Energy policy of the United States

The energy policy of the United States is determined by federal, state, and local entities in the United States, which address issues of energy production, distribution, and consumption, such as building codes and gas mileage standards. Energy policy may include legislation, international treaties, subsidies and incentives to investment, guidelines for energy conservation, taxation and other public policy techniques. Several mandates have been proposed over the years, such as "gasoline will never exceed $1.00/gallon" (Nixon) ($0.26 per liter), and "the United States will never again import as much oil as it did in 1977" (Carter),[1] but no comprehensive long-term energy policy has been proposed, although there has been concern over this failure.[2] Energy policy acts have been passed in 1992, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2009,[3] 2021, and 2022 which include many provisions for conservation, such as the Energy Star program, and energy development, with grants and tax incentives for both renewable energy and non-renewable energy.

Hoover Dam
US oil production, imports, & exports

There is also criticism that federal energy policies since the 1973 oil crisis have been dominated by crisis-mentality thinking, promoting expensive quick fixes and single-shot solutions that ignore market and technology realities. Instead of providing stable rules that support basic research while leaving plenty of scope for American entrepreneurship and innovation, congresses and presidents have repeatedly backed policies which promise solutions that are politically expedient, but whose prospects are doubtful, without adequate consideration of the dollar costs, environmental costs, or national security costs of their actions.[4][5] In 2018, the US was on the verge of achieving energy security or self-sufficiency as the total export of coal, natural gas, crude oil and petroleum products exceeded imports.[6][7] The US had a trade surplus in the energy sector by 2018.[8][9] In the second half of 2019, the US was the top producer of oil and gas in the world.[10] After becoming a net exporter of crude oil and its products for a brief period of less than one year, the US was expected to become net importer of crude oil and its products in 2020 due to a fall in price of crude oil.[11][12]

State-specific energy efficiency incentive programs also play a significant role in the overall energy policy of the United States.[13] The United States refused to endorse the Kyoto Protocol, preferring to let the market drive CO2 reductions to mitigate global warming, which will require CO2 emission taxation. The administration of Barack Obama proposed aggressive energy policy reforms, including codifying the need for a reduction of CO2 emissions with a cap and trade program under the Waxman-Markey act, which could have helped encourage more clean renewable, sustainable energy development.[14] With new technologies such as fracking, the United States has in 2014 resumed its former role as the top oil producer in the world.[15]

In the United States, British thermal units (Btu), a measure of heat energy, are commonly used for comparing different types of energy to each other. In 2018, total U.S. primary energy consumption was equal to about 101,251,057,000,000,000 British thermal units (Btu), or about 101.3 quadrillion Btu.

History
US energy use (values in quad/year, each equal to 290 TWh/year)
US oil reserves increased until 1970, then began to decline.
Grand Coulee Dam in Washington State.

In the Colonial era the energy policy of the United States was for free use of standing timber for heating and industry. In the 19th century, new emphasis was placed on access to coal and its use for transport, heating and industry. Whales were rendered into lamp oil.[16] Later, coal gas was fractionated for use as lighting and town gas. Natural gas was first used in America for lighting in 1816.[17] it has grown in importance for use in homes, industry, and power plants, but natural gas production reached its US peak in 1973,[18] and the price has risen significantly since then.

Coal provided the bulk of the US energy needs well into the 20th century. Most urban homes had a coal bin and a coal-fired furnace. Over the years these were replaced with oil furnaces, not because of it being cheaper but because it was easier and safer.[19] Coal remains far cheaper than oil. The biggest use of oil has come from the development of the automobile.

Oil became increasingly important to the United States, and, from the early 1940s, the US government and oil industry entered into a mutually beneficial collaboration to control global oil resources.[20] By 1950, oil consumption exceeded that of coal.[21][22] The abundance of oil in California, Texas, Oklahoma, as well as in Canada and Mexico, coupled with its low cost, ease of transportation, high energy density, and use in internal combustion engines, lead to its increasing use.[23]

Following World War II, oil heating boilers took over from coal burners along the Eastern Seaboard; diesel locomotives took over from coal-fired steam engines under dieselisation; oil-fired electricity plants were built; petroleum-burning buses replaced electric streetcars in a GM driven conspiracy, for which they were found guilty, and citizens bought gasoline-powered cars. Interstate Highways helped make cars the major means of personal transportation.[23] As oil imports increased, US foreign policy was inexorably drawn into Middle East politics, supporting oil-producing Saudi Arabia and patrolling the sea lanes of the Persian Gulf.[24]

Hydroelectricity was the basis of Nikola Tesla's introduction of the US electricity grid, starting at Niagara Falls, New York, in 1883.[25] Electricity generated by major dams like the Jensen Dam, TVA Project, Grand Coulee Dam and Hoover Dam still produce some of the lowest-priced ($0.08/kWh), clean electricity in America. Rural electrification strung power lines to many more areas.[16][26]

Utilities have their rates set to earn a revenue stream that provides them with a constant 10% – 13% rate of return based on operating costs. Increases or decreases of the operating costs of electricity production are passed directly through to the consumers.[27]

The federal government provided substantially larger subsidies to fossil fuels than to renewables in the 2002–2008 period. Subsidies to fossil fuels totaled approximately $72 billion over the study period, representing a direct cost to taxpayers. Subsidies for renewable fuels, totaled $29 billion over the same period.[28]

In some cases, the US has used its energy policy as a means to pursue other international goals. Richard Heinberg, a professor from Santa Rosa, California argues that a declassified CIA document shows that the US used oil prices as leverage against the economy of the Soviet Union. Specifically, he argues that the US intentionally worked with Saudi Arabia during the Reagan administration to keep oil prices low, thus decreasing the purchasing power of the Soviet Union's petroleum export industry. When combined with other US efforts to drain Soviet resources, this was eventually a major cause in the dissolution of the Soviet Union.[29]

On June 1, 2017, then-President Donald Trump announced that the U.S. would cease all participation in the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change mitigation.[30] On November 3, 2020, incoming President Joe Biden announced that the U.S. would resume its participation in the Paris Agreement immediately upon assuming office.[31]

The EIA predicts that the dent in energy consumption in the year 2020 due to COVID-19 pandemic would take many years to recover.[32]

Energy imports
See also: 1973 oil crisis and United States energy independence
United States oil product imports by country
The trend of net energy imports into the United States (US Energy Information Administration).
US oil production peaked in 1970, then began to decline. In 2005 imports peaked at 60% of consumption.

As of 2019, the United States receives approximately 80% of its energy from fossil fuels.[33] This energy is used for transport, industry, commercial and domestic use. The remaining non fossil fuel portion comes primarily from Hydro, Wind and Nuclear stations.[34] Americans constitute less than 5% of the world's population, but consume 26% of the world's energy[35] to produce 26% of the world's industrial output. They account for about 25% of the world's petroleum consumption, while producing only 6% of the world's annual petroleum supply.[36]

Almost all of Canada's energy exports go to the United States, making it the largest foreign source of US energy imports. Canada is the top source of US imports of oil, gas. and electricity.[37]

Petroleum

In 2012, the US produced 60% of the petroleum it used, the remainder being imported. The largest sources of imported oil were Canada, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Venezuela, and Russia. Oil imports into the US peaked in 2006, when imports supplied nearly 12 million barrels/day which is 60% of US consumption; they have declined since, due both to increased domestic oil production, and reduced consumption.[38] By April 2018, net imports of crude oil and petroleum products has fallen to 2.634 million barrels/day as shale oil production improved drastically.[39] By the early 2020, the US is expected to be net exporter of crude oil and petroleum products.[6] The US is also expected to be top producer of crude oil by 2019.[40][41] US accounted for 98% of all global oil production growth in 2018.[42][43]

The 1973 oil embargo highlighted the vulnerability of the United States to oil supply disruptions when it depends on imports from nations that are either politically unstable or opposed to US interests. Perceived remedies include measures to reduce demand for petroleum (such as conservation or alternative fuels), increase the supply of petroleum (by increasing domestic production, or maintaining petroleum reserves), or enhance the reliability of foreign imports (through foreign policy).[44] The Federal Department of Energy was started to direct the various approaches.[45]

Conservation

A National Maximum Speed Limit of 55 mph (88 km/h) was imposed to help reduce consumption, and Corporate Average Fuel Economy (aka CAFE) standards were enacted to downsize automobile categories.[46] Year-round Daylight Saving Time was imposed, the United States Strategic Petroleum Reserve was created and the National Energy Act of 1978 was introduced. Alternative forms of energy and diversified oil supply resulted.[47]

Re-design of cities, remote work, mass transit, higher housing density and walking could also reduce automobile fuel consumption.[48] Carpooling, flexcars, Smart cars, and shorter commutes could all reduce fuel use.[49][50]

Increasing supply

The United States Strategic Petroleum Reserve was created to augment supply in case of a national emergency.[47]

Alternative fuels

Two-thirds of US oil consumption is in the transportation sector.[51] The US – an important export country for food stocks – converted approximately 18% of its grain output to ethanol in 2008. Across the US, 25% of the whole corn crop went to ethanol in 2007.[52] The percentage of corn going to biofuel is expected to go up.[53] In 2006, US senators introduced the BioFuels Security Act.[54]

The proposal has been made for a hydrogen economy, in which cars and factories would be powered by hydrogen fuel cells. However, energy would have to be used to produce the hydrogen, and hydrogen cars have been called one of the least efficient, most expensive ways to reduce greenhouse gases.[55][56] Other plans include making society carbon neutral and using renewable energy, including solar, wind, and methane sources.

