Search Results

Chapter 1 begins by stressing the severity of climate change (CC) and showing how, contrary to popular belief, atomic energy is not a viable solution to CC. Many scientists and most market proponents agree that renewable energy and energy efficiencies are better options. The chapter also shows that government subsidies for oil and nuclear power are the result of flawed science, poor ethics, short-term thinking, and special-interest influence. The chapter has 7 sections, the first of which surveys four major components of the energy crisis. These are oil addiction, non-CC-related deaths from fossil-fuel pollution, nuclear-weapons proliferation, and catastrophic CC. The second section summarizes some of the powerful evidence for global CC. The third section uses historical, ahistorical, Rawlsian, and utilitarian ethical principles to show how developed nations, especially the US, are most responsible for human-caused CC. The fourth section shows why climate-change skeptics, such as “deniers” who doubt CC is real, and “delayers” who say that it should not yet be addressed, have no valid objections. Instead, they all err scientifically and ethically. The fifth section illustrates that all modern scientific methods—and scientific consensus since at least 1995—confirm the reality of global CC. Essentially all expert-scientific analyses published in refereed, scientific-professional journals confirm the reality of global CC. The sixth section of the chapter shows how fossil-fuel special interests have contributed to the continued CC debate largely by paying non-experts to deny or challenge CC. The seventh section of the chapter provides an outline of each chapter in the book, noting that this book makes use of both scientific and ethical analyses to show why nuclear proponents’ arguments err, why CC deniers are wrong, and how scientific-methodological understanding can advance sound energy policy—including conservation, renewable energy, and energy efficiencies.

In 1976, when BPA was aggressively promoting nuclear power projects, Ken Lay had yet to form Enron, and Paul Joskow was still years away from conceiving the blueprint of a restructured utility industry, Amory Lovins, then a 29-year old consultant physicist, published a now famous article, “Energy Strategy: The Road Not Taken,” in Foreign Affairs. Drawing on Robert Frost’s poetic image, he saw two contrasting energy paths the nation might follow over the next fifty years: a hard path relying on centralized fossil fuel and nuclear power stations to increase energy supply and a soft path based on efficiency and renewable energy sources. The commitment to a long-term coal economy, he prophesied, would double atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration early in the next century. Described as the “enfant terrible of the energy left,” Lovins became a prolific author and proponent of sustainable energy whose urgent recommendations were dismissed by utility and nuclear interests but eventually gained mainstream credibility. He urged an end to fossil fuel subsidies and early on advocated a severance royalty, now called a carbon tax, in order to place renewable energy – wind, solar, and biomass – on an equal footing by reflecting the costs of externalities such as pollution and climate change. A brilliant promoter of his ideas, Lovins invented the concept of the negawatt – a theoretical unit of power representing the amount of energy saved (measured in watts) as a direct result of energy conservation or increased efficiency. Over time conservation gained political traction, finding expression in state and federal law supporting demand-side resources. In a recent book, Reinventing Fire, Lovins envisages several different possible scenarios for the future of the U.S. electricity system. One of these, “Renew,” charts a future in which by 2050 centralized renewables account for 80 percent of U.S. electricity generation. “Transform,” an even more ambitious forecast, envisions a radical change in the centralized grid architecture that has existed since Edison’s time, using distributed resources – rooftop solar, fuel cells, and small-scale wind coupled with smart meters – to create interlinked microgrids that can run in conjunction with the grid or seamlessly disconnect. Lovins relies on clean energy’s economic fundamentals rather than (as he earlier did) carbon pricing. His prescription has met with countervailing views from many energy economists but gains support from renewables’ recent market penetration. He remains a voice of cautious optimism in an otherwise bleak energy worldview.