The energy industry is incredibly fascinating to me. This post is a placeholder and kick-starter for a new series, for an industry I now find myself quite close to; am terribly interested in, and ought to frame and challenge my thinking on this topic, as we live in a time of an energy correction (Crises tend to be overblown, and recoverable) and transition.
My Journey in Energy
It’s difficult to say i’ve truly been front and centre within the industry, but nonetheless it is an area I’ve not been too far from.
My first exposure into energy was during university - where I had soon accidentally found out that my degree, rather than being about Chemistry, which was what prompted me to apply - turned out to mainly be physics (which…I wasn’t a fan of, nor that good at).
I soon found out however, that Chemical Engineering had its roots in the Oil and Gas, or Energy, industry, cracking down fossil fuels and building them up into useful materials and building blocks for all sorts of things we use in modern society (albeit, I feel much of it is taken for granted by the marketeer types.)
It was related to my path towards sustainability, I thereafter got interested in renewables and did a subsequent Masters in sustainability.
Energy is a core part of sustainability - aside from being the number one reason for carbon emissions, it is also an excellent case study for systems and interdisciplinary thinking, melding:
- Technology and Engineering
- Economics and Business
- Society and Politics
- Environmental and Ecological sustainability
Very nice. (insert borat pic)
I also recall a fun board game called “Power Grid”, which was used as an ice breaker in my master’s course. I remember “winning” the game - through a heavy investment into fossil fuels first (much to the horror of “green” people, to build up resources, before switching over to renewables (having had a sizeable economic advantage developed).
Later, I read The Quest, by Vaclav Smil a while researching geopolitics for work in parallel - made of an enriching moment to learn more about the less-obvious forces shaping the industry.
Today, I work in a clean fuel technology company - better get updated on the latest developments now.
My Current Thinking
According to International vs Domestic and Centralised vs Decentralised areas
1. International, Centralised
A global interconnected is not the complete answer either - energy security and a fracturing geopolitical climate will force nations to look towards independence rather than the naivete of believing in a perfect globalised system. No sovereign nation would want to be dependent on another country for such a fundamental need. Interconnected grids from the middle east to Southeast Asia would be fantastic but too idealistic.
2. Domestic, Centralised
Nuclear is not a technological problem, but principally a Political (and by extension, social acceptance) and economic one (history has demonstrated it is practically impossible to stay on budget). No doubt that world war II and its use as a weapon has set the world behind. But it pays to not be naive about this either. As long as Nuclear Weapons are on the global agenda, there will be skyrocketing costs of bureacracy (safety, security of nuclear fuel) adding to the deep unattractiveness to finance such a project. Governments cannot fork out that moeny alone, and the private sector would hardly want to invest in something that is completed a decade later. However, I am a fan of nuclear being a clean baseload.
I hold weaker views on Hydropower, tidal power, geothermal and the other sorts of renewable power for these are highly geographically dependent (so is wind and solar, but you will find far more accessible wind and solar than suitable rivers, coasts and hotspots).
Domestic, Decentralised
Wind and Solar is not enough to solve energy needs, and I cannot express my frustration further at those with an imbalance advocacy:engineeing knowledge ratio - claiming and complaining that companies/governments (i.e. everyone else) should be installing MOAR rENewaBLEZ are dangerously myopic in what is technically feasible. Wind and Solar should be deployed as much as possible, but one must understand its limitations in efficiency and scale. Also, I encourage all to understand its Total Lifecycle where possible
Electrochemical Energy storage is insufficient in fringe cases - the stored capacity is intensive for physical space and volume, versus the potential uncertain and disasters that the world will face, . Energy storage is must be weighed against its resource requirements and the criticality of its use. I do not believe it should be something done centrally at a large scale. For example, storing energy for a hospital is a far better use of resource than for a commercial property.
Smart Grids are an area i need to understand better, but I have not been a big believer in software solutions. The improvements are marginal, at best. For example, implementing a “smart sensor” for air-conditioning for power saving is probably less likely to be efficient than getting more efficient hardware. Fuels, and energy carriers are required as a medium to improve energy resilience, both domestically and internationally.
To ensure the availability of energy, there is a continued requirement for clean, safe, and easily transportable fuels. However, we must be prepared to pay an energy and cost premium. This means paradoxically consuming more energy, to manufacture clean fuels to enable resilient and accessible energy for all.
The Energy Trilemma
Much of these forces are captured very well in the “Energy Trilemma” framework which is making its round now. The Energy Trilemma neatly sums up the trade-offs around the perfect energy system requiring: Security, Affordability and (principally environmental) Sustainability.
This gels well with my own thinking around “trade-off” decision-making. There are too few suitable and we simply cannot eat them.
The liberal world had taken its energy security for granted for too long (Green parties were the first to assume the world is a perfectly peaceful place, with flowers and rainbows and tree-hugging. Bye bye decommissioning nuclear plants - Welcome to the real world)
The Discourse
It is then, equally interesting how polarising the energy sector can be. Incumbents vs the future, hydrogen vs batteries, etc. But I assess the credibility of such discourse through the interdisciplinary lenses I described above. There are common pitfalls (which i am admittedly capable of falling into as well) that risks oversimplifcations:
-
Technology and Engineering - misunderstanding the latest technology, and believing in some hype. 10000% Efficient solar cells? WaOW
-
Economics and Business - Pushing the problem to say that corporates and businesses (and governments) should bear the burden of energy increases. Equally - saying that Big Oil are the sole criminal for carbon emissions. They are part of a system, that these advocates are very much consumers of.
-
Society and Politics - believing the world is rosy and how “easy” it is to import energy through the grid from other countries. Literal wars and blood ahs been spilled over these before.
-
Environmental and Ecological sustainability - taking narrow views on which A is irrefutably better than B from an environmental perspective. Gosh this one is full of hatred online. Having done Lifecycle calculations before (and the many assumptions).
The most ridiculous one i had seen was a “sustainability consultant” comparing the emissions of making a battery vs the operating emissions of a combustion engine. Not to mention the other aspects of sustainability - fishies in water,
I’d love to revisit my current thinking as the global energy system resets itself. But this post will anchor my thoughts in the meantime.
Off this - I’m finally done with my quarantine and headed to the big city of Shanghai soon!