Entropy Law Rules Fossil Fuels ‘Out-Of-Order’

Current economic models mainly serve corporate interests.  The result is opportunistic, careless, and seriously incomplete analyses that threaten our ecological viability.  Failed energy policy provides a particularly egregious example.

Consider how Big Oil is continuing to build centralized gas-electric power plants, petro-pipelines, export terminals and other large fossil fuel infrastructure hoping to maintain its controlling, asset-situated position in energy production, distribution and management.

Finally, forced to acknowledge the disastrous health and environmental implications of the fossil industry on climate change, Oil is now using its political clout to paint distributed solar as a threat to the national power grid, touting instead carbon capture and storage (CCS) at its power stations as a reasonable means for solving climate effects, thus preserving its centralized, near-monopoly as business per usual.

Captive government agencies have been supporting such distorted energy policy via huge loan guarantees, seemingly unaware that tech fixes like CCS can only further contribute to global pollution.  The following discussion illuminates the above problematics via the Entropy principle.

Energy’s indestructibility per the Conservation of Energy Principle allows endless, nondepleting options.  However, energy’s peculiar ‘one-wayness’ per the Entropy Law rudely dictates fundamental, physical limitations on energy’s availability and use.  Easily recognizable instances of the world’s one-wayness abound. Perfume molecules escape their container and spread out in a room, but never gather back into the bottle of their own accord. Heat always flows from the hotter to the colder body, never the reverse. Once the concentrated energy of coal in the mine is converted to the desirable, high-grade energy of electricity at our houses, we will have lost ninety percent of the coal’s energy.  It will have dissipated forever into low-grade heat, an exhaust or waste because its temperature is too low for reuse.

During every energy exchange, elemental occupation of easier to reach, but less ordered or concentrated configurations, occurs.  Deployments do not use up the energy involved; rather they diminish its quality/availability.  All energy concentrations, such as those stored in fossil fuels, eventually undergo dispersive interactions, thus qualitatively degrade. This unavoidable outcome (that ordered concentrations naturally decay into annoying uselessness) is commonly experienced as pollution.

Nature’s insurmountable constraints on energy use can be formalized mathematically.  Specifically, high-quality energy’s unavoidable dispersal to uselessness and the environment’s resulting overall loss of quality (pollution) can be characterized as an entropy increase, dS.  The relevant mathematical framing of the entropy law is:

dS  > 0    thus    dS (earth’s envelope) > – dS (system)

Two ordinary boundary conditions are involved: (i) The system under consideration experiences no external inputs—only on-earth-derived sources of energy such as fossil or nuclear fuels are involved, and (ii) The earth’s interactive envelope (surface, oceans, and atmosphere) serves as a reservoir large enough to passively absorb yet maintain interactions as earth-proximate.

This formal inequality can be read:  All earth-powered orderings of local systems (technological fixes, such as CCS) result in greater overall disorder for the earth’s envelope.

Thus, we can expect an overall decline in our surroundings from continued use of fossil fuels—no fix exists.  We do have, however, the sun as an outside, restoring gift of energy.

When the earth intercepts solar (outside) energy, its large-scale regenerative cycles (carbon, oxygen, and so on) mitigate entropy’s otherwise inevitable environmental decrements. Since the sun’s input is finite, however, solar energy can only compensate technologically induced environmental decrements provided they are not too large. A tipping point surely exists where entropic dissipations from human technologies exceed the sun’s ability to reverse them. Beyond that point, equilibrium destabilization of the earth necessarily results.

Thus, the Entropy Law’s solar dictate: Solar energy is the earth’s only entropy mitigating, thus potentially sustaining, source of energy.

If this dictate of Physical Law had been fully understood and observed, we might have long since ‘gone solar’ and averted many of today’s environmental problems.

Consider hydrogen-fueled cars as an example of how an entropy-based analysis might expeditiously cull out technological proposals.  Aren’t such cars ‘ecological’ since they emit only pure water?  An entropy analysis cuts immediately to whether a solar component is involved.  If no solar component exists to negate the entropy that attends hydrogen production, storage, and handling, the overall effect is ecological degradation.   Note the economy of approach here.  Analysis does not need to show precisely how the degradation manifests to declare a technology ecologically deficient.

