Population bogey

It has been a bone of contention for long – the rising population in the developing world. In the climate change dialogue too, this is used to justify a target for emissions for these nations. But as we have been saying, it is over-consumption and opulent lifestyles that are to blame than population. This is corroborated by a report from the International Institute for Environment and Development.

Researcher David Satterthwaite found that between 1980 and 2005 sub-Saharan Africa had 18.5% of world population growth, but only 2.4% of growth in carbon emissions. Conversely, the US had only 3.4% of world population growth but accounted for 12.6% of emission increases.

Overall, developed nations accounted for 7% of population growth, but 29% of emissions growth; developing nation had 52% of population growth and 13% of emissions growth.

The average child born in the US has an environmental impact larger than one born in most other places. Also, while China's one-child policy did result in a decline in population growth, GHG emissions still rose 44.5% over the study period, due to increasing levels of material consumption among segments of the population.

The New Economics Foundation found that by 4am on January 2nd of a given year, a typical US resident had already emitted carbon emissions equivalent to of the average Tanzanian in a year. A UK resident hit the same level of emissions two days later.

Does this info help? Will those who are rapidly devouring the planet’s resources stop the binge to accommodate others? Unlikely. But perhaps it is time to seriously think of individual emission commitments and plan on a carbon tax like France.

Carbon capture to get a boost

When it comes to coal, there are two extreme opinions – for or against. Those for the fuel are not giving up on ways to take the carbon bite out of coal. While carbon capture and sequestration technology remains controversial, a team from MIT has been studying a carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technique called pressurized oxy-fuel combustion. This process converts the carbon dioxide emissions of a power plant into a pressurized liquid stream meant to be pumped underground.

NYT reports similar plans of American Electric Power’s to inject about 100,000 tons annually for two to five years at ist Mountaineer plant in West Virginia. The plan, to begin in the next few days, is to convert carbon dioxide to a fluid into a layer of sandstone 7800 feet below and then into a layer of dolomite even below. The liquid will displace salt water and assume a shape of a squashed football 30-40 feet high and hundreds of yards long!

E.ON and Siemens have launched a carbon capture pilot project at E.ON’s Staudinger coal-fired power plant in Grosskrotzenburg near Hanau, Germany.

A post-combustion capture process developed by Siemens will be used to remove over 90% of the CO2 from the flue gases of one of the units at the E.ON plant. Siemens will run the carbon capture facility until the end of 2010 to test the long-term chemical stability and efficiency of the cleaning agents under real operating conditions. The initial pilot project could, if successful, form the basis of large-scale demonstration of the technology.

There are still some who fear we haven't understood the geology of deep terrains where we plan to pump and store the carbon. Will the displaced water be affected? Will the carbon stay in a stable form? Is CCS just a way of burying troubles?

Connected with reality: Nokia

Nokia is the world's most sustainable technology company, according to Dow Jones Sustainability Indexes, that looked at how over 2,500 companies in 50 countries incorporate sustainability into their practices. It was chosen as "World Technology Supersector Leader," making it the leader across the entire global technology sector.

Nokia has been integrating environmental and sustainable activities into the way it does business for more than a decade and the company considers the environment in ALL of the devices it makes by reducing environmental impacts in packaging, energy consumption, materials and manufacturing processes, and recyclability.

Nokia works with a number of public sector bodies, NGOs and voluntary groups to harness the power of mobile technology to address environmental, social or economic issues.

As part of its climate change strategy, Nokia is constantly working on reducing energy consumption and increasing efficiency across its business. Some of its actions include reducing travel, investing in research and development of new technologies using renewable energy resources, and plans to increase the usage of green electricity which already accounts for 25% of all energy the company consumes.

Creditable achievement. Let us hope more companies will follow suit.

Flywheels to be deployed

A Massachusetts utility is planning to build a 20 MW flywheel plant in New York. Spinning flywheels that found use in pottery to running steam engines now will be deployed to smooth out the electricity flow, and do it fast and clean.

Beacon Power's flywheels - each weighing one ton, levitating in a sealed chamber and spinning up to 16,000 times per minute - will make the electric grid more efficient and green, the company says. Beacon's flywheel plant will act as a short-term energy storage system for New York's electrical distribution system, sucking excess energy off the grid when supply is high, storing it in the flywheels' spinning cores, then returning it when demand surges.

The job is done now mainly by fossil-fuel powered generators that are one-tenth the speed of flywheels and create double the carbon emissions. The carbon emissions saved over the 20-year life of a single 20-megawatt flywheel plant are equal to the carbon reduction achieved by planting 660,000 trees, says the company.

Flywheels also figure into the emerging renewable energy market, where intermittent energy sources such as wind and solar provide power at wildly varying intensities.

Flywheels are rotating discs or cylinders that store energy as motion, like the bicycle wheel that keeps rotating long after a pedal's been turned. They still have technological hurdles like friction to surmount. A one-ton flywheel has to be durable enough to spin smoothly at exceptionally high speeds. To avoid losing stored energy to friction, the flywheel levitates between magnets in a vacuum chamber.

