Report: By 2035, 90 Percent of the US Could Be Powered by Renewables

“What an incredible opportunity for economic stimulus.”

Rainbow over San Gorgonio wind turbines in Palm Springs, California.Ruaridh Stewart/Zuma

Despite America’s continued reliance on fossil fuels as its primary source of energy, the plummeting costs of alternative energy sources—like power harnessed from the sun or wind—is making them an increasingly viable choice on the competitive market. So much so, that a UC Berkeley report released on Tuesday argues that by 2035, 90 percent of the US could be powered by renewables.

“Technically, it’s feasible,” says Billy Pizer, an expert in climate change who teaches at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy and was not involved in the Berkeley research. “I think people have thought about this for awhile and, with a combination of renewables and storage, you can certainly reach those sorts of targets.”

Researchers took the available data on renewable energy and created two scenarios for the next 15 years. In one, energy policy remains the way it is now, without ambitious policy changes to encourage the growth of renewable energy. The other imagines what ambitious policy changes implemented over that time could yield. In the first forecast, 55 percent of the US energy infrastructure would come from renewables. That falls short of the change necessary to meet the Paris Climate Agreement goals, but does reflect the dramatically lowering costs in the renewable energy sector. “Cost reductions in clean technology have occurred much faster than anticipated just a few years ago,” said Dr. Amol Phadke, senior scientist at UC Berkeley’s Center for Environmental Public Policy in a press release. “It is technically and economically feasible to deliver 90 percent carbon-free electricity on the U.S. power grid by 2035.”

To reach the more ambitious but still achievable 90 percent goal by 2035, the devil is in the details. While the technology to harness renewable energy has been successfully scaled up to higher capacities in recent years, the report also relies on large scale use of what are known as “grid scale batteries”—batteries that are able to store collected energy for an electricity grid until it’s needed. “Grid scale batteries are still just beginning to be used in certain circumstances,” Pizer said, as part of the recent effort to upscale renewable energy sources. But, he noted, the cost could be prohibitive.

Unlike fossil fuels, most of the costs in renewable energy infrastructure come in the beginning phases, which involve purchasing usable land and installing wind turbines or solar panels. The cost of long-term maintenance is less significant than securing start up finance. A solar farm large enough to help support a medium-sized city could easily cost tens of millions of dollars. I reported on Cincinnati’s success in securing funds to build the nation’s largest municipal solar farm—but financing these projects pose unique challenges. 

The report suggests that the state and federal government could lead the way to finance and facilitate the energy reform necessary for a greener 2035.  But even under a progressive president, the logistics of the energy sector are often determined on the state level, or across several states where transmission lines carrying power cross. When the laws of those states are different, things become even more complex.

A companion study from the climate policy think tank Energy Innovation heavily leans on Congress-driven policies, like tax credits to renewable energy companies and nationalized standards for clean energy infrastructure, to reach the goal. “What an incredible opportunity for economic stimulus,” Sonia Aggarwal, vice president at Energy Innovation, stated in the press release. “A federal clean energy standard, supported by government investments in deployment and American manufacturing, could put us back on track for a healthier economy.”

Those potential government investments can’t come a moment too soon. There are growing concerns within the renewable energy sector that the economic consequences of COVID-19 could halt its growth. In response to the economic fallout, the federal government offered fossil fuel tax benefits of $2 billion through the CARES Act, a $2 trillion economic stimulus package for businesses and local governments. Meanwhile, employment in the clean energy industry could drop by 13 percent in response to the crisis. Without relief, the more ambitious vision of 2035 outlined in the report may become impossible to realize. As with so much else, the fate of clean energy will depend on the priorities of the president and lawmakers who come to Washington in January.

More Mother Jones reporting on Climate Desk

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate