The purpose of this website is to explore with you some of the many paths leading to sustainable futures for you, your children, and their children.
Don't think of this as a website. Instead, think of this as an organic book in a constant state of growth and evolution. You can move through it much as you might move through a forest, exploring its brooks, caverns, and crannies, possibly finding a delightful view or two of possible futures as you explore. There will be clearly marked paths everywhere you look, but none will be concrete, and some that seem concrete might evaporate before your eyes, perhaps to be replaced with something that offers even better footing and a clearer vision.
I hope to explore with you and show you possible paths into amazing futures for us, our children, and our grandchildren. In some of the trails we examine, you might see your future self, but most of the visions will work better for others. For example, when I am discussing battery-powered electric vehicles (BEVs), most Americans will find that this path is not good for them yet. Most Americans live in apartments, condos, dorms, rentals, or even vans, and for these people, a BEV might become a burdensome lifestyle. On the other hand, if you live in a dorm, and you come across discussions of future careers in a circular economy, you might want to explore that trail for a bit.
So . . . welcome to this experience. I do hope you enjoy it and find in it paths that will lead us alll to a better future.
Permit me to introduce myself.
I am a science writer who has written about emerging technologies since 1982. You might infer from that information how very old I must be, and you would be right; I am way past my “use by” date. But that doesn’t make me out of date.
Last year, I graduated from an MIT program that qualified me for Certification as a Sustainability Professional. I was 80 then. I finished the program after a year of post-doctoral classes, and now I am 82. As you already know, however, I have been writing about sustainability issues in industrial environments for a very long time, so I did not go back to school to learn about sustainability; I went there to tie everything I already know into a tighter, more coherent bundle.
I will not be preaching in this book. Instead, I am looking for paths that we can reasonably take toward a better future without having to sacrifice our lifestyles. For example, I mentioned owning an electric vehicle in the previous snippet. There are paths where owning an electric vehicle is a joy, but I have seen used EVs in car lots with less than 500 miles on them. That happens when someone buys one, but has a system that is incompatible with maintaining an EV. We can explore these paths together, without the heartbreak of buying a $100,000 pickup and immediately having to give it up.
Dr. David Hailey, CSP
Rethinking Liquid Fuels for Replacing Petroleum-Powered Autos and for Refueling HEVs, and PHEVs as We Move to Zero Carbon Emissions.
David E. Hailey, Ph.D.
The molecule of renewable gasoline is identical to a petroleum molecule, but with careful management, the fuel can have a less-than-zero carbon footprint
As we reflect on our own carbon footprints, we might be consumed with guilt because we are unknowingly caught in a mindset trap set by the fossil fuel industry. At some level, many of us see ourselves as not doing our part toward eliminating those carbon footprints and so, not mitigating climate change. Naturally, we feel bad about it. The worst of our footprints comes from driving gasoline-powered automobiles. If we eliminated those emissions, our carbon footprints would be minuscule, but we are hostages in a destructive economy, and as long as we are trapped here, most of us will be unable to eliminate our transportation footprints. For most of us, there are no bus routes, commuter trains, no trollies, no bicycling to work, or walking . . . we are forced to drive to work. And as we drive, our tailpipes emit around 19.5 pounds of CO2 per gallon of gas. But it is worse. The oil companies emit another nine pounds of CO2 while extracting, transporting, refining, and storing that fuel, so our final footprint is 28 pounds of CO2 per gallon of gas.
Unfortunately, the fossil fuel industry and their allies have let us down, and to cover those actions, they have convinced most of us that climate change is our problem – not theirs. The idea that we have a carbon footprint came from an ad, produced by BP, that included a carbon footprint calculator and the tagline, “What size is your carbon footprint?” . . . and in doing that, they put the consequences of the growing climate crisis directly onto us. MORE . . .
Still, according to the Carbon Majors Database, 57 companies are responsible for 75% of all GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions worldwide since 1850, and BP is one of those companies. Think about that for a moment – 57 companies have emitted 75% of all greenhouse gases produced, worldwide, since 1850. What’s more, four of the worst 8 of those companies are ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, and BP. Is it any wonder that they want us to think that climate change is our fault? Half of the very worst polluting companies in the world are petroleum companies doing business in the United States.
MORE . . .
Should You buy an EV?
David E. Hailey, Ph.D.
According to the Road and Track’s Online Magazine, General Motors made their Silverado RST EV First Edition available for ordering online at 1:00 PM, 5 January 2022. By 1:12 PM (12 minutes later), buyers had reserved all First Edition trucks GM would ever produce.
