***MUST READ! **** FOCUS: Bill McKibben | A Future Without Fossil Fuels?

15 March 19 It's Live on the HomePage Now: Reader Supported News FOLKS, WE ARE NOT GETTING ANY DONATIONS - This is day 10 of the March funding drive and we are getting no real traction at all. We are doing everything in our power to communicate the seriousness of the situation and it's falling on deaf ears. There must be a budget. / Marc Ash, Founder Reader Supported News Sure, I'll make a donation! FOCUS: Bill McKibben | A Future Without Fossil Fuels?  Bill McKibben, The New York Review of Books McKibben writes: "At what point does a new technology cause an existing industry to start losing significant value?"  EXCERPT:  Much the same is happening around the world. President Trump has spared no effort to help the coal industry, but more coal-fired power plants shut down during the first two years of his presidency than during President Obama’s entire first term. American coal consumption fell 4 percent in 2018. In 2017 Kentucky’s coal-mining museum installed solar panels on its roof in order to save $10,000 a year on electric costs. And it’s not just coal that’s on the way out. Natural gas was supposed to be the planet’s next big fuel source, since it produces less carbon than coal (although its production releases great clouds of methane, another potent greenhouse gas). While fracking has produced high volumes of natural gas—especially in the US, where it was pioneered—wells tend to dry out quickly, and despite enormous investment, the International Energy Agency estimates that between 2010 and 2014 the shale industry operated with negative cash flows of more than $200 billion. Even “cheap” natural gas is now starting to look expensive compared to the combination of sun, wind, and batteries. In an essay for Vox, the energy reporter David Roberts listed all the natural gas plants—many of them designed to provide quick bursts of “peaking power” on heavy demand days—whose planned construction has been canceled in recent months, as utilities and banks began to figure out that over the projected forty-year life of a new plant, there was a good chance it would become an uncompetitive “stranded asset” producing pointlessly expensive electricity. The chief executive of one US solar company said in January, “I can beat a gas peaker anywhere in the country today with a solar-plus-storage power plant. Who in their right mind today would build a new gas peaker? We are a factor of two cheaper.” READ MORE Contribute to RSN Update My Monthly Donation