I have often heard said something like this: “It would nice to achieve renewable energy dominance , but it just isn’t economically likely; it just doesn’t make economic sense yet”.
I disagree. It already does make economic sense. Our problem is that the levers of economic incentive have been placed in the opposite direction, in support of propping up the more damaging (but known and profitable to a select but powerful few). For instance, it is a known economic method that you tax things we want to decrease, and subsidize things we wish to increase.
We have the opposite of that when one considers the lower costs of the technology itself, and the benefits of lowering and eventually eliminating the “external costs” (ecological) which will only continue to rise as ecological effects deepen and worsen. There are too many political barriers at present. And many of those are purely political manipulations, such as Trump’s solar panel tariffs, and the efforts of state legislatures and power utilities to block and hinder and “dis-incentivize” rooftop solar by individuals.
When more recent Electric Cars were first made available to the public in the early 90s, such as the GM EV-1 , pressure was applied to car makers and dealers by the fossil fuel industry to keep the EV out or in extremely low profile so as to make its adoption and therefore virtually eliminate any serious demand. GM limited the EV-1 to closed end leases and ended up taking all the cars back and destroying them ,despite the protests of the adoring owners/leasers.
This kind of obstinate resistance to the clear desire of “the market”, and the proven potential of the EV concept has kept us from letting Moore’s Law of technological advance be released to “the wild” (the world of exponential advancement and development), and therefore greatly hindered its adoption and the concurrent constant drive for improvement of efficiencies, and more ecologically innocent means of electric storage.
Many top ecological activists are calling for a “World War II style mobilization”, referring to the massive citizen mobilization and participation in the “re-tooling” of American industry to aid in the war effort, as well as many incentives for filling various military needs from civic programs that prior focused on other things. The point they make is that “we have it in us” to rally around a cause when it is clear to us that our lives, economy, and country are endangered.
Political will can engender massive re-tooling, rapid research and development, and amazing turnaround, limited only by the will to implement. And now that we have the Internet , coupled with Moore’s Law, we have a miraculous level of potential to pull off amazingly significant change in increasingly rapid fashion.
I have hope that this , coupled with the commitment of God’s people (to help inspire us and provide spiritual resources to “preach and teach” the truths that are being lived in such an effort), will help us achieve this faster than we would have thought possible.