S5 - È realmente possibile la transizione energetica?

These substitution sources are essentially those made up of wind turbines, photovoltaic panels and nuclear power plants. Obviously, there are also hydroelectric, geothermal and oceanic sources, but these cannot be used on sufficiently broad scales to solve the problem of fossil fuels. The urgency to carry out an energy transition is due, at the moment, to three main reasons. 1. The fact that fossil fuels are running out. 2. The fact that greenhouse gas emissions are irrevocably altering the climate of the planet, with catastrophic consequences for numerous populations of the planet. 3. The fact, less mentioned but not therefore less relevant, that in a few they lead to a decrease in human activities on the planet, as growth is necessary to sustain our current lifestyle. As far as emissions are concerned, at the moment every attempt at reduction has been in vain, as in 2022 we have broken every previous record. On the other hand, energy transition advocates often claim that this process would not be new in history. In their opinion, we would have already witnessed other epochal transitions, such as the one from wood to coal in the 19th century or from coal to oil in the 20th century. In other words, it would be about continuing to do what has already been done. However, this is an incomplete vision, because, as Jean-Baptiste Fresseau, the historian of science, recalls, the history of energy is not a history of transitions, but of symbiotic accumulations. In the sense that energies have always added to each other, depending strongly on each other. In other words, historically no energy substitution has ever really happened. But if this is true, as it is true, what we are trying to do is something totally new, and then a question arises. Is it really possible to do it? I am not here talking about political, economic or social difficulties. The question must be understood in a technical sense. It is technically possible for our thermo-industrial societies for a transition that sees the progressive and systematic abandonment of energy sources centered on fossil fuels. We can observe that in the pre-industrial era we humans used as a source of energy that contained in the food we fed ourselves, through hunting and harvesting, then agriculture and breeding. In addition to food, we used the energy generated by the combustion of those biomasses that were easily accessible to us. Here it was possible to reach directly, such as wood, hay or animal fats. And thanks to the development of increasingly more efficient ovens and furnaces, we have made increasingly more efficient tools and utensils to help us extract energy, the energy we needed. Metallurgy has thus allowed us to continuously improve agricultural yields and the absorption of food calories. Let us think about how the plough was radically transformed following the introduction of metal parts. Let us think about the reinforcement of the mills' mechanisms thanks to the production of steel parts. Let us think about the increasingly more efficient production of saws and axes. These are just examples. All this has allowed us to optimize access to sources of heat and the absorption of calories and macronutrients from various foods. This technical progress has had a further acceleration when the exploitation of fossil fuels such as carbon began, which, by replacing biomass in ovens, has greatly increased efficiency. This has allowed the development of increasingly more efficient techniques for the treatment of high-content iron minerals, in order to obtain different types of alloys, including steel, cast iron and alloyed steels, in the context of the so-called siderurgic industry, which has taken off since the 18th century, transforming our human societies into thermo-industrial societies, that is, societies that base their activities on the concentrated energy found in carbon, oil and gas, which can be exploited on a large scale. Thanks to these fuels, human societies have been able to preserve and develop in unthinkable ways before then. All this, however, no longer applies when we have to deal with the kinetic energy contained in the wind, with the electromagnetic energy contained in the solar rays or with the nuclear energy contained in the atomic nuclei. When, for example, we are exposed to the wind, we cannot directly use the energy that transports to our advantage. To do this, we need to build a machine capable of collecting and extracting such energy. A sailboat is an example of such a machine. To build a sailboat, one must be able to dispose of materials such as wood, for example, to make the shaft and the hull, or of materials such as steel and glass-resin found in modern boats. The same goes for the sun. We can use solar photons to tan and produce vitamin D, and partly also to heat ourselves when directly exposed to their irradiation, but we cannot use them to extract additional heat or work, without a specific machine capable of collecting and transforming the energy they transport. Similarly, the nuclear energy contained, for example, in the uranium that we can extract from the rocks is not directly accessible without a specific and sophisticated technology. In other words, unlike fossil substances, we cannot burn the wind, solar rays or radioactive materials to build machinery that allow us to extract energy from the windmills, for example, through windmills, or from the sun, for example, through photovoltaic panels, or from atomic nuclei, for example, through nuclear power plants. Here we can observe a fundamental difference between fossil energies and the so-called substitution energies. The first were developed starting from the same fossil energies, while the second can be used only insofar as specific technological infrastructures are created that require the concentrated energy power that only the first are able to develop. To put it in poor words, the wind cannot be used to build an wind turbine, the sun cannot be used to build a photovoltaic panel, nuclear energy cannot be used to build an atomic power plant. Our thermo-industrial society could emerge