Billy’s Book Bag with Special Guest Anthony Akerman

Here are two takes on the book, “Electrify” by Saul Griffith. The first is a guest review by Anthony Akerman and the other is by our CEO Billy Afghan.

“Electrify: An Optimist’s Playbook for Our Clean Energy Future” by Saul Griffith should be viewed as a blueprint for how the world can decarbonize quickly.

By Anthony Akerman

Saul is an engineer and inventor. Over his 20-year career in Silicon Valley, he has focused on developing clean energy solutions. In this book, he outlines how we can use renewable energy, particularly solar and wind generation, to achieve our net-zero goals. He explores various options available to the world and concludes that electrification is the only readily available solution that can be implemented quickly. Current technology can be rolled out swiftly and economically. The main hurdles are political and economic, but even those can be tackled, leading to green prosperity. Through detailed graphs and a structured roadmap, Griffith demonstrates what it would take to make this transition, asserting that it would be easier than most people imagine. This green transition is not only possible but is one of our only options to overcome the climate emergency.

What first drew me to the book was the overarching optimism in his writing. The task ahead is not as daunting as I had imagined. I began studying climate change 10 years ago and, over time, grew more despondent about the direction we were headed. To avoid the pitfalls of a “doomer” mindset, I have been seeking positive messages that guide solutions to our environmental problems. This book provides exactly that kind of messaging. Saul shows that the inherent challenges we face have presented a clear way to correct our trajectory.

I have been working on the decarbonization of transportation for over 20 years and now head up the Renewable Energy sector for Maersk, one of the world’s largest shipping companies. Having previously worked on LNG projects for Oil & Gas companies, I feel partially responsible for the state of our climate catastrophe. But Saul does not blame the world for the development of fossil fuels. On the contrary, he points out, as Hannah Ritchie discusses in Not the End of the World, that we are living in an age of prosperity, with long life spans and well-being never seen on this planet. We should thank the Oil & Gas industry for providing the world we enjoy, and now depend on them to put the same ingenuity and hard work into renewable energy that went into fossil fuels.

I am already seeing this firsthand with a hub for R&D in renewable energy being built in Houston. There already exists a talented pool of highly trained people who can use their skills to fix the problems they helped create. As Paul Polman wrote in Net Positive, “business broke it, and now they need to fix it.” This thinking does not exonerate past mistakes but points to a pragmatic way to create a new future. This book has given me new hope and purpose in my work. The task ahead will not be easy, but it certainly is possible, and frankly, we don’t have any other options. I have renewed energy for my work decarbonizing transportation and helping to build the renewable energy infrastructure we need, much of which is being funded by the United States Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

One of my key takeaways from the book is that when naysayers argue we can’t afford to switch immediately to renewable energy because it would cause a global economic collapse, they are not referring to the investment needed or the costs to individuals. The issue is that Big Oil majors have significant investments in “oil reserves,” which amount to around $5 trillion on their balance sheets. If they leave oil in the ground, they must write off these assets, which would certainly cause a complete economic collapse. However, the cost to the planet and the future clean-up from exploiting these reserves is significantly higher. Thus, the issue of saving the planet is one of global macroeconomics and politics, not of lacking a viable solution.

Through the IRA, we have seen a surge in the development of solar utility farms. This is certainly moving the needle in the right direction, but more needs to be done. Every facet of our lives must transition from fossil fuels to green energy. This book shows us how we can do this in a way where everyone wins.

---

What “theory of change” would most move the dial on our urgently needed energy transition in the United States?

Griffith’s book Electrify is a refreshing, die-hard optimist’s manifesto on how we can urgently transform our energy challenge into a completely redesigned U.S. energy infrastructure of the future—and do it now—by electrifying everything. I found it very exciting and easy to get pulled into this well-researched, highly calculated dream scenario.

And I actually think it’s doable. Griffith lays out well-thought-out calculations to show how electrifying everything—and he means everything—could be the elusive solution to our energy and climate challenges. He addresses every angle and concern regarding the energy transition.

For example, he points to the trillions of dollars in oil and gas assets on fossil fuel company books that would be lost if we stopped using oil and gas immediately. This would cause a cascade of financial breakdowns, difficult to overcome if not addressed. He helps us see that ignoring these critical issues will only keep anti-fossil fuel advocates in a stalemate with energy companies, and he offers solutions to address the loss. He begins by acknowledging the contributions of the thousands of skilled energy workers who have made our current health and prosperity possible. He suggests various financial and employment opportunities to encourage oil companies and their workforces to get on the electrification bandwagon, rather than continuing to demonize and punish them.

Here’s the thorn in my brain that keeps needling me after reading this pragmatic, problem-solving book: How do you move people to take the action he suggests? Many people have made rational, well-researched cases for why change needs to happen. They lay out the numbers and technical solutions and make solid, evidence-based arguments for why action is critical for the future. Yet, time after time, these well-researched, evidence-based arguments fail to generate the urgent change needed.

Why? Because we are dealing with people. As Katharine Hayhoe points out in her book Saving Us: A Climate Scientist’s Case for Hope and Healing in a Divided World, no amount of evidence and research changes the minds of people who feel like they are giving in by agreeing with those they do not like. Griffith’s book doesn’t address a critical question—without which his brilliant ideas may fall by the wayside: How do we create a dialogue with those we would prefer not to even be in the same state with, let alone the same room?

Ken Wilber’s Integral Theory, as laid out in his book A Brief History of Everything, speaks to the need for any real change to consider both the objective and subjective—the personal and behavioral as well as the cultural and systemic dimensions present in any current reality—before committed action and sustainable change can happen. This integral approach to change is more critical than ever in today’s reality.

Here are some strategies to consider:

1. Identify the people who need to be convinced to begin this transition—the critical few, not the many. Who do they listen to? Who are the influencers shaping their thinking? Start with the smallest viable audience of influencers to share ideas and concepts that might move them to talk more about what’s possible.
2. Find out what matters most to the critical few and better understand what is most important to them. Help them see how their values and interests will be served by the proposed changes. Is it children’s health? Better-paying jobs? Clean water? Standard of living? Avoid triggering “strawman” arguments that push people into a corner.
3. Better understand opposing views by “steel-manning” their argument. Work to understand exactly why they think what they think and feel the way they do—know it better than they do. Then, weave in ideas that support their values and interests. Offer perspectives while avoiding positions. Positions bring opposition, while perspectives expand ideas and ways of looking at something.
4. You don’t always have to start with the most difficult opposition. You can also begin with those who already see the need for change and create pathways and incentives for them to take urgent, positive action. For example, I’ve spoken with many professionals inside oil companies who are anxious to contribute more directly to the energy transition but struggle to find pathways within their organizations.

I love the concept of electrifying everything. I would encourage Saul Griffith to read Wilber’s and Hayhoe’s books and their theories of change, and then reconsider the next edition of his book. Given his infectious optimism and compelling thinking, I’d love to see what new solutions he might offer.

Interested in learning more about integral theories of change? Contact Genii Earth at hello@geniiearth.com.