Pulling Back The Curtain On The Energy Transition Tale

 

OK, I am going to try to keep this quite short and to the point. Everyone familiar with me knows that I have been rather outspoken against what are commonly called "technofixes" for a considerably long time. Of course, this has always been for very good reasons, being that technology is what has caused the predicament of ecological overshoot in the first place. However, given the hype, marketing, advertising, and PR work done by the industries involved, many people are unaware that these technologies do not reduce fossil fuel use, they actually INCREASE their use by requiring (among other things) a considerably larger electrical grid, storage of energy for when intermittent devices are not generating, and large losses due to the realities of electrical transmission. Because the overwhelming message presented to society over the years that technology is "great" and does so much for us, the inculcated message is that technology can do no harm. Unfortunately, this couldn't be further from the truth. While technology has definitely accomplished very many awesome feats, these have all come at great cost to all the nature surrounding us which we ourselves are a part of; and we cannot live without this nature because we depend on it for the ecosystem services it provides, giving us habitat. Technology use is actually what supports civilization and is the cause of ecological overshoot. 

Finally, this paper by William E. Rees and Megan K. Seibert (based upon this particular study) has been distributed showing once and for all that the technofixes that are constantly hyped about are nothing but an illusion, quote: 

"We have exposed fatal weaknesses in the technologies widely advanced as solutions to the climate crisis. The notion of clean energy is an illusion that ignores innumerable biophysical realities and costs that cannot be afforded by any reasonable measure. So-called RE [renewable energy] technologies are neither renewable nor possible to construct and implement in the absence of FF [fossil fuels]. They are not carbon neutral and will simply increase human dependence on non-renewable resources and cause unacceptable social and environmental harm. 

Clearly, business-as-usual by alternative means is not a solution. To avert even greater catastrophic impacts of climate change than we already face, we need to situate climate disruption within its broader context of human ecological dysfunction. We need to understand the paradigmatic source of this underlying cancer and formulate entirely new narratives and pathways for a genuine renewable energy and sustainability transition."

Of course, this isn't really new information. Alice Friedemann pointed all of this out in her book Life After Fossil Fuels. Tom Murphy pointed it out in his new book Energy and Human Ambitions on a Finite Planet. Tim Garrett pointed it out in multiple studies but I covered the important study here and there is BOTH the text form of the study AND a video presentation. Also, both the book and documentary of Bright Green Lies are highlighted as bringing this reality to the forefront here and here. Last but not least, this article highlights a collection of studies in a new report authored by Professor Simon Michaux.

I'm sorry to burst anyone's bubble, but armed with all of these studies and wealth of information available, the so-called "energy transition" and "Green New Deal" fall into the category of fantasies, myths, and fairy tales. This is precisely why it is so important to Live Now.