decarbonisation may be ways off

[johnsmith]

www.latimes.com/business/story/2022-09-05/the-energy-historian-who-says-rapid-decarbonization-is-a-fantasy

This was a super interesting read.

TLDR - we need to reduce demand by 25% or 50% (my guess) to stop the destruction of the planet.

[habsui]

Good read, thanks!

[bizman]

I see potential technological breakthroughs and a huge nuclear buildout as the only potential ways to make a real difference here. I have a nephew who is doing his Post Doc at a university out west doing research on potential geo engineering solutions with sea salt crystals. Many of these things may not work out, but I think breakthroughs there or with carbon removal technologies will be needed to make substantial progress at an acceptable societal cost.

Average people will simply not submit to energy poverty or enforced austerity to solve this problem.

And even if the US and Europe do submit, China, India, Africa and the rest of the developing world will not.

There's a saying that if there is no solution then you don't have a problem, you have a condition that must be dealt with. Kind of like diabetes. No real cure, but mitigation opportunities exist. I understand my views aren't popular, but saying something like "let them eat cake" to the poor around the world who want the life that western citizens have seems unrealistic as well as inhumane.

Edited to add: Sorry I couldn't access the article as it was behind a paywall.

[Norbert]

Sept 7, 2022 23:22:16 GMT bizman said:

I see potential technological breakthroughs and a huge nuclear buildout as the only potential ways to make a real difference here. I have a nephew who is doing his Post Doc at a university out west doing research on potential geo engineering solutions with sea salt crystals. Many of these things may not work out, but I think breakthroughs there or with carbon removal technologies will be needed to make substantial progress at an acceptable societal cost.

Average people will simply not submit to energy poverty or enforced austerity to solve this problem.

And even if the US and Europe do submit, China, India, Africa and the rest of the developing world will not.

There's a saying that if there is no solution then you don't have a problem, you have a condition that must be dealt with. Kind of like diabetes. No real cure, but mitigation opportunities exist. I understand my views aren't popular, but saying something like "let them eat cake" to the poor around the world who want the life that western citizens have seems unrealistic as well as inhumane.

Edited to add: Sorry I couldn't access the article as it was behind a paywall.

Agreed.  And I doubt that even US or European voters would be willing to accept much higher fuel prices in order to seriously cut CO2 emissions (though that might change after a series of drought years).  Most of Asia and Africa are have demonstrated little or no inclination to compromise economic prosperity to reduce CO2 output.

I don't accept that the planet is being "destroyed"; in fact, it's greener than ever.  Warmer temperatures offer benefits as well as risks.   But, it's likely that events like glacier melt will eventually impact water availability and result in serious problems for certain regions.  Of course, this is not just about "global warming", but also about rapid population growth and urbanization.

The development of an electric grid to make widespread use of EVs possible is a good idea, but technical breakthroughs will be required to phase out oil & gas as sources of electrical energy.  Wind & solar are fine, but clearly limited in terms of powering national industry, transport, and heating.  Nuclear is an excellent option, though it remains pricey.  Nuclear miniaturization looks interesting. 

Meanwhile, adaption to a changing climate is essential.

N.

[FD1000]

The best 2 solutions are
1) nuclear power
2) hybrids vehicle from Toyota. Toyota leads here, it costs about $2000 more, it gets the best MPG.

[johntaylor]

Global population in the year 1900 was about 1.6 b. Now, despite two world wars and pandemic, roughly 6 b more.

[Chahta]

Sept 7, 2022 23:22:16 GMT bizman said:

I see potential technological breakthroughs and a huge nuclear buildout as the only potential ways to make a real difference here. I have a nephew who is doing his Post Doc at a university out west doing research on potential geo engineering solutions with sea salt crystals. Many of these things may not work out, but I think breakthroughs there or with carbon removal technologies will be needed to make substantial progress at an acceptable societal cost.

Average people will simply not submit to energy poverty or enforced austerity to solve this problem.

And even if the US and Europe do submit, China, India, Africa and the rest of the developing world will not.

There's a saying that if there is no solution then you don't have a problem, you have a condition that must be dealt with. Kind of like diabetes. No real cure, but mitigation opportunities exist. I understand my views aren't popular, but saying something like "let them eat cake" to the poor around the world who want the life that western citizens have seems unrealistic as well as inhumane.

Edited to add: Sorry I couldn't access the article as it was behind a paywall.

I agree.