A few days ago I posted a link to Michael Moore’s new film Planet
of the Humans (actually, Moore is the producer, Jeff Gibbs is the
director). At the time I hadn’t yet viewed the movie; I thought it was of
interest primarily because some in the academic community wanted to emulate authoritarian
governments and ban and suppress the film instead of simply refuting it. In
general Michael Moore’s films and public statements don’t interest me. He is a
bit too extreme for my taste, but considering the fuss I though it was worth
seeing what he and Gibbs had to say that was causing such a reaction.
Now I have seen it. It’s not great. Gibbs, as the narrator,
has a stultifying voice. And of course, being a Michael Moore film, it has an
agenda and isn’t above shading the facts a bit to make his point. For example, they
attack environmentalist Bill McKibben for his support of biomass energy plants.
Well, it’s true McKibben 20 years ago supported biomass plants, but they fail
to note that since then he has changed his mind and become a staunch opponent
of biomass as an energy source.
Similarly, they lean a bit too much on the unsubstantiated claim
that manufacture of solar cells and wind turbines costs as much energy as the
energy they eventually produce. There are studies that suggest otherwise,
though in fact those studies themselves have been subject to criticism that
they are overly optimistic about the energy produced (wind turbines turn out to
have significantly more downtime and higher maintenance costs than originally
projected), and perhaps don’t capture all the real costs in the supply chain. It’s not as clear cut as either the proponents
nor the opponents make out, because in fact it is quite hard to find and
quantify all the real costs of a complex supply chain.
But the overall point I think is valid. Renewable energy is useful, but it will never
completely replace carbon-based energy until, perhaps, fusion power becomes economically
viable. And even then, much of the world
depends on hydrocarbon-based feedstock for lots of other things besides energy,
such as the pesticides and fertilizers that keep much of the world from
starving to death. And it is certainly
true, as others have also pointed out, that “green energy” has become a highly
profitable field for lots of big corporations, banks and funds, and a useful
issue for some politicians, all of whom continue to support it often for reasons
having to do with their own self-interest.
So my conclusion: an interesting film but not a great one,
infected a bit with Moore’s and Gibb’s clear agenda, worth thinking about but
not necessarily believing without more study. In the end, I still think the
most interesting thing about it is the almost religious fervor of the reaction
against it by some. When an idea, however good, becomes an ideology and then morphs
into a religion too sacred to be challenged it ceases to be of much use.
Posts
