Committee on the Environment

The Renewables Gambit: Putin Loses, the West Unites, and the Gambit Pays Off
From:
https://www.architecturalrecord.com/articles/15635-the-renewables-gambit-putin-loses-the-west-unites-and-the-gambit-pays-off

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has generated the headlines of the fossil fuel industry's dreams, with articles claiming that the transition to green energy will be more difficult, or that the 1.5-degree goal Is all but dead-or even calling for more drilling and fossil fuel development. But these assessments are clouding the extraordinary progress currently taking place worldwide: the development of sustainable, resilient, and zero-carbon built environments; and the unprecedented and explosive growth of renewable energy generation, a promising solution for both ecological and political stability in the 21st century.

Nowhere are these achievements more evident than in the statistics coming from the solar and wind industries. Solar electricity generation is now growing exponentially worldwide, doubling between 2016 and 2019, and doubling again by 2021. Wind electricity generation is following a similar trajectory, doubling between 2016 and 2021.

In the U.S., solar and wind electricity generation is growing at an impressive rate as well. Solar electricity generation doubled between 2015 and 2017, and again by 2021. Wind generation doubled between 2010 and 2015, and again by 2021. So why do we think it's so difficult to accelerate this growth and address both climate change and energy security?

We are accustomed to thinking of growth and change in linear terms because that's what we're most familiar with: a child growing about 2.5 inches a year, for example, or a car rental billed at a fixed daily rate or per mile traveled. We're not used to exponential growth-very gradual growth followed by an explosive increase over a very short period-and as a result, we tend to underestimate it. Consider the lesson of the following legend:

Wind and solar energy are now the cheapest source of electricity generation for much of the world, and they continue to become cheaper each year-between 2010 and 2019, the unit cost of solar energy decreased 85 percent, and that of wind energy decreased 55 percent. The cost of lithium-ion batteries, essential for storing renewable energy that is generated at variable rates, also fell by 85 percent. With such quick progress, the remarkable solar and wind growth numbers are not unfathomable. And with market forces, increasing pressure for energy security, and the implementation of emissions reduction plans by governments and institutions, including incentives for sustainable development and electrification policies, explosive growth will continue to be the norm.

The price of fossil fuel-generated power depends on the cost of plant construction and operations, geopolitics, and the respective prices of fuel, storage, and transportation. Solar- and wind-generated power, on the other hand, are very different: their fuel sources (sunlight and wind) are delivered free worldwide; they are not encumbered by fuel supply chain issues; their installation and operating costs are comparatively low; and they require minimal rare earths or other difficult-to-obtain materials.

Today, 40.2 percent of the global power sector is supplied by zero-carbon-generated energy, with renewables-wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower-making up three-quarters of the supply. If solar and wind sustain their present course of exponential growth, 60 to 75 percent of global power will be generated by renewables in 2030, and we will be able to phase out carbon dioxide emissions and transition to a zero-carbon power sector by 2040.

The war in Ukraine has reminded us once again of the catastrophic security and humanitarian costs of fossil fuel dependency. With Vladimir Putin using fossil fuels as a geopolitical weapon, the struggle in Ukraine, coupled with the climate crisis, has united the West around a struggle to rapidly wean ourselves off fossil fuels. A global transition to renewable energy generation will dramatically reduce the power wielded by autocratic petrostates like Russia, whose economies are heavily dependent on the extraction and export of oil and natural gas.

In short, the renewables gambit is paying off. With an impressive foundation in place, now is the time to accelerate the transition to a zero-carbon built environment by implementing the following actions:

New Buildings and Developments

Adopt current zero-carbon building codes, standards, and policies. This ensures that all new buildings are highly efficient, use no on-site fossil fuels, and generate or procure enough renewable energy to meet building demand.

Existing Buildings and Developments

Enact policies that leverage building intervention points-or moments during a building's life cycle where construction is likely to occur-in order to accelerate energy efficiency upgrades, shift to electric or district heating systems powered by carbon-free renewable energy sources, and generate or procure carbon-free renewable energy. Aligning work with these intervention points can help mitigate the cost barriers and disruption associated with renovations.

Embodied Carbon

Enact policies and incentives that accelerate existing building reuse and renovation, use recycled and low-carbon or carbon-sequestering materials, design for deconstruction, and reduce emissions by designing carbon-sequestering sites and landscapes.

Implementing these policies will hasten the transition to renewable energy, building on the growth of renewable energy generation and recent movement toward electrification and reducing or sequestering carbon in the built environment. The present global crisis illustrates that doing so is an imperative, not a choice.

Thank you, Edward Mazria, for shining light on the "unprecedented and explosive growth of renewable energy generation", the potential solve-all for decarbonization. Unfortunately, we have a very long way to go. Admittedly, the numbers are confusing. Although 40 percent of the global "power sector" is supplied by "zero-carbon-generated" energy, as you mentioned, electricity is only a fraction of global energy consumption. In 2019, the last year before COVID skewed the numbers, electricity accounted for only 17 percent of the Total Final Energy Consumption (TFEC) worldwide. 

Electricity: 17% of Total Global Energy Consumption

As you mentioned, a quarter of that was generated from zero-carbon renewables: wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower. An excellent accomplishment. Nonetheless, zero-carbon renewables constituted a mere 4.4 percent of global consumption (26 percent of the 17 percent).

Zero-carbon Renewable Electricity: 4.4% of Total Global Energy Consumption 

The largest source of renewable energy is not carbon-free. Biomass energy constituted 40 percent of U.S. renewable energy generation in 2019, releasing 350 million metric tons of carbon dioxide from the U.S. alone. Per Btu of Energy, biomass emissions are higher than petroleum, and 1.4 times natural gas. Biomass energy generation was twice hydroelectric, twice wind, five times solar, and twenty-four times geothermal. The bottom line? Carbon-free renewables constituted a mere 6.4 percent of total energy consumption in the U.S.
 

Total U.S. Zero-carbon Renewable Energy: 6.4% of Energy Consumption

The kind of exponential growth exemplified by your "chessboard" legend, which doubled with each square, would certainly be welcome for the expansion of solar and wind generation. But for such expansion to "continue to be the norm" might be wishful thinking. The massive infrastructure required for their energy storage and distribution, the funding necessary, and the decades of construction, all require political will. That seems unlikely within a meaningful timeframe. We cannot afford to sit back, hoping that future energy supply decarbonization will solve the problem. The IPCC is already ringing alarm bells. 

In February, IPCC Chair Hoesung Lee issued a "dire warning about the consequences of inaction", noting the "urgency of immediate and more ambitious action", and that "[h]alf measures are no longer an option." Succumbing to another legend may be more relevant to contemplate, admiring Nero's fiddling while Rome burned. We need to extinguish the fire now.

