Mankind versus Mother Nature

Byron King - Fri 10 Nov, 2006

...By digging up and releasing this buried carbon and CO2 at the present rapid pace, mankind is reversing in perhaps two centuries what Mother Nature required literally geologic ages to accomplish...

 
 
- During the past century, the industrial activities of mankind have added immense amounts of carbon dioxide to the Earth's atmosphere through the burning of carbon-based fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas. The pace of adding CO2 to the atmosphere is increasing due to worldwide industrial and other human activities.

- It required tens of millions of years, if not hundreds of millions of years, for the Earth's natural, dynamic processes to remove almost incalculable quantities of CO2 from the atmosphere and sequester it underground in coal beds, in other fossil fuel deposits (oil, gas, tar sand, oil shale), and in rocks like limestone (which is calcium carbonate).

- By digging up and releasing this buried carbon and CO2 at the present rapid pace, mankind is reversing in perhaps two centuries what Mother Nature required literally geologic ages to accomplish.

- So in the course of two centuries, the one just past and the one upon which we are all about to embark, mankind may well force the Earth's atmosphere to regress by about 30 million years from a post-Pleistocene (or "Holocene") state of about 280 parts per million (ppm) of CO2, to an Eocene state of nearly 1,000 ppm CO2.

- What will happen? Nobody really knows, and that's the problem. Will the CO2 build-up lead to global warming and severe climate changes? If we wait to find out, we might learn to our eventual sorrow that mankind has triggered atmospheric alterations that are beyond the ability of anyone or any technology to control. Whoops.
 
- What is the solution? Actually, there are many. But the first priority must be to control, and dramatically reduce emissions of carbon into the atmosphere, particularly CO2 generated by burning fossil fuel.
 
- The three major fossil fuels used worldwide are coal, oil, and natural gas. At the risk of oversimplifying, most coal is used to generate electricity and to heat and power certain basic industries such as the coke and steel business.

- Most oil is used in the transportation sector as motor or engine fuel. Most natural gas is used for space heating, with significant amounts also used for petrochemicals (including agricultural chemicals that enhance the production of food and fibre). And a not insignificant amount of natural gas is used for electricity generation. OK, for all of the purists out there, I know that it is more complicated than this. But this is a broad outline.

- In essence, therefore, controlling carbon and CO2 emissions requires means finding some other way to generate electricity, to power vehicles, and to heat spaces. Fortunately for the future of mankind, there are a plethora of well-developed technologies in existence just waiting for mankind to start using them on a vast scale.

- According to solar energy authority Steve Strong (www.solardesign.com ), solar power has the immediate ability to replace immense amounts of fossil fuel that are now being burned for electricity, heat, and transportation. Strong has been in the solar business for about 30 years, and has a very long list of accomplishments to back up his claims.

- Strong showed numerous examples of innovative solar collectors, both photovoltaic and solar-thermal, on home roofs and walls, on office buildings, and on industrial structures. These are coupled with highly adapted, environmentally responsive architectural design. Wherever there is sunlight falling on some structure or another, Strong advocates designing a system and capturing the energy.

- By day, of course, solar photovoltaic power can power the house or office building or industrial structure beneath, and any electricity surplus feeds into the larger-scale power grid. But it is also possible to store this sunlight-generated electricity in batteries, for use at night or during periods of overcast weather.

- Strong showed many examples of structures that require no electrical power from the power grid (some are not even hooked up to the grid), and other examples of structures that are in fact "net-positive" contributors to the grid over given periods of time.

- In recent years, as production of photovoltaic cells has increased, the costs have come down to where solar photovoltaic technology is cost competitive with coal-generated electricity. (In the event that "carbon taxes" become commonplace, photovoltaic systems will be among the relatively cheapest sources of electricity.)

- Yes, a photovoltaic system requires more upfront cost, but it should last for 25 years or more under normal service demands. So after a payback period of between four to six years, the subsequent electricity is "free" to the owner for the next 20 years or so, if it is not "sold" back into the grid at a profit to the owner.

- Thus are both the technology and the market-based economics in place to support a growing switch away from the traditional, coal-fired (or oil- or gas-fired) electric generation paradigm to a solar photovoltaic paradigm.

- This would mark the beginning of the end, over the long term, of using large amounts of fossil fuel to generate electricity, with the reduction of the accompanying carbon load that is otherwise being added to the atmosphere. If you use the electricity to charge the batteries in an electric vehicle, this also reduces demand for liquid fuels.

- But the status quo is the status quo because it works for somebody. So there is still quite a bit of legislative, regulatory, and market resistance to adopting an entirely different approach to generating electricity and heating spaces with solar systems.

- People know what they are used to using, and the coal-fired electric plant is simply part of the modern mind-set. So the future will be one of education and growing awareness of solar options, and of developing a level of public acceptance of the utility and safety of solar energy generation.

- At the same time, investors would do well to remember that the installed base of solar photovoltaic systems is so low that even a relatively modest level of growth and market penetration would represent a significant, long-term business opportunity.


Regards,

Byron King
for The Daily Reckoning