Page added on April 17, 2015
Don’t hold your breath, but future historians may look back on 2015 as the year that the renewable energy ascendancy began, the moment when the world started to move decisively away from its reliance on fossil fuels. Those fuels — oil, natural gas, and coal — will, of course, continue to dominate the energy landscape for years to come, adding billions of tons of heat-trapping carbon to the atmosphere. For the first time, however, it appears that a shift to renewable energy sources is gaining momentum. If sustained, it will have momentous implications for the world economy — as profound as the shift from wood to coal or coal to oil in previous centuries.
Global economic growth has, of course, long been powered by an increasing supply of fossil fuels, especially petroleum. Beginning with the United States, countries that succeeded in mastering the extraction and utilization of oil gained immense economic and political power, while countries with huge reserves of oil to exploit and sell, like Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, became fabulously wealthy. The giant oil companies that engineered the rise of petroleum made legendary profits, accumulated vast wealth, and grew immensely powerful. Not surprisingly, the oil states and those energy corporations continue to dream of a future in which they will play a dominant role.
“Fossil fuels are our most enduring energy source,” said Ali Al-Naimi, Saudi Arabia’s minister of petroleum and mineral resources, in April 2013. “They are the driving force of economic development in the U.S., Saudi Arabia, and for much of the developed and developing world [and] they have the capacity to sustain us well into the future.”
But new developments, including a surprising surge in wind and solar installations, suggest that oil’s dominance may not prove as “enduring” as imagined. “Rapidly spreading solar technology could change everything,” energy analyst Nick Butler recently wrote in the Financial Times. “There is growing evidence that some fundamental changes are coming that will over time put a question mark over investments in old energy systems.”
Normally, transitions from one energy system to another take many decades. According to Vaclav Smil of the University of Manitoba, the shift from wood to coal and coal to oil each took 50 years. The same length of time, he has argued, will be needed to complete the transition to renewables, which would leave any green energy era in the distant future. “The slow pace of this energy transition is not surprising,” he wrote in Scientific American. “In fact, it is expected.”
Smil’s analysis, however, assumes two things: first, that a business-as-usual environment in which decisions about energy investments will largely be made within the same profit-seeking outlook as in the past will continue to prevail; and second, that it will take decades for renewables to best fossil fuels in terms of cost and practicality. Both assumptions, however, appear increasingly flawed. Concern over climate change is already altering the political and regulatory landscape, while improvements in wind and solar technology are occurring at an extraordinary rate, rapidly eliminating the price advantage of fossil fuels. “The direction of change is clear,” Butler writes. With the cost of renewable installations falling, solar power has moved “from being a niche supplier to being a major regional competitor [to fossil fuels].”
Experts largely agree that renewables will claim a larger share of the global energy budget in the years ahead. Nevertheless, most mainstream analysts continue to believe that fossil fuels will be the dominant form of energy for decades to come. The U.S. Department of Energy (DoE) typically predicts that the share of world energy provided by renewables, nuclear, and hydro combined will climb from 17% in 2015 to a mere 22% in 2040 — hardly change on a scale that would threaten the predominance of fossil fuels. There are, however, four key trends that could speed the transition to renewables in striking ways: the world’s growing determination to put a brake on the advance of climate change; a sea change in China’s stance on growth and the environment; the increasing embrace of green energy in the developing world; and the growing affordability of renewable energy.
Taking Climate Change Seriously
Resistance to progress on climate change is widespread and well entrenched. As Naomi Klein documents in her latest book, This Changes Everything, the major fossil fuel companies have mounted well-financed campaigns for years to sow doubt about the reality of climate change, while politicians, often in their pay, have obstructed efforts to place restraints on carbon emissions. At the same time, many ordinary people have been reluctant to acknowledge what’s happening and so consider steps to bring it under control (a phenomenon examined by George Marshall in Don’t Even Think About It). As the devastating effects of extreme weather, including droughts, floods, and ever more powerful storms, gain greater prominence in everyday life, however, all of this is clearly in flux.
