Profile Network Activity Comments Articles Blog Bookmarks Contact
 

Why the Energy Transition is Longer Than We Admit

By Stephen Lacey
April 22, 2010   |   9 Comments

Do you like this blog post?

Email   Bookmark Bookmark   Print   Share
 

The information and views expressed in this blog post are solely those of the author and not necessarily those of RenewableEnergyWorld.com or the companies that advertise on this Web site and other publications. This blog was posted directly by the author and was not reviewed for accuracy, spelling or grammar.

9 Reader Comments
Comment
1 of 9
April 23, 2010
Who sets the goals is critical. When President Carter said in 1977, that energy independence was the equivalent of war, many responded and took the solar jump as part of what seemed like a rather natural career shift. Many home-builders like myself simply researched solar and redesigned new products to fit the new expected paradigm shift.

After the 1980 election all five years of that work became wasted effort as nobody expected to be betrayed by a reversal of government policy much less 30 years of false energy claims by hydrocarbon-nuclear proponents. To me, this article's focus should not be technological change timeliness, but on our 30 year political pendulum. This is because in retrospect driving the renewable technological revolution would have been easy in comparison to overturning the right wing/hydrocarbon dominance by mass media for the last 30 years.

Many then thought (in 1977) that today's US solar water preheating market penetration (slightly more than zilch) was achievable by 1984 and our slightly more a GW of solar electricity (both PV and ST) by 1985. Instead, the US watched Japan, Germany, achieve OUR goals just as we now watch China's accelerating market share WITH disbelief?

Goal setting is irrelevant in this field unless it comes from the top and is firmly codified into law.
Comment
2 of 9
April 23, 2010
A recent article in The Economist compared the transition to electric vehicles to the transition from horse and buggy to the automobile. It took 40 years! Even in a case where the automobile was clearly preferable to the horse and buggy, it still took 40 years for the full transition.

As Henry Ford said at the time, "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said 'a faster horse'."
Comment
3 of 9
April 24, 2010
Hi:

Nicely said George... I think the conventionals realize now, and for some time, that the RE mosquito will not go away. The have put into place the necessary positioning to control the market and allow it to proceed at a pace that will not harm or cost them any profits in the long run. By controlling the market and allowing some progress at a slow pace, it precludes any big buildup for a massive surge of support.... just keep talking, provide mis-information, make some promises, allow some successes, capitalize on the gains yourself, etc., etc. and a status-quo can be maintained. This is the SOP text book for persistent disruptive situations.

.....Bill
Comment
4 of 9
April 26, 2010
Hi Stephen!

One of the measures of product adoption that some people find useful is this:

"typically one-half of the product lifecycle expires before substantial growth begins to occur. So if a product or technology has a 100-year lifecycle, the mainstream portion of the market won't "kick in" until about 50 years have passed."

Obviously there are many technologies that have very short lifecycles. But that 50% point always seems to apply.

Thought you might find this interesting.

- Warren
Comment
5 of 9
April 26, 2010
It's an important reality check that we not get carried away by unrealistic expectations for the transition to renewables, like Al Gore's "100% renewable electricity by 2020." Can that happen in 10 years? No way. Nor is there justification for pursuing a 100% substitution, versus a more realistic target of a "significant" (to be defined) contribution from renewables. Nonetheless, the rate of change today is much faster than in the horse-and-buggy era, so we ought not be discouraged by academic comparisons to technology adoption curves in the 19th and early 20th centuries.

I also want to underscore George Reynoldson's comment about the importance of goal-setting and leadership from the top. Like him, I was there in 1977 when President Carter created the Department of Energy, which funded four regional centers to foster public awareness and adoption of renewables (I worked at the center which served the Northeast). Despite, or maybe because of, our demonstrable successes, Reagan terminated the program on Christmas Eve 1981, and his successors largely ignored energy until gasoline prices spiked in 2008.

Unlike 1981, when much of the renewables industry collapsed in the wake of Reagan's action, today the industry is on far solider footing, and enjoys greater public and political support. But leadership from President Obama and Congress will be vital in the coming weeks and months to implement a pricing/market mechanism for carbon.
Comment
6 of 9
April 26, 2010
As long as we are trying to transition into renewable energy, i think that is what matters most. Solar has gone a long way. And whether it'll take longer that it is expected, it is a start. Go green! :)

Kristine
www.sunetric.com
Comment
7 of 9
May 6, 2010
There are a lot more factors today that either spur or retard technology advancement in the energy realm; most of these are societal rather than technical. The environmental organizations are now attacking placement of solar farms just as much as they are wind farms, add NIMBYism (not in my back yard) factors and you have much slower progress than is possible. The current administration and the Washington DC atmosphere certainly aren't helping move energy independence progress forward.
Comment
8 of 9
May 6, 2010
You can have all the policy measures and goal setting you want, but that's not what will decide the Big Picture here. The fact is we are running out of cheap oil. Period. I'm sure many of you read the articles. It could be by 2020, or 2015, or even by 2014 according to the Kuwaitis. Personally, when the Arabs start talking Peak Oil, my colon tightens. After all, they should know, right?
When we see oil start hitting $100 a barrel again, and gas hits $4.00, then $5.00, then up to around $17.00 a gallon by 2017, trust me, they'll be a lot more than policy being discussed.
I just hope somebody gets off their ass and does something. Talk is cheap, but when this shit hits the fan, the whole world is gonna be fertilized.
Comment
9 of 9
May 6, 2010
Although the transition process as you mentioned is painful plus not easy, but we need to realize this that we have to start from somewhere. Possibly we need to put huge capital investments which will ensure sustainable development in long run. We cannot deny that we are still living in a hydrocarbon dominated era, and conventional resources are meant to be finished.
Want to learn more about balanced energy for America? Visit www.consumerenergyalliance.org to get involved, discover CEA's mission and sign up for our informative newsletter.
Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!

Register Now   Sign-In

Stephen Lacey

View Stephen Lacey's Profile
About: I am a reporter with ClimateProgress.org, a blog published by the Center for American Progress. I am former editor and producer for RenewableEnergyWorld.com, wh... more »

Advertise With Us

Ocean Renewable Energy Coalition SolarNexus 350 Media Helios Solar Works Conergy Inc. Information & Technology Management Krannich Solar Inc.
World's #1 Renewable Energy Network
PennWell
Renewable Energy World Magazine International Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
RenewableEnergyWorld.com Solar Power Gen Conference & Expo Hydro Review Magazine Hydro Review World Magazine
HydroVision International HydroVision Brazil HydroVision India HydroVision Russia
Twitter Facebook Linked In RSS Feeds e-Newsletters