You might want an EV because you are tired of paying so much for gasoline. Or you might want an EV because you want to save your children from disastrous climate change. Whether you want the one result or the other, an EV moves you toward both of those results. Still, EVs are not for everyone. It is not unusual to find an EV in a used car lot with virtually no miles on its odometer. That is because people will often buy the cars without fully understanding the pros and cons and pitfalls of EV ownership – and there are pros and cons and pitfalls.
For example, gasoline and maintenance cost the average driver ~$4,500 (approximately $4,500) per year, so a person who has a solar array and a garage with appropriate connections, can buy an EV that will pay for itself again and again over its lifetime – that is a real pro. On the other hand, an apartment, condo dweller or student in a dorm may have no convenient place to charge an EV (keep in mind that fully charging an EV can take hours). Such a person will be involved in a constant search for charging stations (that are frequently vandalized, looted, or otherwise broken) and will be paying a premium for inconvenient electricity. For them, an EV might turn out to be nothing but one stressful event after another – definitely a con.
MORE . . .
Green energy in the United States is growing exponentially.
David E. Hailey, Ph.D.
In the United States, solar rose by 22 billion Watts in 2022 and by 33 billion watts in 2023 (up by more than 50%). According to Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm, “Solar is our cheapest and fastest-growing source of clean energy, and it could produce enough electricity to power all of the homes in the United States by 2035 as the solar increases employment by as many as 1.5 million people in the process.”
Household solar in the United States: When 66 Watt solar panels were $450 each, solar was an expensive hobby for the rich, with virtually no return on investment (ROI). Today, most families with a roof can afford 450 Watt solar panels at around $200 each. If you search on Google, you will find that the ROI of solar is around 10%. That is old news. With the reductions in solar costs and the 30% Federal tax rebate, the current ROI ranges from 15% to nearly 50% per year. The ROI of solar depends on the cost of installation plus the number of bright hours per year in your region, compared to the price of your electricity ($0.12/kWh in Austin as opposed to a maximum of $0.45/kWh in San Diego). Because installation costs are currently reduced by the United States Federal tax credit, a $20,000 investment is really ~$12,500 after you receive your tax rebate.
MORE . . .
Green energy in the United States is growing exponentially.
Grid-based solar in the United States: In the United States, solar rose by 22 billion Watts in 2022 and by 33 billion watts in 2023 (up by more than 50%). According to Secretary of Energy Jennifer Granholm, “Solar is our cheapest and fastest-growing source of clean energy, and it could produce enough electricity to power all of the homes in the United States by 2035, as the solar increases employment by as many as 1.5 million people in the process.” (ICYMI: Secretary Granholm Visited Maine and New Hampshire to Tour Renewable Energy Infrastructure | Department of Energy)
If you invest ~$12,500 in solar panels, your return on investment will be ~$2,500 —$3,000/yr. in Texas (ROI of 10% to 12%) and $3,000- $5,000/yr. in San Diego (ROI of 30% or more). In San Diego, solar pays for itself in under five years.
In some parts of the United states,
wind is already the number one energy source.
Effective in 2024, wind power was the largest renewable energy source in the United States, with more than 100,000 turbines in a total of ~20,000 wind farms in 44 states. They produce ~200 billion Watts per hour (~200 gigawatt hours or ~200gWh).
This points to an interesting phenomenon. In conservative states, many politicians oppose renewable energy growth because it reduces profits for the fossil fuel industry. As of this writing, Senators Ted Cruze and John Cornyn, along with Governor Greg Abbot of Texas, still deny that the climate is changing and insist there is no reason to abandon fossil fuels. And yet, according to Time Magazine,
From sea level rise and hurricanes to extreme heat, Texas is one of the most threatened states in the United States when it comes to the impacts of climate change. It ranked first in the number of billion-dollar disasters per year since 2001, and a 2020 analysis by ProPublica and The New York Times of America’s 3,000 counties revealed that, of the 135 counties deemed most at risk from a changing climate, 24 are in Texas. As Texas Boils, Climate Denying Politicians Seek Federal Aid | TIME MAGAZINE
Ironically, despite all the political foot-dragging, Texas leads the nation in wind energy production, having more wind energy than the next three states. Thirty-eight percent of Texas energy is renewable – not because it is politically expedient, but because it is the most cost-effective energy source – it’s good for business, and good businessmen understand “good for business.”
Should you be anxious about the future?
You should be anxious about the future, but things are not as bad as many suspect. That will be the goals of this website -- show you where the problems are and where to find the paths through or around them.