An interesting, but disingenuous article on What It Would Really Take to Reverse Climate Change.
I’m no longer astounded by the lack of insight these researchers have. This sort of misguided assumptions and false hopium is being reported everywhere, but they’re dead wrong.
For those who don’t want to wade through the propaganda in the link above, the short to-the-point synopsis:
“So our best-case scenario, which was based on our most optimistic forecasts for renewable energy, would still result in severe climate change, with all its dire consequences: shifting climatic zones, freshwater shortages, eroding coasts, and ocean acidification, among others. Our reckoning showed that reversing the trend would require both radical technological advances in cheap zero-carbon energy, as well as a method of extracting CO2 from the atmosphere and sequestering the carbon.
Those calculations cast our work at Google’s RE<C program in a sobering new light. Suppose for a moment that it had achieved the most extraordinary success possible, and that we had found cheap renewable energy technologies that could gradually replace all the world’s coal plants—a situation roughly equivalent to the energy innovation study’s best-case scenario. Even if that dream had come to pass, it still wouldn’t have solved climate change. This realization was frankly shocking: Not only had RE<C failed to reach its goal of creating energy cheaper than coal, but that goal had not been ambitious enough to reverse climate change.
That realization prompted us to reconsider the economics of energy. What’s needed, we concluded, are reliable zero-carbon energy sources so cheap that the operators of power plants and industrial facilities alike have an economic rationale for switching over soon—say, within the next 40 years.”
Which is utter bullshit (and a total pipe dream – the only zero-carbon energy source is the natural sunlight WITHOUT any technology attempting to harness this., i.e. “just sun light” or photosynthesis).
This is also NOT “what’s needed” because it just another stupid attempt to preserve what we’ve already done (over consume energy). Nor do we do even HAVE 40 years to fix this. By then, massive levels of starvation will have wiped out most of the human population.
The “consume-energy-model” (by any means except direct natural sunlight) is fatally flawed. We need ZERO energy consumption (which also means massive levels of die-off by the way), but this is the ONLY “model” that preserves a habitable future for humanity and the rest of the biosphere.
Virtually ALL other models will continue to drive climate change faster and faster as they exploit more and more resources, driving up greenhouse gas concentrations in the effort (all this activity will still be done through carbon-based emissions).
We are in fact, chasing the tail of the Dragon we have unleashed – while STILL feeding its voracious appetite for energy (and resources) – and this approach will never “undue” what we’ve done.
And all other models will STILL fail to “solve climate change” as noted above.
It is astounding that these facts can be admitted to by these researchers, yet they CONTINUE to advocate “let’s use a better form of energy” mantra – which is provably FALSE and will achieve nothing towards future habitability or our survival as a species (it will make some corporations very rich however, which is the BAU “model”).
Jevon’s Paradox applies to ALL attempts to continue as before (consume energy, even in “cheap” or “alternative” or “sustainable” ways) and what this means for maintaining existing human populations and the corresponding depletion of resources (and the pollution caused, including greenhouse gas contributions).
We are fucked, there is NO escape from what this means. Read the link carefully – they admit that nothing will fix climate change. Die-off WILL happen, on a massive scale as our ability to feed ourselves collapses along with the rest of the biosphere.
THAT is what humanity should be preparing for – the massive depopulation of humans on a global scale. This is so painfully obvious now that it hurts, identified as the likely outcome in countless research efforts. Yet despite all the accumulated knowledge and research going on, it is being deliberately ignored.
I’ve always said that “we’re on our own” here and this still remains as true as ever. There will be no “rescue” from any organization, group, government or magical Sky God. The single, greatest problem facing the species will be STARVATION (which comes first), then and alongside, endless resource wars, conflicts, immigration and competition for what remains. As the biosphere dies (and it will), so will humanity.
Watch and weep, what is depicted here will come to pass because we CATEGORICALLY REFUSE TO ADMIT TO WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE: