Google puts a price tag on clean energy innovation - and gives me a headache - by Doug Mohney

Views and Opinions on Green IT (Jun 29 2011)

1. 

   The philanthropic arm of Google, Google.org) has run a bunch of models to put a price tag on clean energy innovation.   According to the computer crystal ball, "aggressive energy innovation alone" could grow the U.S. economy by over $155 billion in GDP per year, create over 1.1 million new net jobs, save U.S. consumers over $942 per household per year, reduce U.S. oil consumption by over 1.1 billion barrels per year, and reduce total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 13 percent.  Better numbers come from a "Clean Policy" made up of "comprehensive federal incentives and mandates."

   You can find "The Impact of Clean Energy Innovation" paper at http://www.google.org/energyinnovation/.  About the only thing it didn't throw in for good news is whiter teeth and fresher breath.

   Let me stop for a moment here and rub my temples to get rid of my slow-growing headache. As an economic major, I revised a common saying to "Lies, damned lies, statistics, and computer modeling," so I feel like I should grab my wallet and put my back to the wall when someone starts making policy statements based on computer models.

   I think the second paragraph says it all, with my italics thrown in for emphasis: "The analysis assumes aggressive hypothetical cost breakthroughs (BT) in clean power generation, grid-storage, electric vehicle, and natural gas technologies and compares them to Business as Usual (BAU) scenarios modeled to 2030 and 2050."

   My problem with aggressive hypotheticals is it's like playing a craps game with loaded dice. You already know you're going to get the outcome you want, so everything else is window dressing and theater presentations. For example, a group of people outside the Google.org world are playing aggressive hypotheticals in clean energy using Helium-3 and fusion -- never mind that we haven't figured out how to do breakeven fusion on earth and it's always been 10 to 50 years away for the last 30 years.

   Secondly, predictive modeling 20 to 40 years out is just freaking fairy dust.  The real world is chaotic enough as it is that we can't figure out when the current recession is going to let up, how to make a solar panel cost-competitive with other energy alternatives, or have "totally safe" nuclear power. 

   Sometimes the world throws you a "hard six" with unloaded dice and you get a totally unpredicted technology breakthrough that can be rapidly exploited.   But more often, technology progress is a plodding, boring process that takes time.

   Google.org's big messages once you blow away the model mythmaking are 1) Energy innovation pays off big, 2) Speed matters and delay is costly, and 3) Policy and innovation can enhance each other.   The stalking horse involved here is a wish/desire for the U.S. government to get hardcore on clean energy policy with a package of mandates, standards, and incentives.  It would be more salable if Google.com didn't already have its own bets placed on clean energy and would financially benefit from policies designed to promote clean energy usage.

   Bookmark or Share this article

Login to comment.