By: Sam Capasso
s
Part 1: What?
Take one moment and try to imagine your life without electricity. No lights, no computers, no television, no cell phones, no iPods, no internet. Certainly a moment away from all this would be nice, but we would quickly find ourselves not knowing what to do without electricity to power all of our things. If there is one thing the modern world needs one thing to run, it is electricity. However, if there is one thing the modern world is becoming increasingly concerned about, it is the environment. Reconciling this apparent conflict is of the utmost importance.
Global climate change is a big issue now and there are few who do not try to take some measure to preserve the world for their children. When people are presented with the choice between powering all of life’s electric convenience in a world devastated by global warming or going without for the benefit of future generations, many feel caught in a catch 22. It seems to them the choice is between destroying the world by using its resources or destroying any semblance of modern society by reverting to a more primitive lifestyle. This is not necessarily the situation.
We have inherited an energy industry that operates on unsustainable[1] fuel sources. Oil, coal, natural gas, all are in finite supply. Though these resources effectively created the world we live in today, their consumption leaves long-term scars on the environment. These facts reaffirm the claim that we need to change the way the energy industry operates. An energy revolution is needed.
Many current and emerging energy technologies will allow us to change the way we power our lives in a sustainable way. Sunlight, water, wind, crops, hydrogen, the earth’s own heat, and even trash have the potential to power our lives[2]. These resources will be integrated into the energy industry and eventually displace oil and coal. The new energy industry will simultaneously diminish humanity’s environmental footprint and make electricity more accessible, efficient, and abundant than ever.
The energy revolution will address many problems simultaneously. Global climate change will slow as we shift from the current energy industry to the new energy industry. As businesses experience the benefits of clean, cheap, efficient energy, their costs will fall and net profits will rise. The economy will bolster as wages will increase and unemployment decreases due to the reduction in energy costs. The world, in short will be a better place.
[1] Sustainability has become something of a buzzword, but does have real meaning. For the purposes of this article, a sustainable act is one that can be performed with little negative consequence throughout generations.
[2] I will discuss each of these in greater detail in future articles.
The energy revolution ha already begun, what are your thoughts on wave powered energy that is being explored in costal cities. Also, Iceland’s geothermal energy policies runs most of the country, can the US learn from this scandinavian culture or are we doomed to be perpetual gas guzzlers and cocacola drinkers?
By: Andy on March 21, 2008
at 9:34 pm
Wave energy has some promise, but is severely limited in its application. Though there are a lot of large coastal cities, current wave turbines can only be used in a relatively small percentage of localities. For instance, while New York City can benefit from harnessing tidal energy, a city like L.A. would not really be able to yield enough energy to make it worth it. So, tidal, while a potential ‘wedge’ of the future energy market, will likely only be a wedge.
Geothermal on the other hand has some potential for energy production and better potential as a energy saver. You are right to mention Iceland since they do stand at the forefront of geothermal energy utilization, not to mention energy sustainability. The US can’t convert to hydro and geothermal very easily because of the lack of viable sources. For geothermal energy production, either there needs to be a deep bore hole or the plant needs to be near a ‘hot spot.’ There is some research that suggests geothermal depletes over time, but even that research sees any geothermal source lasting several generations. Despite these negatives, I stand by my initial statement.
Geothermal can be used to a sufficient degree to compromise a significant energy ‘wedge.’ However, this may mean that some natural wonders, like hot springs and geysers (sorry Old Faithful) are turned into energy plants that supply 99.9% clean energy (geothermal still emits a very small amount of pollutants). Geothermal sees its best use in heating and cooling systems. Since much of the energy we use is just for environmental control, geothermal could make a huge impact by cutting energy usage down to almost nothing for purposes of heating and cooling. So, geothermal is a two thumbs up project. I’ll discuss this and other topics more in future articles which I will write once I get a free minute.
By: Sam Capasso on April 9, 2008
at 3:41 am
Dear Sam:
I wonder if you can share some of your summer experiences with us?
By: Leon Tsinberg on July 21, 2008
at 8:18 pm
I suspect real start of solar energy project is artificially delayed because of entrenched oil lobby.
By: Mike on March 14, 2009
at 9:10 am