Being in the ‘biz, so to speak, I do a ton of “light reading” on emerging technologies for weaning us off the fossil teat. I’ve also spent quite a bit of time looking into what can be done right now, versus what can’t. What can’t be done, at least not without forcing the citizenry of industrialized nations to drastically alter their way of life..and not for the better…is, unfortunately EXACTLY what almost every bit of current protocol is calling for. We can’t simply WISH the renewable generation to immediately replace the fossil-fueled kind. The technologies simply aren’t there to make it cost-effective. It would be extremely short-sighted to legislate the replacement of cheap, plentiful fossil-fuel derived energy with expensive, limited and really unproven renewable technologies.

Let me lay out a few barriers to the IMMEDIATE (or near term anyhow) implementation of “green energy” policies, from a sort of insider’s perspective. First off, as I’ve stated the technology is not advanced enough yet to make most green energy economically feasible to the average consumer. There are TONS of exciting technologies out there, from solar, wind, geothermal, distributed generation, “pocket” nuclear, wave….it’s all being deampt up. Unfortunately, even the two “oldest” technologies, wind and solar, are still not cost-effective. The average consumer cannot afford to install a solar array on their roof (assuming they live in an area where they have enough sunshine to make it feasible in the first place) due to the up-front cost of several tens of thousands of dollars. Individual windmills….will NEVER get past the zoning restrictions, Homeowner Associations and such to be even a possiblity…not to mention cost).

Another problem with these technologies is one of land use. In order to replace carbon-based technology, the land required for the same generation capacity is enormous. By way of comparison, replacing 300 MW of existing carbon-based generation, which can fit inside a one square mile parcel, with a 300 MW solar generating station requires 9.2 square miles of land. California recently wanted to build a solar power plant in the Mojave Desert, to both help alleviate the energy crisis in that state caused by their OWN short-sightedness (by banning the importaion of any Fossil-Fuel derived generation, California legislators put environmental extremeism over sound public policy) AND meet demands for an expanding “renewable” portfolio. However, the plans were squashed when state and federal legislators (I’ll leave it to you to guess their political affiliation….) expressed misgivings about the project’s requirement for land and possible ECOLOGICAL DAMAGE! Read that again…a solar power plant was NOT built because the politicans were concerned about the damage to the environment it would cause! All this non-sense led the Gubernator to say “If ve can’t build ze zolar plant in ze middle uf ze Mojave Desert, vere de hell can ve build it?”

This brings up another point….the unappeasablity of the knot-hole rapist. They hate planet killing fossil-fuels, but have successfully blocked or punished solar, wind, nuclear, tidal and biomass replacement technologies. besides the solar plant mentioned above, they have won law-suits against wind turbine farm operators in the Altamonte Pass of the Sierra Nevadas (migratory birds being to dumb to notice the 100 foot tall obstacles and navigate around them), blocked a proposed wind-farm in the Nantucket Sound (The uber-liberal Kennedy clan blocked that one….since all those windmills would interfere with the views and get in the way of their drunken yachting expeditions), registered opposition to developing tidal generation in the sea bed of the coast of Florida, filed suit to prevent (or in some cases curtail) the trial burning of biomass fuels and successfully prevented a SINGLE new nuclear plant from being completed in the US in over 2 decades. You have to ask yourself….what EXACTLY are they after?

So what do I think should be done? How about pursuing a smart solution? One that does everything possible to PRUDENTLY trim back our reliance on carbon emitting generation, while encouraging the meteoric expansion in renewable technologies. To begin, remove the disincentives to R & D and clean generation construction that are currently in place. If a utility wants to replace dirty coal or oil generation with clean-caol (and yes there is such a thing!), Natural Gas or proven renewable technology, make that investment a lucrative one. Minimze the regulatory hurdles, and block the frivolous lawsuits from the knot-holers. Secondly, incentivize the re-powering of coal/oil plants with natural gas plants. This is an idea that has been proven to reduce emmissions, while simultaneously providing the consumer with more energy for less cost. My company just replaced 450 MW of oil-fired generation with 1600 MW of cutting-edge gas-fired generation, drastically reducing GHG emissions while maintaining the same thermal footprint on the surrounding wetlands and bay. As an interim measure, this makes sense. But only if the process is streamlined, and incentives are put in place to attract the capital required to accomplish the construction. Next, nuclear has GOT to be central in any carbon-reduction scheme. Unfortunately, nuclear construction is currently so cost prohibitive, and fraught with uncertainty that elaborate schemes have to be developed to attract the required private sector investment. Whether these schemes involve government garauntees of ROI, or regulation allowing pre-collection of some of the cost from the consumer..the public ends up on the hook. Much of the hesitancy on the part of investors could be alleviated if the knot-holers could be prevented from delaying/cancelling projects. As it stand, investors NEED the certainty of a garaunteed return on their money, given the track record of the knot-holers.

Lastly, create HUGE incentives for the development of new sources of energy. By this I mean get teh government out of the way and allow the free market to work. Quit pushing one technology over the other, allow the marketplace to determine winners and losers. Allow companies and entraprenuers who hit on a winning product to collect BIG. Quit propping up failed ideas and enterprises. Think of how much closer we’d be to the Jetson’s flying cars I was promised as a kid if the internal combustion engine hadn’t been protected by the government for so long! And I’m sure you could think of a LOT better use (from the standpoint of energy technology and getting off the oil teat) for the BILLIONS just given to organized labor via the automaker bailout!

My point is simple. Rather than MANDATING change RIGHT THIS MINUTE!!! under the false pretense of impending global doom, and forcing we humans to adapt to a new, less comfortable life, base energy policy on a wise, thoughtful and well-planned move away from coal and oil and towards more ‘eco-friendly” (ugh I LOATHE that term!) solutions.

I’m instinctively a little suspicious of conspiracy theories… eg who precisely the “they” are who want a single world government.

Channelling my inner Mike Myers….

“the Pentaverate. The Rothschilds, The Gettys, The Queen, the Pope and The Colonel….

The Colonel dad? Really?

Aye…the Colonel..with his wee beady eyes!

What could anyone possibly have against ‘The Colonel’?

He puts an addictive chemical in his chicken that makes ya crave it fortnightly…..smarta**”

THATS who is behind all of the evil in the world!!

LOL!

Happy Turkey Day!