“What we have now is one-way bureaucratic command-and-control making poor choices with funding derived from captive customers and one-sided radical agendas. Accordingly, the environmental zealots demonize fossil fuels, whereas sustaining that solely wind and photo voltaic are ‘inexperienced’ sufficient to ‘save the planet.’ This itself is greenwashing.”
Like Rob Bradley’s “Renewable Vitality: Not Low cost, Not ‘Inexperienced’” (see Half I), my colleague Tom Tanton wrote a serious piece in regards to the over-regulation of the rare-earth extraction business within the U.S.: “Dig it! In order for you extra info on the significance of uncommon earths inside the united stateseconomy, this may be an excellent place to begin.
The long-term feasibility of this transition to renewables merely assumes ample uncooked supplies exist for it in any respect. Professor Michaux of the Geological Survey of Finland (GTK) has studied these points, in all probability extra extensively than anybody else and thinks not. Professor Simon Michaux took on these points by way of the next ground-breaking work:
The upshot of Professor Michaux’s work is that “we want a brand new plan” as there aren’t sufficient uncooked supplies to maintain this transition nor can recycling or reprocessing mining waste make up for the shortfall. Because the success of free market economies relies upon knowledgeable residents, I urge you to go to Professor Michaux’s web site or, at a minimal, view the next YouTube:
Dr. Michaux additionally has a number of PowerPoint shows that may be downloaded from his web site. I like to recommend beginning with the next:
Whereas Michaux’s info is invaluable, be warned that taking all of it in is akin to consuming from a hearth hose. However I assure, it will likely be value it.
Whereas it’s possible that at the least some technical course of and uncooked supplies discoveries will probably be made to enhance the availability of uncommon earth minerals required for all-renewables-all-the-time, there’s at the least another class of issues to contemplate: What are the environmental and social penalties of this transition to “clear vitality” relative to conventional fuels.
There are a lot of earlier articles in my MasterResource archives (https://www.masterresource.org/class/krebs-mark/) that summarize the environmental and “social justice” issues of presidency’s forcing of renewables, a few of which I wrote or co-wrote with Tom Tanton. These articles referenced complete financial prices (within the trillions of {dollars} within the U.S. alone); baby/slave labor used to extract uncooked supplies after which course of/manufacture them into renewable vitality techniques; environmental aftermath, and many others. The latter included the extremely poisonous waste streams related to lithium extraction and processing on the usually poverty-stricken native communities the place such operations are routinely carried out. “Environmental justice” for me however not for thee.
Seabed Strip Mining
Getting again to seabed strip-mining; it appears the assumed GHG reductions of this transition to renewables are considerably undermined by their very own distinctive types of environmental aftermath. Not solely does it take huge quantities of fossil fuels to provide renewable vitality techniques, however the more durable it will get to safe uncooked supplies, the extra GHG’s will probably be emitted for this transition to “clear vitality.” As Professor Michaux places it, “minerals develop into the brand new oil.” Or as Daniel Yergin titled the vitality transformation: “Massive Oil to Massive Shovels.”
One case-in-point: a Actual Clear Wire article dated November 18th 2022 titled Seabed Mining Will Assist Break China’s Grip on Important Minerals by Tom LaTourrette, senior bodily scientist and interim director of the Neighborhood Well being and Environmental Coverage program on the RAND Company (a authorities funded assume tank).
The article makes the case for creating new assets for uncooked supplies wanted for the “clear vitality transition” from seabed mining impartial from China. I don’t low cost that such useful resource potential exists and may reduce the dominance of China in these markets, however I do query whether or not the remedy is worse than the illness when it comes to successfully mitigating a brand new sort of ostensible climatic apocalypse.
The GHG emissions associated to seabed mining are a serious penalty towards the manufacturing of renewable vitality techniques and the topic requires additional scientific analysis. Along with the GHG releases from the extremely vitality intensive nature of seabed mining and extraction, coverage shouldn’t overlook the truth that seabed extraction requires acute disturbances of ocean sediments that signify the biggest (by far) sequestration reservoir for carbon and methane on the planet.
