SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
industrial revolution
The Power of Presidents—Even Trump—Is Nothing to the Power of Clean Energy Revolution
Ten years from now, Donald Trump will be remembered ruefully as our country’s very own King Canute, who used the full force of presidential power in a failed, futile effort to halt the tides of technological change.
Jun 20, 2025
He lived over 1,000 years ago, but King Canute’s life still has some important lessons for our own time. After conquering England, Denmark, Norway, and part of Sweden, he forged a vast North Sea empire that made him, by the year 1030, the greatest of all the Viking kings. At that peak of power, he ordered his courtiers to place a throne on the seashore. There, according to a contemporaneous account, he shouted at the rising tide: “Thou, too, are subject to my command, as the land on which I am seated is mine and no one has ever resisted my commands with impunity. I command you then not to flow over my land, nor presume to wet the feet and the robe of your Lord.”
But the tide, of course, kept rising and waves soon washed over the legs of his royal person. Stunned and chastened, Canute leapt backwards, saying, “Let all men know how empty and worthless is the power of kings.”
In our time, specifically on January 20, 2025, Donald Trump, who had vanquished his rivals, took office with full control of Congress, making him an exceptionally powerful president. On that day, he ordered his courtiers to set up an executive desk at the Capital One Arena in downtown Washington, D.C. There, before waves of cheers from MAGA-capped supporters, he commanded that the U.S. quit the Paris climate accord, announcing: “We are going to save over a trillion dollars by withdrawing from that treaty.”
In March, despite Donald Trump’s many prohibitions, wind and solar surged to 25% of the U.S. electrical supply, and when combined with other forms of “clean energy” like hydropower, already generated 51% of the country’s total electricity output, surpassing fossil fuels for the first time.
Retiring to the Oval Office, he then signed another executive order eliminating “the electric vehicle (EV) mandate” by ending “unfair subsidies and other ill-conceived government-imposed market distortions that favor EVs over other technologies.” More broadly, that decree also removed any barrier to the development of “domestic energy resources—with particular attention to oil, natural gas, coal, hydropower… and nuclear energy resources.”
Like King Canute before him, President Trump was attempting to do nothing less than command the tides to recede. Not the ocean tides, of course, but the no less powerful tides of economic and technological change. For the United States, and indeed the world, is at the cusp of a new industrial revolution in the way we live and work that will, within the coming decades, do nothing less than save humanity from the rising threat of global warming.
America’s Energy Transitions
To grasp the full import and unstoppable power of this impending change, let’s take a moment to place our current era in its historical energy context. Over the past 500 years, as I argued in my book To Govern the Globe, human life has been transformed by three great revolutions in the basic energy infrastructure that drove the global economy and shaped all human life on this planet.
Starting in the 16th century, European nations forged the world’s first maritime empires through technologies that maximized the power of nature’s raw energy. In the era’s first technological advance, Portugal’s agile sailing ship, the caravel, used multiple sails to master the winds and thereby conquer sea lanes from the South Atlantic to the South China Sea. Somewhat later, the Dutch district at Zaan (near Amsterdam) became the world’s first dedicated industrial zone, where 150 powerful windmills cut logs into low-cost lumber for shipyards that would build the world’s largest merchant fleet with 4,000 ships on the high seas. Starting in the 15th century, Portugal combined water mills with massed teams of enslaved laborers on the island of São Tomé off the coast of Africa to create a new form of agribusiness, the fazenda or sugar plantation, whose phenomenal profitability—achieved by using cruel coercion to push the energy output of the human body beyond its natural limits—soon led to the spread of slavery to Brazil, the Caribbean, and the American colonies.
