
A GENI Opinion-Editorial: A Crisis of Ignorance
January 12, 2001
There is no energy shortage,
there is no energy crisis, there is a crisis of ignorance.
Over three decades ago, visionary engineer Buckminster
Fuller made the statement that seems heretical today.
Any rational person viewing our energy quagmire
would dismiss Dr. Fuller's notion as utopian and
out of touch.
Yet it's possible that our present situation in
California and the Western U.S. has everyone focused
on immediate answers -- and that few are asking
the larger questions. The numerous players
in the energy game see the issues from completely
different perspectives: consumers want cheap, reliable
energy, California utilities want a rate increase
to avoid bankruptcy, out-of-state producers want
to make a profit for shareholders, and legislators
want a solution to salvage their deregulation vote
of four years ago. This stew of vested interests
offers little confidence in finding a strategy
that meets everyone’s needs.
The major problem with deregulation is that market
forces were unleashed before energy supply and demand
could be balanced. While the regulations were
changing in California, no additional generation
was built. Who would invest millions into
new power supply when the rules of the game
are unclear? Then, in that same period, California's
economy boomed, more people and computers moved
in and a hot summer offered up a triple whammy.
So, what are the questions that we should be asking?
First, how can we reduce our demand during the peak
hours? Where the utilities and their customers
are getting killed is at the Power Exchange (the
hourly marketplace where the big three utilities
must go to buy their megawatts). During the mid-day
hours when demand is highest, our supply must be
purchased from out-of-state. While the
utilities are limited to charging a fixed rate,
they must purchase that power at the highest bidder
price.
Governor Davis promised to address this folly in
his State of the State speech. But 30 million
consumers could dramatically affect this mid-day
cost/rate gap. How many lights, radios, computers,
TVs, are just left on during the day -- doing
no work, but causing utilities to purchase power
at peak prices? Yet without brownouts
or blackouts, consumers are oblivious to this basic
inequality of the daily electricity market. The
print media could make the difference here.
Newspapers could publish the hourly price of power
for the previous day and week. This information
is as critical as yesterday’s stock prices.
When consumers understand that the bulk of their
rate increase comes from 3-4 peak hours, they can
choose to turn off those electrical devices -- thus
reducing power demand when prices are their highest.
What about the supply side? Experts
are projecting that an additional 10,000-12,000
megawatts of new capacity is needed to balance the
supply/demand equation. Some of this new capacity
is under construction, and the Governor wants to
help fast-track even more. Yet, power generation
takes 2-3 years from groundbreaking to commissioning.
Almost all of these new projects are fired by natural
gas, the cleanest of the fossil fuels.
Our growing demand has caused a spike in gas prices,
which is also being added to our utility bills for
household heating and cooking. This increasing
fuel cost to the generators translates into higher
prices for power at the Power Exchange.
As all these new natural gas power plants come
on-line, does anyone believe the price of fuel will
return to last year’s level? And nowhere are
the greenhouse gas emissions being considered when
our pocketbook is in peril.
If we return to Buckminster Fuller’s thesis – there
is no energy shortage – one must examine the larger
energy potential of our region. For bulk power,
the western United States, British Columbia, Alberta
and northern Baja California are all linked via
a high-voltage electric transmission grid.
This network acts as a freeway for
electrons , enabling power generator and customer
to be hundreds, and in some cases, thousands of
miles apart. This grid is indifferent to the
power source, equally delivering power generated
from non-renewable energy sources: coal, natural
gas, nuclear, or the renewable sources: solar, wind,
biomass, geothermal, and hydropower.
The difference? Nonrenewable sources are mined,
transported and then burned to boil water, creating
steam to turn a turbine and generator – producing
either atmospheric or toxic waste. On the
other hand, with renewable resources we simply need
to harvest them: solar radiation in the desert,
high winds in the plains, underground steam and
falling water. These resources
are virtually unlimited in potential supply.
And what few people seem to know – these renewable
resources lie within our western region, and could
meet the lion’s share of our power needs. The Department
of Energy studied the wind resources of Idaho, Montana,
Wyoming and Colorado, and reported enough potential
to meet all the peak energy needs of the United
States today! Sanyo Electric has found that
using just 4% of the world’s deserts, photovoltaic
cells could meet the entire electrical needs of
the planet! The southwestern U.S. has more
than 4% of the world’s deserts. Combining
these renewables with existing geothermal and hydropower
offer an abundant potential that is far beyond our
immediate shortfall. The cost? Wind,
geothermal and hydropower are cost-competitive today.
The crisis we are facing is very real – but doesn’t
have to persist. Asking the right questions now
can alter our path and economy for decades to come.
Can we meet the energy needs of our region and reduce
pollution at the same time? Absolutely.
Peter Meisen,
President,
Global Energy Network Institute
|