“That is indeed the debate we should be having – to reduce the demand for energy and not to increase the supply of energy – whether ‘green’ or whatever.”
.
The problem with trying to address any problems around renewables, is that the debate is often promoted or even high jacked by climate sceptics:
Climate science deniers and long-time opponents of renewable energy, many with ties to oil and gas companies, have seized on Michael Moore’s latest documentary to argue the case for continued fossil fuel dependence.
Planet of the Humans investigates the environmental footprint of renewable technologies such as wind, solar and biomass, and argues that the green movement has sold out to corporate interests. The documentary has been viewed over five million times on YouTube since its release last week to coincide with the 50th Anniversary of Earth Day.
But the film, produced by Moore and written and directed by his long-time collaborator Jeff Gibbs, has been widely criticised by energy and climate experts, who say it fails to provide context on the benefits of renewable energy and the negative impacts of fossil fuels, and is based on out-of-date information.
That was in 2020. In 2021, another documentary came out – based on experiences in northern Sweden:
Headwind”21 [Documentary] – YouTube
Here’s a different take on it:
A key plank of climate denial has been and continues to be that climate change is just a pretense for communism, and that climate policies are an assault on capitalism.
But two posts on Sunday show that, however unintentional, deniers agree that unchecked capitalism is getting in the way of successful climate action.
A NoTricksZone post by P Gosselin that was reposted to WUWT describes a new documentary called Headwind“21 that exposes how renewable energy projects also have environmental impacts, and that the business behind them are, in the words of a former London banker, “all about money.”
We’re not going to watch the entire feature-length 92 minute documentary available on YouTube, because even if it were totally 100% accurate in revealing how, as Gosselin describes, it’s all “about corporations making tonnes of money,” it wouldn’t change the fact that we need renewables to replace fossil fuels. The question is obviously how that happens, and as this doc might just show, when capitalism gets its dirty (invisible) hands on something, it doesn’t stay ethically clean for long.
Deniers Accidentally Confirm That Capitalism Stands In The Way Of Climate Solutions
So, the issue is not ‘renewable’ or ‘green’ energy per se – but ‘how it happens’
It was refreshing, therefore, to listen to this week’s Costing the Earth on Radio 4, looking at the impact of the ‘green energy revolution’ on northern Sweden:
Green industry is heading to Scandinavia’s far north. Fossil fuel-free steel and clean, green wind energy are in great demand but what does this rapid development mean for the indigenous people of the region?
Costing the Earth – Green Power in the Far North – BBC Sounds
And what was refreshing was that Greenpeace are taking direct action against the clear-felling of forests:
Swedish ‘sustainable’ forestry is threatening our home and livelihood – Greenpeace International
But in particular, it was the last word on the programme from Henrick Anderson, a local indigenous reindeer herder, who pointed to what we really need to be talking about:
“When is it enough? We need a debate about the huge issue of consumption.”
And as a commentator says:
“That is indeed the debate we should be having – to reduce the demand for energy and not to increase the supply of energy – whether ‘green’ or whatever.”