A recent article by former EnCana CEO Gwynn Morgan shed some light on the information warfare that has always been at the center of the climate change debate. This is not in reference to the juvenile points of view that either ignore the reality of climate change or – at the other end of the spectrum – assume that human beings can exist as a species without impacting the environment. Rather, the real debates are about: 1) the impact of fossil fuels on the environment, both in relative comparison to other sources of human activity (e.g. living/breathing, agriculture) and in direct comparison to other sources of energy (wind, solar, etc); and 2) the length of time required to fully deploy renewable energy on a global scale.
Three Post-Truths about Global Energy and Climate Change
The recent election in the US has made “post-truth”, “disinformation”, “fake news” and “alternative truth” new buzzwords in the sociopolitical arena. These aren’t old phrases or even revolutionary ones, as any special interest group will tell you. However, the saturation of informal news sources – lubricated by social media – has deepened the impact of any such information that can be gotten to trend. Unfortunately, I’ve found the green energy lobby to be at the forefront of such dissemination.
Over the last few weeks, several outlandish ‘news’ articles have surfaced about cities (Las Vegas), states (Hawaii) and countries (Costa Rica) either running entirely or nearly entirely on renewable energy. A deeper perusal of the linked articles makes it clear that the headlines are merely meant to grab attention and, knowing that most people have stopped reading articles in depth (who can, when there are thousands competing for attention?), focused on swaying public opinion. In Las Vegas for example, only street lights and a few public facilities are entirely solar-powered. Other municipal concerns and private users have the normal renewable/fossil mix seen in other cities. In some cases (Costa Rica), regions that use significant amounts of hydroelectric power and natural gas are listed as ‘100% renewable’, despite considerable debate about including these energy sources on the renewable energy list.
In that regard, Mr. Morgan’s comments are well received and point to some undeniable facts about alternative energy related to cost, reliability and efficiency. The challenges related to these areas are felt even more acutely in the densely populated and less developed regions of the world, where the impact (and future growth) of energy usage is likely to be felt the most. Given that the developed world is yet to come to grasp with these realities, it will take the likes of India, China and Nigeria a lot longer to do so. In the meantime and until that occurs, the human impact on the environment will continue.
Rather than waste time on propaganda and false news, the green energy lobby will be better served accepting that fossil fuels are a fact of the next 20-30 years and are a crucial requirement as we transition to a cleaner, more renewable future. What we need to do is ensure that our exploitation, generation and usage of energy from fossil sources – and from all other sources, frankly – is effective and efficient. Climate change will not – and cannot practically – be addressed solely by switching to renewable energy. In both the developed and the developing world, the implementation of energy efficiency practices is crucial to a cleaner future.