Considerable evidence can be assembled to support this assessment, including recent polling data, but perhaps the most impressive indication of this shift can be found in the carbon-reduction plans major nations are now submitting to U.N. authorities in preparation for a global climate summit to be held this December in Paris. Under a measure adopted by delegates to the most recent summit, held last December in Lima, Peru, all parties to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) are obliged to submit detailed action plans known as “intended nationally determined contributions” (INDCs) to the global climate effort. These plans, for the most part, have proven to be impressively tough and ambitious. More important yet, the numbers being offered when it comes to carbon reduction would have been inconceivable only a few years ago.
The U.S. plan, for example, promises that national carbon emissions will drop 26%-28% below 2005 levels by 2025, which represents a substantial reduction. There are, of course, many obstacles to achieving this goal, most notably the diehard resistance of Republican legislators with strong ties to the fossil fuel industry. The White House insists, however, that many of the measures included in the INDC can be achieved through executive branch action, including curbs on carbon emissions from coal plants and mandated improvements in the fuel efficiency of cars and trucks.
Other countries have submitted similarly ambitious INDCs. Mexico, for example, has pledged to cap its carbon emissions by 2026, and to achieve a 22% reduction in greenhouse gas levels by 2030. Its commitment is considered especially significant, since it’s the first such pledge by a major developing nation. “Mexico is setting an example for the rest of the world by submitting an INDC that is timely, clear, ambitious, and supported by robust, unconditional policy commitments,” the Obama White House noted in a congratulatory statement.
No one can predict the outcome of the December climate summit, but few observers expect the measures it may endorse to be tough enough to keep future increases in global temperatures below two degrees Celsius, the maximum amount most scientists believe the planet can absorb without incurring climate disasters far beyond anything seen to date. Nevertheless, implementation of the INDCs, or even a significant portion of them, would at least produce a significant reduction in fossil fuel consumption and point the way to a different future.
A Sea Change in Chinese Energy Behavior
Of equal importance is China’s evident determination to reduce its reliance on fossil fuels — a critical change in stance, given its projected energy needs in the decades to come. According to the DoE, China’s share of world energy consumption is expected to jump from an already impressive 19% in 2010 to 27% in 2040, with most of its added energy coming from fossil fuels. Should this indeed occur, China would consume another 88 quadrillion British thermal units of such energy over the next 30 years, or 43% of all added fossil fuel consumption worldwide. So any significant moves by China to reduce its reliance on those energy sources, as now being promised by senior government officials, would have an outsized impact on the global energy equation.
China has not yet submitted its INDC, but its plan is expected to incorporate the commitments made by President Xi Jinping in a meeting with President Obama in Beijing last November. Xi promised to cap China’s carbon emissions by 2030 and increase the share of non-fossil fuels in primary energy consumption to around 20% by that time. He also agreed to work with the U.S. “to make sure international climate change negotiations will reach agreement as scheduled at the Paris conference in 2015.”
Although the Chinese plan allows for continued growth in carbon emissions for another 15 years, it substantially reduces the amount of new energy that will be derived from fossil fuels. According to a White House statement, “It will require China to deploy an additional 800-1,000 gigawatts of nuclear, wind, solar, and other zero-emission generation capacity by 2030 — more than all the coal-fired power plants that exist in China today.”
It appears, moreover, that Chinese leaders are preparing to move even faster than their pledge would require in transitioning away from fossil fuels. Under pressure from urban residents to reduce punishing levels of smog, the authorities have announced ambitious plans to lessen reliance on coal for electricity generation and rely instead on hydropower, nuclear, wind, and solar power, as well as natural gas. “We will strive for zero-growth in the consumption of coal in key areas of the country,” Premier Li Keqiang told the National People’s Congress, China’s legislature, this March.
As in the United States, the Chinese leadership will face opposition from entrenched fossil fuel interests, as well as local government structures. However, their evident determination to reduce reliance on oil and coal represents a real change of mood and thinking. It’s likely to result in a far different energy landscape than the one laid out by the Department of Energy and, until recently, most other experts. Despite repeated predictions of ever-increasing coal consumption, for instance, China actually burned less coal in 2014 than in the previous year, the first such decline in decades. At the same time, it increased its spending on renewable forms of energy by an impressive 33% in 2014, investing a total of $83.3 billion — the most ever spent by a single country in one year — to a renewable future. If China leads the way globally and such trends continue, the transition from fossil fuels to renewables will occur far sooner than expected.
