Energy Transition: "Accelerating the machine that’s eating the planet alive"
Also, Tony Dwyer searches for the market bottom
For many readers it’s no secret that the “energy transition” is highly flawed. Some might even call it disastrous.
While I recognize the destruction spewed by our carbon-intensive system, in many respects the ‘cure’ - electrification - is worse than the disease. In humanity’s desperate attempt to cling to the status quo, our head-first dive into electrification will strip the planet of resources and life.
In reality, we’re simply trading one problem for another (worse) one. Growth is not the solution - it is the problem. We’ve come to think of the economy as pieces of paper and characters on a screen, and so we’ve disassociated from the actual source of growth: productive use of physical labor and physical resources.
To survive, the humanity must learn to thrive within the limits of the physical world.
U.S. physicist Tom Murphy critiques the push for electrification:
“It’s doubling down on the wrong thing: propping up and accelerating the machine that’s eating the planet alive. Barrelling forward on renewable energy is the last thing Earth’s critters would vote for, and would be considered one of the more disruptive decisions we could make.”
The following article, shared by a reader, gives an excellent overview of the problem (click image to re-direct to article):
Here are the key points for those who don’t have time to read the entire article:
Renewable energy sources are widely supported as a solution to combat climate change.
Skeptics argue that the large-scale infrastructure required for renewables can have adverse environmental impacts.
Habitat destruction, wildlife displacement, and resource extraction are among the potential negative consequences of renewable energy projects.
The intermittent nature of renewable energy sources, like solar and wind, can pose challenges to grid stability.
To maintain a stable grid, energy storage solutions and backup power systems are necessary, which can be expensive and resource-intensive.
Some critics question the ability of renewable energy to completely replace fossil fuels, given the current energy demands and technology limitations.
Nuclear energy is proposed as an alternative, as it provides a reliable, low-carbon energy source, although concerns about waste management and safety persist.
Carbon capture technology is another option suggested by skeptics, which can mitigate emissions from fossil fuel power plants and industrial processes.
A focus on conservation efforts, such as energy efficiency and reducing consumption, is encouraged as part of a comprehensive approach to combat climate change.
The growing chorus of skeptics emphasizes the need for a more holistic approach to address climate change, considering various energy options and conservation strategies.
Was that the market bottom?
For a deep dive interview into the state of the markets and economy, I suggest watching this. It features Tony Dwyer Canaccord Genuity’s Chief Market Strategist.
Dwyer is often featured in the financial media, but something this in-depth usually costs $$ and is only available to Dwyer subscribers.
Be sure to subscribe to our sister publication: