Archive: Environment & Energy

August 3rd, 2011 | By Glen Hiemstra | Posted in Business & Economy, Environment & Energy | 2 Comments

Can Economic Growth Last and other Math

Yesterday I discovered a really terrific website, a blog called Do the Math, by UCSD professor Tom Murphy. He is a physicist and mathematician, who began wondering if commonly held assumptions mostly about the future could be true when subjected to math. For example, in this blog and a related one he wrote earlier Professor Murphy asks if economic growth forever is possible. It has been true in the U.S. since 1650, and virtually all economic models, political reasoning, and personal hopes assume that we can just keep growing as we have. Tom notes the correlation between economic growth and the 2.9% annual growth in energy consumption in the U.S. for the last 360 years. Economic growth has been connected to energy growth. No mystery there.

Unless we can decouple economic growth from increasing energy consumption the merry-go-round will come to a stop, because energy growth cannot continue. Why? Because anything that grows at a regular annual percentage rate enters the realm of exponential growth, where things double over time. Remember the old calculation for the doubling rate? It is basically 70 divided by the percent growth rate. So, if U.S. energy consumption grows at 2.9%, then our energy use will double in 24 years. In 48 years, about 2060, we’d be using four times as much energy as today. Now factor in world economic growth (remember China) and world growth in energy consumption. In his clever blog Professor Murphy proves that if the doubling rates were to continue like this (he actually lowers the annual growth rate in energy to 2.3% so that each doubling takes 100 years) the earth would be producing, and using, more energy than the sun in 1400 years. Peter summarizes:

Let me restate that important point. No matter what the technology, a sustained 2.3% energy growth rate would require us to produce as much energy as the entire sun within 1400 years. A word of warning: that power plant is going to run a little warm. Thermodynamics require that if we generated sun-comparable power on Earth, the surface of the Earth—being smaller than that of the sun—would have to be hotter than the surface of the sun!

1400 years sounds like a long time, but limits of technology will be reached long before that. You can use less energy by increasing the efficiency of cars, buildings, computers and so on but only until they are 100% efficient and then no more (well, you can’t actually get to 100%). Thus increases in the use of energy become “impossible within conceivable time frames” (less than a couple of hundred years). Implication: because economic growth, which everyone wishes for right now, is linked to growth in energy use and that cannot continue, a new economic model that enables prosperity without growth is on the horizon, or had better be.

His blog yesterday, by they way, explored whether it would be mathematically possible to build enough batteries to provide sufficient back-up power to run the U.S. if we were to convert to a solar and wind energy economy. His conclusion is no, not enough raw materials on planet earth, either for lead-acid or for variations on lithium-ion batteries or both.

Check it out.

(Coincidently I will be doing a lunch keynote for the Association for Corporate Growth in Seattle tomorrow, August 4, 2011. What should I tell them?)

Glen Hiemstra is a futurist speaker, author, consultant, blogger, internet video producer and Founder of Futurist.com. To arrange for a speech contact Futurist.com.

Continue Reading & Comment »

August 2nd, 2011 | By Glen Hiemstra | Posted in Current Choices for a Better Future, Environment & Energy | Comments Off

Carbon Nation – the Movie – Now on DVD and Recommended

Carbon Nation is now available on DVD and on most download and On Demand sites. This important, entertaining and hopeful documentary, produced by Peter Byck, is highly recommended by us here at Futurist.com. Read the press release here. Learn how to order the film here.

I saw Carbon Nation this spring when Boeing sponsored a premier here in Seattle, and we blogged at that time that it would be come the “new must see film on our common future.” In the movie Peter travels throughout the country documenting amazing stories of individuals and companies who are creating the next clean and low-carbon energy future. If you see climate change as a problem, or if you don’t but would like cleaner and cheaper energy anyway, this film tells you how it can be done, and is already being done.

We encourage you to buy the DVD, and what we are really recommending is that companies, educational institutions, and conference events consider a bulk purchase of DVD’s for use as a premium, an educational asset, or strategic planning tool. Carbon Nation would be terrific for any of those uses, and I have already begun talking with one speaking event I am doing about the possibility of a purchase and give-away of the DVD to those in attendance.

By the way, our new Futurist.com Office Manager, Mallory Smith, university graduate this year, just watched the DVD and loved it. If you have a message that speaks to both the sustainability and next jet fuel managers at Boeing, as well as the most recent college grads, chances are you have message that is worth watching.

To order the DVD or to inquire about a bulk purchase we suggest you contact Carbon Nation directly at www.carbonnationmovie.com. You can always contact us at info@futurist.com for information.

