'Fossil Fuels Have Lost.' The Problem Is Trump Doesn't Know It Yet.
By Andy Rowell
"Fossil fuels have lost," argued Eddie O'Connor, chief executive of Ireland's Mainstream Renewable Power company, before adding, "The rest of the world just doesn't know it yet."
O'Connor was speaking to the influential business newspaper the Financial Times, in a must-read 4,000 word article about the rapid energy transition that is taking place right now from cars to power plants, from solar roofs to wind turbines, affecting how we drive and power our homes and industry.
Change is coming much faster than people think, said the article, The Big Green Bang: how renewable energy became unstoppable.
As the paper stated:
"After years of hype and false starts, the shift to clean power has begun to accelerate at a pace that has taken the most experienced experts by surprise. Even leaders in the oil and gas sector have been forced to confront an existential question: Will the 21st century be the last one for fossil fuels?"
As the old saying goes, the stone age didn't end due to the lack of stones, and the hydrocarbon age will not end because we ran out of oil. It will end due to concerns over climate change and the fact that fossil fuels could not compete against cheaper renewables.
Earlier this week, I blogged on a new Stanford University report which warned, "We are on the cusp of the fastest, deepest, most consequential disruption of transportation in history."
"Within ten years, we may witness a radical technological shake up in the way we drive as people switch from petrol and diesel engines to self-drive electric vehicles ... And as people switch in droves to electric, the internal combustion engine could soon be consigned to the history books."
In response, some people scoffed at the Stanford report and the "hype" of self-drive cars. But you cannot question the growth in electric vehicles, driven by the radically reducing costs of batteries, which have halved in the last four years: As the FT noted, "Sales of plug-in electric vehicles last year were 42 per cent higher than in 2015, growing eight times faster than the overall market."
Big Oil is worried, noted the FT:
"These advances have become too significant for the oil and gas industry to ignore. In the first three months of this year, the heads of some of the world's largest oil companies have spoken of a 'global transformation' (Saudi Aramco) that is 'unstoppable' (Royal Dutch Shell) and 'reshaping the energy industry' (Statoil). Isabelle Kocher, chief executive of French power and gas group Engie, calls it a new 'industrial revolution' that will 'bring about a profound change in the way we behave.'"
After many false starts and false promises, and attempts at greenwashing, notably BP's "beyond petroleum" image makeover at the start of the century, the paper noted that "some fossil fuel companies are starting to put serious money into green energy," before warning, "But oil and gas companies may need to act faster if the ambitious plans of other large energy companies succeed."
The business paper makes an interesting point in that many people do not realize the pace of the coming clean energy transition, especially in "countries where the existence of climate change is still so widely contested." And of course, one of those countries is the U.S.
Veteran investor Jeremy Grantham, co-founder of Boston asset manager GMO, argued, "I think it's happening much faster than most well-educated business people in America understand."
He may try and hold back the green energy tide, but sooner rather than later he will find himself swimming out of his depth. "Fossil fuels have lost," as Eddie O'Connor said. The problem is that Trump doesn't know it yet.
The White House is assembling a climate change panel to be headed by a known climate denier who once took money from a coal company to testify at a hearing and who has compared criticism of carbon dioxide to Hitler's demonization of the Jews.
William Happer, a Princeton physicist who has never trained as a climate scientist, joined the Trump administration in September 2018 as senior director for emerging technologies at the National Security Council (NSC).
2018 saw a number of studies pointing to the outsized climate impact of meat consumption. Beef has long been singled out as particularly unsustainable: Cows both release the greenhouse gas methane into the atmosphere because of their digestive processes and require a lot of land area to raise. But for those unwilling to give up the taste and texture of a steak or burger, could lab-grown meat be a climate-friendly alternative? In a first-of-its-kind study, researchers from the Oxford Martin School set out to answer that question.
By Gary Paul Nabhan
President Trump has declared a national emergency to fund a wall along our nation's southern border. The border wall issue has bitterly divided people across the U.S., becoming a vivid symbol of political deadlock.
By Daniel Ross
Hurricane Florence, which battered the U.S. East Coast last September, left a trail of ruin and destruction estimated to cost between $17 billion and $22 billion. Some of the damage was all too visible—smashed homes and livelihoods. But other damage was less so, like the long-term environmental impacts in North Carolina from hog waste that spilled out over large open-air lagoons saturated in the rains.
Hog waste can contain potentially dangerous pathogens, pharmaceuticals and chemicals. According to the state's Department of Environmental Quality, as of early October nearly 100 such lagoons were damaged, breached or were very close to being so, the effluent from which can seep into waterways and drinking water supplies.