FREE

You are here: Home / Archives for Energy and Climate Investment

A New Climate Chapter: The 2022 US Inflation Reduction Act Spurs Action to Address Climate Change

By FREE Staff

Joe Biden signs Inflation Reduction Act (source White House Twitter)

Attempts by the federal government to enact meaningful climate policy have often been stifled due to political intransigence and infighting.

A recent phenomenon documented by the Foundation for Renewable Energy & Environment (FREE) research team is the growing hostility by the national Republican party towards climate science and action, with Democratic party efforts failing to push past this opposition.

The gap in climate action has motivated significant state and local climate effort, forming a ‘polycentric layer’ of ambition that is accelerating the United States energy transition. In particular, local governments have taken the lead implementing progressive climate policy that pushes cities and states to reimagine their economies in the era of an energy transition.

Cities and states have introduced everything from aggressive vehicle emission cut mandates to
city-to-city knowledge sharing through coalitions, like the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate
& Energy.

Now, finally, the federal government is getting involved. The Biden administration passed the
Inflation Reduction Act in August 2022, the biggest piece of climate-fighting legislation in U.S.
history. The law includes billions of dollars for tax incentives, government programs, and other
resources to advance the country’s clean energy transition.

FREE research into the Inflation Reduction Act found that, combined with the previously passed Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the federal government has announced over $465 billion in clean energy related funding (research soon to be published on freefutures.org/publications). Research estimates suggest that the federal effort will help the U.S. reach its target of cutting its greenhouse gas emissions by 40% below 2005 levels by 2030.

The bill includes a host of possible funding opportunities for states and localities to take
advantage of, such as loans to finance the building of electric distribution, transmission, and
generation facilities, or loans to aid in the production of sustainable aviation fuel.

This financing is meant to spread and strengthen the country’s energy transition, as well as
create jobs and economic growth. Such a strategy also aims to create greater buy-in for the
energy transition by spreading the economic might that the Biden administration says the law
and its many programs will bring.

Observers say that promise is off to a good start. The World Economic Forum found that in the
six months after the law was passed, almost $90 billion dollars had been invested in the
country, creating more than 100,000 jobs. The pace of investment is accelerating as another
study found that, by the time nine months had passed since enactment of the bill, over $150
billion in private clean energy investments have been announced – more than the total private
investment volume in clean energy from 2017- 2021.

The IRA’s investment, funding, and programming brings new opportunities for local and state
governments. Powered with new federal financial and policy support, these locations can create
programs that aid citizens in the fight against climate change.

One of the key ways the law does so is through the $250 billion expansion of the Department of
Energy’s financing authority in its Loan Programs Office. This increase will allow the department
to help states meet their own climate emissions targets and to carry out the goals set by the law.
States will play a key role in the IRA’s implementation by regulating the planning, siting, and
permitting of energy projects, according to a blog post from the Center for American Progress.

The law works to complement existing efforts by cities and states to push their residents and
businesses to implement more progressive climate policies. It includes $4.5 billion for grants
related to the high-efficiency home electric rebate program, as well as $1 billion in the Department of Housing and Urban Development loans for efficiency and resiliency upgrades to affordable housing.

The Biden administration is making it clear it’s ready to aid state-by-state. In Delaware, for
example, it’s offering grants to help the state and local governments implement the latest
building energy codes, which would save the average new homeowner in Delaware 9.8% on
their utility bills.

And at the individual level, the law will help make it more affordable for residents in the state to
install energy-efficient appliances. This includes rebates that cover 50-100% of the cost of
electric appliances such as heat pumps, water heaters, clothes dryers, stoves, and ovens.
In addition, it offers tax credits to cover 30% of the cost to install solar panels on a home.

These types of incentives and financial aid can help local governments to bring progressive
climate policies and ideas to fruition. They also help to bypass the constant infighting between
the national Democratic and Republican parties that has all too often squashed climate policy
change.

By giving local governments more financial capacity to enact their own policies and
programming, it brings change to the community level, where it can be more acutely felt and
quality of life improvements for families can be seen.