Given this immediate need for "ambitious" action, the most productive steps the world's 1.3 million architects can take are to reduce upfront Carbon emissions, tackling Embodied Carbon. This is the key to "immediate" reductions. And as you suggest, let's "Enact policies and incentives that accelerate existing building reuse and renovation, use recycled and low-carbon or carbon-sequestering materials, design for deconstruction, and reduce emissions by designing carbon-sequestering sites and landscapes."

I urge everyone to do so.

The Renewables Gambit: Putin Loses, the West Unites, and the Gambit Pays Off
From:
https://www.architecturalrecord.com/articles/15635-the-renewables-gambit-putin-loses-the-west-unites-and-the-gambit-pays-off

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has generated the headlines of the fossil fuel industry's dreams, with articles claiming that the transition to green energy will be more difficult, or that the 1.5-degree goal Is all but dead-or even calling for more drilling and fossil fuel development. But these assessments are clouding the extraordinary progress currently taking place worldwide: the development of sustainable, resilient, and zero-carbon built environments; and the unprecedented and explosive growth of renewable energy generation, a promising solution for both ecological and political stability in the 21st century.

Nowhere are these achievements more evident than in the statistics coming from the solar and wind industries. Solar electricity generation is now growing exponentially worldwide, doubling between 2016 and 2019, and doubling again by 2021. Wind electricity generation is following a similar trajectory, doubling between 2016 and 2021.

In the U.S., solar and wind electricity generation is growing at an impressive rate as well. Solar electricity generation doubled between 2015 and 2017, and again by 2021. Wind generation doubled between 2010 and 2015, and again by 2021. So why do we think it's so difficult to accelerate this growth and address both climate change and energy security?

We are accustomed to thinking of growth and change in linear terms because that's what we're most familiar with: a child growing about 2.5 inches a year, for example, or a car rental billed at a fixed daily rate or per mile traveled. We're not used to exponential growth-very gradual growth followed by an explosive increase over a very short period-and as a result, we tend to underestimate it. Consider the lesson of the following legend:

Wind and solar energy are now the cheapest source of electricity generation for much of the world, and they continue to become cheaper each year-between 2010 and 2019, the unit cost of solar energy decreased 85 percent, and that of wind energy decreased 55 percent. The cost of lithium-ion batteries, essential for storing renewable energy that is generated at variable rates, also fell by 85 percent. With such quick progress, the remarkable solar and wind growth numbers are not unfathomable. And with market forces, increasing pressure for energy security, and the implementation of emissions reduction plans by governments and institutions, including incentives for sustainable development and electrification policies, explosive growth will continue to be the norm.

The price of fossil fuel-generated power depends on the cost of plant construction and operations, geopolitics, and the respective prices of fuel, storage, and transportation. Solar- and wind-generated power, on the other hand, are very different: their fuel sources (sunlight and wind) are delivered free worldwide; they are not encumbered by fuel supply chain issues; their installation and operating costs are comparatively low; and they require minimal rare earths or other difficult-to-obtain materials.

Today, 40.2 percent of the global power sector is supplied by zero-carbon-generated energy, with renewables-wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower-making up three-quarters of the supply. If solar and wind sustain their present course of exponential growth, 60 to 75 percent of global power will be generated by renewables in 2030, and we will be able to phase out carbon dioxide emissions and transition to a zero-carbon power sector by 2040.

The war in Ukraine has reminded us once again of the catastrophic security and humanitarian costs of fossil fuel dependency. With Vladimir Putin using fossil fuels as a geopolitical weapon, the struggle in Ukraine, coupled with the climate crisis, has united the West around a struggle to rapidly wean ourselves off fossil fuels. A global transition to renewable energy generation will dramatically reduce the power wielded by autocratic petrostates like Russia, whose economies are heavily dependent on the extraction and export of oil and natural gas.

In short, the renewables gambit is paying off. With an impressive foundation in place, now is the time to accelerate the transition to a zero-carbon built environment by implementing the following actions:

New Buildings and Developments

Adopt current zero-carbon building codes, standards, and policies. This ensures that all new buildings are highly efficient, use no on-site fossil fuels, and generate or procure enough renewable energy to meet building demand.

Existing Buildings and Developments

Enact policies that leverage building intervention points-or moments during a building's life cycle where construction is likely to occur-in order to accelerate energy efficiency upgrades, shift to electric or district heating systems powered by carbon-free renewable energy sources, and generate or procure carbon-free renewable energy. Aligning work with these intervention points can help mitigate the cost barriers and disruption associated with renovations.

Embodied Carbon

Enact policies and incentives that accelerate existing building reuse and renovation, use recycled and low-carbon or carbon-sequestering materials, design for deconstruction, and reduce emissions by designing carbon-sequestering sites and landscapes.

Implementing these policies will hasten the transition to renewable energy, building on the growth of renewable energy generation and recent movement toward electrification and reducing or sequestering carbon in the built environment. The present global crisis illustrates that doing so is an imperative, not a choice.

Bill, thanks for your thoughtful post.

 Additional information. In 2021:

          Electricity = 38.9% of total global energy consumption (includes electricity related losses), and 40% of total global CO₂ emissions

 When global electricity CO₂ emissions are attributed to sectors, the percentages of total global emissions are:

Thank you, Edward Mazria, for shining light on the "unprecedented and explosive growth of renewable energy generation", the potential solve-all for decarbonization. Unfortunately, we have a very long way to go. Admittedly, the numbers are confusing. Although 40 percent of the global "power sector" is supplied by "zero-carbon-generated" energy, as you mentioned, electricity is only a fraction of global energy consumption. In 2019, the last year before COVID skewed the numbers, electricity accounted for only 17 percent of the Total Final Energy Consumption (TFEC) worldwide. 

Electricity: 17% of Total Global Energy Consumption

As you mentioned, a quarter of that was generated from zero-carbon renewables: wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower. An excellent accomplishment. Nonetheless, zero-carbon renewables constituted a mere 4.4 percent of global consumption (26 percent of the 17 percent).

Zero-carbon Renewable Electricity: 4.4% of Total Global Energy Consumption 

The largest source of renewable energy is not carbon-free. Biomass energy constituted 40 percent of U.S. renewable energy generation in 2019, releasing 350 million metric tons of carbon dioxide from the U.S. alone. Per Btu of Energy, biomass emissions are higher than petroleum, and 1.4 times natural gas. Biomass energy generation was twice hydroelectric, twice wind, five times solar, and twenty-four times geothermal. The bottom line? Carbon-free renewables constituted a mere 6.4 percent of total energy consumption in the U.S.
 

Total U.S. Zero-carbon Renewable Energy: 6.4% of Energy Consumption

The kind of exponential growth exemplified by your "chessboard" legend, which doubled with each square, would certainly be welcome for the expansion of solar and wind generation. But for such expansion to "continue to be the norm" might be wishful thinking. The massive infrastructure required for their energy storage and distribution, the funding necessary, and the decades of construction, all require political will. That seems unlikely within a meaningful timeframe. We cannot afford to sit back, hoping that future energy supply decarbonization will solve the problem. The IPCC is already ringing alarm bells. 

In February, IPCC Chair Hoesung Lee issued a "dire warning about the consequences of inaction", noting the "urgency of immediate and more ambitious action", and that "[h]alf measures are no longer an option." Succumbing to another legend may be more relevant to contemplate, admiring Nero's fiddling while Rome burned. We need to extinguish the fire now.

Given this immediate need for "ambitious" action, the most productive steps the world's 1.3 million architects can take are to reduce upfront Carbon emissions, tackling Embodied Carbon. This is the key to "immediate" reductions. And as you suggest, let's "Enact policies and incentives that accelerate existing building reuse and renovation, use recycled and low-carbon or carbon-sequestering materials, design for deconstruction, and reduce emissions by designing carbon-sequestering sites and landscapes."

I urge everyone to do so.

The Renewables Gambit: Putin Loses, the West Unites, and the Gambit Pays Off
From:
https://www.architecturalrecord.com/articles/15635-the-renewables-gambit-putin-loses-the-west-unites-and-the-gambit-pays-off

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has generated the headlines of the fossil fuel industry's dreams, with articles claiming that the transition to green energy will be more difficult, or that the 1.5-degree goal Is all but dead-or even calling for more drilling and fossil fuel development. But these assessments are clouding the extraordinary progress currently taking place worldwide: the development of sustainable, resilient, and zero-carbon built environments; and the unprecedented and explosive growth of renewable energy generation, a promising solution for both ecological and political stability in the 21st century.

Nowhere are these achievements more evident than in the statistics coming from the solar and wind industries. Solar electricity generation is now growing exponentially worldwide, doubling between 2016 and 2019, and doubling again by 2021. Wind electricity generation is following a similar trajectory, doubling between 2016 and 2021.

In the U.S., solar and wind electricity generation is growing at an impressive rate as well. Solar electricity generation doubled between 2015 and 2017, and again by 2021. Wind generation doubled between 2010 and 2015, and again by 2021. So why do we think it's so difficult to accelerate this growth and address both climate change and energy security?

We are accustomed to thinking of growth and change in linear terms because that's what we're most familiar with: a child growing about 2.5 inches a year, for example, or a car rental billed at a fixed daily rate or per mile traveled. We're not used to exponential growth-very gradual growth followed by an explosive increase over a very short period-and as a result, we tend to underestimate it. Consider the lesson of the following legend:

Wind and solar energy are now the cheapest source of electricity generation for much of the world, and they continue to become cheaper each year-between 2010 and 2019, the unit cost of solar energy decreased 85 percent, and that of wind energy decreased 55 percent. The cost of lithium-ion batteries, essential for storing renewable energy that is generated at variable rates, also fell by 85 percent. With such quick progress, the remarkable solar and wind growth numbers are not unfathomable. And with market forces, increasing pressure for energy security, and the implementation of emissions reduction plans by governments and institutions, including incentives for sustainable development and electrification policies, explosive growth will continue to be the norm.

The price of fossil fuel-generated power depends on the cost of plant construction and operations, geopolitics, and the respective prices of fuel, storage, and transportation. Solar- and wind-generated power, on the other hand, are very different: their fuel sources (sunlight and wind) are delivered free worldwide; they are not encumbered by fuel supply chain issues; their installation and operating costs are comparatively low; and they require minimal rare earths or other difficult-to-obtain materials.

Today, 40.2 percent of the global power sector is supplied by zero-carbon-generated energy, with renewables-wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower-making up three-quarters of the supply. If solar and wind sustain their present course of exponential growth, 60 to 75 percent of global power will be generated by renewables in 2030, and we will be able to phase out carbon dioxide emissions and transition to a zero-carbon power sector by 2040.

The war in Ukraine has reminded us once again of the catastrophic security and humanitarian costs of fossil fuel dependency. With Vladimir Putin using fossil fuels as a geopolitical weapon, the struggle in Ukraine, coupled with the climate crisis, has united the West around a struggle to rapidly wean ourselves off fossil fuels. A global transition to renewable energy generation will dramatically reduce the power wielded by autocratic petrostates like Russia, whose economies are heavily dependent on the extraction and export of oil and natural gas.

In short, the renewables gambit is paying off. With an impressive foundation in place, now is the time to accelerate the transition to a zero-carbon built environment by implementing the following actions:

New Buildings and Developments

Adopt current zero-carbon building codes, standards, and policies. This ensures that all new buildings are highly efficient, use no on-site fossil fuels, and generate or procure enough renewable energy to meet building demand.

Existing Buildings and Developments

Enact policies that leverage building intervention points-or moments during a building's life cycle where construction is likely to occur-in order to accelerate energy efficiency upgrades, shift to electric or district heating systems powered by carbon-free renewable energy sources, and generate or procure carbon-free renewable energy. Aligning work with these intervention points can help mitigate the cost barriers and disruption associated with renovations.

Embodied Carbon

Enact policies and incentives that accelerate existing building reuse and renovation, use recycled and low-carbon or carbon-sequestering materials, design for deconstruction, and reduce emissions by designing carbon-sequestering sites and landscapes.

Implementing these policies will hasten the transition to renewable energy, building on the growth of renewable energy generation and recent movement toward electrification and reducing or sequestering carbon in the built environment. The present global crisis illustrates that doing so is an imperative, not a choice.

Bill, thanks for your thoughtful post.

 Additional information. In 2021:

          Electricity = 38.9% of total global energy consumption (includes electricity related losses), and 40% of total global CO₂ emissions

 When global electricity CO₂ emissions are attributed to sectors, the percentages of total global emissions are:

Thank you, Edward Mazria, for shining light on the "unprecedented and explosive growth of renewable energy generation", the potential solve-all for decarbonization. Unfortunately, we have a very long way to go. Admittedly, the numbers are confusing. Although 40 percent of the global "power sector" is supplied by "zero-carbon-generated" energy, as you mentioned, electricity is only a fraction of global energy consumption. In 2019, the last year before COVID skewed the numbers, electricity accounted for only 17 percent of the Total Final Energy Consumption (TFEC) worldwide. 

Electricity: 17% of Total Global Energy Consumption

As you mentioned, a quarter of that was generated from zero-carbon renewables: wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower. An excellent accomplishment. Nonetheless, zero-carbon renewables constituted a mere 4.4 percent of global consumption (26 percent of the 17 percent).

Zero-carbon Renewable Electricity: 4.4% of Total Global Energy Consumption 

The largest source of renewable energy is not carbon-free. Biomass energy constituted 40 percent of U.S. renewable energy generation in 2019, releasing 350 million metric tons of carbon dioxide from the U.S. alone. Per Btu of Energy, biomass emissions are higher than petroleum, and 1.4 times natural gas. Biomass energy generation was twice hydroelectric, twice wind, five times solar, and twenty-four times geothermal. The bottom line? Carbon-free renewables constituted a mere 6.4 percent of total energy consumption in the U.S.
 

Total U.S. Zero-carbon Renewable Energy: 6.4% of Energy Consumption

The kind of exponential growth exemplified by your "chessboard" legend, which doubled with each square, would certainly be welcome for the expansion of solar and wind generation. But for such expansion to "continue to be the norm" might be wishful thinking. The massive infrastructure required for their energy storage and distribution, the funding necessary, and the decades of construction, all require political will. That seems unlikely within a meaningful timeframe. We cannot afford to sit back, hoping that future energy supply decarbonization will solve the problem. The IPCC is already ringing alarm bells. 

In February, IPCC Chair Hoesung Lee issued a "dire warning about the consequences of inaction", noting the "urgency of immediate and more ambitious action", and that "[h]alf measures are no longer an option." Succumbing to another legend may be more relevant to contemplate, admiring Nero's fiddling while Rome burned. We need to extinguish the fire now.

Given this immediate need for "ambitious" action, the most productive steps the world's 1.3 million architects can take are to reduce upfront Carbon emissions, tackling Embodied Carbon. This is the key to "immediate" reductions. And as you suggest, let's "Enact policies and incentives that accelerate existing building reuse and renovation, use recycled and low-carbon or carbon-sequestering materials, design for deconstruction, and reduce emissions by designing carbon-sequestering sites and landscapes."

I urge everyone to do so.

The Renewables Gambit: Putin Loses, the West Unites, and the Gambit Pays Off
From:
https://www.architecturalrecord.com/articles/15635-the-renewables-gambit-putin-loses-the-west-unites-and-the-gambit-pays-off

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has generated the headlines of the fossil fuel industry's dreams, with articles claiming that the transition to green energy will be more difficult, or that the 1.5-degree goal Is all but dead-or even calling for more drilling and fossil fuel development. But these assessments are clouding the extraordinary progress currently taking place worldwide: the development of sustainable, resilient, and zero-carbon built environments; and the unprecedented and explosive growth of renewable energy generation, a promising solution for both ecological and political stability in the 21st century.

Nowhere are these achievements more evident than in the statistics coming from the solar and wind industries. Solar electricity generation is now growing exponentially worldwide, doubling between 2016 and 2019, and doubling again by 2021. Wind electricity generation is following a similar trajectory, doubling between 2016 and 2021.

In the U.S., solar and wind electricity generation is growing at an impressive rate as well. Solar electricity generation doubled between 2015 and 2017, and again by 2021. Wind generation doubled between 2010 and 2015, and again by 2021. So why do we think it's so difficult to accelerate this growth and address both climate change and energy security?

We are accustomed to thinking of growth and change in linear terms because that's what we're most familiar with: a child growing about 2.5 inches a year, for example, or a car rental billed at a fixed daily rate or per mile traveled. We're not used to exponential growth-very gradual growth followed by an explosive increase over a very short period-and as a result, we tend to underestimate it. Consider the lesson of the following legend:

Wind and solar energy are now the cheapest source of electricity generation for much of the world, and they continue to become cheaper each year-between 2010 and 2019, the unit cost of solar energy decreased 85 percent, and that of wind energy decreased 55 percent. The cost of lithium-ion batteries, essential for storing renewable energy that is generated at variable rates, also fell by 85 percent. With such quick progress, the remarkable solar and wind growth numbers are not unfathomable. And with market forces, increasing pressure for energy security, and the implementation of emissions reduction plans by governments and institutions, including incentives for sustainable development and electrification policies, explosive growth will continue to be the norm.

The price of fossil fuel-generated power depends on the cost of plant construction and operations, geopolitics, and the respective prices of fuel, storage, and transportation. Solar- and wind-generated power, on the other hand, are very different: their fuel sources (sunlight and wind) are delivered free worldwide; they are not encumbered by fuel supply chain issues; their installation and operating costs are comparatively low; and they require minimal rare earths or other difficult-to-obtain materials.

Today, 40.2 percent of the global power sector is supplied by zero-carbon-generated energy, with renewables-wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower-making up three-quarters of the supply. If solar and wind sustain their present course of exponential growth, 60 to 75 percent of global power will be generated by renewables in 2030, and we will be able to phase out carbon dioxide emissions and transition to a zero-carbon power sector by 2040.

The war in Ukraine has reminded us once again of the catastrophic security and humanitarian costs of fossil fuel dependency. With Vladimir Putin using fossil fuels as a geopolitical weapon, the struggle in Ukraine, coupled with the climate crisis, has united the West around a struggle to rapidly wean ourselves off fossil fuels. A global transition to renewable energy generation will dramatically reduce the power wielded by autocratic petrostates like Russia, whose economies are heavily dependent on the extraction and export of oil and natural gas.

In short, the renewables gambit is paying off. With an impressive foundation in place, now is the time to accelerate the transition to a zero-carbon built environment by implementing the following actions:

New Buildings and Developments

Adopt current zero-carbon building codes, standards, and policies. This ensures that all new buildings are highly efficient, use no on-site fossil fuels, and generate or procure enough renewable energy to meet building demand.

Existing Buildings and Developments

Enact policies that leverage building intervention points-or moments during a building's life cycle where construction is likely to occur-in order to accelerate energy efficiency upgrades, shift to electric or district heating systems powered by carbon-free renewable energy sources, and generate or procure carbon-free renewable energy. Aligning work with these intervention points can help mitigate the cost barriers and disruption associated with renovations.

Embodied Carbon

Enact policies and incentives that accelerate existing building reuse and renovation, use recycled and low-carbon or carbon-sequestering materials, design for deconstruction, and reduce emissions by designing carbon-sequestering sites and landscapes.

Implementing these policies will hasten the transition to renewable energy, building on the growth of renewable energy generation and recent movement toward electrification and reducing or sequestering carbon in the built environment. The present global crisis illustrates that doing so is an imperative, not a choice.

Bill, thanks for your thoughtful post.

 Additional information. In 2021:

          Electricity = 38.9% of total global energy consumption (includes electricity related losses), and 40% of total global CO₂ emissions

 When global electricity CO₂ emissions are attributed to sectors, the percentages of total global emissions are:

Thank you, Edward Mazria, for shining light on the "unprecedented and explosive growth of renewable energy generation", the potential solve-all for decarbonization. Unfortunately, we have a very long way to go. Admittedly, the numbers are confusing. Although 40 percent of the global "power sector" is supplied by "zero-carbon-generated" energy, as you mentioned, electricity is only a fraction of global energy consumption. In 2019, the last year before COVID skewed the numbers, electricity accounted for only 17 percent of the Total Final Energy Consumption (TFEC) worldwide. 

