Posted December 8, 2013
by Jerry Alatalo
Amory Lovins and Arnie Gunderson are two fellows who have been greatly involved in energy issues for a very long time. Both have come to the point where they are advocates of renewable energy in very intense ways, speaking out at every opportunity to show others why the great, world energy transition has to be sped up. The main reasons I have become a renewable energy advocate is very simple. Most importantly, fossil fuels’ significant contribution to environmental pollution and climate change. Then, because the energy from the sun and wind, as well as other renewables, is free.
Secondary, yet important reasons for a worldwide great transition to renewables, include the health of human beings and all life forms, a large reduction in the amount of military resources – which result in devastating wars, destruction, and worsening human relations – devoted to protection of fossil fuels’ production and transport, and the harmful effects of competition in fossil fuels industries globally.
After researching renewables in a not too intense way for some months, it just seems that the world’s people would want to move very strongly in this positive direction. My vision is of the Earth where every land has been covered with solar panels and windmills and industrial hemp, etc. for energy production, where every person has free energy in abundant supply. Where gas, oil, coal, and nuclear plants are energy dinosaurs, gone from the world just as whale oil disappeared many years ago.
The transition to renewables is now occurring, but it is simply not fast enough for me – and there are many millions of men and women around the world who feel the same. A personal hero of many renewable energy fans is Hermann Scheer from Germany, a man who was the driving force behind his country’s renewable revolution before passing away in 2010, who said, “a fast solar energy revolution is possible”. Amory Lovins and Arnie Gunderson are two people who belong in the same league with Hermann Scheer when it comes to advocacy for renewable energy’s tremendous potential.
With my personal experience of seeing a plane performing some kind of geoengineering exercise a few weeks ago, my determination to push for renewable energy on Earth intensified. Seeing a plane with a persistent contrail behind it extending for miles, and seemingly raining down “something” from the entire length of the formation, has me in a state where I am upset – I demand answers for what is going on with this activity. It seems that such an activity would not be necessary if the kind of fossil fuels emission reductions needed to halt global climate change were accomplished.
Geoengineering with planes around the world, with the spraying of aluminum, barium, strontium, and who knows what else, is an activity which some describe as done to reflect the sun’s rays away from the Earth, thereby reducing the temperature – the effects of global climate change. As geoengineering is almost a covert operation to most people, there is no real way to know what is actually involved. No politicians, media (but for alternative news from the internet), military, or business leaders are speaking to what is going on.
At this point I would lean toward the geoengineering theory which says that it is a cheap alternative to large, global changes in energy policies which would include a great revolution in renewable energy. Vested interests in the status-quo, powerful oil, gas, coal, and nuclear energy industries see geoengineering as a practice which keeps their positions of immense power, profits, and wealth intact. I suppose those who had been involved in the whale oil industry before it went extinct held on as tightly as possible before the end.
The obvious question for the human race is which direction to move in concerning energy production in this world. Is it the perpetuation of the energy status-quo, where greenhouse gas emissions stay at the same levels, geoengineering “experiments” getting conducted on the largest of scales – which a rapidly growing number of men and women warn is dangerously unhealthy to all life forms – to avoid dealing seriously with the Earth’s climate and environmental challenges?
Or is it the most powerful movement toward clean, green, renewable energy that the world has ever seen?
Watch this conversation between Amory Lovins and Arnie Gunderson, then let the world know where you stand. What energy direction do you think humanity – the world – should move toward?
****
(Video source: Msmilkytheclown1 channel – YouTube)
Related articles
- USA Move to Penalize Free/Renewable Energy Freeriders (revolution-green.com)
- 83% Increase In US Solar PV Capacity In 2012 (cleantechnica.com)
- Understanding The Facts Of The Renewable Energy PTC (cleantechnica.com)
- Is Chile the Next Star in Renewable Energy? (theenergycollective.com)
THE ONENESS of HUMANITY 
Jerry, I absolutely agree with you that we need to dramatically change our energy policies and use in this country away from fossil fuels and towards renewables.
One minor area of disagreement is that I see a place for nuclear energy. Nuclear does not have the CO2 (global warming) issues of fossil fuels and can provide a solid baseload energy source. The latter is key as wind and solar are intermittant sources of energy (the sun does not always shine and the wind does not always blow) and biomass is logistically hard as it is expensive and energy-intensive to densify it into units that are practical to transport and store. Eventually, I am hopeful that we will develop efficient batteries to address these concerns but that is likely decades in the future.
Peace,
W. Ockham
LikeLike
William,
How are you. I agree with you and James Hansen, who has talked about new generation nuclear power processes that are much safer. You would think that an energy conference with experts from every standpoint would have been an annual event begun in America years ago. I suppose vested interests (energy industries / status-quo) have no interest in changing. Scheer spoke to the situation as one where the people will have to initiate changes. Lovins pointed out the cars coming out getting very high mileage. You may remember the Public TV series “Race To Save The Planet” decades ago. I’ll never forget the Volvo VP who was interviewed about Volvo’s vehicle, shown running out on the highway, made of light-weight materials with a high-efficiency diesel, that got over 100 mpg. He said the reason they weren’t mass-producing the car was because Volvo determined there wasn’t enough “demand”. I remember telling myself after hearing this, “Are you crazy, I’d be the first in line to buy one.” This was around twenty years ago. Have any opinion on geoengineering?
Thanks,
Jerry
LikeLike
Jerry:
You are correct that the fossil fuel industry has a very strong lobby in the U.S. Through governmental policy we have a combination of direct and indirect (e.g. Iraq war) subsidies that make coal and oil artificially cheap. Our current cost of energy does not include the enormous costs that future generations will pay due to the amount of carbon we are putting in the atmosphere.
I remember in 1993 when Clinton/Gore proposed a modest BTU tax. That was defeated and morphed into a couple of cents gasoline taxes. No President since, including our current one, has made any meaningful attempt to deal with the issue.
Peace,
W. Ockham
LikeLike
William,
If impatience on energy transition could be tapped as energy, the whole energy situation would be solved! Optimism is warranted for the good changes that are occurring – better days ahead.
Thanks,
Jerry
LikeLike
My knowledge of this issue is very limited but living in Florida, it strikes me as obscene that solar power is not built into every modern structure and retrofitted when possible. The Plains could provide wind power for regions of the country (I’m guessing) and hydroelectric power harnessed on a wider scale. Of course, there are environmental tradeoffs but I doubt they outweigh the damage already done by hydraulic fracking, mountaintop removal and strip mining, deep water oil drilling, etc.
Thank you, Jerry, for continually challenging my synapses to get off their lazy butts.
LikeLike
Jeff,
How are you. The thought came to mind that Robert Kennedy Jr., whose appearances would increase ratings on any mainstream media program, is never seen on MSM. He’s pro-renewables, so will not be seen on the TV. Same thing with Lovins and Gunderson, etc. The key to the German renewable energy revolution was drafting solid national laws which encouraged investment in renewables, mainly “feed-in tariffs” where, for example, citizens could earn money from solar panels on their roofs.
I suppose, when we consider humans use at the most 10% of their brain capacity, synaptic obesity is epidemic! Gotta take a break now and then – get some meditation/quiet time.
Thanks,
Jerry
LikeLike