35 Comments

It says it all Kollibri! Spot on!

Expand full comment

Thanks, Nikos!

Btw, I'm *finally* launching my new podcast next week and you're in line to be episode #3.

Expand full comment

I share your rage. Thanks for speaking out for the real world.

Expand full comment

Thanks, Rob! I meant to call your attention to the fact that I linked to your excellent and highly illuminating series, but it looks like you saw it already!

Expand full comment

You write "the potential of “green energy” generation to be “carbon free” doesn’t start until after it’s all set up". Even then it's far from "carbon free". As just three of many examples: 1) switching stations, substations, etc. use SF6 to insulate electrical gear (to keep it from catching fire and exploding). The gas has a warming potential 23,000 times that of CO2 and is used all over the grid. Needless to say, it leaks (as all gases do). 2) wind turbines contain oil, grease and hydraulic fluids, around 800 gallons of lubricants. Needless to say, it often leaks. And it must be replaced regularly. 3) All technologies on a grid from the solar and wind to the grid lines and stations to the grid stabilization centers to the computers used throughout the grid need constant maintenance. This often requires workers traveling to stations and remote areas in, you guessed it, diesel trucks. I can go on. There is nothing "carbon free" about so-called "renewable" energy.

Expand full comment

Thank you for adding all that! I've run across most of those figures in my reading, but failed to include them in this piece, so I'm grateful that readers will have your addendum to show a more complete picture. I'll add a note in the text directing attention to your comment.

I really appreciate the work you do raising awareness on these topics, so thank you very much!

Expand full comment

Likewise, so much appreciation for what you do.

Expand full comment

At some point, all this complexity on top of complexity to maintain current and future levels of complexity will have to collapse under its own weight. Add to that the insane amounts of computer processing necessary to keep this house of cards from falling and the insane amounts of energy to power that processing. To call this scenario "renewable", "green" or "sustainable" is next-level delusion.

Expand full comment

Indeed. The complexity is not sustainable at all. The more complex the systems get, the more fragile they get. Once you start digging into everything that's required to create the complex system and keep it running, you quickly realize the insanity and hubris and cruelty our modern lives entail.

Expand full comment

Love this! Wish I had written it myself ;)

Expand full comment

Thanks so much, Amy! I admire your work a lot so that's a very meaningful compliment to me.

Expand full comment

Aww, the mutual admiration society on substack is a delight!

Expand full comment

It's so nice, isn't it? So different than social media.

Expand full comment

Check out any of the works of the celebrated artist and writer William Morris, a truly prophetic voice, and arguably the world's first revolutionary ecosocialist. Maybe start with his lyrical essay, "Under an Elm Tree" (https://www.marxists.org/archive/morris/works/1889/commonweal/07-elm-tree.htm ).

Morris's insights are evergreen. For example, he broadly defined "waste", which he regarded as the quintessential characteristic of capitalism, as that state of affairs in which, paraphrasing, "some have more than they could ever use, while others have not enough to satisfy the minimum to sustain a dignified life".

Also, there's the "second product" of human labor, which socialist thinkers like Michael Lebowitz have insisted was of paramount importance to Marx's humanistic vision. In short, all work simultaneously produces tangible goods and services, while also changing and molding the very human beings performing that work. So it follows that, in organizing that work, a society has to consider out of what kinds of human beings it wants to constitute itself. (https://links.org.au/michael-lebowitz-if-you-dont-understand-second-product-you-understand-nothing-about-marxs-capital )

Expand full comment

Thanks, Guy! I'm sure there's more talk about these topics in Socialist circles than I'm aware of, so I appreciate the sources.

Expand full comment

By the way, yes, a reduction in TOTAL consumption is imperative, even if only because there are no realistic prospects for miraculously converting to "green energy" on a scale that could replace certain uses of fossil fuels, eg, for conventional aviation. Bring back hot air balloons. But focusing on total consumption is not helpful in a world where we rightly understand "waste" in the way William Morris did. Rather, a few people need to consume vastly less, but a vastly larger number need to be able to consume more! That is why waste and inequality are inseparable, and therefore ecology and economy are, too. Or, to quote from another excellent essay by Nobel winning economist Thomas Piketty, "the compression of social inequalities at all levels" is indispensable. (https://www.lemonde.fr/blog/piketty/2019/06/11/the-illusion-of-centrist-ecology/ )

Whereas, if we (those of us who side with people and planet over profit) headline our rhetoric with austerity slogans, all we are doing is playing right into the hands of pseudopopulist fascism, which we already see playing out around the world.

