At what cost energy? At what cost food? At what cost clothes, house, life? Cost to who? Outside of a circular economy everything 'costs', and the buck stops with the planet, nature, Gaia, our home, where we come from, where we live and where we shall die. How should we preserve our home and how should we behave? This is, after all, the age of the Anthropocene. Are we free? No, we are highly addicted, to something we cannot currently live without...electricity!
The need to decarbonise is more than critical. In the last 40 years global consumption of oil, gas, and coal has doubled, exacting immeasurable damage to Gaia. The need to stop biodiversity loss is life-threatening to humans as well as the planet. Since 1984 global arable land has reduced by 30 per cent as the human population has increased by 170 per cent. Is it possible to maintain life as we know it?
Without appearing alarmist, the answer is almost definitely not! Stopping climate change and preventing mass biodiversity loss will not happen unless humans are prepared to radically change their lifestyle and use what our planet can provide, because there are not enough resources for the infinite GDP economic growth model to continue. But what democratically elected government dares to tell their electorate that they must accept to be 'worse off' than their parents?
Masquerading
Kate Raworth, an economist that I profoundly admire and author of the book Doughnut Economics, postulates that our value system must be fundamentally changed to prioritise 'thriving' and 'well-being' for all within an economy that is by design distributive rather than divisive. She advocates an economic model that balances essential human needs with planetary boundaries. "We need to thrive between the social foundation and the ecological ceiling, living in balance with the rest of the living world."
Living in a digital age, large parts of the world's population are dependent on the life blood of electrical energy. With the exponential growth of AI, robotics, and data storage systems, global electrical demand in 2024 is set to rise by four per cent to its highest level ever, and 25 to 30 per cent by 2030! Energy has become one of the most debated, contentious and politicised global issues of our era, but it must remain just one consideration alongside other aspects of our unique ecosystem. Energy is not the only criteria on which our lives depend!
Our planet seems almost not to be suited for the ways in which many of us now wish to live, and let's not forget that it is those living outside the cities who are having to not only witness the full spectrum of climate breakdown and biodiversity loss first hand but are also expected to embrace the industrialisation of environmentalism, using up fertile landscape, creating a negative feedback loop for biodiversity and well-being!
We must remember that we have evolved within a physical body and mind co-existing in harmony with other species. Our fundamental priorities have always been simple: feeding ourselves, procreation, shelter, health, well-being, co-existence, and above all love!
The first step is that local communities become responsible for the production, storage, and distribution of renewable energy.
It has been, and continues to be, a gargantuan battle to wean ourselves off fossil fuels, and this battle must not cease. There is now a sizeable renewables industry, but where I live in Italy, it has been brutally hijacked by profiteers masquerading as environmentalists. This is classic 'business as usual' tactics, just the latest chapter in the consumeristic capitalistic playbook that has now brought us to the brink.
Systems
The green transition is repeating the exact same tactics that the fossil fuel companies were using, except with the moral authority to save the planet. Yesterday I was an oil baron, today I'm a wind turbine king! This must change; it’s not okay to use renewable energy as an excuse to plaster our arable land with huge solar farms or litter the countryside with thousands of giant wind turbines disfiguring ancient landscapes and endangering the health of local populations.
Our land is our only capital and our natural environment, it gives us well-being from its space, silence, abundance and beauty. Allowing its value to be controlled by the marketplace for energy is a recipe for disaster.
In Europe there have been differing models for resolving the energy problem. Germany is the biggest industrial powerhouse in Europe, it is intransigently averse to nuclear and has heavily invested in renewables - particularly wind turbines of which there are now 30,000 sprawled across the countryside.
These, like solar, are intermittent energy sources. When the wind doesn't blow or the sun doesn't shine, Germany uses a back-up system of coal-fired, lignite or gas power stations, which must always be on standby, because Germany, like all industrialised countries, needs electricity 24/7, all year. This has severely impacted its ability to reduce net carbon emissions. A radical change in the economic, financial and social systems is even more essential and urgent.
Bureaucratic
I am observing the 'green transition' from the countryside of Tuscia, Central Italy, home to the ancient Etruscan people and visited by millions of people every year. It is a beautiful place to live. There are lakes, ancient caves, vines, mushrooms, mozzarella, and unsurprisingly, a large proportion of the population make their livelihood from food and tourism.
In the 12 years I have lived here we have seen temperatures rise of three to four degrees in the summer, and experience unpredictable out of season weather events throughout the year that confuse the flora and fauna. Floods, droughts, fires and ruined crops are now common here, as everywhere.
I don't consider myself a luddite. I've been aware of the potential consequences of climate change for a long time. I moved to Italy to be utility independent. I bought a house with its own well on a hill, and sufficient land to grow food. I installed solar panels with battery storage at my house to become up to 80 per cent electrically autonomous. I cook, heat and drive with electricity. Ironically, I am now writing in the middle of a power cut after a storm!
The household is largely carbon free, but not silicon, lithium or copper free. Any material used to harvest 'green' energy must come from somewhere. I aspire to being carbon neutral, but it is extremely difficult to reconcile being carbon neutral with a modern lifestyle.
Italy is a highly conservative society: it holds the most UNESCO sites with 58, so there is a lot to conserve! It is also steeped in bureaucratic glue and been sluggish to mitigate and activate any plan for a green transition. Post-Covid in 2021, a huge sum of €200 billion in grants and loans was made available to Italy by the EU for this very purpose, but it must be spent by 2026.
