View source for 100% renewable energy

{{Short description|Practice of exclusively using easily replenished natural resources to do work}}

{{Renewable energy sources}}

[[File:Shepherds Flat Wind Farm 2011.jpg|thumb|The Shepherds Flat Wind Farm is an 845 megawatt (MW) wind farm in the U.S. state of Oregon.]]
[[File:02-09-15 First Solar Desert Sunlight Solar Farm (15863210084).jpg|thumb|The 550 MW Desert Sunlight Solar Farm in California.]]
[[File:ThreeGorgesDam-China2009.jpg|thumb|The Three Gorges Dam on the Yangtze River, China.]]
[[File:NesjavellirPowerPlant edit2.jpg|thumb|The Nesjavellir Geothermal Power Plant in Þingvellir, Iceland]]
[[File:Ivanpah Solar Power Facility (2).jpg|thumb|The 392 MW [[Organization:Ivanpah Solar Power Facility|Ivanpah Solar Power Facility]] in California: The facility's three towers.]]
[[File:Abengoa Solar (7336087392).jpg|thumbnail| Construction of the Salt Tanks, which provide efficient [[Physics:Thermal energy storage|thermal energy storage]]<ref>Wright, Matthew; Hearps, Patrick; et al. [http://media.bze.org.au/ZCA2020_Stationary_Energy_Report_v1.pdf Australian Sustainable Energy: Zero Carbon Australia Stationary Energy Plan] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151124173114/http://media.bze.org.au/ZCA2020_Stationary_Energy_Report_v1.pdf |date=24 November 2015 }}, Energy Research Institute, University of Melbourne, October 2010, p. 33. Retrieved from BeyondZeroEmissions.org website.</ref> so that output can be provided after the sun goes down, and output can be scheduled to meet demand requirements.<ref>[http://www.renewableenergyfocus.com/view/3272/innovation-in-concentrating-thermal-solar-power-csp/ Innovation in Concentrating Thermal Solar Power (CSP)], RenewableEnergyFocus.com website.</ref> The 280 MW Solana Generating Station is designed to provide six hours of energy storage. This allows the plant to generate about 38 percent of its rated capacity over the course of a year.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2013/10/solana_10_facts_you_didnt_know.php |title = Solana: 10 Facts You Didn't Know About the Concentrated Solar Power Plant Near Gila Bend |first=Ray |last=Stern |work=Phoenix New Times |date=10 October 2013}}</ref>]]
[[File:Bp world energy consumption 2016.gif|thumb|Comparing trends in worldwide energy use, the growth of renewable energy to 2015 is the green line<ref>[http://www.bp.com/statisticalreview Statistical Review of World Energy], Workbook (xlsx), London, 2016</ref>]]

'''100% renewable energy''' means getting all energy from renewable resources. The endeavor to use 100% [[Engineering:Renewable energy|renewable energy]] for electricity, heating, cooling and transport is motivated by [[Earth:Climate change|climate change]], pollution and other environmental issues, as well as economic and energy security concerns. Shifting the total global [[Physics:Primary energy|primary energy]] supply to renewable sources requires [[Earth:Renewable energy transition|a transition of the energy system]], since most of today's energy is derived from non-renewable fossil fuels.

Research into this topic is fairly new, with very few studies published before 2009, but has gained increasing attention in recent years. The majority of studies show that a global transition to 100% renewable energy across all sectors – power, heat, transport and desalination – is feasible and economically viable.<ref name=":3">{{Cite journal |last1=Bogdanov |first1=Dmitrii |last2=Gulagi |first2=Ashish |last3=Fasihi |first3=Mahdi |last4=Breyer |first4=Christian |date=2021-02-01 |title=Full energy sector transition towards 100% renewable energy supply: Integrating power, heat, transport and industry sectors including desalination |journal=Applied Energy |language=en |volume=283 |pages=116273 |doi=10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.116273 |issn=0306-2619 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name=":8">{{Cite book |url=https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-05843-2 |title=Achieving the Paris Climate Agreement Goals |year=2019 |language=en |doi=10.1007/978-3-030-05843-2|isbn=978-3-030-05842-5 |s2cid=198078901 |editor-last1=Teske |editor-first1=Sven }}</ref><ref name=":6" /><ref name=":7" /> A cross-sectoral, holistic approach is seen as an important feature of 100% renewable energy systems and is based on the assumption "that the best solutions can be found only if one focuses on the synergies between the sectors" of the energy system such as electricity, heat, transport or industry.<ref name="Hansen et al.">{{cite journal |last1=Hansen |first1=Kenneth |display-authors=0 |year=2019 |title=Status and perspectives on 100% renewable energy systems |journal=Energy |volume=175 |pages=471–480 |doi=10.1016/j.energy.2019.03.092 |quote=The great majority of all publications highlights the technical feasibility and economic viability of 100% RE systems. |doi-access=free}}</ref>

The main barriers to the widespread implementation of large-scale renewable energy and low-carbon energy strategies are seen to be primarily social and political rather than technological or economic.<ref name="Koumoundouros">{{Cite web|url=https://www.sciencealert.com/stanford-researchers-have-a-plan-to-tackle-the-climate-emergency|title=Stanford Researchers Have an Exciting Plan to Tackle The Climate Emergency Worldwide|last=Koumoundouros|first=Tessa|date=27 December 2019|website=ScienceAlert|language=en-gb|access-date=5 January 2020}}</ref> According to the 2013 ''Post Carbon Pathways'' report, which reviewed many international studies, the key roadblocks are: [[Earth:Climate change denial|climate change denial]], the [[Earth:Fossil fuels lobby|fossil fuels lobby]], political inaction, [[Earth:Sustainable energy|unsustainable energy consumption]], outdated energy infrastructure, and financial constraints.<ref name="John Wiseman et al">{{cite web|url=https://cpd.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Post-Carbon-Pathways-Report-2013_Revised.pdf|title=Post Carbon Pathways|first=John|last=Wiseman|date=April 2013|work=University of Melbourne|display-authors=0}}</ref>

==Feasibility==
No uniform definition for 100% renewable energy systems has been adopted across the published literature.<ref name="Hansen et al." />

Recent studies show that a global [[Earth:Renewable energy transition|transition to 100% renewable energy]] across all sectors – power, heat, transport and desalination well before 2050 is feasible.<ref name=":3" /><ref name=":8" /><ref name=":6">{{Cite web|title=Cheap, safe 100% renewable energy possible before 2050, says Finnish uni study|url=https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/cheap_safe_100_renewable_energy_possible_before_2050_says_finnish_uni_study/10736252|access-date=2021-06-18|website=Yle Uutiset|date=12 April 2019 |language=en}}</ref><ref name=":7">{{Cite journal|last1=Gulagi|first1=Ashish|last2=Alcanzare|first2=Myron|last3=Bogdanov|first3=Dmitrii|last4=Esparcia|first4=Eugene|last5=Ocon|first5=Joey|last6=Breyer|first6=Christian|date=2021-07-01|title=Transition pathway towards 100% renewable energy across the sectors of power, heat, transport, and desalination for the Philippines|journal=Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews|language=en|volume=144|pages=110934|doi=10.1016/j.rser.2021.110934|issn=1364-0321|doi-access=free}}</ref> According to a review of the 181 peer-reviewed papers on 100% renewable energy that were published until 2018, "[t]he great majority of all publications highlights the technical feasibility and economic viability of 100% RE systems."<ref name="Hansen et al." /> A review of 97 papers published since 2004 and focusing on islands concluded that across the studies 100% renewable energy was found to be "technically feasible and economically viable."<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Meschede |first1=Henning |last2=Bertheau |first2=Paul |last3=Khalili |first3=Siavash |last4=Breyer |first4=Christian |date=2022-06-24 |title=A review of 100% renewable energy scenarios on islands |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wene.450 |journal=WIREs Energy and Environment |volume=11 |issue=6 |language=en |doi=10.1002/wene.450 |s2cid=250061841 |issn=2041-8396}}</ref> A 2022 review found that the main conclusion of most of the literature in the field is that 100% renewables is feasible worldwide at low cost.<ref name="10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402">{{cite journal |last1=Breyer |first1=Christian |last2=Khalili |first2=Siavash |last3=Bogdanov |first3=Dmitrii |last4=Ram |first4=Manish |last5=Oyewo |first5=Ayobami Solomon |last6=Aghahosseini |first6=Arman |last7=Gulagi |first7=Ashish |last8=Solomon |first8=A. A. |last9=Keiner |first9=Dominik |last10=Lopez |first10=Gabriel |last11=Østergaard |first11=Poul Alberg |last12=Lund |first12=Henrik |last13=Mathiesen |first13=Brian V. |last14=Jacobson |first14=Mark Z. |last15=Victoria |first15=Marta |last16=Teske |first16=Sven |last17=Pregger |first17=Thomas |last18=Fthenakis |first18=Vasilis |last19=Raugei |first19=Marco |last20=Holttinen |first20=Hannele |last21=Bardi |first21=Ugo |last22=Hoekstra |first22=Auke |last23=Sovacool |first23=Benjamin K. |title=On the History and Future of 100% Renewable Energy Systems Research |journal=IEEE Access |date=2022 |volume=10 |pages=78176–78218 |doi=10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402 |issn=2169-3536|doi-access=free}} [[File:CC-BY icon.svg|50px]]  Text was copied from this source, which is available under a [https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/  Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License].
* News article: {{cite news |last1=Shakeel |first1=Fatima |title=The World Can Achieve A 100% Renewable Energy System By 2050, Researchers Say |url=https://wonderfulengineering.com/renewable-energy-systems-could-be-possible-by-2050/ |access-date=23 August 2022 |work=Wonderful Engineering |date=12 August 2022}}
* University press release: {{cite news |title=Researchers agree: The world can reach a 100% renewable energy system by or before 2050 - Oxford Brookes University |url=https://www.brookes.ac.uk/about-brookes/news/researchers-agree--the-world-can-reach-a-100--renewable-energy-system-by-or-before-2050/ |access-date=1 September 2022 |work=[[Organization:Oxford Brookes University|Oxford Brookes University]]}}</ref>

Existing technologies, including storage, are capable of generating a secure energy supply at every hour throughout the year. The sustainable energy system is more efficient and cost effective than the existing system.<ref name="LUT">{{cite book|last1=Ram|first1=M.|url=http://energywatchgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/EWG_LUT_100RE_All_Sectors_Global_Report_2019.pdf|title=Global Energy System based on 100% Renewable Energy – Power, Heat, Transport and Desalination Sectors|last2=Bogdanov|first2=D.|last3=Aghahosseini|first3=A.|last4=Gulagi|first4=A.|publisher=Lappeenranta University of Technology {{!}} Energy Watch Group|year=2019|isbn=978-952-335-339-8|issn=2243-3376|ref={{harvid|Ram et al.|2019}}}}</ref> The {{wipe|United Nations}} [[Organization:Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change|Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]] (IPCC) stated in their [[Earth:Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation|2011 report]] that there is little that limits integrating [[Engineering:Renewable energy|renewable]] technologies for satisfying the total global energy demand.

Mark Z. Jacobson, professor of civil and environmental engineering at [[Organization:Stanford University|Stanford University]] and director of its Atmosphere and Energy program, says that producing all new energy with wind power, [[Engineering:Solar power|solar power]],  and [[Physics:Hydropower|hydropower]] by 2030 is feasible, and that existing energy supply arrangements could be replaced by 2050.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Jacobson|first1=Mark Z.|last2=Delucchi|first2=Mark A.|last3=Cameron|first3=Mary A.|last4=Coughlin|first4=Stephen J.|last5=Hay|first5=Catherine A.|last6=Manogaran|first6=Indu Priya|last7=Shu|first7=Yanbo|last8=Krauland|first8=Anna-Katharina von|date=20 December 2019|title=Impacts of Green New Deal Energy Plans on Grid Stability, Costs, Jobs, Health, and Climate in 143 Countries|journal=One Earth|language=English|volume=1|issue=4|pages=449–463|doi=10.1016/j.oneear.2019.12.003|bibcode=2019AGUFMPA32A..01J|issn=2590-3330|doi-access=free}}</ref> Although disputed by other researchers, Jacobson says that [[Finance:Cost of electricity by source|energy costs]] today with a wind, solar, and water system should be similar to today's energy costs from other optimally cost-effective strategies and he has rebutted their criticisms.<ref name="enpol2011">{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.enpol.2010.11.045 |pages=1170–90 |title=Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part II: Reliability, system and transmission costs, and policies |url=https://archive.org/details/sim_energy-policy_2011-03_39_3/page/1170 |journal=Energy Policy |volume=39 |issue=3 |year=2011 |last1=Delucchi |first1=Mark A |last2=Jacobson |first2=Mark Z }}</ref><ref name="disputeJacobson">{{cite web |url=https://www.technologyreview.com/s/608126/in-sharp-rebuttal-scientists-squash-hopes-for-100-percent-renewables/ | title = Scientists Sharply Rebut Influential Renewable-Energy Plan}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Frew|first1=Bethany A.|last2=Cameron|first2=Mary A.|last3=Delucchi|first3=Mark A.|last4=Jacobson|first4=Mark Z.|date=27 June 2017|title=The United States can keep the grid stable at low cost with 100% clean, renewable energy in all sectors despite inaccurate claims|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences|language=en|volume=114|issue=26|pages=E5021–E5023|doi=10.1073/pnas.1708069114|issn=0027-8424|pmc=5495290|pmid=28630350|bibcode=2017PNAS..114E5021J|doi-access=free}}</ref> A followup paper was published by Jacobson and others in 2022, in which paths to 100% renewable energy by 2035 and 2050 were developed for 145 countries.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Jacobson |first1=Mark Z. |last2=von Krauland |first2=Anna-Katharina |last3=Coughlin |first3=Stephen J. |last4=Dukas |first4=Emily |last5=Nelson |first5=Alexander J. H. |last6=Palmer |first6=Frances C. |last7=Rasmussen |first7=Kylie R. |date=2022 |title=Low-cost solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy insecurity for 145 countries |url=http://xlink.rsc.org/?DOI=D2EE00722C |journal=Energy & Environmental Science |volume=15 |issue=8 |language=en |pages=3343–3359 |doi=10.1039/D2EE00722C |s2cid=250126767 |issn=1754-5692}}</ref> The study concluded that a wind-water-solar (WWS) based system "requires less energy, costs less, and creates more jobs than business as usual". The cost reduction was primarily due to the substantial (-56.4%) decrease in overall energy demand thanks to the increased efficiency of relying on renewable electricity for all energy needs.

