We Need to Control Our Destiny in Energy Policy — But Who’s “We”?

In a recent post I suggested that renewable energy throws a new set of variables into an already complex energy market: intermittencies, transmission issues, suitability for certain kinds of storage, etc.  At the end, I asked: Are we intellectually capable — and honest enough — to make all this happen?

In preparing for a talk I’m giving at a conference later this month, I started to think about that.  We?  Who’s “we”?  The citizens of Earth? Am I implying that the seven billion inhabitants of Earth have some collective voice in the matter?

In truth, most of the decisions that this world makes on a day-to-day or year-to-year basis with respect to energy policy fall largely into the hands of a very few billionaires, whose fortunes were made in the energy monopolies, and, though those fortunes seem bound to ebb in the future, will certainly not go down without a considerable fight. 

It’s clear that our civilization will, in fact, get to renewable energy – purely because it must.  Fossil fuels, starting with oil, will prove too costly in the long run.  Supply and demand alone will ensure that the energy stored here over the last hundred million years (and consumed without a thought over the last century) will soon become unacceptably expensive. 

But what will happen as we struggle along this supply and demand curve?  Will this become, as most of our scientists say, a tough time for a growing population of people and the biosphere that supports it?  

It’s clear that there’s more at stake here than the fortunes of a few billionaires.  May we make the right decisions.  Oops — there I go again..  Who’s “we”?

Tagged with: ,
One comment on “We Need to Control Our Destiny in Energy Policy — But Who’s “We”?
  1. Chris says:

    You are thinking big! A problem that effects the whole planet. But I think you have defined “we” very well when it comes to energy. Now how about the debt crisis? Who are the actual “we” making the decisions that are causing the problem? What is their motivation? Defeating Obama at the cost of destroying the world trust in our currency seems a bit selfish? Could the motivation really be as simple as that?