Tariffs
The government has not produced a coherent strategy or comprehensible legal framework as to how and where renewable plants can be installed. The country is in desperate need of some energy sovereignty, with very little 'constant' reserves of its own, importing for example, as much as 97 per cent of its oil and gas. The only other constant lower carbon source of energy is nuclear, but even this source has been problematic. Italians rejected a return to nuclear in two referendums, in 1987 and 2011, preferring instead to import nuclear generated electricity from France and Switzerland!
However, there has been a lot of discussion in Italy about a new generation of nuclear power stations which are smaller, quicker, safer and cheaper to build. Giorgia Meloni's government is supportive, but commentators are doubtful whether they will obtain majority support in parliament. We shall see...
Without any governmental guidance to follow, the situation has become chaotic. An army of speculators have arrived from all over Europe, rubbing their hands in glee because every large wind/solar project brings a 30 per cent risk free return on investment over 20 years - manna to any board and shareholders! These opportunists are now confronting those wishing to protect Italian food sovereignty, cultural assets, and tourism.
Even though Italy is a country of sun, not wind, there are plans to erect 450 wind turbines 200 metres high within an area of just over 50km between Northwestern Umbria/Tuscany and the Mediterranean Sea. The idealised Italian landscape of Da Vinci, Corot and Poussin is in danger of changing from arable farmland to industrial wasteland.
Crucially, this is an area without sufficient wind to generate enough electricity to justify the vast financial and resource investment. The wind companies do not need to worry because they will receive fixed 'higher than market rate' feed-in tariffs from the government over 20 years, regardless of the electricity generated! A more sensible option (but not ideal) would be to utilise the 8000km of coastline around Italy and place the turbines offshore.
Habitats
Sardinia, one of the most beautiful and culturally important areas of Italy has been badly afflicted onshore and offshore with a huge quantity of renewable energy that far outstrips its potential consumption.
The regional government has passed a decree imposing a 'moratorium' on any further renewable projects in their areas until the government produces a clear plan for distributing projects equally and intelligently throughout Italy. With no forward planning, resistance from regional governments, potential unrest throughout the country, and pressure from Brussels to spend the €200 billion grant/loan by 2026, the Italian government finds itself caught between the devil and the deep blue sea.
This type of situation is happening in many parts of the globe and will only start to be resolved when we all face up to the fact that the world is unable to continue as it was before, our system and lifestyles must change radically.... but how?
The first step is that local communities become responsible for the production, storage, and distribution of renewable energy. Every area in the world has meteorological and geographical defining characteristics that will dictate a renewable energy mix in that area, and this must be balanced with due respect to the landscape and habitats around it.
Redistribution
For example, in Italy, because it is a country of sun, energy production will come from solar panels placed on existing structures and already industrialised sites in the community such as car parks, factories, warehouses, motorway cuttings, railway cuttings, office buildings, condominiums and private houses.
A seminal article by researchers Massimo Mazzer and David Moser was published April 2021 in the journal Nature. This set out a plan for powering Italy on the basis that there are already sufficient structures for solar panels to meet the EU renewables targets for 2030 with a 30 per cent surplus. Existing solar farms must be upgraded from the existing 15-year-old technology to the latest generations of panels. No more arable fertile land need be used.
One of the keys to implement this plan is the creation of local energy communities, or community-based energy projects, whereby local citizens and businesses invest collectively in renewable projects for production, storage and distribution of electricity. Governments are starting to provide subsidies for installation costs, in Italy up to 40 per cent, and the community can also earn credits for extra clean electricity which goes into the central grid.
Apart from the financial model this system has many other advantages. It ensures that interests valuable to the local community are protected, like arable land and cultural assets. Energy begins to become a democratic benefit, cutting transport costs for a more efficient and reliable power supply, reducing bills, and generating local jobs.
Locally generated solar power feeds electricity into a local 'smart' hub to either be used immediately or stored in battery systems maintained by the community which will then provide for nighttime use. Any surplus supply will be sold back into the grid for redistribution. In the case of under supply a fixed constant source generated by nuclear or other non-carbon emitting source will need to be used as back up.
Addiction
The emphasis must be on energy responsibility and democratisation and not on profit and corporate ownership. For that energy saving is crucial. Lifestyles will have to change because no longer will we be able to live in an energy-infinite world. The fossil fuel era must end.
This model will not work for transport, which is transient and not community based. Once again, a system of constant energy which can be increased or decreased in real time will have to be implemented. Lower carbon nuclear is the only option currently available: no doubt other technologies will come online in the future.
The price of electric vehicles is currently prohibitive for millions of people, which indicates that in the event of a ban on fossil fuelled transport, many people will be obliged to exist with public transport, or not travel at all.
This has the advantage of strengthening local communities but can the genie be put back in the bottle? Is it possible for our world to return to an era of limited or no travel? How will goods circulate?
Throughout history humans have been incredibly resourceful, but it seems that we are at a point where 'civilisation' and 'technological advance' are a hindrance to our freedom rather than an enhancement.
Apart from the inequality, we are imprisoned within our smartphones living in a virtual world which cannot exist without electricity, losing our freedom to become beholden to energy! We must balance our intelligence, creativity, and labour with the resources available on planet Earth, otherwise our energy addiction will destroy us.
This Author
James P Graham is an artist and activist. He is a former trustee of the Resurgence Trust, which owns and publishes The Ecologist online.