Here’s the link to part 1.
Focusing on key links in the system is one type of approach to mitigating and preventing climate change.
In research, removal technologies deserve special attention as they will be central to alleviating climate change, and cost and efficiency are prominent concerns with this particular technology. Other promising developments like hydrogen electrolyzers, advanced batteries, and grid storage have to be prioritized, given the dearth of time and various other considerations in reaching net-zero goals.
The public is another key link. Cities, in particular, are densely populated hubs of industry and transport, so urban sustainability must be a focus area. It is also citizens who advocate for, consent to, and are affected by the large infrastructural projects that will be needed, and more effort will be required to convince them of the utility and benefits of these expensive plans.
Similarly, there can be pressure on businesses to optimize logistics and processes to be energy efficient. Reducing energy demand and improving energy efficiency are essential to reaching net zero.
Of course, there is a deeper, more democratic reason to improve energy access: billions are rising out of poverty and into the bustling middle class, striving to live more comfortable lifestyles. Energy availability alone can fulfil these aspirations. One may want to point out that this surge in the demands of the middle class for carbon-intensive industrial products will hamper attempts to reduce energy usage for the same democratic reasons. Actually, as populations grow, energy efficiency will have improved and demand actually declines as GDP expands. By 2050, global energy demand will be about 8% less but powering an economy more than twice as big, with 2 billion additional people.
Government policy is indispensable to bring about the kind of systemic change needed to transition. Governments are crucial in fostering technological innovation, creating markets, and influencing consumer behaviour. Regulations such as those on deforestation are necessary because the world’s forests suck massive amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, yet 5 million hectares of forest are lost annually, 95% of which occurs in the tropics.
Strict yet tactful regulations are the need of the hour, not only because the science calls for it, but also because ambitious standards and regulations can stimulate innovation within businesses. The historical record speaks for itself: the government has promoted important institutions and technology that would not have otherwise survived. It is difficult to think that the energy industry will invest in massive building projects at breakneck speed when there are already trillions lost in the existing system and little incentive for change.
However critical it is to reduce fossil fuel usage, compromising energy security by transitioning without having reliable, affordable alternatives is a recipe for disaster, as seen in Europe. Policy decisions must be made based on the realities of a fossil-fuel economy, not the ideals of a green one. That being said: we still aren’t acting fast enough.
The essence of sustainable development is already known: governments must be prepared to make sacrifices in the short term and invest heavily in research, the clean energy sector, and energy infrastructure. Policy and science must be judicious, as all efforts against climate change are time-bound. But always think about the system, the big picture: none of us exist in a vacuum.
“When we try to pick out anything by itself,” said the great naturalist John Muir, “we find it hitched to everything else in the universe.”