During the 19th century, Britain’s coal-fired industrial revolution brought an energy transition that would move the world quickly beyond the wind and muscle power of the previous four centuries. Steam engines started powering factories in 1786, riverboats in 1810, railways in 1829, trans-Atlantic steamships by the 1830s, and the British Royal Navy’s warships by the 1840s. Meanwhile, Britain’s coal production soared from just 9 million tons in 1800 to a peak of 292 million tons in 1913. By the 1850s, an armada of steam engines was transforming the nature of work worldwide—powering factories, driving sawmills, threshing grains, husking rice, pulling gang plows, and crushing sugarcane. Coal-powered construction equipment sculpted the Earth’s surface, as steam shovels (patented in 1839) moved mountains, steam dredges (1844) cut canals, and steamrollers (1867) flattened roadways. Between 1880 and 1900, the number of steam engines in the United States tripled from 56,000 to 156,000, accounting for 77% of all the power that drove this country’s first industrial revolution.
That era of coal-fired energy, for both steam engines and electrical generation, lasted for nearly a century until it, too, began to fade during the 1950s before the power of petroleum. Even on the eve of World War II, when the United States produced two-thirds of the world’s petroleum, oil accounted for only one-third of its energy supply and just 10% of that of other industrial societies like Europe and Japan. However, as American automobile ownership climbed from 40 million units in 1950 to 213 million in 2000, oil consumption surged from 6.5 million barrels daily to a peak of 20 million barrels. By the time the 1973 Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) oil embargo roiled American life, with gas lines of angry motorists wrapping round the block in cities across the country, oil accounted for 46% of total energy needs in the U.S., 60% in Western Europe, and an overwhelming 73% in Japan.
The Seeds of Change
After those three energy transitions over the span of 500 years, the world is now at the cusp of a fourth great transformation that will indeed prove critical for humanity’s survival. Energy from coal and oil may have freed the world from the curse of slavery and brought unprecedented prosperity to millions, but burning all that carbon also carried the threat of climate change. As early as 1896, Swedish physicist Svante Arrhenius published the world’s first report on global warming, predicting with uncanny prescience that a continued increase in carbon (CO2) emissions would raise “the temperature in the Arctic regions… about 8-9°C.” Between the Rio Earth Summit that finally recognized the problem in 1992 and the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris in 2015, where 195 nations signed an agreement to limit CO2 emissions, the world started a fitful and initially unsuccessful transition to alternative energy.
At the outset, it seemed as if governments were trying to force a shift to alternative energy that carried high costs for questionable results. Solar panels were expensive then and their energy output was low. The few electric-powered cars cost a relative fortune and couldn’t go very far. By 2016, the climate issue had also become bitterly partisan, with the first Trump administration banning the federal government from any mention of climate change while trying desperately to save coal-fired electrical plants and introducing 74 executive actions to weaken environmental protections.
Now that technology has resolved so many of the cost constraints holding back the world’s transition to alternative energy, it’s possible to grasp the shape that America’s new industrial revolution is likely to take within a decade or even less (no matter who is the president of the United States).
But as had happened during the world’s earlier energy transitions over the past 500 years, technological innovation was already fusing with economic rationality to catalyze a phenomenally powerful transformation in the world’s energy infrastructure. After solar and wind power began spreading across the globe around 2000, engineering innovation and economies of scale began making alternative energy not only ever more affordable but also ever more efficient. Between 2010 and 2019, the cost of solar power fell by 82% from $0.37 per kilowatt hour to just $0.05. By 2020, the International Energy Agency, known for its rigorous analysis, reported that the world’s best solar schemes already had the “cheapest… electricity in history.”
By the time Joseph Biden took office in 2021, the tides of technological change were just starting to turn. In a bid to ride that tide, the Biden administration invested a massive $1 trillion in “clean energy”—including semiconductor manufacturing ($446 billion), clean power ($188 billion), and electric vehicles ($182 billion).