Sustainable Strides: How U.S. Corporate Pledges and Green Investments Are Shaping a Sustainable Future

By FREE Staff

Photo By: Karolina Grabowska

The United States, with the deployment of Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) funds, is actively pursuing greater policy action in the fight against climate change. The corporate sector is making strides to do its part. Two aspects of corporate action stand out. First, companies across the United States are increasingly willing to publicly commit to a 100% renewable energy future. Second, private sector investments into sustainable energy, clean transportation, battery storage, and energy efficiency are being deployed that might lead to the realization of the 100% renewable energy objectives.

Public Corporate Pledges for a 100% Renewable Energy Future

Companies across the country are spending billions of dollars on public campaigns to outline ambitious emissions targets that promise to transition towards renewable energy. A key piece of these campaigns has become public pledges to transition to 100% renewable energy use. 

The global initiative RE100 is helping to encourage and centralize these plans. It’s gathered a group of more than 400 companies from across 175 markets worldwide, with each member committing to their own goals for renewable energy use both in their owned operations and throughout their supply chains.  The initiative includes a baseline target for all members to consume 100% renewable energy by no later than 2050. The groups include household names like 3M, Apple, Johnson & Johnson, and Nike.

RE100 touted several improvements in reaching these goals in its 2022 disclosure report, particularly when it comes to the availability of commissioning date information for the reported purchase of renewable energy. Last year, members disclosed a commissioning date for 43% of the reported purchases, up from just 17% in 2021. 

The increase is a positive sign of improved transparency and proactivity in a market that often feels opaque and with empty promises of change. This shift is also due in large part to the increased public scrutiny of corporate carbon emissions and consumers’ push for more sustainable products and actions. The amount of renewable energy that members are using is also increasing. In 2021, renewable energy made up 49% of total energy procurement among members, up from just over 30% in 2016. 

In its industry outlook, the 2022 report underscores the domino effect that the corporate energy transition can have. A continuous increase in renewable energy procurement can send price signals to develop an electricity grid with more capacity. In addition, given that RE100 members must procure renewable energy from every market in which they operate, the pledges can push more global markets to offer enhanced supplies of renewable energy. 

Corporate Sustainability Investments

The Inflation Reduction Act significantly raises the corporate sustainability campaigns’ probability of success. Since its passage, over $150 billion in private clean energy investments has been announced – more than the total U.S. private investment volume in clean energy achieved over 2017-2021 (American Clean Power, 2023).

The $150 billion investment is connected to the deployment of over 96 gigawatt (GW) of clean energy capacity. On its website, American Clean Power provides updated numbers showing that, as of July 31, 2023, over $270 billion in capital investment to support utility-scale clean energy projects and manufacturing facilities has been publicly announced since the passage of the IRA. In total, their inventory suggests that 83 facilities for the sustainable energy transition are expected to be completed or expanded – an investment that could produce as many as 30,000 new jobs.  The investments are geared predominantly towards solar energy battery storage. 

Realizing a 100% Renewable Energy Future

Together, tools like public corporate pledges for emissions cuts and corporate investments for sustainable energy help shape a future that is more responsive to the climate change challenge. Corporate action in the U.S. and across the globe represents an essential puzzle piece to achieve the sustainable energy transition. The support structure put in place by the federal government and state and local governments appears capable of rapidly driving forward the U.S. clean energy sector. As state-level governments continue to raise their ambitions, for instance through raising the clean electricity targets articulated in Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS), the U.S. seems on course to transform the energy sector.

As we move towards the next decade and the target date for many of these corporate sustainability campaigns, the ‘polycentric’ layer of action identified by the FREE research team vitalizes policy and civic society and empowers their ability to demand corporate accountability and responsibility to ensure these campaigns come to fruition. 

Simply Switching to Electric Vehicles Today is Not Enough to Address Climate Change

By: Deborah Bleviss

There is no doubt that purchasing an electric vehicle (EV) is quite chic right now, and it is indeed true that non-fossil-fuel-based vehicles will play an increasingly important role in achieving net zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2050. Moreover, focusing on personal vehicles makes sense; they account for almost 60 percent of the GHG emissions from transportation today in the US, with transportation making up the largest sectoral share of US GHG emissions, 27 percent (EPA, Transportation GHG Emissions).