In 2014, renewable sources such as wind, [[Earth:Geothermal energy|geothermal]], [[Physics:Solar energy|solar]], [[Biology:Bioenergy|biomass]], and burnt waste provided 19% of the total energy consumed worldwide, with roughly half of that coming from traditional use of biomass.<ref name=Armaroli>{{cite journal | last1 = Armaroli | first1 = Nicola |  author-link2 = Vincenzo Balzani | last2 = Balzani | first2 = Vincenzo | year = 2016 | title = Solar Electricity and Solar Fuels: Status and Perspectives in the Context of the Energy Transition | journal = Chemistry – A European Journal | volume = 22 | issue = 1| pages = 32–57 | doi = 10.1002/chem.201503580 | pmid = 26584653 }}</ref> The largest sector in terms of energy consumption is electricity with a renewable share of 22.8%, most of it coming from hydropower with a share of 16.6%, followed by wind with 3.1%.<ref name=Armaroli/> {{As of|2018}}, according to [[Organization:REN21|REN21]], transformation is picking up speed in the power sector, but urgent action is required in heating, cooling and transport.<ref>{{cite web |title=Renewables Global Status Report |url=http://www.ren21.net/status-of-renewables/global-status-report/ |publisher=[[Organization:REN21|REN21]] |access-date=15 May 2019}}</ref>

There are many places around the world with grids that are run almost exclusively on renewable energy {{see below|below}}. At the national level, at least 30 nations already have renewable energy contributing more than 20% of the energy supply.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Ritchie|first1=Hannah|last2=Roser|first2=Max|date=2020-12-17|title=Renewable Energy|url=https://ourworldindata.org/renewable-energy|journal=Our World in Data}}</ref>  [[Social:Renewable energy commercialization|Renewable energy use]] has grown more quickly than even advocates anticipated.<ref name=pg11 /> {{As of|2019}}, however, it needs to grow six times faster to limit global warming to {{convert|2|C-change|F-change|1}}.<ref>{{cite web |title = Global energy transformation: A roadmap to 2050 (2019 edition) |url = https://www.irena.org/publications/2019/Apr/Global-energy-transformation-A-roadmap-to-2050-2019Edition |access-date=21 April 2019 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20190418182733/https://www.irena.org/publications/2019/Apr/Global-energy-transformation-A-roadmap-to-2050-2019Edition |archive-date=18 April 2019 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

== History ==
Using 100% renewable energy was first suggested in a paper in ''Science''{{nnbsp}}<ref name="sorensen-1975">
{{cite journal
 | first1 = Bent | last1 = Sørensen
 | title = A plan is outlined according to which solar and wind energy would supply Denmark's needs by the year 2050
 | url = https://archive.org/details/sim_science_1975-07-25_189_4199/page/255 | date = 25 July 1975
 | journal = Science
 | volume = 189
 | number = 4199
 | pages = 255–260
 | doi = 10.1126/science.189.4199.255
 | pmid = 17813696
 | bibcode = 1975Sci...189..255S
 | s2cid = 220099848
 | issn = 0036-8075
}}</ref>
published in 1975 by Danish physicist Bent Sørensen, which was followed by several other proposals.<ref name="Hohmeyer" /> In 1976, [[Earth:Energy policy|energy policy]] analyst [[Biography:Amory Lovins|Amory Lovins]] coined the term "[[Physics:Soft energy path|soft energy path]]" to describe an alternative future where [[Physics:Efficient energy use|energy efficiency]] and appropriate [[Engineering:Renewable energy|renewable energy]] sources steadily replace a centralized energy system based on fossil and nuclear fuels.<ref name=joshua2011>{{cite web |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/07/the-elusive-green-economy/7554/ |title=The Elusive Green Economy |author=Green, Joshua |date=July–August 2009 |work=The Atlantic }}</ref>

[[File:Timeline of selected key milestones of 100% renewable energy systems research.gif|thumb|Timeline of selected key milestones of 100% renewable energy systems research<ref name="10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402"/>]]
In 1998, the first detailed analysis of scenarios with high shares of renewables were published. These were followed by the first detailed 100% scenarios. In 2006, a PhD thesis was published by Czisch in which it was shown that in a 100% renewable scenario energy supply could match demand in every hour of the year in Europe and North Africa. In the same year, Danish Energy professor Henrik Lund published a first paper<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Lund | first1 = Henrik |  year = 2006| title = Large-scale integration of optimal combinations of PV, wind and wave power into the electricity supply | journal = Renewable Energy | volume = 31 | issue = 4| pages = 503–515 | doi = 10.1016/j.renene.2005.04.008}}</ref> in which he addresses the optimal combination of renewables, which was followed by several other papers on the transition to 100% renewable energy in Denmark. Since then, Lund has been publishing several papers on 100% renewable energy. After 2009, publications began to rise steeply, covering 100% scenarios for countries in Europe, America, Australia and other parts of the world.<ref name="Hohmeyer" />

[[File:Development of peer-reviewed journal articles based on 100% RE system analyses for concrete geographic entities.gif|thumb|Development of peer-reviewed journal articles based on 100% RE system analyses for concrete geographic entities<ref name="10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402"/>]]
Even in the early 21st century, it was extraordinary for scientists and decision-makers to consider the concept of 100% renewable electricity. However, renewable energy progress has been so rapid that things have totally changed since then:<ref name=diesrev />
{{blockquote|
Solar photovoltaic modules have dropped about 75 percent in price. Current scientific and technological advances in the laboratory suggest that they will soon be less expensive than the cost of installation of a photovoltaic system on residential or commercial buildings. On-shore wind power is spreading over all continents and is economically competitive with fossil and nuclear power in several regions. Concentrated solar thermal power (CST) with thermal storage has moved from the demonstration stage of maturity to the limited commercial stage and still has the potential for further cost reductions of about 50 percent.<ref name=diesrev>{{cite web |url= http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/another-myth-busted-on-the-road-to-100-renewable-electricity-52178 |title=Another Myth Busted on the Road to 100% Renewable Electricity |first=Mark |last=Diesendorf |date=4 April 2013 |work=Reneweconomy.com.au }}</ref>
|sign=|source=}}

Renewable energy use has grown much faster than even advocates had anticipated.<ref name=pg11 /> [[Physics:Wind turbine|Wind turbine]]s generate 39<ref>{{cite web|title = Elproduktion|url = https://www.energinet.dk/DA/KLIMA-OG-MILJOE/Miljoerapportering/Termisk-produktion/Sider/Termisk-produktion.aspx|website = www.energinet.dk|access-date = 21 February 2016|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20160302062337/https://www.energinet.dk/DA/KLIMA-OG-MILJOE/Miljoerapportering/Termisk-produktion/Sider/Termisk-produktion.aspx|archive-date = 2 March 2016|url-status = dead}}</ref> percent of Danish electricity, and Denmark has many biogas digesters and waste-to-energy plants as well. Together, wind and biomass provide 44% of the electricity consumed by the country's six million inhabitants. In 2010, Portugal's 10 million people produced more than half their electricity from indigenous renewable energy resources. Spain's 40 million inhabitants meet one-third of their electrical needs from renewables.<ref name=pg11>{{cite web |url=http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2013/04/100-percent-renewable-vision-building |title=100 Percent Renewable Vision Building |first=Paul |last=Gipe |date=4 April 2013 |work=Renewable Energy World }}</ref>

Renewable energy has a history of strong public support. In America, for example, a 2013 Gallup survey showed that two in three Americans want the U.S. to increase domestic energy production using solar power (76%), wind power (71%), and natural gas (65%). Far fewer want more petroleum production (46%) and more nuclear power (37%). Least favored is coal, with about one in three Americans favouring it.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2013/04/americans-want-more-emphasis-on-solar-wind-natural-gas |title=Americans Want More Emphasis on Solar, Wind, Natural Gas |first=Dennis |last=Jacobe |date=9 April 2013 |work=Renewable Energy World }}</ref>

[[Organization:REN21|REN21]] says renewable energy already plays a significant role and there are many policy targets that aim to increase this:
{{blockquote|
At the national level, at least 30 nations around the world already have renewable energy contributing more than 20% of energy supply. National renewable energy markets are projected to continue to grow strongly in the coming decade and beyond, and some 120 countries have various policy targets for longer-term shares of renewable energy, including a binding 20% by 2020 target for the European Union. Some countries have much higher long-term policy targets of up to 100% renewables. Outside Europe, a diverse group of 20 or more other countries target renewable energy shares in the 2020–2030 time frame that range from 10% to 50%.<ref>{{cite report|url=https://www.ren21.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/REN21_GFR_2013.pdf |title=Renewables Global Futures Report 2013 |date=2013 |publisher= REN21, Institute for Sustainable Energy Policies }}</ref>
}}

Supporters of 100% renewable energy do not consider [[Physics:Nuclear power|nuclear power]] as renewable or [[Earth:Sustainable energy|sustainable]] due to [[Physics:Nuclear power debate|perceived risks]] of disasters and high-level waste management, and consider [[Physics:Carbon capture and storage|carbon capture and storage]] to have limited safe storage potential.<ref name="Hohmeyer">{{cite journal |doi=10.1002/wene.128 |pages=74–97 |title=Trends toward 100% renewable electricity supply in Germany and Europe: A paradigm shift in energy policies |journal=Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment |volume=4 |year=2015 |last1=Hohmeyer |first1=Olav H |last2=Bohm |first2=Sönke |s2cid=109863320 }}</ref> These constraints have also led to an interest in 100% renewable energy. A well established body of academic literature has been written over the past decade{{when|date=November 2019}}, evaluating scenarios for 100% renewable energy for various geographical areas. In recent years{{when|date=November 2019}}, more detailed analyses have emerged from government and industry sources.<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.enpol.2013.03.038 |pages=270–82 |title=Least cost 100% renewable electricity scenarios in the Australian National Electricity Market |journal=Energy Policy |volume=59 |year=2013 |last1=Elliston |first1=Ben |last2=MacGill |first2=Iain |last3=Diesendorf |first3=Mark }}</ref> The incentive to use 100% renewable energy is created by [[Earth:Global warming|global warming]] and ecological as well as economic concerns, post [[Unsolved:Peak oil|peak oil]].

The first country to propose 100% renewable energy was Iceland, in 1998.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.rio02.com/proceedings/pdf/031_Gissuarson.pdf |title=Implementation of Green Bookkeeping at Reykjavik Energy |publisher=Rio02.com |access-date=1 November 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120617131226/http://www.rio02.com/proceedings/pdf/031_Gissuarson.pdf |archive-date=17 June 2012 |url-status=dead}}</ref> Proposals have been made for Japan in 2003,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.energyrichjapan.info/en/welcome.html |title=Energy Rich Japan |publisher=Energyrichjapan.info |access-date=1 November 2012}}</ref> and for Australia in 2011.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://media.beyondzeroemissions.org/ZCA2020_Stationary_Energy_Report_v1.pdf |title=Zero Carbon Australia Stationary Energy Plan |access-date=1 November 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120523064256/http://media.beyondzeroemissions.org/ZCA2020_Stationary_Energy_Report_v1.pdf |archive-date=23 May 2012}}</ref> Albania, Iceland, and Paraguay obtain essentially all of their electricity from renewable sources (Albania and Paraguay 100% from hydroelectricity, Iceland 72% hydro and 28% geothermal).<ref name=":2">US EIA, [http://www.eia.gov/cfapps/ipdbproject/IEDIndex3.cfm?tid=2&pid=2&aid=12 International energy statistics] data for 2011.</ref> Norway obtains nearly all of its electricity from renewable sources (97 percent from hydropower).<ref>US EIA, [http://www.eia.gov/countries/cab.cfm?fips=NO Norway], updated 2014.</ref> Iceland proposed using hydrogen for transportation and its fishing fleet. Australia proposed biofuel for those elements of transportation not easily converted to electricity. The road map for the United States,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://ieer.org/projects/carbon-free-nuclear-free/ |title=A Roadmap for U.S. Energy Policy |publisher=Ieer.org |date=13 March 2012 |access-date=1 November 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ecocivilization.info/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/CarbonFreeNuclearFree.pdf |title=A Road Map for U.S. Energy Policy |access-date=1 November 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120913062255/http://www.ecocivilization.info/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/CarbonFreeNuclearFree.pdf |archive-date=13 September 2012 |url-status=dead}}</ref> commitment by Denmark,<ref>{{cite web |last=Carrasco |first=Alicia |url=http://www.emeter.com/smart-grid-watch/2012/denmark-commits-to-100-renewable-energy/ |title=Denmark commits to 100% renewable energy |publisher=Emeter.com |date=9 April 2012 |access-date=1 November 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120613182905/http://www.emeter.com/smart-grid-watch/2012/denmark-commits-to-100-renewable-energy/ |archive-date=13 June 2012 |url-status=dead}}</ref> and Vision 2050 for Europe set a 2050 timeline for converting to 100% renewable energy,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.inforse.org/europe/Vision2050.htm |title=Vision 2050 |publisher=Inforse.org |date=2 December 2010 |access-date=1 November 2012}}</ref> later reduced to 2040 in 2011.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.inforse.org/europe/VisionEU27.htm |title=EU Sustainable Energy Vision 2040 |publisher=Inforse.org |date=2 December 2010 |access-date=1 November 2012}}</ref> Zero Carbon Britain 2030 proposes eliminating carbon emissions in Britain by 2030 by transitioning to renewable energy.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.zerocarbonbritain.org/zcb-world |title=Zero Carbon World |publisher=Zerocarbonbritain.org |date=9 November 2011 |access-date=1 November 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121017081557/http://www.zerocarbonbritain.org/zcb-world |archive-date=17 October 2012 |url-status=dead }}</ref> In 2015, Hawaii enacted a law that the Renewable Portfolio Standard shall be 100 percent by 2045. This is often confused with renewable energy. If electricity produced on the grid is 65 GWh from fossil fuel and 35 GWh from renewable energy and rooftop off grid solar produces 80 GWh of renewable energy, then the total renewable energy is 115 GWh and the total electricity on the grid is 100 GWh. Then the RPS is 115 percent.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.ililani.media/2015/06/heco-asserts-hawaiis-renewable-energy.html|title=HECO asserts Hawaii's renewable energy requirement can exceed 100%}}</ref>

Cities like [[Place:Paris|Paris]] and Strasbourg in France, planned to use 100% renewable energy by 2050.<ref>{{Cite news |title=Un plan climat met Paris sur la voie de la neutralité carbone |url=https://www.lemonde.fr/climat/article/2018/03/22/un-plan-climat-met-paris-sur-la-voie-de-la-neutralite-carbone_5274533_1652612.html|work=Le Monde.fr|date=21 March 2018|last1=Roger|first1=Simon}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=L'Eurométropole de Strasbourg dévoile son plan climat 2030 |url=https://www.francebleu.fr/infos/climat-environnement/l-eurometropole-de-strasbourg-devoile-son-plan-climat-2030-1509993398|date=6 November 2017}}</ref>

Similarly, in the United States, the independent National Research Council has noted that "sufficient domestic renewable resources exist to allow renewable electricity to play a significant role in future electricity generation and thus help confront issues related to climate change, energy security, and the escalation of energy costs ... Renewable energy is an attractive option because renewable resources available in the United States, taken collectively, can supply significantly greater amounts of electricity than the total current or projected domestic demand."<ref name=NRC>{{Cite book |url=http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12619|title=Electricity from Renewable Resources: Status, Prospects, and Impediments  |author=National Research Council| date=2010|page=4|publisher=National Academies of Science|isbn=9780309137089}}</ref>

It is estimated that the world will spend an extra $8 trillion over the next 25 years to prolong the use of non-renewable resources, a cost that would be eliminated by transitioning instead to 100% renewable energy.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2010/11/101109-peak-oil-iea-world-energy-outlook/ |title=Has the World Already Passed "Peak Oil"? |publisher=News.nationalgeographic.com |date=9 November 2010 |access-date=1 November 2012}}</ref> Research that has been published in Energy Policy suggests that converting the entire world to 100% renewable energy by 2050 is both possible and affordable, but requires political support.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320934766|title=Global Energy System based on 100% Renewable Energy - Power Sector|website=ResearchGate|language=en|access-date=19 February 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://news.stanford.edu/2018/02/08/avoiding-blackouts-100-renewable-energy/|title=Avoiding blackouts with 100% renewable energy|date=8 February 2018|website=Stanford News|language=en|access-date=19 February 2019}}</ref> It would require building many more [[Physics:Wind turbine|wind turbine]]s and solar power systems but wouldn't utilize [[Biology:Bioenergy|bioenergy]]. Other changes involve use of [[Engineering:Electric car|electric car]]s and the development of enhanced transmission grids and storage.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Jacobson | first1 = Mark Z. | last2 = Delucchi | first2 = Mark A. | year = 2011| title = Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part I: Technologies, energy resources, quantities and areas of infrastructure, and materials | url = https://archive.org/details/sim_energy-policy_2011-03_39_3/page/1154 | journal = Energy Policy | volume = 39 | issue = 3| pages = 1154–1169 | doi = 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.11.040}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Delucchi | first1 = Mark A. | last2 = Jacobson | first2 = Mark Z. | year = 2011| title = Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part II: Reliability, system and transmission costs, and policies | url = https://archive.org/details/sim_energy-policy_2011-03_39_3/page/1170 | journal = Energy Policy | volume = 39 | issue = 3| pages = 1170–1190 | doi = 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.11.045}}</ref> As part of the Paris Agreement, countries periodically update their climate change targets for the future, by 2018 no [[Organization:G20|G20 country]] had committed to a 100% renewable target.<ref>[https://www.climate-transparency.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Brown-to-Green-Report-2018_rev.pdf Brown to Green Report 2018, p21]</ref>

