Google proposes $4.4 trillion clean energy plan

[Andy]

Tiring of its mission to "organize the world's information," Google has set itself a new objective: save the planet.

The search giant unveiled a US$4.4 trillion plan Wednesday to reduce the U.S.'s dependency on fossil fuels and embrace alternative energy. The proposal would yield a net saving of $1 trillion by 2030 and slash U.S. carbon dioxide emissions by 48 percent, according to Google, which said it had been busy "crunching the numbers."

Official Google Blog: Clean energy 2030
Clean Energy 2030 - a knol by Jeffery Greenblatt

[Windguy]

It sounds brilliant such a dominating powerful company has got on board. Google is a company that doesn't make too many mistakes and does seem to be a bit more righteous than Microsoft.

What it may mean is not if but when, especially now Google is possibly more powerful than even the oil companies combined. They've even chosen the softer target of coal to challenge first.

The problem is America doesn't lead the world no more and, China and India will probably not follow.

[August]

I don't give the slightest damn about the amount of money that is involved. What really is essential is that human societies, all over the planet, kick the habit of going on fossil fuels. We must do something about the CO2 emissions, and it must happen very soon! I mean: before the all the smart, knowledge-seeking people of this world all go mad with the realization that we're in the slow (but time is relative) process of destroying the living habitat of ours, by means of oil, gas, and coal; as well as a terrible lot of chain saws.

[Windguy]

Originally Posted by August

I don't give the slightest damn about the amount of money that is involved. What really is essential is that human societies, all over the planet, kick the habit of going on fossil fuels. We must do something about the CO2 emissions, and it must happen very soon! I mean: before the all the smart, knowledge-seeking people of this world all go mad with the realization that we're in the slow (but time is relative) process of destroying the living habitat of ours, by means of oil, gas, and coal; as well as a terrible lot of chain saws.

August, you've given the reason as to "why", but we need the "how" answered mostly. The only way I see is to ensure the new kids on the block show the dinosaurs what we should be doing so they either change or become extinct.

What we are currently doing though is like this economic crisis. The US government wants to create a 700 billion dollar bailout package for the fallen or falling companies. But if they really thought about it, they should be putting the money into businesses with near unlimited growth potential and the only thing stopping them is funding.

If Nanosolar is the cheapest and the best solar panels out there and they are charging 500% of build cost per panel due to supply restrictions, could you imagine what would happen if the government threw a few billion their way to supply a lot more. It would double the benefit impact of each dollar the government invests in by increasing Nanosolar's profits, and making the panels cheaper for all.

Another example is the Australian Governments 4 billion dollar bailout they are considering. Why throw money at the bad companies when even those companies would profit from a richer Australia. So how do we do that?

Two methods:
1. Add money to their pockets
2. Save them money in areas they should save money

Put a solar hot water system on every house and that will add between $100 to $400 per household to people's pockets every year.

[hoon]

Why do good plans for a sound energy policy never come from the government? All joking aside, these politicians all went to the best schools and have top advisors...

[bruce]

Google should Google "broken window fallacy" and use some of that brainpower they have to see how it applies to the millions of jobs they mention creating. Replacing all the old power generation and distribution infrastructure, while it will create many new jobs, takes a massive amount of resources away from other, potentially more profitable endeavors. This is ultimately why the government should not be involved, it has a horrible track record at picking losing technologies and spending money that the private sector, which actually has to account for its actions (except when the Government bails them out), would never make.

Parable of the broken window - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[LMagic007]

Generalisations aside about what government is and is not capable of and the degree of government involvement in commercial markets, the fact is government is part of society and will likely never be removed from the regulatory process. No entity or group of entities, be it government or the private sector, has a monopoly on good advice. This is an old argument that has long been put to rest and there is no escaping the fact that government can and will influence markets, for better and perhaps on some occasions seemingly for worse. There seems little point in taking pot shots about the failings of government or the private sector.

It's clear that markets in themselves are at times ignorant to longer term risk, particularly in relation to complex issues like Climate Change. Government regulation exists in many spheres of human activity and always will. The commercial sector and government have to work together in finding ways forward in dealing with the evolving challenges presented to human endeavour. Neither singularly have all the answers.

I agree with the less limited growth potential paradigm in so far that it implies sustainability, governed by the notion of social responsibility, not just for today, but for tomorrow also. The concept of sustainability embodies the concept of environmental management. Again though, we can't singularly rely on one entity over the other to achieve such goals.

The more power brokers and individuals interested in sustainability for the benefit of all, the better, be it a Google magnate or be it Joe six pack, to borrow from a phrase used recently in political circles. Ultimately though, be them representing private or government entities, they must work together and not blame each other to such as extent that we get nowhere and just point fingers. The problems we face are real and only through co-operative efforts can they have any reasonable chance of being solved.

[August]

Originally Posted by Windguy

August, you've given the reason as to "why", but we need the "how" answered mostly. The only way I see is to ensure the new kids on the block show the dinosaurs what we should be doing so they either change or become extinct.

Why? Yes, I am worried that the more intelligent among us will simply have to wake up to the fact that international climate science and the issue of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions will not be taken as seriously as every intelligent person quickly realize it should be. Choosing deliberately to forget about everything you've learnt over the past few years, as yet another coping strategy, is not going to work. But as economists keep on calculating, and politicians keep on talking -- mostly about cap-and-trade and the so-called "clean coal" -- and nothing at all seems to be happening on the ground level which is reality, I mean: come on! How are intelligent, knowledgeable and constantly information seeking people going to cope?!

What is needed, more than ever before, is administrative leadership that goes to instruct societies of humans to depend much less on fossil-fuels, and make way for renewable energy alternatives. Solar energy systems do have a lot of potential. If only the alternative were to be seen as a cheap way out of a terribly expensive fossil fuels adventure which we are seeing today, and which has been scientifically proven, time and time again, to be exceptionally risky.

The technology is available. All that remains now are questions of political will and industrial courage. Will we ever be ready to do away with a whole lot of coal plants? - And start building mega-fantastic solar energy power stations instead? Or are we going to keep dragging our feet on this, simply because old habits are terribly difficult to do away with? - Mixed messages and confusing reports are coming my way all the time now, I'm afraid, so I really don't know exactly what to think.

[include]

Holy shit, I love Google. Truly a 21st century company. We need more of them.

[david16]

I for one welcome our new google overlords