Expand full comment

People have been saying this for a long time, but there are just too few of us saying it. I wrote something similar a few months ago. (Well, maybe more favorable to distributed rather than centralized solar.) https://larryhogue.substack.com/p/embracing-my-inner-luddite

Expand full comment

Thanks, Larry! I consider myself a Luddite and look forward to reading your piece.

Expand full comment

I can't even bring myself to read this thoroughly because I know, and it pains me to my very core. How do we convince individuals that this is not actually in their best interest? That's what needs to happen and I find that it often falls on deaf ears.

Expand full comment

I should add that I was working in the desert for a few summers before this really started snowballing, so it's an issue very close to my heart.

Expand full comment

I ♥️ the desert too and set up this website of my photography to highlight the beauty there: https://wildflowersofjoshuatreecountry.com/

Expand full comment

Yes, but regular people can change like I did, see my comment below.

Expand full comment

Excellent article! I agree completely. The myth that we can keep our precious lifestyles through "sustainable development" has done more damage than climate denial.

Expand full comment

Thanks! 100% agreed on the damage caused by the narrative.

Expand full comment

This is excellent - thanks so much. I’m so glad that there are others who can’t see the logic of this green revolution in its present form, which seems only designed to make corporations more money and destroy the earth on slightly different ways.

Expand full comment

Thanks, Tara, and you're very welcome! I will be posting more on this topic. And there's a podcast episode coming too!

Expand full comment

I agree with you one hundred percent. But it wasn’t that long ago that I was all in for a green energy transition with a ‘humans first’ personal philosophy. Then I turned off the mainstream news, started reading indigenous writers, shut my mouth, listened carefully to nature, began to think and reflect, and five years later I’m a totally different person than I was. My own journey makes me hopeful that others like me can also learn to shut up and listen and learn from people like you. Thank you.

Expand full comment

I can relate, I'm less than a year into my new way of viewing these matters, and seeing this for what it really is, not what it's marketed as. Though I've suspected for years that something was definitely off, I felt I was the only one who felt that way.

Expand full comment

“Sustainability must be about sustaining life, not sustaining a lifestyle". I'm seeing farmland get turned into solar farms in Wisconsin and I've come to much the same conclusion: it's not about "saving the planet", it's about maintaining our mindless overconsumption and wasting of energy, continuing to externalize it so we don't have to think about where it comes from and what was lost to get it, while feeling warm and fuzzy about it because it's branded "green". However, when more of us are seeing these projects from our front porches, it will be harder for us to externalize, ignore, or comfort ourselves over "green" and "renewable" marketing buzzwords. I hope then, though it would probably be largely too late, we would wake up to this and resist.

Expand full comment

Learned a new word from Zerzan's Anarchy Radio from 6/25/24: "solastalgia" - "a form of emotional or existential distress caused by environmental change". That's one word for it...

Expand full comment

Agreed. Sustainability is not sustainable.

Expand full comment

Excellent, we need more people standing up for nature and advocating a move towards using less energy. I've been impressed by how many essays sharing a similar point of view I've seen on Substack in the past couple of weeks. Hopefully a sign that more people are beginning to see sense.

Expand full comment

Great write up, thank you. It's great that folks are finally starting to "get" climate change (I use that term loosely, hence the quotes), but the fact that climate change is but ONE symptom of ecological overshoot has gotten completely missed in the noise. We can't allow that to continue.

Expand full comment

There’s a caveat. If we don’t address, climate change, none of the work needed in the bio regional Eco habitat restoration project on a global basis will be worth worth doing. It won’t survive.

We need solutions everyone. The problems are easy to see. Think bigger.

Expand full comment