Electricity: 17% of Total Global Energy Consumption

As you mentioned, a quarter of that was generated from zero-carbon renewables: wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower. An excellent accomplishment. Nonetheless, zero-carbon renewables constituted a mere 4.4 percent of global consumption (26 percent of the 17 percent).

Zero-carbon Renewable Electricity: 4.4% of Total Global Energy Consumption 

The largest source of renewable energy is not carbon-free. Biomass energy constituted 40 percent of U.S. renewable energy generation in 2019, releasing 350 million metric tons of carbon dioxide from the U.S. alone. Per Btu of Energy, biomass emissions are higher than petroleum, and 1.4 times natural gas. Biomass energy generation was twice hydroelectric, twice wind, five times solar, and twenty-four times geothermal. The bottom line? Carbon-free renewables constituted a mere 6.4 percent of total energy consumption in the U.S.
 

Total U.S. Zero-carbon Renewable Energy: 6.4% of Energy Consumption

The kind of exponential growth exemplified by your "chessboard" legend, which doubled with each square, would certainly be welcome for the expansion of solar and wind generation. But for such expansion to "continue to be the norm" might be wishful thinking. The massive infrastructure required for their energy storage and distribution, the funding necessary, and the decades of construction, all require political will. That seems unlikely within a meaningful timeframe. We cannot afford to sit back, hoping that future energy supply decarbonization will solve the problem. The IPCC is already ringing alarm bells. 

In February, IPCC Chair Hoesung Lee issued a "dire warning about the consequences of inaction", noting the "urgency of immediate and more ambitious action", and that "[h]alf measures are no longer an option." Succumbing to another legend may be more relevant to contemplate, admiring Nero's fiddling while Rome burned. We need to extinguish the fire now.

Given this immediate need for "ambitious" action, the most productive steps the world's 1.3 million architects can take are to reduce upfront Carbon emissions, tackling Embodied Carbon. This is the key to "immediate" reductions. And as you suggest, let's "Enact policies and incentives that accelerate existing building reuse and renovation, use recycled and low-carbon or carbon-sequestering materials, design for deconstruction, and reduce emissions by designing carbon-sequestering sites and landscapes."

I urge everyone to do so.

The Renewables Gambit: Putin Loses, the West Unites, and the Gambit Pays Off
From:
https://www.architecturalrecord.com/articles/15635-the-renewables-gambit-putin-loses-the-west-unites-and-the-gambit-pays-off

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has generated the headlines of the fossil fuel industry's dreams, with articles claiming that the transition to green energy will be more difficult, or that the 1.5-degree goal Is all but dead-or even calling for more drilling and fossil fuel development. But these assessments are clouding the extraordinary progress currently taking place worldwide: the development of sustainable, resilient, and zero-carbon built environments; and the unprecedented and explosive growth of renewable energy generation, a promising solution for both ecological and political stability in the 21st century.

Nowhere are these achievements more evident than in the statistics coming from the solar and wind industries. Solar electricity generation is now growing exponentially worldwide, doubling between 2016 and 2019, and doubling again by 2021. Wind electricity generation is following a similar trajectory, doubling between 2016 and 2021.

In the U.S., solar and wind electricity generation is growing at an impressive rate as well. Solar electricity generation doubled between 2015 and 2017, and again by 2021. Wind generation doubled between 2010 and 2015, and again by 2021. So why do we think it's so difficult to accelerate this growth and address both climate change and energy security?

We are accustomed to thinking of growth and change in linear terms because that's what we're most familiar with: a child growing about 2.5 inches a year, for example, or a car rental billed at a fixed daily rate or per mile traveled. We're not used to exponential growth-very gradual growth followed by an explosive increase over a very short period-and as a result, we tend to underestimate it. Consider the lesson of the following legend:

Wind and solar energy are now the cheapest source of electricity generation for much of the world, and they continue to become cheaper each year-between 2010 and 2019, the unit cost of solar energy decreased 85 percent, and that of wind energy decreased 55 percent. The cost of lithium-ion batteries, essential for storing renewable energy that is generated at variable rates, also fell by 85 percent. With such quick progress, the remarkable solar and wind growth numbers are not unfathomable. And with market forces, increasing pressure for energy security, and the implementation of emissions reduction plans by governments and institutions, including incentives for sustainable development and electrification policies, explosive growth will continue to be the norm.

The price of fossil fuel-generated power depends on the cost of plant construction and operations, geopolitics, and the respective prices of fuel, storage, and transportation. Solar- and wind-generated power, on the other hand, are very different: their fuel sources (sunlight and wind) are delivered free worldwide; they are not encumbered by fuel supply chain issues; their installation and operating costs are comparatively low; and they require minimal rare earths or other difficult-to-obtain materials.

Today, 40.2 percent of the global power sector is supplied by zero-carbon-generated energy, with renewables-wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower-making up three-quarters of the supply. If solar and wind sustain their present course of exponential growth, 60 to 75 percent of global power will be generated by renewables in 2030, and we will be able to phase out carbon dioxide emissions and transition to a zero-carbon power sector by 2040.

The war in Ukraine has reminded us once again of the catastrophic security and humanitarian costs of fossil fuel dependency. With Vladimir Putin using fossil fuels as a geopolitical weapon, the struggle in Ukraine, coupled with the climate crisis, has united the West around a struggle to rapidly wean ourselves off fossil fuels. A global transition to renewable energy generation will dramatically reduce the power wielded by autocratic petrostates like Russia, whose economies are heavily dependent on the extraction and export of oil and natural gas.

In short, the renewables gambit is paying off. With an impressive foundation in place, now is the time to accelerate the transition to a zero-carbon built environment by implementing the following actions:

New Buildings and Developments

Adopt current zero-carbon building codes, standards, and policies. This ensures that all new buildings are highly efficient, use no on-site fossil fuels, and generate or procure enough renewable energy to meet building demand.

Existing Buildings and Developments

Enact policies that leverage building intervention points-or moments during a building's life cycle where construction is likely to occur-in order to accelerate energy efficiency upgrades, shift to electric or district heating systems powered by carbon-free renewable energy sources, and generate or procure carbon-free renewable energy. Aligning work with these intervention points can help mitigate the cost barriers and disruption associated with renovations.

Embodied Carbon

Enact policies and incentives that accelerate existing building reuse and renovation, use recycled and low-carbon or carbon-sequestering materials, design for deconstruction, and reduce emissions by designing carbon-sequestering sites and landscapes.

Implementing these policies will hasten the transition to renewable energy, building on the growth of renewable energy generation and recent movement toward electrification and reducing or sequestering carbon in the built environment. The present global crisis illustrates that doing so is an imperative, not a choice.

