Electrification alone could cut current energy use in half without lowering heating and cooling temperatures or reducing the number of cars.
《Electrify Everything》 points out the inefficiency of fossil fuels and presents an innovative vision for an electric energy transition that is possible with the technology we have.
Author Saul Griffiths, a former energy and climate policy advisor in the Biden administration, captures our attention by contrasting the 20% energy efficiency of internal combustion engine vehicles with the 72% efficiency of electric vehicles. The author, an engineer with a PhD from MIT, argues for the massive electrification of the energy system, highlighting the advancement and cost competitiveness of renewable energy technologies.
We already have cheap, clean energy production technology, and switching to 100% electric power would require only half the energy we consume today, requiring only World War II-level mobilization to implement.
The positive tone, based on an analysis of the success story of the "arsenal of democracy" that led to the end of the war, washes away the fatigue of fear marketing.
Creating a sense of crisis that disaster will strike if we don't do something eco-friendly right now won't bring about change.
As the author says, we need new technologies that don't cause any inconvenience to anyone.
We already have the answer: electricity.
Plus, the costs are getting cheaper.

Another unique feature is the commentary written by translators who are experts in the fields of science, technology, and energy.
Grid construction, expansion of renewable energy, and electrification of the industrial and transportation sectors are key tasks of Korea's energy policy.
When read together, the author's ideas and interpretation will serve as crucial reference material for Korea, which has a highly dependent on energy imports and a manufacturing-centric economic structure.

How can we achieve the lowest energy costs while electrifying everything? First, policymakers must comprehensively revise federal, state, and municipal laws and regulations designed for the fossil fuel era.
Because they are preventing America from having the cheapest electricity in history.
The United States must bring technological solutions into the realm of large-scale industrial production, just as it did to win World War II.

---From "Entering"

The reason I still see hope is because many of the obstacles blocking a clean energy future are more institutional and bureaucratic than technical.
We already have the technological means to address climate change, clean our air, and create a greener future, all while maintaining the comfort of our cars and homes.
Many people believe that a miracle is needed to solve the problem of climate change.
But the truth is that if we put in the effort in the right way, we can fully solve the problem.
Many people say that the cost burden is too high, but if done correctly, it can actually save money.
While there are concerns that jobs will be lost, embracing a more environmentally conscious future is more likely to create millions of jobs.
---From "Chapter 1: A Ray of Hope in the Darkness"

Achieving 100% electric vehicle adoption requires mandatory policies and strong financial incentives.
It usually takes decades for a new technology to achieve a dominant position, gradually increasing its market share year after year, relying solely on market forces.
For example, in 2018, electric vehicles accounted for only 2% of total vehicle sales in the United States.
But in 2019, electric vehicles accounted for 5% of all vehicle sales in California.
---From "Chapter 2: There's Less Time Than You Think"

The transportation sector is the second largest sector in terms of energy consumption, after the industrial sector.
Although air travel gets a lot of flak, road transport actually accounts for the majority of energy consumption in the transportation sector.
Road transport uses more than ten times the energy of air travel.
About 75% of this road energy is used by small vehicles such as cars and trucks to move people.
Surprisingly, nearly half of these are used for short trips of less than 32 kilometers, mostly for everyday purposes such as commuting to work and taking family to church, shopping, and school.
In non-highway transport, air travel is the largest energy consumer, followed by ships and trains.
A fully loaded modern jet can achieve fuel economy of around 25 kilometers per liter per passenger, making long-distance travel more efficient than driving alone.
---From Chapter 4, How Do We Know What We Know?

The transport energy that can be provided with the same amount of electricity is only 0.72 for electric trains, 0.24 for hydrogen cars, and 0.1 for gasoline synthetic fuel.

Generating the electricity we need today is already incredibly difficult.
The claim that we need to produce three to five times as much electricity to enjoy the convenience of using fuels that were widespread in the 20th century is absurd.
It's like Henry Ford building a metal horse and trying to make it run on oil.
This basic math serves as a principle we can apply to all our decarbonization choices.
---From "Chapter 6: Electrify!"