But simply buying and using EVs today is not enough. Here are the reasons why:

  1. Electricity generation is still overwhelmingly from fossil fuels. Indeed, fossil fuels generated more than 60 percent of utility-produced electricity in 2021 (EIA, Electricity Generation by Source). Hence, EVs are not GHG free when tracing electricity back to how it is generated. But they are better than a fossil-fueled vehicle. A typical gasoline vehicle produces over 11,000 pounds of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent emissions per year. In comparison, a fully electric vehicle produces less than 4,000 pounds, while a plug-in hybrid (runs on gasoline and electricity) produces less than 6,000 pounds. A typical fossil fuel hybrid produces not much more than a plug-in hybrid, just over 6,000 pounds of CO2 equivalent emissions (DOE Alternative Fuels Data Center, Vehicle Emissions).
  • Electric vehicles remain outside the affordability scale for most Americans. Their prices continue to be higher than fossil-fueled vehicles. As of June 2022, the average cost of an electric vehicle was $54,000 compared with the average price of a fossil-fueled vehicle of $44,400; both have risen sharply since the beginning of the year, 22 percent for EVs and 14 percent for fossil-fueled vehicles (Inside EVs, EV Prices). Moreover, the dominant electric vehicle brand on the market today is Tesla, whose models all exceed the average price of a fossil-fueled vehicle, ranging from $47,000 to over $200,000 (Motortrend, Price of a Tesla). Hence, while demand for EVs has increased, they remain a small fraction of overall personal vehicle sales, estimated at just over 5 percent (Car and Driver, EV Sales ).
  • Price aside, electric vehicles have other issues that make their potential purchase a problem for would-be buyers. First, their ranges are generally less than for fossil-fueled vehicles, especially high-efficiency vehicles. Lower-priced EVs, in particular, tend to have lower ranges. Ranges for EVs today typically are 200 to 300 miles, with some still getting less than that and a few, generally with price tags over $100,000, getting ranges in the 400-to-500-mile range (Inside EVs, EV range). In contrast, the 2022 hybrid Toyota Camry LE, with a combined fuel economy of 52 miles per gallon, a base price just below $28,000, and a CO2 equivalent emissions of 5,600 pounds per year, has a range of 686 miles (fueleconomy.gov). Added to this problem is the limited infrastructure enabling electric vehicle owners to fuel up when their fuel supply is low. There are 46,000 public EV charging stations in the US today, of which 41,000 are slow-charging level 2 chargers that can take 4 to 10 hours to charge a fully electric vehicle (US News, Charging Stations). In contrast, there are 145,000 fossil fuel service stations in the US, and refueling takes minutes (American Petroleum Institute, No. of Service Stations ).
  • Using electric vehicles instead of fossil-fueled vehicles in congested urban conditions does nothing to relieve the traffic congestion that exacerbates fossil fuel use and thereby increases greenhouse gas emissions. While EVs do not directly consume more fossil fuel in traffic congestion and do not add to local emissions, their usage in urban congested areas only adds to the number of vehicles in those areas. As a result, everybody slows down and is subjected to stop-and-go conditions that cause fossil-fueled vehicles to consume more fuel and emit more greenhouse gas emissions. Not using personal vehicles at all—electric or fossil fuel—in congested urban conditions and instead using public transportation is the best strategy for reducing GHG emissions in these areas. The National Academy of Sciences has recently estimated that a person taking public transportation results in a 55 percent reduction in their CO2 equivalent emissions compared with driving or ride-hailing (NAS, Update on Public Transportation’s Impact on GHG Emissions ).
credit: Pexels

So what should consumers, businesses and governments do to reduce greenhouse gases in personal travel?

  1. Buying energy-efficient fossil-fueled cars is a good short- to medium-term strategy. As already noted, a fossil fuel hybrid produces half of the emissions of a typical fossil fuel car. Purchase and use of these vehicles will buy us time to address the price, range, infrastructure, and fossil fuel electricity generation problems facing today’s electric vehicles.
  • To the maximum extent possible, leave your personal vehicle behind—fossil fuel or electric–and use public transportation if you are traveling in an urban area. It is indeed true that public transportation does not function well in some parts of the country. This makes advocacy for investing in functional public transportation systems critical. It is essential to ensure that public transportation systems are inter-connected in an urban area (for example, buses and rail transit systems) and that public transportation users can access this type of transportation from the first mile of their commute to the last.
  • With public transportation so crucial in reducing GHG emissions, prioritize converting public transportation vehicles totally off fossil fuels. Already the percentage of electric buses worldwide, estimated at 13 percent in 2018 (Bloomberg, Electric Buses ), substantially exceeds the percentage of personal vehicles globally that are electrified, estimated at 1.6 percent at the beginning of 2022 (IEA, Electric Vehicles). Being able to plug electric buses into renewably generated electricity goes one step further. Montgomery County, Maryland, is leading the way here, having just started a program that enables county electric buses to recharge through electricity generated by a solar microgrid (Montgomery County, Solar Microgrid for Electric Buses ).
  • Be strategic in driving electric vehicle prices down, including a focus on fleets. Increasing the volume of electric vehicles sold is critical to driving down costs. Focusing on fleets to do this, owned by governments, private companies and car sharing companies such as ZipCar, makes sense. They can purchase en masse rather than buying one at a time. The US federal fleet is under a mandate to green its vehicles and hence can be an important source for increasing the size of the EV market. And among private car-sharing companies, we are already seeing many engaged in demonstrations in cities globally where EVs are among consumers’ choices.
  • Similarly, think creatively about how to increase the range of electric vehicles, not only through better batteries but also by using renewable technologies in the vehicles to capture energy for usage by the vehicle. These may include solar panels on vehicle roofs and wind turbines that capture the energy of air blowing through vehicle grilles. Indeed, Toyota has been testing a rooftop solar system on its Prius Prime since 2019.
  • Invest in solar photovoltaic arrays and potentially other renewable technologies that can directly charge personal EVs. This avoids the usage of the fossil-fuel-intensive electricity grid. These types of investments can start with demonstration programs, potentially in cities with extensive roof infrastructure upon which solar panels can be placed. While these panels should first be used to provide needed energy services for the buildings on which they are placed, by improving the energy efficiency of these buildings, there is the potential for these solar panels to generate more power than is needed for the buildings, power that can then be used to charge EVs.
  • Set clear goals and timelines for converting the electric grid away from fossil fuels across the country. Ultimately, the electric grid will probably remain the major source of electricity for charging electric vehicles. Hence, it is essential that the grid move as quickly as possible to generate electricity from non-fossil sources. This also benefits decarbonization efforts in other sectors that use electricity. But for electric vehicles truly to be fossil fuel-free, the electricity they use must not be generated from fossil fuels.
  • Keep the door open to using other fossil fuel-free fuels for personal vehicles. The most likely alternative fuel is hydrogen-based fuel cells, which both Toyota and Hyundai are seriously exploring. But biofuels may have a role as well, for example, in a country like Brazil, which already has substituted a substantial biofuels/fossil fuels mix into fuels for its personal vehicles.

Transportation will be one of the hardest sectors to move off fossil fuels, if for no other reason than this sector is almost exclusively dependent on these fuels. If we are to be successful in decarbonizing the transportation sector, it is important to recognize how challenging this will be and not leap to simplistic solutions. Electric vehicles have an important role to play, especially in the future, but they are far from the predominant solution today.

Seoul 1 GWp ‘Solar City’ Highlighted at Mayors Forum

NYC_small
Dr. Byrne and Mayor Park Won-soon interview in Seoul, Korea

The 2019 Mayors Forum (part of IREC held in Seoul in October) featured Seoul’s 1 GWp Solar City Initiative. FREE helped the City to design this ambitious program as part of the FREE-Seoul Metropolitan Government (SMG) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). Dr. Byrne delivered the keynote at the Forum, which drew 37 mayors from 25 countries. Mayor Park Won Soon chaired the Forum.

