We have been explaining for a long time: the current energy model is devastating for the climate, for pollution in cities, and for our energy dependence on external sources. Even so, it is difficult for society as a whole to fully believe it. And with the war in Iran, the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, and the new energy crisis, we are reaping the fruits of our stubbornness: price volatility and concern about supply. What more needs to happen?
The shift to renewable energies is cheap, environmentally cleaner, and makes us more secure. It is not just a matter of climate, it is also a matter of security and economic common sense. In Catalonia, this vulnerability is particularly evident: we depend overwhelmingly on imported energy, which directly exposes us to price shocks and geopolitical risks.
This dependence is not an abstraction: it is a structural reality of our energy system that affects the cost of living and the competitiveness of companies. Furthermore, it should be remembered that the main part of energy consumption is not just electricity: transport is one of the main responsible for energy consumption and continues to depend almost entirely on oil. This explains why the transition is slower than we would like, but also where we need to act more decisively.
Despite this, we remain stuck. A few days ago, the Plater map was presented, which specifies regional renewable energy targets, and, quickly, opposing voices have appeared (voices we can describe as "nimbies", for the English acronym Not In My Backyard, "not in my backyard"), including political representatives with a resounding "no" or a "yes, but not like this", which, in practice, are quite equivalent in terms of immobility. I would like to see these same mayors protesting against having gas stations in their region or against the substations that bring them electricity. It is legitimate to discuss how things should be done, but it cannot be that everything ends in blockage or eternal prolongation. In dramatic times like the ones we are living, it is simply reprehensible bad taste and a privilege, even more so when this happens in areas that do not even produce energy, as is the case in the Girona regions.
The energy we consume every day also takes up space and has an impact. The difference is that, with renewables, these impacts are much smaller and, above all, compatible with a viable future. However, we see the space they occupy at home, instead of externalizing it outside the country. We deny a paradigm shift while dismissing the impacts of the current model, appealing to the fear of change and to poorly contrasted evidence.
At the European level, we are moving at a better pace, but with missteps. The Ukraine crisis led to more climate ambition, but also to a green taxonomy agreement that included gas and nuclear to appease Germany and France, and which slows down the paradigm shift. It is a good example of how we progress, often with contradictions that slow down the pace of change.
With the car issue, something similar happens. If there is a gasoline shortage, we will have many problems. But for years now we have had a viable solution, which has been adopted in many countries and which we have been actively delaying here: the electric car. Gasoline is a very efficient fuel, but we have to burn it quite inefficiently inside the car. The magic of the electric car is that it skips this step: there is no need to burn anything and, therefore, it is already cheaper to drive it, even without an energy crisis.
Instead, we insist on delaying the progressive abandonment of the combustion car, promising bio or synthetic fuels. These fuels still require the combustion process and are very expensive to produce, making it impossible for them to compete with gasoline without large subsidies. The only case with some success in implementation, that of ethanol in the USA, has been a financial and environmental disaster, with high subsidy costs and enormous pressure in terms of food and deforestation. Since we like to count hectares so much with Plater, in terms of pure energy, solar panels produce approximately 40 times more energy per hectare than the crops used to make ethanol, even before considering that electric cars are much more efficient.
Mathematics is stubborn and the transition is no longer an abstract concept. Just recently I was reading Francesc Mauri explaining a success story about electric trucks and the savings they represent for pioneering companies. I myself generate the energy needed to travel 100 km with my car at home many days. I am sure that readers who have a plug-in car have already been using it more for days. In other words, the future already exists. What is missing is to deploy it without being so picky. Denial of progress with speed is not neutral.
In summary, we need a radical change in attitude. We must start celebrating those actors and projects that are drivers of change, facilitate this great transformation, and stop constantly putting up obstacles. Not only to protect ourselves, but to be able to build a future that, compared to that of fossil fuels, is at least possible.
