How to fix climate change in both the short term and the long term from the individual to society to nations

1. How to deal with climate change in the short and long term
Climate Change:
• Short-Term Solutions — Long-Term Challenges
1) Introduction
Fossil fuels create a Gordian knot tying up three key global issues: energy security, economic
development and climate change. The fossil fuel age faces a cruelchoice: economic development and
energy independence clash against a stable climate. Today, we cannot have them all. The attendant geo-
political conflicts take severalforms. Fossil fuels are the primary energy source in the world today.
Because they are unevenly distributed on the earth’s crust they have led to wars and conflicts, prompting
understandable calls for energy security and independence. At the same time eco- nomic development
still depends crucially on the use of energy, and in today’s economy, this means fossil fuels.
In the longer term, the only way out is to disentangle the use of energy from carbon emissions, namely to
make available clean and abundant renewable energy sources. But this is not feasible in the short term
because of the sheer scale of the fossil fuel infrastructure: about $40 trillion today, and with current trends
about $400 trillion by the end of the century.1 The short term and the long term present different
problems, however, and therefore require different solutions.
Time is not on our side. The Intergovernmental Panelon Climate Change (IPCC) scientists posit that
atmospheric carbon concentration stabilization is needed, and that it will require a significant reduction in
global greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.2 Avoiding further carbon emissions in no way solves the short-
term problem. Even if we stabilize at the current level of emissions, we still globally release carbon
dioxide at a rate slightly above 32 billion metric tons per year and therefore will increase carbon
concentration.3
The solution for much of this problem is negative carbon — a type of technologythatisable to actually
reduce carbonfrom the atmosphere innetterms.Thisisincontrast to technologiesthatsimplyreduce
emissions,whichatbestleave the amountof carbonin the atmosphere unchanged.Forinstance,“clean
coal,”whichis achievingagreatdeal of attentioninthe U.S. CongressandSenate,meanscoal that
producesfewerornoemissions.The processof extractingthatcoal,however,isanythingbutclean.
Cleancoal has at besta neutral “footprint”intermsof emissionsthatcanleave atmosphericcarbon
unchanged.
Can YOU Fix Climate Change?
https://oke.io/Kqba7LBu
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) The solution for much of this problem is negative carbon —

2. a type of technology that is able to actuallyreduce carbon from
the atmosphere in net terms.
This may help as a stop-gap measure,if one forgets the other forms of environmental destruction that coal
mining leaves in its wake. But even assuming this problem away for the moment, clean coal alone is not
sufficient. Even if it was possible, it would not suffice to arrest catastrophic climate change. New coal
plants that clean the carbon they emit are a step forward but they create burdensome economic costs and,
in any case,they merely stabilize the implacable growth of carbon concentration at current rates. More to
the point, such coal plants defeat the long-term objective of making an orderly transition to non-fossil
resources. It is critical that short-term goals be compatible with long-term objectives. We must avoid the
trap of defeating long-term aims by focusing solely on short-term targets. Capturing carbon dioxide
directly from fossil fuel power plants may delay the time of reckoning but it adversely impacts the long-
term objective of replacing fossil fuels with renewable sources and carbon removal.
The long-term solution we seek is to disassociate energy use from fossil fuels. This cuts the Gordian knot
referred to earlier, which ties energy use, economic development and climate change together. A long-
term transition away from fossil fuels to alternative sources of energy4 that are more broadly distributed
can provide economic development and security without inducing global warming. A transition away
from fossil fuel energy sources seems inevitable in the long term, because fossils are limited in supply.
Alternative sources of energy are a necessary condition for sustainable development in the future and the
rapidly growing world demand for energy will require a variety of alternative sources.5 Supplies are not
the problem. Through solar alone, the United States has the potential to supply more than 100 times the
electricity it uses annually. Moreover, solar is a more democratically distributed input than other natural
resources such as oil and coal.6
However optimistic one may be for the long term, it is important to recognize that this long-term solution
is not appropriate for the short term. A transition to alternative energy sources is expected to take a long
time since most of the energy used in the planet today is obtained from fossil fuels such as oil and coal.7
As already pointed out, the change could take time and require a massive new infrastructure.8 Yet as long
as we continue to use fossil fuels and emit carbon we increase the concentration of greenhouse gases,and
the‫ظ‬ risk of catastrophic climate change.9
Can YOU Fix Climate Change?
https://oke.io/Kqba7LBu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
3) Solar is a more democratically distributed input than other natural
resources such as oil and coal.6
We cannot eliminate fossil fuels from our economy overnight. A quick and drastic reduction in emissions
is not feasible due to the sheer size of the fossil infrastructure that needs to be replaced.10 Indeed, rich
and poor nations could be seriously affected by economic disruptions caused by a drastic decrease in the
use of fossil fuels. Rapidly growing nations such as China and India are heavily dependent on coal; so are
the U.S. and Russia. Hydroelectric power covers only 6% of world energy use, about the same as nuclear
power, and renewable sources account for only 1% of the world’s energy production today. It does not