It has been suggested that automobiles could be powered by the following forms of energy: 60% by grid electricity, 20% by biofuels, and 20% by direct solar.

Enhance reliability of foreign sources

One purpose of American foreign policy, especially in the Middle East, is commonly seen as securing the continued flow of petroleum exports from the region.

Natural gas

The United States is a net importer of natural gas, most of it by pipeline from Canada, with a smaller amount of LNG from other sources. Net gas imports into the US peaked in 2007, when the country imported 16.4 percent of the natural gas it consumed, and was the world's largest net importer of natural gas.[57] By 2013, despite growing use of natural gas in the US, net imports had fallen to 5.0 percent of consumption.[58]

Coal

The United States mines more coal than it uses, and is an exporter of coal.[59]

Electricity

The United States is a net importer of electricity from Canada, and a net exporter to Mexico. Overall, in 2012 the US had net electricity imports of 47 thousand gigawatt-hours, which was less than 1.2% of the electrical power generated within the US.[60]

Nuclear power in the United States depends largely on imported uranium. In 2011, US uranium mining provided 8 percent of the uranium concentrate loaded into nuclear reactors.[61] The remainder was imported. Principal sources of imported uranium were Russia, Canada, Australia, Kazakhstan, and Namibia.[62]

The US Energy Information Administration (EIA) groups the five largest consumers of energy in the United States, by sector. Their shares of total primary energy consumption in 2017 were:[63]

  • Electric power—38.1%
  • Transportation—28.8%
  • Industrial—22.4%
  • Residential—6.2%
  • Commercial—4.5%

The electric power sector generates most of the electricity used in the US. The other four sectors consume most of that electricity.[63] Sustained outages in the U.S. went from less than 12 in 2000 to over 180 in 2020. The average utility customer went from 8 hours of power failure per year in 2013 to 16 in 2020.[64]

Energy consumption
The primary sectors of US energy consumption in 2019.[33]
  •   Residential: 15.7%
  •   Commercial: 12.4%
  •   Industrial: 34.8%
  •   Transportation: 37.1%

The per capita primary energy consumption is 6.6 tons of oil equivalent in 2017.[65] Energy consumption can vary widely from state to state in the US. In 2012 for example, there was a large gap in electricity consumption by state between the top three states - Louisiana (1254 kWh/mo.), Tennessee (1217 kWh/mo.) and Mississippi (1193 kWh/mo.) - and the bottom three states - Maine (531 kWh/mo.), Hawaii (544 kWh/mo.) and Vermont (565 kWh/mo.).[66]

Buildings and their construction consume more energy than transportation or industrial applications, and because buildings are responsible for the largest portion of greenhouse emissions, they have the largest impact on anthropic climate change. The AIA has proposed making buildings carbon neutral by 2030, meaning that the construction and operation of buildings will not require fossil fuel energy or emit greenhouse gases, and having the US reduce CO2 emissions to 40 to 60% below 1990 levels by 2050.[67]

When President Carter created the US Department of Energy in 1977, one of their first successful projects was the Weatherization Assistance Program.[68] During the last 30 years, this program has provided services to more than 5.5 million low-income families. On average, low-cost weatherization reduces heating bills by 31% and overall energy bills by $358 per year at current prices. Increased energy efficiency and weatherization spending has a high return on investment.[69]

The "Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007" has a significant impact on US energy policy. It includes funding to help improve building codes, and will make it illegal to sell incandescent light bulbs, as they are less efficient than fluorescents and LEDs.[3]

Technologies such as passive solar building design and zero energy buildings (ZEB) have demonstrated significant new-construction energy bill reductions. The "Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007" includes funding to increase the popularity of ZEBs, photovoltaics, and even a new solar air conditioning program. Many energy-saving measures can be added to existing buildings as retrofits, but others are only cost-effective in new construction, which is why building code improvements are being encouraged. The solution requires both improved incentives for energy conservation, and new energy sources.

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 increases average gas mileage to 35 mpg by 2020. The Obama administration and 2007 legislation are encouraging the near-term use of plug-in electric cars, and hydrogen cars by 2020. Toyota has suggested that their third-generation 2009 Prius[70] may cost much less than the current model.[71] Larger advanced-technology batteries have been suggested to make it plug-in rechargeable. Photovoltaics are an option being discussed to extend its daytime electric driving range. Improving solar cell efficiency factors will continue to make this a progressively more-cost-effective option.

Sources
An offshore oil platform
100.2 Quad: The primary sources of US energy in 2019.[33]
  •   Coal: 11.4Quad (11.4%)
  •   Hydro: 2.5Quad (2.5%)
  •   Geothermal: 0.209Quad (0.2%)
  •   Wind Power: 2.74Quad (2.7%)
  •   Solar: 1.04Quad (1.0%)
  •   Biomass: 4.98Quad (5.0%)
  •   Nuclear: 8.46Quad (8.4%)
  •   Natural Gas: 32.1Quad (32.1%)
  •   Oil: 36.7Quad (36.7%)

About 80% of all types of energy used in the United States is derived from fossil fuels. In 2019, the largest source of the country's energy came from petroleum (36.6%), followed by natural gas (32%), coal (11.4%), renewable sources (11.4%) and nuclear power (8.4%).[33] Amory Lovins says that the sharp and steady cost reductions in solar power has been a "stunning market success". He says that solar, wind and cheap natural gas have significantly reduced the prospects of coal and nuclear power plants around the world. These costs have come down so far for solar photovoltaic electricity that CNBC pointed out that only 79 individuals could fund the US transition to solar.[72] John Rowe, chair of Exelon (the largest nuclear power producer in the US), has said that the nuclear renaissance is dead.[73]

Currently, the major issues in U.S. energy policy revolve around the rapidly growing production of domestic and other North American energy resources. The U.S. drive toward energy independence and less reliance on oil and coal is fraught with partisan conflict because these issues revolve around how best to balance both competing values, such as environmental protection and economic growth, and the demands of rival organized interests, such as those of the fossil fuel industry and of the newer renewable energy businesses. The Energy Policy Act (EPA) addresses energy production in the United States, including: (1) energy efficiency; (2) renewable energy; (3) oil and gas; (4) coal; (5) Tribal energy; (6) nuclear matters and security; (7) vehicles and motor fuels, including ethanol; (8) hydrogen; (9) electricity; (10) energy tax incentives; (11) hydropower and geothermal energy; and (12) climate change technology.[74]

Petroleum
US imports of crude oil and petroleum products (in thousands of barrels), 1981–2010.

In 2006, the US consumed 20.8 million bbl (3.31 million m3) of petroleum a day,[75] of which 9 million bbl (1.4 million m3) is motor gasoline. Transportation is the largest consumer, accounting for approximately 68.9%,[76] and 55% of oil use worldwide as documented in the Hirsch report. With approximately 5% of the world's population, the United States is responsible for approximately 25% of annual global oil consumption and according to 2008 estimates has a per-person daily consumption rate more than double that of the European Union.[77][78] Automobiles are the single largest consumer of oil,[79] consuming 40%, and are also the source of 20% of the nation's greenhouse gas emissions.[80]

The US has about 22 billion bbl (3.5 billion m3) reserves while consuming about 7.6 billion bbl (1.21 billion m3) per year.[75] This has created pressure for additional drilling. European gasoline prices reached $4 per U.S. gallon ($1.1 per liter) through taxation long before they reached the same price in the US, leading to higher consumption in the US.[81][82]

Problems associated with oil supply include volatile oil prices, increasing world and domestic petroleum product demand, dependence on unstable imported foreign oil, falling domestic production (peak oil), and declining infrastructure, like the Alaska pipeline and oil refineries.

American dependence on imports grew from 10% in 1970 to 65% by the end of 2004.[83] The Energy Information Administration projects that US oil imports will remain flat and consumption will grow, so net imports will decline to 54% of US oil consumption by 2030.[84]


The subject of continued exploration for offshore drilling in the United States is a perennial debate, one which was heavily influenced in 2010 by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Coal
US coal production regions

America is self-sufficient in coal.[85] Indeed, it has several hundred years' supply of it.[86][87] The United States trend in coal use has been rising from 1950 through 2007, when coal production and consumption more than doubled.[88] The population of the US has almost doubled in this time period as well, while the per capita energy use has been declining since 1978.[89][90]

Coal in transit in Ohio

Most electricity (52% in 2000) in the country was historically generated from coal-fired power plants:[16] in 2006, more than 90% of coal consumed was used to generate electricity. In 1950, about 19% percent of the coal consumed was for electricity generation.[91] However, subsequent to 2007, coal-fired electricity began to decline, and in 2018, just 27.4% of US electricity was generated from coal.[92]

In terms of the production of energy from domestic sources, from 1885 through 1951, coal was the leading source of energy in the United States. Crude oil and natural gas then vied for that role until 1982. Coal regained the position of the top domestic resource that year and again in 1984, and has retained it since.[93] The US burns 1 billion tons of coal every year.

Concern for climate change has led to a call for a moratorium on all coal consumption, unless carbon capture is utilized. Coal is the largest potential source of CO2 emissions.[94][95][96]

Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) is the cleanest currently operational coal-fired electricity generation technology. FutureGen is an experimental US research project to investigate the possibility of sequestering IGCC CO2 emissions underground.

Natural gas

Natural gas production and consumption quadrupled between 1950 and 1970 to 20×10^12 cu ft (570 km3), but declined steadily to stabilize in 1986. Since then, the United States imports a rising share of its gas. In 2008 consumption of natural gas stood at 23.2×10^12 cu ft (660 km3), while domestic production was at 20.6×10^12 cu ft (580 km3). Approximately 3.0×10^12 cu ft (85 km3) were imported, mainly by pipelines from Canada, which accounted for 90% of foreign supplies, while the remainder is delivered by liquefied natural gas (LNG) tankers carrying gas from five different countries.[97]

The largest gas-producing states in 2007 were Texas (30%), Wyoming (10%), Oklahoma (9%) and New Mexico (8%), while 14% of the country's production came from the federal offshore lands in the Gulf of Mexico.[97] Recent development in hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling have increased interest for shale gas across the United States in recent years. Leading fields are the Barnett Shale in Texas and the Antrim Shale in Michigan. Natural gas reserves in the United States were 35% higher in 2008 than two years earlier largely due to shale gas discoveries.[98]

Rapid increase in shale gas production by 2018, has converted the country from a natural gas importer to an exporter and the largest producer of natural gas.[99][7] LNG and CNG are being used in the transport sector to replace the costlier liquid fuels.[100] Natural gas, which was earlier used as fuel mainly, is also diversifying in the form of feed stock in food sector to produce protein rich feed for cattle/fish/poultry.[101] Cultivation of Methylococcus capsulatus bacteria culture by consuming natural gas produces high protein rich feed with tiny land and water foot print.[102][103] Abundant natural gas availability in the US can also impart full global food security by producing highly nutrient food products without any water pollution.[104] Natural gas/methane can also be converted cheaply in to hydrogen gas and carbon black using renewable electricity without emitting any green house gas for use in transport sector with fuel cell vehicle technology.[105]

Nuclear power

The United States is the world's largest supplier of commercial nuclear power. As of 2010, the demand for nuclear power is softening in America, and some companies have withdrawn their applications for licenses to build.[106][107] Ground has been broken on two new nuclear plants with a total of four reactors.

In August 2011, John Rowe, head of Exelon, America's largest nuclear utility, said that this was not the time to build new nuclear plants, not because of political opposition or the threat of cost overruns, but because of the low price of natural gas. "Shale [gas]", said he, "is good for the country, bad for new nuclear development".[108]

Following the 2011 Japanese nuclear accidents, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission has announced it will launch a comprehensive safety review of the 104 nuclear power reactors across the United States, at the request of President Obama. The Obama administration "continues to support the expansion of nuclear power in the United States, despite the crisis in Japan".[109] Following the Japanese nuclear emergency, public support for building nuclear power plants in the US dropped to 43%, slightly lower than it was immediately after the Three Mile Island accident in 1979, according to a CBS News poll.[110]

In his 2012 state-of-the-union address, Barack Obama said that America needs "an all-out, all-of-the-above strategy that develops every available source of American energy." President Obama boasted about a Michigan wind turbine factory, America's healthy supplies of natural gas and widespread oil exploration. He urged Congress to pass tax incentives for energy efficiency, clean energy, and an end to oil-company subsidies, but made no mention of nuclear power.[108]

In 2013, four aging reactors in the US were permanently closed before their licenses expired because of high maintenance and repair costs at a time when natural gas prices have fallen: San Onofre 2 and 3 in California, Crystal River 3 in Florida, and Kewaunee in Wisconsin.[111][112] The state of Vermont is trying to close Vermont Yankee, in Vernon. New York State is seeking to close Indian Point in Buchanan, 30 miles from New York City.[112] Loss of nuclear-generating capacity is expected to be offset by the five new nuclear reactors currently under construction, with a proposed combined capacity of more than 5,000 MW.[113]

As of 2020, support for nuclear energy from policymakers has been on the rise throughout the United States. President Joe Biden's administration has been said to have "one of the most explicitly pro-nuclear agendas", of any of his predecessors.[114] A growing number of Democratic politicians like Senators Amy Klobuchar, Cory Booker, and John Delaney have expressed support for the expansion of nuclear power to combat climate change.[115] Leaders in business and in government, like Jimmy Carter[116] and Bill Gates,[117] along with energy industry experts like Bret Kugelmass (founder of the Energy Impact Center)[118] and Richard Martin (author of SuperFuel)[119] have also openly supported the use of nuclear energy to curb and reverse the effects of climate change.[120][121]

In October 2020, the US Department of Energy selected two US-based teams to receive $160 million in initial funding under the new Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP). TerraPower and X-energy were each awarded $80 million to build two advanced nuclear reactors that can be operational within seven years.[122] There are several other companies and institutions throughout the United States, like the Energy Impact Center's OPEN100 project,[123] Commonwealth Fusion Systems, and Flibe Energy that are gaining attention from their nuclear power innovations and research efforts as well.[124][125]

Renewable energy
Part of the 354 MW SEGS solar complex in northern San Bernardino County, California.
The Shepherds Flat Wind Farm is an 845 megawatt (MW) wind farm in the US state of Oregon.
The 550 MW Desert Sunlight Solar Farm in California.

Renewable energy in the United States accounted for 12.9 percent of the domestically produced electricity in 2013.[126] Renewable energy reached a major milestone in the first quarter of 2011, when it contributed 11.7 percent of total US energy production at 2.245 quadrillion British thermal units (658 terawatt-hours), surpassing energy production from nuclear power at 2.125 quadrillion British thermal units (623 TWh).[127] 2011 was the first year since 1997 that renewables exceeded nuclear in US total energy production.[128]

Hydroelectric power is currently the largest producer of renewable power in the US. It produced around 6.2% of the nation's total electricity in 2010 which was 60.2% of the total renewable power in the US.[36] The United States is the fourth largest producer of hydroelectricity in the world after China, Canada and Brazil. The Grand Coulee Dam is the 5th largest hydroelectric power station in the world.

US wind power installed capacity now exceeds 65,000 MW.[129] For calendar year 2014, the electricity produced from wind power in the United States amounted to 181.79 terawatt-hours, or 4.44% of all generated electrical energy.[130] Texas is firmly established as the leader in wind power development, followed by Iowa and California.[131]

Several large solar thermal power stations have also been built. The largest of these solar thermal power stations is the SEGS group of plants in the Mojave Desert with a total generating capacity of 354 MW, making the system the largest solar plant of any kind in the world.[132] As of 2015, the largest photovoltaic (PV) power plant in North America is Solar Star, a 579 megawatt photovoltaic power station near Rosamond, California.[133][134][135] The Geysers in Northern California is the largest complex of geothermal energy production in the world.

With 2,957 MW of installed geothermal capacity, the United States remains the world leader with 30% of the online capacity total. As of early 2009, 120 new projects are underway.[136] When developed, these projects could potentially supply up to 3,979 MW of power, meeting the needs of about 4 million homes. At this rate of development, geothermal production in the United States could exceed 15,000 MW by 2025.[137]

The development of renewable energy and energy efficiency marks "a new era of energy exploration" in the United States, according to President Barack Obama.[138] In a joint address to the Congress on February 24, 2009, President Obama called for doubling renewable energy within the next three years.[139] In his 2012 State of the Union address, President Barack Obama restated his commitment to renewable energy and mentioned the long-standing Interior Department commitment to permit 10,000 MW of renewable energy projects on public land in 2012.[140]

President Barack Obama's American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 included more than $70 billion in direct spending and tax credits for clean energy and associated transportation programs. This policy-stimulus combination represents the largest federal commitment in US history for renewable energy, advanced transportation, and energy conservation initiatives. As a result of these new initiatives, many more utilities are expected to strengthen their clean energy programs.[141] In February 2011, the US Department of Energy launched its SunShot initiative, a collaborative national effort to cut the total cost of photovoltaic solar energy systems by 75% by 2020.[142] Reaching this goal would make unsubsidized solar energy cost-competitive with other forms of electricity and get grid parity.[143]

Biofuels
Main articles: Biofuel in the United States, Food vs. fuel, and Sustainable biofuel

In recent years there has been an increased interest in biofuels – bioethanol and biodiesel – derived from common agricultural staples or waste. Increased domestic production of these fuels could reduce US expenditure on foreign oil and improve energy security if methods of producing and transporting the fuels do not involve heavy inputs of fossil fuels, as current agriculture does.

