Global investment in renewable energy reached record levels in 2015, according to a new report from the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF).
More surprisingly, perhaps, the report shows that the $286bn poured into green energy was more than double the spending on coal- and gas-fired power.
It also shows, for the first time, that more renewable power capacity was added than other sources and that renewable energy investment was mostly in developing countries.
Carbon Brief runs through the key findings in seven charts.
1. Record Renewables
Investment in renewable energy reached a record $285.9bn in 2015, UNEP and BNEF say. That was up 5 percent on a year earlier and surpassed the previous peak of $279bn in 2011.
2. Low-Carbon Takes Over
Investments in low-carbon sources of electricity, such as renewables, large hydro and nuclear, were much higher than for fossil fuel generation. The record $262bn renewable investment in 2015 was more than twice the $130bn that went into coal and gas.
In fact, this has been the case for several years, highlighting the extent to which low-carbon, generally and renewables, in particular, have become mainstream.
However, it’s worth noting that investments in oil and gas exploration and extraction easily eclipse spending on new electricity generation capacity. Despite huge spending cuts in the wake of the oil price crash, oil and gas investment in 2016 is expected to be $522bn, down from $595bn in 2015.
3. Majority Stake
Last year also saw renewables, excluding large hydro, account for more than half of new power generation capacity for the first time. Of the 253 gigawatts (GW) added around the world in 2015, 134GW was from renewables excluding large hydro.
The world’s fossil-fired capacity also increased. After accounting for closures, global coal capacity increased by 42GW and gas by 40GW. Nuclear capacity grew by 15GW.
4. Rising Share
Despite renewables dominating capacity growth in 2015, it’s worth remembering that the world continues to rely heavily on fossil fuels to generate its power. Renewables supplied 10 percent of global electricity, excluding large hydro.
Including large hydro, renewables’ share of global electricity generation rises to more than 20 percent.
5. Developing World Dominates
The UNEP report shows, for the first time, that most renewable energy investment was in developing nations. This trend appears to be accelerating as ambition soars in China and India, while stalling across Europe.
6. China’s Surge
This regional split is seen even more clearly on the map, below. China, which now spends more on renewables than the U.S. and Europe combined, has ambitious plans to double its wind capacity and treble its solar capacity during its next five-year plan to 2020.
In contrast, spending in Europe has more than halved since a 2011 peak and has now fallen back to 2006 levels. U.S. investment has been relatively steady. The recent extension of wind and solar tax credits should ensure this continues.
7. Falling Costs
As well as reaching record levels of investment, renewable capacity added in 2015 was the highest ever too. That’s partly thanks to renewables getting cheaper, with each dollar buying more capacity.
In 2015, spending was 3 percent higher than in 2011. The 156 gigawatts (GW) added, however, was 56 percent larger than the 100GW installed in 2011.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Feds Find Offshore Fracking in the Pacific Would Have No ‘Significant’ Environmental Impact
New York State Assembly Passes Nation’s Most Ambitious Climate Bill
Scottish Parliament Passes Motion in Support of Outright Fracking Ban
Though made in large part of plastic, glass, ceramics, gold and copper, they also contain critical resources. The gallium used for LEDs and the camera flash, the tantalum in capacitors and indium that powers the display were all pulled from the ground — at a price for nature and people.
"Mining raw materials is always problematic, both with regard to human rights and ecology," said Melanie Müller, raw materials expert of the German think tank SWP. "Their production process is pretty toxic."
The gallium and indium in many phones comes from China or South Korea, the tantalum from the Democratic Republic of Congo or Rwanda. All in, such materials comprise less than ten grams of a phone's weight. But these grams finance an international mining industry that causes radioactive earth dumps, poisoned groundwater and Indigenous population displacement.
Environmental Damage: 'Nature Has Been Overexploited'
The problem is that modern technologies don't work without what are known as critical raw materials. Collectively, solar panels, drones, 3D printers and smartphone contain as many as 30 of these different elements sourced from around the globe. A prime example is lithium from Chile, which is essential in the manufacture of batteries for electric vehicles.
"No one, not even within the industry, would deny that mining lithium causes enormous environmental damage," Müller explained, in reference to the artificial lakes companies create when flushing the metal out of underground brine reservoirs. "The process uses vast amounts of water, so you end up with these huge flooded areas where the lithium settles."
This means of extraction results in the destruction and contamination of the natural water system. Unique plants and animals lose access to groundwater and watering holes. There have also been reports of freshwater becoming salinated due to extensive acidic waste water during lithium mining.
But lithium is not the only raw material that causes damage. Securing just one ton of rare earth elements produces 2,000 tons of toxic waste, and has devastated large regions of China, said Günther Hilpert, head of the Asia Research Division of the German think tank SWP.
He says companies there have adopted a process of spraying acid over the mining areas in order to separate the rare earths from other ores, and that mined areas are often abandoned after excavation.
"They are no longer viable for agricultural use," Hilpert said. "Nature has been overexploited."
China is not the only country with low environmental mining standards and poor resource governance. In Madagascar, for example, a thriving illegal gem and metal mining sector has been linked to rainforest depletion and destruction of natural lemur habitats.
States like Madagascar, Rwanda and the DRC score poorly on the Environmental Performance Index that ranks 180 countries for their effort on factors including conservation, air quality, waste management and emissions. Environmentalists are therefore particularly concerned that these countries are mining highly toxic materials like beryllium, tantalum and cobalt.
But it is not only nature that suffers from the extraction of high-demand critical raw materials.
"It is a dirty, toxic, partly radioactive industry," Hilpert said. "China, for example, has never really cared about human rights when it comes to achieving production targets."
Dirty, Toxic, Radioactive: Working in the Mining Sector
One of the most extreme examples is Baotou, a Chinese city in Inner Mongolia, where rare earth mining poisoned surrounding farms and nearby villages, causing thousands of people to leave the area.
In 2012, The Guardian described a toxic lake created in conjunction with rare earth mining as "a murky expanse of water, in which no fish or algae can survive. The shore is coated with a black crust, so thick you can walk on it. Into this huge, 10 sq km tailings pond nearby factories discharge water loaded with chemicals used to process the 17 most sought after minerals in the world."
Local residents reported health issues including aching legs, diabetes, osteoporosis and chest problems, The Guardian wrote.
South Africa has also been held up for turning a blind eye to the health impacts of mining.
"The platinum sector in South Africa has been criticized for performing very poorly on human rights — even within the raw materials sector," Müller said.
In 2012, security forces killed 34 miners who had been protesting poor working conditions and low wages at a mine owned by the British company Lonmin. What became known as the "Marikana massacre" triggered several spontaneous strikes across the country's mining sector.
Müller says miners can still face exposure to acid drainage — a frequent byproduct of platinum mining — that can cause chemical burns and severe lung damage. Though this can be prevented by a careful waste system.
Some progress was made in 2016 when the South African government announced plans to make mining companies pay $800 million (€679 million) for recycling acid mine water. But they didn't all comply. In 2020, activists sued Australian-owned mining company Mintails and the government to cover the cost of environmental cleanup.
Another massive issue around mining is water consumption. Since the extraction of critical raw materials is very water intensive, drought prone countries such as South Africa, have witnessed an increase in conflicts over supply.
For years, industry, government and the South African public debated – without a clear agreement – whether companies should get privileged access to water and how much the population may suffer from shortages.
Mining in Brazil: Replacing Nature, People, Land Rights
Beyond the direct health and environmental impact of mining toxic substances, quarrying critical raw materials destroys livelihoods, as developments in Brazil demonstrate.
"Brazil is the major worldwide niobium producer and reserves in [the state of] Minas Gerais would last more than 200 years [at the current rate of demand]," said Juliana Siqueira-Gay, environmental engineer and Ph.D. student at the University of São Paulo.
While the overall number of niobium mining requests is stagnating, the share of claims for Indigenous land has skyrocketed from 3 to 36 percent within one year. If granted, 23 percent of the Amazon forest and the homeland of 222 Indigenous groups could fall victim to deforestation in the name of mining, a study by Siqueira-Gay finds.
In early 2020, Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro signed a bill which would allow corporations to develop areas populated by Indigenous communities in the future. The law has not yet entered into force, but "this policy could have long-lasting negative effects on Brazil's socio-biodiversity," said Siqueira-Gay.
One example are the niobium reserves in Seis Lagos, in Brazil's northeast, which could be quarried to build electrolytic capacitors for smartphones.
"They overlap the Balaio Indigenous land and it would cause major impacts in Indigenous communities by clearing forests responsible for providing food, raw materials and regulating the local climate," Siqueira-Gay explained.
She says scientific good practice guidelines offer a blueprint for sustainable mining that adheres to human rights and protects forests. Quarries in South America — and especially Brazil — funded by multilaterial banks like the International Finance Corporation of the World Bank Group have to follow these guidelines, Siqueira-Gay said.
They force companies to develop sustainable water supply, minimize acid exposure and re-vegetate mined surfaces. "First, negative impacts must be avoided, then minimized and at last compensated — not the other way around."
Reposted with permission from DW.