3. seem realistic to drastically decrease the use of fossil fuels in the short term, which is why there is an
increasing call to capture the carbon emitted by fossil fuel plants and store it safely in the form of
commercial products that create profits and employment.
In the long term, we must take into consideration that an alternative source should be able to provide five
to 10 times the energy used in the world today. This is a standard projection of energy demand by the end
of this century.11 None of the five main types of renewable energy — hydroelectric,geothermal,solar,
windandbiomassresources — nornuclearenergycan offerthispossibility,eitherbecausetheylackthe
capacityor because todo sowouldcreate additional problems.Forexample,biomassforenergy
competeswithfoodproductionandismuchlessefficientpersquare meterthansolar(about3% of the
energypotential providedbysolarforthe same surface area),and hydroelectriclacksthe capacityand
has environmental consequences.Butsolarenergy — inparticularConcentratedSolarPower(CSP) —
couldeasilymeetthe demandwithlimitedenvironmental impact.A combinationof all of these energy
sourcesthat includessolarcouldtherefore offerareasonable long-termsolution.
In the short run,accordingto the IPCCFifth AssessmentReportof 2014 andthe 2015 ParisAgreement,
we neednegative carbon.Thisimpliesawayof reducingthe atmosphericconcentrationof carbon
altogether.
The technologystrategywe needshouldaccommodateboththe short- andlong-termgoals,andthe
transitionfromthe shortintothe longterm.This isa tall orderbecause sucha technologymust
simultaneouslyfacilitate the transitiontoalternative sources,providingformassiveincreasesinsupplies
for the longterm,while inthe shortterm allowingthe continueduse of fossil fuelsandsimultaneously
decreasingthe carboncontentinthe planet’satmosphere.
Can YOU Fix Climate Change?
https://oke.io/Kqba7LBu
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
4) The technology strategy we need should accommodate both the
short- and long-term goals, and the transition from the short into the long
term.
Amongseveral available technologies,one calledthe Global Thermostat — createdbymyself
(Chichilnisky) andPeterEisenberger — hasthe capabilitytoproduce electricitywhile simultaneously
decreasingcarboninthe atmosphere bylow costair-extractionandstorage (cogenerationof electricity
and carbon capture).12In thisprocess,the carbonconcentrationinthe atmosphere decreaseswhile