One more important announcement: We are pleased to announce that Peter will become a featured associate at Futurist.com, and is available for public speaking events where he can show the film and talk about it, or in a shorter format provide a presentation sprinkled with excerpts from the movie. Peter has over 20 years experience as a director and editor. His first documentary “Garbage” won the South by Southwest Film Festival, screened in scores of festivals and played at the Museum of Modern Art and Lincoln Center. In addition, he has edited documentaries for Peter Jackson’s “Lord of the Rings” and “King Kong.” As an associate, he will be available for speaking engagements and we will also be looking for ways to develop collaborative projects. There will be more news to come on that in our next newsletter. Contact us at info@futurist.com about arranging a speech by Peter.

The Movie Trailer

The Impending Dominance of the Electric Car

On May 4th I had the pleasure of attending a Washington Clean Technology Alliance (WCTA) Lunch Seminar to hear James Billmaier, author of JOLT! The Impending Dominance of the Electric Car and Why America Must Take Charge.

After listening to Jim speak, I was fully convinced that America will soon become an “electriconomy” as he puts it. The way he explained it, it will be similar to the evolution of the internet, which existed for a fair amount of time before it became easily accessible to the general public through the introduction of the internet browser. Soon electric cars will be mass produced, charging stations will be easily found, and battery life will last longer to make it not only feasible, but desirable to own an electric car as your primary vehicle.

Jim had a number of enlightening facts about the current gas economy as well. As much as we complain about gas prices, they are currently paying $9/gal in France and the U.S. is not even in the top 100 for gas prices around the world. As gas imports increase, jobs will be lost to overseas production. Some would argue that there is gas to be found within our nation, which is true, but not nearly enough to meet our current needs. A much brighter picture will be painted as energy production becomes a higher priority. There are many ways to keep this production within our borders and increase the number of jobs here with it. Currently the government is still subsidizing gas and defending the pipelines in the Middle East, but even on this uneven playing field the current electric technology is highly superior.

Some people are unnecessarily worried about our current electric grid being overwhelmed by the increasing amount of cars that will need to be charged. Jim put this in perspective for us and explained that electric companies currently produce enough energy to meet the highest demands during the day, but the demand lowers so dramatically at night that even with a conservative estimate, 100 million cars can be charged at night on the unused energy that is currently available. And the future of energy production will only increase that amount. Charging an electric vehicle is equivalent to hooking up a new fridge, NOT a new house. Even air conditioning units take up to 75% more watts than are used to charge an electric vehicle for a 40 mile commute, and AC is more of a luxury than a necessity in many places.

Gas continues to sound more and more wasteful as it is compared to energy use and dollars spent on electric cars. It takes 6-7 kilowatt hours to make 1 gallon of gas. Even one of the newest electric cars, the Nissan Leaf, goes 30 miles on less than 6 kilowatts! In 2010, on a good day, $1 could buy you enough gas to get about 8 miles in a standard car, but in an electric car that same $1 could take you 50 miles! For those interested in sustainability, the Nissan Leaf is made from 90% recycled material and is fully 95% recyclable. And the lithium that batteries are made from is also endlessly recyclable.

Jim currently has two fairly new cars that he told us about, one that runs on gas, and one Nissan Leaf that he could not bring himself to wait to buy. It sounded like he bought it based on ideals, but he drives it because it is such a comfortable and efficient ride. He said that 95% of his miles are driven in his electric car and the other one is kept around now for longer trips or weekend holidays. I had expected to be convinced by the end of his speech that I should read his book, but instead I am convinced that my next car will be electric. If you ever have the chance to hear James Billmaier speak, you should take it. Until then, I would highly recommend his book because if it is half as informative and entertaining as he is in person, it will be one of the best of the year.

He has an even better conclusion on his Jolt! website:

There is no longer any question of whether or not we will adopt an electric-based transportation system. We will. And the transition will come much more quickly than most “experts” predict. All major auto-makers have some type of plug-in vehicle coming out in the very near future, with the first cars due out at the end of 2010. The U.S. can’t afford to be left behind. But we’re going to need to move fast to become the undisputed market leader.

The good news is that we’re halfway there, at least in terms of ability. The U.S. has a well-established history of economic leadership and is renowned for its innovation. It also has a resourceful and skilled workforce able to capitalize on every aspect of the coming electriconomy, from conception and development to manufacture and delivery. In short, the U.S. workforce is a veritable Dream Team.

And the electric vehicle is a Dream Car. EVs are good for us individually. They’re good for us as a nation. And they’re good for the planet.

Hang on, America! The EV is going to take us on an amazing ride.

- James Billmaier

Continue Reading & Comment »

April 20th, 2011 | By Catherine Otten | Posted in Current Choices for a Better Future, Environment & Energy, Society & Culture | Comments Off

The Truth About Climate Change

In a perfect world, people would rely on facts to uncover the truth. I don’t want climate change to be real, but I’m not going to ignore all of the statistics that tell me that it is. However, the problem that many people face is how to change not only their beliefs, but their entire life just by accepting these facts. As Upton Sinclair pointed out nearly a century ago, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

In his New York Times opinion article, The Truth, Still Inconvenient, Krugman writes about five “expert witnesses” Republicans called for last week’s Congressional hearing on climate science.

