The Covid-19 pandemic won’t last forever, and at some point we will have to return to figuring out how to respond to the climate crisis. (What a depressing opening line. No, I have no desire to live in a world of permanent crisis.) Is the answer a Green New Deal? Challenge has just published my analysis of this; you can find the link here.
Abstract: The Green New Deal, an attractive agenda of increased investment in energy efficiency and renewable energy sources, is not remotely sufficient to stabilize global warming at a non-catastrophic level. Such a policy needs to be accompanied by direct measures to curtail the use of fossil fuels, although this may complicate the intended messaging.
Indisputable proof of global warming — in three sentences :-O
Earth’s atmospheric temperature is already high enough to melt the permafrost (part of year freezing, part melting, more melting than freezing). The permafrost (I’m not exactly sure what that is) reportedly contains twice as much carbon as there is in the atmosphere now (may not be all in gas form but believe will all end up in gas form eventually: one and a trillion tons to add to 750 billion tons now). The more it melts, the more carbon dioxide is released, the hotter it gets, the more it melts, etc.: more than enough to eventually turn the earth into a pole to pole swamp — the normal condition of the earth for the majority of the last 500 million years (see video).
Indisputable — without any additional human help.
https://www.pbs.org/video/polar-extremes-mfaum5/
****************************
At first (last year) I thought the only way out was for all electric output to go nuclear — that was the physics of course; not the politics, good luck. My reasoning was that in 100 years the human population would need 10X more electricity — and I couldn’t see doing all that with windmills and photovoltaic).
I’m figuring thermonuclear to come along in about 50 years — for however that feeds into all of this. The technological way is well charted but it will take tremendous R&D working out. (see The Future of Fusion Energy by Ian Kershaw — must be good; I could only read about half of it).
Then, I came upon carbon capture technology. [cut-and-paste]
Carbon capture technology: practicably end global warming – even reverse it — for 5% of GDP with a reasonably lo-tech process – once the price to gets down to $100 a ton?
According to a Businessweek article, worldwide we add 34 billion tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere every year. Said article says Squamish Engineering, in B.C., Canada expects to launch a plant that will remove a million tons a year, located somewhere in the Permian Basin in Texas. Squamish says it can do this for $200 a ton.
My back-of-the-envelope calculates that, when the price reaches $100 a ton, then, worldwide we can keep cool for $3.4 trillion a year – less than 5% of world GDP. US kick-in about one trillion – out of $20 trillion GDP. That figure would grow as US economy grows – but: for every trillion of growth only additional $50 billion would go for removal, leaving us $950 billion ahead: set for the life of the planet.
(closest link I could find)
https://www.magzter.com/article/Business/Bloomberg-Businessweek/A-Big-Step-for-the-Sky-Vacuums
[snip]
Snag: where to put all the carbon we capture — there is reportedly room for two trillion tons of captured carbon in some kind of rock formations. (can’t get back to link)
If we are putting 34 billion tons or carbon in the air now — could we be doing 340 billion tons a year 100 years from now — if we don’t replace carbon with thermonuclear? 100 years from now hopefully earth will be rich enough to go complexly thermo. And here comes 1.5 trillion tons from the permafrost.
Better get busy. Better get busy finding room to hide lots more carbon — if that is possible — or whatever. Did somebody say:
The Green New Deal … is not remotely sufficient to stabilize global warming at a non-catastrophic level?
Who is the ‘We’ in ‘We need to..’?
Is it this ‘We’:
—–
It’s no secret that the coronavirus pandemic has been particularly devastating for the airline industry, with the number of passengers paying to fly falling by as much as 95 percent compared to this time last year.
Air carriers’ financial pain proved enough of a justification for Congress to include $60 billion in financial assistance to the industry as part of the $2.3 trillion economic relief package it passed last week.
This aid isn’t without strings, however. Airlines are being asked to maintain a minimum level of service to qualify for emergency government funding. The result has been companies running nearly-empty, money-losing flights just so they can avail themselves of taxpayer support.
————-
The ‘We’ you are referring to will always find a crisis that lets it violate the enforcement. Pick another ‘We’, like a tort judge is a much better ‘We’. The tort judge removes the ‘This time is different’ excuses that your ‘We’ uses to violate the fossil fuel rules.
It is in your abstract, note you had to give a node to GND before you introduced the stringent rules. You are deliberately inserting an escape clause in your ‘We’. Tort judges have no incentive to cheat, they will dismiss your node to GND as a fake right away.
Well, that is really selling it, really that is :<)
Peter:
Thanks for raising the issue. We are running out of time. Potable water sources are dwindling; arable soil is being washed away; dead zones are rising logarithmically–rarely if ever discussed, but deadly none the same–; ecological destruction; acidification of the oceans; species loss; over population; flooding, fires….the list goes on and on.
Consumption and profits seem to be the only things of importance.
Neither party addresses this problem.
“My research suggests the current growth rate of carbon dioxide emissions is faster than those which triggered two previous mass extinctions, including the event that wiped out the dinosaurs.
“The world’s gaze may be focused on COVID-19 right now. But the risks to nature from human-made global warming – and the imperative to act – remain clear.”
https://theconversation.com/while-we-fixate-on-coronavirus-earth-is-hurtling-towards-a-catastrophe-worse-than-the-dinosaur-extinction-130869