• More Blogs
• Observations »
• Bering in Mind »
• Cross-check »
• Extinction Countdown »
• Solar at Home »
• Expeditions »
• Guest Blog »
• Anecdotes from the Archive »

CAMBRIDGE, MASS.—You could be forgiven for showing up to the M.I.T. Energy Conference here this past weekend looking forward to hearing how clean energy was going to take the world by storm. After all, Friday night, the exhibition hall was full of solar, small wind and cellulosic biofuel projects, sandwiched in between better batteries, fuel cells, nukes and algae. And the agenda was full of sessions on bioenergy, wind power, energy storage and smart grids.

But for a conference billed as "accelerating change in global energy," there was a consistent theme: Today's main sources of electricity—fossil fuels, particularly coal —are not going to stand aside for renewable sources without a significant shift in policy.

The day began with a great deal of enthusiasm about the gains the U.S. and the world can make by quickly building up renewable energy supplies, to beat back climate change, get the country off oil, and even end the economic crisis by creating scads of green jobs. Founders of innovative companies said they have the know-how and the technology to commercialize solar, wind, geothermal and hydroelectric supplies, as well as efficiency gains and a smart grid. (We live-Twittered the conference, so you can find the play-by-play, with additional input from our followers, here.)

But despite their readiness, and the excitement over President Obama’s stimulus package (which includes funding for renewable energy sources), the startup companies said they are trapped because they can’t get past small development into large economies of scale. With low oil prices and a bad economy, market demand has largely disappeared. Some other driver is needed. As Lars Josefsson, CEO of Vattenfall, the Swedish utility that is now the fifth largest power producer in all of Europe put it: Change “is not a question of money or technology. It requires a redesign of society.”

Until that redesign happens, it appears we'll be relying on some very old-fashioned sources of energy. On the other side of the makeshift partitions between conference rooms, Ian Copeland, president of new technology at Bechtel, which builds power plants for utilities, said the future of baseload power is: “coal, and natural gas, with some nuclear.” Later that day senior executives Atul Arya from British Petroleum, the global fuel company, and J. Wayne Leonard of Entergy, one the largest U.S. utilities, said the same thing.

By evening, the message was even more clear. “There is no shortage of fossil fuels," Arya said in the last session. "Demand is the issue, not supply.” And Leonard said, “The market has already picked the winning technology: coal.”

The conclusion from hearing the various speakers was evident: only an enlightened government policy -- not the free market -- will move us into a renewable energy future. Fossil fuel companies don't pay the full cost of producing their product--they don’t pay for its disposal, in the form of emissions, which creates an unfair advantage over renewable technologies. And consumers—from industries to individuals—must also change their behavior, given that lower-priced fossil fuels won’t be forcing them to change. Virtually every speaker acknowledged that government policy is the only way to fix the disconnect between large energy firms and startups.

Josefsson actually provided a roadmap for what that policy should be: He said four moves are needed: 1. Use coal, but much cleaner coal, which requires a policy that puts a price on carbon emissions, namely national cap and trade systems. 2. Reduce demand, by improving efficiency, which requires policies that allow utilities to earn a rate of return on those improvements (not possible under current regulations); 3. Force growth of renewable supplies, through federal Renewable Power Standards; and 4. International emission reduction agreements.

To be sure, these steps will cost money, certainly in the short term. Entergy CEO Leonard said Obama is doing the right thing by auctioning permits to emit carbon dioxide. But he also noted that fossil-fuel based electricity prices will go way up. One analysis presented at the conference suggested that electricity from coal would jump in price by more than 180 percent with a greenhouse gas law.

And given that many of these projects will cost money, perhaps the most worrisome comment, if you were still looking for an alternative energy future anytime soon, was a final thought from Barclay Bank's Theodore Roosevelt IV -- yes, that’s President Teddy Roosevelt's great-grandson: Who is going to pay for energy transformation now that banks are dead?

A CO₂ storage tank is lifted into final position at a Vattenfall plant (courtesy Vattenfall)

12 Comments

1. 1. candide 03:45 PM 3/9/09

   How much will energy cost when the climate is permanently damaged?

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. eco-steve 04:02 PM 3/9/09

   Supposing we do manage to sequester fossil-origin CO2 effectively and continue to burn coal. What will our descendants do when the coal has run out?

