Skip to main content

Changing Climate, Changing World

May 9, 2011 – A very important report was issued by the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) today. The 2200 member scientists of the U.N.-sponsored organization have found renewable energy sources to hold the key to the future. (We might actually have one if we use them!) The report targets 450 ppm of greenhouse gases as the upper limit, beyond which life as we know it would not be sustainable. This level of GHG concentration exceeds the more ideal level of 350 ppm considerably, perhaps a tacit admission on the part of the report’s authors that they no longer think the lower concentration is achievable.
The IPCC believes that 80% of the world’s energy needs can be met by renewable energy sources, and that the financial investment required would amount to only 1% of GDP, or approximately five trillion dollars over the next decade. The very plain implication of such numbers is that failure to make the small investment needed would be nothing short of criminal. The lack of foresight thus far demonstrated by the governments of wealthier nations, particularly the United States, tells us that a policy of “all for one, one for all” doesn’t hold a candle when compared to policies that allow corporate pillaging of the world’s fossil fuel reserves. How to convince American lawmakers of the need for environmentally-friendly policies and legislation, up to and including a climate treaty, is still one of the major, unresolved issues.
The opportunity that exists for countries not yet part of the electrical grid is unique. Wind and solar power are of particular interest to the IPCC. Their capacity for localization makes them especially attractive for these non-electrified areas of the world, home to two billion people. The first step toward recognizing and taking advantage of this opportunity is designing national policies conducive to developing renewable sources of electricity. It is possible that the policies designed by these electrification newcomers could well serve as a template to those slower off the mark. The need for us to learn from each other at this juncture is very great.
The need for haste is similarly great. Production of renewable energy will have to increase by as much as 20 times in order to avert climate catastrophe. The IPCC report predicts that renewables will play a greater role in reducing GHGE than either nuclear or carbon capture and storage by 2050. Surprisingly, 13% of the world’s electricity was derived from renewable energy in 2008. The flip side of this coin is that much of this alternative energy resulted from the burning of biomass. This leads to deforestation, and to the deposition of soot, which – particularly in the Arctic – drives climate change. It is hoped that wind power, a far cleaner option, will supply 20% of the world’s energy needs by 2050.
Solar power, the production of which entails using rare metals and a hyper-clean environment, is still looked to by the IPCC as a major future player. If a method of production could be developed that eliminates the need for either or both of these restrictive conditions, solar could well move to the forefront in meeting our future energy needs. While neither wind nor solar will remove conservation from the long list of new habits people will need to develop, they could lead us in the direction of living sustainable lives. That would be a change for the better, for the future.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Time to be Scared

November 26, 2018 You've heard by now that the US Global Change Research Program released its Fourth National Climate Assessment last Friday. Scientists are, at last, confident enough to say that climate change is the new reality. How very much I wish they had published this bold assertion many years ago, rather than always being hesitant (" . . . we're 73% sure this could happen . . ."). While I know the politics involved cannot be allowed to sway them, and that scientists are unaccustomed to speaking for the masses, their inability to convince the scientifically uneducated of the value in climate change hypotheses has hurt us all. In any event, they have now spoken up loudly and clearly. According to NOAA, one of the 13 government agencies responsible for the Assessment, we can expect the following, should mitigating actions not be taken immediately: - Human health and safety, quality of life, and economic growth will all suffer.        The 2014 Assessment c...

A Rock and a Hard Place

October 8, 2012 - Such a pickle: we have the coal, but no longer want to burn it.  China wants the coal, but shouldn't burn it because of the resulting air pollution.  Coal mining companies in the U.S. are ready and waiting to ship their coal to China.  Citizens of the U.S. living on its west coast are adamant they want nothing to do with exporting coal.  That includes Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber.  Kitzhaber's April 25 letter to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar expresses his profound skepticism about shipping coal by way of Oregon's ports.  He has requested that a programatic Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) first be conducted for all five of the export projects currently being considered, as well as a comprehensive policy review.  Here is part of a press release announcing his letter: "I have concerns about proceeding in this direction [exporting coal to China via Oregon ports] in the absence of a full national discussion about the ramif...