Blog Archives

2067: First Major Metro Goes Off National Electric Grid

I’ve taken up tweeting from the future, example above, in addition to my usual political-writing-SciFi-whatevs antics @Tao23.

It keeps me thinking to turn out those tweets on a semi-regular basis. And the tweets can make a great nucleus for future SciFi News Network posts here, AKA my futurist “predictions.” Older posts are formatted to look kind of like actual articles from the future. I’m seeing more posts like this, where I let the Tweetmorrow tweet stand for the future story and then get to speculate and explain like I’m doing now. This is fun.

Predictions in quotes because who knows what monkeywrenches the future could throw into the works? Our pet Trumphole could yet start a nuclear war and derail everything…

Donald J. Trump on Twitter https   t.co P4vAanXvgm.png

Nothing like trying to provoke a nuclear war in a lame attempt to prove how macho you are, s–t for brains.

…but gee, we’d save his personal pet illusion of his machismo so win-win post-apocalyptic Mad Max hellhole, right?

rick-and-morty-gets-the-mad-max-treatment.png

50 years seems like a reasonable horizon for a major metro going off-grid and relying on locally generated renewables. Solar, wind, biogas, hydroelectric, geothermal, tidal, and more — there are a lot of options for a city to generate its own local power, and for residences and businesses to take themselves off even the local grid. Batteries like Tesla’s PowerPack (and the residential version, PowerWall) make 24/7 power availability practical even with variables like solar, and small local cooperative grids can increase that support — imagine a neighborhood grid with all the batteries and different forms of power generation contributing. Or a college campus grid. Lots of possibilities.

In the lead story of my Closer Than You Think collection, One More For The Road, the protagonist drives into an isolated, long-off-grid town on its own local grid, with nearly every home and business sending up one or more combo wind turbine and solar collector on a long mast, evoking a field of glittering flowers in her imagination. The masts are even retractable to avoid damage in strong winds and storms. They stand tall and slender in light breezes, short and stout in heavy blows, and fold themselves into protective housings during storms, dormant while the town runs on battery power.

Not too bad a vision, eh? Certainly, there will be advantages and disadvantages, ups and downs. A spell of very strange weather might leave residents rationing their power and sending out battery trucks to pick up spare power from the neighbors. But that seems not so much more trouble than the current system that leaves us in the dark if something damages the wires, transformers, or power stations, and releases more and more carbon dioxide into the air to further warp the already wobbly climate.

Advertisements

Short-term Thinking: Pushing Back Against Solar and Wind

SolarAndWind

 

Oklahoma is just the latest locality to enact legislation that penalizes individuals for using solar or wind power to supplement power from local utility companies.  Oklahoma’s SB1456 requires a person installing solar panels (or any other item that generates power on site, if you can install a windmill, geothermal plant, or hydroelectric generator in your backyard) to pay a ‘tariff’ to the electric company if you remain on-grid.

Okay, you say.  When you install solar, you’re prudent to retain your connection to the power distribution infrastructure.  You can sell power back to the electric company if you generate more than you use.  You have power if your solar doesn’t generate enough to run your home all by itself.  And it costs a lot of money to maintain that infrastructure.  Never mind that you subsidize a lot of that infrastructure as a citizen through your taxes either directly or by subsidizing the natural gas or coal that runs a lot of traditional power plants.

Well, not okay, I say.  Natural gas and coal generate pollution and come from finite reservoirs within the earth.  Nobody’s putting them back.  An adherent of an apocalyptic religion might feel the world will end before we run out of oil, natural gas, and coal.  Well, hypothetical adherent, I don’t share that belief and I’d prefer to hedge that bet, thankyouverymuch.

Discouraging people from shifting to renewable energy is a disservice to the future.  I know, I know, we’ve built up a system that urges us not to worry about tomorrow.  Too many of us live for the moment in a bad way, unable to distinguish it from the good kind of living for today that urges us to not worry ourselves to distraction and death about things we can’t anticipate, yet plan and prepare for what we can.  Too many of us think, ‘hey, I’ll be dead by the time it matters, so why should I worry?’

I don’t know what to tell you, if you don’t care about what happens in the future, if you don’t care about what kind of world we’re leaving to our great-great grandchildren/nieces/nephews or simply fellow human beings who haven’t been born yet.  I don’t know how to address that degree of insularity, how to turn around the ‘screw you future buddy, I’ve got mine’ attitude that doesn’t see a need to knock off burning the fossil fuels to run cars and factories and cool computers that fit in the palm of your hand (and I’m not knocking them, I enjoy the hell out of my smartphone).

I simply don’t know what to say to the people who think we shouldn’t switch to clean sources of power that damage the environment far less than fossil fuels and which are quite capable of running our present electric civilization and then some the same way it’s been sustaining a planet full of plants and proto-plants for about three and a half billion years now.

Stop being a short-sighted jerk?

 

—–

 

Related article here.