Dr. James Hansen on global climate change mitigation
I subscribe to Dr. James Hansen's e-mail list (Past Communications and a link to subscribe can be found here.) His most recent missive (which can be downloaded here) is an 18-page account of a recent trip he took to Europe and Asia, as well as some details on climate modeling and other thoughts of his which I find fascinating.
It's useful to keep the integral approach in mind when looking at climate change, because it helps to understand the various ways that the debate is being thought about by the various constituencies (civil society, governments, corporations). Keeping an integral approach in mind also reminds us that any proposed solution must also have an integral context (vis-a-vis a "flatland" approach which only addresses the problem in one quadrant), or else the solution will likely cause more problems than it tries to solve.
Dr. Hansen's cogent arguments come from mainly a scientific approach, based on hard data. From this data, he concludes the following:
- We must do everything we can to keep CO2 emissions as low as possible, in order to mitigate any climate change due to anthropogenic (man-made) CO2 effects. He has thought a lot about how this can happen, from a scientific point of view.
- With global oil reserves close to or at their "peak" (in terms of energy efficient extraction), the next most abundant resource for producing energy is coal.
- Since burning coal is a heavy emitter of CO2, if the world "falls back' to coal as its main source of energy for fuel, or spends a lot of money to develop "unconventional fossil fuels" such as tar sands, then his opinion (backed by scientific data) is that CO2 emissions will rise beyond the "tipping point", leading to irreversible climate change which, no matter which scenario you believe (ice age or "ice-free"), will change the way of life on the planet as we know it.
- Therefore his conclusion is that every country must put a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants.
It helps to think about this from a systems thinking perspective. This means thinking in loops and cycles instead of linearly. Systems thinking also emphasizes the importance of delays in the system... that is, a significant time can take place between the "cause" and the "effect".
Apply this to global climate change, and the following emerges as important to understand:
- It takes years to build a coal-fired power plant, especially with any kind of new technology carbon sequestration (which none of them are implementing yet).
- Once a coal-fired plant is built, it has an average life of 40-50 years. This means we will want to use it to burn coal to produce electricity for a long time (at least until something better comes along).
- CO2, emitted by burning fossil fuels, lasts a relatively long time in the atmosphere, once it's been emitted. According to Dr. Hansen, half of a fossil fuel CO2 discharge disappears with 20-30 years, mostly into the ocean. But 20% of it may still be in the atmosphere after 1,000 years!
- Therefore, his argument is that slowing CO2 emissions is never going to solve the main problem of the CO2 tipping point for global climate change; we must find a way to leave the fossil fuel in the ground, and not burn it at all.
Dr. Hansen then goes into a commentary about a political solution, which is a carbon cap-and-trade program. Such a program, Dr. Hansen asserts, will still allow coal emissions to continue, and new coal-fired power plants to be built. An emissions cap merely slows the rate of oil use (which can still increase, though more slowly). It would have almost no impact on eventual climate change, because of the long CO2 lifetime in the atmosphere. He believes the only way to keep climate change within tolerable limits is to cut off coal emissions, and put a price on carbon emissions (a carbon tax) that discourages unconventional fossil fuel use (i.e. tar sands, etc.).
He is not arguing against a carbon cap; he merely says that it is an insufficient solution to the problem. This is because it promotes a self-deception to the public that the climate problem is actually being solved, when it really isn't doing anything. Unless coal emissions are phased out totally, a carbon cap will have almost no impact.
I agree with Dr. Hansen's assessment of stopping any future coal-fired power plants and focusing on alternative cleaner ways of generating energy. If you're digging yourself into a hole of runaway CO2 emissions, the first thing to do is to stop digging (stop burning coal without sequestering the CO2).
I will continue with Dr. Hansen's analysis in my next blog post, but wanted to touch on an integral perspective. The world has acknowledged that it has identified a science-based global problem of too much CO2 being emitted into the atmosphere (driven mainly by the U.S., with China right up there, as the main producer of goods for the U.S.). This problem must be addressed on the national level, in terms of energy policies (as well as on the individual level, through being responsible for reducing our own personal carbon footprints). As citizens of democracies, we trust our government to implement long-term solutions to long-term problems such as this, and be open and honest with us about what kinds of changes and sacrifices we may need to make. If our government, instead, allows itself to be politically influenced by short-term profits of oil and coal companies, and therefore buys into short-term solutions which not only benefit these companies to the detriment of its citizens, but also do nothing to solve the long-term problem, then that governmental structure is creating long-term unhealthy conditions for its citizens, and must be called to answer for itself. This means that the solution must be a political one, involving Congress, who passes the laws, as well as the Executive branch. This is the place we are at, and it is no time to be passively sitting around watching our world get warmer, and our climate get crazier.
The paradox is that both Michael Crichton and Dr. James Hansen both say that global climate change has gotten too politicized... but they have very different perspectives on how that shows up. Dr. Hansen says that it doesn't allow the objective science to dictate the conversation, and Dr. Crichton (MD) says it doesn't allow for dissenting opinions. It goes to show how objective data analysis is inherently subjective, and how complex the system is that we're trying to understand.
About ben
Middle child, born in Los Angeles in 1958.
Keen interest in electronics as a child. Went on to graduate in Engineering Science summa cum laude with concentrations in Solar Engineering, Solid State Physics and Computer Science.
Worked as a solar engineer and computer programmer for a couple years after university.
Began Macintosh computer consulting and database programming in 1986, and continue with that profession today.
Lived in a spiritual community (Emissaries of Divine Light) for three years before moving to Boulder, CO in 1993.
Did graduate work at Naropa University in Environmental Leadership, Authentic Leadership and Coaching.
Began studying the theory and application of Spiral Dynamics Integral in 2000, am now certified trainer, practitioner, and consultant worldwide.
Received permanent residency in New Zealand September 2006, and now make Boulder CO and New Zealand my homes, spending approximately half the year in each place.
Began working for Aliveworld in August 2006.
ben’s Tags
Recent Posts
Blog Lists