Reversing Churchill's Blunder

"Churchill's blunder" is how Utah Governor Jon Huntsman, Jr. characterizes our dependence and addiction to oil, tracing it back to Winston Churchill's decision before the First World War to convert the British navy to petroleum, thereby making Britain dependent on foreign sources of fuel such as Iran. Huntsman made the analogy at the National Clean Energy Summit in Las Vegas convened by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and the Center for American Progress at the University of Nevada.

The overarching message from the Summit was one of boldness and a palpable excitement that we have not one but many pathways to reverse Churchill's mistake and build a clean energy future. T. Boone Pickens laid out how we can get 20 percent of our electricity from wind and cut our dependence on oil by a third; New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg laid out his Plan NY and his commitment that New York won't just shift to renewables from other places, it also will create them right there in the city. Ed Mazria of Architecture 2030 combined elements from his earlier proposals with those from Pickens and others and raised the bar still further, while Federal Energy Regulatory Commissioner Jon Wellinghoff offered a brand new set of incentives to make clean energy happen even faster.

It's getting hard to follow the proposals without a scorecard, so here's my summary of the big ideas I heard brought to the table:

1. Repower America. Think Al Gore (100 percent renewable electricity in ten years) and T. Boone Pickens. Use renewables to completely displace fossil fuels from electricity generation and to build a national grid (one of the Bloomberg's major themes) to get power from the places where it can be cleanly produced to the places where it is needed.
2. Refuel America. Combine Vinod Khosla and his investments in cellulosic ethanol; Aubrey McClendon of Chesapeake Energy, who is revolutionizing the American natural gas supply picture; and Elon Musk of Tesla motors. Use lower-carbon liquid fuels (particularly compressed natural gas) in our vehicles as a transition while we wait and see which technology wins the race: all-electric vehicles, plug-in hybrids, or cellulosic-ethanol-powered internal combustion engines.
3. Rebuild America. Cross Ed Mazria, Leo Gerard of the United Steelworkers, and Van Jones of Green for All. Eliminate carbon emissions from new buildings by 2030 and double or triple the rate at which we retrofit existing building stock (and, when we perform those retrofits, cut energy usage a half, or even more). Double employment in the building sector, ending the unemployment crisis in our cities, and create millions of new jobs manufacturing green building technologies such as high performance windows here in the US. By 2050, when we've slashed our greenhouse emissions by 80 percent, none of us will be paying a utility bill, because buildings will be energy self-sufficient.

There are all technically feasible, all affordable, all American, and all green. Don't choose among these pathways to success -- we can't afford not to go after all of them. If one slows down, it won't hurt us if the other two are hurtling along.

So what stands in the way? Big oil and big coal.

What's their secret weapon? The politics of the trivial.

While bipartisan voices as diverse as Jon Huntsman and Van Jones, T. Boone Pickens and Harry Reid were laying out big ideas for a bright American future at the Clean Energy Summit, America's mainstream media were allowing the issue of how many dry holes we should drill off the Atlantic Coast to dominate the political dialogue. That's exactly where Big Carbon wants the focus, and it's exactly where anyone who's serious knows that the American future cannot lie.

And what about Churchill? He at least had a big idea that broke boldly with the past (even if we've clung to it for far too long). We need the same kind of leadership today.

Comments

[Mr Grey]

Let's not get lost in the "Churchhill" analogy. Oil was the cheap and efficient energy source of the last century. Now the multiple sources listed in this article are what we need to be implementing NOW. It is good for our economy, our environment and security. Win, Win, Win. Unfortunately change is scary and the status quo was more or less comfortable. Now the status quo is making us uneasy. However, Big Oil has Big Money and they are going to fight change.

It is going to take hundreds of millions, if not billions of voices demanding change to overcome that influence. So any chance you have, step up and speak out. Call for change, call for our leadership to support that change. Be informed and don't be afraid to speak out. Start in your own life and make what change you can. Next go to the voting booth and support candidates who support our green energy future. But don't stop there. Remind our leaders you demand change, because energy efficiency is our future, and change is coming. Change for the better if we act now, change for the worse if we don't.

[Semaj51]

The British Navy converted their ships from coal power to petroleum. Coal (other than it's environmental impacts) is not very effective for ships. Petroleum powered ships need much less storage spaces than coal, can carry more fuel, requires lower manning, easier to load, and, most importantly to the crew, lot less dirty. And to be more accurate, it was not just Churchill, but all the navies and commercial shipping converted to petroleum.

What exactly was Gov. Hunstman trying to say. The only available power sources for ships at that time was either sails or coal. If he was trying to blame someone for our dependency on petroleum, than get his facts right. It took us over a hundred years to develop today's society dependency on oil and too many are saying, "convert today". I am personally tired of seeing so many blogs playing the "blame game" and not giving realistic, effective alternates.

[KillTheMessenger]

Realistic effective alternatives:

Hybrid engines. Check.
Higher EPA ratings. Check.
Public transportation. Check.
Ride sharing. Check.
Higher urban density. Check.

Except for the hybrid engines which are available for almost a decade we could have done
everything else 30 years ago. And we actually used to do public transportation until approx. 50 years ago.

It's not like we don't know the solutions. It's just that we don't like the solutions.

But somebody else will have to explain why we don't like the solutions. Because I really don't know.

[research]

Navies around the world are planning on Hybrid power for the next generation of ships:

Because it gives them better range

Because it gives them more electricity.

[prattvictory]

Churchill's blunder? Which one? Winston Churchill is the most overrated person of the 20th Century. Gallipoli, the Middle East, stalling the cross channel invasion and his confrontational style in the post war.

Churchill was a war lover even if he was a blunderer. In do so he has become the right wing's fat pink cigar smoking mascot. Churchill used gas warfare in Iraq long before Saddam. Churchill's use of WMD was to spread democracy, or rather to steal their oil. His American grandfather used a machine gun to break up a strike but he did it for America.

[KillTheMessenger]

Oy. Somebody really hates the man. I wonder why...

[prattvictory]

Hatred is irrational. Your only counter to my statement is to call me irrational and question my motivation. A very weak response, this is what you consider slaying the messenger?

Not accepting the conventional sentiments is not hatred, but labeling something you don't agree with as hate without any support or refutation of what was presented is just dumb.