Such processes are akin to strip mining the ocean flooring with largely unknown ecological impacts. Furthermore, GHG emissions are however one type of environmental aftermath related to seabed mining. A Google seek for the time period “environmental impacts of seabed mining” signifies the extent of such points. The next lists a selection few of those references:
- Deep-sea Mining FAQ
- Understanding the influence of deep-sea mining
- Deep-Sea Mining Might Assist Meet Demand for Important Minerals, However Additionally Comes with Severe Obstacles
- A Local weather Resolution Lies Deep Below the Ocean—However Accessing It Might Have Enormous Environmental Prices
- Is deep-sea mining a remedy for the local weather disaster or a curse?
To summarize, oceans are a significant carbon sink, absorbing as much as 1 / 4 of world carbon emissions annually of their deep sediments. Strip-mining the ocean flooring will possible upset this stability and hurt ocean ecosystems basically.
There may be not sufficient scientific proof thus far to conclusively assess the dangers related to deep ocean strip mining. What is understood is that sediments that may be miles in depth, have to be sucked up after which filtered to display screen out massive solids that will comprise useful minerals. Then, the filtered sediments are merely dumped overboard. It will possible launch important quantities of carbon and presumably methane (hydrates) too. Silt plumes could disrupt meals chains obligatory for a lot of the world’s creatures.
A lot Vitality Required, Entrance Air pollution
The vitality required for powering the mining gear and the ensuing emissions are additionally important. Assuming the operators of seabed mining gear are required to pay for the “social price of carbon” (SCC), the fee effectiveness of the method could also be adverse. All for what? To cut back “international lukewarming?”
Betting the farm on “clear vitality” more and more seems to be a nasty guess each economically and environmentally. Until in fact, you’re the authorities and are betting with “different folks’s cash” and get to develop your empire.
Are avid environmentalists prepared to simply accept the ecological dangers related to deep-sea strip mining to achieve their “inexperienced vitality” transition agenda? “Out of sight is out of thoughts,” proper? Apparently, they’re prepared to take such dangers, as evidenced by their “eyes shut” strategy to baby slaves in mining. The next excerpt is from the fifth article within the above listing. It additional signifies the reply is sure:
We live in a world the place increasingly more folks wish to have the newest cellphones in addition to electrical autos and wind and solar energy crops that can assist in attaining web zero emissions. And these require metals like cobalt and manganese.
By itself, recycling these metals is unlikely to supply the elements we want for these units, so mining goes to be necessary. On land it’s related to all types of issues and ultimately there will probably be a push for deep-sea mining – and in the long run it can occur.
Conclusion
I do not advocate that customers must be disadvantaged of fabric items resembling sensible telephones. Nor ought to they be disadvantaged of inexpensive vitality. I do advocate that, since all types of vitality have adverse impacts, to make vitality sustainable decision-making must be effectively knowledgeable, clear by way of sound (vs. politicized) science–and customers must be well-informed about each the professional’s and the con’s of such alternate options.
Conversely, what we have now is one-way bureaucratic command-and-control making poor choices with funding derived from captive customers and one-sided radical agendas. Accordingly, the environmental zealots demonize fossil fuels, whereas sustaining that solely wind and photo voltaic are “inexperienced” sufficient to “save the planet.” This itself is greenwashing. It’s again to Robert Bradley’s “Renewable Vitality: Not Low cost, Not ‘Inexperienced’”.
ADDENDUM
- Mark Krebs presentation to Cooler Heads about “Helpful Electrification”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Biden-Administration-policies-to-
eliminate-personal-consumption-of-fossil-fuels-FINAL09JAN23-.pptx - Robert Bryce’s “Energy Hungry” Podcast: Simon Michaux
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QzSlXEEyw8
————
This concludes a two-part publish (Half I yesterday).
Mark Krebs, a mechanical engineer and vitality coverage marketing consultant, has been concerned with vitality effectivity design and program analysis for greater than thirty years. He has served as an skilled witness in dozens of State vitality effectivity proceedings, has been an advisor to DOE and has submitted scores of Federal energy-efficiency filings. His many MasterResource posts on pure fuel vs. electrical energy and “Deep Decarbonization” federal coverage will be discovered right here. Mark’s first article was in Public Utilities Fortnightly, titled “It’s a Conflict Out There: A Fuel Man Questions Electrical Effectivity” (December 1996). Not too long ago retired from Spire Inc., Krebs has fashioned an vitality coverage consultancy (Fuel Analytic & Advocacy Providers) with different veteran vitality analysts.
