The Campaign to Discredit Clean Energy Can Only Intensify
I had lunch yesterday at the American Wind Energy Association conference with an interesting gentleman who, quite successfully from what I could discern, develops PV and wind projects in the U.S. and Latin America. The actual business model varies: where sometimes his team and he might sell the entire project when it’s shovel-ready, in other cases they like to retain an interest. A typical wind project might be 100 MW or so, where the usual PV effort is a fraction of that, perhaps a couple of MW.
He mentioned something that I thought I’d offer readers: an explanation of the fairly recent ruckus being raised about the government subsidies for solar and wind. “Why,” he asked me in a thoughtful tone, “do you think Fox News and congressional Republicans waited until now before starting their campaign to convince voters that renewable energy is a waste of money, a drain on the economy, a job-killer, part of a socialist agenda, etc.? The tax credits have been around for quite a while. Virtually everyone on both sides of the aisle were absolutely fine on this until very recently.”
“Well,” I replied, “My personal theory is that, when all this was in its infancy, no one thought it was worth the effort that would have been required to kill it. It wasn’t really a threat to the fossil fuel industry, and no one believed that it could possibly become one. Now, with wind at almost 5% of the national grid mix, and growing steadily, it’s a threat in a big way.”
“That’s exactly right,” he nodded. “Neither the fossil fuel boys nor the utilities saw this coming. They thought it was likely to go nowhere, and they figured they could simply ignore it. It turns out that this was a huge mistake for them. At this point their situation is especially dire, when you think about it, because the costs of PV and wind have fallen so dramatically. The cost of electricity from a natural gas project may be $60/MWh; my last wind project was at $22 with the PTC (production tax credit) — but even without the PTC, it’s still under $50. So now the gloves are off; it’s really going to get ugly.”
I’m afraid this guy is spot on. As the mid-term elections in the U.S. get closer, and 2016 right behind, watch what happens in terms of rhetoric, and the efforts to squash renewable energy. Keep an eye on legislative efforts to repeal RPSs (renewable portfolio standards), declaw the EPA, put an axe through tax incentives for solar and wind, get rid of net-metering provisions, and kill ARPA-E funding of cleantech R&D.
My prediction, sadly, is that nothing of any real value to a healthy environment will be exempt.
What about the subsidies for the fossil fuel industry???
Craig: I’m afraid you are right, but it’s like Mahatma Ghandi said about these things: “First they ignore you, then they try to discredit you, then they fight you, but in the end… you win”
Why? Well, it’s simple: Renewable energy is better in every respect, health wise, environmentally better, business better, job wise better. It’s Renewable Energy’s turn, it’s time, now is the time to realize all these things, and we must “evangelize” everyone around, convince them through facts that Renewable energy is the way to go. We are seeing it happen and we should use every trick under our sleeve to push it throgh, because it’s the truth.
For now, wind and solar are the stars, and other “brothers ” are going to join the group, like hydrokinetic, and other clean alternatives (turning into base options).
We can see now in Europe the effect of cheaper renewable energy on the fossil fueled energy suppliers, they are loosing business by the day, and are feeling it, and they are complaining.
We should be prepared for the coming battle, we should be prepared for the change of arms and our new micro and mid grids, with thousands of owners and a more distributed wealth. But we should not be sleeping or be distracted to the blows from the fossil guys. Fossil energy is becoming a fossil business.
Let’s put ourselves in their shoes: Who in his right mind would like to loose a nice business as they have? I wouldn’t. But things have to change, history is now revealing the new game board.
You make several excellent points here. Yes, I think we have to look at this transition from all sides. Personally, I’m quite grateful to the fossil fuel industry for what it did for us in the 20th Century. But now, it’s time for a new way to power or civilization.
Craig,
I have two points to add.
1. My wife and I are daily viewers of FOX News and have as of yet to hear them attack renewables, only fossil fuel subsidies. And having developed a BIPV solar encapsulation system that is projected to cost less than a non-solar roof therefore being in the business, I would have reacted immediately.
2. One of my sons is a manager for Bonneville Power, so we get more of the inside story. They are not against renewables. They are working to eliminate the need for fossil fuels. However, their fossil fuel facilities are paid for while those for renewables take on average 30 years to recover their investment. And, they are not able to charge enough for their power to pay for the conversion.
Jim
How can you, or anyone say their fossil fuel energy facilities are paid for?? Did you get a contract for continual fuel supply for free, and with health support? Secondly, your average of thirty years cost recocery on renewable energy is not in accordance with most others. Your biases are showing.
Phil,
You are misreading what I said. Bonneville Power is not building any new fossil fuel facilities and is working to eliminate the need for fossil fuels.
It is their investment in the equipment to supply the renewable energy provided them that is paid for over thirty years. Remember, wind and solar is not continuous and has to have back-up supplies.
I am not biased against renewables. As a developer of renewables as well as a transformational construction system that a home built with this system, the Oregon DOE projects will require but 24% of the energy the same home built to the Model Energy Code will consume, I would say that I am at the forefront on renewables. I just happen to have a son who is in a position to accurately discuss what the problems that are faced by the utility companies. It is taking a way of supplying electricity for over a hundred years and changing it overnight.
At the risk of being labeled a conspiracy theorist, allow me to point out (as was firmly recognized by Teddy Roosevelt, and a great many other powerful folks across the history of our species) that “capital organizes.”
The wealthy interests at the very “top” of our society – and who exert massive and undue influence in all areas of human endeavor – have no interest in a critically thinking and imaginative population over which to rule. Instead they encourage ignorance and demand obedience and conformity.
How does this apply to renewables? The controlling interests in our society have not yet decided it is to their private advantage to shift from filthy ancient sunlight to the clean modern stuff. The immensely profitable fossil energy industry is subsidized, according to a recent presidential speech, to the tune of $4 billion annually… that’s pretty rich music to march to.
Nuke tech is not an option. All currently operating and genuinely planned commercial nuclear fission energy technology is prohibitively expensive when all the costs are accounted for – mining, refining, construction, insuring, waste containment, facility lifespan, and final decommissioning. Further, given natural disasters, human error and sabotage/terrorism potential, the technology is clearly proven to be inherently dangerous to the biosphere just to operate. Advanced forms of nuclear are in their infancy and not being seriously pursued.
Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) is safe, clean, proven technology, and modern energy storage systems make it viable. Harvesting modern sunshine is much cleaner and safer (and cheaper in the long run) than sucking and digging up filthy prehistoric sunshine, dragging it dangerously all over the planet, burning it up, and pouring gigatons of the resulting prehistoric carbon into our modern sky year on year. Only bribery keeps that toxic filth marketable.
However beneficial various renewables will prove to our United States and health and well-being for ourselves and our progeny, there is a substantial transition cost for all those fossil firms, and they still continue to regard these clean resources as competition. Their formidable lobbying power ensures that the feeble attempts to subsidize renewables will continue to be sporadic, unpredictable and anemic. As has been pointed out, we may also expect the campaign of misinformation, concealment, and discredit to endure.
All the elections in the nation in the 2012 cycle cost something like $2 billion, and just ExxonMobil by itself profits something like 40 times that number in a single year. That means ExxonMobil could have bought all the elections in the country with about 2.5% of its PROFITS!
If ideas based on logic and sanity are going to have a chance in this game (the stakes of which could not be higher), we must stop the bribery.
Exxon-Mobil and its ilk are quite well organized, and not for altruistic public benefit. If we logical, critically thinking and imaginative humans want to see our national security and political sovereignty preserved, and if we want to defend ourselves and our posterity against the lethal ravages that fossil fuels continually inflict upon the biosphere and the economy, we had best get organized.
If we want to escape indentured servitude and act with true liberty, we will find instruction in the words of a man who accomplished those feats in great measure, Frederick Douglass:
“Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to, and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.”
Job growth satill lags in the US. Little mention is made about the number of jobs ceated by Elon Musk to provide supercharging stations in the US, Europe and China. China is especially interested and making efforts to reduce the enormous amounts of pollution created by the increasing number of gas-powered vehicles. Musk and Tesla will change the air quality of the world while most are not aware of the changes. Renewable energy is intended to provide the supercharging stations with enough energy to charge the Model S and have excess electricity put into the grid for use by the general public, even those who do not drive or are not yet old enough to drive. It will be interesting to see what the next ten years will show us. http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/100-supercharger-stations and here are locations of the supercharging stations: http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger
I’ve studied renewable energy for more than 40 years and DO NOT find it financially viable or anywhere close. Virtually 100% of the media and politicians would fail the most basic quiz relating to power and energy and are completely deluded on this topic.
