We are in numerous world crises; the erratic weather patterns are causing droughts, floods, and high extremes of heat or sudden cold; less productive land and the oceans of the world are heating up, and that has progressively a dire consequence on our food chain.
We are still caught up in this fruitless debate of shall we / shant we switch away from fossil fuels, especially while we are (seemingly) in an energy crisis. We need to radically switch away from fossil fuel now period!!
We have worse to come. All these crises are heading us towards a world that will become increasingly difficult to live in as humans, to produce enough food or uninhabitable for many animals or species we have around us that increasingly are facing extinction. Then what about nature itself? I find it very hard that humans seem to ignore so much and just seem to want to carry on as usual. We as humans have induced climate change, we have less than twenty to thirty years to attempt to reverse it.
I was reading a (typical) consulting article from BCG entitled.”Shifting the Direct Air Capture Paradigm” giving a “classic”, somewhat optimistic view of how we can bring the costs down of Direct Air Capture.
The authors start with, “Even though it is still nascent, DAC could play a critical role in delivering on net zero.”
Sorry, convince me.
They outline that “the cost of DAC (the end-to-end cost of CO2 removal including final storage) will need to fall from $600 to $1,000 per ton of CO2 today to below $200 per ton and ideally closer to $100 per ton by 2050, and preferably earlier.”
Is this where I get my magic wand out, wave it a few times, and this scenario will happen?
Is the needed path to the Collaborative Energy Transition ApproachthroughGrand Challenges?
I have to admit that I am sceptical of individual energy organizations’ pledges to move toward a carbon-neutral future. They argue that there is a limited amount of time to make this transition, yet it is broadly recognized that individual organizations cannot achieve this alone. Are energy organizations open enough to alternative suggestions for overcoming the resource and knowledge constraints working alone can bring? Are they exploring alternative thinking enough, such as organised collective challenges? We need to bridge the gap through collaborations at multiple firm levels.
I believe there is a weakness in the energy ecosystem that deprives it of more significant collective action and innovation to achieve a more accelerated pathway to the energy transition. My argument is that while many energy companies are working on solutions within the energy transition, they often work in isolation and struggle to get out of their “self-made” islands of knowledge.
I suggest that applying ecosystem thinking and platform solutions could bring together many organizations to work in broader, more ambitious innovation ecosystems of collaborations or even work through grand challenge-designed approaches.
I often wonder about the rigor of assessments and the lack of a common approach when evaluating or assessing the contributions of new concepts or innovation solutions in any Energy Transition and the broader impacts these can have. So does this 18S framework provide this?
So what makes up the 18S framework to assess any change and innovation in the Energy transition?
I feel this framework can apply to any energy transition and provides a common point of evaluation with consistency in each part of the 18S to evaluate for efficiencies, affordability, reliability, accessibility, availability, dependability, abundance, and effectiveness.
The elements and dimensions of this 18S can determine what we need to work through and understand to gain a more “holistic” overview, especially coming from any changes and new innovative solutions.
I struggle increasingly with individual energy organizations’ pledges of moving their solutions towards a carbon-neutral future. The mixture of reports, initiatives, and viewpoints all move towards the transformation of the energy system but they all admit or fail to address TWO crucial aspects.
Firstly the limited time we have to make such a transition in their offerings of new and different imaginative ways to change the current dynamics within our energy systems. Secondly how each organization alone cannot achieve it with limited or no alternative suggestions to how to overcome this “constraint”. Well, this post is about one alternative well worth considering.
One area of potential to bridge is the collaborations at the multiple firm levels. There is a weakness that deprives the ecosystem of a greater “collective action and innovation” to achieve a more accelerated pathway to the Energy Transition.
The Energy Transition has a rich network of complimentary ecosystems all keeping the energy transition change moving at a ‘certain’ level of momentum but is it good enough, I don’t think so.
The sheer number of Energy companies working on solutions within the Energy Transition is vast, varied and geographically spread. Each is struggling to get out of their (self-made) islands of knowledge to grow their business value through mostly individual innovation solutions.
We then have an Ecosystem of Governments and intergovernmental organizations providing policy suggestions and directions, offering sources of analysis, central data collection and interpretation along with proving reference and exchange points and forums. Then you have general and highly specialised Consulting firms, and investing institutions that are all constantly providing insights and supporting solutions.
We need to find new ways of collaborating and that means applying ecosystem thinking and platform solutions. Let me suggest one as an opener to this thinking.
There are so many risks in the near to mid-term to derail the Energy Transition. I feel it is really hard to stay focused and not become distracted by the anti-energy transition groups. I am a firm believer in having a navigable strategic and tactical pathway to keep you on a given track along the route you have chosen to get to a given goal. Clearly, as we progress, we learn and adjustments are made but you have to map out a fairly solid (looking) pathway to keep on track.
I wrote about the concept of exploring energy fitness landscapes. The article “My initial thinking behind Energy Fitness Landscapes“, written in 2021, uses Hydrogen as an example, with a follow-up one year later. Here I am looking at the Energy Transition from an evolving technology innovation perspective. In other words, what “forces” can be identified or promoted that can transform the existing energy system through the pursuit of new inventions, innovations, or technological advancement? I took hydrogen as an example.
A risk of the energy transition is we give higher emphasis on the depth of knowledge in one area, get distracted often and fail to pull this together, to map it into the bigger picture of the practical, broader-based one. We do need a clear pathway.
One of the largest News Agencies recently asked me about the Energy Transition. These were some really tough open-ended questions: “What are the industry challenges and solutions,” “the key trends and developments“, What are the Challenges I face,” then “What critical solutions are there to the challenges” and finally “What value and guidance would you offer.”
The energy transition is a vast, complex area to view. I took a deep breath and thought about how I would break this down over a discussion of only 45 minutes. I decided to break it down into bite-size chunks such as Key Challenges, Worries, Big Ticket issues, My working issues, and finally, How the energy industry needs to get organized.
On reflection, I realized how many more points I could have raised or explained. Still, the structure of my breaking this down allows for some further thinking and additions that help me build this out, as many struggles with absorbing this energy transition, and I can build on my initial reactions here. Well, that is in my plans going forward.
In the past week the Davos World Economic Forum has been on, where thousands gather to listen, explore, make contact and generally gather the mood of the Worlds economic climate over the coming year. The sessions are highly valuable to be selective over but listen into.
Over this weekend, I spent a fair amount of reading time working through the World Economic Forum to remind me of this incredible source of knowledge across many world issues and challenges. I think this is not an event to miss when you cut through all the negatives surrounding Davos and the “elite” and lucky ones are able to rub shoulders and get a better understanding of thinking and give some degrees of new clarity to individual thinking and their strategic direction from grasping the risks, potentials and value opportunities offered when so many leaders can find time to come together and exchange.
These reports (Whitepapers) are a storehouse of knowledge, facts and suggested actions that need to be taken. The Whitepapers found here cover Climate issues, Green Deal views, Resilience, Circular Transformation, Global Value Chains, Electricity views , Securing the Energy Transition and plenty more.
For me, the weekend focus was on the Energy Transition following on from their recent Davos event and the series of reports co-sponsored with different organizations built up over many years.
The pressure on our Power Grids needs urgent attention
There is a growing, possibly intense focus and awareness that our Energy Grids worldwide are in serious trouble.
The significant changing consumption needs and generation patterns are causing significant concerns that existing ageing infrastructure is becoming a major source of risk to power grid safety, reliability and financial exposure and in failing to deliver power on the expected 24 x 7, we need.
If you look at ten of the top issues that are causing a growing crisis
Ageing or outdated infrastructure
Supply chain failures are delaying infrastructure equipment changes.
A continued public opposition delaying infrastructure options and bureaucratic barriers
There is a continued lack of sizable funding to make major changes
System redundancies and stranded assets and the issues of legacy write-offs
The increased complexity of the grid is still unclear in its final generation mix design
Cyber Attacks are continuing and exposing significant weakness
Extreme weather events are growing and exposing grid vulnerabilities.
Previously poor project management, inconsistencies in capital spending
Changing demand needs, the acceleration of electrification and the lack of new infrastructure
The need is to find effective responses and considerations of the options, managing change simultaneously while maintaining increasing power demand.
The energy system is being disrupted, and where there are levels of high disruption, there is always uncertainty, debate and learning to take risker views of the future, creating a lot of unease and hesitation. As quoted by one senior person, “we have an inadequate view of what – positively, and in detail – we’re building towards.
As the sector transforms at such an accelerating rate, the move towards ambitious decarbonization targets has required that clean energy is explored in all those options and required to be pushed to the forefront of future solutions. Integrating that variable green energy onto the grid and hardening infrastructure assets against extreme weather are proving some industry’s most pressing challenges.
The energy shifts we are undertaking within all the energy transitions today do allow real innovation opportunities when you survey the innovation landscape.
There is complexity in all the energy transitions going on. Still, the ones that can see the possibilities and ‘energize’ through new innovative solutions hold the future in our hands to capitalize upon as fast as we can.
All we can predict is that the pace of innovation and energy transition will speed and then scale up to meet the needs of a world rapidly wanting to decarbonize. The companies that are investors in innovation will be the best placed to capitalize on this.
