The fossil fuel companies keep fighting for life as cleaner energy sources slowly climb upwards. They continue to pump money into politician’s coffers in increasingly desperate attempts to stay antiquated. In doing so they have continually put off investing in other sources of energy production.
Again and again they fight against the inevitable. Their protectionism, their conservatism may well be their downfall.
We already have the infrastructure in place for high voltage long distance transmission of DC currents.
But now they are facing more than just the advancements of technology and an unlimited and free source of energy, they are now facing an enemy within. OPEC.
Saudi Arabia is willing to let crude fall to a low of $20 a barrel. That is going to cost investors a ton of money. That loss leads to a selloff that leads to more losses. The end result is a halt to research and development.
The question seemingly floating around is why would OPEC purposely take this hit? I have a theory not connected to energy per se. We think in terms of western capitalism. The middle east doesn’t. Religion, power, money and politics are intertwined.
The biggest threat in the middle east is ISIS. ISIS funds itself by selling oil from oil fields it has captured. As the prices drop so does their power, ISIS is mostly a mercenary army and they have to be paid or they stop fighting. Why should the Saudi’s fight on the ground when they can starve the enemy?
Big Oil and they old way of doing business doesn’t quite mesh with this new global economy. We really do have to change the way we think.
Our most challenging obstacle in converting to clean environmentally friendly energy is not cost but the conservative and corporate mind set. The idea that the root source of energy is free, ample and worldwide and therefore unable to turn a profit through exploration and extraction could be frightening if your business model is based on turning a profit from every aspect involved in the manufacturing of your end product.
This approach seems, as I see it, to be the way international corporations have modeled themselves and that is counterproductive in the long-term. Electricity in today’s world is no longer a luxury but a necessity.
As long as the grid is held in the mini monopolies that make up the national network we currently have, innovative and progressive ideas and solutions will be viewed as a threat to the status quo.
By looking at electricity solely as a singular profit generating entity and not as an evolving body in need of constant inner growth, care and ideological innovations, progressive growth becomes hampered or halted by quick growth profiteering.
Long term sustainable profit growth requires a view to the future and beyond. By treating electricity solely as a commodity as opposed to a necessary economic component this will not be accomplished.
Innovation and progress is born of need and change. It is time for people, politicians and courts to look beyond today and to the future. The intelligently run corporations will help foster innovation and progress, the conservative ones will inevitably fail.
I came upon this video of Naomi Klein speaking recently at the The Festival of Dangerous Ideas held September 5&6 at the Sydney Opera House. Streamed live on Sept 5th.
As 86 notions, meaning to throw out your past ideas of how this world must work (aka. changing the way you think). Naomi Klein puts it in perspective. The ways of capitalism, as we know it today, are incompatible with sustaining life on this planet.
Should we force a change? In a way, yes. By force, but not by force. Innovation is key to change. Socially and politically and innovation comes from small groups, companies, individuals with a desire to make life better not just for a profit but because they care.
Empathy for people. Love of the planet and all life no matter how small or seemingly insignificant has to come first above money and profit. There is great profit to be made by caring. It takes longer but it lasts longer. It is sustainable. It can and must be done.
Now think about combining wind and solar in the same area. If or when these two technologies join together, the power generation from a single farm would almost double. Taking into consideration that wind tends to be stronger at night, the marriage of these two technologies could almost solve the power gaps associated with both separately.
One wonders what the probability is that a system could be developed that would combine collecting wind and solar in a single unit.
The possibilities are there, we only need to rethink how we have been thinking.
86notions: to throw out the old ways of thinking and relearn not just how we think, but to look with fresh eyes.
David Owens tells the investor-owned utilities that the plan must include convincing customers to be concerned about net-metering.
One of the big complaints they have is regulations. Since wind and solar don’t pollute during the generation stage they don’t need as much regulation.