Despite all the Biden-Harris election hype about factories built and jobs created, the gains for the country’s energy infrastructure were still… well, distinctly incremental. By the end of Biden’s term in December 2024, wind and solar had inched up to just 17% of U.S. electrical generation, though they had finally passed coal, that dirty fuel left over from the horse-and-buggy era, which fell to a historic low of 15%. Simultaneously, however, natural gas surged to a record 43% of the U.S. energy supply, meaning that carbon was still king. Compared to Norway where a proliferation of 400 chargers for every 100,000 Norwegians has allowed EVs to hit 90% of new car sales, even leading American states like California still only have a pathetic 46 chargers per 100,000 population—a key reason EVs still account for just 8% of this country’s new auto sales.
But beneath such dismal statistics, by the end of Biden’s term there were also some significant signs of deep, underlying change. In September 2024, an industry group reported that solar energy, which had been four times more expensive than fossil fuels in 2010, was now less than half the cost (56% lower) than them.
Portents of a New Industrial Revolution
Despite all the political (and climate change) pyrotechnics of Trump’s tumultuous first months in office this year, those deeper processes of technological change have continued their ceaseless, mechanistic march toward transformation. Indeed, in recent months there have been some telling signs—veritable portents—that we are indeed at the cusp of a transition to alternative energy of sufficient power to drive a new American industrial revolution. Let’s read the tea leaves.
In April, the first driverless 18-wheeler “robotruck” appeared on a U.S. highway, delivering refrigerated goods along Interstate 45 in Texas. In May, Elon Musk announced the debut of Tesla’s “cyber cab” service in Austin, Texas, with 10 driverless trial cars that are expected to lead to the deployment of “hundreds of thousands of robotaxis across the U.S.” Lending substance to that claim, Alphabet’s competing Waymo taxi service announced in May that its paid driverless rides had doubled to 10 million in the previous five months, launching the company on “a path to profitability.” Within days, China’s top EV car maker BYD had dropped a “price bombshell” by slashing the sticker price on its top-selling Seagull subcompact to an amazingly low $7,700—and that, mind you, is for a brand-new sedan loaded with self-driving features and able to travel a 200-mile range on a single charge. These days in America, it would be hard to beat that price with any sort of gas-powered car, even, say, a 2012 Honda Civic with 150,000 miles on the clock.
But perhaps most important, in March, despite Donald Trump’s many prohibitions, wind and solar surged to 25% of the U.S. electrical supply, and when combined with other forms of “clean energy” like hydropower, already generated 51% of the country’s total electricity output, surpassing fossil fuels for the first time. “This is a first signal,” explained energy analyst Nicolas Fulghum, “that the U.S. is approaching a tipping point where clean power takes the lead over fossil generation, and where the importance of coal and gas inevitably starts to fade.” Indeed, just this month, the authoritative International Energy Agency announced that the “global energy investment scene is changing fast,” with two-thirds of this year’s $3.3 trillion investment in energy production slated for “renewables” (such as wind and solar), double the amount for fossil fuels.
The Shape of the Future
If that impending transformation follows the pattern of history’s past transitions, technology and the global economy are about to achieve a sudden, silent synergy that will unleash not just a tide but a veritable tsunami of socioeconomic change. To cite some past examples, within the 15 years after George Stephenson launched The Rocket, a steam locomotive with an average speed of just 13 miles per hour in 1829, Britain covered the country with 2,200 miles of rail lines, transforming English life and work. And in the 10 years after 1907-1908, when Henry Ford upgraded the mass production of his Model-T motorcar, the price for it dropped steadily from $850 to just $260 while the number of automobiles registered nationwide soared from 140,300 in 1907 to nearly 5,000,000 in 1917, putting America on the road to becoming a petroleum-powered nation on wheels.
Now that technology has resolved so many of the cost constraints holding back the world’s transition to alternative energy, it’s possible to grasp the shape that America’s new industrial revolution is likely to take within a decade or even less (no matter who is the president of the United States). After rendering high-cost fossil fuels largely obsolete by 2035, solar and wind power, backed by storage farms equipped with new safer technologies like sodium-ion batteries, will create a reliable electrical grid, cutting the country’s basic energy costs by well over half and sparking a proliferation of innovation.
