Response to ‘Burden of proof
A comprehensive review of the feasibility of 100% renewable-electricity systems’
T. W. Brown (Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies, Karlsruhe Institut für Technologie)
T. Bischof-Niemz (Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR))
Kornelis Blok (TU Delft - Energy and Industry)
C. Breyer (Lappeenranta University of Technology)
H. Lund (Aalborg University)
B. V. Mathiesen (Aalborg University)
More Info
expand_more
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.
Abstract
A recent article ‘Burden of proof: A comprehensive review of the feasibility of 100% renewable-electricity systems’ claims that many studies of 100% renewable electricity systems do not demonstrate sufficient technical feasibility, according to the criteria of the article's authors (henceforth ‘the authors’). Here we analyse the authors’ methodology and find it problematic. The feasibility criteria chosen by the authors are important, but are also easily addressed at low economic cost, while not affecting the main conclusions of the reviewed studies and certainly not affecting their technical feasibility. A more thorough review reveals that all of the issues have already been addressed in the engineering and modelling literature. Nuclear power, which the authors have evaluated positively elsewhere, faces other, genuine feasibility problems, such as the finiteness of uranium resources and a reliance on unproven technologies in the medium- to long-term. Energy systems based on renewables, on the other hand, are not only feasible, but already economically viable and decreasing in cost every year.
help_outline