Until 2018, there were 181 peer-reviewed papers on 100% renewable energy. In the same year, 100% renewable energy was also mentioned in the Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C as a potential means to "expand the range of 1.5 °C pathways", if the findings can be corroborated.<ref name="Hansen et al." />

As of 2021, wind and solar were consistently increasing their share worldwide, but still represented just 5% of global primary energy consumption. A report by J.P. Morgan Asset Management (the biggest lender to fossil fuels in the world) analyzed renewable energy forecasts made by eight scientists and research bodies (including Bent Sorensen, Mark Z. Jacobson, [[Biography:Amory Lovins|Amory Lovins]]) between 1970 and 2020 and claimed that all of them were unrealistically optimistic as they ignored "energy  density,  intermittency  and  the  complex realities of incumbent energy systems".<ref>{{Cite web|last=Cembalest|first=Michael|date=2021|title=2021 Annual Energy Paper|url=https://am.jpmorgan.com/content/dam/jpm-am-aem/global/en/insights/eye-on-the-market/future-shock-amv.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210624201101/https://am.jpmorgan.com/content/dam/jpm-am-aem/global/en/insights/eye-on-the-market/future-shock-amv.pdf|archive-date=2021-06-24|access-date=2021-06-16|website=J.P. Morgan Asset Management}} [https://ipfs.io/ipfs/bafybeiagawykt4sbrviryo7eenvykrrnlvt252nakhkfesjx3ntfkryf2q?filename=future-shock-amv.pdf Alt URL]</ref><ref name=":9">{{Cite news|title=JPMorgan Chase promises to shift portfolio away from fossil fuels|url=https://www.ft.com/content/e1be8a23-1c80-43dd-be7b-18636ff61c46|access-date=September 12, 2021|newspaper=Financial Times|date=October 6, 2020|last1=Nauman|first1=Billy}}</ref>

== Places with near 100% renewable electricity ==
The following places meet 90% or more of their average yearly electricity demand with renewable energy (incomplete list):
{| class="wikitable sortable" style="text-align: center;"
|+
!  style="width:20%;"| Place
!  style="width:12%;" data-sort-type=number| Population
!  style="width:39%;"| Electricity
!  style="width:8%;"| Source(s)
|-
|{{Flag|Albania}}
|2,821,977 (2011)
|Hydroelectric.
|<ref name=":2" />
|-
| Aller-Leine Valley, {{Flag|Germany}}
| 75,000 (2012)
| 63.5% wind, 30% biogas, 10.7% hydro, 3.1% solar
|<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.kommunal-erneuerbar.de/energie-kommunen/energie-kommunen/aller-leine-tal.html|title=Aller-Leine-Tal|work=Kommunal Erneuerbar|date=August 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.go100percent.org/cms/index.php?id=99|title=Cort-Brün Voige, Aller Leine Tal|website=Go 100% Renewable Energy}}</ref>
|-
| Aspen, {{Flag|Colorado}}, {{Flag|United States}}
| 6,658 (2010)
| Hydroelectric, wind and solar and geothermal
|<ref name=aspentimes>{{cite web|url=http://www.aspentimes.com/news/17972193-113/aspen-is-third-us-city-to-reach-100|title=Aspen is third U.S. city to reach 100% renewable energy|work=The Aspen Times|access-date=6 September 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150905053306/http://www.aspentimes.com/news/17972193-113/aspen-is-third-us-city-to-reach-100|archive-date=5 September 2015|url-status=dead}}</ref>
|-
|{{Flag|Bhutan}}
|727,145 (2017)
|Largely hydroelectricity; exports 70% of its production due to excess energy generated; no fossil fuel power plants.
|<ref>{{Cite news|date=2016-02-25|title=Bhutan: a proactive sustainability and renewable energy leader • BiogasWorld|language=en-US|work=BiogasWorld|url=http://www.biogasworld.com/news/bhutan-a-proactive-sustainability-and-renewable-energy-leader/|access-date=2018-08-04}}</ref>
|-
| Burlington, {{Flag|Vermont}}, {{Flag|United States}}
| 42,417 (2010)
| 35.3% hydro, 35.3% wood, 27.9% wind, 1.4% solar photovoltaic
|<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.burlingtonelectric.com/our-energy-portfolio|title=Our Energy Portfolio|publisher=Burlington Electric Department}}</ref>
|-
| {{Flag|British Columbia}}, {{Flag|Canada}}
| 4,700,000 (2017)
| 97% hydroelectric
|<ref>{{Cite web|date=2021-03-17|title=Provincial and Territorial Energy Profiles – British Columbia|url=https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/data-analysis/energy-markets/provincial-territorial-energy-profiles/provincial-territorial-energy-profiles-british-columbia.html|access-date=2021-06-23|website=Canada Energy Regulator}}</ref><ref>{{Cite report|url=https://www.bchydro.com/content/dam/BCHydro/customer-portal/documents/corporate/accountability-reports/financial-reports/annual-reports/bc-hydro-annual-report-2014.pdf|title=BC Hydro Annual Report 2014|date=2014|publisher=BC Hydro for Generations, British Columbia|page=30|access-date=10 August 2021}}</ref>
|-
|Centralia, {{Flag|Washington}}, {{Flag|United States}}
|17,216
|90.6% hydro, 7.9% nuclear
|<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|url=https://www.commerce.wa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/2018-Preliminary-Disclosure-Data-03122019.pdf|title=Washington State Electric Utility Fuel Mix Disclosure Reports For Calendar Year 2018|date=October 2019|website=Washington State Department of Commerce|access-date=30 January 2020}}</ref>
|-
|Chelan Cty., {{Flag|Washington}}, {{Flag|United States}}
|76,533
|100% renewable energy made up of 99.98% hydroelectric and 0.02% wind power.
|<ref>{{Cite web |date=2020 |title=Fuel Mix Disclosure |url=https://www.chelanpud.org/my-pud-services/rates-and-policies/fuel-mix-disclosure |access-date=18 October 2022}}</ref>
|-
|{{Flag|Costa Rica}}
| 4,857,000
| 99% renewable electricity. Hydroelectric (90%), geothermal, wind (and others)
|<ref name=":1">{{cite web|title = Costa Rica Is 99% Powered By Renewable Energy - MetaEfficient|url = http://www.metaefficient.com/renewable-power/costa-rica-is-99-powered-by-renewable-energy.html|website = MetaEfficient|access-date = 23 November 2015|date = 8 April 2008}}</ref>
|-
|{{Flag|Democratic Republic of the Congo}}
|84,000,000
|Almost 100% hydro, but only 9% have access to electricity.
|<ref>{{Cite web|date=2020-04-16|title=Power Africa in Democratic Republic of the Congo {{!}} Power Africa {{!}} U.S. Agency for International Development|url=https://www.usaid.gov/powerafrica/democratic-republic-congo|access-date=2021-06-23|website=www.usaid.gov|language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Democratic Republic of the Congo - Countries & Regions|url=https://www.iea.org/countries/democratic-republic-of-the-congo|access-date=2021-06-23|website=IEA|language=en-GB}}</ref>
|-
|Douglas Cty., {{Flag|Washington}}, {{Flag|United States}}
|41,945
|100% hydro
|<ref name=":0" />
|-
|{{Flag|Ethiopia}}
|109,224,414 (2018)
|Mostly hydroelectricity (>90%). Smaller quantities of wind, solar, and geothermal. 45% of the population has access to electricity {{As of|2018}}, and there is a 100% access target set in 2017 for 2025.
|<ref>{{Cite web|date=2021-05-26|title=POWER AFRICA IN ETHIOPIA {{!}} Power Africa {{!}} U.S. Agency for International Development|url=https://www.usaid.gov/powerafrica/ethiopia|access-date=2021-09-20|website=www.usaid.gov|language=en}}</ref>
|-
| Georgetown, {{Flag|Texas}}, {{Flag|United States}}
| 70,000
| 100% - 154MW solar and wind balanced with grid connection
|<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://georgetown.org/2018/06/29/georgetowns-energy-100-percent-renewable-with-solar-plant/|title=Georgetown's energy 100 percent renewable with solar plant – City of Georgetown Texas}}</ref>
|-
| Greensburg, {{Flag|Kansas}}, {{Flag|United States}}
| 1400
| 100% - wind balanced with grid connection
|<ref name="aspentimes" /><ref>{{Cite web |url=http://blog.rmi.org/blog_2013_09_10_high_renewables_tomorrow_today_greensburg_kansas |title=A High-Renewables Tomorrow, Today: Greensburg, Kansas |last=Guevara-Stone |first=Laurie |work=RMI Outlet |date=10 September 2013 |access-date=6 September 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150906140015/http://blog.rmi.org/blog_2013_09_10_high_renewables_tomorrow_today_greensburg_kansas |archive-date=6 September 2015 |url-status=dead}}</ref>
|-
| {{Flag|Iceland}}
| 329,100
| 72% hydroelectricity, 28% geothermal, wind, and solar power, less than 0.1% combustible fuel (off-grid diesel)
|<ref name="auto">International Energy Agency, [http://www.iea.org/statistics/relatedsurveys/monthlyelectricitysurvey/ December 2014] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180731213417/http://www.iea.org/statistics/relatedsurveys/monthlyelectricitysurvey/ |date=31 July 2018 }}, Monthly electricity statistics, data for January through December 2014.</ref>
|-
| Kodiak Island, {{Flag|Alaska}}, {{Flag|United States}}
| 13,448
| 80.9% hydroelectricity, 19.8% wind power, 0.3% diesel generator
|<ref>Kodiak Electric Association, [http://www.kodiakelectric.com/generation.html Statistics] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150722103159/http://www.kodiakelectric.com/generation.html |date=22 July 2015 }}, accessed 21 July 2015.</ref>
|-
| {{Flag|Lower Austria}}, {{Flag|Austria}}
| 1,612,000 
| 63% hydroelectricity, 26% wind, 9% biomass, 2% solar
| <ref>{{cite web|url=http://cleantechnica.com/2015/11/11/lower-austria-claims-100-renewable-electricity/|title=Lower Austria Claims 100% Renewable Electricity - CleanTechnica|website=cleantechnica.com|date=11 November 2015}}</ref>
|-
|{{Flag|Manitoba}}, {{Flag|Canada}}
|1,278,365
|97% hydroelectricity, 3% wind, <1% petroleum (diesel in four off-grid communities), <1% natural gas
|<ref>{{Cite web|date=2018|title=Provincial and Territorial Energy Profiles – Manitoba|url=https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/data-analysis/energy-markets/provincial-territorial-energy-profiles/provincial-territorial-energy-profiles-manitoba.html|access-date=2021-02-28|website=Canada Energy Regulator}}</ref>
|-
| {{Flag|Norway}}
| 5,140,000
| 96% hydroelectricity, 2% combustible fuel, 2% geothermal, wind, and solar
|<ref name="auto" />
|-
| {{Flag|Newfoundland and Labrador}}, {{Flag|Canada}}
| 525,604
| 95% hydroelectricity
|<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/nrg/ntgrtd/mrkt/nrgsstmprfls/nl-eng.html|title=Provincial and Territorial Energy Profiles – Newfoundland and Labrador|date=8 April 2020|publisher=Government of Canada}}</ref>
|-
| Palo Alto, {{Flag|California}}, {{Flag|United States}}
| 66,000
| 50% hydro, rest a combination of solar, wind and biogas
| <ref>{{cite web|url=http://reneweconomy.com.au/palo-alto-switches-to-100-renewable-effective-immediately-21373/|title=Palo Alto switches to 100% renewables – at a cost of $3 a year|date=23 July 2013}}</ref>
|-
| {{Flag|Paraguay}}
| 7,010,000
| Electricity sector in Paraguay is 100% hydroelectricity, about 90% of which is exported, remaining 10% covers domestic demand
| <ref>{{cite web
|title= 'IRENA (2015), Renewable Energy Policy Brief: Paraguay; IRENA, Abu Dhabi'.
|url= http://www.irena.org/DocumentDownloads/Publications/IRENA_RE_Latin_America_Policies_2015_Country_Paraguay.pdf
|access-date= 16 September 2017
|archive-date= 16 September 2017
|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170916095320/http://www.irena.org/DocumentDownloads/Publications/IRENA_RE_Latin_America_Policies_2015_Country_Paraguay.pdf
|url-status= dead
}}</ref>
|-
|Pend Oreille Cty., {{Flag|Washington}}, {{Flag|United States}}
|13,354
|97.1% hydro
|<ref name=":0" />
|-
| {{Flag|Quebec}}, {{Flag|Canada}}
| 8,200,000
| 99% renewable electricity is the main energy used in Quebec (41%), followed by oil (38%) and natural gas (10%)
|<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.hydroquebec.com/sustainable-development/pdf/energy-supplies-and-air-emissions-2013.pdf |title=Hydro-Québec's Electricity Facts: Energy Supplies and Air Emissions |publisher=Hydro-Québec |date=2013 |access-date=30 January 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160306031755/http://www.hydroquebec.com/sustainable-development/pdf/energy-supplies-and-air-emissions-2013.pdf |archive-date=6 March 2016 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
|-
| Samsø, {{Flag|Denmark}}
| 3,806
| Net greater than 100% wind power and biomass, connected to mainland for balance and backup power
|<ref name="time">{{cite magazine|url=http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1881646,00.html |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130105055817/http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1881646,00.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=5 January 2013 |title=Denmark's Wind of Change |magazine=Time |access-date=14 November 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Kolbert |first=Elizabeth |url=https://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/07/080707fa_fact_kolbert?currentPage=all |title=The Island in the Wind |date=30 June 2008 |publisher=Newyorker.com |access-date=14 November 2013}}</ref>
|-
|{{Flag|Scotland}}
|5,510,000 (2022)
|97% of electricity (2020) produced from renewables, mainly wind followed by hydroelectric.
|<ref name="RenLowCarbon">{{Cite news|title=Renewables met 97% of Scotland's electricity demand in 2020|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-56530424|access-date=2021-03-26|work=BBC News|date=25 March 2021 }}</ref>
|-
|{{Flag|Sealand}}
|2
|100% of electricity produced from wind and solar power.
|<ref>{{Cite web |date=1 October 2022 |title=Did you know Sealand is one of the most environmentally responsible nations on Earth due to a combination of wind turbines and solar panels? The collection of rain provides Sealand's entire supply of fresh water. |url=https://twitter.com/SealandGov/status/1576273307908849664 |access-date=18 October 2022}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=30 October 2015 |title=Thank you for your donations |url=https://sealandgov.org/thank-you-for-your-donations/ |access-date=18 October 2022}}</ref>
|-
| Seattle, {{Flag|Washington}}, {{Flag|United States}}
| 724,745
| 86% hydroelectricity, 7% wind, 1% biogas
|<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.seattle.gov/light/FuelMix/|title=Seattle City Light {{!}} Power Mix|website=seattle.gov|access-date=31 July 2018}}</ref><ref name=":0" />
|-
| South Island, {{Flag|New Zealand}}
| 1,115,000
| 98.2% hydroelectricity and 1.6% wind. Around one-fifth of generation is exported to the North Island.
| <ref>{{cite web |title= Energy in New Zealand 2015 |url= http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info-services/sectors-industries/energy/energy-data-modelling/publications/energy-in-new-zealand |publisher=Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment |access-date= 23 February 2016 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20160215114526/http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info-services/sectors-industries/energy/energy-data-modelling/publications/energy-in-new-zealand/ |archive-date= 15 February 2016 |url-status= dead }}</ref>
|-
|Tacoma, {{Flag|Washington}}, {{Flag|United States}}
|208,100
|85% hydro, 6% wind
|<ref name=":0" />
|-
|{{Flag|Tajikistan}}
|8,734,951 (2016)
|Hydropower supplies nearly 100 percent of Tajikistan's electricity.
|<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.hydropower.org/country-profiles/tajikistan|title=Tajikistan {{!}} International Hydropower Association|website=hydropower.org|language=en|access-date=16 November 2018}}</ref>
|-
|{{Flag|Tasmania}}, {{Flag|Australia}}
|515,000
|Hydropower supplies 100 percent of Tasmania's electricity. (Pending legislation plans for %200 renewable power by 2040, with the remainder to be sent to mainland Australia via [[Engineering:Submarine power cable|submarine power cable]]s)
|<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/12/tasmania-renewable-energy-sustainable-hydropower/|title=Tasmania is now powered entirely by renewable energy|website=weforum.org|language=en|date=9 December 2020|access-date=11 January 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://reneweconomy.com.au/morrison-steps-in-to-take-majority-stake-in-marinus-link-project-23287/|title=Morrison steps in to take majority stake in Marinus Link project|website=reneweconomy.com.au|date=15 December 2020|access-date=11 January 2021}}</ref>
|-
| Tau, {{Flag|American Samoa}}
| 873 (2000)
| ~100% solar power, with battery backup
| <ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.engadget.com/2016/11/22/tesla-runs-island-on-solar-power/|title=Tesla runs an entire island on solar power}}</ref>
|-
| Tilos, {{Flag|Greece}}
| 400 (winter), 3,000 (summer)
| 100% wind and solar power, with battery backup 
|<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.businessinsider.com/ap-renewable-resort-greek-island-to-run-on-wind-solar-power-2018-8|title=A small Greek island will become the first in the Mediterranean to run solely on wind and solar power after its businesses have been hindered by blackouts|first=Iliana|last=Mier|website=Business Insider}}</ref>
|-
| {{Flag|Tokelau}}, {{Flag|New Zealand}}
| 1,411
| 93% solar power, with battery backup and 7% coconut biofuel 
|<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-20233754|title=Tokelau islands shift to solar energy|date=7 November 2012|via=www.bbc.com}}</ref><ref>[https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20901-coconuts-and-sunshine-will-power-south-pacific-islands.html Coconuts and sunshine will power South Pacific islands] New Scientist, published 2011-09-13, accessed 14 September 2011 {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140512232425/http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20901-coconuts-and-sunshine-will-power-south-pacific-islands.html |date=12 May 2014 }}</ref>
|-
| {{Flag|Uruguay}}
| 3,300,000 (2013)
| 94.5% renewable electricity; wind power (and biomass and solar power) is used to stretch hydroelectricity reserves into the dry season
|<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/dec/03/uruguay-makes-dramatic-shift-to-nearly-95-clean-energy|title=Uruguay makes dramatic shift to nearly 95% electricity from clean energy|first=Jonathan|last=Watts|date=3 December 2015|work=The Guardian}}</ref>
|- 
| Wildpoldsried, {{Flag|Bavaria}}, {{Flag|Germany}}
| 2,512 (2013)
| 500% wind, solar, hydro
|<ref>{{cite news|url=http://on.ft.com/18o8CH5|title=Germany's renewable energy experiment comes at a cost|work=Financial Times|date=15 September 2013 }}</ref>
|- 
| {{Flag|Yukon}}, {{Flag|Canada}}
| 35,874
| 94% hydroelectricity
|<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/nrg/ntgrtd/mrkt/nrgsstmprfls/yt-eng.html|title=Provincial and Territorial Energy Profiles – Yukon|date=8 April 2020|publisher=Government of Canada}}</ref>
|}

Some other places have high percentages, for example the electricity sector in Denmark, {{as of|2014|lc=y}}, is 45% wind power, with plans in place to reach 85%. The electricity sector in Canada and the electricity sector in New Zealand have even higher percentages of renewables (mostly hydro), 65% and 75% respectively, and Austria is approaching 70%.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://qz.com/543177/austrias-largest-state-now-gets-100-of-its-electricity-from-renewables/|title=Austria's largest state now gets 100% of its electricity from renewables|first=Cassie|last=Werber|date=6 November 2015 }}</ref> {{as of|2015}}, the electricity sector in Germany sometimes meets almost 100% of the electricity demand with PV and wind power, and renewable electricity is over 25%.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://reneweconomy.com.au/renewables-cover-almost-100-of-german-demand-68831/|title=Renewables cover almost 100% of German demand|date=26 August 2015|website=RenewEconomy}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.bdew.de/internet.nsf/id/20120726-pi-erneuerbare-energien-liefern-mehr-als-ein-viertel-des-stroms-de/$file/Strom_Erneuerbaren_Energien_1_Halbjahr_2012.pdf |title=Electricity – Renewable Energies in the first half of 2012 |access-date=1 September 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121010174909/http://www.bdew.de/internet.nsf/id/20120726-pi-erneuerbare-energien-liefern-mehr-als-ein-viertel-des-stroms-de/$file/Strom_Erneuerbaren_Energien_1_Halbjahr_2012.pdf |archive-date=10 October 2012 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Albania has 94.8% of installed capacity as hydroelectric, 5.2% diesel generator; but Albania imports 39% of its electricity.<ref>[https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/albania/ Albania], CIA World Factbook.</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Electricity_production,_consumption_and_market_overview|title=Electricity production, consumption and market overview - Statistics Explained|website=ec.europa.eu}}</ref> In 2016, Portugal achieved 100% renewable electricity for four days between 7 and 11 May, partly because [[Physics:Efficient energy use|efficient energy use]] had reduced electricity demand.<ref>[http://www.nature.com/nenergy/volumes/1/issues/6 Embrace the change], Editorial, ''Nature Energy'', 7 June 2016.</ref> France and Sweden have low carbon intensity, since they predominantly use a mixture of nuclear power and hydroelectricity. In 2018 Scotland met 76% of their demand from renewable sources.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.scottishrenewables.com/our-industry/statistics|title=Renewable Energy Facts & Statistics {{pipe}} Scottish Renewables|website=www.scottishrenewables.com}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.power-technology.com/news/scotland-renewable-energy-record/|title=Scotland renewable energy generation reaches record levels|website=www.power-technology.com|date=29 March 2019 }}</ref>

Although electricity is currently around a quarter of world energy supply and consumption; primary energy use is expected to decrease with renewable energy deployment as electricity use increases, as it is likely to be combined with some degree of further electrification.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Jacobson | first1 = Mark Z. | s2cid = 97348845 |  display-authors = etal | year = 2015 | title = 100% clean and renewable wind, water, and sunlight (WWS) all-sector energy roadmaps for the 50 United States| journal = Energy and Environmental Science | volume = 8 | issue = 7| pages = 2093–2117 | doi = 10.1039/c5ee01283j }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Vad Mathiesen | first1 = Brian | author-link = Brian Vad Mathiesen | display-authors = etal | year = 2015 | title = ''Smart Energy Systems for coherent 100% renewable energy and transport solutions''. In | journal = Applied Energy | volume = 145 | pages = 139–154 | doi = 10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.075 }}</ref> For example, [[Engineering:Electric car|electric car]]s achieve much better [[Physics:Fuel efficiency|fuel efficiency]] than fossil fuel cars, and another example is [[Physics:Renewable heat|renewable heat]] such as in the case of Denmark, which is proposing to move to greater use of heat pumps for heating buildings to provide multiple kilowatts of heat per kilowatt of electricity.

== 100% clean electricity ==
Other electricity generating sources are considered clean, though not necessarily renewable, as they also do not emit carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases and air pollutants. The largest of these is nuclear energy, which produces no emissions. Some argue that transitioning to 100% renewable energy would be too slow to [[Earth:Climate change mitigation|limit climate change]], and that closing down [[Engineering:Nuclear power plant|nuclear power stations]] is a mistake.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2021-03-06 |title=Nuclear power must be well regulated, not ditched |newspaper=The Economist |url=https://www.economist.com/leaders/2021/03/06/nuclear-power-must-be-well-regulated-not-ditched |access-date=2022-01-31 |issn=0013-0613}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=McDonnell |first=Tim |title=Germany's exit from nuclear energy will make its power dirtier and more expensive |url=https://qz.com/2108729/germany-just-closed-half-of-its-nuclear-power-plants/ |access-date=2022-01-31 |website=Quartz |date=3 January 2022 |language=en}}</ref> [[Physics:Carbon capture and storage|Carbon capture and storage]] projects may still use coal or natural gas but capture carbon dioxide for storage or alternative uses. Pathways to eliminate greenhouse gases may include these in addition to renewable energy to save money,<ref>{{Cite report|url=https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/943714/Modelling-2050-Electricity-System-Analysis.pdf|title=Modelling 2050: Electricity System Analysis|quote="the additional renewable capacity required to replace unabated gas generation during periods of low renewable output either increases systems costs more than using additional nuclear and/or gas CCUS to do the same thing, or is not achievable within the build limits used in this modelling"|publisher=Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy}}</ref> or to avoid shutting down existing plants and allow for flexibility in designing a carbon-free electric grid.

In 2018, California passed SB 100, which mandates 100% clean, carbon-free by 2045, including a 60% renewable electricity goal by 2030.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/california-100-percent-clean-energy-grid-de-leon|title=California Assembly Passes Historic 100% Carbon-Free Electricity Bill|last=Spector|first=Julian|date=29 August 2018|website=greentechmedia.com|access-date=4 February 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2018/8/31/17799094/california-100-percent-clean-energy-target-brown-de-leon|title=California just adopted its boldest energy target yet: 100% clean electricity|last=Roberts|first=David|date=31 August 2018|website=Vox|access-date=4 February 2019}}</ref> 2019 legislation in {{wipe|Washington (state)}} also requires 100% clean electricity by 2045, eliminating coal by 2025.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/inslee-wants-100-percent-clean-energy-in-washington-by-2045/281-622645039|title=Inslee wants 100 percent clean energy in Washington by 2045|website=KING|access-date=4 February 2019}}</ref> Further states and territories to require 100% carbon-free electricity are Hawaii, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Virginia, Puerto Rico, and Washington, DC.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://news.energysage.com/states-with-100-renewable-targets/|title=100 Percent Renewable Energy Targets by State {{!}} EnergySage|date=2 May 2019|website=Solar News|language=en-US|access-date=20 October 2019}}</ref>

== Obstacles ==
{{further|Earth:Politics of global warming}}
According to Mark Z. Jacobson, the most significant barriers to the widespread implementation of large-scale renewable energy and low carbon energy strategies, at the pace required to prevent [[Earth:Runaway climate change|runaway climate change]], are primarily political and not technological.<ref name="Koumoundouros"/>{{dubious|reason=statement based on a single article by Jacobson based on controversial assumptions. No wide consensus in scientific community|date=April 2020}} According to the 2013 ''Post Carbon Pathways'' report, which reviewed many international studies, the key roadblocks are:<ref name="John Wiseman et al"/>
{{blockquote|
* [[Earth:Climate change denial|Climate change denial]]
* [[Earth:Fossil fuels lobby|Efforts to impede renewable energy by the fossil fuel industry]]
* Political paralysis
* Unsustainable consumption of energy and resources
* Path dependencies and outdated infrastructure
* Financial and governance constraints
}}

In 2011, the [[Organization:Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change|Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]], some of the world's leading climate researchers selected by the United Nations, said "as infrastructure and energy systems develop, in spite of the complexities, there are few, if any, fundamental technological limits to integrating a portfolio of renewable energy technologies to meet a majority share of total energy demand in locations where suitable renewable resources exist or can be supplied".<ref name="IPCC 2011 17" /> IPCC scenarios "generally indicate that growth in renewable energy will be widespread around the world".<ref name="IPCC 2011 22">{{cite web |url=http://srren.ipcc-wg3.de/report/IPCC_SRREN_SPM.pdf |title=Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation |author=IPCC |date=2011 |work=Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA |page=22 |access-date=4 July 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140111081913/http://srren.ipcc-wg3.de/report/IPCC_SRREN_SPM.pdf |archive-date=11 January 2014 |url-status=dead }}</ref> The IPCC said that if governments were supportive, and the full complement of renewable energy technologies were deployed, renewable energy supply could account for almost 80% of the world's energy use within forty years.<ref name=ipccccc /> Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the IPCC, said the necessary investment in renewables would cost only about 1% of global GDP annually. This approach could contain greenhouse gas levels to less than 450 parts per million, the safe level beyond which climate change becomes catastrophic and irreversible.<ref name=ipccccc>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/may/09/ipcc-renewable-energy-power-world |title=Renewable energy can power the world, says landmark IPCC study |first=Fiona |last=Harvey |date=9 May 2011  |work=The Guardian |location=London}}</ref>

Stephen W. Pacala and [[Biography:Robert H. Socolow|Robert H. Socolow]] have developed a series of "climate stabilization wedges" that can allow societies to maintain their quality of life while avoiding catastrophic [[Earth:Climate change|climate change]], and "renewable energy sources", in aggregate, constitute the largest number of their "wedges".<ref name="Pacala">{{cite journal |doi=10.1126/science.1100103 |pmid=15310891 |pages=968–72 |title=Stabilization Wedges: Solving the Climate Problem for the Next 50 Years with Current Technologies |journal=Science |volume=305 |issue=5686 |year=2004|last1=Pacala |first1=S |last2=Socolow |first2=R |bibcode=2004Sci...305..968P |citeseerx=10.1.1.642.8472 |s2cid=2203046}}</ref>

===Lack of urgency and coordination===
Lester R. Brown founder and president of the Earth Policy Institute, a nonprofit research organization based in Washington, D.C., says a rapid transition to 100% renewable energy is both possible and necessary. Brown compares with the U.S. entry into World War II and the subsequent rapid mobilization and transformation of the US industry and economy. A quick transition to 100% renewable energy and saving of our civilization is proposed by Brown to follow an approach with similar urgency.<ref name="Plan B 4.0">{{cite web |url=http://www.earth-policy.org/images/uploads/book_files/pb4book.pdf |title=Plan B 4.0, Mobilizing to Save Civilization  |first=Lester R. |last=Brown |date=2009 |work=Earth Policy Institute}}</ref>

===Systemic barriers===
In 1999 American academic Dr. Gregory Unruh published a dissertation identifying the systemic barriers to the adoption and diffusion of renewable energy technologies. This theoretical framework was called Carbon Lock-in and pointed to the creation of self-reinforcing feedbacks that arise through the co-evolution of large technological systems, like electricity and transportation networks, with the social and political institutions that support and benefit from system growth. Once established, these techno-institutional complexes<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/portal/pls/portallive/docs/1/7294726.PDF |title=Microsoft Word - Lock-in_Foxon_final.doc |access-date=25 July 2018}}</ref> become "locked-in" and resist efforts to transform them towards more environmentally sustainable systems based on renewable sources.