only thanks to the possibility and availability of fossil energies that are abundantly present in the environment. But there will never be, on the contrary, wind-industrial societies, photo-industrial societies or nuclear-industrial societies, because the exploitation of wind, photon and nuclear energy is possible only through the exploitation of fossil fuels. All our technology, based on metals and alloys, is based on such fuels, to generate the heat necessary to feed the fusion processes of iron minerals. Steel, for example, is among the industrial materials with the highest carbon footprint. At this point, we could say that there is a totally green solution, capable of emancipating us from fossil energies, preserving our ability to obtain those high temperatures that are necessary for the creation, repair and substitution of the parks of car collectors and transformers of the energy of substitution. This energy is hydrogen. In theory, it could seem a really feasible solution, because the combustion of hydrogen certainly allows to access those high temperatures from which all our technologies depend. But, from a practical point of view, the matter is quite different. First of all, the transition to hydrogen will require massive structural interventions, because only the existing gas plants can be converted, not the carbon ones. But there is not only the problem of the substitution of existing plants. The real problem is that hydrogen-based siderurgy is still an experimental project. There are countless technical problems and challenges to overcome. Therefore, it is not clear if and when it will be possible to dispose of a siderurgy on a large scale based on green hydrogen, able to replace the current siderurgy based on fossil fuels. Certainly, it is not possible to know if such substitution will be able to come in useful times to ensure an energy transition able to preserve the current rate of growth of the world's internal product, taking into account the diminishing availability of fossil fuels and, at the same time, the disaster of the current climate change. However, even assuming to dispose of siderurgy plants capable of exploiting hydrogen on a large scale, we have to produce this hydrogen on a large scale before being able to use it. A simple way would be to use fossil fuels, but this way we are at the head. We have simply moved the problem, because hydrogen-based siderurgy makes sense only if the hydrogen is perfectly green, that is, produced through electrolysis, powered by electricity coming exclusively from non-fossil sources. At the moment, its production still has extremely low efficiencies, with problems such as the considerable energy expenditure in transporting it over long distances or simply to store it in liquid form. Then there are the high water consumption and the immense renewable power that would be necessary to be able to dedicate to its production to power the electrolyzers, that is, the electrochemical devices that allow to break the molecules of water, separating hydrogen from oxygen. Just to give an example, to power two 100 MW electrolyzers, for example, to power the CERN in Geneva, we would need a dedicated photovoltaic power equal to about 22 hectares of surface of photovoltaic panels. In short, all this to say that the possibility of operating our green hydrogen thermo-industrial society seems still remote, indeed, very remote, not being at all evident whether the current experimental technology is really exploitable on a large scale, in useful times to allow the transition. However, the real problem is another. As we have seen, the energy replacement industry is a by-product of the hydrocarbons industry. Even leaving aside the problem of a green concentrated energy source such as hydrogen, currently available only as a theoretical hypothesis, certainly not as a concrete, scalable reality, the immense wind and photovoltaic parks of which we need the innumerable power plants to extract nuclear energy and all the megalithic infrastructures involved must be built. And to build them, fossil fuels are required. Not only that, once these infrastructures are built, they must be maintained, because over time they are damaged, they wear out, they lose efficiency, they become obsolete, so they must be regularly repaired and replaced. And if the means available for these repair and replacement processes are not up to the requirements, over time the production capacities will be compromised. In short, even if we assume a planet entirely powered by energy, which does not emit greenhouse gas, how can we maintain such infrastructures functional over time without an incessant supply of fossil fuels? As already highlighted, the situation we are witnessing is that of a symbiotic accumulation of energies that continue to depend strongly on each other. Another possible objection could be to believe that the problem of emissions will be solved thanks to the development of innumerable carbon wells capable of neutralizing future emissions. It is essentially about re-injecting our emissions back into the sun and into the oceans. Even in this case, theoretically, it could work, but in practice the problem is that compressing CO2 to make it liquid and then injecting it underground is a very energy-consuming process, which requires consuming up to 50% of the energy generated by its emission. In any case, even in this case, technologies are still experimental. The point is that, in the end, the fossil fuels of the planet will run out. We still have a few tens of thousands of billions of dollars to burn, and then, poof, they won't be there anymore. We can bet on any technology that in the future will be able to replace them, providing the necessary caloric densities for our thermo-industrial society. We can also hope that aliens will land on Earth and provide us with a key solution that we have never thought of. But if we consider what we know today to be really available and usable, then we must make it clear that there will be no energy transition where fossil fuels will be replaced by green energies. There will simply be a gradual process of reducing the available