99% of what is bandied about these days is incredibly simplistic thinking. First order. This? Therefore that! Zero thought given to the consequences of implementing That — what happens when That does not work as planned. Most "modern" planners simply double-down on That — after all, they are the smartest people in the room and if That does not work, they just must have not been doing That hard or often enough.
Meet Vaclav Smil - from the Los Angeles Times:
The energy historian who says rapid decarbonization is a fantasy
Vaclav Smil rarely agrees to interviews. Too many in the media have portrayed him as a tool of Big Oil, he says — because he insists on pointing out how deeply dependent humanity is on fossil fuels and how difficult it will be to give them up.
The economist and professor emeritus at Canada’s University of Manitoba heats his house with solar energy. He’s no global warming denier. He recognizes the need to move away from plastics, but asks readers to note how often they touch plastic every day and ask themselves how rapid they think the switch can be.
His mission: lay out facts. “I’m not an optimist or a pessimist,” he likes to say. “I’m a scientist.”
A really good interview - lots of thoughtful examination. One example:
[LA Times] Much of the climate debate, you write, is dominated by catastrophists who are certain humanity finds itself on the eve of destruction, and utopians who fervently believe that technology will save the human race. How should the rest of us think about real solutions to serious energy and environmental problems?
[Smil] Nothing can be more counterproductive than any certainty regarding complex affairs.
Uncertainty and unpredictability will always remain the most fundamental attributes of human existence.
And this observation (he lives in Manitoba):
[LA Times] You drive a Honda Civic with a small, efficient engine. While not opposed to electric vehicles, you take issue with those who buy them thinking they’re doing their part to solve global warming, mission accomplished.
[Smil] There are no EVs. They are battery vehicles reflecting the electricity’s origins. If I were to buy an EV in Manitoba, it would be a 100% hydroelectricity, truly zero carbon energy, car. In North China it is a 90% coal car, in France it is a 70% nuclear car, in Russia mostly a natural gas car and in Denmark a 50% wind car et cetera.
Good stuff - definitely going to look up his books.
Leave a comment