===Required minerals===
According to [[Organization:World Bank|World Bank]] the "below 2°C" climate scenario requires 3 billions of tonnes of metals and minerals by 2050. Supply of mined resources such as zinc, molybdenum, silver, nickel, copper must increase by up to 500%.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Bromby|first=Robin|date=2 June 2020|title=Needed by 2050: 3 billion tonnes of metals to generate clean energy|url=https://smallcaps.com.au/needed-by-2050-world-bank-metals-generate-clean-energy/|access-date=19 June 2020|website=Small Caps|language=en-US}}</ref> A 2018 study analysed the metal requirements to transition the global energy system up to 2060. Currently used battery technologies and known reserves are not compatible with the transition scenario as a result of insufficient [[Chemistry:Cobalt|cobalt]] and [[Chemistry:Lithium|lithium]] reserves. Batteries containing less or no cobalt are feasible. Lithium is much more difficult to replace with maintained performance and cost.<ref name="ReferenceA">{{Cite journal|last1=Månberger|first1=André|last2=Stenqvist|first2=Björn|date=1 August 2018|title=Global metal flows in the renewable energy transition: Exploring the effects of substitutes, technological mix and development|journal=Energy Policy|language=en|volume=119|pages=226–241|doi=10.1016/j.enpol.2018.04.056|issn=0301-4215|doi-access=free}}</ref>

===Institutional inertia===
A review suggests large institutions are prone to resisting "the challenge of 100% RE scenarios based on the dogma that the world cannot do without fossil fuels and nuclear energy". Institutions that have received extensive criticism include the [[Organization:International Energy Agency|International Energy Agency]] and the [[Organization:Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change|Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]], with the latter also being criticized for not including studies on 100% RE systems in their IPCC reports.<ref name="10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402"/>

===Manufacturing concentration in China===
A report found that China is about to produce "almost 95% of the world's polysilicon and the ingots and wafers" of the solar panel supply chain, with this level of concentration in any global supply chain "would represent a considerable vulnerability".<ref>{{cite news |last1=Binnie |first1=Isla |title=IEA warns global solar supply chains are too concentrated in China |url=https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/iea-warns-global-solar-supply-chains-are-too-concentrated-china-2022-07-07/ |access-date=1 September 2022 |work=Reuters |date=7 July 2022 |language=en}}</ref>

===Intermittency===
One of the main obstacles to 100% renewable energy is the [[Engineering:Variable renewable energy|intermittency or variability of renewable energy sources]] – such as times when sufficient amounts of energy can be generated neither via wind nor via solar power ("Dunkelflauten").

Proposed notable options to manage this intermittency by the time the first transitional period to 100% renewable energy is completed include:
* certain forms of (flexible) [[Physics:Dispatchable generation|dispatchable generation]]<ref name="10.1016/j.energy.2017.07.027"/> such as biomass (including forms of [[Biology:Pellet fuel|pellet fuel]], [[Biology:Woodchips|woodchips]], [[Biology:Algae fuel|algae fuel]]/[[Biology:Algae bioreactor|bioreactors]], and [[Biology:Biomass|biomass]] grown on land formerly used for meat-production) or hydroelectricity
* diversification of (nonsynchronous) renewables<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Crespo |first1=Diego |title=STE can replace coal, nuclear and early gas as demonstrated in an hourly simulation over 4 years in the Spanish electricity mix |journal=AIP Conference Proceedings |series=SOLARPACES 2018: International Conference on Concentrating Solar Power and Chemical Energy Systems |date=25 July 2019 |volume=2126 |issue=1 |pages=130003 |doi=10.1063/1.5117645 |bibcode=2019AIPC.2126m0003C |s2cid=201317957 |issn=0094-243X}}</ref><ref name="10.1016/j.energy.2017.07.027"/>
* super grids<ref name="10.1016/j.energy.2017.07.027">{{cite journal |last1=McPherson |first1=Madeleine |last2=Karney |first2=Bryan |title=A scenario based approach to designing electricity grids with high variable renewable energy penetrations in Ontario, Canada: Development and application of the SILVER model |journal=Energy |date=1 November 2017 |volume=138 |pages=185–196 |doi=10.1016/j.energy.2017.07.027 |language=en |issn=0360-5442 |quote=Several flexibility options have been proposed to facilitate VRE integration, including interconnecting geographically dispersed resources, interconnecting different VRE types, building flexible and dispatchable generation assets, shifting flexible loads through demand response, shifting electricity generation through storage, curtailing excess generation, interconnections to the transport or heating energy sectors, and improving VRE forecasting methodologies (Delucchi and Jacobson 2011). Previous VRE integration studies have considered different combinations of balancing options, but few have considered all flexibility options simultaneously.}}</ref><ref name="10.1016/j.esr.2019.01.007">{{cite journal |last1=Benasla |first1=Mokhtar |last2=Hess |first2=Denis |last3=Allaoui |first3=Tayeb |last4=Brahami |first4=Mostefa |last5=Denaï |first5=Mouloud |title=The transition towards a sustainable energy system in Europe: What role can North Africa's solar resources play? |journal=Energy Strategy Reviews |date=1 April 2019 |volume=24 |pages=1–13 |doi=10.1016/j.esr.2019.01.007 |s2cid=169342098 |language=en |issn=2211-467X}}</ref> (due to foreign unique capacities/resources for generation and storage) and strengthening interconnections<ref name="10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402"/> and larger grids in general (due to differences in weather or daytime)
* curtailing excess generation<ref name="10.1016/j.energy.2017.07.027"/> and [[Engineering:Power-to-X|power-to-X]] (e.g. producing green hydrogen immediately when there is abundant energy)<ref name="10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402"/>
* [[Earth:Geothermal energy|Geothermal energy]] to reduce energy storage needs<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kulasekara |first1=Hasal |last2=Seynulabdeen |first2=Vaithehi |title=A Review of Geothermal Energy for Future Power Generation |journal=2019 5th International Conference on Advances in Electrical Engineering (ICAEE) |date=September 2019 |pages=223–228 |doi=10.1109/ICAEE48663.2019.8975470|isbn=978-1-7281-4934-9 |s2cid=210992606 }}</ref> or potentially as dispatchable energy via in-reservoir storage<ref>{{cite news |last1=Brahambhatt |first1=Rupendra |title=In a world first, scientists propose geothermal power plants that also work as valuable clean energy reservoirs |url=https://interestingengineering.com/science/geothermal-power-plants-clean-energy-reservoirs |access-date=20 October 2022 |work=interestingengineering.com |date=9 September 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ricks |first1=Wilson |last2=Norbeck |first2=Jack |last3=Jenkins |first3=Jesse |title=The value of in-reservoir energy storage for flexible dispatch of geothermal power |journal=Applied Energy |date=1 May 2022 |volume=313 |pages=118807 |doi=10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.118807 |s2cid=247302205 |url=https://zenodo.org/record/6385742 |language=en |issn=0306-2619}}
* University press release: {{cite news |last1=Waters |first1=Sharon |title=Study shows geothermal could be an ideal energy storage technology |url=https://techxplore.com/news/2022-09-geothermal-ideal-energy-storage-technology.html |access-date=20 October 2022 |work=Princeton University via techxplore.com |language=en}}</ref>
* oversizing solar and wind capacities<ref name="10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402"/>
* flexible energy demand- and supply-regulating [[Engineering:Smart grid|smart grid]]s
**Demand response technologies<ref name="10.1016/j.energy.2017.07.027"/><ref name="10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402"/>
**[[Engineering:Vehicle-to-grid|Vehicle-to-grid]] uses a vehicle's battery to supply the grid when needed<ref>{{Cite web|date=2021-06-08|title=UK vehicle-to-grid trial finds economic potential but 'hardware costs still too high'|url=https://www.energy-storage.news/uk-vehicle-to-grid-trial-finds-economic-potential-but-hardware-costs-still-too-high/|access-date=2021-12-24|website=Energy Storage News|language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|date=2021-09-04|title=Electric cars: Ofgem plans easier way for drivers to sell energy back to grid|url=http://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/sep/04/electric-cars-ofgem-plans-easier-way-for-drivers-to-sell-energy-back-to-grid|access-date=2021-12-24|website=the Guardian|language=en}}</ref><ref name="10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402"/>
**Smart scheduling<ref>{{cite web |title=Scheduling energy a key to the smart grid |url=https://www.engr.ncsu.edu/news/2015/10/06/scheduling-energy-a-key-to-the-smart-grid/ |website=College of Engineering |access-date=25 January 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Smart scheduling for big computing tasks cuts emissions up to a third |url=https://www.newscientist.com/article/2295330-smart-scheduling-for-big-computing-tasks-cuts-emissions-up-to-a-third/ |access-date=25 January 2022 |work=New Scientist}}</ref>
**Monitoring and/or controlling energy use that is noncritical during periods of peak power consumption, and returning their function during nonpeak hours, such as for residential devices (like washing machines)<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Sayed |first1=K. |last2=Gabbar |first2=H. A. |title=Chapter 18 - SCADA and smart energy grid control automation |journal=Smart Energy Grid Engineering |date=1 January 2017 |pages=481–514 |doi=10.1016/B978-0-12-805343-0.00018-8 |publisher=Academic Press |isbn=9780128053430 |language=en}}</ref>
**Optimizing the interaction between electricity, heat, transport, and industry<ref name="10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402"/>
* technologies and options for [[Engineering:Energy storage|energy storage]]<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Arbabzadeh |first1=Maryam |last2=Sioshansi |first2=Ramteen |last3=Johnson |first3=Jeremiah X. |last4=Keoleian |first4=Gregory A. |title=The role of energy storage in deep decarbonization of electricity production |journal=Nature Communications |date=30 July 2019 |volume=10 |issue=1 |pages=3413 |doi=10.1038/s41467-019-11161-5 |pmid=31363084 |pmc=6667472 |bibcode=2019NatCo..10.3413A |language=en |issn=2041-1723}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ayodele |first1=T. R. |last2=Ogunjuyigbe |first2=A. S. O. |title=Mitigation of wind power intermittency: Storage technology approach |journal=Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews |date=1 April 2015 |volume=44 |pages=447–456 |doi=10.1016/j.rser.2014.12.034 |language=en |issn=1364-0321}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=McPherson |first1=Madeleine |last2=Tahseen |first2=Samiha |title=Deploying storage assets to facilitate variable renewable energy integration: The impacts of grid flexibility, renewable penetration, and market structure |journal=Energy |date=15 February 2018 |volume=145 |pages=856–870 |doi=10.1016/j.energy.2018.01.002 |language=en |issn=0360-5442}}</ref><ref name="10.1016/j.energy.2017.07.027"/> For example:
** Batteries<ref name="10.1016/j.renene.2021.11.067"/>
** [[Physics:Thermal energy storage|Thermal energy storage]]<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Hunt |first1=Julian David |last2=Zakeri |first2=Behnam |last3=Nascimento |first3=Andreas |last4=Garnier |first4=Bruno |last5=Pereira |first5=Márcio Giannini |last6=Bellezoni |first6=Rodrigo Augusto |last7=de Assis Brasil Weber |first7=Natália |last8=Schneider |first8=Paulo Smith |last9=Machado |first9=Pedro Paulo Bezerra |last10=Ramos |first10=Dorel Soares |title=High velocity seawater air-conditioning with thermal energy storage and its operation with intermittent renewable energies |journal=Energy Efficiency |date=1 December 2020 |volume=13 |issue=8 |pages=1825–1840 |doi=10.1007/s12053-020-09905-0 |s2cid=225063420 |language=en |issn=1570-6478}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Gils |first1=Hans Christian |title=Balancing of intermittent renewable power generation by demand response and thermal energy storage |date=2015 |doi=10.18419/opus-6888}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Li |first1=Gang |last2=Zheng |first2=Xuefei |title=Thermal energy storage system integration forms for a sustainable future |journal=Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews |date=1 September 2016 |volume=62 |pages=736–757 |doi=10.1016/j.rser.2016.04.076 |language=en |issn=1364-0321}}</ref>
** Ammonia<ref>{{cite journal |last1=MacFarlane |first1=Douglas R. |last2=Cherepanov |first2=Pavel V. |last3=Choi |first3=Jaecheol |last4=Suryanto |first4=Bryan H. R. |last5=Hodgetts |first5=Rebecca Y. |last6=Bakker |first6=Jacinta M. |last7=Ferrero Vallana |first7=Federico M. |last8=Simonov |first8=Alexandr N. |title=A Roadmap to the Ammonia Economy |journal=Joule |date=17 June 2020 |volume=4 |issue=6 |pages=1186–1205 |doi=10.1016/j.joule.2020.04.004 |s2cid=218945723 |language=en |issn=2542-4351}}</ref>
** [[Engineering:Green hydrogen|Green hydrogen]]<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Oliveira |first1=Alexandra M |last2=Beswick |first2=Rebecca R |last3=Yan |first3=Yushan |title=A green hydrogen economy for a renewable energy society |journal=Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering |date=1 September 2021 |volume=33 |pages=100701 |doi=10.1016/j.coche.2021.100701 |language=en |issn=2211-3398}}</ref><ref name="10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402"/>

In 2013, Smil analyzed proposals to depend on wind and solar-generated electricity including the proposals of Jacobson and colleagues, and writing in an issue of ''Spectrum'' prepared by the [[Organization:Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers|Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers]], he identified numerous points of concern, such as cost, intermittent power supply, growing NIMBYism, and a lack of infrastructure as negative factors and said that "History and a consideration of the technical requirements show that the problem is much greater than these advocates have supposed."<ref name="slate.com">{{cite web|url=http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/nuclear_power/2013/01/nuclear_energy_and_climate_change_environmentalists_debate_how_to_stop_global.html|title=Nuclear energy and climate change: Environmentalists debate how to stop global warming.|work=Slate Magazine|date=14 January 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/a-skeptic-looks-at-alternative-energy/0|title=A Skeptic Looks at Alternative Energy|first=Vaclav|last=Smil|work=ieee.org|date=28 June 2012|access-date=4 July 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190320153801/https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/a-skeptic-looks-at-alternative-energy/0|archive-date=20 March 2019|url-status=dead}}</ref> Smil and Hansen are concerned about the [[Engineering:Variable renewable energy|variable output]] of solar and wind power. According to [[Biography:Amory Lovins|Amory Lovins]] the electricity grid  alone can compensate for variability, just as it routinely backs up nonworking coal-fired and nuclear plants with working ones.<ref name=lovi12>{{Cite journal |url=http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137246/amory-b-lovins/a-farewell-to-fossil-fuels |title=A Farewell to Fossil Fuels |issue=March/April 2012 |first=Amory |last=Lovins |date=March–April 2012 |journal=Foreign Affairs |volume=329 |pages=1292–1294 |doi=10.1126/science.1195449 |pmid=20829473 |bibcode=2010Sci...329.1292H |s2cid=206529026}}</ref>

In November 2014 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change came out with their [[Earth:IPCC Fifth Assessment Report|fifth report]], saying that in the absence of any one technology (such as bioenergy, carbon dioxide capture and storage, nuclear, wind and solar), climate change mitigation costs can increase substantially depending on which technology is absent. For example, it may cost 40% more to reduce carbon emissions without carbon dioxide capture. (Table 3.2)<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ipcc.ch/|title=IPCC – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change|work=ipcc.ch}}</ref> According to a 2018 study, "in the absence of firm low-carbon [[Physics:Dispatchable generation|[dispatchable]]] resources, the cost of decarbonizing power generation rises rapidly as the emissions limit approaches zero" and a renewable-only generation (with batteries) results in energy prices 42-163% higher in regions with lower VRE availability, and 11-105% higher in regions with higher VRE availability. The study introduced the term "firm low-carbon energy source" (e.g. [[Physics:Nuclear power|nuclear]], [[Earth:Geothermal energy|geothermal]]), which is intended to operate along "fast-burst" sources (e.g. batteries) and "fuel saving" (VRE).<ref>{{Cite journal|date=2018-11-21|title=The Role of Firm Low-Carbon Electricity Resources in Deep Decarbonization of Power Generation|journal=Joule|language=en|volume=2|issue=11|pages=2403–2420|doi=10.1016/j.joule.2018.08.006|issn=2542-4351|doi-access=free|last1=Sepulveda|first1=Nestor A.|last2=Jenkins|first2=Jesse D.|last3=De Sisternes|first3=Fernando J.|last4=Lester|first4=Richard K.}}</ref>

The [[Organization:International Energy Agency|International Energy Agency]] says that there has been too much attention on issue of the variability of renewable electricity production.<ref name=IEA /> The issue of [[Engineering:Intermittent energy source|intermittent supply]] applies to popular renewable technologies, mainly wind power and solar photovoltaics, and its significance depends on a range of factors that include the market penetration of the renewables concerned, the balance of plant and the wider connectivity of the system, as well as the demand side flexibility. Variability is rarely a barrier to increased renewable energy deployment when [[Physics:Dispatchable generation|dispatchable generation]] such as hydroelectricity or solar thermal storage is also available. But at high levels of market penetration it requires careful analysis and management, and additional costs may be required for back-up or system modification.<ref name=IEA>{{cite web|url=http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/so_contribution.pdf|title=Contribution of Renewables to Energy Security|access-date=20 April 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190502230748/https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/so_contribution.pdf|archive-date=2 May 2019|url-status=dead}}</ref> Renewable electricity supply in the 20-50+% penetration range has already been implemented in several European systems, albeit in the context of an integrated European grid system:<ref name=Lovins11>[[Biography:Amory Lovins|Amory Lovins]] (2011). ''Reinventing Fire'', Chelsea Green Publishing, p. 199.</ref>

===Seasonal energy storage===
Hydropower is currently the only large scale low-carbon seasonal energy storage. In countries with high variation in energy demand by season (for example the UK uses far more gas for heating in the winter than it uses electricity) but lacking hydropower [[Physics:Electrical interconnector|electrical interconnector]]s to countries with lots of hydropower (e.g. UK - Norway), electricity from hydropower is likely to be insufficient and development of a [[Physics:Hydrogen economy|hydrogen economy]] would likely be needed: this is being trialled in the UK and 8 TWh of inter-seasonal hydrogen energy storage has been proposed.<ref>{{cite web |title=Engineers publish £22bn blueprint for UK to take global lead on hydrogen heating |url=https://www.thechemicalengineer.com/news/engineers-publish-22bn-blueprint-for-uk-to-take-global-lead-on-hydrogen-heating/|work=The Chemical Engineer |date=27 November 2018}}</ref>

In Australia, as well as storing renewable energy as hydrogen, it is also proposed to be exported in the form of [[Chemistry:Ammonia|ammonia]].<ref>{{cite web |title=What would Australia look like powered by 100% renewable energy? |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/28/what-would-australia-look-like-powered-by-100-renewable-energy |work={{wipe|The Guardian}} |date=27 January 2019 |access-date=28 January 2019}}</ref>

===Open research questions===
A review identified major gaps and neglected aspects – open [[Research question|research question]]s – in the 100% RE literature. These include:<ref name="10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402"/>

[[File:A multi-scalar policy mix for reducing vulnerability to low-carbon transitions.jpg|thumb|A multi-scalar [[Policy|policy]] mix for reducing vulnerability to low-carbon transitions.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Sovacool |first1=Benjamin K. |last2=Turnheim |first2=Bruno |last3=Hook |first3=Andrew |last4=Brock |first4=Andrea |last5=Martiskainen |first5=Mari |title=Dispossessed by decarbonisation: Reducing vulnerability, injustice, and inequality in the lived experience of low-carbon pathways |journal=World Development |date=1 January 2021 |volume=137 |pages=105116 |doi=10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105116 |s2cid=225023245 |language=en |issn=0305-750X}}</ref>]]
[[File:100% RE system analyses per country (global and regional studies are not included).gif|thumb|100% RE system analyses per country (global and regional studies are not included)<ref name="10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402"/>]]
* Coupling of energy system models and [[Earth:Integrated assessment modelling|integrated assessment models]]
* Holistic analysis of material criticality for 100% RE systems, with consideration of [[Engineering:Renewable energy#Conservation areas, recycling and rare-earth elements|recycling]]
* Impact of inter-annual resource variations and respective inter-annual storage demand
* District heating and cooling in transition scenarios
* Increased geo-spatial resolution and coverage of global 100% RE system analyses
* Including [[Physics:Off-the-grid|off-grid solutions]] or a transition of off-grid and on-grid solutions in comprehensive energy system transition pathways
* Societal risks and issues of the transition, including linking it to energy security and consequences for peace and stability, and maximum area availability in societies
* Model intercomparisons of analyses
* Various questions for design particulars of intermittency management
* Issues of equity, environmental issues, community wellbeing, energy justice, social acceptance, and good governance – research on how to make RE technologies more equitable, accountable, and just, which may help to both contextualize and manage this potential barrier (including [[Policy|policy]] mechanisms)

== Plans and models ==
{| class="wikitable sortable" style="font-size:85%"
|+
! rowspan="2" |Name of Plan
! rowspan="2" |Organization
! rowspan="2" |Regional Scale
! rowspan="2" |Publication (year)
! rowspan="2" |Warming Target
! rowspan="2" |Timescale
! rowspan="2" |Total Investments
! rowspan="2" |Number of Jobs
! rowspan="2" |Total CO2 Emissions
(gt CO2)
! rowspan="2" |Primary Energy Supply
(GW)
! rowspan="2" |Final Energy Demand (GW)
! colspan="5" |Energy Sources at End of Timeline
|-
!Solar
!Wind
!Biomass
!Hydro
!Other
|-
|[[Earth:Project Drawdown|Project Drawdown]]<ref>{{cite web |title=Electricity @ProjectDrawdown |url=https://www.drawdown.org/sectors/electricity |website=Project Drawdown |language=en |date=5 February 2020}}</ref> (Global)
|Project Drawdown
|Global
|Living
|1.5-2C
|
|N/A
|N/A
|N/A
|N/A
|N/A
| 
| 
| 
| 
|N/A
|-
|Princeton Net-Zero by 2050<ref>{{Cite web|last=Larson|first=Eric|date=December 15, 2020|title=Net-Zero America: Potential Pathways Infrastructure and Impacts|url=https://environmenthalfcentury.princeton.edu/sites/g/files/toruqf331/files/2020-12/Princeton_NZA_Interim_Report_15_Dec_2020_FINAL.pdf|url-status=live|access-date=29 March 2021|archive-date=2 March 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210302020910/https://environmenthalfcentury.princeton.edu/sites/g/files/toruqf331/files/2020-12/Princeton_NZA_Interim_Report_15_Dec_2020_FINAL.pdf}}</ref> (USA)
|Princeton 
|USA
|2020
|N/A
|2020-2050
|5910
|8.5 million
|78
|20465.29121
|14582.09104
|29%
|53%
|17%
|1%
|0%
|-
|Carbon-Neutral Pathways for the United States: Central<ref name="Williams 2021 e2020AV000284">{{Cite journal|last1=Williams|first1=James H.|last2=Jones|first2=Ryan A.|last3=Haley|first3=Ben|last4=Kwok|first4=Gabe|last5=Hargreaves|first5=Jeremy|last6=Farbes|first6=Jamil|last7=Torn|first7=Margaret S.|date=2021|title=Carbon-Neutral Pathways for the United States|journal=AGU Advances|language=en|volume=2|issue=1|pages=e2020AV000284|doi=10.1029/2020AV000284|bibcode=2021AGUA....200284W|issn=2576-604X|doi-access=free}}</ref> (USA)
|University of San Francisco / UC Berkeley
|USA
|2021
|2, 1.5, 1C
|no target
|Decarbonization: 600/Yr
|0
|0
|15190
|0
|34%
|64%
|0%
|2%
|0%
|-
|Carbon-Neutral Pathways for the United States: 100% RE<ref name="Williams 2021 e2020AV000284"/> (USA)
|University of San Francisco / UC Berkeley
|Global
|2021
|2C, 1.5C, and 1C
|2070
|0.2-1.2% of annual GDP
|0
|74.8
|15190
|0
|0%
|Several different scenarios clearly laid out in SI
|0%
|0%
|0%
|-
|University of Technology Sydney - Institute for Sustainable Futures
|USA
|2019
|1.5 C by 2050 
|2020-2050
|63500 (total investments from 2015 to 2020)
|47.8 million 
|450
|114444
|70277
|32%
|17%
|14%
|2%
|0%
|-
|Designing a Model for the Global Energy System—GENeSYS-MOD: An Application of the Open-Source Energy Modeling System (OSeMOSYS)<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Löffler|first1=Konstantin|last2=Hainsch|first2=Karlo|last3=Burandt|first3=Thorsten|last4=Oei|first4=Pao-Yu|last5=Kemfert|first5=Claudia|last6=Von Hirschhausen|first6=Christian|date=October 2017|title=Designing a Model for the Global Energy System—GENeSYS-MOD: An Application of the Open-Source Energy Modeling System (OSeMOSYS)|journal=Energies|language=en|volume=10|issue=10|pages=1468|doi=10.3390/en10101468|doi-access=free}}</ref> (Global)
|Workgroup for Infrastructure and Policy, TU Berlin
|Global 
|2017
|650 Gt of CO2 (compared to the predicted 550-1300 emitted between 2011 and 2050) / 1.5-2 C
(section 3.5)
|2020-2050
|N/A
|N/A
|519
|N/A
|97575
|23%
|36%
|32%
|8%
|0%
|-
|Global Energy System Based on 100% Renewable Energy<ref>{{Cite web|date=April 2019|title=Global Energy System Based on 100% Renewable Energy|url=http://energywatchgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/EWG_LUT_100RE_All_Sectors_Global_Report_2019.pdf|url-status=live|access-date=29 March 2021|archive-date=1 April 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210401183622/http://energywatchgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/EWG_LUT_100RE_All_Sectors_Global_Report_2019.pdf}}</ref> 
|LUT University
|Global
|2019
|net-zero emissions by 2050
|2050
|7200
|35 million
|115
|141189
|134018
|72%
|18%
|6%
|3%
|0%
|-
|Energy System Model (GENeSYS-MOD)<ref name=":4">{{Cite journal|last1=Sarmiento|first1=Luis|last2=Burandt|first2=Thorsten|last3=Löffler|first3=Konstantin|last4=Oei|first4=Pao-Yu|date=January 2019|title=Analyzing Scenarios for the Integration of Renewable Energy Sources in the Mexican Energy System—An Application of the Global Energy System Model (GENeSYS-MOD)|journal=Energies|language=en|volume=12|issue=17|pages=3270|doi=10.3390/en12173270|doi-access=free}}</ref> (Mexico)
|DIW Berlin, Cide Mexico
|Mexico
|2019
|Full decaronization of the energy system by 2050. 
|
|n/a
|n/a
|7.16 for renewable target and 12 for national target. P. 15
|n/a
|320.73 GW for national target, 842.89, GW 100% renewables
|78%
|22%
|0%
|<1%
|0%
|-
|Energy System Model (GENeSYS-MOD) - 100% RE Scenario<ref name=":4" /> 
|DIW Berlin, Cide Mexico
|Mexico
|
|Full decaronization of the energy system by 2050. 
|
|N/A
|N/A
|7.16
|N/A
|8835.914153
|58%
|27%
|15%
|1%
|0%
|-
|Transformation towards a Renewable Energy System in Brazil and Mexico—Technological and Structural Options for Latin America<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Simon |first1=Sonja |last2=Naegler |first2=Tobias |last3=Gils |first3=Hans Christian |title=Transformation towards a Renewable Energy System in Brazil and Mexico—Technological and Structural Options for Latin America |journal=Energies |date=April 2018 |volume=11 |issue=4 |pages=907 |doi=10.3390/en11040907 |language=en|doi-access=free }}</ref>
|
|Mexico
|2018
|70-95% emissions reduction
|
|N/A
|0
|0
|0
|0
|0%
|0%
|0%
|0%
|0%
|-
|Advanced Energy [r]evolution<ref name=":5">{{Cite web|title=Energy [R]evolution 2015|url=https://issuu.com/greenpeaceinternational/docs/energy-revolution-2015-full-hr|access-date=2021-03-30|website=Issuu|language=en|archive-date=19 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210119232641/https://issuu.com/greenpeaceinternational/docs/energy-revolution-2015-full-hr|url-status=live}}</ref> 
|Greenpeace
|Global 
|2021
|>2 degrees
|
|48
|0
|0
|0
|149722.222
|32%
|32%
|1%
|1%
|34%
|-
|Basic Energy [r]evolution<ref name=":5" /> 
|Greenpeace
|Global
|
|>2 degrees
|
|64.6
|0
|0
|0
|80277.7778
|16%
|30%
|4%
|10%
|38%
|-
|100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World<ref>{{Cite web|last1=Jacobson|first1=Mark Z.|last2=Delucchi|first2=Mark A.|last3=Bauer|first3=Zach A.F.|last4=Wang|first4=Jingfan|last5=Weiner|first5=Eric|last6=Yachanin|first6=Alexander S.|date=September 6, 2017|title=100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World|url=https://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/CountriesWWS.pdf|url-status=live|publisher=Elsevier Inc|access-date=30 March 2021|archive-date=28 March 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210328013707/https://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/CountriesWWS.pdf}}</ref> 
|Stanford 
|Global/intern.
|2017
|Net Zero by 2050
|
|124700
|24262122
|N/A
|N/A
|N/A
|58%
|37%
|0%
|4%
| -36%
|-
|Full energy sector transition towards 100% renewable energy supply: Integrating power, heat, transport and industry sectors including desalination<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bogdanov |first1=Dmitrii |last2=Gulagi |first2=Ashish |last3=Fasihi |first3=Mahdi |last4=Breyer |first4=Christian |title=Full energy sector transition towards 100% renewable energy supply: Integrating power, heat, transport and industry sectors including desalination |journal=Applied Energy |date=1 February 2021 |volume=283 |pages=116273 |doi=10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.116273 |s2cid=229427360 |language=en |issn=0306-2619}}</ref>
|LUT University 
|Global
|2020
|Net Zero by 2050
|2050
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 
| 
|-
|Zero air pollution and zero carbon from all energy at low cost and without blackouts in variable weather throughout the U.S. with 100% wind-water-solar and storage<ref name="10.1016/j.renene.2021.11.067">{{cite journal |last1=Jacobson |first1=Mark Z. |last2=von Krauland |first2=Anna-Katharina |last3=Coughlin |first3=Stephen J. |last4=Palmer |first4=Frances C. |last5=Smith |first5=Miles M. |title=Zero air pollution and zero carbon from all energy at low cost and without blackouts in variable weather throughout the U.S. with 100% wind-water-solar and storage |journal=Renewable Energy |date=1 January 2022 |volume=184 |pages=430–442 |doi=10.1016/j.renene.2021.11.067 |s2cid=244820608 |language=en |issn=0960-1481|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0960148121016499|url-access=subscription}}</ref>
|Stanford 
|USA
|2021
|Net Zero by 2050
|2050
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 
|}
[[File:Solar PV and wind electricity generation in (TWh per yr) in global 100% RE scenarios in the year 2050.gif|thumb|Solar PV and wind electricity generation in (TWh per yr) in global 100% RE scenarios in the year 2050<ref name="10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402"/>]]
[[File:Global 100% RE System Analyses.gif|thumb|Global 100% RE system analyses<ref name="10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402"/>]]

== Recent developments ==
''The Fourth Revolution: Energy'' is a German documentary film released in 2010. It shows the vision of a global society, which lives in a world where the energy is produced 100% with renewable energies, showing a complete reconstruction of the economy, to reach this goal. In 2011, Hermann Scheer wrote the book ''The Energy Imperative: 100 Percent Renewable Now'', published by Routledge.

