10% reduction in carbon emissions by 2010 ran the headline.
Too little, too late.
We need a 100% reduction and Pretty Damned Quickly.
Possible?
Of course. Nuclear for primary electrical energy produces hydrogen for secondary energy.
Fission to fusion will ensure sufficient energy.
Compact nuclear systems mean compact power units, maaybe even down to railway locomotive size.
There is a technical future. We just have to go for it, PDQ.
Monday, 26 October 2009
Sunday, 6 September 2009
Carbon Free Future
As I write, September 2010, a campaign called 10/10 has started. It is simple enough. Individuals pledge to reduce their carbon footprint by 10% by 2010.
My initial reaction; "looks like a Victorian temperance crusade" is still the same. In fact looking at the Guardian newspaper website I realised that I was not alone in this opinion.
It is not the temperance movement approach from the 19th century we should be looking at as a model. That they eventually failed is all to obvious.
Even so, there is a movement from the 19th century that can be followed. It was big government moving to solve a problem. Sewer systems in parallel with fresh water supply systems were built in all major cities in the UK as well as the rest of the world. This big government action solved a major health problem and certainly saved those countries that invested well from a sickly fate.
1: Removing carbon emissions requires big government action. The actions required are as follows.
And that really is it. Zero carbon primary energy providing the energy to produce the fuel for other zero carbon power systems.
My time lines are plausible. Most of the problems could be ironed out.
Of course it would not produce a %100 carbon free world, but the planet can cope with a certain amount. The problem is too much.
So, my advice is to ignore the Eco temperance movements. Big government will have to act. The sooner the better.
It is the only way.
My initial reaction; "looks like a Victorian temperance crusade" is still the same. In fact looking at the Guardian newspaper website I realised that I was not alone in this opinion.
It is not the temperance movement approach from the 19th century we should be looking at as a model. That they eventually failed is all to obvious.
Even so, there is a movement from the 19th century that can be followed. It was big government moving to solve a problem. Sewer systems in parallel with fresh water supply systems were built in all major cities in the UK as well as the rest of the world. This big government action solved a major health problem and certainly saved those countries that invested well from a sickly fate.
1: Removing carbon emissions requires big government action. The actions required are as follows.
- All primary energy production to become carbon free by 2025.
- All public transport to be carbon free by 2025
- All personal transport systems to be carbon free by 2030
And that really is it. Zero carbon primary energy providing the energy to produce the fuel for other zero carbon power systems.
My time lines are plausible. Most of the problems could be ironed out.
Of course it would not produce a %100 carbon free world, but the planet can cope with a certain amount. The problem is too much.
So, my advice is to ignore the Eco temperance movements. Big government will have to act. The sooner the better.
It is the only way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)