Monthly Archives: January 2010
Energy Policy — Where's the Solution?
| January 31, 2010 | Posted by Craig Shields under Renewables - Politics |
We see a great deal of social criticism, lambasting us Americans for being fat, lazy super-consumers. In that vein, frequent commenter Dan Conine writes:
Most of the electricity people get (including myself) isn’t necessary. Most of the activities we perform are useless to the future and only serve our entertainment … and our pollution of the world.
I don’t dispute that. But where’s the solution here? Change hundreds of millions of people’s way of thinking about their responsibilities and their overall lifestyle choices? Sounds like a challenge – getting through to a nation of people who are busy driving their SUVs out to Walmart to stock up on Budweiser and guacamole for the Super Bowl.
There is no doubt to you, me, and most other 2GreenEnergy readers that Americans’ indolent lifestyle cannot sustain itself. I think we’ve already proven that with our child cancer rates, financial bailouts, ceaseless wars, obesity, school test scores, etc. And if you want to see some real social chaos, wait until you see what happens when the world (especially the US with its sense of entitlement) comes face-to-face with the impact of peal oil in the not-too-distant future.
But again, I ask: Where’s the solution? I like to think of myself as a man of action. I like to solve problems. So when I look at this energy problem and all its implications in public health, national security, global climate change, empowering evil, and so forth, I look for a big, broad solution – and that’s renewable energy.
All I’m asking is that *we the people* put pressure on our elected officials. Force them to create legislation that levels of playing field on which renewables compete against fossil fuels. As I’m fond of saying, take away the subsidies and get everyone to pay to true and full costs of the energy we produce and consume – and see how long coal and oil last as industries. They’ll be gone in an afternoon.
In any case, we either make a lot of noise and create a difference in the trajectory of energy-related policy, or we’ll get exactly what will have so richly deserved.
Related posts:
Renewables and the US Government
| January 30, 2010 | Posted by Craig Shields under Renewables - Politics |
In response to my rant on a few recent Supreme Court decisions, frequent commenter Dan Conine writes:
“… The government we have is the government we deserve. Though you are correct per se from your point of view, I disagree with both counts to some extent. First, the Supreme Court’s job is to interpret the legality of laws written by Congress, etc.. It is now up to Congress to right the wrong of 100 plus years of corporate personhood. Now that an impotent attempt at campaign finance has been shot down, Congress should look deeper into who the constitution is written to protect: individuals from bullies/mobs. They won’t, though, as long as we keep giving more money to corporations every day than we keep for ourselves (savings) or give to the constitutional power (taxes).”
You always amaze me. You’re 100% right that Congress could do something about this, but won’t — and for the exact reasons you’ve named. That is why this is such a terrible conundrum — and the reason that I blog; without a grassroots effort to call attention to our broken poltical processes, we’re doomed.
Dan continues:
Second: The dependence of renewable energy’s future upon federal government intervention shows that renewable energy proponents are not much different than the corporate power proponents: both are trying to make profits through coercion of the government Gun.
“We will be ready for renewable energy when people stop using so much nonrenewable energy. Not before. Until then, local control of rights-of-way is the only way to counteract corporate control of rights-of-way because the corporations own the federal government. When you advocate for federal decisions over local decisions, you are advocating for the biggest corporation to decide your future. You might as well just go to Little Rock and ask Wal-Mart to start selling power grids.”
Here I’m not so sure.
First, I’m not asking Congress to help renewables — only to level the playing field. Remove the subsidies, force everyone to pay the full price of the power they’re producing and consuming, and see what happens. We’ll have renewable energy in about 10 minutes. Btw, you often mention that you’d like to see less consumption of power overall; this action will achieve that goal in a big way.
Secondly, I point out a matter of political philosophy. Though I felt different about this as a younger man, I’m currently convinced that we need to impute some moral goodness to government — and make sure that goodness happens. Without it, we’re really dead — worse than dead, actually; we have a dystopia along the lines of 1984 or Brave New World. But you’re certainly right in what you said above: we get the government we deserve.