Most cars on the road today in the US can run on blends of up to 10% ethanol, and motor vehicle manufacturers already produce vehicles designed to run on much higher ethanol blends. In 2007, Portland, Oregon, became the first city in the United States to require all gasoline sold within city limits to contain at least 10% ethanol.[144] Ford, Daimler AG, and GM are among the automobile companies that sell "flexible-fuel" cars, trucks, and minivans that can use gasoline and ethanol blends ranging from pure gasoline up to 85% ethanol (E85). By mid-2006, there were approximately 6 million E85-compatible vehicles on US roads.[145]

The Renewable Fuels Association counts 113 US ethanol distilleries in operation and another 78 under construction, with capacity to produce 11.8 billion gallons within the next few years. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) predicts in its Annual Energy Outlook 2007 that ethanol consumption will reach 11.2 billion US gallons (42,000,000 m3) by 2012, outstripping the 7.5 billion US gallons (28,000,000 m3) required in the Renewable Fuel Standard that was enacted as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005.[146]

Expanding ethanol fuel (and biodiesel) industries provide jobs in plant construction, operations, and maintenance, mostly in rural communities. According to the Renewable Fuels Association, the ethanol industry created almost 154,000 US jobs in 2005 alone, boosting household income by $5.7 billion. It also contributed about $3.5 billion in tax revenues at the local, state, and federal levels.[145]

In recent years, there has been criticism about the production of ethanol fuel from food crops.[147][148][149] However, second generation biofuels are now being produced from a much broader range of feedstocks including the cellulose in dedicated energy crops (perennial grasses such as switchgrass and Miscanthus giganteus), forestry materials, the co-products from food production, and domestic vegetable waste.[150] Produced responsibly they are sustainable energy sources that need not divert any land from growing food, nor damage the environment.[151][152]

Energy efficiency
A spiral-type integrated compact fluorescent lamp, which has been popular among North American consumers since its introduction in the mid 1990s.[153]
Tesla Roadster (2008) uses lithium ion batteries to achieve 220 mi (350 km) per charge, while also capable of going 0-60 in under 4 seconds.

There are many different types of energy efficiency innovation, including efficient water heaters; improved refrigerators and freezers; advanced building control technologies and advances in heating, ventilation, and cooling (HVAC); smart windows that adapt to maintain a comfortable interior environment; new building codes to reduce needless energy use; and compact fluorescent lights. Improvements in buildings alone, where over sixty percent of all energy is used, can save tens of billions of dollars per year.[154]

Several states, including California, New York, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin, have consistently deployed energy efficiency innovations. Their state planning officials, citizens, and industry leaders, have found these very cost-effective, often providing greater service at lower personal and social cost than simply adding more fossil-fuel-based supply. This is the case for several reasons. Energy-efficient technologies often represent upgrades in service through superior performance (e.g. higher quality lighting, heating and cooling with greater controls, or improved reliability of service through greater ability of utilities to respond to time of peak demand). So these innovations can provide a better, less expensive service.[154]

A wide range of energy-efficient technologies have ancillary benefits in improved quality of life, such as advanced windows that not only save on heating and cooling expenses, but also make the workplace or home more comfortable. Another example is more efficient vehicles, which not only save immediately on fuel purchases, but also emit fewer pollutants, improving health and saving on medical costs to the individual and to society.[154]

In 1994, Amory Lovins developed the design concept of the Hypercar. This vehicle would have ultra-light construction with an aerodynamic body using advanced composite materials, low-drag design, and hybrid drive.[155] Designers of the Hypercar claim it would achieve a three- to five-fold improvement in fuel economy, equal or better performance, safety, amenity, and affordability, compared with today's cars.[156] Lovins says the commercialisation of the Hypercar began in 2014, with the production of the all-carbon electric BMW i3 family and the 313 miles per gallon Volkswagen XL1.[157]

Energy budget, initiatives and incentives

An incentive resulting from US energy policy is a factor that provides motive for a specific course of action regarding the use of energy. In the US most energy policy incentives take the form of financial incentives. Examples of these include tax breaks, tax reductions, tax exemptions, rebates, loans and specific funding. Throughout US history there have been many incentives created through US energy policy.

Most recently the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, and Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, each promote various energy efficiency improvements and encourage development of specific energy sources. US energy policy incentives can serve as a strategic manner to develop certain industries that plan to reduce America's dependence on foreign petroleum products and create jobs and industries that boost the national economy. The ability to do this depends upon which industries and products the government chooses to subsidize. In 2016, federal government energy-specific subsidies and supports for renewables, fossil fuels, and nuclear energy were $6,682 million, $489 million and $365 million, respectively.[158]

Budget
Further information: USDOE

The 2012 budget that President Obama submitted to Congress calls for a 70 percent increase over the 2011 allocation for federal research and development activities related to renewable energy. The Office of Science in the Department of Energy would receive $2.0 billion for basic energy sciences to discover new ways to produce, store and use energy. Included in that amount are allocations of $457 million for solar energy; $341 million for biofuels and biomass R&D, including a new reverse auction to promote advanced biofuels; and more than doubling investment in geothermal energy to $102 million. The budget includes funding to accelerate the deployment of new models of energy research pioneered in the last several years, including $550 million for the Advanced Research Projects Agency–Energy, a program that supports breakthrough ideas.[159]

Public investment

Public investment can enable the development of infrastructure projects through the use of public funds, grants, loans or other financing options. These funds provide a means for allocating the capital necessary for the development of renewable energy technologies.

Tax incentives

Federal tax incentives can be designed to accelerate market adoption, create jobs, encourage investment in a public good (reduced pollution) or encourage investment in renewable technology research and development. The Production Tax Credit (PTC) reduces the federal income taxes of qualified tax-paying owners of renewable energy projects based on the electrical output (measured in kWh) of grid-connected renewable energy facilities. The Investment Tax Credit (ITC) reduces federal income taxes for qualified tax-paying owners based on dollars of capital investment in renewable energy projects. The Advanced Energy Manufacturing Tax Credit (MTC) awards tax credits to new, expanded, or re-equipped domestic manufacturing facilities that support clean energy development.[160]

Loan guarantees

The Department of Energy's Loan Guarantee Program, established by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and enhanced by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, attempts to pave the way for investor support of clean energy projects by providing a guarantee of financing up to 80% of the project cost. The program is scheduled to end on September 30, 2011, unless Congress passes further legislation.[161]

Renewable portfolio standard

A Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) is a mandate that requires electricity providers to supply to their customers a minimum amount of power from renewable sources, usually as a percentage of total energy use. As of June 2010, such standards have been enacted in 31 US states and the District of Columbia.[162] For example, Governor Jerry Brown signed legislation requiring California's utilities to get 33 percent of their electricity from renewable energy sources by the end of 2020.[163] Congress has considered a national RPS since 1997: the Senate has passed legislation three times, and the House once.[164] As of April 2011, both houses have not acted in unison to pass legislation.

Biofuel subsidies

In the United States, biofuel subsidies have been justified on the following grounds: energy independence, reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, improvements in rural development related to biofuel plants and farm income support. Several economists from Iowa State University found "there is no evidence to disprove that the primary objective of biofuel policy is to support farm income."[165]

Consumer subsidies

Consumers who purchase hybrid vehicles are eligible for a tax credit that depends upon the type of vehicle and the difference in fuel economy in comparison to vehicles of similar weights. These credits range from several hundred dollars to a few thousand dollars.[166] Homeowners can receive a tax credit up to $500 for energy-efficient products like insulation, windows, doors, as well as heating and cooling equipment. Homeowners who install solar electric systems can receive a 30% tax credit and homeowners who install small wind systems can receive a tax credit up to $4000. Geothermal heat pumps also qualify for tax credits up to $2,000.[167]

Other subsidies

Recent energy policy incentives have provided, among other things, billions of dollars in tax reductions for nuclear power, fossil fuel production, clean coal technologies, renewable electricity production, and conservation and efficiency improvements.[168]

Federal leases

Ceasing to issue new leases for fossil fuel extraction on federal lands and waters, and avoiding renewals of existing leases for resources that are not yet producing would reduce global CO2 emissions by 100 million tonnes per year by 2030, and by greater amounts thereafter.[169][170]

Net metering
This section is an excerpt from Net metering in the United States.[edit]
Growth of net metering in the United States

Net metering is a policy by many states in the United States designed to help the adoption of renewable energy. Net metering was pioneered in the United States as a way to allow solar and wind to provide electricity whenever available and allow use of that electricity whenever it was needed, beginning with utilities in Idaho in 1980, and in Arizona in 1981.[171] In 1983, Minnesota passed the first state net metering law.[172] As of March 2015, 44 states and Washington, D.C. have developed mandatory net metering rules for at least some utilities.[173] However, although the states' rules are clear, few utilities actually compensate at full retail rates.[174]

Net metering policies are determined by states, which have set policies varying on a number of key dimensions. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 required state electricity regulators to "consider" (but not necessarily implement) rules that mandate public electric utilities make net metering available to their customers upon request.[175] Several legislative bills have been proposed to institute a federal standard limit on net metering. They range from H.R. 729, which sets a net metering cap at 2% of forecasted aggregate customer peak demand, to H.R. 1945, which has no aggregate cap, but does limit residential users to 10 kW, a low limit compared to many states, such as New Mexico, with an 80,000 kW limit, or states such as Arizona, Colorado, New Jersey, and Ohio, which limit as a percentage of load.[176]

Electricity distribution
The US power transmission grid consists of about 300,000 km (190,000 mi) of lines operated by approximately 500 companies. The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) oversees all of them.

