{"id":99992,"date":"2021-07-07T14:12:52","date_gmt":"2021-07-07T18:12:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/huntsville.dopperonline.ca\/?p=99992"},"modified":"2021-07-07T14:12:53","modified_gmt":"2021-07-07T18:12:53","slug":"mitigating-climate-change-some-key-questions-and-answers-commentary","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/doppleronline.ca\/huntsville\/mitigating-climate-change-some-key-questions-and-answers-commentary\/","title":{"rendered":"Mitigating climate change: some key questions and answers | Commentary"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Hugh Holland<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The good news is that finally, after three decades of warnings by the world\u2019s top climate experts, most citizens and leaders understand that climate change is today\u2019s biggest global threat. Average global temperature is rising 10,000 times faster than can be attributed to the earth\u2019s natural cycles. Left unabated, climate change would impact every aspect of life on the planet. But many are still trying to understand how to best mitigate the problem. Hopefully this article provides clarity on some questions. <\/p>\n\n\n

<\/broadstreet-zone><\/strong><\/div>\n\n\n\n

What is the root cause of today\u2019s climate change?<\/strong> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before the industrial revolution of the 1800s, there were one billion people using mostly renewable energy with few harmful emissions. The industrial revolution provided major improvements in quality of life and life expectancy. As shown below, that resulted in exponential growth in population, energy consumption, and emissions. Simply put, there are too many people using too much of the wrong stuff. Resulting emissions are accumulating in the earth\u2019s atmosphere and trapping heat like a greenhouse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How big is the problem?<\/strong> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The chart below shows the enormous size of the problem. By 1960, global population had tripled from 1800, and energy consumption had risen to 3,187 mtoe (million tonnes of oil equivalent) with 80 per cent coming from fossil fuels. Sixty years later, we are consuming 14,301 mtoe, 80 per cent is still coming from fossil fuels, and emissions have reached 33,143 billion tonnes per year. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Will replacement of fossil fuels alone solve the problem?<\/strong> <\/p>\n\n\n\n

An energy revolution is essential. Fossil fuels have been the mainstay of the world\u2019s energy supply for 100 years. But they are finite resources. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

We now understand that we must aggressively transition to clean energy to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. And we must scale up on new energy before we run out of the finite old energy. Cutting off fossil fuels before they can be replaced would create an energy shortage with a disproportionate impact on the most vulnerable people in every country. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

As shown on the chart, we must at the same time deploy more energy-efficient <\/strong>technologies. Battery-electric vehicles reduce energy consumption by cars and light trucks by 70 per cent. Heat pumps, and co-generation of electricity and heat will reduce energy consumption for heating by 30 per cent. It is unlikely we can completely replace oil and gas by 2050, so as shown on the chart, we must offset emissions from the remaining 10 per cent of oil and gas consumption by capturing their emissions and turning them into useful products such as carbon-fiber materials and carbon-neutral liquid aircraft fuels. Canada will be needed as one of only five countries that can supply that last 10 per cent of oil and gas.
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What are the pros and cons of counting on renewable energy? <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hydro and geothermal potential is limited by geography. Every year there are advancements in wind and solar power, but the basic limitations remain. Solar power output is equivalent to 10 hours per day in June in Madrid, but only one hour per day in December in Toronto or Berlin. In Canada, wind power output is three times higher in January than in June. Wind and solar energy have become low-cost where they can be used when they are producing at capacity (e.g. to supply mid-day peak demand, or for making clean hydrogen fuel), but they become high-cost when their output must be stored or backed-up for up to 85 per cent of the time. Some experts are predicting that the massive recycling costs for solar panels and wind turbine blades will double or triple the levelized lifetime cost of wind and solar power.

The use of <\/strong>shrinking agricultural land near growing high-population areas is a major limitation. While some people are opposed to the proposed short 2,000-acre Ontario Highway 413 bypass, they have not done the math to understand the amounts of land required for various sources of clean energy. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n