4. producingelectrical power.Thispatented(32patents) processusesthe residual processheatthat
remainsafterthe productionof electricitytocapture carbon fromthe atmosphere.Electricityis
producedusuallybyturbinesdrivenwithhighheat(about300°C(570°F)) and afterthe highheat isused,
the residual lowtemperature(80°C) heatcan be usedto capture carbon fromair. Thisprocessusesany
source of processheatto cogenerate electricityandcarboncapture (fossil fuels,nuclearorconcentrated
solarpowerplants,aluminumsmelters,refineries,andothers) andcanmake a fossil fuel powerplanta
“netcarbon sink,”namelyasite that actuallyreducesatmosphericcarbon.13Such a combinationis
unusual andcontrastswiththe physical realitiesof the fossil fuel economytoday,where the more
energythatis producedthe more carbondioxide isemitted.Incontrast,the proposedtechnology
reducesmore carbonfrom the atmosphere the more electricitypoweritproduces.Thisprovidesreal
protectionagainsthuman-inducedclimate change sinceitallowsustobecome carbonneutral inthe
short termand enablesanorderlytransitionfromthe shorttermto a renewable energyfuture,
enhancingenergysecurityandeconomicdevelopment.
The KyotoProtocol createdin1997 ensuresthatdevelopingcountriesare compensatedforemissions
reductionsthattake place withintheir borders.Richcountriescanpurchase certifiedcarbonoff-takes
fromdevelopingcountriesthroughKyoto’sCleanDevelopmentMechanism(CDM) andapplythem
towardstheirownemissiontargets.Negativecarbontechnologiescouldprovidemore financial
compensationfordevelopingnationsthroughthe CDMthansimplystabilizingemissions.Global
Thermostatplantswouldgetcreditbothforthe avoidedcarbon,fromusinga carbon neutral source of
energytoproduce electricity,andforthe reductionincarbondioxide thattheyprovidethroughair
capture and storage.Thus,the CDM can be a powerful tool inthe financingof Global ThermostatPlants
for developingnations.Thisinturncan provide developingnationsinthe longtermwithcleanenergy
infrastructure, andinthe shortterm itcan provide atransferof technologyanda source of cleanand
abundantenergytogrow theireconomies.14
Equallyimportant,however,isthatthistype of technologycanhelplevel the playingfieldbetweenpoor
and richnations, while reducingthe riskstoall countriesfromclimate change.The recentinvestment
boomin poorcountriesresultingfromthe KyotoProtocol’sCDMhas benefitedsome poorcountries
much more than others.Investmentsare now flowingintoChinatobuildhydroelectric,windand,most
recently,natural gas-firedpowerplants.WhyChina?Simple.Thisiswhere mostof the developing
world’semissionscome from.Indeed,over18% of worldemissionscome fromChina,whileonly3%
come from the entire Africancontinent.Thisisnatural ina nationthat byitself represents20% of the
worldpopulation.Butthe CDMprogramwas designedtofundchangestoreduce emissions,andso60%
of all CDMs wentto fundchangesinChina’senergystructure,whichproduceslarge emissions,while
leavingoutthe poorestnationsinthe worldbecause theyhappentoemitsolittle.A similarsituation
emergedinIndia.Thisproblemcanandshouldbe correctedbythe use of carbon negative technologies,
because eventhoughapoor nationemitsverylittle,withcarbonnegative technologiesitcanreduce
CO2 in the atmosphere more thanwhatitemits,indeedmuchmore thanwhatit emits.15

5. Africaplaysa lesserrole inKyoto’scurrentCDM.It receiveslittletodayinthe wayof technologyand
wealthtransfersunderKyotobecause itconsumessolittle energyandgeneratestoofew emissions.
Today,the KyotoProtocol and the CDM are justaboutreducingemissions.Andsince solittlereduction
can be achievedinLatinAmericaorinAfricathere islittle role forthemtoplay.
But all thischangeswithnegative carbontechnologies.These couldbe locatedinAfricaorin Latin
Americaandcouldallowthose regionstoplaya significantrole inglobal climate change prevention
efforts.Withnegative carbon,Africacouldsignificantlyreduce carboninthe atmosphere,becomingan
excellentcandidateforCDMprojects(perhapsevenbetterthanChina).Will thishappen?WillAfricabe
able to capture 30% of the atmosphere’scarbondioxideeventhoughit emitsonly3%?CanAfricasave
the world?To answerthis,we mustfirstexplore the KyotoProtocol,itscarbonmarketanditsCDM. If
developingnationsare offeredfundingfromthe CDMto cleanthe atmosphere — toremove more
carbon than theyemit — they are likelytopromise tolimittheiremissionstowhattheycanachieve
withthe fundingandthe technologyavailable tothem.A willingnessbydevelopingnationstoagree to
thisnewformof mandatoryemissionslimitswouldinturnhelpovercomethe main hurdle createdby
the U.S. Congressinthe unanimouslypassedByrd–Hagel Resolution.The U.S.couldnow accept
mandatoryemissionslimitsinaway that isconsistentwiththe limitationsestablishedbythe Byrd–Hagel
Resolution,whichrequiresthatthe U.S.accept nomandatorylimitsunlessthe developingnationsdo.
The newcarbon negative technologycanovercome thisobstacle
Can YOU Fix Climate Change?
https://oke.io/Kqba7LBu
--------------------------------------------------------------------------