Long distance electric power transmission results in energy loss, through electrical resistance, heat generation, electromagnetic induction and less-than-perfect electrical insulation.[177] In 1995, these losses were estimated at 7.2%.[178] Energy generation and distribution can be more efficient the closer it is to the point of use, if conducted in a high-efficiency generator, such as a CHP. In the generation and delivery of electrical power, system losses along the delivery chain are pronounced. Of five units of energy going into most large power plants, only about one unit of energy is delivered to the consumer in a usable form.[179]

A similar situation exists in gas transport, where compressor stations along pipelines use energy to keep the gas moving, or where gas liquefaction/cooling/regasification in the liquiefied natural gas supply chain uses a substantial amount of energy, even though the scale of the loss is not as pronounced as it is in electricity.

Distributed generation and distributed storage are means of reducing total and transmission losses as well as reducing costs for electricity consumers.[180][181][182]

Statistics

Electricity production by source[183]
Source2012 production (TWh)Percentage of Total
Coal1,70941.5%
Petroleum300.7%
Natural Gas1,06625.8%
Nuclear81319.7%
Renewable sources48611.8%
Other210.5%
Total4,120100%

Electricity consumption by sector[183]
Sector2012 consumption (TWh)Percentage of total
Residential1,41336.5%
Commercial1,32334.2%
Industrial98625.5%
Transportation70.2%
Direct use1383.6%
Total3,867100%

Oil
  • production: 9.688-million-barrels-per-day (1,540,300 m3/d) (2010 est.)
  • consumption: 19.15-million-barrels-per-day (3,045,000 m3/d) (2010 est.)[184]

Heat engines are only 20% efficient at converting oil into work.[185][186] Electric transmission (production to consumer) loses over 23% of the energy due to generation, transmission, and distribution.[187]

Carbon dioxide emissions
Atmospheric carbon dioxide versus time

The EPA has the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, under the Clean Air Act, and is one of the agency's seven priorities.[188]

US carbon dioxide emissions (millions of metric tons of CO2)[189]
YearCO2Change from 1990
19905,100.50.00%
20056,107.619.75%
20066,019.018.01%
20076,118.619.96%
20085,924.316.15%
20095,500.57.84%
20105,706.411.88%

Public opinion
The summer 2006 issue of Ms. magazine examined how the oil industry impacts women's lives

The US results from the 1st Annual World Environment Review, published on June 5, 2007, revealed that:[190]

  • 74% are concerned about climate change.
  • 80% think their Government should do more to tackle global warming.
  • 84% think that the US is too dependent on fossil fuels.
  • 72% think that the US is too reliant on foreign oil.
  • 79% think that the US Government should do more to increase the number of hybrid cars that are sold.
  • 67% think that the US Government should allow more offshore drilling.

The public is also quite clear on its priorities when it comes to promoting energy conservation versus increasing the supply of oil, coal, and natural gas. When asked which of these should be the higher priority, the public chooses energy conservation by a very wide 68 percent-to-21 percent margin.[191] The public also predominantly believes that the need to cut down on energy consumption and protect the environment means increased energy efficiency should be mandated for certain products. Ninety-two percent of Americans now support such requirements.[192]

However, when energy policy and climate change are compared to other issues, they are rated extremely low in terms of importance. A Pew Research Center poll on public priorities for 2011 found that global warming ranked last of twenty-two possible policy priorities. The same survey in 2012 found similar results.[193]

Gallup found that from 2009 through the latest poll in March 2013, public opinion has been nearly evenly split on whether to give priority to the environment or to developing energy sources such as oil, gas, and coal. This represents a shift from poll results from 2001 through 2008, when clear pluralities of Americans wanted environmental concerns to take priority over developing fossil fuel resources. However, public opinion still heavily favors an emphasis on wind and solar energy (59 percent) over fossil fuels (31 percent).[194]

General legislative policy, legislation and plans

The current head of the US Department of Energy under the Biden administration is Jennifer Granholm, who succeeded Dan Brouillette in February 2021.

As of September 2012, "The mission of the Energy Department is to ensure America's security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions."[195]

  • Catalyze the timely, material, and efficient transformation of the nation's energy system and secure US leadership in clean energy technologies.
  • Maintain a vibrant US effort in science and engineering as a cornerstone of our economic prosperity with clear leadership in strategic areas.
  • Enhance nuclear security through defense, nonproliferation, and environmental efforts.
  • Establish an operational and adaptable framework that combines the best wisdom of all Department stakeholders to maximize mission success.

In December 2009, the United States Patent and Trademark Office announced the Green Patent Pilot Program.[196] The program was initiated to accelerate the examination of patent applications relating to certain green technologies, including the energy sector.[197] The pilot program was initially designed to accommodate 3,000 applications related to certain green technology categories, and the program was originally set to expire on December 8, 2010. In May 2010, the USPTO announced that it would expand the pilot program.[198]

Greenhouse gas emissions
See also: Greenhouse gas emissions by the United States and Kyoto Protocol
CO2 emission per capita per year per country

Although exceeded by China since 2007,[199] the United States has historically been the world's largest producer of greenhouse gases.[200] Some states are much more prolific polluters than others. The state of Texas produces approximately 1.5 trillion pounds of carbon dioxide yearly, more than every nation in the world except five outside of the United States: China, Russia, Japan, India, and Germany.[201]

Despite signing the Kyoto Protocol, the United States has neither ratified nor withdrawn from it. In the absence of ratification, it remains non-binding on the US.

The Obama Administration has promised to take specific action towards mitigation of climate change. In addition, at state and local levels, there are currently a number of initiatives. As of March 11, 2007, mayors of 418 US cities in 50 states have endorsed the Kyoto protocol, after Mayor Greg Nickels of Seattle started a nationwide effort to get cities to agree to the protocol.[202] As of January 18, 2007, eight Northeastern US states are involved in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI),[203] a state level emissions capping and trading program.

On August 31, 2006, the California Legislature reached an agreement with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to reduce the state's greenhouse-gas emissions, which rank at 12th-largest carbon emitter in the world,[204] by 25 percent by the year 2020. This resulted in the Global Warming Solutions Act which effectively puts California in line with the Kyoto limitations, but at a date later than the 2008–2012 Kyoto commitment period.

In the non-binding 'Washington Declaration' agreed on February 16, 2007, the United States, together with Presidents or Prime Ministers from Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, United Kingdom, Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa agreed in principle on the outline of a successor to the Kyoto Protocol. They envisage a global cap-and-trade system that would apply to both industrialized nations and developing countries, and hoped that this would be in place by 2009.[205][206]

Chemistry Professor Nathan Lewis at Caltech estimates that to keep atmospheric carbon levels below 750 ppm, a level at which serious climate change would occur, by the year 2050, the United States would need to generate twice as much energy from renewable sources as is generated by all power sources combined today.[207] However, current research indicates that even carbon dioxide concentrations in excess of 450 ppm would result in irreversible global climate change.[208]

The book, Carbon-Free and Nuclear-Free, A Roadmap for U.S. Energy Policy,[209] by Arjun Makhijani, argues that in order to meet goals of limiting global warming to 2 °C, the world will need to reduce CO2 emissions by 85% and the US will need to reduce emissions by 95%, which can be extended to within a few percent plus or minus of carbon free with little additional change.[210] The book calls for phasing out use of oil, natural gas, and coal which does not use carbon sequestration by the year 2050.[211] Effective delivered energy is projected to increase from about 75 Quadrillion Btu in 2005 to about 125 Quadrillion in 2050,[212] but due to efficiency increases, the actual energy input is projected to increase from about 99 Quadrillion Btu in 2005 to about 103 Quadrillion in 2010 and then to decrease to about 77 Quadrillion in 2050.[213] Petroleum use is projected to increase until 2010 and then linearly decrease to zero by 2050. The roadmap calls for nuclear power to decrease to zero at the same time, with the reduction also beginning in 2010.[214]

In his book Hell and High Water, author Joseph Romm calls for the rapid deployment of existing technologies to decrease carbon emissions. In a follow-up article in Nature in June 2008, he argues that "If we are to have confidence in our ability to stabilize carbon dioxide levels below 450 p.p.m. emissions must average less than [5 billion metric tons of carbon] per year over the century. This means accelerating the deployment of the 11 wedges so they begin to take effect in 2015 and are completely operational in much less time than originally modeled by Socolow and Pacala."[215]

In 2012, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory assessed the technical potential for renewable electricity for each of the 50 states, and concluded that each state has technical potential for renewable electricity, mostly from solar power and wind power, greater than its current electricity consumption. The report cautions: "Note that as a technical potential, rather than economic or market potential, these estimates do not consider availability of transmission infrastructure, costs, reliability or time-of-dispatch, current or future electricity loads, or relevant policies."[216]

See also
  • United States hydrogen policy
  • 2000s energy crisis
  • Carbon tax
  • Carter Doctrine
  • Climate change policy of the United States
  • Economics of new nuclear power plants
  • Electricity sector of the United States
  • Emissions trading
  • Energy and American Society: Thirteen Myths
  • Energy in the United States
  • Energy law
  • Energy policy of the Obama administration
  • Energy policy of the Soviet Union
  • List of U.S. states by electricity production from renewable sources
  • United States House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming
  • United States Secretary of Energy
  • World energy consumption