Our “problems” are not energy and the environment. They are overpopulation and over-consumption of resources. Renewable energy and “sustainability” are placebos aimed at addressing the symptoms not the problems.
Lastly, “the fossil fuel boys (and girls)” earn their money from the SALE of energy, not from exploration, production, transportation, etc. IF there is a truly viable renewable energy system I PROMISE you, THEY would passionately, aggressively pursue it. Rather, they “invest” what is necessary to placate politicians who are clueless.
PeakHunter: Anything you learned about the financial viability of renewable energy 40 years ago (or even 4 years ago) has essentially zero relevance today. If you read up on the projects that are happening right now, you’ll be astonished at the bargain-basement prices that energy from PV and especially wind are fetching.
Fossil fuels remain financially competitive only as a result of the massive subsidies (direct payments, tax breaks and loopholes, fee forgiveness, lax enforcement of regulations, construction and support of dependent infrastructure, vast global military defense of access, etc.), not to mention the coldly shrewd externalization of enormous health and biosphere service costs and consequences – some well hidden and obscured, and some not so well.
Investment and insurance firms (no bastions of liberalism) have been urgently calling for quick international government action to rapidly reduce emissions, and to thereby limit the trajectory of climate disruption that is already well demonstrated as clearly in effect – the results of which will be predictably disastrous for a great many substantial financial interests that are not related to the revenue generated by fossil energy.
As long as we keep taking prehistoric carbon out of the layers of the earth, and pouring 32 billion metric tons of CO2 yearly into the modern sky, we’ll be seeing more and more weather extremes of all kinds, in both frequency and severity.
I think the issue here is that the renewable policies of the current administration are working. This is an election year, so of course the “other side,” will attack this to try and make it look less successful than it is. I still read lots of articles and comments that mention Solyndra and ignore the fact that the overall program and direction have resulted in an overall success in terms of direction and cost of energy – that creates good home grown jobs. But, I don’t worry. You can fool all of the people… Most people get it about renewables. The “reddest” states have some of the best wind investment around. In fact, I still think Romney’s first and one of his biggest mistakes was in attacking wind. Not the way to win in Iowa these days!
I agree with Cameron, fossil fuels are “cheap” (but getting impossibly expensive due to peak oil and population growth, which we cannot stop).
We are realizing that the most important resources are getting scarcer and demand is growing non-stop. This is the problem. We are not going to stop any of the demand, the only solution is an attitude change by EVERYBODY, and that means everybody, including corporations.
Energy supply is one of these important resources, and renewable energy IS getting cheaper (because the energy is FREE AND SUSTAINABLE) the investments are in the equipent to get it and the way it gets to the people using it, no matter if it’s liquid, solid or live current.
The other important resources problems are going to pop out in a chain reaction: water, food, and then the other resources like metals, minerals for fertilizers, etc.
We should all be exposing these problems and get prepared because that is one thing we won’t survive.
Maybe the polluters are right: it doesn’t matter if we are ruining the environment, it won’t last that long anyway. What a problem!
As long as western civilization is based upon exploitation of man by man, and the goal continues to be the accumulation of money (or material wealth), environmental issues in general (clean energy included) will be put aside, because the sun, air (wind), geothermal energy, ocean waves, fermentation (methane producer) and so on… can not be privately owned, therefore, can not yield any “profit” i. e. gain from exploitation. But the global neo-liberalism is based upon quick sands, limited resources can not be endlessly exploited, so, it will eventually lead to an unstoppable crisis. We people better be prepared for such an event developing self-defense groups in every rural community, in every street… everywhere.
I don’t object to rich people getting richer, but I do object to their owning the legislative process that would have otherwise served to protect the rest of us from their exploits. That’s the central issue in today’s world: corruption.
Yep! Greed and Corruption. That’s the road to destruction, blinded by our own short sightedness! (Or rather…theirs)
If I were a rich man, trallallalalalala…..
It has worked through history and, apparently, it will continue. How to break it? That’s the $ 60,000.00 question! [ I think it will be survival ]