Fox News: Four Dirty Secrets about Clean Energy
Apparently, the Fox News article “Four Dirty Secrets about Clean Energy” is going viral, as I just got it from a friend who is normally not too closely connected to the subject. I have to hand it to these guys; they’re sure good at getting their word out.
In addition to admiring the sheer aggression with which Fox promotes its beliefs, one has to like their cleverness as well. Even the ploy of referring to their enemies’ concepts as “Dirty Secrets,” implying as it does the existence of some clandestine group with a malicious, hidden agenda is really a very bright idea from a public relations perspective.
In any case, I promised my friend that I would take a few minutes and respond to each of these damnable “dirty secrets,” so here goes:
Dirty Secret #1: If “clean energy” were actually cheaper than fossil fuels, it wouldn’t need a policy.
The cost of renewable energy is anything but a secret. No one disputes that, in each of its many forms as they currently exist, clean energy is more expensive than coal – especially when it’s burned in the absence of scrubbers on the plants to remove the most damaging components of their emissions. And, though the prices of renewables are falling constantly, this inequality will remain in place for at least the next few years. The larger issue that the author elected not to discuss, of course, is that fossil fuels come with huge but generally ignored costs in terms of the health of our people, our society and our environment.
Dirty Secret #2: Clean energy advocates want to force us to use solar, wind, and biofuels, even though there is no evidence these can power modern civilization.
This ties into #1 above. No one who has seriously looked at the matter doubts that clean energy can power the civilization, but the issue is cost. As Dr. Peter Lilienthal, world energy expert whose software is used by power utilities in more than 80 countries says, “There’s plenty of clean energy, if you don’t care what you pay for it.” Most clean energy advocates suggest weaning ourselves off fossil fuels using the market forces that would be created by establishing a level playing field in which the true costs of all forms of energy are taken into consideration and “internalized.” We also hope for a bit of help from government; it would be good (as well as fair and wise) to remove the enormous subsidies bestowed upon the fossil fuel companies – and perhaps send the funds thus freed up in the direction of renewables, as the latter clearly represents a public good (as opposed to a public hazard).
Dirty Secret #3: There are promising carbon-free energy sources–hydroelectric and nuclear–but “clean energy” policies oppose them as not “green” enough.
Let’s start here by being honest: Fox News has heretofore expressed identically zero concern about carbon. In any case, it’s true that most clean energy advocates see obvious and serious dangers in nuclear power. I’m not sure what planet someone would have to be living on not to share these concerns. It’s also important to note that all sincere and objective environmentalists very much eagerly look forward to the commercialization of “advanced nuclear,” i.e., the next generation that can potentially operate safely and inexpensively.
Dirty Secret #4: The environmentalists behind clean energy policy are anti-energy.
It is true that there are environmental extremists who are unwilling to make any compromises, and thus become de facto advocates for the end of economic prosperity, a return to an agrarian society, etc. Pointing to a few people with fringe views may stir up the passions of a largely uninformed audience, but it’s hardly to the point. I’m sure you could find a few who believe in astrology as well, though I can’t see the relevance of that either.
The vast majority of clean energy advocates are honestly looking for trade-offs that make sense. In fact, we don’t see this issue as “us vs. them,” as all seven billion of us live on the same sick planet. Our main agenda is doing what’s right for this sorry world; I’m not sure Fox News can say the same.
Again, I congratulate Fox on its cleverness, even though its command of the facts and the intellectual honesty it displays in dealing with them are dubious at best.






“Changing surface colors in 100 of the world’s largest cities could save the equivalent of 44 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide – about as much as global carbon emissions are expected to rise by over the next decade,” said U.S. Secretary of Energy, Steven Chu in 2009.In fact, pale surfaces reflect up to 80 percent of the sunlight that falls on them, compared with about 20 percent for dark ones, which is why roofs and walls in hot countries are often whitewashed. An increase in pale surfaces in our urban locations could both reflect more solar radiation away and reduce the amount of energy needed to cool buildings.Professor Chu explains he has been influenced by Art Rosenfeld, a member of the California Energy Commission, who pushed for some new building codes. Since 2005, California has required all flat roofs on commercial buildings to be white. Florida and Georgia are among states that have adopted building codes for white roof installations and more than 75 percent of Wal-Mart stores in the U.S. have them. Dr. Rosenfeld, also a physicist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, and two of his colleagues from the laboratory, Hashem Akbari and Surabi Menon, made the calculations found in Steven Chu’s quote above and believe light surfaces can help chip away at energy conservation and global warming issues.Using this very concept, some cities (including those in California) are painting roofs white to reflect heat, conserve energy and reduce the carbon footprint. Another company, Emerald Cities, successfully developed a high performance solar reflective coating for asphalt and cement for the same purpose. The special coating can cool down the surface by up to 50 degrees and reduce smog by 15%, and it also preserves deteriorating asphalt. The product is called Emerald Cities (EC) Solar Reflective Cool Pavement, coined Cool Pavement.
