Tuesday, September 16, 2014

Energiewende is the zeitgeist word. No schadenfreude, please

What if globally we are at, or at least close to, that worst point along the environmental Kuznets Curve, and things could only get better from now on?


Of course, I could be--and for all I know--completely wrong.  But then, keep this in mind: Nobody. Knows. Anything.

We try to make order of the chaos that the world is by connecting the dots.  It is, however, to some extent like how we connect the celestial dots--the stars--and give them "shapes."  But, we could connect the stars differently and come up with completely different shapes, right?  Of course, I am using the stars analogy only for illustrative purposes--here on earth, we can confirm with the passing of time whether or not the shape that I create is wrong and whether somebody else's is correct.

I suppose I am connecting a few dots out of my optimism.  A wish that we might be on to a path of screwing up the natural environment a tad less, and make it better.

It all begins with the world's factory--China--where "environmental anxiety is spreading."
This growing anxiety is reflected in the rising frequency of environmental protests. In the past year, people have taken to the streets in cities throughout the country to protest the building of coal-fired power plants, chemical plants, oil refineries, waste incinerators, and the like. According to Chen Jiping, a former leading member of the Communist Party’s political and legislative affairs committee, pollution is now the leading cause of social unrest in China.
Why this budding environmental consciousness now? The answer is simple: 2013 was, by any accounting, one horrific year for the environment. ...
China’s environment is a disaster. But by casting a bright light on the country’s severe pollution problems, the crises of the past year have stirred a greater environmental consciousness in the people. At the same time, they have spurred the country’s leaders to take more aggressive environmental action.
There is hope.

Meanwhile, the big European industrial power, Germany, continues to wage its seemingly lone war against climate change:
Germans will soon be getting 30 percent of their power from renewable energy sources. Many smaller countries are beating that, but Germany is by far the largest industrial power to reach that level in the modern era. It is more than twice the percentage in the United States.
Hence:
The word the Germans use for their plan is starting to make its way into conversations elsewhere: energiewende, the energy transition.
Germany's efforts involve China too:
Germany’s relentless push into renewable energy has implications far beyond its shores. By creating huge demand for wind turbines and especially for solar panels, it has helped lure big Chinese manufacturers into the market, and that combination is driving down costs faster than almost anyone thought possible just a few years ago.
But, it does not mean that all is well.  There is a catch:
Much concern is focused on Germany's reliance on brown coal, which harms the environment more than other types of coal, for a secure and affordable power supply. Last year lignite was the single biggest source of German power, generating 25.8 percent, and it has risen every year since 2010.
Greenpeace says no other country in the world extracts and converts as much brown coal into electricity as Germany.
"Germany is making itself a laughing stock because it hasn't set limits on brown coal," said Greenpeace's Karsten Smid, who wants the government to say when it will phase it out.
These lignite-based power plants (which is why Germans were technical advisers for the industry in the town where I grew up) are needed because, more than anything else, the renewables are intermittent.

I am confident a majority on this planet are in a situation where we can echo this:
“Indeed, the German people are paying significant money,” said Markus Steigenberger, an analyst at Agora, the think tank. “But in Germany, we can afford this — we are a rich country. It’s a gift to the world.”
Germany is not the only rich country, right?  We can all afford to begin to afford to experiment with Energiewende (pronounced in-ur-GEE-vend-uh) and make it a century of carbon in other ways than merely burning it up:


6 comments:

Ramesh said...

The country doing precious little about it and is currently the biggest culprit is yours.

The country which shall in future become the biggest culprit and is also doing nothing about it is mine.

Sriram Khé said...

Yes, guilty as charged. What else can we expect from a country where one of the two parties actively champions the idea that there is no climate change, or that there is nothing to worry about climate change!!!

Anonymous said...

Looks like Energiewende was more hot gas.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/12/economist-explains-10
Another testimony to the fact that our actions have unintended consequences. And the world is more complex than the oversimplified models we make to predict weather / stock markets / blah blah

Sriram Khé said...

Responding in case "Anon" checks in ...

Yes, as Yogi Berra said, predicting is difficult especially when it is about the future. But, the German approach was not any result of oversimplification but to respond to a reality of climate change for which fossil fuels are significant contributors. While nuclear power might be acceptable to some, whether or not to pursue nuclear energy is always a political issue (in democracies) and not merely a question of science and technology.

We--the world--will actually benefit from the German stumbles and successes: the German/Chinese push into non-fossil fuels has certainly catalyzed a growth in technology and a drop in prices, with prices expected to continue to fall rapidly. This falling price is already helping countries like India to think about huge solar projects, for instance.

Anonymous said...

Hi Dr. Khe. This is the same anon as above.
Crude is now trading at 55 a barrel. The investment in alternate energy sources is also a lot more political than would meet the eye. With crude at 55, several alternate energy sources would become unviable - including US shale. Yes, "the reasonable man adapts himself to his surroundings and circumstance - all progress therefore depends on the unreasonable men." Maybe we will learn from other's blunders (easier said than done though).
- Ajay

Sriram Khé said...

Crude oil prices have crashed, yes. Coal is even less expensive. The problem here is not with any shortage or abundance of these fuels but with the effects of using them. The problem is with the effects of using them--global climate change being our biggest worry.

Here is the German minister for the environment on this very issue:
"15 years after we launched our "Energiewende" -- the move away from an energy supply based on fossil and nuclear fuels -- the economic impact has been broadly extremely positive: Renewable energy sources now account for nearly 30% of our electricity demands, and by 2050, our energy supply will be based almost completely on renewable sources.
Indeed, the boom in environmental technologies is one of the reasons Germany made it through the economic crisis relatively unscathed.
There are now over 1.5 million people working in this sector. Technologies such as photovoltaics are now commercially viable despite the doubts about their economic benefits only 10 years ago. Meanwhile, money that would otherwise have been needed to import expensive fossil resources now instead goes to individuals, cooperatives, farmers, and small and medium-sized enterprises, that can all themselves become energy suppliers."
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/12/18/opinion/hendricks-germany-climate-change/