By HE Haitham Al Ghais, OPEC Secretary General
Some energy sources get called green. Such a term or slogan can obscure energy realities. It is important we explore what green actually means.
If green means no greenhouse gases emissions, then the full carbon footprint of an energy source should be considered, including production processes and transportation.
For example, the manufacture, installation, operation and eventual decommissioning of wind turbines and solar panels result in greenhouse gas emissions. Steel, cement and plastics are critical for these technologies, but the production processes for these materials are emissions intensive. Approximately 70 percent of global steel is produced from iron ore using processes based on coal. Silicon extraction and manufacturing it into solar cells also releases emissions.
The extraction of critical minerals like copper, lithium, nickel and cobalt, which are essential for wind turbines, solar panels and lithium-ion batteries requires heavy mining, a process that causes significant greenhouse gas emissions.
‘Electrify everything’ is often described as a way of going green. Yet the year 2024 saw electricity generation from coal reach a record high, unprecedented in human history. Resultantly, global CO2 emissions from coal-fired power plants reached a new all-time high in 2024, with this expected to be even higher for 2025.
If green means being in harmony with nature, due regard should be paid to the full ecological impact of an energy source. The first step in building an onshore wind turbine or solar farm often involves clearing land. This can involve removing trees, rock or other attributes of natural landscapes. Industrial explosives are sometimes used in this process. Turbines and fencing off land for solar farms can disrupt animal habitats and migratory paths.
If green refers to the seamlessness of the recycling process, it should be born in mind that the life cycle of a wind turbine is approximately 20-25 years; for a solar panel, it is about 30 years.
According to The New York Times, engineers have predicted that more than 43 million tonnes of landfill waste will be generated by turbine blades globally by 2050. The International Renewable Energy Agency has calculated that annual end-of-life PV panel waste is projected to increase to more than 60-78 million metric tonnes cumulatively by 2050. Solar panels contain toxic heavy metals, which some governments categorize as hazardous waste. This must be disposed off under very strict guidelines and schedules.
Technological innovation is helping improve the recyclability of turbines and panels and commendable progress has been made, but as the United Nations Environment Programme has noted, the world is currently facing a waste disposal crisis. Just because something can be recycled is no guarantee that it will be recycled or that it will not end up in a landfill.
It begs the question: why do some energies get labelled green? It is a simple word, but one that can allow an energy to be viewed as a panacea to the climate challenge. No more questions needed. It implies that an energy source is perfect, without drawbacks but no energy source can be defined in this manner.
Such a slogan can lose the nuances behind the difficult trade-offs policymakers have when balancing competing development priorities. It suggests there is a morality to energy sources, thereby discounting some of the important benefits that sources not traditionally seen as green can provide.
It is important to stress that solar panels and wind turbines are extraordinary technologies. They are a necessary component of the energy mix, especially with energy demand growth expected in the decades ahead. However, as the energy historian Jean-Baptiste Fressoz has written, “it is unreasonable to expect more from solar panels and wind turbines than they can deliver.”
Delivering an energy future that provides energy security, makes energy affordable, addresses energy poverty and sees emissions reduced requires a realistic understanding of all energies, the products derived from them and what they can deliver.
Is the term ‘green’ too narrowly focused on a few specific energies, and allows some, to conveniently forget the benefits others bring? Or perhaps we should look to drop it all together? The future is about all energies, it does not matter what colour they are labelled. We need solutions, not slogans.
The post What does ‘green’ really mean? appeared first on Caribbean News Global.