Green Goes Global
The giant oil companies have long acknowledged that the most advanced countries, led by the U.S., Japan, and Europe, would eventually transition from fossil fuels to renewables, but they continue to insist that developing nations — eager to expand their economies but too poor to invest in alternative energy — will continue to rely on fossil fuels in a big way. This outlook led ExxonMobil and other oil firms to make massive investments in new refineries, pipelines, and other infrastructure aimed at satisfying anticipated demand from the global South. But surprise, surprise: those countries are also showing every sign of turning to renewables in their drive to expand energy output.
The global South’s surprisingly enthusiastic embrace of renewables is impressively documented in Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2015, a recent collaboration between the Frankfurt School of Finance and Management and the U.N. Environment Programme. It reports that the developing countries, excluding China, spent $30 billion on renewables in 2014, a substantial rise over the previous year. Together with China, investment in renewables in the developing world totaled nearly as much as that spent by the developed countries that year. Significant increases in spending on renewables were registered by Brazil (for a total of $7.6 billion), India ($7.4 billion), and South Africa ($5.5 billion); investments of $1 billion or more were posted by Chile, Indonesia, Kenya, Mexico, and Turkey. Given how little such countries were devoting to a renewable future just a few years ago, consider this a sign of changing times.
No less striking is the degree to which oil-producing countries are beginning to embrace green energy. In January, for example, the Dubai Electricity and Water Authority awarded a contract to Saudi Arabia’s ACWA Power International to build a 200-megawatt, $330 million solar electricity plant. The deal received widespread attention, as ACWA promised to deliver electricity from the plant for $58.50 per megawatt-hour, one-third less than the cost of natural gas-fired generation.
“This is a major breakthrough in the oil-fired Emirates and a clear demonstration of the ongoing global energy transition,” suggested Mark Lewis of Kepler Cheuvreux, a European financial services company. “We think this is a landmark deal both in terms of the extremely competitive cost at which the project will generate power and the potential for a much greater take-up of renewables in countries that have so far been slow to embrace them.”
The Falling Price of Renewables
As the Dubai deal indicates, price is playing a crucial role in the shift from fossil fuels to renewables. Listen to the apostles of coal and oil and you’d think that poor countries had no choice but to rely on their chosen form of energy because of its low cost compared to other fuels. “There are still hundreds of millions, billions of people living in abject poverty around the world,” said Rex Tillerson, the CEO and Chairman of ExxonMobil. “They need electricity they can count on, that they can afford… They’d love to burn fossil fuels because their quality of life would rise immeasurably, and their quality of health and the health of their children and their future would rise immeasurably.”
Until recently, this would have been gospel among mainstream energy experts, but the cost of renewables, especially solar power, is dropping so rapidly that, even in a moment when the price of oil has been halved, the news on the horizon couldn’t be clearer: fossil fuels are no longer guaranteed a price advantage in delivering energy to developing countries. Among the harbingers of this change: the cost of solar photovoltaic cells (PVs) has plunged by 75% since 2009 and the cost of electricity generated by solar PVs has fallen globally by 50% since 2010. In other words, solar is now becoming competitive with oil and natural gas, even at their currently depressed prices. “Cost is no longer a reason not to proceed with renewables,” concluded a report released by the National Bank of Abu Dhabi in March. Says Lewis of Kepler Cheuvreux: “Over time, as renewable-technology costs continue to come down and economies of scale continue to increase, the relative competitiveness of renewables in the global energy mix will only increase further.”
Keep in mind as well that developing nations have a powerful reason to favor renewables over fossil energy that has nothing to do with price and everything to do with costs of another sort. As the most recent reports from the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) make clear, poor countries in the global South will suffer more (and sooner) from the ravages of climate change than countries in the global North. This is so because these countries are expected to experience some of the sharpest declines in rainfall and so the most droughts, endangering the food supply for hundreds of millions of people. Combine such concerns with the plunging prices of renewable energy, and it appears that the transition away from fossil fuels will occur faster than predicted in the very regions that the oil companies were counting on for their future profits.
A New World’s A-Coming
Add up these factors, all relatively unexpected, and one conclusion seems self-evident: we are witnessing the start of a global energy transition that could turn expectations upside down, politically, environmentally, and economically. This transformation won’t happen overnight and it will face fierce opposition from powerful and entrenched fossil fuel interests. Even so, it shows every sign of accelerating, which means that while we may be talking decades, the half-century horizon previously offered by experts like Vaclav Smil is probably no longer in the cards. Fossil fuels — and the companies, politicians, and petro-states they have long enriched — will lose their dominant status and be overtaken by the purveyors of renewable energy far more quickly than that.
Even with the quickening of investment in green technology, the likelihood that world temperatures will be held at a 2 degrees Celsius rise, that all-important threshold for catastrophic damage, is unfortunately vanishingly small. Which means that our children and grandchildren will live in a distinctly less inviting world. But as the destructive effects of climate change become more pronounced and more embedded in daily life across the planet, the impetus to slow the warming phenomenon will only intensify. This means that the urge to impose strict curbs on fossil fuel consumption and the companies that promote it will grow, too.
We’re talking, in other words, about the building of genuine momentum for an energy transition which, in turn, means that the majority of people alive on the planet today will experience the ascendancy of renewables. As with previous energy transitions, this shift is going to produce both winners and losers. Countries and companies that assume early leadership in the development and installation of advanced green technologies are likely to prosper in the years ahead, while those committed to the perpetuation of fossil energy will see their wealth and power decline or disappear. For the planet as a whole, such a transition can’t come soon enough.
31 Comments on "The Renewable Revolution"
Makati1 on Fri, 17th Apr 2015 6:54 pm
Too little … too late!
Perk Earl on Fri, 17th Apr 2015 7:15 pm
I agree, Mak. TPTB Can’t wait until the whole enchilada is busting at the seams, holding on to life support desperate fiscal relentless policies until we collectively drive the Chevy to the levy, to finally get it and act in a big way. No, the allowance has been spent and what’s left the panicked masses will hold on to for dear life in hopes of making it through the bottleneck.
Once they realize all those electronic gizmos aren’t helping any longer they’ll wish they had packed a bottle of almond butter and some French bread.
Bandits on Fri, 17th Apr 2015 8:03 pm
I agree with Perk agreeing with Mak…………..
“Renewables” are the indicators of desperation, the final phase of the façade of BAU. I think most should have known gig was up, when ethanol was called green and renewable.
Like ethanol and other so called renewable’s though, they did not prevent the flat out search and burn of FF’s, they in fact enabled the burn to extend and increase.
Speculawyer on Fri, 17th Apr 2015 9:05 pm
I disagree with all of you.
We can switch to renewables (and nuclear). We are just too cheap, lazy, and controlled by vested interest to do it quickly. But we will do it as they get cheaper, as fossil fuels get more expensive, and as climate change slaps us around a bit more.
I currently generate all my net electricity and that includes my electric car so I use no gasoline. If forced, I could get rid of my small amount of natural gas usage by installing more solar PV and putting in a heat pump system.
It is not so hard.
Bandits on Fri, 17th Apr 2015 9:42 pm
“But we will do it as they get cheaper, as fossil fuels get more expensive, and as climate change slaps us around a bit more”.
So you expect continued BAU, economic growth and therefore continued population growth and environmental degradation and resource depletion to enable more expensive FF’s, you expect continued burning of FF’s to manufacture, construct and maintain the “renewables”.
You expect “climate change” to “slap as around a bit more” but you also expect a switch to renewables as matter of course.
Davy on Fri, 17th Apr 2015 9:59 pm
Not gonna happin. No money no time no oil. A big assumption by all these greenies and AltE wonks is oil will continue to be a robust supplier of energy well into the future to support this so called AltE build out. The global oil sector is a mess and I see no indication it will improve. A big part of BAU is the global financial system. A big assumption of these greenies and AltE wonks is that the finance system will continue on as usual. The other assumption is AltE will break out of its fossil fuel grip and self-replicate.
Greenies and AltE wonks are basing their future on technology, progress, and markets to deliver this hugely expensive energy switch. I want to ask them how are we going to service and maintain what we have now? Or do they think we can just let our current infrastructure degrade while we do a huge AltE build out. They are banking on smart grids and enormous yet to be perfected storage technologies. These technologies are much like fusion just fantasy with an invoice attached. They are banking on EV’s to take off and begin replacing the billion internal combustion vehicles.