In the decades to come on our interstate highways, the left lanes will undoubtedly be filled with endless packs of a dozen or more electric-powered, driverless 18-wheelers, drafting six feet apart. They will be guided by uninterrupted digital signals transmitted from fiber optic cables laid down along the median strip, slashing both fuel consumption and transport costs. Those semi-trailer platoons will be headed for massive distribution depots that are likely to ring American cities, large and small. From them, drivers will be dispatched with robot-packed loads for the delivery of foodstuffs and consumer goods direct to individual households. Those truckloads will also include things like factory-produced complete kitchens and bathrooms for on-site installation at mass-assembly construction sites—slashing costs and making housing once again more affordable for working Americans.
Since an EV is simply a steel box housing a battery, for about $9,000 an American family will be able to purchase a brand-new, self-driving sedan with a 600-mile range from a single 10-minute charge, providing maintenance-free transportation for a typical monthly fuel cost of about $35. With the electrical grid generating cheap solar power, every urban hub will be connected to its suburbs by electrical rails and to its own neighborhoods by electrified mass transit. Once downtown, commuters will move about easily, freed from the stress and cost of parking by fleets of robotaxis that will move quickly through inner-city streets no longer jammed with private cars. Their only competitor for curb space will be the flotilla of delivery vehicles whose drivers will circulate ceaselessly about the city, fulfilling same-day orders.
With the world’s lowest cost for critical inputs of energy and transportation, combined with the most extensive grid of fiber optic cables, the United States will hold the pole position in the ceaseless race for international competitiveness. Once modern history’s fourth great transformation takes hold and that new energy infrastructure is in place, productivity, profits, and global power will soon follow on a far healthier and cooler planet. With domestic transport costs but a fraction of those for international shipping, the economic logic of “nearshoring” will become inescapable, making “Made in the USA” compellingly economical and creating countless new jobs that could strain the country’s labor supply.
Oh yes, and I almost forgot: all that technology will, of course, be emissions-free and so will bring America close to net-zero carbon emissions well before the 2050 date mandated by the 2016 Paris climate accord.
America’s King Canute
Ten years from now, Donald Trump will be remembered ruefully as our country’s very own King Canute, who used the full force of presidential power in a failed, futile effort to halt the tides of technological change that, by then, will have launched this country headlong into the world’s new industrial revolution.
Keep ReadingShow Less
No Paine, No Gain: Common Sense in the Year 2024
“We have it in our power to begin the world again.” And so we must.
Oct 24, 2024
Contributing fundamentally to the American Revolution, the French Revolution, and the struggles of British workers in the Industrial Revolution, Thomas Paine was the greatest radical of a truly radical age. Yet this son of an English artisan did not become a radical until his arrival in America in late 1774 at the age of thirty-seven. Even then he had never expected such things to happen.
However, struck by America’s startling contradictions and magnificent possibilities, and moved by the spirit and determination of its people to resist British authority, he dedicated himself to the American cause and through his pamphlets of 1776—Common Sense and the ensuing American Crisis Papers—he emboldened Americans to transform their colonial rebellion into a revolutionary war, defined the new nation in a democratically expansive and progressive fashion, and articulated an American identity charged with exceptional purpose and promise.
As Paine saw it: Americans could show the world that humanity had no need for kings and overlords, indeed, that common people, working people, could govern themselves!
Is it any wonder then that we have reached back and recruited Paine to the cause of rescuing America’s revolutionary promise from royal wannabee Donald Trump and his MAGA and GOP (Tory) subjects who seem set upon destroying it?
Vote Democratic top to bottom on November 5th… so we can start acting anew on Citizen Paine’s radical-democratic challenge: “We have it in our power to begin the world again.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
World's Carbon Budget is Only Half As Big As Thought
The days of producing electricity from fossil fuels may be drawing to an end.
Feb 26, 2016
Climate scientists have bad news for governments, energy companies, motorists, passengers and citizens everywhere in the world: to contain global warming to the limits agreed by 195 nations in Paris last December, they will have to cut fossil fuel combustion at an even faster rate than anybody had predicted.
