The myth of Green Capitalism reifies neoliberal privatization of the environment—that justifies exploitation of marginalized communities while relying on vast carbon consumption to institutionalize renewables.

Renewables Revolution: Green Colonialism and Clean-Tech Industries. We have seen the consequences for those who question the status quo in one of the most “sustainable ecovillages” in this country. This binary driven fundamentalism also undergirds our environmental movements. In addition to their history of racism, an insidious strain of orthodoxy dictates these movements. We are prohibited from questioning their ideologies—in this case, the Renewables Revolution and its perceived alternative energies.49 As with our shift from our systemically racist culture to one rooted in mutual respect for multiplicity and difference, we must practice caution during our transition out of our global petroculture. This vigilance should not be based on the motivation, but on the underlying false assumptions and strategies that perceived sustainability and agendas offer. The implicit assumptions embedded in the concept of equality emulate those of sustainability: maintaining the status quo. At this juncture of geopolitical, ecological, social, and corporeal catastrophes, we must critically question clean/green solutions such as the erroneously-named Renewable Energies Revolution. I suggest we face both the roots and the implications of how perceived solutions to our climate crisis, like “renewable” energies, may unintentionally sustain ecological devastation and global wealth inequities, and actually divert us from establishing long-term, regenerative infrastructures. On the surface, sustainability agendas appear to offer critical shifts toward an ecologically, economically, and ethically sound society, but there is much evidence to suggest that #1: these structural changes must be accompanied by a psychological shift in individuals’ behavior to effectively shut down consumer-waste convenience culture; and, #2: the core of too many green/clean solutions is rooted in the very essence of our climate crisis: privatized, industrialized-corporate capitalism. For example, Cheyftz alerts us: The Green New Deal is a “capitalist solution to a capitalist problem.” It claims to address the linked oppressions of wealth inequity and climate-crisis, yet its proposed solutions avoid the very roots of each crisis. My challenge is rooted in three interrelated inquiries: 1. How are our daily choices reinforcing the very racist systems we are questioning or even trying to dismantle? 2. How are the alternatives to fossil-fuel economies and environmental racism reinforcing the very systems we are questioning or even trying to dismantle? 3. What can we learn from indigenous philosophies and socialist ecofeminist movements in order to establish viable, sustainable, regenerative infrastructures—an Ecozoic Era? As we transition to supposedly carbon-free electricity, we must be attentive to the ways in which we unconsciously manifest the very racist hegemonies we seek to dislodge; we must be cautious of the greening-of capitalism that manifests as “green colonialism” through a new dependency on what is falsely identifed as “renewable” energies. Currently, human and natural-world habitat destruction are implicit in the mass production and disposal infrastructures of most “renewable energies:” solar, wind, biomass/biofuels, geothermal, ethanol, hydrogen, nuclear, and other ostensible renewables.50 This includes our technocratic petroleum-pharmaceutical addictions that use technologies to create “equality”. Even if policy appears to be in alignment with environmental ethics, we are consistently fnding that policy change simply replaces one hegemony with another—particularly within the framework of neoliberal globalization. Only when we acknowledge the roots of our Western imperialist crisis, can we begin to decolonize and revitalize all peoples’ livelihoods and their environments. Zazu Dreams: Between the Scarab and the Dung Beetle, A Cautionary Fable for the Anthropocene Era, my climate justice book that explores the perils of the Anthropocene, challenges cultural habits deeply embedded in our calamitous trajectory toward global ecological and cultural, ethnic collapse. The book’s main character refects: “We have this crazy idea that anything ‘green’ is good—but we know that there is no clear-cut good and evil. What happens when the very solution causes more problems than the original problem it was supposed to fx?” How we measure our ecological footprint and global biocapacity is often riddled with paradox—particularly in the face of green colonialism, or what I call humanitarian imperialism. The litany of our collusion with corporate forms of domination is infnite within the Anthropocene Era (increasingly characterized as the Plasticene). Disinformation campaigns spread by fossil-fuel interests deeply root us in assimilationist consumerism. The Zazu Dreams’ characters witness social and environmental costs of subjugating others through both fossil-fuel-obsessed economies and their “green” replacements. Vaclav Smil warns us of this “Miasma of falsehood.” This implies replacing one destructive socializing norm—petropharma cultures sustained by fossil-fuel addicted economics—with another: purportedly “renewable” energies. These energies (I don’t call them renewable, because they are not renewable and not carbon-free),51 like fossil-fuels, are rooted in barbaric colonialist extractive industries. Once again, the “solution” is precisely the problem. Greenwashing is a prime example of the ways in which capitalism dictates our alleged freedom. The “green economy has come to mean … the wholesale privatization of nature.”52 Consumerism becomes the default for making supposedly ethical choices. In Deep Green Resistance, Lierre Keith urges us: “We can’t consume our way out of environmental collapse. Consumption is the problem.”53 Even within the 99%, consumers are capitalism. Without convenienceculture/mass consumer-demand, the machine of the proft-driven free market would have to shift gears. We can’t blame oil companies without simultaneously implicating ourselves, holding our consumption-habits equally responsible. How can we insist government and transnational corporations be accountable, when we refuse to curb our buying, using, and disposal habits? We don’t have to travel far in our cross-cultural histories of nonviolent resistance and civil disobedience to learn from worldchanging examples of strikes, unions, boycotts, expropriation, infrastructural sabotage, embargoes, and divestment protests. Yet, most contemporary transition movements are founded in the very system they are trying to dismantle. Our perceived resources, these alternative forms of energy proposed to power our public electrical grids, are misidentifed under the misleading misnomers: labels such “renewable”/“sustainable”/“clean”/“green”. How is “clean” defined? For whom? There is not a clear division between clean energy and dirty energy/dirty power—clean isn’t always clean. Neoliberal denial of corporeal and global interrelationships instills conformist laws of conduct that continually replenish our toxic soup in which we all live. One perceived solution to help us transition is to create alternatives to fossil fuel-addicted economies, as proposed, for example, through The Green New Deal and its focus on allegedly “renewable” energies. However well-intentioned, these supposed alternatives perpetuate the violence of wasteful behavior and destructive infrastructures. Even if temporarily abated, they ultimately conserve the original crisis. Below I address technologies falsely identifed as “renewable” energies that actually reinforce the very problem they are trying to solve. 1. Solar/Photovoltaic and Wind Technologies: Given proposed solutions using industrial solar and wind harvesting, Western imperialism will continue to dominate global relations. Solar cell and storage production and disposal infrastructure (mining and other extractive industries) as well as industrial wind farms (turbines54 and their infrastructure) use exorbitant resources to produce and implement. Wind and solar energies require vast quantities of fossil fuels to execute them on a grand scale. As we have seen throughout California and China (two examples among many), massive solar-energy sites/ solar industrial complexes strip land bare—displacing human populations and migration routes of both wildlife and people for acres of solar felds, substations, and access roads—all of which require incredibly carbon-intensive concrete.55 Consuming massive tracts of land, 100–1000 times more land area is required for wind and solar, as well as for biofuel energy production than does fossil-fuel production. This is a prime example of replacing one hegemony with another. 2. Hydro-Power Technology: Large-scale dams for hydro-power have historically had cataclysmic effects on indigenous peoples and their lands. Although macro-hydro, like fracking, has fnally been recognized for its calamitous consequences, perversely, it is still proposed as a viable alternative to fossil-fuel economies. 3. Battery Technology: According to the Union of Concerned Scientists and their Climate Vulnerability Index (CVI) in California, fne particulate pollution harms African-American communities 43% more than predominantly white communities, Latinx 39% more, and Asian-American communities 21% more (21). As if tailpipe emissions are the only humanitarian catastrophe, one “clean solution” is the electric vehicle for public transportation and for personal consumption. Completely ignoring embodied energy, this perceived 54 “Blenders in the sky” devastate migrating wildlife—bats and birds critical to healthy ecosystems, some of whom are endangered species. 55Concrete has an extremely high embodied energy solution displaces the costs of environmental racism—once again exported out of the US into the global south—in this case to Bolivia where lithium (essential for battery production) is primarily mined. The Renewable Energy Movement claims that our global addiction to oil (“black gold”) should be replaced by lithium (“white gold”). What we are not considering is that extracting lithium and converting it to a commercially viable form consumes copious quantities of water—drastically depleting availability for indigenous communities and wildlife, and produces toxic waste (that includes an already growing history of chemical leaks poisoning rivers, thus people and other animals). Cobalt, also essential for battery production, is mined in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Like lithium, cobalt’s environmental and humanitarian costs are unconscionable, perpetuated by wanton corruption—including habitat destruction, child slavery, and death. Additionally: 5. Solar technologies and battery e-waste are dumped throughout Asia, South America, and Africa. 6. Rarely considered are the fossil-fuel sources used to supply the electricity for private and public electric vehicles. Too frequently, the poorest US populations work and live near coal mines/power plants/fracking station sources. 7. Furthermore, these “renewable” energies are low-power density: they produce very little energy in proportion to the energy required to institutionalize them. As the main character in Zazu Dreams prompts: “Even if we fnd great alternatives to fossil fuels, what if renewable energies become big business and just maintain our addiction to consumption? (…) Replacing tar sands or oil-drills or coal power plants with megalithic ‘green’ energy is not the solution—it just masks the original problem—confusing ‘freedom’ with free market and free enterprise.”56 We must now act on our knowledge that the renewable “revolution” is dangerously carbon intensive. And, as the authors of Deep Green Resistance caution us: “The new world of renewables will look exactly like the old in terms of exploitation.”5