Let’s look at the results thus far. AltE as a percentage of all energy is around 5% without biomass heating included. Tell me folks how the hell are we going to get that level quickly to a significant level before fossil fuel depletion does its damage? How are we going to grow AltE with so much global debt currently including $1trillion in shale debt that is likely bad?
This is more hopium from the BAUtopians. It is cornucopian delusion and dangerous denial of the end of growth and diminishing returns. It is not being realistic with the instability of our financial system. Finally it does not acknowledge scientific and mathematical realities of the abilities of AltE to transition to a foundational energy source.
This AltE hopium is dangerous because it builds false hope that could be better directed towards adjustment and mitigation of the coming descent. I love AltE and green policies but I can’t stand lies, denial, and delusions. What we need today is reality. We need acceptance. We are finished going forward it is time to prepare for the drop.
Dave Thompson on Fri, 17th Apr 2015 10:59 pm
There is not any alternative to burning gasoline,diesel and jet fuel for transportation…….period. Unless we go back to walking, riding horses, canal and river shipping ect. EV transport can never replace our current living standard to scale.
MSN Fanboy on Sat, 18th Apr 2015 4:02 am
A New Worlds indeed a coming. A world where we reap what we sow. Tom S seems to think people will just wake up and start caring about the Planet. It may happen ( Even though he thinks BAU will fund this- it cant fund itself lol )
Kenz300 on Sat, 18th Apr 2015 5:47 am
The transition to safer,cleaner and cheaper alternative energy sources is growing around the world. Wind, solar, wave energy, geothermal and second generation biofuels made from algae, cellulose and waste are the future.
Fossil Fuels Just Lost the Race Against Renewables
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2015/04/fossil-fuels-just-lost-the-race-against-renewables
Kenz300 on Sat, 18th Apr 2015 5:49 am
China will increase investments in renewable energy sources…….Wind, solar and electric vehicles investments will grow……They are now starting to spend money on cleaning up the environment….
Beijing to Shut All Major Coal Power Plants to Cut Pollution
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2015/03/beijing-to-shut-all-major-coal-power-plants-to-cut-pollution
joe on Sat, 18th Apr 2015 7:49 am
Was watching a doc about a guy taking a train holiday from Morocco to Algeria. Some of the cities you can barely fit a donkey in the streets. Thought then occurred to me. They won’t even notice the age of oil, let alone ‘peak oil’ that we fat westerners cry about. We forget that for most people in the world, what we call renewable and organic, they call living. With peak oil we see peak capitalism.
Makati1 on Sat, 18th Apr 2015 8:49 am
Joe, you see what I have seen for a long time. Most of the 7 billion humans on this planet will not even miss oil or the ‘conveniences’ it provides as it/they are not a part of their lives. Maybe the one billion or so that are tied to Western countries will hurt, but the pain will be much less for the rest.
For instance. Here in the Ps there is one car per 20 Filipinos, and many of those are taxis or jeepneys, not privately owned. Do you think they will be missed as much as say, Americans where there is at least one car per person of any age? Nope!
Not having a credit card for ‘convenience’ will not be noticed as most here do not have ANY bank connections. All cash transactions. No mortgage, car loans, student loans, etc.. More real freedom then any American can dream of.
Here a laborer still earns only $12 per 8 hour day. My excellent barber makes about $5,000 per year in a good year and he has 2 children and a wife to support. A registered architect Filipino friend makes about $12,000 per year after 20 years experience and he works for an American firm in their office here in Makati.
No, many in the world will not notice the ‘loss’. They live on the edge everyday and have no expectations of anything better. But, they will soon be joined by the rest of the world.
Davy on Sat, 18th Apr 2015 10:29 am
Makster, get a friggen grip and get out of your ignorant mentality. Asians with 4BIL of the 7BIL are going to starve when oil is gone. That is a certainty. The westerners are going to starve too from a breakdown in there complex economic food arrangements. Your friggen Asia will have proportionately more excess deaths over births. Asian have destroyed their farmland and are increasingly in mega cities very much dependent on oil. You are so far into denial and agendas it is sad. All you want to do is justify how Asians will prosper in the descent and the westerners will perish. What a moron.
rockman on Sat, 18th Apr 2015 2:42 pm
So 2015, the year that has seen the collapse of oil prices and RESIDENTIAL NG prices (adjusted for inflation) being lower then they have been for 15 years, will mark the turning point?
An amazing prediction IMHO.
peakyeast on Sat, 18th Apr 2015 4:27 pm
I like that speculawyer thinks he is the ordinary man and that everybody on earth can do what he does…
He obviously hasnt tried to live in Kibera slums in Kenya and from that situation doing the same.
The reality is that he is the 1 ppm. And that maybe a 100ppm can do what he does if squeezed enough on their tummies by the mob of violence monopoly.
peakyeast on Sat, 18th Apr 2015 4:32 pm
“A New Worlds indeed a coming. A world where we reap what we sow.”
Actually we are going to not reap what we havent sown – since we have so far to a large extent reaped what we havent sown and also we will not reap what we have sown since we have sown with what we havent reaped (fossil fuels).
😀
apneaman on Sat, 18th Apr 2015 6:39 pm
How come I have never once seen any of the alt energy cheerleaders address the externalities of producing the beloved solar panels, batteries, turbines, etc? Assuming you could scale up alternatives then your going to also have to scale up the environmental waste lands they create and the toxic working conditions for the employees. I posted this link and others like it before and not one of you guys has ever responded to these issues…..just silence. There are a number of good reasons why someone would switch to alternatives and that’s fine if you can afford it(most can’t), but can we please stop pretending it’s green or it will ever scale up? It isn’t and it wont.
The dystopian lake filled by the world’s tech lust
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150402-the-worst-place-on-earth
Makati1 on Sat, 18th Apr 2015 9:00 pm
Apneamna, they live in a dream world where all food magically appears on grocery shelves and the tech toys they play with are produced out of nothing by elves. No understanding of total systems at all. I doubt they even want to know.
Davy on Sun, 19th Apr 2015 6:36 am
Makster, the dream world is real for Asia where the majority of the environmental destruction is occurring with the AltE toys. And the beat goes on Nuff said.
apneaman on Sun, 19th Apr 2015 11:27 am
Is Renewable Energy looking like a ‘new religion’?
http://bravenewclimate.com/2015/04/14/is-renewable-energy-looking-like-a-new-religion/
apneaman on Sun, 19th Apr 2015 11:28 am
TEDxWarwick – David MacKay – How the Laws of Physics Constrain Our Sustainable Energy Options
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5bVbfWuq-Q
apneaman on Sun, 19th Apr 2015 11:58 am
Y’all techno-utopians should head over to Robert Scribblers blog. There you will find tons of love and support for alternatives and constant bashing and blaming of Republicans. It’s all their fault – no one else is contributing to the problem with driving and internet (13%-15% of electrical generation)and non stop consuming of goods you don’t actually need. Only Republicans do that. Also, any critique of alternatives is considered as “fossil fuel industry based misinformation.” Even when it comes for otherwise harsh critics of that the FF industry. Robert does all the hard work of censoring for you – saves on cognitive dissonance that way……for awhile.
“I removed the above post due to the fact that it was linking to fossil fuel industry based misinformation. The claims on renewables are flat wrong.”
https://robertscribbler.wordpress.com/2015/04/17/the-dry-land-burned-like-grass-siberias-road-to-a-permaburn-hell/#comment-38808
Davy on Sun, 19th Apr 2015 12:39 pm
Ape Man, do you think these green clowns think about their energy footprints when they fly to Boulder for a conference. Do you think they understand that their EV created a waste stream? What about that smart grid and all those AltE devices are they made with sustainably grown substances that cause no carbon emissions? How about those EV’s that charge up on that high carbon coal. IMA do the math on converting coal to electricity then charging a battery finally driving an electric motor. Wow, talk about a great energy conversion stream of feel-good-ness. Not! I love when they talk about recycling their overconsumption. I love when they talk about how high population is OK if we educate people, reduce emissions, and eat veggies.
I love AltE and I am a nature lover but I am going to call myself a hypocrite when I am a hypocrite. Greenies and renewbees are oblivious of the consequences of their proposed actions. They think we can end fossil fuels and not starve. They think AltE can self-replicate something like osmosis and we are near a breakout because we are at 5% of total world energy contribution. That’s some serious contribution 5% in 30 years…Hurray. They are like the rich church goers talking about feeding the poor then go to a huge church fundraising buffet for white whales.