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

3. 3. bigbaddude 04:04 PM 3/9/09

   WII ASK THE BIG OIL MANUFACTURES AND THE SINKING CAR MANUFACTURES.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

4. 4. candide 04:43 PM 3/9/09

   Countries without major infrastructure (grid) need localized small generation and power, coal will never be clean for that type of generation.
   Why would anyone rather use mined coal as opposed to, say, solar photovoltaics....
   
   Sounds like the coal lobby has worked overtime on this one.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

5. 5. scientific earthling 08:08 PM 3/9/09

   Burn the coal, accelerate the sixth extinction.
   
   Stop looking for intelligent life in our universe. If we are a sample of intelligent life, any intelligent life that existed has exterminated itself along with countless other species.
   
   If you believe our intelligence exists in a electro-chemical matrix generated by neurons, then look at the largest electro-chemical matrix in our vicinity, sadly it exists on a different time scale to us.
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

6. 6. Die Maker 01:16 PM 3/10/09

   I think we need too see what is out there. Here are two companies working on the problem's. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Babcock-Power-amp-bw-14479288.html/print

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

7. 7. janicetran 07:18 PM 3/10/09

   I think Government has a huge role to play in making investment in alternative energy profitable. Despite the banking mess that we see ourselves in, investment will still go into something that is profitable and likely to provide a high return. All because times are tough doesn't mean an investment completely shuts down all operations and deals. What the government needs to do in this economic downturn is make renewable energy an attractive investment to the rest of corporate american. I think this is possible with the economic stimulus plan.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

8. 8. janicetran 07:20 PM 3/10/09

   Also for those of you interested, there is a global energy conference happening in Calgary Alberta this summer called the International Student Energy Summit. Website is http://www.studentenergy.org
   
   The same types of sessions will be there, but on a more global scale.
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

9. 9. Less1leg 09:39 AM 3/17/09

   The sad fact is on-line journalism is still pushing whimsicle idealist bunk out onto a misinformed public. All these "green jobs" are nothing more than snow jobs. You aren't telling all of the truth about green agendas. Its stinking expensive, and the public purse has run out. The price of a kilowatt of power from Green source is too expensive compared to present fossil generated power. If you decrease load on the affordable power and push Green source power expensive power, guess who gets stuck with the end bill, the consumer, you and me. I particularly don't want to get stuck picking up the tab for overly zealous trend setting liberalism. I only have a certain amount of monthly income, and I don't want to use it up on being trendy for Mr. Al Gore, or all you supporters of so called climate change.
   First prove its real.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

10. 10. realscience1 01:25 PM 3/17/09

    Global warming is real, but the way we have chosen to fight us will bankrupt us and not do anything to help with the global warming problem. Greenhouse gases are increasing at more than two percent a year. The amount of these pernicious gases already in our upper atmosphere is irreversible even if we stop all greenhouse gas emissions today. Irreversible is defined as 1,000 years or more. We will have to use geoengineering technologies to block approximately two percent of the sun's light/heat energy before it penetrates our atmosphere. This will buy us the time to develop clean energy, including clearn coal. We have more coal reserves in the U.S. than any other country in the world. By cleaning up the energy we have in our country, we will buy the time to go green gradually (these things take time). Geoengineering technologies can stop global warming and adverse climate change as soon as the research and development is completed and these technologies are deployed. Present government plans are misguided, impossible to execute, and a sure formula to bankrupt us. Both geoengineering and clean energy technologies are necessary and both must be funded adequately and immediately. Geoengineering technologies can be put in place in regions of the world where they are most needed. World cooperation will be obtained if we develop these technologies and conduct successful tests to insure the effectiveness and the safety of these technologies. Al Gore is only half right. Another Nobel Prize should go to the individuals and organizations that develop successful the technologies to block, scatter or reflect back just two percent of the sun's light/heat energy (this will be a Nobel Prize in the science used in the best of these projects).

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

11. 11. Geeta 01:17 AM 1/28/10

    Thanks for sharing this powerful information.That's very helpful and interesting.
    http://www.ddsagency.com/
    

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

12. 12. Geeta 01:18 AM 1/28/10

    Thanks for sharing this powerful information.That's very helpful and interesting.
    http://www.ddsagency.com/
    

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this