Building Our Energy Literacy

A summary of future energies from Thomas Friedman’s
"Hot, Flat and Crowded"

It’s easy to get confused about future energy technologies – we hope this piece makes it a bit clearer and encourages you to do a bit more research of your own. In Hot, Flat and Crowded, Thomas Friedman argues we need electrons that are: abundant, clean, reliable and cheap. But in case you think this is a green light for coal because it checks the ‘cheap’ box, or that renewable energy technologies are out because they’re expensive or too unreliable for base load power, read on . . .

 
Energy type
Abundant
Clean
Reliable
Cheap
Solar photovoltaic – uses sunlight to make electricity from materials such as silicon
Not yet abundant in the market – we need to invent a battery that can store massive amounts that can be used when the sun is not shining
Is clean
Note: in Requiem for a Species, Clive Hamilton cites two promising new innovations in battery technology and also explains the potential of ‘hydro storage’
Is getting steadily cheaper
Solar thermal electricity –uses mirrors to concentrate the sun’s rays to heat a fluid to drive a generator (the same way a coal plant does – without emissions)
Is enormously promising for clean base load power as it doesn’t need a battery for storage
Is clean
Is reliable – as it can now provide baseload power using molten salt vats to store heat overnight  (already widely deployed in Spain)
Is still expensive but projected to get cheaper
Wind
When and where the wind blows
Is clean
Will require better storage batteries to scale
Is cheap
Diesel generators
No comment
Is not clean
Not always reliable at scale – generators break
Is cheap
Geothermal – drawn from natural steam or hot rocks in the earth
Not that abundant
Is clean
Is reliable
Not yet cheap
Coal with CCS (carbon capture and storage)
Could be abundant, (though the technology does not yet exist and coal reserves are finite)
Could be clean
No-one knows how reliable the sequestration process would be – some could leak
Will not be cheap – the more CO₂ you sequester, the lower your overall power yield
Note: coal is prohibitively expensive when you factor the ‘externalities’ of climate change
Nuclear power
Is not abundant – plus the problem of storing the nuclear waste (which has potential to leak or be processed into bomb)
Is clean
Is reliable
Is not cheap
Note: the extra costs involved with continually upgrading technologies for meeting safety  requirements

 

Virtually everyone who writes about future energies makes the same point – we will need to diversify – we will need to make this transition through investing in a variety of technologies. Denmark and three Northern German states already get up to 30% of their energy from wind and California has just passed a 30% solar energy target. Critically, success will depend on both wide scale investment (to drive up efficiency and drive down price) and innovation (to create what we cannot yet conceive). We must work towards the short term and the long term by:
  • constantly trying to invent new forms of abundant, clean, reliable and cheap electrons, and
  • making the existing forms of clean energy that we have even more abundant, reliable and cheap through increasing investment in research and production.
 
Friedman argues that aside from helping us to stop wrecking the climate, developing sources of abundant, clean, reliable and cheap electrons will also provide:
  • water in deserts from deep generator-powered wells;
  • an end to the petro dictatorships;
  • an end to deforestation from communities desperate for fuel;
  • an end to drilling in nature’s pristine environments;
  • access by the world’s poorest millions to refrigeration for their medicines, education for their women and lighting at night;  
  • networks where people can contribute their energy innovations like shareware on the web.
 
When you consider the alternatives, it’s a pretty good argument for making the switch.