energy, regardless of its production mode, because they all depend on the existence of a technology that cannot be preserved without the availability of fossil fuels. It seems that we are all telling a nice story, that of a world where we can continue to do what we have always done, simply replacing old energy sources with new ones. A story that tells us that when we have reached a sufficient amount of green sources, we will have solved all our problems. In reality, what we are not telling is another story. The new sources depend on the old ones. The old ones are being exhausted, so inevitably we will encounter an ever more pronounced energy shortage, which will radically alter our way of living on this planet. Of course, we can and must continue to explore technological possibilities that could change in the future this inevitable energy shortage scenario. As a human race, we are only at the dawn of our understanding of the laws of nature. There could be many surprises on the horizon, but we do not know when these will occur, if ever they will occur. However, we must not confuse the pursuit of fundamental research with the sale of a future at the moment non-existent. And we can ask ourselves who would be interested today to feed this false narrative that hides the real problem under the carpet, making a sure bet. But above all, we can ask ourselves what we should do to prepare for this inevitable fall of energy flows. Obviously, even a child would understand it. To prepare for the inevitable energy shortage, we must reduce our dependence on those transformations that consume a lot of energy. And since these transformations are associated with the production of wealth, we must gradually reduce our material wealth, that is, our consumption. This is also the master way to reduce our impact on the climate, because until proven otherwise, no one has ever shown that it is possible to reduce emissions through the development of the so-called energy of substitution. Of course, there would be a lot to add on such a vast topic, but the purpose of this brief intervention was only to highlight something that is usually never mentioned. When I myself recently learned of the dependence of new energies on the old ones, I was amazed. Because, like everyone else, I had critically absorbed the predominant narrative, which is promoted in every way, especially by the big oil companies, and I had not seen, honestly, the fateful Elephant in the Room. By the way, much of what I have just told comes from the reading of a beautiful book by Vincent Minierot, entitled L'Energie du Déni, that is, L'Energia del Diniego, by Rue de Les Chiquiers. If you read this precious little book, you will also understand the scope of the Greenwashing phenomenon, and you will learn that there is also the most recent phenomenon of Collapse Washing. Greenwashing justifies the narration of an endless growth through facade actions facade actions sold as eco-sustainable and resolutive, but which in fact aim to mask their real negative effects on the environment. Similarly, the new narration of Collapse Washing sells facade actions aimed at mitigating the negative effects of a forced decline, but which again serve only to hide the perpetuation of ecological destruction and the inability of such actions to reduce suffering, which will unfortunately affect all human beings in this century because of our inability to face for a long time the great challenges of our time, the so-called Anthropocene. Will we really come to a collapse? What we can observe is that year after year we set new emissions records, and if we have used a few millennia to eliminate more than half of the forests of the planet, in just a few decades we have annihilated more than half of the wildlife, and it took us a few years to eradicate more than half of the existing insects. In other words, we are witnessing a real and proper global biological, voluntary and systematic annihilation. Then, considering the elevation of the average temperature of the planet, at the horizon of 2050 there will be further deaths of animals, for example of marine species that depend on the safeguarding of coral barriers. Because of the high temperatures combined with the high humidity, we will also see hundreds of millions of climate refugees looking for new lands simply to survive. If we add to this the fact that the overcoming of the oil peak will lead to the systematic decline of our industrial production systems, including that of the food industry, without which it becomes unthinkable to feed all the inhabitants of the planet, which in 2050 could reach 10 billion, well, let me decide for you whether we will arrive or not to a collapse. But what do we really mean when we talk about collapse? To paraphrase Yves Cauchet, we must mean with this word a process at the end of which basic needs are no longer offered to the majority of the world population by means of services regulated by law. Or, to paraphrase Vincent Migneron, collapse is a process that simply sees the more or less rapid and global return of those links that result from a regulation of human activity through simple natural laws, especially as regards the aspects of food, security and health. This process, which leads to the collapse of our human societies, has already started a long time ago and it is not a linear process, it is an exponential process. Will we be able to ride it without getting disheveled? Will we be able to modulate it, looking for solutions really able to reduce global suffering and to increase the antifragility of our human species, without at the same time increasing the already enormous inequalities present on the planet? I really don't know what to answer. I will only say that I really hope that we will succeed. I really hope that humanity can soon become the loving guardian of the beautiful spaceship on which it has been traveling for millions of years, learning to self-regulate with wisdom and longsightedness and to influence harmoniously on all the living species it is responsible for. Of course, to achieve all this, there is still an immense work to do. Thank you for listening.