How to kick that Fossil Fuel habit in just 82 years!
A new report from the European Renewable Energy Council (EREC) and Greenpeace International concludes that renewable energy could provide all global energy needs by 2090. “Energy [R]evolution: A Sustainable World Energy Outlook” provides a blueprint how. (Download the 210-page report here.)
The blueprint calls for a structural shift to decentralized power systems, among other things. No big shock there, but it’s genuinely encouraging to see the appearance of such practical, long-term, stepwise prescriptions for governments.
“Countries such as China and India are well placed to take the enormous investment opportunity presented by the energy revolution,” said G. Ananthapadmanabhan, an international programme director at Greenpeace International. “It would be retrogressive for them to focus on fossil fuels to power their rapid economic growth.”
Hallelujah, brother! Even if it’s no surprise to hear Greenpeace take this kind of position, I couldn’t have put it better myself.
While the forecast model used in the paper is detailed and reasonable, I would take slightly different and more realistic assumptions.
It’s understood that Greenpeace and EREC are trying to hold up a virtuous target, rather than make a prediction about what actually will happen. Nevertheless, even my most optimistic predictions would assume a much higher urgency on the part of world governments and business leaders in acting upon competitive needs — i.e. securing adequate, affordable and sustainable energy supplies — compared with motives like reversing global warming and eradicating nuclear power.
Specifically, I expect coal to hang around a lot longer, due to its sheer abundance and where it happens to be located in the world — in energy-hungry places like China. So-called “clean coal” technologies now appearing will prolong its role by making emissions sequestration feasible, most likely. And while the environmental movement has for decades detested nuclear as a sort of symbolic “bete noire”, I see it as an unavoidable option for energy-hungry, resource poor nations who have capital to spend, especially given its zero-carbon-footprint credentials. It’s not sustainable or green, strictly speaking, but post peak oil, my sense is that nuclear will be clean enough for many. Sorry, Greenpeace.
Comment by H. Asher Bolande — November 3, 2008 @ 9:33 pm