Three charts show how your state stacks up against Iowa (yep) and others in production and use of renewables
Blowing up: Wind and other renewable energy sources are now statistically ahead of some of the competition. Photo by Sheila Sund/CC
By Dan Gearino, Inside Climate News. August 24, 2021. The Energy Information Administration reported in July that, for the first time ever, the United States generated more electricity from renewable sources in 2020 than from coal.
I’ve spent the week looking beyond the national numbers to focus on how the energy transition is playing out in the states, with help from ICN graphic artist Paul Horn.
Texas stands out as the country’s renewable energy leader, when measured by gigawatt-hours of electricity generated. The runner-up is California, which leads in solar power but has little wind power.
MORE: Hydro-fade: Pac NW power production is in dramatic flux
While few would be surprised that Texas and California rank as the top two, after that are some wind energy powerhouses that may not get their due.
Iowa beats everybody except Texas and California. Oklahoma is right behind.
“We’re in the midst of a historic energy transition, and it’s challenging to keep track of power sector trends across 50 different states, which makes it extremely valuable to have the latest, state-level data organized and presented in a way that’s easily digestible,” says Tyler Norris, senior director of development for Cypress Creek Renewables, one of the country’s largest solar developers.
Nationwide, renewable energy sources—including wind, solar, hydroelectric, biomass and geothermal—generated 834,236 gigawatt-hours last year, enough to pass coal and nuclear, which generated 773,805 and 789,919 gigawatt-hours, respectively.
Renewables were second only to natural gas, which, with 1.6 million gigawatt-hours, was way out in front. In percentage terms, natural gas was used to generate 40 percent of the country’s electricity, followed by renewables at 21 percent; nuclear at 20 percent; coal at 19 percent; and “other,” at less than 1 percent.
MORE: What’s wrong with solar power? More than you know
But 2020 was far from an ordinary year. The coronavirus led to a decrease in economic activity, which meant a reduction in electricity demand. Since coal-fired power plants cost more to operate than other leading sources, many plant operators responded to the drop in demand by running their coal plants less than before.
I mention this to help explain why coal is having a bit of a comeback in 2021. The Energy Information Administration and others are projecting coal generation will increase enough to pass renewables for the year, even though renewables also are growing.
This may be a “dead cat bounce,” to use investor lingo, a brief recovery from a long-term decline that precedes a continuation of the decline.
If renewables fall behind coal in 2022, the two are likely to switch places again soon after, probably in 2023.
After that, every forecast I’ve seen shows coal continuing to shrink while renewables accelerate in their growth.
The national trends provide some context for what’s happened in the states with electricity generation from coal plants, shown here for 2015 and 2020:
There is a clear gap between the states that are quickly moving away from coal and those whose shift has been more gradual. Part of the reason for the difference is that states have different systems for regulating power plants, with some states forcing plants to compete on an open market.
Some of the states with the greatest decreases in coal power—including Texas, Pennsylvania and Illinois—have laws that require most power plants to compete. If coal plants cost much more to operate than gas plants, owners respond quickly or risk severe financial losses.
MORE: Can nuclear power make a comeback?
In many more states, however, power plants are insulated from market forces by regulations that give utilities monopolies on electricity generation and an ability to pass costs along to consumers, even if those costs are out of step with the market.
This helps to explain why North Dakota, Missouri, West Virginia and Wyoming have had only small decreases in their electricity generation from coal. And, three of those states—North Dakota, West Virginia and Wyoming—are leaders in coal mining, which tends to increase political pressure to maintain the use of coal-fired power plants.
Here’s a look at the bigger picture, showing changes from 2015 to 2020 for six leading electricity sources:
Find your state and run your eyes across the numbers to see what’s happened there during a period of great change in how we produce electricity.
Dan Gearino covers the Midwestern United States, part of Inside Climate News’ National Environment Reporting Network. His coverage deals with the business side of the clean-energy transition and he writes ICN’s Inside Clean Energy newsletter.
Columbia Insight is publishing this story in collaboration with Inside Climate News, a nonprofit, independent news organization that covers climate, energy and the environment. You can subscribe to the ICN newsletter here.
Why is California missing from a few of these comparisons?
Hi J. In the first graph (Wind, Solar), California is #2 and appears at the bottom in its own pullout segment with Texas. In the second graph (Coal) California is listed near the bottom after Alaska. In the third graph (Changing Energy) it is fifth after Arkansas. Thanks, Chuck (Editor, Columbia Insight)
I thought Oregon closed it’s last coal plant, so I’m surprised to see it still has some coal production. Or was the Boardman closure after your statistics?
Excellent point, Dan. The EIA stats used in the charts above are for 2020. The Boardman coal-fired plant closed in October 2020. I’m assuming the EIA calculations were done before October 2020. Thanks for the close read. Chuck (Editor, Columbia Insight)
Excellent to read. Thanks for sharing.