Seoul Metropolitan Government (SMG) plans to invest $1.5 billion in their strategy to deploy 1 gigawatt (GWp) of solar energy by 2022. As part of the MOU, FREE has provided the modeling and technical assessment of the city’s rooftop potential as hosts of a distributed solar power plant. FREE also calculated the economics of the project and used a financing structure it has developed for city-scale investment in such a project. (FREE has published results of it modeling and financing approach for 5 cities in addition to Seoul: New York City, London, Munich, Amsterdam, and Tokyo.)

In November 2017, Seoul Metropolitan Government (SMG) declared its intention to deploy 1 gigawatt of rooftop solar as part of its “Solar City Seoul” master plan. Over the next five years, Seoul city government plans to invest $1.5 billion to make the project a reality. This is a significant step forward in the future of Seoul’s sustainability contribution and follows in the wake of the very successful first stages of the city’s One Less Nuclear Power Plant (OLNPP) initiative. 1 Under initiatives like the OLNPP, Seoul focused heavily on promoting energy conservation and efficiency improvement. With this new Solar City Seoul plan, the city is ramping up investment in energy production as well. FREE applauds this direction chartered by the Mayor of Seoul, Mr. Park Won-soon.

FREE has been actively advising the city for five years on the prospects of becoming a “solar city.” As part of the Seoul International Energy Advisory Council (SIEAC), Dr. John Byrne has described to city officials the potential of rooftop solar across the 10-million people strong city. FREE has also published several refereed articles analyzing the emergent role of the solar city concept coupled with new priorities, such as policy effectiveness, solar financing support, and market mechanisms available to Seoul to explore this potential in detail. 2 For example, research we have conducted shows Seoul has a full deployment potential of about 10 gigawatts. 3

FREE attended the launch of the initiative. Mayor Park Won-soon and Dr. Byrne were interviewed by leading Korean newspapers on the strategy. During an interview with Kyunghyang Shinmun, Mayor Park underscored FREE’s role, noting that he “had an opportunity to take a view of the downtown area in Seoul from Namsan Mountain with Prof. Byrne. As I talked with him, I realized that Seoul has a significant PV technical potential.” 4

A striking feature of the Solar City Seoul plan is the commitment to increase household-level PV deployment through miniature solar generators installed on rooftops and verandas or so-called “mini-PV” technology. This prong of the plan will engage more than 100,000 households in helping to supply solar energy to the city! This is exactly in tune with the Mayor’s original pursuit of the idea that “citizens are energy.” The initiative will make solar energy a part of the everyday life of Seoul’s citizens and businesses.

FREE has worked extensively on the concept of the “solar city” – the citywide deployment of rooftop solar energy. Our work shows not only that Seoul has significant potential to develop itself as a solar city but that cities like New York, Tokyo, London, Amsterdam, and Munich possess similar resources. 5 Indeed, a paper published in the International Journal of Urban Sciences by the FREE research team highlights the fact that this opportunity is common to most cities around the world. 6 An investigation of the market, finance, and policy considerations associated with solar city deployment found that the concept is not only technically feasible but it also creates practical economic benefits, including job creation and expansion of local green industries, and results in significant environmental benefits by shrinking the city’s carbon footprint by more than 10 percent. 7

“I will make Seoul a place where PV can be found everywhere”, the Mayor said. The FREE team will be there to continue to help make this ambition become unavoidable reality.