References
  1. Jimmy Carter. "Crisis of Confidence Speech 1979". Cartercenter.org. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  2. "CRS Report for Congress". Digital.library.unt.edu. December 21, 2004. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  3. "Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)". Archived from the original on January 15, 2016. Retrieved 2008-01-18.
  4. Grossman, Peter (2013). U.S. Energy Policy and the Pursuit of Failure. Cambridge University Press. p. 416. ISBN 978-1107005174.
  5. Hamilton, Michael S. 2013. Energy Policy Analysis: A Conceptual Framework. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, Inc.
  6. "EIA: U.S. Net Oil Imports to Drop to Lowest Levels in 60 Years". Retrieved July 13, 2018.
  7. "BP Statistical Review 2018" (PDF). Retrieved June 15, 2018.
  8. "Record Oil Production Won't Free The U.S. From Global Markets". Retrieved July 13, 2018.
  9. "U.S. Will Soon Export More Oil, Liquids Than Saudi Arabia". Retrieved March 9, 2019.
  10. "U.S. Is Now Largest Oil... And Gas Producer In The World". Retrieved August 24, 2019.
  11. "Is U.S. Energy Dominance Coming To An End?". Retrieved April 8, 2020.
  12. "Oil producers agree to cut production by a tenth". Retrieved April 10, 2020.
  13. "Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency". Dsireusa.org. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  14. Daly, Herman E. (2006). "Sustainable Development – Definitions, Principles, Policies". In Keiner, Marco (ed.). The Future of Sustainability. Springer. p. 257. ISBN 978-1-4020-4734-3.
  15. Smith, Grant (July 4, 2014). "U.S. is now world's biggest oil producer". www.chicagotribune.com. Bloomberg News. Retrieved July 4, 2014.
  16. "Energy in the United States: 1635–2000 – Electricity". United States Department of Energy. Retrieved July 4, 2007.
  17. "Natural Gas". Archived from the original on January 8, 2008. Retrieved January 18, 2008.
  18. Archived February 9, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
  19. Vivian, John. "Wood and Coal Stove Advisory". Motherearthnews.com. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  20. Painter, David S. (1986). Oil and the American Century: The Political Economy of US Foreign Oil Policy, 1941–1954. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 978-0-801-82693-1.
  21. "Petroleum Timeline". United States Department of Energy. Retrieved July 4, 2007.
  22. "Energy in the United States: 1635–2000 – Coal". United States Department of Energy. Retrieved July 4, 2007.
  23. "Energy in the United States: 1635–2000 – Total Energy". United States Department of Energy. Retrieved July 4, 2007.
  24. "Energy in the United States: 1635–2000 – Petroleum". United States Department of Energy. Retrieved July 4, 2007.
  25. "Niagara Falls History of Power". Niagarafrontier.com. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  26. "Energy in the United States: 1635–2000 – Renewable". United States Department of Energy. Retrieved July 4, 2007.
  27. "Energy – It Just Doesn't Add Up | Renewable Energy News Article". Renewableenergyworld.com. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  28. Estimating U.S. Government Subsidies to Energy Sources: 2002–2008, Environmental Law Institute Archived January 17, 2013, at the Wayback Machine
  29. Erwin, Jerry (October 9, 2006). "The Challenges Facing the Intelligence Community Regarding Global Oil Depletion". Portland Peak Oil. Archived from the original on March 4, 2016. Retrieved April 29, 2009.
  30. Beavers, Olivia (June 1, 2017). "Pro-Paris agreement protesters flock to White House". TheHill. Retrieved May 8, 2019.
  31. Parsons, Jeff (January 21, 2020). "United States rejoins Paris climate agreement as Biden signs executive order". Metro. Retrieved January 28, 2020.
  32. "Annual Energy Outlook 2021" (PDF). Retrieved February 21, 2021.
  33. "Visualizing America's Energy Use, in One Giant Chart". Visual Capitalist. May 6, 2020. Retrieved May 7, 2020.
  34. "ENERGY INFOCARD – United States". United States Department of Energy. October 2006. Archived from the original on August 20, 2001. Retrieved July 4, 2007.
  35. "SEI: Energy Consumption". Solarenergy.org. Archived from the original on May 25, 2009. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  36. "EIA – Petroleum Basic Data". Eia.doe.gov. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  37. See Energy Information Administration, "Canada" (2009 report) Archived December 10, 2010, at the Wayback Machine
  38. How dependent are we on foreign oil? 10 May 2013.
  39. "U.S. net imports of crude oil and petroleum products". United States Department of Energy. Retrieved July 13, 2018.
  40. "How U.S. Shale Flipped The Script In Global Oil Markets". Retrieved August 2, 2018.
  41. "US on pace to become world's biggest oil producer". ABC News. Archived from the original on July 15, 2018. Retrieved July 14, 2018.
  42. "U.S. Accounts For 98% Of All Global Oil Production Growth". Retrieved June 30, 2019.
  43. "BP Statistical Review of World Energy - 2019" (PDF). Retrieved June 30, 2019.
  44. Jeffrey P. Bialos, "Oil imports and national security", Univ. of Pennsylvania Journal of International Business Law, 1989, v.11 n.2 p.235-300.
  45. "25th Anniversary of the 1973 Oil Embargo". United States Department of Energy. March 9, 1998. Retrieved July 4, 2007.
  46. "Performance Profiles of Major Energy Producers 1993" (PDF). United States Department of Energy. Archived from the original (PDF) on November 27, 2001. Retrieved July 4, 2007. See page 48.
  47. "Petroleum Chronology of events 1970–2000". United States Department of Energy. May 2002. Retrieved July 4, 2007.
  48. "Higher gasoline price seen trimming down Americans". Reuters. September 11, 2007.
  49. Carpool Archived January 17, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
  50. 8th Annual Emerging Transportation Plenary Archived February 16, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
  51. After the Oil Runs Out, washingtonpost.com
  52. Kathleen Kingsbury (November 16, 2007). "After the Oil Crisis, a Food Crisis?". Time. Archived from the original on November 20, 2007. Retrieved April 28, 2008.
  53. "Global warming rage lets global hunger grow". Telegraph. London. May 31, 2011. Archived from the original on April 16, 2008. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  54. Baltimore, Chris. "New U.S. Congress looks to boost alternate fuels", The Boston Globe, January 5, 2007. Retrieved on August 23, 2007 Archived June 17, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
  55. "Hydrogen Economy Fact Sheet". whitehouse.gov. June 25, 2003. Retrieved July 4, 2007 – via National Archives.
  56. Robert S. Boyd, McClatchy Newspapers. "Hydrogen cars may be a long time coming". Mcclatchydc.com. Archived from the original on May 1, 2009. Retrieved 2012-03-30.
  57. US EIA, Natural gas year-in-review 2008, 2009.
  58. US EIA, International Energy Statistics, accessed August 10, 2014.
  59. US EIA, Coal overview
  60. US Energy Information Administration, Imports and exports of electricity, and Electricity: summary statistics for the United States, accessed 21 Dec. 2013.
  61. US EIA, Uranium and nuclear fuel statistics Energy Annual 2011
  62. US EIA, Energy daily, 11 July 2011.
  63. "U.S. Energy Facts - Energy Explained, Your Guide To Understanding Energy - Energy Information Administration". www.eia.gov. Retrieved September 14, 2018.
  64. Katherine Blunt (February 18, 2022). "America's Power Grid Is Increasingly Unreliable". The Wall Street Journal. ISSN 0099-9660. Wikidata Q114357325. Retrieved October 2, 2022. In 2000, there were fewer than two dozen major disruptions, the data shows. In 2020, the number surpassed 180. Utility customers on average experienced just over eight hours of power interruptions in 2020, more than double the amount in 2013
  65. "Energy indicators by country". IEA. Retrieved May 27, 2020.
  66. "Electricity Rates and Usage in the United States". Electricity Local. Retrieved May 12, 2014.
  67. "Architects and Climate Change" (PDF). Aia.org. December 13, 2011. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  68. "Weatherization Assistance Program". Eere.energy.gov. January 30, 2012. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  69. "Communities of the Future" (PDF). Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  70. "2009 Toyota Prius: Spy Report". Popularmechanics.com. February 7, 2007. Archived from the original on March 12, 2010. Retrieved 2012-03-30.
  71. Stahl, Andreas. "Ultra-Green: Radical 100-MPG Toyota Prius in the Works for 2009". Edmunds.com. Archived from the original on August 6, 2009. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  72. Clifford, Catherine (September 12, 2019). "America's richest could afford this important investment to help fight climate change, scientist says". CNBC. Retrieved October 26, 2019.
  73. Amory Lovins (March–April 2012). "A Farewell to Fossil Fuels". Foreign Affairs.
  74. "Summary of the Energy Policy Act". EPA.gov. February 22, 2013. Retrieved April 16, 2020.
  75. "Basic Petroleum Statistics". Energy Information Administration. June 2006. Archived from the original on September 7, 2002. Retrieved July 4, 2007.
  76. "Domestic Demand for Refined Petroleum Products by Sector". US Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Archived from the original on September 29, 2007. Retrieved December 20, 2007.
