Land-use intensity of energy

A recent article calculated the land-use intensity of energy (LUIE) from actual data for all major sources of electricity.

Land-use intensity of electricity production and tomorrow’s energy landscape
Lovering et al.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal…
Abstract:
The global energy system has a relatively small land footprint at present, comprising just 0.4% of ice-free land. This pales in comparison to agricultural land use– 30–38% of ice-free land–yet future low-carbon energy systems that shift to more extensive technologies could dramatically alter landscapes around the globe.

The challenge is more acute given the projected doubling of global energy consumption by 2050 and widespread electrification of transportation and industry. Yet unlike greenhouse gas emissions, land use intensity of energy has been rarely studied in a rigorous way.

Here we calculate land-use intensity of energy (LUIE) for real-world sites across all major sources of electricity, integrating data from published literature, databases, and original data collection. We find a range of LUIE that span four orders of magnitude, from nuclear with 7.1 ha/TWh/y to dedicated biomass at 58,000 ha/TWh/y.

By applying these LUIE results to the future electricity portfolios of ten energy scenarios, we conclude that land use could become a significant constraint on deep decarbonization of the power system, yet low-carbon, land-efficient options are available.

DB2

How about using land that is already tied up in development? The amount of roof space on factories, offices, houses and other structures has to be considerable and could be put to good use for solar panels or wind turbines.

In the latest issue of the Nature Conservancy magazine, they are highlighting the use of mangrove trees to both protect coastlines and sequester atmospheric carbon. According to the Conservancy article the mangroves swamps are more effective than forest lands at gathering and holding the carbon.

OTFoolish

1 Like

OTF:“The amount of roof space on factories, offices, houses and other structures has to be considerable and could be put to good use for solar panels or wind turbines.”

A few buildings were tried for wind turbines but they flopped big time. You can’t put large turbines above city buildings without massive problems and a little rinky dink turbine is just greenwashing. Besides, a 300 foot high wind machine on top of a building in an urban area would pose an air traffic hazard as most have airports nearby, including Chicago, Washington DC, Dallas, etc.

Some buildings can hold tons of solar panels on top, but most are neither designed to hold those loads/wind loading, for have people safely walking on rooftops.

A few new Walmart stores have solar panels on top and some new buildings.

Ole Jimmy Carter put 2 solar hot water panels on the White House roof. they lasted a few years and proved like 10% of the hot water for one of the 50 or so White House bathrooms. They were removed for ‘security reasons’ as they obstructed the secret service folks from having a clear view around the WH roof. You’ll note that Biden hasn’t made and effort, nor did Obama, to put solar panels on the roof again.

In Texas, it’s better to have 20,000 acre solar farms out west where the weather is better and the population density is a few critters per square mile. That replaces 10,000 little roof installations with less cost per watt.

t.

How about using land that is already tied up in development? The amount of roof space on factories, offices, houses and other structures has to be considerable and could be put to good use for solar panels or wind turbines.

The authors assign a LUIE of zero to rooftop solar for the study. Overall, the land-use intensities vary over four orders of magnitude. The lowest overall is nuclear.

  • Nuclear
  • Geothermal
  • Wind (footprint only)
  • Natural gas
  • Hydro
  • Coal
  • Concentrated solar
  • PV solar
  • Wind (footprint & spacing)
  • Biomass

DB2

How about using land that is already tied up in development? The amount of roof space on factories, offices, houses and other structures has to be considerable and could be put to good use for solar panels or wind turbines.

The authors assign a LUIE of zero to rooftop solar for the study.

Speaking of rooftop solar, I didn’t know there was a fire hazard.

Amazon took all U.S. solar rooftops offline last year after flurry of fires, electrical explosions
www.cnbc.com/2022/09/01/amazon-took-solar-rooftops-offline-l…

DB2

Ole Jimmy Carter put 2 solar hot water panels on the White House roof. they lasted a few years and proved like 10% of the hot water for one of the 50 or so White House bathrooms. They were removed for ‘security reasons’ as they obstructed the secret service folks from having a clear view around the WH roof. You’ll note that Biden hasn’t made and effort, nor did Obama, to put solar panels on the roof again.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong again.

Carter put up 32 solar hot water panels, not 2. They stayed up there producing hot water for 7 years until they were taken down for roof repairs and the Reagan administration didn’t re-install them, supposedly for cost reasons, but their hostility to renewable energy probably played a role. Obama installed solar electric panels on the White House roof in 2013,and George W Bush had also installed some solar electric and solar hot water panels back in 2003.

3 Likes

According to the report you linked it looked like the problems seem to be caused by improper installation of the panels i.e. the connectors between the panels and the inverters.

It reminds me of the chimney collapse after my parents had a new woodstove installed. The mason did not install a large enough footing to support the chimney so down it came.

So, it was not the fault of the woodstove but it was the fault of the installer.

OTFoolish

The land footprint of energy may become an even larger driver of environmental impacts in the coming decades, if energy consumption rises rapidly in emerging economies and countries shift their mix of energy sources to meet decarbonization targets [3], potentially towards more land-intensive energy sources.

The authors assign a LUIE of zero to rooftop solar for the study. Overall, the land-use intensities vary over four orders of magnitude. The lowest overall is nuclear.

  • Nuclear
  • Geothermal
  • Wind (footprint only)
  • Natural gas
  • Hydro
  • Coal
  • Concentrated solar
  • PV solar
  • Wind (footprint & spacing)
  • Biomass

================================

Water-use intensity is also a major environmental issue in electricity generation. Thermal power plants ranked by use of once through cooling water:

Nuclear power plants are worst
Coal fired power plants are 2nd worst
Natural gas power plants are distant 3rd

Wind and PV solar have no water usage requirements.

Jaak

1 Like

USGS explains water usage for thermal power plants in link below.

Thermal power plants ranked by use of once through cooling water:

Nuclear power plants are worst
Coal fired power plants are 2nd worst
Natural gas power plants are distant 3rd

https://www.usgs.gov/mission-areas/water-resources/science/t…

Good map from 2015 showing water usage by state for electricity generation.

Jaak

1 Like

Good map from 2015 showing water usage by state for electricity generation.

It would have been nice if they had adjusted by population.

DB2