Today’s Contemplation: Collapse Cometh CLI
Critiquing ‘Renewables’ is Simply a Right-Wing Conspiracy
Today’s brief Contemplation is my comment to another’s FB post. The post shares an article that paints the critiques of non-renewable, renewable energy-harvesting technologies as ‘right wing’.
I’m leery of much put out by Cleantechnica whose primary focus is to sell/market (via a lot of greenwashing) non-renewable, renewable energy-harvesting technologies. (see here for some rather pointed critiques of the site)
First, the argument that “governments don’t get a cut” or “big companies” don’t profit from the pursuit of these technologies is disingenuous and misleading to say the least. While this simple (but misleading) message appeals to a certain segment of the population, it is certainly not true when one looks at all the upstream and downstream production, maintenance, distribution, and reclamation/disposal chains where governments impose taxes, get industrial kickbacks and political contributions, benefit from the growth Ponzi being extended a bit longer, etc., and companies profit from the sales of these products (and don’t lose sight of the fact that it is the large energy corporations (i.e., Big Oil and Gas) that have invested billions of dollars in the ‘renewable’ energy sector )— to say little about the financial support/revenue streams for such ‘clean’ energy marketers such as Cleantechnica.
In addition, I wouldn’t be so sure that governments (who are always looking for ways to expand their revenue streams) don’t start ‘taking a cut’ or ‘regulating’ use in some extended fashion, just as they have with regard to rainwater that falls on your property in some locations. In fact, in many locations solar panels located on homes feed into the public grid rather than get used for personal use, with no guarantee that — should the power be required elsewhere — the ‘owner’ of the panels receives any of its generated electricity.
Also, framing the criticism of these technologies as some ‘right wing’ attack is similarly disingenuous but, again, appeals to some. The painting of critiques as politically-driven not only further drives the increasing polarisation of our world but also helps to reduce one’s cognitive dissonance regarding the very real and substantive ecological destruction wrought by the pursuit of these technologies.
This partisan approach persuades many to dismiss those who would point out the many issues surrounding these technologies as unworthy of even the slightest consideration of their perspective; or, worse, to ignore the evidence and continue to cheerlead the pursuit of industrial processes that are doing the exact opposite of what the ‘goal/motivation’ of reducing/eliminating fossil fuels via these technologies claims to be doing: ‘saving the planet’.
That I have been labelled a Malthusian doomer, Big Oil shill, far-right conspiracy theorist, etc. for simply pointing out the ecological systems destruction that accompanies the production of these complex ‘renewable’ technologies supports this contention. Those disagreeing with my perspective resort very quickly to ad hominem rhetoric without ever considering the ecological system impacts of the industries they are supporting. They dismiss it as fossil fuel-supporter propaganda.
Is the evidence of the shortcomings, including the negative environmental impacts of non-renewable, renewable energy-harvesting technologies, being leveraged by those that support hydrocarbon energy continuation/expansion? Absolutely. I cannot deny this since it is quite evident. But this does not negate the evidence that the industrial processes required to produce these technologies (especially large-scale mining powered by hydrocarbons) are helping to overload planetary sinks and destroy ecological systems. This is what complex, industrial technology requires; all of it.
Lost in this Overton Window that has been created is the overarching predicament of ecological overshoot. And I think that there’s a reason/motive for ensuring this predicament is kept off the radar for most: growth (economic and population) must be pursued else the Ponzi schemes/rackets we are all entrenched within will collapse — and with it the revenue streams (and thus power/wealth) of the ruling caste. What is needed is little to no complex technology and a rapid contraction of both our economies and population, not a grandiose and magical shift from one type of industrial technology to another. This argument, however, undermines significantly the infinite growth narrative that keeps the rackets going just a bit longer.
Recently released:
It Bears Repeating: Best Of…Volume 1
A compilation of writers focused on the nexus of limits to growth, energy, and ecological overshoot.
With a Foreword and Afterword by Michael Dowd, authors include: Max Wilbert; Tim Watkins; Mike Stasse; Dr. Bill Rees; Dr. Tim Morgan; Rob Mielcarski; Dr. Simon Michaux; Erik Michaels; Just Collapse’s Tristan Sykes & Dr. Kate Booth; Kevin Hester; Alice Friedemann; David Casey; and, Steve Bull.
The document is not a guided narrative towards a singular or overarching message; except, perhaps, that we are in a predicament of our own making with a far more chaotic future ahead of us than most imagine–and most certainly than what mainstream media/politics would have us believe.
Click here to access the document as a PDF file, free to download.
If you’ve made it to the end of this contemplation and have got something out of my writing, please consider ordering the trilogy of my ‘fictional’ novel series, Olduvai (PDF files; only $9.99 Canadian), via my website — the ‘profits’ of which help me to keep my internet presence alive and first book available in print (and is available via various online retailers).
You can also find a variety of resources, particularly my summary notes for a handful of texts, especially Catton’s Overshoot and Tainter’s Collapse: see here.