When we burn coal to generate electricity, we are said to be contributing to the long-term destruction of the Earth’s capacity to support life. So thousands of communities and utilities have switched to natural gas, only to be told that fracking might be poisoning the ground water and in perhaps setting faucets on fire. Biomass sounded good for many years, but we know that, just like coal or gas, burning it puts carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, with the same results. I’ve always thought of hydroelectric power as the most renewable of all, but of course it requires dams, which we are told destroy fish habitat and alter the flow of rivers unacceptably.
Our national focus the past couple decades has been on wind and solar. Political leaders have “invested” massive subsidies to alter the economics, spawning huge industries that might not have grown so much on their own. But then we find that solar panels take up too much space, are too expensive to power a nation this large, and require the use of minerals mined in China. That leaves wind, if we can ignore the problem of turbines chopping up eagles and other birds. Strange health problems seem to result from the noise of these giant machines, and some studies conclude that climate change is causing the wind itself to diminish in some areas, leading at least some researchers to wonder if wind power has the bright future once promised.
When those studies were published a couple years ago, one in Nature Scientific Reports and another in Nature Geoscience, they raised awareness that any energy source dependent on weather and climate is vulnerable to changes resulting from the very global-warming phenomenon they were supposed to thwart.
One report put it succinctly: “The world is turning more and more to renewable sources of energy… to fight climate change. But what if climate change itself alters the distribution of wind, or sunlight… or river flows, and so changes or even shrinks the potential of these energy sources?”
Must we still seek other alternatives? Is it possible that every single method mankind has discovered to provide heat, light, food, and sustenance are threats to human existence? Clearly, no energy source is free of consequences, some of them very disturbing. It is easy to get discouraged, and wonder if there any way to delay our inevitable self-destruction.
The irony is that such pessimism must also be considered in the context of the great advances affordable energy has made possible. We live in a world that is astonishingly comfortable compared to that of our ancestors, who worked from sunup to sundown to eke out a bare living from marginal farms, chopping wood, hauling water, milking cows, and dying young. We now have central heating and air conditioning, cars, trucks, roads, airports, and harbors that bring a better quality of life. We eat better than any generation in history, with fully-stocked grocery stores and restaurants, and people in Western Colorado now do business with people around the world without leaving their homes – all possible because of the discovery, use, and improvement of energy. Directional drilling and hydraulic fracturing now extract oil and gas from entire regions previously unavailable. Fossil fuels are now used without emitting nearly the level of harmful pollutants seen just a few years ago, and cars still burn gas but emit almost nothing into the air.
Still, we remain concerned about how bad this is for the Earth. I’m always more aware of it this time of year, when we only half-jokingly hope for a little global warming. When I was young, snow was fun; now it’s work. So when told that climate change may lead to warmer temperatures and less wind, I’m mostly on board. In fact, it makes me want to leave the lights on a bit longer, to make sure I’m doing my part.
Skeptic ask if there will ever be any source of energy upon which everyone agrees. The answer is no, because not everyone shares that lofty goal. Many activists simply believe mankind’s presence is always bad for the environment.
Some Americans may want to return to an earlier lifestyle, where they keep a milk cow and a couple hogs, raise beans in their own backyards, and eat year-round by canning a cellar full of mason jars. Personally, I prefer grocery stores, cars, and comfortable homes. And if that results in slightly warmer temperatures, I’m probably OK with that. Especially if there are no acceptable alternatives.
Comments on this entry are closed.