|
Shift from green small talk to Big walk
by Emil Möller
There seems to be a change in the discussions regarding sustainable energy. Up to now green talk was good enough ('99% of green claims are greenwash', see recent study by Terrawatch here). Now there are bold statements by previously placid people, like, most recently, 20 Nobel laureates (here), as well as inclinations in academia towards 'Big stories'. Stories, scenario's, visions, sense making efforts, conceptions of 'The Good, True, Beautiful', which are not done under Post modernity.
My findings are that this to a large extent rules academia and governance domains, allowing societal systems to run amok (here). That consumers, voters, people are wary of marketing claims by corporations, governments or their fellow men, needs no elaboration.
Big business
A mixed blessing par excellence is big business (be they run by CEO's, or heads of State). This phenomenon is by far the most threatening (here) and the most promising (here) option our spaceship has. Part of the threat side is that organizations like the IEA are stuck in old paradigms: 'base load can only be delivered by coal and nuclear. In order to make headway in sustainability, besides user end efficiency gains, coal should be made clean with CCS and nuclear should have strictest safety measures. Renewables are as important as they are impotent to deliver base load.'
CSP and CCS / nuclear
The fact within the current paradigm CSP delivers cheaper electricity as CCS (± 30-60% more expensive as regular coal plants) or nuclear (where decommissioning cost is higher as commissioning cost, but are omitted now), can be ignored due to current governance structures. Besides these financial arguments, additional ecological, social, logistical, safety related arguments support the case for CSP over CCS and nuclear.
My research in Transition Processes (here) indicates that the line between those that think this paradigm exacerbates current problems and those that think that it is unavoidable in any effort to move forward, mostly runs between those without vested interests in business as usual and those with vested interests.
Transition Management
Transition Management recognizes 'sustainability' as embedded in a chaotic setting, being society on a world scale.
This means that current paradigms (cause and effect, manageable, predictable, short term profitable) can deliver incremental change, but not the needed system change.
- Incremental: CCS, safer nuclear plants, hybrid cars, energy saving light bulbs, etc.
- System change: 100% sustainable energy in and from sunny areas, with abundant fresh water for people and soil (food as well as bio fuels and bio based plastics), built to Cradle to Cradle standards.
This energy powers the Electric Vehicles (EV) consumers want (640hp, 0-100km/u in 4 sec, 300km all electric range, 1100 with modular generator: Volvo's next C30, the Mini, the Zap) or cities want for their inner city transport (here) which are approaching mass production. Current paradigm thinking says it will take until 2015 before this can happen; truth is, that it can be done within 2 years. But there are other reasons prohibiting such fast introduction.
As you rightfully suspect: the reasons are similar to those prohibiting fast mass deployment of CSP.
Transformation
The described 'system change' actually is a part of a change in our psychological make up, our technology, our culture, our institutions -- all at once.
CSP and EV fans are avant garde, are anomalies. They are the imaginal cells in the body of a caterpillar, struggling to shift to a butterfly like paradigm. The struggle is with the immune system of the caterpillar, which sees its end approaching.
What can we do?
In order to get the other parts to move in sync with CSP-EV, various options come in sight:
- approach your insurance company: on November 6th there was an information evening, organized by TREC at Dresdener bank (Pariser Platz in Berlin). Reason that the bank offered its chique venue is that 25% of its insurance claims is now climate related and growing. And that they support viable routes to address this.
- approach your pension fund and your bank on how sustainable their investment portfolio is and that you have ideas that can make them money (green investments have a better than average roi)
- ask how they can emulate Evelop receiving 500mln for wind farm projects (here), like in a Solar Mobilization Fund (here)
- ask your car lease company for plug in hybrids (PHEV), or even better EV's
- ask your utility to run the math on CSP - CCS, nuclear in a public debate, invite Shai Agassi (here), Vinod Khosla (here) and Sir Charles Branson (here)
- ask your utility to contact Pacific Gas and Electric (here) and Google.org (here) on their PHEV program and that you would like to see similar early adapter behavior
- place soft orders where you can. Example here
Emil Möller
In the course of his PhD he came across projects of which he wondered why they were merely being discussed, rather than being acted upon. In the domain of Sustainability in general and in the domain of Transition Management in particular, how to arrive at - people really wanting- effective action is of the essence.
After having spoken with many actors in all domains of society, his findings so far point towards this adjective 'really' as being the leading edge.
'Sustainable' anything is the default quality of most official utterings in the political, commercial, private domain in middle and upper strata in the West. Less won't do.
Key is that this formal position, followed by all but appropriate action, is held to be good enough, or at least as good as it gets. While a system change is expedient.
Emil sees a system change as appropriate, feasible, honorable and joyful. That is why he has initiated numerous projects geared towards system change and supports the combination of the Electric Vehicle and CSP. |
