I have written a great deal about energy from the climate change perspective. This has roused, from time to time, the ire of climate change deniers, who have often not bothered to read my views but argue against opinions that I do not hold. However, in all the arguments of those that think that climate change is nonsense and deny it, or those that hold it to be a no more than a trick for climate change researchers to get tax dollars, there are two points that their arguments overlook; the first is that traditional fuel supplies are finite and when they are exhausted there will be no more fuel and the second point is the desirability of energy security.
If people believe that the earth holds an endless supply of oil, gas, coal and uranium then nothing that I write will change that view. It will be the equivalent of their religion – the belief in never ending oil, gas coal and uranium.
It is much easier to persuade people about the desirability of energy independence.
The people of sovereign nations usually wish to maintain their sovereignty. If someone has to rule you, it should be people that speak the same language and hold the same values as you. Put simply, Americans do not wish to be ruled by the French, and the Greeks do not wish to be ruled by the Costa Ricans.
Many of the worse episodes in history have happened because one nation or group of people sought to impose their rule on others. Ruling others is a mistake that most nations commit when they are powerful; as powerful nations slowly become less powerful, they often find reasons to regret their rule of others.
With energy, independence or self dependence (probably more or less the same thing) is now critical. We cannot run our defences or criminal justice system or hospitals and medical services or most of what we do without having a ready and safe supply of energy. Most of us could not live without energy. It is, like food, an essential.
Most of us do not wish to be dependent upon other nations for essentials. Nations that we depend upon for essentials may be fair and reasonable today, but no one could guarantee that they will always remain so. The United States may find Canada a safe and substantial ally. The United States found Venezuela such an ally, once upon a time; things change and time changes things.
I have spoken with people who live in Germany and with others who live in Eastern Europe. They are fearful that this winter the supplies of gas upon which they depend will be cut off by Russia, which owns the natural gas. It is not a good position to be in. You might be free, except for your dependence on Russian gas. You are then not truly free at all.
Even if your nation had limitless fossil fuel, would you really be free? If you take the position one step further, if we, as a nation, produced all the energy that we needed, we would still be dependent upon others for the energy that we need. I shall explain.
Most of us are dependent upon the local energy company to produce and sell to us sufficient current to operate the light when we turn it on, and sell to us sufficient gas or oil to heat up our water and our homes. The energy company is dependent upon an energy network or grid through which the energy is distributed and a power station or energy producing plant for the generation of electricity and upon a regular supply of fuel to that plant and to its system for distributing fuel such as gas and oil in order to produce our heat. The fuel companies are dependent upon buying the fuel from abroad. If we simply remove the need to buy fuel from abroad, we will still be dependent on all sorts of other entities for our energy.
There is no guarantee that the local grid company or gas supplier or petrol station will always treat us fair and reasonably. Indeed, history tends to show that these entities strive to become monopolies, not to be able to treat us fairly, but to be able to get as much money from us as they can. That is the way of the world.
So, when you see wind turbines in a farm or solar panels proposed on every roof do not scoff at them because you may not accept that the climate is being changed by humans. Do not complain that they and the energy they bring are too expensive. They will provide some energy independence on a large scale for your nation, and on a small scale, for yourself. With any degree of energy independence, comes freedom.
Filed under: Coal, carbon dioxide, climate change, climate change deniers, energy, gas, global warming, nuclear energy, oil, solar panels, wind turbines | Tagged: climate change deniers, energy dependence, energy independence, sovereignty
You’re right about most of that, of course, but apart from the monopolies, we also have to contend with politicians, most of whom absolutely LOVE a crisis. The reasons for that are simple: whilst we’re worrying about the crisis, we’re not keeping a very close eye on what they are doing and nor is the media; secondly, if they can make you afraid of something, then it gives them control and they can claim that anything they do (like taxing you into oblivion, or cancelling any freedoms and rights you once had) is in the course of “protecting” you from that crisis.
All that said, I do agree with most of your arguments and you are clearly right, although (except for solar panels which make total sense – BOTH types with some development) I don’t see any of the current alternative energy options as truly viable and wind turbines are a total abomination. They may not produce carbon pollution, but you need to go a long way to find something as ugly and constantly noisy, as well as not being all that efficient.
However, nuclear fusion will almost certainly one day provide an interim answer to most of our energy problems until “Startrek” technology finally becomes a reality. That may sound fanciful, but they are already having trouble with the films since (with a couple of notable exceptions) much of the technology imagined in the first series has already been surpassed – 200 years ahead of time!
Great site, I now have you bookmarked to come back again.
There’s truth in that. Look how Michael Jackson’s death dominated the BBC broadcasts – especially at it happened just when they released the expense figures of their top executives. Very similar to the way politicians, those masters of sophistry, divert attention from the issues that are important.
Startrek technology is great in fiction but not in theory; Einstein, for example, “proved” that we cannot travel faster than light so I am afraid Mr Soolu can’t get to Warp factor five!
Robert