This group brings together the best thinkers on energy and climate. Join us for smart, insightful posts and conversations about where the energy industry is and where it is going.

Video

Here’s a New Year’s Resolution for the Climate Community – Stop Deluding Yourself

image credit: Image by macrovector on Freepik
Tony Paradiso's picture
Principal, E3

I provide consulting services primarily assisting renewable energy-related companies in areas such as strategic planning, marketing, and operations. I have helped bring to market numerous leading...

  • Member since 2023
  • 366 items added with 91,697 views
  • Jan 2, 2024
  • 272 views

Access Video

The World Resource Institute is like a dog with a bone. In this case the bone is the notion that global warming can still be limited to 1.5 degrees C. We can only hope that going beyond that limit doesn’t permanently damage the environment, because beyond it we will go.

The State of Climate Action 2023 report offers 42 progress benchmarks. Sadly, only one benchmark is on track: the percentage share of EVs in light-duty vehicle sales.

Six others are going in the right direction but off track.  These include zero-carbon electric generation, EV fleet metrics, ruminant meat productivity, reforestation, and the percentage share of global GHG emissions under mandatory corporate climate risk disclosure.

Twenty-four metrics are going in the right direction but are well off track. Key ones include GHG agriculture emissions, natural gas and coal in electric generation, and total global climate finance.

Six benchmarks need to make a complete U-turn including carbon intensity of steel production and the share of kilometers traveled by passenger cars.

Insufficient data exists for five metrics. Don’t ask me why you create a metric that can’t be measured.

1.5 degrees C was a worthy and perhaps a necessary goal. However, at this point it’s unachievable. The rationale response: reassess and realign your goals. I’d start by using the 42 metrics to conduct a “post-mortem.”

I know climate activists will say – we must limit warming to 1.5 degrees C or the world as we know it will end. It may wreak havoc, but it’s better to accept and plan for it, than to close your eyes and wish it weren’t so.

Here’s the reality: financing levels will invariably fall short of desired targets. Fossil fuels will not be quickly phased out. And because of insufficient grid infrastructure investments, even clean power generation isn’t likely to reach its longer-term targets.

That segues into the two major roadblocks to achieving any climate change goal: infrastructure and the need to significantly change human behavior. Infrastructure upgrades require decades even when the will and sufficient funds exist. Major shifts in human behavior take generations, and there is little society can do to accelerate it.

The climate community needs to admit that these roadblocks exist and integrate them within the strategy. Generally, that means finding solutions that require neither.

Here’s an example. Weaning society off of fossil fuels will happen gradually and take decades. However, getting society to make slight behavioral modifications to reduce their energy consumption can realistically be accomplished in a much shorter period of time.

Focus on those types of solutions and we’ll be more likely to achieve future targets.

#climatechange #globalwarming #stateofclimate

Discussions
Matt Chester's picture
Matt Chester on Jan 2, 2024

I love it, Tony-- I'd love to invite you to share more of your resolutions on the New Year Q&A we started: 

 

Rick Engebretson's picture
Rick Engebretson on Jan 3, 2024

I could not disagree more with your "roadblock" of infrastructure need.

Please take a look at Charley Rattan's article

 

The linked "World Economic Forum" pdf says similar to you, but adds that now biochar, bioenergy, and forest management are top priority.

I've actually lost count of the decades listening to self righteous lectures from opportunistic politicos. Now some guy shows up saying "thermodynamics" proves climate change, another shows up saying thermodynamics disproves it. All the while internet resources offer rapidly growing Infrared science; including from the US NIST and the US Navy (electro-optics).

The environmental politicos blew it, big time. They have had the time, money, and podium; just no science. I don't know how trust can be restored.

Tony Paradiso's picture
Tony Paradiso on Jan 3, 2024

Rick - thanks for the document. I will take a look.

 

Rick Engebretson's picture
Rick Engebretson on Jan 4, 2024

Here are some other references that stand out to me:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

https://web.archive.org/web/20011207153734/http://ewhdbks.mugu.navy.mil/EO-IR.htm#transmission

 

The last link to an archived Navy doc from 2001 includes effects of scattering. The WEF doc mentions how trees don't help much if they burn in wildfire, and has a flattering picture of a "forest" of corn. There is a lot to consider outside the box of windmills and solar panels; long overdue. Thanks for your consideration. (ooops, most links didn't stick)

Tony Paradiso's picture
Thank Tony for the Post!
Energy Central contributors share their experience and insights for the benefit of other Members (like you). Please show them your appreciation by leaving a comment, 'liking' this post, or following this Member.
More posts from this member

Get Published - Build a Following

The Energy Central Power Industry Network® is based on one core idea - power industry professionals helping each other and advancing the industry by sharing and learning from each other.

If you have an experience or insight to share or have learned something from a conference or seminar, your peers and colleagues on Energy Central want to hear about it. It's also easy to share a link to an article you've liked or an industry resource that you think would be helpful.

                 Learn more about posting on Energy Central »