The
World We Face (and what to do about it)
For millennia mankind has increased
its productivity and quality of life by harnessing energy. In ancient
times this was quite literally through the harnessing of draft
animals. An ancient proverb references both the consequences and
benefits of this practice: “Where no oxen are the manger is clean,
but much increase comes through the strength of the ox.” Those with
wealth and power harnessed other human beings as slaves. Sadly, such
was the practice in the USA early in our history.
Some ingenious people were able to
harness water power for the grinding of grain. This might be
considered the first “kitchen” appliance, in that it replaced an
activity commonly performed by women preparing food.
Others – most notably the Dutch –
harnessed wind power for the pumping of water.
Water and wind power have their
weaknesses. Water power is simply not available everywhere. Wind
power although more widely available than water power, is
intermittent, and varies greatly in its strength. Both of these are
limited in their power outputs at any given location. If all the
available water power in the rivers of the United States were
harnessed, the total would still be a small fraction of our energy
needs.
Energy on
demand
The industrial revolution in England
began with the development of steam power. Now whatever amount of
power was needed could be produced wherever it was needed. The only
requirement is that combustible fuel be delivered to the site (Let’s
forever ignore the exception of nuclear power in this discussion).
The need for fuel soon outstripped
the ability of natural forests to reproduce trees, and thermal
processes (to include the smelting of iron) turned to coal, and
eventually oil.
As we fast-forward to our current
period, we can see that there are additional issues. Land is
devastated by pollution and mining operations, and we have delivery
problems. We are forced into bad treaties and wars to insure the
resources to meet our voracious energy apatite. Even without the
political problems, our current practices are doomed. Oil wells are
drying up, and other sources must ultimately follow. The world is
increasingly controlled by those who control sources of fuel.
Consider the
options
There are often questions with no
good answers, and problems with no desirable solutions. In such
cases, inaction is a choice, and often one of the worst. A
willingness to face reality can steer around the default of inaction,
and an intelligent analysis can reveal other options. A willingness
to compromise can then make the best option available.
The reality is that the future will
be different from the past. We won’t have abundant cheap energy, we
will use less of it, and we will pay more for it.
The next worst thing to inaction is
to make reluctant incremental adjustments as the pressure increases.
Legislation and economics are required to drive people into getting
more efficient appliances and higher gas-mileage cars. These are good
products by the way, and they do significantly contribute to the
available energy, but each adjustment required is a reluctant
imposition that ultimately fails to solve the real and looming
problem.
Change is
not an option
Again, the reality check: If/since
we cannot close this gap with our current lifestyles, we will either
change our lifestyles or suffer shortages. Take your pick between:
You won’t be able to drive your car, electricity will only be on
for a few hours a day, you won’t be able to heat or cool your
house, you won’t be able to cook, two or more of the above.
Any of these would constitute a
change in our lifestyle – albeit an involuntary one. Although
energy costs have already began to increase alarmingly. An
availability crisis may still be ten or more years in the future –
unless a broken treaty, a war, a change in global politics, or a
major natural disaster happens. In such cases, major shortages could
happen at any time.
It would be far wiser to design a
change that is immune to catastrophic loss and uncontrollable costs,
and to embrace it voluntarily.
The key word for future energy
sources is “renewable.” When the last drop or chunk of
fossil fuel has been consumed, any source of energy we have will be
that which is replenished in real time through nature. Such sources
are considered “renewable.” For the most part, they consist of
wind, water, and solar. Biomass, the burning of wood etc. is
technically a category of solar.
With the exception of biomass, such
sources cause no pollution directly. Indirectly however, energy usage
and pollution are involved in the manufacture of equipment required
to harvest wind and water.
Although the burning of wood creates
CO2, growing wood for fuel pulls this CO2 out of the atmosphere,
stores the carbon as energy, and releases the oxygen for us to
breathe.
My father planted a one hundred
fifty-foot row of eucalyptus trees so he would have wood to heat his
home. The fall before the summer he died he harvested the last tree
he would ever need; it was about two feet thick at the base. The rest
of the trees continue to bind many tons of CO2 that they have
extracted from the atmosphere. The practice of growing wood for fuel
is clearly an avenue by which greenhouse gasses can be reduced.
Another key word is “conservation.”
You can have enough of something by either getting more, or by
needing less. Renewable energy sources will never provide enough to
meet the needs of our current patterns of usage. Therefore we are
ultimately going to be making major changes in our lifestyles whether
we choose to face this reality or not. Any intelligent individual who
is willing to face reality is going embrace conservation and
renewable energy, rather than suffer shortages.
A third key concept is
“sustainability.” Sustainability happens when through
conservation and the use of renewable energy you have enough to meet
your needs.
The big challenge for us in America
is that there is such a disparity between opportunities for renewable
energy and the amount of energy we need. Available opportunities for
conservation in our current culture are simply not enough to close
this gap. This is why a significant redesign of our living practices
is imperative.
A fourth and final key word is
“local.” This concept is essential to the success of the
other efforts. To the degree that your place of work and the sources
of the fundamental essentials of life (food, shelter, water, and
energy) are locally available, you cease to be helpless with regard
to your own provision.
Target
principles
When designing something, it is a
good practice to define the most desired outcome before the actual
design begins. Never begin by limiting your thinking with a check
list of what can’t be done, or that’s all you’ll succeed in
designing.
Approximately two thirds of all the
petroleum used in the USA is consumed in transportation. We reduce
this sector of energy dependency directly to the degree that
transportation needs can be minimized.
Look around you: Consider the area
covered by streets, gas stations, driveways, garages (household and
commercial) auto parts stores, etc. This all represents environment
that has been obliterated by the transportation infrastructure alone.
How much of your paycheck goes to
car payments, insurance, gasoline, oil, repairs, and maintenance?
Such expenses are not voluntary; they are unavoidable if you own a
car.
There is a trend in recent years of
people moving back from the suburbs into apartments near their work.
This is a good thing, and millions of people no longer need cars. It
is far cheaper to rent a car for an occasional week or weekend than
to own one forever. Another important factor is the amount of time
you spend each day just getting to and from work.
A still better direction would be to
find or create work where you chose to live. In this case however,
the availability of public transportation could become a critical
factor.
In the transmission of electrical
power, the volume of the wires increases with the square of the
distance. This means that if you lived one half the distance from the
power plant, only one fourth of the copper would be needed to deliver
your power.
Taking this to an extreme, any power
developed at the household level from renewable sources would have a
tremendous advantage both environmentally and economically (don’t
write “can’t be done” next to this one).
The
neighborhood community
A small set of local services would
enhance the practicality of living locally. A food store,
restaurant/coffee shop, recreational facilities, a community
building, a rental agency – anything but a gas station – would
provide local employment and bring the essentials of life within
walking distance.
Although I am a strong advocate of
private ownership, essentials such as food staples and utility distribution
systems should be owned and controlled exclusively by the local community,
with every resident homeowner in it having a voice and a single vote.
Prepared foods and all other businesses would remain private. This
would prevent individuals companies, and external levels of
government from holding the community hostage for their personal
gain. A light industrial preserve and a village woodlot (“forest”)
adjacent to the neighborhood would provide everything but food, and
bring true local sustainability within reach.
Allocate some space for a
sustainable energy power plant. We’ll need to work on this one, but
the objective would be to meet all energy needs as reliably and
conveniently as they are now.