Ed, thanks for the data source. Parsing reality from published statistics seems no easy task, especially when it comes to the categorization by "source", "sector" and "use". Confusing at best, they are mostly unintelligible. Our numbers appear to differ by the magnitude of the "energy losses incurred in the generation, transmission, and distribution of electricity" that you noted. That loss is quite staggering. Computing from EIA's 2020 U.S. data, Electricity's share of the energy-use sector's consumption equates to 38.5%-nearly identical to the Global number you stated. However, when one tally's the primary energy used by the end-use sectors, including the electricity they purchased from the electric power sector, electricity's share is 15%-similar to the 17% global share noted in the Renewables 2021 Global Status Report. The difference derived from the unproductive energy losses.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) defines "Electricity [as] a secondary energy source that is generated (produced) from primary energy sources." The primary energy sources include "fossil fuels (petroleum, natural gas, and coal), nuclear energy, and renewable sources of energy." The EIA defines five "energy-use" sectors: electric power; transportation; industrial; commercial; and residential. Four of these sectors are designated as "end-use" sectors (transportation, industrial, commercial, and residential) because they "consume primary energy and electricity produced by the electric power sector." In 2020, electric power in the U.S. was 38.5% of the "energy-use" sectors' primary energy consumption, but only 15% of "end-use" sectors' consumption which includes the electricity they purchase.

In the end, the 17% figure reflects the total final energy consumption, the TFEC. Renewables 2021 stated it this way: "As in past years, the highest share of renewable energy use was in the electricity sector (26% renewables); however, electrical end-uses accounted for only 17% of total final energy consumption. The transport sector, meanwhile, accounted for an estimated 32% of TFEC and had the lowest share of renewables (3.3%). The remaining thermal energy uses, which include space and water heating, space cooling, and industrial process heat, represented more than half (51%) of TFEC; of this, renewables supplied some 11%." And this includes biomass fuels which are not carbon-free."

No matter how the data is parsed the message is still the same, decarbonizing the world's energy supply with renewable carbon-free energy is a long way off. Although our current progress is admirable, it is far from what is needed. Dependency on far-off future goals is still wishful thinking. Immediate CO₂ reductions during the remainder of the 2020s are necessary for any shot at capping warming near 2 degrees C.

Architects, designers and engineers are uniquely situated to have an immediate impact within this decade by cutting "upfront" embodied carbon in the next project designed. The world's 1.3 million architects specify a massive quantity of materials every year.

Bill, thanks for your thoughtful post.

 Additional information. In 2021:

          Electricity = 38.9% of total global energy consumption (includes electricity related losses), and 40% of total global CO₂ emissions

 When global electricity CO₂ emissions are attributed to sectors, the percentages of total global emissions are:

Thank you, Edward Mazria, for shining light on the "unprecedented and explosive growth of renewable energy generation", the potential solve-all for decarbonization. Unfortunately, we have a very long way to go. Admittedly, the numbers are confusing. Although 40 percent of the global "power sector" is supplied by "zero-carbon-generated" energy, as you mentioned, electricity is only a fraction of global energy consumption. In 2019, the last year before COVID skewed the numbers, electricity accounted for only 17 percent of the Total Final Energy Consumption (TFEC) worldwide. 

Electricity: 17% of Total Global Energy Consumption

As you mentioned, a quarter of that was generated from zero-carbon renewables: wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower. An excellent accomplishment. Nonetheless, zero-carbon renewables constituted a mere 4.4 percent of global consumption (26 percent of the 17 percent).

Zero-carbon Renewable Electricity: 4.4% of Total Global Energy Consumption 

The largest source of renewable energy is not carbon-free. Biomass energy constituted 40 percent of U.S. renewable energy generation in 2019, releasing 350 million metric tons of carbon dioxide from the U.S. alone. Per Btu of Energy, biomass emissions are higher than petroleum, and 1.4 times natural gas. Biomass energy generation was twice hydroelectric, twice wind, five times solar, and twenty-four times geothermal. The bottom line? Carbon-free renewables constituted a mere 6.4 percent of total energy consumption in the U.S.
 

Total U.S. Zero-carbon Renewable Energy: 6.4% of Energy Consumption

The kind of exponential growth exemplified by your "chessboard" legend, which doubled with each square, would certainly be welcome for the expansion of solar and wind generation. But for such expansion to "continue to be the norm" might be wishful thinking. The massive infrastructure required for their energy storage and distribution, the funding necessary, and the decades of construction, all require political will. That seems unlikely within a meaningful timeframe. We cannot afford to sit back, hoping that future energy supply decarbonization will solve the problem. The IPCC is already ringing alarm bells. 

In February, IPCC Chair Hoesung Lee issued a "dire warning about the consequences of inaction", noting the "urgency of immediate and more ambitious action", and that "[h]alf measures are no longer an option." Succumbing to another legend may be more relevant to contemplate, admiring Nero's fiddling while Rome burned. We need to extinguish the fire now.

Given this immediate need for "ambitious" action, the most productive steps the world's 1.3 million architects can take are to reduce upfront Carbon emissions, tackling Embodied Carbon. This is the key to "immediate" reductions. And as you suggest, let's "Enact policies and incentives that accelerate existing building reuse and renovation, use recycled and low-carbon or carbon-sequestering materials, design for deconstruction, and reduce emissions by designing carbon-sequestering sites and landscapes."

I urge everyone to do so.

The Renewables Gambit: Putin Loses, the West Unites, and the Gambit Pays Off
From:
https://www.architecturalrecord.com/articles/15635-the-renewables-gambit-putin-loses-the-west-unites-and-the-gambit-pays-off

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has generated the headlines of the fossil fuel industry's dreams, with articles claiming that the transition to green energy will be more difficult, or that the 1.5-degree goal Is all but dead-or even calling for more drilling and fossil fuel development. But these assessments are clouding the extraordinary progress currently taking place worldwide: the development of sustainable, resilient, and zero-carbon built environments; and the unprecedented and explosive growth of renewable energy generation, a promising solution for both ecological and political stability in the 21st century.

Nowhere are these achievements more evident than in the statistics coming from the solar and wind industries. Solar electricity generation is now growing exponentially worldwide, doubling between 2016 and 2019, and doubling again by 2021. Wind electricity generation is following a similar trajectory, doubling between 2016 and 2021.

In the U.S., solar and wind electricity generation is growing at an impressive rate as well. Solar electricity generation doubled between 2015 and 2017, and again by 2021. Wind generation doubled between 2010 and 2015, and again by 2021. So why do we think it's so difficult to accelerate this growth and address both climate change and energy security?

We are accustomed to thinking of growth and change in linear terms because that's what we're most familiar with: a child growing about 2.5 inches a year, for example, or a car rental billed at a fixed daily rate or per mile traveled. We're not used to exponential growth-very gradual growth followed by an explosive increase over a very short period-and as a result, we tend to underestimate it. Consider the lesson of the following legend:

Wind and solar energy are now the cheapest source of electricity generation for much of the world, and they continue to become cheaper each year-between 2010 and 2019, the unit cost of solar energy decreased 85 percent, and that of wind energy decreased 55 percent. The cost of lithium-ion batteries, essential for storing renewable energy that is generated at variable rates, also fell by 85 percent. With such quick progress, the remarkable solar and wind growth numbers are not unfathomable. And with market forces, increasing pressure for energy security, and the implementation of emissions reduction plans by governments and institutions, including incentives for sustainable development and electrification policies, explosive growth will continue to be the norm.

The price of fossil fuel-generated power depends on the cost of plant construction and operations, geopolitics, and the respective prices of fuel, storage, and transportation. Solar- and wind-generated power, on the other hand, are very different: their fuel sources (sunlight and wind) are delivered free worldwide; they are not encumbered by fuel supply chain issues; their installation and operating costs are comparatively low; and they require minimal rare earths or other difficult-to-obtain materials.

Today, 40.2 percent of the global power sector is supplied by zero-carbon-generated energy, with renewables-wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower-making up three-quarters of the supply. If solar and wind sustain their present course of exponential growth, 60 to 75 percent of global power will be generated by renewables in 2030, and we will be able to phase out carbon dioxide emissions and transition to a zero-carbon power sector by 2040.

The war in Ukraine has reminded us once again of the catastrophic security and humanitarian costs of fossil fuel dependency. With Vladimir Putin using fossil fuels as a geopolitical weapon, the struggle in Ukraine, coupled with the climate crisis, has united the West around a struggle to rapidly wean ourselves off fossil fuels. A global transition to renewable energy generation will dramatically reduce the power wielded by autocratic petrostates like Russia, whose economies are heavily dependent on the extraction and export of oil and natural gas.

In short, the renewables gambit is paying off. With an impressive foundation in place, now is the time to accelerate the transition to a zero-carbon built environment by implementing the following actions:

New Buildings and Developments

Adopt current zero-carbon building codes, standards, and policies. This ensures that all new buildings are highly efficient, use no on-site fossil fuels, and generate or procure enough renewable energy to meet building demand.

Existing Buildings and Developments

Enact policies that leverage building intervention points-or moments during a building's life cycle where construction is likely to occur-in order to accelerate energy efficiency upgrades, shift to electric or district heating systems powered by carbon-free renewable energy sources, and generate or procure carbon-free renewable energy. Aligning work with these intervention points can help mitigate the cost barriers and disruption associated with renovations.

Embodied Carbon

Enact policies and incentives that accelerate existing building reuse and renovation, use recycled and low-carbon or carbon-sequestering materials, design for deconstruction, and reduce emissions by designing carbon-sequestering sites and landscapes.

Implementing these policies will hasten the transition to renewable energy, building on the growth of renewable energy generation and recent movement toward electrification and reducing or sequestering carbon in the built environment. The present global crisis illustrates that doing so is an imperative, not a choice.

And what percentage of the world's new and renovated buildings are actually specified by those 1.3 million architects? And what percentage of the 1.3 million architects actually know or care enough to advocate for alternative materials on the basis of embodied carbon? And what percentage of those architects' clients would actually heed an architect's advice and not make their decisions based on cost, status, peer pressure, or the advice of a materials salesperson?

So, no, in my humble opinion architects are not really in a position to make a significant impact on embodied carbon in the next ten years through championing of certain materials over others on projects. Yes, we should continue to advocate with our clients to choose lower carbon materials, but we should not be under any illusions about the impact!

More important is our advocacy with our elected leaders and governments: significant changes in the amount of embodied carbon in the built environment will only come through government regulation, i.e. changes to the building codes to take things like embodied carbon into account. These do seem to be happening, though, so there is a ray of hope there.

Information like that you are providing will help to make the case!

Ed, thanks for the data source. Parsing reality from published statistics seems no easy task, especially when it comes to the categorization by "source", "sector" and "use". Confusing at best, they are mostly unintelligible. Our numbers appear to differ by the magnitude of the "energy losses incurred in the generation, transmission, and distribution of electricity" that you noted. That loss is quite staggering. Computing from EIA's 2020 U.S. data, Electricity's share of the energy-use sector's consumption equates to 38.5%-nearly identical to the Global number you stated. However, when one tally's the primary energy used by the end-use sectors, including the electricity they purchased from the electric power sector, electricity's share is 15%-similar to the 17% global share noted in the Renewables 2021 Global Status Report. The difference derived from the unproductive energy losses.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) defines "Electricity [as] a secondary energy source that is generated (produced) from primary energy sources." The primary energy sources include "fossil fuels (petroleum, natural gas, and coal), nuclear energy, and renewable sources of energy." The EIA defines five "energy-use" sectors: electric power; transportation; industrial; commercial; and residential. Four of these sectors are designated as "end-use" sectors (transportation, industrial, commercial, and residential) because they "consume primary energy and electricity produced by the electric power sector." In 2020, electric power in the U.S. was 38.5% of the "energy-use" sectors' primary energy consumption, but only 15% of "end-use" sectors' consumption which includes the electricity they purchase.

In the end, the 17% figure reflects the total final energy consumption, the TFEC. Renewables 2021 stated it this way: "As in past years, the highest share of renewable energy use was in the electricity sector (26% renewables); however, electrical end-uses accounted for only 17% of total final energy consumption. The transport sector, meanwhile, accounted for an estimated 32% of TFEC and had the lowest share of renewables (3.3%). The remaining thermal energy uses, which include space and water heating, space cooling, and industrial process heat, represented more than half (51%) of TFEC; of this, renewables supplied some 11%." And this includes biomass fuels which are not carbon-free."

No matter how the data is parsed the message is still the same, decarbonizing the world's energy supply with renewable carbon-free energy is a long way off. Although our current progress is admirable, it is far from what is needed. Dependency on far-off future goals is still wishful thinking. Immediate CO₂ reductions during the remainder of the 2020s are necessary for any shot at capping warming near 2 degrees C.

Architects, designers and engineers are uniquely situated to have an immediate impact within this decade by cutting "upfront" embodied carbon in the next project designed. The world's 1.3 million architects specify a massive quantity of materials every year.

Bill, thanks for your thoughtful post.

 Additional information. In 2021:

          Electricity = 38.9% of total global energy consumption (includes electricity related losses), and 40% of total global CO₂ emissions

 When global electricity CO₂ emissions are attributed to sectors, the percentages of total global emissions are:

Thank you, Edward Mazria, for shining light on the "unprecedented and explosive growth of renewable energy generation", the potential solve-all for decarbonization. Unfortunately, we have a very long way to go. Admittedly, the numbers are confusing. Although 40 percent of the global "power sector" is supplied by "zero-carbon-generated" energy, as you mentioned, electricity is only a fraction of global energy consumption. In 2019, the last year before COVID skewed the numbers, electricity accounted for only 17 percent of the Total Final Energy Consumption (TFEC) worldwide. 