''Reinventing Fire'' is a book by Amory Lovins released in October 2011. By combining reduced energy use with [[Physics:Efficient energy use|energy efficiency]] gains, Lovins says that there will be a $5 trillion saving and a faster-growing economy. This can all be done with the profitable commercialization of existing energy-saving technologies, through market forces, led by business.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.greenbiz.com/blog/2012/03/16/amory-lovins-reinventing-fire-convergence-and-innovation?page=full |title=Amory Lovins on 'Reinventing Fire' with convergence and innovation |first=Adam |last=Aston |date=16 March 2012  |work=Greenbiz }}</ref> Former US president Bill Clinton says the book is a "wise, detailed and comprehensive blueprint".<ref name=nytrf>{{cite web |url=http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/27/fossil-fuels-as-the-whale-oil-of-the-future/ |title=Fossil Fuels as the Whale Oil of the Future |first=Matthew |last=Wald |date=27 October 2011 |work=New York Times }}</ref> The first paragraph of the preface says:
{{blockquote|
Imagine fuel without fear. No climate change. No oil spills, dead coal miners, dirty air, devastated lands, lost wildlife. No energy poverty. No oil-fed wars, tyrannies, or terrorists. Nothing to run out. Nothing to cut off. Nothing to worry about. Just energy abundance, benign and affordable, for all, for ever.<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/sustainability-with-john-elkington/reinventing-transforming-capitalism-barriers |title=Nine barriers to reinventing capitalism |first=John |last=Elkington |date=21 March 2012 |work=The Guardian }}</ref>
}}

The [[Organization:Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change|Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]] has said that there are few fundamental technological limits to integrating a portfolio of renewable energy technologies to meet most of total global energy demand. In a 2011 review of 164 recent scenarios of future renewable energy growth, the report noted that the majority expected renewable sources to supply more than 17% of total energy by 2030, and 27% by 2050; the highest forecast projected 43% supplied by renewables by 2030 and 77% by 2050.<ref name="IPCC 2011 17">{{cite web |url=http://srren.ipcc-wg3.de/report/IPCC_SRREN_SPM.pdf |title=Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation |author=IPCC |date=2011 |work=Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA |page=17 |access-date=4 July 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140111081913/http://srren.ipcc-wg3.de/report/IPCC_SRREN_SPM.pdf |archive-date=11 January 2014 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

In 2011, the [[Organization:International Energy Agency|International Energy Agency]] has said that [[Physics:Solar energy|solar energy]] technologies, in its many forms, can make considerable contributions to solving some of the most urgent problems the world now faces:<ref name=ie11>{{Cite web|url=http://www.iea.org/Textbase/npsum/solar2011SUM.pdf|title=Solar Energy Perspectives: Executive Summary}}</ref>
{{blockquote|
The development of affordable, inexhaustible and clean solar energy technologies will have huge longer-term benefits. It will increase countries' energy security through reliance on an indigenous, inexhaustible and mostly import-independent resource, enhance sustainability, reduce pollution, lower the costs of mitigating climate change, and keep fossil fuel prices lower than otherwise. These advantages are global. Hence the additional costs of the incentives for early deployment should be considered learning investments; they must be wisely spent and need to be widely shared.<ref name=ie11 />
}}

In 2011, the refereed journal ''Energy Policy'' published two articles by Mark Z. Jacobson, a professor of engineering at [[Organization:Stanford University|Stanford University]], and research scientist Mark A. Delucchi, about changing our energy supply mix and "Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power". The articles analyze the feasibility of providing worldwide energy for electric power, transportation, and heating/cooling from wind, water, and sunlight (WWS), which are safe clean options. In Part I, Jacobson and Delucchi discuss WWS energy system characteristics, aspects of energy demand, WWS resource availability, WWS devices needed, and material requirements.<ref name=enpol2010>{{Cite journal |url=http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/JDEnPolicyPt1.pdf |title=Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part I: Technologies, energy resources, quantities and areas of infrastructure, and materials |first1=Mark Z. |last1=Jacobson |first2=Mark A. |last2=Delucchi |name-list-style=amp |date=2011 | volume=39 |issue=3 |journal=Energy Policy |pages=1154–1169 |doi=10.1016/j.enpol.2010.11.040}}</ref>  They estimate that 3,800,000 5 MW wind turbines, 5350 100 MW [[Earth:Geothermal power|geothermal power]] plants, and 270 new 1300 MW hydroelectric power plants would be required. In terms of [[Engineering:Solar power|solar power]], an additional 49,000 300 MW concentrating solar plants, 40,000 300 MW solar photovoltaic power plants, and 1.7 billion 3&nbsp;kW rooftop photovoltaic systems would also be needed. Such an extensive WWS infrastructure could decrease world power demand by 30%.<ref name=enpol2010 />  In Part II, Jacobson and Delucchi address variability of supply, system economics, and energy policy initiatives associated with a WWS system. The authors advocate producing all new energy with WWS by 2030 and replacing existing energy supply arrangements by 2050. Barriers to implementing the renewable energy plan are seen to be "primarily social and political, not technological or economic". Energy costs with a WWS system should be similar to today's energy costs.<ref name="enpol2011" />

In general, Jacobson has said wind, water and solar technologies can provide 100 percent of the world's energy, eliminating all fossil fuels.<ref>Kate Galbraith. [http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/01/100-percent-renewables-by-2030/ 100 Percent Renewables by 2030?] ''Green Inc.'', 1 December 2009.</ref> He advocates a "smart mix" of renewable energy sources to reliably meet electricity demand:
{{blockquote|
Because the wind blows during stormy conditions when the sun does not shine and the sun often shines on calm days with little wind, combining wind and solar can go a long way toward meeting demand, especially when geothermal provides a steady base and hydroelectric can be called on to fill in the gaps.<ref name=wws>{{cite journal |first1=Mark Z. |last1=Jacobson |first2=M.A. |last2=Delucchi |url=http://www.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/sad1109Jaco5p.indd.pdf |title=A Path to Sustainable Energy by 2030 |journal=Scientific American |volume=301 |issue=5 |pages=58–65 |doi=10.1038/scientificamerican1109-58 |pmid=19873905 |date=November 2009|bibcode=2009SciAm.301e..58J}}</ref>
}}

A 2012 study by the [[Organization:University of Delaware|University of Delaware]] for a 72 GW system considered 28 billion combinations of renewable energy and storage and found the most cost-effective, for the PJM Interconnection, would use 17 GW of solar, 68 GW of offshore wind, and 115 GW of onshore wind, although at times as much as three times the demand would be provided. 0.1% of the time would require generation from other sources.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.udel.edu/udaily/2013/dec/renewable-energy-121012.html|title=Wind, solar power paired with storage could be cost-effective way to power grid|work=UDaily}}</ref>

In March 2012, Denmark's parliament agreed on a comprehensive new set promotional programs for energy efficiency and renewable energy aimed at reaching 100 percent of electricity, heat and fuels from renewables by 2050.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2012/03/a-true-all-of-the-above-energy-policy-denmark-affirms-commitment-to-100-renewable-energy-by-2050 |title=A True 'All of the Above' Energy Policy: Denmark Affirms Commitment to 100% Renewable Energy by 2050 |first=Stephen |last=Lacey |date=29 March 2012 |work=Renewable Energy World }}</ref>
IRENEC is an annual conference on 100% renewable energy started in 2011 by [[Organization:Eurosolar|Eurosolar]] Turkey. The 2013 conference was in Istanbul.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.irenec2012.com/giris.php |title=International 100% Renewable Energy Conference |publisher=Irenec2012.com |date=26 June 2012 |access-date=1 November 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121022093739/http://www.irenec2012.com/giris.php |archive-date=22 October 2012 |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.irenec2013.com/ |title=IRENEC 2013 |publisher=IRENEC 2013 |access-date=1 November 2012}}</ref>

More recently, Jacobson and his colleagues have developed detailed proposals for switching to 100% renewable energy produced by wind, water and sunlight, for New York,<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Jacobson | first1 = Mark Z. | display-authors = etal | year = 2013 | title = Examining the feasibility of converting New York State's all-purpose energy infrastructure to one using wind, water, and sunlight | journal = Energy Policy | volume = 57 | pages = 585–601 | doi = 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.02.036 }}</ref> California<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Jacobson | first1 = Mark Z. | display-authors = etal | title = A roadmap for repowering California for all purposes with wind, water, and sunlight | year = 2014 | journal = Energy | volume = 73 | pages = 875–889 | doi = 10.1016/j.energy.2014.06.099 }}</ref> and Washington<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Jacobson | first1 = Mark Z. | display-authors = etal | year = 2016 | title = A 100% wind, water, sunlight (WWS) all-sector energy plan for Washington State | journal = Renewable Energy | volume = 86 | pages = 75–88 | doi = 10.1016/j.renene.2015.08.003}}</ref> states, by 2050.  {{as of|2014}}, a more expansive new plan for the 50 states has been drawn up, which includes an online interactive map showing the renewable resource potential of each of the 50 states. The 50-state plan is part of The Solutions Project, an independent outreach effort led by Jacobson, actor Mark Ruffalo, and film director Josh Fox.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/february/fifty-states-renewables-022414.html |title=Stanford scientist unveils 50-state plan to transform U.S. to renewable energy |first=Mark |last=Schwarz |date= 26 February 2014 |work=Stanford Report}}</ref>

{{as of|2014}}, many detailed assessments show that the energy service needs of a world enjoying radically higher levels of wellbeing, can be economically met entirely through the diverse currently available technological and organizational innovations around wind, solar, biomass, biofuel, hydro, ocean and geothermal energy. Debate over detailed plans remain, but transformations in global energy services based entirely around renewable energy are in principle technically practicable, economically feasible, socially viable, and so realisable. This prospect underpins the ambitious commitment by Germany, one of the world's most successful industrial economies, to undertake a major energy transition, [[Earth:Energiewende|Energiewende]].<ref>{{cite journal |title=Transforming power |first1=Andy |last1=Stirling |date=2014 |journal=Energy Research and Social Science |doi=10.1016/j.erss.2014.02.001 |volume=1 |pages=83–95|doi-access=free}}</ref>

In 2015 a study was published in ''Energy and Environmental Science'' that describes a pathway to 100% renewable energy in the United States by 2050 without using biomass. Implementation of this roadmap is regarded as both environmentally and economically feasible and reasonable, as by 2050 it would save about $600 Billion Dollars health costs a year due to reduced [[Earth:Air pollution|air pollution]] and $3.3 Trillion global warming costs. This would translate in yearly cost savings per head of around $8300 compared to a business as usual pathway. According to that study, barriers that could hamper implementation are neither technical nor economic but social and political, as most people didn't know that benefits from such a transformation far exceeded the costs.<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1039/C5EE01283J |pages=2093–117 |title=100% clean and renewable wind, water, and sunlight (WWS) all-sector energy roadmaps for the 50 United States |journal=Energy & Environmental Science |volume=8 |issue=7 |year=2015 |last1=Jacobson |first1=Mark Z |last2=Delucchi |first2=Mark A |last3=Bazouin |first3=Guillaume |last4=Bauer |first4=Zack A. F |last5=Heavey |first5=Christa C |last6=Fisher |first6=Emma |last7=Morris |first7=Sean B |last8=Piekutowski |first8=Diniana J. Y |last9=Vencill |first9=Taylor A |last10=Yeskoo |first10=Tim W |s2cid=97348845}}</ref>

In June 2017, twenty-one researchers published an article in the ''Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America'' rejecting Jacobson's earlier ''PNAS'' article, accusing him of modeling errors and of using invalid modeling tools.<ref name=NYT21june17>{{cite news|last1=Porter|first1=Eduardo|title=Fisticuffs Over the Route to a Clean-Energy Future|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/20/business/energy-environment/renewable-energy-national-academy-matt-jacobson.html|access-date=4 August 2017|work={{wipe|The New York Times}}|date=21 June 2017|page=B1}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1073/pnas.1610381114 |pmid=28630353 |pmc=5495221 |title=Evaluation of a proposal for reliable low-cost grid power with 100% wind, water, and solar |journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences |volume=114 |issue=26 |pages=6722–6727 |year=2017 |last1=Clack |first1=Christopher T. M |last2=Qvist |first2=Staffan A |last3=Apt |first3=Jay |last4=Bazilian |first4=Morgan |last5=Brandt |first5=Adam R |last6=Caldeira |first6=Ken |last7=Davis |first7=Steven J |last8=Diakov |first8=Victor |last9=Handschy |first9=Mark A |last10=Hines |first10=Paul D. H |last11=Jaramillo |first11=Paulina |last12=Kammen |first12=Daniel M |last13=Long |first13=Jane C. S |last14=Morgan |first14=M. Granger |last15=Reed |first15=Adam |last16=Sivaram |first16=Varun |last17=Sweeney |first17=James |last18=Tynan |first18=George R |last19=Victor |first19=David G |last20=Weyant |first20=John P |last21=Whitacre |first21=Jay F |bibcode=2017PNAS..114.6722C |doi-access=free }}</ref>  They further asserted he made implausible assumptions through his reliance upon increasing national [[Engineering:Energy storage|energy storage]] from 43 minutes to 7 weeks, increasing [[Chemistry:Hydrogen production|hydrogen production]] by 100,000%, and increasing [[Physics:Hydropower|hydropower]] by the equivalent of 600 [[Engineering:Hoover Dam|Hoover Dam]]s.<ref name=NYT21june17/> Article authors David G. Victor called Jacobson's work "dangerous" and Ken Caldeira emphasized that increasing hydropower output by 1,300 gigawatts, a 25% increase, is the equivalent flow of 100 Mississippi Rivers.<ref name=NYT21june17/>  Jacobson published a response in the same issue of the ''PNAS'' and also authored a blog post where he asserted the researchers were advocates of the fossil fuel industry.<ref name=NYT21june17/><ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1073/pnas.1708069114 |pmid=28630350 |pmc=5495290 |title=The United States can keep the grid stable at low cost with 100% clean, renewable energy in all sectors despite inaccurate claims |journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences |volume=114 |issue=26 |pages=E5021–E5023 |year=2017 |last1=Jacobson |first1=Mark Z |last2=Delucchi |first2=Mark A |last3=Cameron |first3=Mary A |last4=Frew |first4=Bethany A |bibcode=2017PNAS..114E5021J |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last1=Jacobson|first1=Mark|title=4 Reasons Nuclear and Fossil Fuel Supporters Criticizing 100% Renewable Energy Plan Are Wrong|url=https://www.ecowatch.com/pnas-jacobson-renewable-energy-2444465393.html|access-date=4 August 2017|work=EcoWatch|date=19 June 2017|language=en}}</ref> Another study published in 2017 confirmed the earlier results for a 100% renewable power system for North America, without changes in hydropower assumptions, but with more realistic emphasis on a balanced storage portfolio, in particular seasonal storage, and for competitive economics.<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.3390/en10081171 |title=A Techno-Economic Study of an Entirely Renewable Energy-Based Power Supply for North America for 2030 Conditions|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319015965 |journal=Energies |volume=10 |issue=8|page=1171 |year=2017 |last1=Aghahosseini |first1=Arman |last2=Bogdanov |first2=Dmitrii |last3=Breyer |first3=Christian |doi-access=free}}</ref>

