SEP 14, 2017 6:50 PM PDT

Can California go 100% renewable?

California has set about an ambitious goal to achieve 100 percent clean energy by 2045. The legislation, called Senate Bill (SB) 100 passed by the state Senate with Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles) championing it, has sparked clashing visions among unions, utilities, environmentalists, energy companies and lawmakers.

The measure accelerates California’s deadline for reaching 50% renewable energy from 2030 to 2026. Mark Jacobson, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford University, is adamant that this is the right path for the state: "We absolutely do not need natural gas or coal. The costs of solar are so low. The costs of wind are very low."

However, others are not so sure. "I think the key is to start down that path and keep our options open," opinionates Ken Caldeira, a scientist at the Carnegie Institution for Science at Stanford. He points out that while we have the renewable technologies in our grasp today, they are currently much too expensive to make the bill’s goal attainable under a budget. Eighty percent, instead of one hundred, may be a more realistic goal, economically at least.

Perhaps because of this, along with other technical obstacles in infrastructure, California lawmakers rewrote the bill to stipulate a goal of 100% greenhouse-gas-free energy, instead of 100% renewable. Under these terms, 60% of the state’s energy would still have to come from renewable sources while the rest could be generated from nuclear energy or even natural gas power plants, supposing they capture their carbon emissions. As of now, California generates roughly a quarter of its electricity from renewables.

Sierra Club organizer Katya English rallies with other environmentalists in front of Assemblyman Chris Holden's district office in Pasadena. Photo: Mel Melcon / Los Angeles Times

"I'd say flexibility is critical," says Lupe Jimenez, research and development manager at the Sacramento Municipal Utility District. "If we're looking for a low-carbon future, I don't think we want to narrow our options."

Sources: NPR, LA Times (1), (2)

About the Author
  • Kathryn is a curious world-traveller interested in the intersection between nature, culture, history, and people. She has worked for environmental education non-profits and is a Spanish/English interpreter.
You May Also Like
DEC 01, 2019
Earth & The Environment
DEC 01, 2019
Reducing GHG emissions of the transportation sector
The United States Environmental Protection Agency reported that the highest greenhouse gas emissions in 2017 were in the transportation sector, making up a...
DEC 02, 2019
Earth & The Environment
DEC 02, 2019
Let's use grape skins to deice our roads
Large parts of the country are getting hit with the first big snowstorm of the year this week and if you travel the roads, you ought to be concerned &ndash...
JAN 06, 2020
Cannabis Sciences
JAN 06, 2020
Psychedelics Linked to Stronger Connection to Nature
Taking psychedelic drugs, sometimes referred to as “tripping,” was recently shown to increase individuals’ “nature relatedness&rdqu...
JAN 14, 2020
Earth & The Environment
JAN 14, 2020
That awkward conversation: climate change
New research published in Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability takes a psychological angle at understanding why people deny climate change. Focu...
JAN 17, 2020
Earth & The Environment
JAN 17, 2020
What's the carbon footprint of your fish stick?
New research from scientists at the University of California, Santa Cruz highlights the unsustainable footprint of the processed fish industry. The study, ...
FEB 09, 2020
Plants & Animals
FEB 09, 2020
Lightning Strike Kills Four Endangered Mountain Gorillas in Uganda
While perusing the confines of the Mgahinga National Park in Uganda earlier this month, a team of conservationists were unlucky enough to discover four dec...
Loading Comments...