Adding up all these savings, we conclude that we only need to supply about 42% of the primary energy we currently use with renewable energy.
This is certainly a surprising figure.
The United States could cut its energy use by more than half without introducing any other efficiency measures other than electrification.
Without lowering your heating and cooling temperature, without downsizing your vehicle, or without downsizing your home.
Moreover, electrification is a “no regrets” choice.
Additional benefits can be achieved when combined with other strategies, such as behavior change or efficiency improvements.
For these reasons, electrification is the only realistic strategy for decarbonization.
Electrification also frees us from the paralysis of “what should we do?” and serves as a powerful deterrent against those who seek to confuse the public about the future role of fossil fuels.
---From "Chapter 6: Electrify!"

Currently commercialized lithium-ion batteries can be charged and discharged approximately 1,000 times.
Although it is possible to extend the lifespan slightly, the cost per charge/discharge can still be around 10 to 25 cents per kilowatt-hour (¢/kWh).
My research suggests that battery life needs to be doubled or tripled from its current 1,000 cycles to bring the cost per charge/discharge down to a few cents per kilowatt-hour.

The energy industry landscape will be completely transformed when self-consumption rooftop solar power and battery storage systems (BESS) are combined to become cheaper than grid power.
Those of my friends who are optimistic about BESS call this moment the energy singularity, the point when the cost of batteries becomes cheaper than the cost of transmission and distribution to the grid.
---From "Chapter 8 24 Hours a Day, 7 Days a Week, 365 Days a Year"

The cost of wind and solar power has been falling rapidly since the 2010s.
Even innovators have a hard time keeping up.
In 2006, I founded Makani Power, a wind energy company that uses the principles of kite flying.
The company's goal was to produce wind energy at a cost of 3 to 4 cents per kilowatt-hour, cheaper than natural gas and five to six times cheaper than other wind power plants at the time.
This project was really great.
We built a wing the size of a Boeing 747, attached it with giant cables, and made it spin at 320 kilometers per hour, withstanding 8G acceleration while generating megawatts of power.
Makani Power, backed by Google, has undergone an exciting development journey to bring its technology to reality, successfully completing an offshore installation and demonstration project in Norway in 2019 with Shell.
---From "It's cheap enough that you don't need to measure 10 sheets"

Clean energy technologies require more labor to manufacture, install, and maintain than fossil fuel technologies.
It takes more people to install and continuously operate a wind farm than it does to drill wells and operate pumps to produce the same amount of energy.
Renewable energy is free to fuel, while fossil fuels cost money.
However, utilizing this free renewable energy requires more labor and constant maintenance.
It is the optimal condition to invest more in labor costs rather than reducing fuel costs.
---From Chapter 15: Jobs, Jobs, and More Jobs

Let's say that the remaining power required, that is, 1,050 terawatt-hours, is supplied by renewable energy while nuclear power capacity remains at its current level.
Here too, division of roles among each power source is essential.
We assumed a ratio of 60% solar power, 30% offshore wind power, and 10% onshore wind power.

For solar power, 1 square kilometer is required for every 100 megawatts (MW) of installed capacity, and at a capacity factor of 16%, approximately 4,577 square kilometers of land is required to obtain 641 terawatt hours.
Taking infrastructure into account, this would require about 5,000 square kilometers – or 5% of South Korea's total land area, three times the size of Jeju Island and eight times the size of Seoul.

Solar power requires careful consideration of location.
At least because it is difficult to coexist with natural vegetation.
Agricultural solar power is possible, but it will take time to expand due to the burden of construction costs.
Onshore wind power differs from solar power in that it causes limited destruction of vegetation, and offshore wind power also damages only a portion of the seabed.
Therefore, solar power should be given top priority in utilizing a portion of artificially developed areas such as land, factory sites, and parking lots.

---From the Translator's Note