=== Grid integration simulation ===
In 2015, Jacobson and Delucchi, together with Mary Cameron and Bethany Frew, examined with computer simulation (Loadmatch), in more detail how a wind-water-solar (WWS) system can track the energy demand from minute to minute. This turned out to be possible in the United States for 6 years, including WWS variability by extreme weather events.<ref>{{Cite journal|title=Low-cost solution to the grid reliability problem with 100% penetration of intermittent wind, water, and solar for all purposes|first1=Mark Z.|last1=Jacobson|first2=Mark A.|last2=Delucchi|first3=Mary A.|last3=Cameron|first4=Bethany A.|last4=Frew|date=8 December 2015|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences|volume=112|issue=49|pages=15060–15065|doi=10.1073/pnas.1510028112|pmid=26598655|pmc=4679003|bibcode=2015PNAS..11215060J|doi-access=free}}</ref> 
In 2017, the plan was further developed for 139 countries by a team of 27 researchers<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.joule.2017.07.005 |title=100% Clean and Renewable Wind, Water, and Sunlight All-Sector Energy Roadmaps for 139 Countries of the World |journal=Joule |volume=1 |pages=108–21 |year=2017 |last1=Jacobson |first1=Mark Z |last2=Delucchi |first2=Mark A |last3=Bauer |first3=Zack A.F |last4=Goodman |first4=Savannah C |last5=Chapman |first5=William E |last6=Cameron |first6=Mary A |last7=Bozonnat |first7=Cedric |last8=Chobadi |first8=Liat |last9=Clonts |first9=Hailey A |last10=Enevoldsen |first10=Peter |last11=Erwin |first11=Jenny R |last12=Fobi |first12=Simone N |last13=Goldstrom |first13=Owen K |last14=Hennessy |first14=Eleanor M |last15=Liu |first15=Jingyi |last16=Lo |first16=Jonathan |last17=Meyer |first17=Clayton B |last18=Morris |first18=Sean B |last19=Moy |first19=Kevin R |last20=O'Neill |first20=Patrick L |last21=Petkov |first21=Ivalin |last22=Redfern |first22=Stephanie |last23=Schucker |first23=Robin |last24=Sontag |first24=Michael A |last25=Wang |first25=Jingfan |last26=Weiner |first26=Eric |last27=Yachanin |first27=Alexander S |doi-access=free }}</ref> and in 2018, Jacobson and Delucchi with Mary Cameron and Brian Mathiesen published the Loadmatch results for 20 regions in which the 139 countries in the world are divided. According to this research, a WWS system can follow the demand in all regions.<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.renene.2018.02.009 |title=Matching demand with supply at low cost in 139 countries among 20 world regions with 100% intermittent wind, water, and sunlight (WWS) for all purposes |journal=Renewable Energy |volume=123 |pages=236–48 |year=2018 |last1=Jacobson |first1=Mark Z |last2=Delucchi |first2=Mark A |last3=Cameron |first3=Mary A |last4=Mathiesen |first4=Brian V|s2cid=46784278 }}</ref>

The program Loadmatch receives as input estimated series, per half minute during 2050–2055, of
* the energy demand
* the intermittent wind and solar energy supply predicted with a 3D global climate / weather model GATOR-GCMOM<ref>{{cite web|url=https://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/GATOR/GATOR-GCMOMHist.pdf |title=Data |website=web.stanford.edu }}</ref>
* the hydropower, geothermal, tidal and wave energy
and specifications of
* the capacities and maximum loading / unloading speeds of the different types of storage
* losses due to storage, transport, distribution and maintenance
* a demand-supply management system ([[Engineering:Smart grid|smart grid]]).

The program has been carried out for each region 10-20 times with adapted input for the storage capacities, until a solution was found in which the energy demand was followed, per half minute for 5 years, with low costs.

The WWS system is assumed to connect in the electric network
* geographically dispersed variable energy sources, [[Engineering:Concentrated solar power|concentrated solar power]] (CSP) and hydro power
* storage facilities: [[Engineering:Pumped-storage hydroelectricity|pumped hydro]], as heat in CSP plants, in batteries, as hydrogen by electrolysis of water, or as [[Engineering:Compressed-air energy storage|compressed air]] underground.

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right"
! !! World !! China !! United States !! Europe !! Africa
|-
| Supply 2018<ref>https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tables?country=WORLD&energy=Balances&year=2018 Add Hydro and Wind,solar,etc. production and use 1 Mtoe = 1,327 GWy to convert to GW</ref> || 860 || 244 || 92 || 169 || 24
|-
| Supply 2050 || 12040 || 3223 || 1400 || 1157 || 580
|-
| Unused supply || 2215 || 598 || 336 || 84 || 40
|-
| Transmission loss || 807 || 221 || 98 || 77 || 37
|-
| Other loss || 325 || 76 || 24 || 56 || 22
|-
| End-use || 8693 || 2327 || 939 || 940 || 482
|-
| Storage (TWh) ||  || 1279 || 321 || 664 || 109
|}
{{clear}}
In 2020, Jacobson clarified in a textbook<ref>M Z Jacobson, ''100% Clean, Renewable Energy and Storage for Everything'', Cambridge University Press 2020</ref> computer simulation results of a WWS energy system.
To match demand with supply every minute more solar and wind farms and high-voltage lines must be installed than to match year-averaged demand and supply. Oversizing (also in a conventional energy system) ensures that the demand can be followed during peak hours, but causes unused supply during off-peak hours. In a WWS system, more energy exchange between areas leads to more transmission loss. The table shows WWS supply, unused supply, losses and end-use, in GW average power to reliably supply the world and four major regions with energy by 2050. See textbook Table 8.10; energy in TWh is divided by 26.3 kh (1000 hours) to get power in GW. The bottom row is the storage capacity of pumped hydro plants (Table 8.7).

== See also ==
* [[Finance:Carbon bubble|Carbon bubble]]
* [[Chemistry:Carbon neutrality|Carbon neutrality]]
* Energy transition
* [[Earth:Individual and political action on climate change|Individual and political action on climate change]]
* International Renewable Energy Agency
* [[Physics:Nuclear power proposed as renewable energy|Nuclear power proposed as renewable energy]]
* Timeline of sustainable energy research {{CURRENTDECADE}}–present

== References ==
{{Reflist|32em}}

== Further reading ==
{{refbegin|32em}}
* {{cite book | last1 = Albert | first1 = Barbara | year = 2017 | title = Energy Unlimited: Four Steps to 100% Renewable Energy }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Bogdanov | first1 = Dmitrii | last2 = Breyer | first2 = Christian | year = 2016 | title = ''North-East Asian Super Grid for 100% renewable energy supply: Optimal mix of energy technologies for electricity, gas and heat supply options'' | journal = Energy Conversion and Management | volume = 110 | pages = 176–190 | doi = 10.1016/j.enconman.2016.01.019}}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Breyer | first1 = Christian | display-authors = etal | year = 2022 | title = On the History and Future of 100% Renewable Energy Systems Research | journal = [[Engineering:IEEE Access|IEEE Access]] | volume =  10| issue = | pages =78176–78218  | doi =10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3193402| s2cid = 251076938 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Breyer | first1 = Christian | s2cid = 118050015 | display-authors = etal | year = 2015 | title = North-East Asian Super Grid: Renewable energy mix and economics | journal = [[Physics:Japanese Journal of Applied Physics|Japanese Journal of Applied Physics]] | volume =  54| issue = 8S1| page =  08KJ01| doi = 10.7567/JJAP.54.08KJ01 | bibcode = 2015JaJAP..54hKJ01B}}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Connolly | first1 = David | display-authors = etal | year = 2016 | title = Smart Energy Europe :The technical and economic impact of one potential 100% renewable energy scenario for the European Union |  journal = Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews | volume = 60 | pages = 1634–1653 | doi = 10.1016/j.rser.2016.02.025 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Connolly | first1 = David | display-authors = etal | year = 2011 | title = The first step towards a 100% renewable energy-system for Ireland | journal = Applied Energy | volume = 88 | issue = 2| pages = 502–507 | doi = 10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.03.006 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Cosic | first1 = Boris | display-authors = etal | year = 2012| title = A 100% renewable energy system in the year 2050: The case of Macedonia | url = http://repozitorij.fsb.hr/3543/1/A%20100%25%20renewable%20energy%20system%20in%20the%20year%202050_The%20case%20of%20Macedonia.pdf| journal = Energy | volume = 48 | issue = 1 | pages = 80–87 | doi = 10.1016/j.energy.2012.06.078 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Delucchi | first1 = Mark A. | last2 = Jacobson | first2 = Mark Z. | year = 2011 | title = ''Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part II: Reliability, system and transmission costs, and policies'' | url = https://archive.org/details/sim_energy-policy_2011-03_39_3/page/1170 | journal = Energy Policy | volume = 39 | issue = 3 | pages = 1170–1190 | doi = 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.11.045 }}
* Peter Droege, ''100 Per Cent Renewable. Energy Autonomy in Action''. Routledge 2009, {{ISBN|978-1-849-71471-6}}.
* {{cite journal | last1 = Elliston | first1 = Ben | display-authors = etal | year = 2012 | title = Simulations of scenarios with 100% renewable electricity in the Australian National Electricity Market | journal = Energy Policy | volume = 45 | pages = 606–613 | doi = 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.03.011 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Elliston | first1 = Ben | display-authors = etal | year = 2013 | title = Least cost 100% renewable electricity scenarios in the Australian National Electricity Market | journal = Energy Policy | volume = 59 | pages = 270–282 | doi = 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.03.038}}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Elliston | first1 = Ben | display-authors = etal | year = 2014 | title = Comparing least cost scenarios for 100% renewable electricity with low emission fossil fuel scenarios in the Australian National Electricity Market | journal = Renewable Energy | volume = 66 | pages = 196–204 | doi = 10.1016/j.renene.2013.12.010 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Garcia-Olivares | first1 = Antonio | display-authors = etal | year = 2012 | title = A global renewable mix with proven technologies and common materials | journal = Energy Policy | volume = 41 | pages = 561–574 | doi = 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.11.018 | bibcode = 2012EGUGA..14.4992B | hdl = 10261/92979 | hdl-access = free }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Glasnovica | first1 = Zvonimir | last2 = Margeta | first2 = Jure | year = 2011 | title = Vision of total renewable electricity scenario | journal = Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews | volume = 15 | issue = 4 | pages = 1873–1884 | doi = 10.1016/j.rser.2010.12.016 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Hansen | first1 = Kenneth |display-authors = etal | year = 2019 | title = Status and perspectives on 100% renewable energy systems | journal = Energy | volume = 175 | pages = 471–480 | doi = 10.1016/j.energy.2019.03.092 | doi-access = free }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Hohmeyer | first1 = Olav | last2 = Bohm | first2 = Sönke | year = 2015 | title = ''Trends toward 100% renewable electricity supply in Germany and Europe: a paradigm shift in energy policies''. In | journal = Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment | volume = 4 | pages = 74–97 | doi = 10.1002/wene.128 | s2cid = 109863320 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Jacobson | first1 = Mark Z. |  last2 = Delucchi | first2 = Mark A. | year = 2011 | title = Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part I: Technologies, energy resources, quantities and areas of infrastructure, and materials | url = https://archive.org/details/sim_energy-policy_2011-03_39_3/page/1154 | journal = Energy Policy | volume = 39 | issue = 3| pages = 1154–1169 | doi = 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.11.040 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Jacobson | first1 = Mark Z. | s2cid = 97348845 | display-authors = etal | year = 2015 | title = ''100% clean and renewable wind, water, and sunlight (WWS) all-sector energy roadmaps for the 50 United States''. In | journal = Energy and Environmental Science | volume = 8 | issue = 7| pages = 2093–2117 | doi = 10.1039/c5ee01283j }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Jacobson | first1 = Mark Z. | display-authors = etal | year = 2015 | title = Low-cost solution to the grid reliability problem with 100% penetration of intermittent wind, water, and solar for all purposes | journal = Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences | volume = 112 | issue = 49 | pages = 15060–15065 | doi = 10.1073/pnas.1510028112 | pmid = 26598655 | bibcode = 2015PNAS..11215060J | pmc = 4679003| doi-access = free }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Krajacic | first1 = Goran | display-authors = etal | year = 2011 | title = How to achieve a 100% RES electricity supply for Portugal? | journal = Applied Energy | volume = 88 | issue = 2| pages = 508–517 | doi = 10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.09.006 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Krajacic | first1 = Goran | display-authors = etal | year = 2011 | title = Planning for a 100% independent energy system based on smart energy storage for integration of renewables and CO2 emissions reduction | url = http://repozitorij.fsb.hr/3554/1/Planning%20for%20a%20100%20independent%20energy%20system%20based%20on%20smart%20energy%20storage%20for%20integration%20of%20renewables%20and%20CO2%20emissions%20reduction.pdf | journal = [[Engineering:Applied Thermal Engineering|Applied Thermal Engineering]] | volume = 31 | issue = 13 | pages = 2073–2083 | doi = 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2011.03.014 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Lund | first1 = Henrik |  year = 2007 | title = Renewable energy strategies for sustainable development | journal = Energy | volume = 32 | issue = 6 | pages = 912–919 | doi = 10.1016/j.energy.2006.10.017 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.541.331 | s2cid = 7756522 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Lund | first1 = Henrik | last2 = Vad Mathiesen | first2 = Brian | year = 2009 | title = Energy system analysis of 100% renewable energy systems - The case of Denmark in years 2030 and 2050 | journal = Energy | volume = 34 | issue = 5| pages = 524–531 | doi = 10.1016/j.energy.2008.04.003 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Lund | first1 = H. | display-authors = etal | year = 2010 | title = The role of district heating in future renewable energy systems | journal = Energy | volume = 35 | issue = 3 | pages = 1381–1390 | doi = 10.1016/j.energy.2009.11.023 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = George Mason | first1 = Ian | display-authors = etal | year = 2010 | title = A 100% renewable electricity generation system for New Zealand utilising hydro, wind, geothermal and biomass resources | url = https://archive.org/details/sim_energy-policy_2010-08_38_8/page/3973 | journal = Energy Policy | volume = 38 | issue = 8 | pages = 3973–3984 | doi = 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.03.022 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = George Mason | first1 = Ian | display-authors = etal | year = 2013 | title = ''Security of supply, energy spillage control and peaking options within a 100% renewable electricity system for New Zealand.'' | journal = Energy Policy | volume = 60 | pages = 324–333 | doi = 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.032 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Vad Mathiesen | first1 = Brian |  display-authors = etal | year = 2011| title = ''100% Renewable energy systems, climate mitigation and economic growth'' | journal = Applied Energy | volume = 88 | issue = 2 | pages = 488–501 | doi = 10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.03.001 }}
* {{cite journal | last1 = Vad Mathiesen | first1 = Brian | display-authors = etal | year = 2015 | title = Smart Energy Systems for coherent 100% renewable energy and transport solutions | journal = Applied Energy | volume = 145 | pages = 139–154 | doi = 10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.075 }}
* REN21 (2016). [http://www.ren21.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/GSR_2016_KeyFindings.pdf Renewables 2016 Global Status Report: key findings], Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st century. 
* {{cite journal | last1 = Sovacool | first1 = Benjamin K. |  last2 = Watts | first2 = Charmaine | year = 2009 | title = Going Completely Renewable: Is It Possible (Let Alone Desirable)? | journal = The Electricity Journal | volume = 22 | issue = 4 | pages = 95–111 | doi = 10.1016/j.tej.2009.03.011 }}
{{refend}}

== External links ==
* [http://www.go100percent.org/ Go 100% renewable energy] by Renewables 100 Policy Institute.
* [http://netzerofoundation.org/ Net Zero Foundation]—Education and Leadership of the transition to Net Zero fossil fuel.
* [http://www.renewables100.org/en/home/ Renewables 100 Policy Institute]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20180410071922/http://www.global100re.org/ Global 100% Renewable Energy Platform]
* [http://www.go100re.net Global 100% Renewable Energy Campaign]


{{DEFAULTSORT:100 renewable energy}}
[[Category:Climate change mitigation]]
[[Category:Systems science]]

{{Sourceattribution|100% renewable energy|1}}