  1. FREE published a blog article on the OLNPP initiative which can be accessed at: https://freefutures.org/one-less-nuclear-power-plant-seouls-commitment-to-a-low-carbon-and-non-nuclear-city/
  2. For more information on our publications, please see freefutures.org/publications
  3. Byrne, J., Taminiau, J., Kurdgelashvili, L., & Kim, K. N. (2015). A review of the solar city concept and methods to assess rooftop solar electric potential, with an illustrative application to the city of Seoul. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 41, 830-844. doi://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.08.023
  4. Translated from the Korean newspaper Kyunghyang (article, in Korean, can be found at: https://news.khan.co.kr/kh_news/khan_art_view.html?artid=201712072105005&code=100100
  5. Byrne, J., Taminiau, J., Kim, K. N., Seo, J., & Lee, J. (2016). A solar city strategy applied to six municipalities: Integrating market, finance, and policy factors for infrastructure-scale photovoltaic development in Amsterdam, London, Munich, New York, Seoul, and Tokyo. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, 5(1), 68-88. doi:10.1002/wene.182
  6. Byrne, J., Taminiau, J., Seo, J., Lee, J., & Shin, S. (2017). Are solar cities feasible? A review of current research. International Journal of Urban Sciences, 1-18. doi:10.1080/12265934.2017.1331750
  7. Byrne, J., Taminiau, J., Kim, K. N., Lee, J., & Seo, J. (2017). Multivariate analysis of solar city economics: Impact of energy prices, policy, finance, and cost on urban photovoltaic power plant implementation. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, , n/a. doi:10.1002/wene.241

The Scale of the Energy Access Gap

By Benjamin M. Attia
Access to electricity is a key catalyst correlated with economic development.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) recently estimated that over 1.5 billion people do not have access to affordable electricity, representing one quarter of the world’s population [1]. In the absence of aggressive new policies and significant financing, it is estimated that that number will drop to only 1.3 billion by 2030 [1]. The United Nations’ (UN) Sustainable Energy for All (SE4ALL) initiative, which is working toward a goal of global universal energy access by 2030, estimates that approximately 600 million of these unelectrified people live in Sub-Saharan Africa [2]. This number is expected to rise to approximately 645 million by 2030 under a business-as-usual scenario due to expected explosive population growth [2, 3]. This widening gap of energy access is a complex and multidimensional problem and represents an important hindrance to economic development and social change in the developing world.

Historically, the access gap since the initial commercialization of electricity has “consistently been between 1 and 2 billion people… as grid expansion has roughly paced global population” growth [4]. This suggests that the access gap is a reflection of a persistent lack of equity in distribution. In fact, in 1983, Krugmann and Goldemberg famously estimated that at 1983 global consumption levels, the “energy cost of satisfying the basic human needs” of every person on the planet was well within the available supply of energy resources [5, p. 60].

Today, the consumption and distribution inequalities are even more pronounced. In 2011, the average American consumed 13,240 kilowatt hours (kWh) per person per year, while the average Ethiopian consumed only 56 kWh [6]. Further, across all of Sub-Saharan Africa, annual per capita kWh use is one-sixth the load requirements of a relatively efficient American refrigerator [7]. Globally, the poorest three-quarters of the world’s population comprise less than ten percent of total energy consumption [8, p. 5].

The inequities that underline energy poverty and energy access are also fundamentally connected to climate change. Looking ahead, the world’s demand for electricity is estimated to increase by more than 70% by 2040, and the World Bank and IEA estimate that a doubling in installed energy capacity will be necessary to meet the anticipated growing demands of emerging markets [9], [10]. Despite the accelerating paradigm shift to low-carbon and renewable energy generation technologies, there is a paradoxical irony to the link between development and climate change which has left the poorest countries with the lowest contributions to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as the most vulnerable and most susceptible to the effects of climate change [11, p. 591, 12]. As markets evolve to value avoided GHG emissions [13, p. 215], reconciling the joint–and possibly conflicting– goals of development through universal energy access and combating climate change will accelerate, but at present, the inequity in energy access is only further exacerbated by the parallel inequities with respect to climate change adaptation measures.

Many scholars agree that access to electricity in itself is not fully sufficient to bring about the required economic and social development to break the cycle of poverty [14, p. 1058, 15, p. 2194]. It has also been widely settled that access to electricity is a key catalyst correlated with economic development and that a lack of electricity access is a key bottleneck to growth [16], see [17] for comprehensive rebuttal]. However, approaches for tackling the problems associated with energy poverty are often difficult to scale up because of the difficulties associated with navigating this uneven technical, sociocultural, agricultural, and institutional landscape, and, as will be demonstrated below, the multidimensionality of energy access inhibits scalability of any one catch-all solution.