Unfortunately, energy hacks continue to frame their policies only in accordance with the Conservation Law.  Energy return on Energy Investment (EROEI) is the current fad manifesting this policy short coming.  It is essentially an efficiency analysis, minor enough that it can be overridden by financial engineering, thus market distortions.  Indeed, dominant economic theory still considers the Entropy Law’s inevitable pollution costs as ‘externalities’ (read:  ignorables).   Thus EROEI is insufficient to fully reach our crucially significant economic and ecological problems.

The National Research Council (NRC), already by 2009, estimated that hidden (entropy) costs amount to hundreds of billions of dollars each year and are causing major distortions in decision-making.  Amazingly, this NRC analysis did not even take anthropogenic global warming into account.  We now know that the ecological threat of climate change, largely a result of the Entropy Law operating relative to fossil fuels, is so serious that all other issues pale by comparison.

More articles by:
March 22, 2018
Conn Hallinan
Italy, Germany and the EU’s Future
David Rosen
The Further Adventures of the President and the Porn Star
Gary Leupp
Trump, the Crown Prince and the Whole Ugly Big Picture
The Hudson Report
Modern-Day Debtors’ Prisons and Debt in Antiquity
Steve Martinot
The Properties of Property
Binoy Kampmark
Facebook, Cambridge Analytica and Surveillance Capitalism
Jeff Berg
Russian to Judgment
Gregory Barrett
POSSESSED! Europe’s American Demon Must Be Exorcised
Robby Sherwin
What Do We Do About Facebook?
Sam Husseini
Trump Spokesperson Commemorates Invading Iraq by Claiming U.S. Doesn’t Dictate to Other Countries; State Dept. Defends Invasion
Rob Okun
Students: Time is Ripe to Add Gender to Gun Debate
Michael Barker
Tory Profiteering in Russia and Putin’s Debt of Gratitude
March 21, 2018
Paul Street
Time is Running Out: Who Will Protect Our Wrecked Democracy from the American Oligarchy?
Mel Goodman
The Great Myth of the So-Called “Adults in the Room”
Chris Floyd
Stumbling Blocks: Tim Kaine and the Bipartisan Abettors of Atrocity
Eric Draitser
The Political Repression of the Radical Left in Crimea
Patrick Cockburn
Erdogan Threatens Wider War Against the Kurds
John Steppling
It is Us
Thomas Knapp
Death Penalty for Drug Dealers? Be Careful What You Wish for, President Trump
Manuel García, Jr.
Why I Am a Leftist (Vietnam War)
Isaac Christiansen
A Left Critique of Russiagate
Howard Gregory
The Unemployment Rate is an Inadequate Reporter of U.S. Economic Health
Ramzy Baroud
Who Wants to Kill Palestinian Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah?
Roy Morrison
Trouble Ahead: The Trump Administration at Home and Abroad
Roger Hayden
Too Many Dead Grizzlies
George Wuerthner
The Lessons of the Battle to Save the Ancient Forests of French Pete
Binoy Kampmark
Fictional Free Trade and Permanent Protectionism: Donald Trump’s Economic Orthodoxy
Rivera Sun
Think Outside the Protest Box
March 20, 2018
Jonathan Cook
US Smooths Israel’s Path to Annexing West Bank
Jeffrey St. Clair
How They Sold the Iraq War
Chris Busby
Cancer, George Monbiot and Nuclear Weapons Test Fallout
Nick Alexandrov
Washington’s Invasion of Iraq at Fifteen
David Mattson
Wyoming Plans to Slaughter Grizzly Bears
Paul Edwards
My Lai and the Bad Apples Scam
Julian Vigo
The Privatization of Water and the Impoverishment of the Global South
Mir Alikhan
Trump and Pompeo on Three Issues: Paris, Iran and North Korea
Seiji Yamada
Preparing For Nuclear War is Useless
Gary Leupp
Brennan, Venality and Turpitude
Martha Rosenberg
Why There’s a Boycott of Ben & Jerry’s on World Water Day, March 22
John Pilger
Skripal Case: a Carefully-Constructed Drama?
March 19, 2018
Henry Heller
The Moment of Trump
John Davis
Pristine Buildings, Tarnished Architect
Uri Avnery
The Fake Enemy
Patrick Cockburn
The Fall of Afrin and the Next Phase of the Syrian War
Nick Pemberton
The Democrats Can’t Save Us