CleanTechnica is the #1 cleantech-focused
website
 in the world. Subscribe today!


Biomass Ernst & Young Renewable energy country attractiveness indices

Published on March 1st, 2013 | by Silvio Marcacci

11

China Atop Renewable Energy Ranks As Shale Gas Changes The Game

Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

March 1st, 2013 by
 
Stop me if you’ve heard this before – renewable energy technologies face global challenges from fossil fuels and a lack of public subsidies, but new financing mechanisms and government mandates may be key to their continued growth.

What’s different now, according to Ernst & Young’s (E&Y) latest Renewable energy country attractiveness indices,” is how shale gas development and crashing public financing are changing the way renewable energy is funded across the globe.

Global clean energy investment totaled $267 billion in 2012, a decrease of 11% from 2011, but was buoyed by increasing private funding and outbound investment from Asian markets. All this means foreign and corporate interest, not public dollars, may now be the key to a clean energy future.

China, Germany, America Continue To Lead

What hasn’t changed, however, is the outlook for global markets relative to each other. The top ten ranked countries in terms of renewable energy attractiveness hardly changed from 2011 to 2012. China is the world’s hottest renewables market, followed closely by Germany and the US, with India and France rounding out the top five.

Ernst & Young top 10 renewable energy country attractiveness indices

China remains the best renewables market largely on the strength of onshore wind, overall solar, and infrastructure investments. A massive government target of 48 gigawatts (GW) new installed renewable capacity for 2013 dwarfs all other markets, while outbound investment may give the country’s domestic manufacturing industry a long-term edge against other nations.

Germany retained the second overall position and narrowly edged the US by ranking highest in offshore wind, solar photovoltaic (PV), and biomass. Even though price shocks from the country’s shift away from nuclear power have rattled funding sources, E&Y predicts offshore wind and solar PV will continue powering the country’s renewable industries.

While the US held onto its third overall rank, it was mainly due to large leads in the concentrating solar power and geothermal categories, as well as a late surge in onshore wind driven by doubt over the federal production tax credit renewal. E&Y predicts many challenges remain for America’s clean energy industry, namely regulatory uncertainty and the shale gas revolution.

The Shale Gas “Game Changer”

Indeed, E&Y finds the global shale gas revolution to be the biggest energy policy “game changer” heading into 2013. According to the indices, shale gas is likely to have significant effects on renewables as it combines substantial financial rewards for investors with the prospect of lower emissions and tax revenue for governments.

America has led the shale gas charge, with development significantly reducing energy prices and emissions. Booming shale gas resources have pushed prices so low that they pose long-term challenges to other forms of energy, says E&Y, and may reduce renewables penetration by 10% in the US alone.

The shale gas effect is being felt globally and is creating different energy economics around the world. Energy prices are expected to remain low in the US, intermediate in Europe, and high in Asia, even if international shale gas exports become common. “A three-tier world energy market is emerging, with the greatest opportunities for renewables in Asia,” says E&Y.

Regardless, many other countries are following America’s dash by rushing to produce their own resources or exploit the shale gas glut, namely China, India, and Japan. However, the US example may not mean similar success around the world, with geology and environmental challenges limiting development.

“Not all markets will have the liberal planning policies or frontier culture that allowed the rapid expansion of shale gas that took place in the US, nor indeed a similar cost base”

Private Investment Steps Up

But just as government funding has fallen at the same time shale gas poses price challenges, private investment may present the best outlook yet for renewables. Corporations are shifting their focus to clean energy to create brand benefits by reducing emissions and minimize exposure to price volatility.

“Energy investments and long-term procurements are now a board-level decision for many corporates, due to the significant shareholder value at stake. The fear of rising and volatile costs and brand risk has elevated energy strategy from a tactical and technical challenge to a strategic and financial necessity.”

E&Y note large firms are switching investments from renewable energy certificates or offsets to their own renewable electricity generation. Notable examples exist of single firms investing in clean energy like Google and Ikea, but multiple corporations are also partnering on large projects to secure competitively priced power.

Renewables developers have embraced this new influx of corporate investment by offering innovative funding mechanisms and long-term power purchase agreements (PPA). E&Y notes PPAs are increasingly popular in the United Kingdom and with the US military, and expects the increased competition by independent power producers to spur similar efforts by traditional utilities, further boosting the outlook for renewable energy.

Keep up to date with all the hottest cleantech news by subscribing to our (free) cleantech newsletter, or keep an eye on sector-specific news by getting our (also free) solar energy newsletter, electric vehicle newsletter, or wind energy newsletter.

Print Friendly

Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


About the Author

Silvio is Principal at Marcacci Communications, a full-service clean energy and climate-focused public relations company based in Washington, D.C.



  • Pingback: Marcacci Communications

  • Pingback: Global clean energy market values set to nearly double from 2012 to 2022 |

  • agelbert

    Zachary,
    I’ve posted two comments that have been zapped. Is there a problem?

    • http://zacharyshahan.com/ Zachary Shahan

      Haven’t seen any removed? Have they shown up yet? Sometimes there seems to be a delay.

  • Jessie

    Shale gas is not renewable nor is it clean… what is going on with this article..?

    • http://zacharyshahan.com/ Zachary Shahan

      I didn’t read him writing that it was. I read him presenting it as a competitor to renewables.

      • agelbert

        It’s only a “competitor” because there isn’t a level playing field on fossil fuel energy versus renewables. We are all going to pay for that gas fracking with poisoned aquifers down the line.

        • http://zacharyshahan.com/ Zachary Shahan

          Agreed.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Martin-Scribblin-Leggett/100002283512979 Martin Scribblin Leggett

    The impact of shale gas is serious as it diverts capital from (truly) clean tech, but the returns on the US shale gas side don’t appear to be accruing to anyone except Wall Street:

    http://shalebubble.org/wall-street/

    Wouldn’t surprise me if the same plays out as the ‘boom’ is attempted to be rolled out world-wide

    • http://zacharyshahan.com/ Zachary Shahan

      Yes, that’s how I’m reading what Silvio wrote. I am certainly on the side that thinks this is a big bubble. But the question is if it will pop soon or in several years…

  • http://twitter.com/qwnch Q. T

    I don’t see full cost accounting mentioned anywhere, here.

    “Where American energy policy is far less sensible is when it comes to the price reflecting the true cost. Tiny petrol taxes take no account of the damaging effects of pollution. This newspaper has long argued for a carbon tax to make dirty energy more expensive and thus curb demand. If that happened, some of the new oil might not be worth extracting: Canada’s heavy oil, for instance, emits about 6% more carbon dioxide than normal oil, which in turn can be 30% dirtier than gas. The biggest bonanza from all this new energy would be if the users paid the real cost of consuming oil and gas.”

    The Economist, Nov 17, 2012 http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21566663-good-thingbut-it-would-be-better-if-energy-was-priced-correctly-united-states-americas

Back to Top ↑