The IEA estimates that 30% of those without access to electricity would best be served by grid extension, 52.5% would be best served by micro-grids, and 17.5% would best be served by stand-alone energy systems [3, p. 14]. There is a clear need for investment in rural electrification initiatives at all three levels and a clear gap in understanding routes and sinks for effective impact investing [3, p. 14]. National grid extension programs and firms selling small energy systems are generally much better funded than the community-scale solution of micro-grids, despite their significant potential market share and niche ability to provide scale benefits, rapid deployment, flexibility of business models, and energy storage, security, and reliability [3, p. 15]. The micro-grid space is rife with opportunity to build markets, innovate new business models, develop new financing mechanisms, and provide the sustainable development benefits of renewable electrification and increased economic potential.

As one development professional put it, “If rural [people] have power in their lives, they will have more power over their lives” [16]. Access to electricity is not the answer to the greater global problems of poverty and inequity, but can be a good place to start.

References
[1] “World Energy Outlook 2014,” Paris, France, 2014.
[2] SE4ALL, “Energy for all: Financing Access for the poor,” in Energy for All Conference, 2011.
[3] M. Franz, N. Peterschmidt, M. Rohrer, and B. Kondev, “Mini-grid Policy Toolkit: Policy and Business Frameworks for Successful Mini-grid Roll-outs,” EUEI Partnership Dialogue Facility, Escheborn, 2014.
[4] P. Alstone, D. Gershenson, and D. M. Kammen, “Decentralized energy systems for clean electricity access,” Nat. Clim. Chang., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 305–314, 2015.
[5] H. Krugmann and J. Goldemberg, “The energy cost of satisfying basic human needs,” Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 45–60, 1983.
[6] C. Kenny, “If Everyone Gets Electricity, Can the Planet Survive?,” The Atlantic, 2015.
[7] “Power Africa Annual Report,” 2014.
[8] J. Tomei and D. Gent, “Equity and the energy trilemma Delivering sustainable energy access in low-income communities,” International Institute for Environment & Development, London, United Kingdom, 2015.
[9] “World Energy Outlook 2015 Factsheet,” Paris, France, 2015.
[10] R. K. Akikur, R. Saidur, H. W. Ping, and K. R. Ullah, “Comparative study of stand-alone and hybrid solar energy systems suitable for off-grid rural electrification: A review,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 27, pp. 738–752, 2013.
[11] A. Yadoo and H. Cruickshank, “The role for low carbon electrification technologies in poverty reduction and climate change strategies: A focus on renewable energy mini-grids with case studies in Nepal, Peru and Kenya,” Energy Policy, vol. 42, pp. 591–602, 2012.
[12] J. Byrne, Y.-D. Wang, H. Lee, and J. Kim, “An equity and sustainability-based policy response to global climate change,” Energy Policy, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 335–343, 1998.
[13] U. Deichmann, C. Meisner, S. Murray, and D. Wheeler, “The economics of renewable energy expansion in rural Sub-Saharan Africa,” Energy Policy, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 215–227, 2011.
[14 A. Bhide and C. R. Monroy, “Energy poverty: A special focus on energy poverty in India and renewable energy technologies,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 1057–1066, 2011.
[15] B. Mainali and S. Silveira, “Financing off-grid rural electrification: Country case Nepal,” Energy, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 2194–2201, 2011.
[16] D. Mans, “Back to the Future: Africa’s Mobile Revolution Should Inspire Rural Energy Solutions,” Huffington Post, 20-May-2014.
[17] L. A. Odarno, “Negotiating the Labrynth of Modernity’s Promise: A Paradigm Analysis of Energy Poverty in Peri-Urban Kumasi, Ghana,” University of Delaware, 2014.

Connect

Foundation for Renewable Energy and Environment
630 5th Avenue, Suite 2000
New York, NY 10111

Mailing Address:
1013 Beards Hill Rd.
STE 101-M #200
Aberdeen, MD 21001

E: contact@freefutures.org
P: +1 212 705 8758
P: +1 215 494 7383 (Pennsylvania)

SUPPORT FREE

Social