  77. "CIA – The World Factbook – European Union". Cia.gov. Retrieved April 26, 2009.
  78. "CIA – The World Factbook – United States". Cia.gov. Retrieved April 26, 2009.
  79. The Road to Recovery Begins in Detroit Archived August 10, 2007, at the Wayback Machine accessed 2 October 2007
  80. Advanced Technology Vehicles: The Road Ahead accessed 2 October 2007 Archived September 26, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
  81. "Gasoline Tops $5 A Gallon In Gorda". Theksbwchannel.com. Archived from the original on December 12, 2007. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  82. "Fuel Prices Increase Nationwide as California Braces for $4/Gallon Gas in '08". Awmanet.org. Archived from the original on January 27, 2008. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  83. Tertzakian, Peter (November 15, 2005). "The U.S. Senate's Oil Spill". Forbes. Archived from the original on February 14, 2006. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  84. "How Dependent Is the United States on Foreign Oil? – eia.doe.gov". Tonto.eia.doe.gov. August 22, 2008. Archived from the original on October 24, 2010. Retrieved April 26, 2009.
  85. Bonskowski, Richard F. (March 27, 2001). "Energy Information Administration Statistics and Projections for U.S. Coal Supply and Demand: U.S. Coal, Domestic and International Issues" (PDF). US Department of Energy. Archived from the original (PDF) on November 8, 2004. Retrieved July 7, 2007.
  86. Benson, Sally M. "Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage in Deep Geologic Formations" (PDF). Pew Center on Global Climate Change and the National Commission on Energy Policy. Archived from the original (PDF) on July 10, 2007. Retrieved July 7, 2007.
  87. "Coal – A Fossil Fuel". US Department of Energy. February 2007. Retrieved July 22, 2007.
  88. Table 7.1 Coal Overview, Selected Years, 1949–2006, p. 203. Annual Energy Review 2006 United States Energy Information Administration, United States Department of Energy. (Caution: PDF is 10 megabytes) See: Table of Contents
  89. "U.S. population hits 300 million mark". MSNBC. Archived from the original on October 17, 2006. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  90. "U.S. Per Capita Use of Energy". Eia.doe.gov. Archived from the original on May 23, 2011. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  91. Table 7.3 Coal Consumption by Sector, Selected Years, 1949–2006 (p. 207) and Figure 7.3 Coal Consumption by Sector (p. 206) Annual Energy Review 2006 United States Energy Information Administration, United States Department of Energy. (Caution: PDF is 10 megabytes) See: Table of Contents
  92. "What is U.S. electricity generation by energy source? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)". www.eia.gov. Retrieved September 24, 2019.
  93. Energy in the United States: 1635–2000 United States Energy Information Administration, United States Department of Energy.
  94. "Human-Related Sources and Sinks of Carbon Dioxide". Epa.gov. June 28, 2006. Archived from the original on May 2, 2012. Retrieved 2012-03-30.
  95. Rachel Barron (October 15, 2007). "New Policy Could Put CO2 Underground". Greentechmedia.com. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  96. The great coal hole Archived May 25, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
  97. Energy Information Administration. "Natural Gas Explained : Where Our Natural Gas Comes From". Archived from the original on December 12, 2009. Retrieved December 17, 2009.
  98. Mouawad, Jad (June 17, 2009). "Estimate places natural gas reserves 35% higher". The New York Times. Retrieved October 25, 2009.
  99. "Shale Boom Lowers U.S. Trade Deficit by $250 billion". Butane-Propane News. Retrieved December 5, 2018.
  100. "Alternative Fuels Data Center". Retrieved June 15, 2018.
  101. "Food made from natural gas will soon feed farm animals – and us". Retrieved January 31, 2018.
  102. "BioProtein Production" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on May 10, 2017. Retrieved January 31, 2018.
  103. "New venture selects Cargill's Tennessee site to produce Calysta FeedKind® Protein". Retrieved January 31, 2018.
  104. "Assessment of environmental impact of FeedKind protein" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on August 2, 2019. Retrieved June 15, 2018.
  105. "The Future of Hydrogen (page 41)" (PDF). Retrieved May 28, 2019.
  106. Matthew L. Wald (December 7, 2010). "Nuclear 'Renaissance' Is Short on Largess". The New York Times.
  107. "Team France in disarray: Unhappy attempts to revive a national industry". The Economist. December 2, 2010.
  108. "America's nuclear industry struggles to get off the floor". The Economist. February 18, 2012.
  109. JulieAnn McKellogg (March 18, 2011). "US Nuclear Renaissance Further Crippled by Japan Crisis". Voice of America.
  110. Michael Cooper (March 22, 2011). "Nuclear Power Loses Support in New Poll". The New York Times.
  111. Mark Cooper (June 18, 2013). "Nuclear aging: Not so graceful". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
  112. Matthew Wald (June 14, 2013). "Nuclear Plants, Old and Uncompetitive, Are Closing Earlier Than Expected". The New York Times.
  113. US Energy Information Administration, Lower power prices and high repair costs drive nuclear retirements 2 July 2013.
  114. Bandyk, Matthew (February 1, 2021). "Nuclear has another friend in Biden, but changes at the NRC could mean more scrutiny ahead". Utility Dive. Retrieved October 17, 2021.
  115. King, Ledyard (April 30, 2019). "Nuclear power finds odd bedfellow in 2020 Dems as voters look for climate change solutions". USA Today. Retrieved October 17, 2021.
  116. Stein, Ellin (September 21, 2019). "The President Who Wanted Us to Stop Climate Change". Slate. Retrieved October 17, 2021.
  117. Binkley, Christina (February 15, 2021). "Bill Gates Has a Master Plan for Battling Climate Change". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved October 17, 2021.
  118. Takahashi, Dean (February 25, 2020). "Last Energy raises $3 million to fight climate change with nuclear energy". VentureBeat. Retrieved October 6, 2021.
  119. Flatow, Ira (May 4, 2012). "Is Thorium A Magic Bullet For Our Energy Problems?". Talk of the Nation. Retrieved October 17, 2021.
  120. Scoles, Sarah (February 20, 2020). "The Tech Entrepreneur Who Thinks He Can Reverse Climate Change With Nuclear Power". OneZero. Retrieved October 17, 2021.
  121. Martin, Richard (May 20, 2016). "Nuclear Shutdowns Could Ramp Up U.S. Carbon Emissions". MIT Technology Review. Retrieved October 17, 2021.
  122. "U.S. Department of Energy Announces $160 Million in First Awards under Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program". Energy.gov. Retrieved November 23, 2020.
  123. Proctor, Darrell (February 25, 2020). "Tech Guru's Plan—Fight Climate Change with Nuclear Power". Power. Retrieved October 18, 2021.
  124. "Flibe Energy – Power the World". Retrieved November 23, 2020.
  125. "Home". cfs.energy. Retrieved November 23, 2020.
  126. US Energy Information Administration, Electric Power Monthly, January 2013.
  127. Ron Pernick & Clint Wilder (2012). "Clean Tech Nation" (PDF). p. 5.
  128. US Energy Information Administration, Total Energy.
  129. "AWEA 4th quarter 2014 Public Market Report" (PDF). American Wind Energy Association (AWEA). January 2014. Archived from the original (PDF) on November 19, 2017. Retrieved February 1, 2014.
  130. "Electric Power Monthly" (PDF). Report. US Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration. March 4, 2015.
  131. American Wind Energy Association, Annual U.S. wind power rankings track industry's rapid growth Archived June 19, 2010, at the Wayback Machine
  132. SEGS I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII & IX Archived August 5, 2014, at the Wayback Machine
  133. "Solar Star, Largest PV Power Plant in the World, Now Operational". GreenTechMedia.com. June 24, 2015.
  134. "The Solar Star Projects". September 20, 2016.
  135. "Solar Star I and II".
  136. REN21 (2009). Renewables Global Status Report: 2009 Update Archived June 12, 2009, at the Wayback Machine p. 12.
  137. "Update: The State of U.S. Geothermal Production and Development". Renewableenergyworld.com. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  138. President Obama Touts Clean Energy on Earth Day
  139. "Remarks of President Barack Obama -- Address to Joint Session of Congress". whitehouse.gov. February 24, 2009 – via National Archives.
  140. Lindsay Morris (January 25, 2012). "Obama: Sticking to "Promise of Clean Energy"". Renewable Energy World.
  141. Clean Edge (2009). Clean Energy Trends 2009 Archived March 18, 2009, at the Wayback Machine pp. 1-4.
  142. DOE's SunShot Program Aims to Reach Competitive Solar By 2020. Fast Company, Feb. 4, 2011.
  143. "SunShot Initiative About page, Accessed Jan. 20, 2012". .eere.energy.gov. November 16, 2011. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  144. Introduction: The Clean Tech Opportunity p. 3. Archived July 16, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
  145. Worldwatch Institute and Center for American Progress (2006). American energy: The renewable path to energy security
  146. "Industrial Biotechnology Is Revolutionizing the Production of Ethanol Transportation Fuel" (PDF). Bio.org. Archived from the original (PDF) on July 25, 2011. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  147. "Crime Against Humanity". Live Science. October 27, 2007.