Joeri Rogelj, a research scholar at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Austria, and European and Canadian colleagues propose in Nature Climate Change that all previous estimates of the quantities of carbon dioxide that can be released into the atmosphere before the thermometer rises to potentially catastrophic levels are too generous.
Instead of a range of permissible emissions estimates of up to 2,390 billion tons from 2015 onwards, the very most humans could release would be 1,240 billion tons.
Available levels
In effect, that halves the levels of diesel and petrol available for petrol tanks, coal for power stations, and natural gas for central heating and cooking available to humankind before the global average temperature - already 1degC higher than it was at the start of the Industrial Revolution - reaches the notional 2degC mark long agreed internationally as being the point of no return for the planet.
In fact, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change summit in Paris agreed on a target "well below" 2degC in recognition of ominous projections - one of which was that, at such planetary temperatures, sea levels would rise high enough to submerge several small island states.
The Nature Climate Change paper is a restatement of a problem that has been clear for decades. Carbon dioxide proportions in the atmosphere are linked to planetary surface temperatures and, as they rise, so does average temperature. These proportions oscillated around 280 parts per million for most of human history.
The global exploitation, on a massive scale, of fossil fuels drove the expansion of agriculture, the growth of economies, a sevenfold growth in human population, a sea level rise of 14cms, and a temperature rise of, so far, 1degC.
To stop temperatures increasing another 3degC or more and sea levels rising by more than a metre, humans have to reduce fossil fuel emissions. By how much these must be reduced is difficult to calculate.
"We have been overestimating the budget by 50 to more than 200%. At the high end, this is a difference of more than 1,000 billion tons of carbon dioxide"
The global carbon budget is really the balance between what animals emit - in this context, the word animals includes humans with cars and aeroplanes and factories - and what plants and algae can absorb. So the calculations are bedeviled by uncertainties about forests, grasslands, and oceans.
To make things simpler, climate scientists translate the target into the billions of tons of carbon dioxide that, ideally, may be released into the atmosphere from 2015 onwards. Even these, however, are estimates.
There is general agreement that a limit of 590 billion tons would safely keep the world from overheating in ways that would impose ever greater strains on human society. The argument is about the upper limit of such estimates.
Dr Rogelj says: "In order to have a reasonable chance of keeping global warming below 2degC, we can only emit a certain amount of carbon dioxide, ever. That's our carbon budget.
"This has been understood for about a decade, and the physics behind this concept are well understood, but many different factors can lead to carbon budgets that are either slightly smaller or slightly larger. We wanted to understand these differences, and to provide clarity on the issue for policy-makers and the public.
"This study shows that, in some cases, we have been overestimating the budget by 50 to more than 200%. At the high end, this is a difference of more than 1,000 billion tons of carbon dioxide."
The same study looks at why estimates of the "safe" level of emissions have varied so widely.
One complicating factor has been uncertainty about what humans might do, and another has been about the other more transient greenhouse gases, such as methane and nitrogen oxides.
Although short-lived and released in smaller quantities, some of these are potentially far more potent than carbon dioxide as an influence on planetary temperatures.
Complex calculations
But Dr Rogelj and his colleagues found that a significant cause of variation was simply a consequence of the different assumptions and methodologies inherent in such complex calculations.
So the researchers have re-examined both the options and the approaches, and have worked out a global figure that, they suggest, could be relevant to "real-world policy".
It takes into account the consequences of all human activity, and it embraces detailed outlines of possible low-carbon choices. It also offers, they say, a 66% chance of staying within the internationally agreed limit.
"We now better understand the carbon budget for keeping global warming below 2degC," Dr Rogelj says. "This carbon budget is very important to know because it defines how much carbon dioxide we are allowed to release into the atmosphere, ever.
"We have figured out that this budget is at the low end of what studies indicated before, and if we don't start reducing our emissions immediately, we will blow it in a few decades."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular