There are no breaking news at the moment

Ever since out first ancestor lit a fire, humans have been pumping CO2 into the atmosphere.  Add to that the first herder because ruminants are another large emitter of greenhouse gas (GHG).

Some people want to declare a national emergency and ban fossil fuels within ten years.  How?   I am for it and all ready to go.  But please tell me how.  Think of the quarter billion vehicles in the U.S. and the infrastructure supporting them; the myriad gas stations and repair shops and the people employed in them; the thousands of miles of domestic gas pipelines to homes using gas stoves and gas heating.  Think of the restructuring, the replacement, the energy required, the megatons of metal and other materials used and their production which all require one thing — energy.  And what about air travel and the shipping industry?

What of the millions of jobs lost?  Think of the jobholders and their families.  Most of these workers cannot switch skills overnight.  These are not just the million and a half employed in the industry directly, but include gas company employees, your gas furnace repair and maintenance man, the people building furnaces, gas stoves, the auto repair infrastructure — electric motors of course are darned reliable and need attention only to brakes, tire rotation and battery coolant checks for the most part — and so on.

When you offer this laundry list, the response is likely to be, “Well I didn’t mean that.”  In effect, it defines the problem with the Green New Deal:  It is remarkably short on the ‘whats’ and especially the ‘hows’.  Funny though I first searched for the Green New Deal at Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (whose courage I admire greatly) official web page and surprisingly found … well nothing.  Why not something practical like mandating solar collectors on new homes constructed?

So you want to suck the CO2 out of the air; you can.  It takes 300MW to 500MW of electrical energy per million tons annually.  To put it in perspective, we need to remove at least 20 billion tons (20,000 times more) each year to remove the minimum of a trillion tons expected to be emitted by the end of the century.  The 10 million megawatt electrical base  required for this is ten times the current total US electrical power grid of 1.2 million megawatts.

You want to bring carbon emissions down to zero.  I am all for it even though our ancestor — the one who lit the coal fire — could not.  Just tell me how.  If you want to talk about carbon neutrality … now there’s an idea.  But “switching immediately away from fossil fuels” as I read from one advocate recently … I wish it was possible.

The rest of the goals are equally laudable — in fact I have advocated many including the necessity for well-paying jobs, infrastructure spending, eating less meat, and even net-zero emissions.  The big question is ‘how’ against entrenched interests.

In the meantime, would someone please electrify my local suburban train. The 1950s diesel-electric locomotives spew black smoke and the carriages were designed in the same era.  Worse still, the service is chronically late.  Electrification of rail lines and improving public transport in the U.S. should be job one.  But every activity — and change particularly — uses energy.

Dr Arshad M Khan (http://ofthisandthat.org/index.html) is a former Professor based in the U.S. whose comments over several decades have appeared in a wide-ranging array of print and internet media.  His work has been quoted in the U.S. Congress and published in the Congressional Record.

Source:  This piece first appeared on counterpunch.org

 

2 Comments

  1. Daniel LaLiberte says:

    Those who benefit from burning fossil fuels and other causes of carbon emissions must pay for the sequestration of an equivalent amount of carbon from the atmosphere. Scale it up over 10 years and then we will be carbon neutral in 10 years.

    This is a lot of work, so that means a lot of jobs. It doesn’t necessarily mean no fossil fuel jobs but it does mean new carbon sequestration jobs. If cheaper alternatives are available, such as renewable energy, then people can shift to those.

    We actually need to much *more* than this, to undo centuries of damage. If we don’t pay for it now, someone will have to pay even more for it in the future, so why not do this as soon as possible?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.