But what we had, instead of high seriousness, was a farce: a supposedly crucial hearing stacked with people who had no business being there and instant ostracism for a climate skeptic who was actually willing to change his mind in the face of evidence.

Krugman goes on to say “it’s terrifying to realize that this kind of cynical careerism — for that’s what it is — has probably ensured that we won’t do anything about climate change until catastrophe is already upon us.” I prefer to look at the bright side and point out that one scientist with strong climate-skeptic credentials not only changed his views based on his own research, but had the courage to present it to a Congressional hearing that was eager to hear something else.

You Control Climate Change

Continue Reading & Comment »

March 15th, 2011 | By Glen Hiemstra | Posted in Current Choices for a Better Future, Environment & Energy | 2 Comments

Future of Nuclear Power II

When in my last blog I noted the very early reports of an initial explosion at the Fukushima nuclear plant in Japan, I also suggested this would be a problem for the large-scale nuclear power plant industry. An obvious point. What we did not know on Saturday was that two or three more plants within the larger complex would go into critical failure, with exploding containment buildings and even one report of a breech of the core containment.

Now on March 15 it is becoming clear that the situation was significantly underestimated early on, and that a potential catastrophe looms. The nuclear plants themselves are failing one by one, but worse, the nuclear waste containment pools have begun to fail as well. To my surprise the waste containment pools in these older model plants are situated on the roof of each power plant building. The pools are, according to reports, 40 feet by 40 feet, and 45 feet deep. On the bottom of each pools sits spent nuclear fuel. The word spent is a bit misleading, as this fuel is capable of becoming very hot, burning, and tossing huge amounts of deadly radiation into the air, the equivalent of a dirty bomb.

The earthquake and tsunami that disrupted or destroyed the cooling circulation for the reactors themselves also destroyed the circulation to the waste pools. Now, with the roofs blown off of two of the reactor buildings, and the water reportedly boiling in one of the pools and the side of another breached, it becomes increasingly likely that we will see very large releases of radioactivity. The latest plan is to use helicopters to drop water into the pools, something that sounds like a pretty desperate measure.

Here is the point of discussing this disaster, when much more detailed descriptions are available. Like many futurists, along with environmentalists like Stewart Brand, in recent years I have become more interested in the prospects for nuclear energy as part of the solution to global warming. I have been clear that large-scale reactors like those at Fukushima were problematic for two reasons. One problem is that private industry will not take the risk of building these plants without massive public subsidies, which by itself suggests they may not be good bets for the future. The other is that while the safety record of these plants has been good, the risks when a catastrophe inevitably occurs is almost incalculable, up to and including vast areas uninhabitable. As I write this Japan has declared a “no-fly” zone over the Fukushima region, and is literally relying on workers to accept near suicide conditions to try to combat the emergency. As Eugene Robinson notes today, this all starts to “look like a bargain with the devil.”

Wind energy, solar energy, geothermal energy – yes, scaling them up is a huge undertaking. But none of them can suffer this kind of disaster with consequences that can last for centuries. Perhaps there will still be a future for very small-scale nuclear plants, the kind the Energy Secretary Chu has touted. This is something that requires a lot more study. While the middle of disasters is a bad time to make predictions, the future of large-scale traditional nuclear power looks bleak, and appropriately so.

[Update: The first response to this blog prompted me to dig some more regarding the cost/benefit of nuclear power as an answer to global warming. One of the more interesting sources I came across today is a 2006 report from the Institute for Energy and Environment Research, by Bruce Smith, entitle “Insurmountable Risks.” He presents an interesting case that nuclear is generally much more expensive than people assume (and this explains why massive subsidies are required to build new plants), and that these costs are increasing rapidly. Investors understand that a 2 billion dollar investment can turn into a 1 billion dollar clean up in about 90 minutes. But mostly he anticipates (in 2006 remember) the kind of one-off catastrophes we are currently witnessing, arguing that such events are not unlikely but rather inevitable given the complexity of the machines, the fallibility of human operators, the fickleness of weather and geology, and enough time. The money quote may be this one, in which Smith himself cites an MIT study…

…the expense and unique vulnerabilities associated with nuclear power would make it a very risky, unsustainable, and uncertain option for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. As the authors of the MIT report themselves conclude:

The potential impact on the public from safety or waste management failure and the link to nuclear explosives technology are unique to nuclear energy among energy supply options. These charac- teristics and the fact that nuclear is more costly, make it impossible today to make a credible case for the immediate expanded use of nuclear power.

I also noticed this article today, an interview with a Russian official involved in the Chernobyl cleanup, in which he warns that the industry is not good at putting safety over profit.

Continue Reading & Comment »

Page 8 of 24« First «...6 789 10...20...»Last »