svetz
Works in theory! Practice? That's something else
TL;DR: Any good books on climate change that includes the role of water vapor (the most powerful greenhouse gas)?
So, I’m what some would call a climate denier... and hey, back when this started I was right that Florida wouldn't be underwater by 2020.
But perhaps I’m just a climate undecider? After all, there's about 20 years more science now. But just because some cried wolf early, I sure as heck don't want to be the idiot that caused the extinction of all life on earth (see leaked UN report). So I'm trying to research it some to see what, if anything, I can do personally (you know, be the change) - definitely disagree with the NPR conclusion that talking about it will accomplish much ...oh wait, dang it... I am talking about it!
So I cracked open Bill Gate’s book How to Avoid a Climate Disaster to see where I’m wrong in my thinking. But, while I have enormous respect for Bill, I immediately started rejecting it. Here's the first reason why:
I realize his book is mainly focusing on the technophile view of alternative solutions beyond the battery (like alternatives to concrete (poor example as I believe in that one)). But, the good-enough (not perfect) battery (which I hope is less than a decade away), I believe takes us so much farther than 27%.
This is a 2019 snapshot (I’ll give Bill the 27%, he probably has better information that is more up-to-date than the EPA’s outdated information)
Transportation? Wind & solar can power cars, trucks, trains with a great battery...just not air travel unless it's also very light (or the cabin walls/wings are the battery as in structural tech). Let's say of the 29% transportation 5% is airplane fuel use, just making that number up to illustrate a point.
So, if we banned ICE vehicles in favor of EVs and switched everything with that perfect battery break-through, we’d still have another ~50% to cut back on?
(I know “banning” ICE is harsh, but if it’s truly important for our survival then everyone needs to get behind it and everything else or at least get carbon offsets for their ICE pleasures).
BUT... like transportation, all of those pie slices are using fossil fuels that can be replaced with wind, solar, and nuclear. According to the EPA, the 23% from “industry” is primarily from burning fossil fuels for energy, only 7% of that slice is from things like concrete. So, say 15%. In “commercial & Residential”, that’s again primarily from fossil fuels to heat homes, the rest is waste handling. Let’s say it can be cut to 5%. The last is “agricultural”, which looks like it’s primarily cow burps/farts (Methane), fertilizer (N2O), manure (CH4 and N2O), so let’s keep that at 10% (pretty sure at least half of it is fuel for the tractors, generators and such even if it's not in the EPA description).
So, a perfect battery gets us all but 5% transportation + 8% for industry + 5% for residential + 10% for Agricultural. That’s pretty good! Eliminating ~28% should be a lot easier than 73%; and all with a single technology. I will grant that Bill has a point that you shouldn't put all your eggs in one basket and having a number of backup technologies being worked in parallel does seem a sound strategy especially if survival is on the line.
Just to counterbalance the NPR gloom and doom report at the beginning of the OP, take a look at the latest average temperatures, Bill's book said with all the massive COVID layoffs and shutdowns there was only a 5% reduction in the 51 Billion tons of greenhouse gasses emitted in 2020... yet the WHO report shows the average temperature dipping below 2015 levels, the equivalent of 250 billion tons of greenhouse gasses?
Note: I try to keep a thread recap near the end with links to things investigated to make the thread easy to use.
So, I’m what some would call a climate denier... and hey, back when this started I was right that Florida wouldn't be underwater by 2020.
But perhaps I’m just a climate undecider? After all, there's about 20 years more science now. But just because some cried wolf early, I sure as heck don't want to be the idiot that caused the extinction of all life on earth (see leaked UN report). So I'm trying to research it some to see what, if anything, I can do personally (you know, be the change) - definitely disagree with the NPR conclusion that talking about it will accomplish much ...oh wait, dang it... I am talking about it!
So I cracked open Bill Gate’s book How to Avoid a Climate Disaster to see where I’m wrong in my thinking. But, while I have enormous respect for Bill, I immediately started rejecting it. Here's the first reason why:
Making electricity only accounts for 27% of all greenhouse gas emissions. Even with a battery breakthrough and switching all power to wind & solar we would still need to get rid of the other 73%.
I realize his book is mainly focusing on the technophile view of alternative solutions beyond the battery (like alternatives to concrete (poor example as I believe in that one)). But, the good-enough (not perfect) battery (which I hope is less than a decade away), I believe takes us so much farther than 27%.
This is a 2019 snapshot (I’ll give Bill the 27%, he probably has better information that is more up-to-date than the EPA’s outdated information)
Transportation? Wind & solar can power cars, trucks, trains with a great battery...just not air travel unless it's also very light (or the cabin walls/wings are the battery as in structural tech). Let's say of the 29% transportation 5% is airplane fuel use, just making that number up to illustrate a point.
So, if we banned ICE vehicles in favor of EVs and switched everything with that perfect battery break-through, we’d still have another ~50% to cut back on?
(I know “banning” ICE is harsh, but if it’s truly important for our survival then everyone needs to get behind it and everything else or at least get carbon offsets for their ICE pleasures).
BUT... like transportation, all of those pie slices are using fossil fuels that can be replaced with wind, solar, and nuclear. According to the EPA, the 23% from “industry” is primarily from burning fossil fuels for energy, only 7% of that slice is from things like concrete. So, say 15%. In “commercial & Residential”, that’s again primarily from fossil fuels to heat homes, the rest is waste handling. Let’s say it can be cut to 5%. The last is “agricultural”, which looks like it’s primarily cow burps/farts (Methane), fertilizer (N2O), manure (CH4 and N2O), so let’s keep that at 10% (pretty sure at least half of it is fuel for the tractors, generators and such even if it's not in the EPA description).
So, a perfect battery gets us all but 5% transportation + 8% for industry + 5% for residential + 10% for Agricultural. That’s pretty good! Eliminating ~28% should be a lot easier than 73%; and all with a single technology. I will grant that Bill has a point that you shouldn't put all your eggs in one basket and having a number of backup technologies being worked in parallel does seem a sound strategy especially if survival is on the line.
Just to counterbalance the NPR gloom and doom report at the beginning of the OP, take a look at the latest average temperatures, Bill's book said with all the massive COVID layoffs and shutdowns there was only a 5% reduction in the 51 Billion tons of greenhouse gasses emitted in 2020... yet the WHO report shows the average temperature dipping below 2015 levels, the equivalent of 250 billion tons of greenhouse gasses?
Note: I try to keep a thread recap near the end with links to things investigated to make the thread easy to use.
Last edited: