It is the weekend. What better time for a meditation inspired by beer yeast? I hope you will give a thought to the yeastie beasties as you enjoy your favorite adult beverage.
Why beer yeast? Well, Roger Kay wrote a meditation in Forbes he called the "Beer Yeast Dilemma." Here is the set-up:
Imagine you are a beer yeast. You’ve got a simple life. You live in a nice warm bath of sugar water. G’head. Eat all you want. When you get to feeling a little full, just relax and let go. Your poo is mostly alcohol with some other stuff. After you’ve topped off your mitochondria with energy from all that sugar, you can divide into two perfect copies of yourself. What could be more wonderful?
Life is one big party for the yeasties until the food is gone and the alcohol kills everyone in the pool. Kay asks what would happen if some of those little buggers figured out that this story will end badly for everyone unless they collectively curbed their appetites and emissions.
So, you’re the “moral” beer yeast who saw doom coming, who thought, “You know, when the sugar gets scarce and the alcohol level rises to 11%, we’re done! I’m going to stop this right here. No more sugar for me!”
But all you did was drop out of the “race” and leave your share of the sugar to your cousin, who happily subdivided down unto the generations — while you shriveled up.
The moral dilemma is not really about yeast, but a metaphor for humanity as we face the twin challenges of peak fossil fuels (sugar) and climate change (alcohol). In Kay's vision, the yeasties accomplish nothing with their crisis of conscience other than an early demise. I guess it would not be Forbes without a little gratuitous hippie-punching.
The rest of Kay's meditation bounces like a pinball from human beings suck (we lack impulse control and scarcity makes us pigs on steroids) to our brilliance (technology) will save the day. The pieces do not add up. He is saying individual efforts at conservation are worthless because others will increase their consumption. The good yeast is not the one that consumes less sugar, but one that figures out how to increase the supply of sugar and comes up with alternatives to sugar.
Perhaps it is just beer goggles but Kay actually comes to the optimistic conclusion that technology and rationality will allow us to survive dwindling resources and an inhospitable environment.
There is some good news: our ecosystem is a bit more flexible than a beaker of sugar water. Not a lot, but some. And even if we can’t preserve the “sugar” forever, we can certainly attenuate its exhaustion. Technology has a role, and so does population control (a subject for another time), but we are all in this soup together.
As you ponder life in the glass of a frosty pint or two this weekend, here are few points to consider. First, on some level Kay thinks extending our supply of "sugar" is more important than the rising level of "alcohol" we are excreting into our ecosystem. Science says we better change our diet (e.g., "America's Climate Choices" published this week by the National Research Council). The farther we push our greenhouse gas emissions, the less flexible our ecosystem will become. In other words, it is the alcohol, stupid.
In Kay's beer garden, the yeast magically agree to increase the use of sugar alternatives and make more efficient use of the sugar they have. He left out an ingredient - policy. It takes government policy to meet challenges that threaten the health and welfare of everyone living in the soup. In the real world, clumps of yeast are getting fat by selling increasingly scarce sugar in an overcrowded vat. They are not going to voluntarily give up a lucrative market to benefit the greater good, nor are they going to allow competitors to bring in sugar substitutes. Kay admits human nature is often flawed, but ignores the decisions we make as a society insure our success or failure in having our beer and being able to drink it, too.
The technology exists to get almost all of our energy from sugar substitutes by 2050. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's working group on mitigation evaluated 160 possible scenarios and found that is technologically possible to get nearly 80% of the global energy supply from renewable sources within four decades. An Ecofys study funded by the World Wildlife Fund comes to a similar conclusion, as does an analysis by prominent engineers from Stanford and UC Davis. It is not about technology. We have the means. It is a question of political will and policy.
"The report shows that it is not the availability of the resource, but the public policies that will either expand or constrain renewable energy development over the coming decades."
--Ramon Pichs, Co-chair of the IPCC working group on mitigation
Republicans and some conservative Democrats are betting our economic future on doubling down on fossil fuels. So where are the jobs going to come from in this dirty energy future? Resource extraction? Road construction? Building gas guzzling vehicles? There is no plan for the future beyond maximizing the profit margins of oil, gas, and coal companies. Unfortunately, the carefree days of conspicuous consumption of cheap energy are over in a world with 7 billion human yeast and counting.
Other countries are betting on clean energy technology as the foundation for their energy needs and economic growth. These countries are starting to see a significant economic benefit generated from the clean energy sector.
A recent report commissioned by the World Wildlife Fund ranks 38 countries according to the percentage of renewable energy contribution to their Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The report finds Denmark as the leader with 3.1% of its GDP coming from the renewable energy and energy efficiency sector. China follows Denmark with 1.4% of its GDP being contributed by the clean tech sector.
Rounding out the top 5 countries in terms of GDP generated from clean energy are Germany, Brazil, and Lithuania. Where does the United States rank?
In comparison, the clean energy sector in the United States contributes 0.3% or $45 billion to the GDP and ranks 17th in the list.
The growth in our renewable energy and energy efficiency sectors is going to shrink with the 2010 infusion of climate zombies. In a few years, we will not make the top 20 in GDP from clean energy technology. China has a plan for clean energy. We have a plan to corner the market in 20th century technology and infrastructure.
“When you speak to the Chinese, climate change is not an ideological issue. It’s just a fact of life. While we debate climate change and the transition to a low carbon economy, the debate is passed in China. For them it’s implementation. It’s a growth sector, and they want to capture this sector.”
Donald Pols, economist at the World Wildlife Fund
Japan is scaling back its nuclear energy program in the aftermath of tsunami damage to the Fukushima Daiichi facility. Their new plans call for a greater emphasis on renewable energy and efficiency.
On Tuesday, Mr. Kan said Japan would retain nuclear and fossil fuels as energy sources, but vowed to add two new pillars to Japan’s energy policy: renewable energy and conservation. While Japan has been a global leader in energy conservation, it lags behind the United States and Europe in adopting solar and wind power, and other new energy sources.
“We need to start from scratch,” Mr. Kan told reporters. “We need to make nuclear energy safer and do more to promote renewable energy.”
I think Kay's beer yeast metaphor needs a little tweaking.
So, you’re the “moral” beer yeast who saw doom coming, who thought, “You know, when the sugar gets scarce and the alcohol level rises to 11%, we’re done! I’m going to stop this right here. I am going to switch to renewable sugar. No more dirty and scarce sugar for me!”
And when your yeasty cousins start complaining about the price of fossil sugar and the temperature of the fermentation tank, tell them to shut up. You want to drink in peace.