Related posts:
More Bad News from the US Supreme Court
| January 29, 2010 | Posted by Craig Shields under Renewables - Politics |
Earlier this week I wrote a post expressing my disgust over the US Supreme Court’s announcement that it had found major provisions of campaign finance reform to be unconstitutional. This paved the way for corporate and union money to mute the voices of individual citizens like you and me.
Later in the week, the justices dealt another punch to the gut to the forces of progress. This came with the decision that rendered the federal government impotent against state and local decisions regarding rights of way — for things like power lines.
Many of us are — or were — hoping for long-distance transmission of electrical power. This would have made feasible the development of forms of renewable energy that are prevalent in certain areas of the country, e.g., solar thermal in the southwestern desert, wind energy in the plains, and geothermal in the mountains. As of this week, however, such things will require the buy-in of dozens of state and local bureaucracies.
It hasn’t been a good week of news from high court.
Related posts:
Obama's State of the Union Address and Energy Policy
| January 28, 2010 | Posted by Craig Shields under Renewables - Politics |
Here’s a post I wrote on Renewable Energy World on president Obama’s State of the Union address the other night.
I like to support Obama for his efforts along a number of lines, especially a progressive energy policy. But to me, all the pandering to the masses in that address served more to confuse people than to enlighten and motivate them.
Related posts:
Divergent Ideas at 2GreenEnergy
| January 27, 2010 | Posted by Craig Shields under Renewables - Science |
Readers may have noticed the pro-nuclear comments of Frank Eggers. Responding to my request for guest bloggers, Frank wrote:
I’m not sure that there’d be much point in my blogging on this site.
The only information this site about nuclear energy is very obsolete. The olde objections to nuclear power no longer apply. There are solutions to the problems which were formerly a valid concern. For example, there are reactor designs that do not require enriched uranium; natural uranium and thorium can be used as fuels. Also, there reactor designs that produce very little waste because they use the fuel more than 100 times as efficiently than the pressurized water thermal reactors which, unfortunately, are too common. Moreover, the waste they do produce decays much more quickly and needs to be sequestered for only about 500 years rather than tens of thousands of years.
It seems that up to date and correct information on nuclear power is censored from this site. Also, any information that questions the practicality of wind and solar energy is also censored. That is very unfortunate because unless nuclear energy becomes a major part of our energy mix, we will become even more dependent on coal and the serious problems that coal creates.
Considering the above, there would be little point in my writing blogs for this site.
My original response was:
I understand. Thanks for writing back.
But I woke up this morning with a different take, as follows:
Frank: You know, been I’ve thinking about this further, as, in truth, we don’t censor pro-nuclear or any other ideas. If you want to write a blog on this subject, expressing a divergent but legitimate viewpoint, I would actually encourage that. It can be passionate (I can see you have plenty to offer in that department) as long as it’s respectful. I’m more than open to your ideas.
We’ll see what happens.
Related posts:
Guest Bloggers Coming on Board
| January 26, 2010 | Posted by Craig Shields under Renewables - Business |
I had no fewer than six really good discussions with readers today on the subject of guest blogging — each of whom I expect to come on board — and who knows what tomorrow will bring. I really think this diversity of viewpoint will add a great deal to the discussion.
Perhaps more than any other subject, renewable energy lends itself to this diversity, as there are:
Again, if you have something you’d like to say to the thousands of people who visit us here at 2GreenEnergy, please let us know. Click here to CONTACT us.
Related posts:
Peak Oil
| January 25, 2010 | Posted by Craig Shields under Renewables - Business |
I’m hoping that readers of my upcoming book on renewables will enjoy my conversation with Matt Simmons, arguably the loudest voice on the issue of peak oil. And, although the subject remains controversial, it’s probably a good deal less so today that it was last week, now that two extremely senior automotive industry executives have come out with statements that support it.
In particular, note the recent comments of GM’s Bob Lutz, global climate change skeptic, who is nonetheless a strong proponent of the Volt and the electrification of the automobile. Lutz argues that continued dependence on oil as demand inevitably increases will simply exacerbate boom and bust economic cycles. He notes that, in 20 years the China auto market will equal the rest of the world combined and adds, “At that point we have to have alternative drive systems, which to me have to be electric.”
And check out the remarks of Jim Lentz, President and COO of Toyota Motor Sales. He apparently stunned his interviewer during a recent Commonwealth Club event, in which he stated unequivocally that Toyota believes that peak oil will occur sometime in the later half of this decade.
Peak oil – just one of the many reasons for the rapid migration to renewable energy.
Related posts:
Electric Vehicle Safety
| January 24, 2010 | Posted by Craig Shields under Electric Vehicles |
Jim Stack writes in:
Nissan is taking care of this for EVeryone with their new Nissan LEAF. It’s made in the far east, Smyrna Tennesse …. They are much safer that gas cars; you don’t die from fires when gas explodes or burns after an accident…
Jim: I’m with you all the way.
I was down in Santa Monica a couple of weeks ago interviewing Rick Sikes (their fleet manager) for my book on renewables. If you didn’t know, Santa Monica is an extremely progressive city in a lot of ways – and one of them is the city fleet, which is 87% alternatively fueled.
In any case, I saw all those tanks of CNG, propane, and hydrogen, and I asked about safety. In his answer, which I found more than satisfactory, he pointed out that, on average, 6 people burn to death in gasoline-powered vehicle fires every day. It’s a phenomenon so common that we don’t even report it — like cats getting stuck up in trees.
Related posts:
Renewable Energy is Coming – But Why?
| January 23, 2010 | Posted by Craig Shields under Renewables - Politics |
The other day I wrote a post on my Renewable Energy World blog which garnered a number of interesting comments that I thought I’d pass along. I began the post by indicating that important events in the world generally happen because powerful people make them happen, and that these actions tend to be indifferent to the wellbeing of the vast majority of the world’s population. As an example, I cited George W. Bush’s fixation on removing Saddam Hussein from power and how, in the process, the real threat to world peace and our national security that was developing next door in Afghanistan and Pakistan went unnoticed.
I pointed out that, according to this theory, that although the migration to renewable energy will happen – it will occur for reasons that have essentially nothing to do with the health and safety of our planet, of our nation, and of its people. I provided short explanations of what I see the true drivers: peak oil, public outcry, corporate embrace of renewables, the advent of the smart grid, increases in efficiency of mature clean energy technologies, and the maturation of new technologies.
Of 20+/- comments, most were quite positive. But I was amused by a commentor who wrote:
Do you lefties have to be such drama queens and continue to bring up G.W.? Some of us would like to forget his nonsense. It’s not really much different than what the far right did to the Clinton presidency. Besides, is continuing to make RE a political topic really going to help?
The answer, as I told him, is yes, renewable energy is, in its very essence, a political topic — quite independently of whether he or I want it to be. As I’m fond of saying, the moment you take away the subsidies and force everyone to pay the true cost of the energy they’re producing and consuming, you’ll have ubiquitous clean energy in about 10 minutes.
Related posts:
Clean Energy Businesses Need Precise Market Insights
| January 22, 2010 | Posted by Craig Shields under Renewables - Business |
I thought it might be a good idea to make a list of the types of activities that have been most helpful to our clients in renewable energy and electric transportation. At the top of that list is market research.
As I’m fond of saying, “It doesn’t matter what you think, or what I think; we’re not buying the product or service. What matters is what the market thinks.”
Let me ask you ten quick questions:
1. What market segments have the most intense demand for your product or service?
2. What are the gut-wrenching emotional issues that keep your prospects up at night?
3. What sources of information do they trust most highly?
4. What price-points are most attractive for what you’re offering?
5. What positioning statements communicate an instant understanding of — and attraction for — your product or service?
6. What are the most critical frustrations in your prospects’ professional (and private) lives that motivate them to take risks and make big-dollar commitments?
7. How do your prospects see themselves? What is their self-image, and how does that affect their decision-making?
8. What are your prospects’ key aspirations that drive their purchasing behavior?
9. Through what sales channels are your target market segments most likely to purchase?
10. What would motivate channels partners (reps, dealers, distributors, OEMs, etc.) to embrace a partnership agreement with your company?
If you have airtight answers to these questions, that’s great. But if you’d like to discuss a rigorous and disciplined yet low-cost way to derive rock-solid data points on these and other strategic business issues, please let us know. CONTACT us here.