  148. "OECD Warns Against Biofuels Subsidies". Financial Times. September 10, 2007.
  149. "Global Science Forum Conference on Scientific Challenges for Energy Research: Energy At The Crossroads" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on February 16, 2008.
  150. "Hydrogen injection could boost biofuel production". Environment.newscientist.com. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  151. Oxburgh, Ron. Fuelling hope for the future, Courier Mail, 15 August 2007.
  152. Sustainable biofuels: prospects and challenges p. 2.
  153. "Philips Tornado Asian Compact Fluorescent". Philips. Retrieved December 24, 2007.
  154. "Opportunities for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions" (PDF). Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  155. Hypercars, hydrogen, and the automotive transition Archived July 4, 2013, at the Wayback Machine International Journal of Vehicle Design, Vol. 35, Nos. 1/2, 2004.
  156. Diesendorf, Mark (2007). Greenhouse Solutions with Sustainable Energy, UNSW Press, pp. 191–192.
  157. John Vidal (February 18, 2014). "Amory Lovins: energy visionary sees renewables revolution in full swing". The Guardian.
  158.  This article incorporates public domain material from Direct Federal Financial Interventions and Subsidies in Energy in Fiscal Year 2016. United States Department of Energy.
  159. Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2012, Department of Energy Archived April 27, 2011, at the Wayback Machine US Office of Management and Budget, 2011. Retrieved 2011-04-12.
  160. The Bottom Line on Renewable Energy Tax Credits. World Resources Institute
  161. U.S. Renewable Energy Quarterly Report, October 2010 Archived October 1, 2011, at the Wayback Machine American Council On Renewable Energy
  162. U.S. Renewable Energy Quarterly Report Archived October 1, 2011, at the Wayback Machine American Council on Renewable Energy, October 2010. Retrieved 2011-04-12.
  163. David R. Baker (April 12, 2011). "Brown signs law requiring 33% renewable energy". San Francisco Chronicle.
  164. Comparative Analysis of Three Proposed Federal Renewable Electricity Standards National Renewable Energy Laboratory, NREL/TP-6A2-45877, May 2009.
  165. Rubin, Ofir D. et al. 2008. Implied Objectives of U.S. Biofuel Subsidies. Iowa State University.
  166. "Summary of the Credit for Qualified Hybrid Vehicles". Irs.gov. Archived from the original on March 24, 2012. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  167. "Consumer Energy Tax Incentives". Energy.gov. June 30, 2011. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  168. Energy Policy Act of 2005
  169. Erickson, Peter; Lazarus, Michael (2016). How would phasing out U.S. federal leases for fossil fuel extraction affect CO2 emissions and 2°C goals? — Working Paper 2016-02 (PDF). Seattle, WA, US: Stockholm Environment Institute. Retrieved May 3, 2016.
  170. Milman, Oliver (May 3, 2016). "Phasing out coal, oil and gas extraction in US would drastically cut emissions". The Guardian. Retrieved May 3, 2016.
  171. "Current Experience With Net Metering Programs (1998)" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on May 21, 2013. Retrieved December 15, 2013.
  172. "Minnesota". Dsireusa.org. Archived from the original on October 19, 2012. Retrieved December 15, 2013.
  173. "Net Metering" (PDF). ncsolarcen-prod.s3.amazonaws.com. North Carolina Clean Energy Technology Center. March 1, 2015. Retrieved May 30, 2015.
  174. Shelly, Chelsea; et al. (2017). "Examining interconnection and net metering policy for distributed generation in the United States". Renewable Energy Focus. 22–23: 10–19. doi:10.1016/j.ref.2017.09.002.
  175. "Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA)". U.S. Department of Energy. Retrieved May 30, 2015.
  176. "Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency". North Carolina Clean Energy Technology Center. Retrieved May 31, 2015.
  177. "Transmission and distribution technologies" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on February 16, 2008. Retrieved 2008-01-18.
  178. "Technology Options for the Near and Long Term" (PDF). US Climate Change Technology Program. August 2005. Archived from the original (PDF) on September 16, 2008. Retrieved October 5, 2008.
  179. "Electric System Losses to Inefficiency" (PDF). Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  180. "Power To The People! Michigan Tech Researchers Say Distributed Renewables Save Utility Customers Money". CleanTechnica. March 20, 2019. Retrieved October 27, 2019.
  181. Prehoda, Emily; Pearce, Joshua M.; Schelly, Chelsea (2019). "Policies to Overcome Barriers for Renewable Energy Distributed Generation: A Case Study of Utility Structure and Regulatory Regimes in Michigan". Energies. 12 (4): 674. doi:10.3390/en12040674.
  182. Gil, Hugo A.; Joos, Geza (2008). "Models for Quantifying the Economic Benefits of Distributed Generation". IEEE Transactions on Power Systems. 23 (2): 327–335. Bibcode:2008ITPSy..23..327G. doi:10.1109/TPWRS.2008.920718. ISSN 0885-8950. S2CID 35217322.
  183. "Total Energy – Data – U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)". Eia.doe.gov. Retrieved April 14, 2013.
  184. "CIA – The World Factbook". CIA.gov. Retrieved September 1, 2012.
  185. "Improving IC Engine Efficiency". Courses.washington.edu. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  186. "Carnot Cycle". Hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  187. Preston, John L. (October 1994). "Comparability of Supply- and Consumption-Derived Estimates of Manufacturing Energy Consumption" (PDF). US Department of Energy. Archived from the original (PDF) on July 10, 2007. Retrieved July 6, 2007. Table 7: Total energy: 29,568.0 trillion Btu, Loss: 7,014.1 trillion Btu
  188. Seven Priorities for EPA's Future Archived August 18, 2012, at the Wayback Machine
  189. "U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report". US EPA. April 2012. Archived from the original on September 15, 2012. Retrieved 2012-09-01.
  190. First Annual World Environment Review Poll Reveals Countries Want Governments to Take Strong Action on Climate Change, Global Market Insite, published 2007-06-05, accessed 2007-05-09 Archived October 22, 2013, at the Wayback Machine
  191. Teixeira, Ruy (June 14, 2007). "Public Opinion Snapshot: Public Wants Action on Energy and the Environment". Center for American Progress. Archived from the original on May 13, 2012. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  192. Public Opinion Snapshot: Public Wants Action on Energy and the Environment Archived July 3, 2007, at the Wayback Machine, Center for American Progress, published 2007-06-15,
  193. "Public Priorities: Deficit Rising, Terrorism Slipping". Pew Research Center for the People and the Press RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 19 Jan. 2013.
  194. Jeffrey M. Jones, Americans Still Divided on Energy-Environment Trade-Off, Gallup.
  195. "Mission". Whitehouse.gov. September 1, 2012. Retrieved September 1, 2012.
  196. "USPTO Expands Green Technology Pilot Program to More Inventions". United States Patent and Trademark Office. May 21, 2010. Retrieved July 12, 2012.
  197. "Emerging Energy and Intellectual Property – The Often Unappreciated Risks and Hurdles of Government Regulations and Standard Setting Organizations". The National Law Review. Husch Blackwell. May 22, 2012. Retrieved July 10, 2012.
  198. "USPTO Extends Deadline to Participate in Green Technology Pilot Program by One Year". United States Patent and Trademark Office. November 10, 2010. Retrieved July 12, 2012.
  199. "China now no. 1 in CO2 emissions; USA in second position". Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. Archived from the original on July 1, 2007.
  200. Raupach, M.R. et al. (2007). "Global and regional drivers of accelerating CO2 emissions". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 104 (24): 10288–10293.
  201. Borenstein, Seth (June 4, 2007). "Blame coal: Texas leads in overall emissions". USA Today. Retrieved February 18, 2015.
  202. "US Climate Protection Agreement Home Page". Archived from the original on September 30, 2006. Retrieved November 7, 2006.
  203. "Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative". Retrieved November 7, 2006.
  204. Wintour, Patrick (August 1, 2006). "Blair signs climate pact with Schwarzenegger". The Guardian. London. Retrieved July 7, 2007.
  205. "Politicians sign new climate pact". BBC News. February 16, 2007. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  206. "Guardian Unlimited: Global leaders reach climate change agreement". London: Environment.guardian.co.uk. February 16, 2007. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  207. "Energy Notes" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on February 16, 2008. Retrieved August 30, 2007.
  208. "U.S. Stabilization Wedges: Scientific American". Sciam.com. Retrieved March 30, 2012.
  209. Makhijani, Arjun Carbon-Free and Nuclear-Free, A Roadmap for U.S. Energy Policy 2007 ISBN 978-1-57143-173-8
  210. Makhijani pg. 3
  211. Makhijani Fig. 5-5, 5-8
  212. Makhijani Fig. 5-7
  213. Makhijani Fig. 5-8
  214. Makhijani Fig. 5-5
  215. Romm, Joseph. "Cleaning up on carbon", June 19, 2008
  216. "Renewable Energy Technical Potential". National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Archived from the original on September 15, 2012. Retrieved September 1, 2012., p.2.

Further reading
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.