Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
49% by the year 2005, with bio-gas and wind each sup-
plying 5%, and photovoltaics 11%, of the total. Actual
shares were 0% for bio-gas, 0.04% for wind, and 0.08%
for photovoltaics, so the forecast was off by at least 2
OM.
At the same time, we should resist any return to visions
of massively centralized energy schemes such as those
promoted during the late 1970s (ESPG 1981). Extreme
views of energy futures lead to unrealistic global expecta-
tions. By the year 2030 the soft path was to reduce the
world's 1980 energy use by half, and the hard option
was to lead to as much as a fourfold rise in total primary
energy conversions. Despite their huge differences both
visions shared the bias of a preferred technical fix, a mis-
placed and mistaken faith in a particular set of techniques
as the solution to complex energy challenges (Smil
1987). We must shun grand designs. We need work-
able, reliable, economical, and environmentally accept-
able approaches. We cannot precipitately abandon our
primary energy sources without profoundly reshaping
our way of life. But we also need to begin, with vigor
and determination, the inevitable transition to the post-
fossil fuel world.
Inevitably, there is apprehension—and there is hope.
On the debit side are the concerns about the availability
of fossil fuels extractible with high EROI, environmental
consequences of energy conversions, and bridging the
enormous gap between rich and poor economies. On
the credit side is our better understanding of the bio-
sphere, our technical ingenuity, and our social adaptabil-
ity. The key ingredients of successful long-term strategies
are clear. Above all, we should not encourage question-
able demands, equate them with needs, and fill the gap
by providing more energy. And we should not believe
that the genuinely higher need for energy services must
result in a higher supply of energy. Most of our ingenuity
should be devoted to the reduction of final uses rather
than to the expansion of primary supply.
It would take monumental intellectual arrogance to
maintain that we can decide a priori what will work best.
As Sophocles knew, ''One must learn by doing the thing,
for though you think you know it, you have no certainty
until you try.'' The need to tolerate uncertainty, that
essential openness of the human future, is both uncom-
fortable and promising. John von Neumann (1955, 152)
summarized the task perfectly:
The one solid fact is that the difficulties are due to an evo-
lution that, while useful and constructive, is also danger-
ous. Can we produce the required adjustments with the
necessary speed? The most hopeful answer is that the human
species has been subjected to similar tests before and seems to
have a congenital ability to come through, after varying
amounts of trouble. To ask in advance for a complete recipe
would be unreasonable. We can specify only the human
qualities required: patience, flexibility, intelligence.
