Home › Blog › Page 1563

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Fossil Fuels

I just interviewed Jerry Taylor of the Cato Institute for my next book, Renewable Energy – Following the Money.  This was a wonderfully engaging talk of about 90 minutes with a brilliant person, which I have time only to summarize here.

In one way, I can say that there were no real surprises.  Jerry calmly explained that clean energy either becomes affordable, and capitalists invest, or it’s not, and it sits on the sidelines.  And given the fact that Cato’s mission statement is the forwarding of Libertarianism, how can anyone be shocked by that position?

The interesting part, of course, whether you’re a Libertarian or a Communist, is understanding the damage that fossil fuels are doing, and using government protection of the people to step in and make a difference.  Libertarians believe in minimal government, though they acknowledge its role in protecting individual’s rights.  E.g., I have no more right to pollute the air over your house than I do to throw my garbage in your front yard.

So, with all this philosophic agreement in place, why is the Cato Institute so bearish on renewable energy?  First, it’s about pinning down the damage.  They seem to believe that the externalities of oil and coal are minimal, as compared to most of the reports I’ve read.  Jerry says, for instance, that the recent report from the Harvard Medical School estimating the health and environmental damage of oil and coal at $700 billion annually was “a bad study.” Also, though he acknowledges that industrial activities are causing global climate change,  he thinks that the effects of this will be minimal, and not felt until far in the future.  In addition, he finds it even harder to know who is benefiting and who is suffering.

Really?  Do we have to split hairs here?  What’s the matter with looking at this and concluding the obvious, like the oil companies are the most profitable industry on Earth, and the other seven billion of us are suffering.  Not so fast, says Jerry. The developing countries near the equator are likely to be hit hardest by global warming, but they have also benefited the most from industrialization.

I don’t know, Jerry.  I enjoyed the conversation, but this sounds like sophistry to me.

Tagged with: , , , , , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Sustainability

It will be with great pleasure that I’ll walk into the office of my friend Stephen Lacey tomorrow afternoon, a young man who has already contributed so greatly to the cause of replacing fossil fuels and nuclear with renewables.  In the position he held for years at Renewable Energy World (which, if I’m not mistaken, was his first job out of college where he had majored in journalism) he developed a comprehensive understanding of the energy industry with astonishing speed, and went on to conduct interviews and write articles that shed a great deal of light on the promise and challenge of clean energy.

Here, just a few years later, he’s in our nation’s capital, researching and writing for ClimateProgress.org, wrapping his wits around man’s impact on his environment, and advocating for strategies that mitigate that impact.

I’m always impressed with young people who have their heads on straight, and who endeavor to use their talents to make a difference in the world around them.  It will be a great joy to see him again and find out more about what he’s been working on since the last time I ran into him.

Tagged with: , , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Science

A climate change denier I happen to have known personally for a long time writes me:

The idea that Man alone (specifically, according to leftist mythology, US industrial corporations, which, in the left’s rubric, are the focus of all evil on this planet) is responsible for the change in climate on this planet is utterly laughable, insistence to the contrary of politically-motivated university denizens notwithstanding. After all, “scientists” have been wrong before, and they’ll be wrong again.

I reply:

Thanks for this. Yes, it’s possible that the scientists are wrong here, that we have nothing to fear. And I know there are people who think that this possibility justifies inaction. Personally, I’m not one of them, but hey, that’s cool.

Tagged with: , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Business

About my recent piece on my preparations for an interview with the Cato Institute, frequent commenter and very smart fellow Carl B. Freedman notes:

It seems you are ready to cede the high ground on many of these points when you don’t have to.

(You write that) renewable energy is more expensive than fossil fuels. This is not really true. Buying solar panels means you are buying 35 – 50 years of power at once, even if FF prices were flat for the next 35-50 yrs (and they won’t be), that many years of power would cost more than the solar panels. These price comparisons FF advocates use are flawed due to the fact FF costs go on forever, renewables reach a payback, and then are free for the rest of the systems lifespan save for maintenance. Wind power is even a better deal, so in fact solar and wind are actually cheaper, even without subsidy. (more…)

Tagged with: , , , , , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Science

A reader waxes enthusiastic, in a kindhearted attempt to provide encouragement for me in my discussions at the Cato Institute next week. In particular, he points to the DoE “Monthly Energy Report,” and notes:

Renewable energy sources have now surpassed nuclear in the U.S. and are closing in on others. The trend is clear- renewables are growing rapidly for all kinds of reasons in your linked article. Jobs in America will grow, too, when the energy sources used are ‘home-grown’. Also, as you probably already know, wind and solar (in some areas) are already at parity with fossil fuels.

There is some encouraging news, but I caution this reader and all others to keep this in perspective. (more…)

Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Sustainability

Just got back from a hike up the Hot Springs Trail above Montecito, CA with a new friend, Rafael Quezada, and his winsome dog Oso.

I met Rafael last Saturday when I spoke at TechBrew in downtown Los Angeles. After my talk, he approached me to tell me about his business, Waters Wheel, and I was instantly attracted to the idea. If you haven’t checked out aeroponics, the concept of growing plants in a mixture of water vapor and nutrients, I urge you to do so. This solves a great number of problems at the same time. It’s an easy, inexpensive way to grow terrific, organic crops locally. More on this soon.

Tagged with: , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Sustainability

I check out The Writer’s Almanac every day and noticed this morning that today is the birthday of novelist and travel writer Pico Iyer who said:

“Writing should … be as spontaneous and urgent as a letter to a lover, or a message to a friend who has just lost a parent … and writing is, in the end, that oddest of anomalies: an intimate letter to a stranger.”

That really speaks to me, as a) I never know what these blog posts are about until a few seconds before they’re composed, and b) many of them contain heartfelt messages delivered to people, most of whom I’ll never know.

I’m reminded of an incident that brought a big smile to my face 14 years ago, when I was watching my then four-year-old son playing on a jungle gym. He had encountered a little girl he didn’t know, and tried to strike up a conversation.  She said something to him I couldn’t make out, but I figured it out from my son’s reply: “Oh, it’s OK. You can talk to me. I’m not a stranger. I’m Jake Shields.”

Tagged with:

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Business

I’m proud that Tom Konrad, famed stock market analyst and editor of AltEnergyStocks.com, offers his comments here frequently. In a post yesterday, he offered me guidance in wrapping my wits around the issue of green jobs, directing me to his thoughtful article on Forbes.com, linked below. There, Tom looks at the issue from the standpoint of basic microeconomics’ “production function” which suggests that labor can be freely substituted for capital and energy. He provides examples recently, including this one: 

Shifting people out of their cars and onto mass transit will create jobs because there will have to be drivers and people managing the transit system, where before no one was paid to drive. To the extent that the transit system can be paid for out of the reduced fuel costs and car ownership costs of the former drivers turned riders, the number of jobs created will be a pure economic gain.

But I wonder if it’s that simple. (more…)

Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Uncategorized

I’m interviewing Jerry Taylor, Senior Fellow at the right wing think tank Cato Institute when I’m in Washington D.C.  next week, and I’ve spent a good part of the day preparing, checking out a number of Mr. Taylor’s writings and speeches, like the one linked here.

Yikes. This guy is brilliant, and he’s a terrific presenter, but he and I disagree on practically everything.  Of course, that’s the point; I selected him specifically because of my duty to maintain balance and fair-mindedness in my writing.  I know I’ve interviewed a few economists and social observers whose perspectives are left of center, and I really want to get a few decidedly conservative viewpoints here.  

But I can see that Mr. Taylor’s going to give me the whole nine yards of his attack-dog refutation of what we proponents of renewables are trying to do, and so I’m wondering how to play this conversation. I think I’m simply going to take his talking points one by one and just discuss them calmly.  Here are a few:

(more…)

by craigshieldsPosted on Posted in Renewables - Science

A reader sent me a plan to turn low-skilled people into electricity generating machines, claiming that employees could be paid a reasonable wage.  But his math is wrong.  A human being produces about 80 Watts with his muscles, e.g., bicycling.  That’s  80 Watt-hours each hour = .08 kWhs each hour.  At the U.S. average electricity price of 11 cents/kWh, he’d be creating less than a penny of electricity an hour.  I know we’ve hit hard times, but I don’t think we’ve quite reached that level.

Tagged with: