to drive that investment.
Q: What makes renewable energy the cheapest in most of the world, while in Africa it’s very expensive?
A: Yeah. So this is a great question. In most of the world, and I have a chart on it, solar and wind are the cheapest. Obviously not everywhere, though. In some places hydro is going to be more cost effective. You can do it at scale. And a lot of it depends on how you’re pricing in the cost of electricity production.
We see in a levelized cost analysis that solar and wind are cheapest in most of the world. But there are other factors that come into that, and it can depend on availability, transportation, how robust the electricity system is, etc. All of those things are challenges that people, government and private actors, are dealing with.