Electricity: 17% of Total Global Energy Consumption

As you mentioned, a quarter of that was generated from zero-carbon renewables: wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower. An excellent accomplishment. Nonetheless, zero-carbon renewables constituted a mere 4.4 percent of global consumption (26 percent of the 17 percent).

Zero-carbon Renewable Electricity: 4.4% of Total Global Energy Consumption 

The largest source of renewable energy is not carbon-free. Biomass energy constituted 40 percent of U.S. renewable energy generation in 2019, releasing 350 million metric tons of carbon dioxide from the U.S. alone. Per Btu of Energy, biomass emissions are higher than petroleum, and 1.4 times natural gas. Biomass energy generation was twice hydroelectric, twice wind, five times solar, and twenty-four times geothermal. The bottom line? Carbon-free renewables constituted a mere 6.4 percent of total energy consumption in the U.S.
 

Total U.S. Zero-carbon Renewable Energy: 6.4% of Energy Consumption

The kind of exponential growth exemplified by your "chessboard" legend, which doubled with each square, would certainly be welcome for the expansion of solar and wind generation. But for such expansion to "continue to be the norm" might be wishful thinking. The massive infrastructure required for their energy storage and distribution, the funding necessary, and the decades of construction, all require political will. That seems unlikely within a meaningful timeframe. We cannot afford to sit back, hoping that future energy supply decarbonization will solve the problem. The IPCC is already ringing alarm bells. 

In February, IPCC Chair Hoesung Lee issued a "dire warning about the consequences of inaction", noting the "urgency of immediate and more ambitious action", and that "[h]alf measures are no longer an option." Succumbing to another legend may be more relevant to contemplate, admiring Nero's fiddling while Rome burned. We need to extinguish the fire now.

Given this immediate need for "ambitious" action, the most productive steps the world's 1.3 million architects can take are to reduce upfront Carbon emissions, tackling Embodied Carbon. This is the key to "immediate" reductions. And as you suggest, let's "Enact policies and incentives that accelerate existing building reuse and renovation, use recycled and low-carbon or carbon-sequestering materials, design for deconstruction, and reduce emissions by designing carbon-sequestering sites and landscapes."

I urge everyone to do so.

The Renewables Gambit: Putin Loses, the West Unites, and the Gambit Pays Off
From:
https://www.architecturalrecord.com/articles/15635-the-renewables-gambit-putin-loses-the-west-unites-and-the-gambit-pays-off

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has generated the headlines of the fossil fuel industry's dreams, with articles claiming that the transition to green energy will be more difficult, or that the 1.5-degree goal Is all but dead-or even calling for more drilling and fossil fuel development. But these assessments are clouding the extraordinary progress currently taking place worldwide: the development of sustainable, resilient, and zero-carbon built environments; and the unprecedented and explosive growth of renewable energy generation, a promising solution for both ecological and political stability in the 21st century.

Nowhere are these achievements more evident than in the statistics coming from the solar and wind industries. Solar electricity generation is now growing exponentially worldwide, doubling between 2016 and 2019, and doubling again by 2021. Wind electricity generation is following a similar trajectory, doubling between 2016 and 2021.

In the U.S., solar and wind electricity generation is growing at an impressive rate as well. Solar electricity generation doubled between 2015 and 2017, and again by 2021. Wind generation doubled between 2010 and 2015, and again by 2021. So why do we think it's so difficult to accelerate this growth and address both climate change and energy security?

We are accustomed to thinking of growth and change in linear terms because that's what we're most familiar with: a child growing about 2.5 inches a year, for example, or a car rental billed at a fixed daily rate or per mile traveled. We're not used to exponential growth-very gradual growth followed by an explosive increase over a very short period-and as a result, we tend to underestimate it. Consider the lesson of the following legend:

Wind and solar energy are now the cheapest source of electricity generation for much of the world, and they continue to become cheaper each year-between 2010 and 2019, the unit cost of solar energy decreased 85 percent, and that of wind energy decreased 55 percent. The cost of lithium-ion batteries, essential for storing renewable energy that is generated at variable rates, also fell by 85 percent. With such quick progress, the remarkable solar and wind growth numbers are not unfathomable. And with market forces, increasing pressure for energy security, and the implementation of emissions reduction plans by governments and institutions, including incentives for sustainable development and electrification policies, explosive growth will continue to be the norm.

The price of fossil fuel-generated power depends on the cost of plant construction and operations, geopolitics, and the respective prices of fuel, storage, and transportation. Solar- and wind-generated power, on the other hand, are very different: their fuel sources (sunlight and wind) are delivered free worldwide; they are not encumbered by fuel supply chain issues; their installation and operating costs are comparatively low; and they require minimal rare earths or other difficult-to-obtain materials.

Today, 40.2 percent of the global power sector is supplied by zero-carbon-generated energy, with renewables-wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower-making up three-quarters of the supply. If solar and wind sustain their present course of exponential growth, 60 to 75 percent of global power will be generated by renewables in 2030, and we will be able to phase out carbon dioxide emissions and transition to a zero-carbon power sector by 2040.

The war in Ukraine has reminded us once again of the catastrophic security and humanitarian costs of fossil fuel dependency. With Vladimir Putin using fossil fuels as a geopolitical weapon, the struggle in Ukraine, coupled with the climate crisis, has united the West around a struggle to rapidly wean ourselves off fossil fuels. A global transition to renewable energy generation will dramatically reduce the power wielded by autocratic petrostates like Russia, whose economies are heavily dependent on the extraction and export of oil and natural gas.

In short, the renewables gambit is paying off. With an impressive foundation in place, now is the time to accelerate the transition to a zero-carbon built environment by implementing the following actions:

New Buildings and Developments

Adopt current zero-carbon building codes, standards, and policies. This ensures that all new buildings are highly efficient, use no on-site fossil fuels, and generate or procure enough renewable energy to meet building demand.

Existing Buildings and Developments

Enact policies that leverage building intervention points-or moments during a building's life cycle where construction is likely to occur-in order to accelerate energy efficiency upgrades, shift to electric or district heating systems powered by carbon-free renewable energy sources, and generate or procure carbon-free renewable energy. Aligning work with these intervention points can help mitigate the cost barriers and disruption associated with renovations.

Embodied Carbon

Enact policies and incentives that accelerate existing building reuse and renovation, use recycled and low-carbon or carbon-sequestering materials, design for deconstruction, and reduce emissions by designing carbon-sequestering sites and landscapes.

Implementing these policies will hasten the transition to renewable energy, building on the growth of renewable energy generation and recent movement toward electrification and reducing or sequestering carbon in the built environment. The present global crisis illustrates that doing so is an imperative, not a choice.