If you are truly green do not drive a car, do not go to a mall, and stop showering every day. If you are truly green do not use A/C, live in a very small house, and grow a significant amount of your food. I have to say I respect the dirty brown fossil fuel lovin republican conservatives because they live true to their beliefs. They don’t preach one thing and do another. They are numb nuts but honest numb nuts.
desumaiden on Sun, 19th Apr 2015 1:22 pm
I doubt renewables will save industrial civilization. It has already been proven that no combination of wind, solar, geothermal, hydroelectric, biofuel and hydrogen energy will replace fossil fuels.
peakyeast on Sun, 19th Apr 2015 7:04 pm
Well the amount of energy the internet consumes could probably be reduced with 90+% if commercials, tracking cookies and all the unnecessesary cr@p were shaved away. – Of course together with all the spying that different nations does..
rollin on Sun, 19th Apr 2015 7:36 pm
All ye who enter this site, abandon all hope. The great and wise shamans of peak oil have spoken. Everything will end, civilization will collapse. Obvious solutions will be ignored.
You have to be kidding me.
Makati1 on Sun, 19th Apr 2015 8:16 pm
Davy, you are perfect. Exceptional. Indispensable. And, yes, the stuff made in China and exported to the couch potatoes in the Us is the problem. Want it back? Maybe a few plastic factories or Dow Chemical plants in your farm neighborhood? No? 23% unemployment is better … and ~47,000,000 in the soup line, isn’t it? ^_^
Davy on Sun, 19th Apr 2015 9:02 pm
Mak, people will toughen up everywhere with a little hunger. The white whales and couch potatoes worldwide will be a vanishing species. The bottleneck will start with the easy and weak. They are the easy pickins and tender meat.
Makati1 on Mon, 20th Apr 2015 5:04 am
No they won’t Davy. Yes, some will die from lack of the drugs that keep them ‘happy/sane’, eventually. Maybe after they go postal on you and yours.
Perhaps you assume too much and know too little about your neighbors. Absent a few meals, they will attack you as quick as anyone else. They will pick up those guns and go for anyone that has what they need, or at least more than they do.
That is the animal in us and it is only controlled by eating every day. Americans have not experienced real famine/depression in their lifetimes. I think they are about to find out how the 3rd world lives, from experience. It will be a real shock, and about time for the ‘exceptional’ to realize they are not.
Davy on Mon, 20th Apr 2015 5:43 am
Makster your number are worse than mine. Some of the worst historic violence and famines are Asian. Some of the worst conditions for violence and famines are still lurking in Asia. You yourself live in the middle of 12MIL people that will go desperate quickly without food. You had a small taste of food insecurity a few years ago in the P’s. There is no place for 12MIL people to go in a place the size of Arizona with a population of 100MIL.
Drugs, disease, and lack of education are also rampant in Asia no different than the west. You sing a hollow song Makster. Asia is a turd. The P’s are the bottom of the list environmentally. Your fisheries and forest are near collapse. Climate change has your P’s squarely in its sights. The Philippines is a paradise lost never to recover from the rape and pillage of so many people at least not in our lifetime. Asia as a whole is representative of your country environmentally damaged with exploding population pressures. An economic system based on exports that are in decline. Heavy industry and consumer junk manufacturing with little future. What a bleak picture for your adapted region.
The difference between you and I is you live a lie and preach a message of hate for a country where you had a failed life. I acknowledge the US and the west is dying. I talk about it all the time. You on the other hand want to preach about how bad it is in the west but how positive things are in Asia. Your numbers and story just don’t add up Makster. It makes you look hilarious like Baghdad Bob in the last days of the Saddam Hussein regime. Your days are number Makster get a grip.
Kenz300 on Mon, 20th Apr 2015 6:25 am
The Renewable Revolution | Michael T. Klane
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-t-klare/the-renewable-revolution_b_7078904.html
What Country Powered Itself Entirely On Renewable Energy For 75 Days?
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1097457_what-country-powered-itself-entirely-on-renewable-energy-for-75-days