Despite their potential, flywheels have not taken off as expected. Is it simply a case of not exploring all avenues under the illusion of ‘plentiful’?

Biotech can help:WWF

Biotechnology now has a champion in WWF. In a recent study, the Fund has said that by 2030, biotechnology “has the potential to save the planet up to 2.5 billion tons of CO2 emissions per year.”

Biotechnology can help reduce carbon emissions and can fuel the economy with countless new jobs. The report says that industrial biotechnology “could help create a true 21st century green economy.” However, this cannot be done without political support. The report indentifies four fundamental dimensions of industrial biotechnology: Improved efficiency, the substitution of fossil fuels, the substitution of oil-based materials and the creation of a closed loop system with the potential to eliminate waste.

An example on how biotechnology solutions could help reduce carbon emissions is the harvesting of biogas from waste digesters and wastewater streams. The report emphasizes the potential of taking that existing technology even one step further and creating fully closed loop systems.

Biorefineries are able to transform any biobased waste material into a valuable feedstock for the production of other biobased materials. The possible emission reductions for such processes are estimated to be as high as 633 million tons of CO2.

However, tampering with organisms has its potential dangers as we have seen in the past. The dangers of GM foods with their potential to wipe out native strains have been oft told. As also development of resistance in weeds necessitating development of newer orders. Can we rely on biotechnology to create a green economy?

Nano to the rescue of solar

Chemical engineers at Oregon State University (OSU) have invented a new way to deposit "nanostructure films" on a variety of surfaces. The nanostructure film reduces the amount of light that is reflected off the glass surface.

For solar panels, this means that more of the sun's light reaches the surface of the panels (usually either silicon or copper indium gallium selenide (CIGS)) and doesn't just bounce back into space, so more photons can be captured and turned into clean electricity.

There are already other types of films that do this, but this new nano-film should be able to do it better, for less money, and in a way that is easy to apply to the surfaces (not expensive process that requires big equipment).

This nanostructure-film can be applied on top of whatever technology you already have, so it doesn't matter too much if your solar panel is based on monocrystalline silicon cells, or polycrystalline cells, or thin films, etc. It could also be applied to the lenses of concentrating solar power setups. As efficiencies keep crawling up, it signals good times for solar energy.

Compare this with stumbling 'clean coal' technology. A Harvard Universtity study has said that electricity costs could double for first-generation CCS plants even as costs for renewables go down 10 percent every decade.

All this calls for more investment in R&D in renewable technology. Right?

Who speaks for Earth?

Ban Ki-Moon, Secy general, UN, made a plea to world leaders to trust, negotiate and cooperate to tackle climate change. ‘I visited the Arctic. I saw the remains of a glacier that just a few years ago was a majestic mass of ice. It had collapsed. Not slowly melted — collapsed… The Arctic could be virtually ice-free by 2030… I was alarmed by the rapid pace of change there.’

‘Climate change is the preeminent geopolitical issue of our time. It rewrites the global equation for development, peace and prosperity. It threatens markets, economies and development gains. It can deplete food and water supplies, provoke conflict and migration, destabilize fragile societies and even topple governments.

‘What is needed is political will at the highest levels — presidents and prime ministers — that translates into rapid progress in the negotiating room.’

And here’s the latest from the top three polluters have to say:India is prepared to set non-binding targets to track its progress in reducing carbon emissions, reports AFP. That's the word from Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh: ‘We are already taking a number of actions that will result in significant reduction of our greenhouse gas emissions. We are in a position to quantify these reductions into a broadly indicative number that can be shared with the rest of the world. I see no problem with that.’

Meanwhile, the latest from China is that avoiding a 2 degree rise is not practical. The Guardian reports: "You should not target China to fulfill the two degree target. That is just a vision. Reality has deviated from that vision," said Dai (deputy chief of China's Energy Research institute). "We do not think that target provides room for developing countries." China argues that its priority must be economic growth to relieve poverty among its vast population.

The mother of polluters, the US has a similar thing to say. US Energy Sceretary Chu, believes the ‘United States can bring and can agree to is certainly unknown but I think probably 40-30% (cuts) might be too aggressive for 2020 for the United States.’ This is being interpreted as political feasibility, not technical feasibility.

Clear indications that Copenhagen will be just another junket trip? It is time for citizens to speak out and lead their leaders, maybe.

Flights of imagination

Imagination has never seen such flights of fantasy as pressed on by the search for energy! Get ready for living, breathing buildings in the future.

A report recently released by the Institute of Mechanical Engineers suggests that sealed containers of algae photobioreactors could be integrated into the sides of buildings to produce biofuels and sequester carbon, adding a whole new meaning to the term ‘green building’.

Algae feed on CO2 from the surrounding air which can then be stored and processed as biofuel.

One of the benefits to harnessing algae is that it can use waste-water and ocean water, and it is relatively harmless to the local environment should it spill or leak. Algae also have a much higher production rate per acre than soy or corn. Some studies have shown that up to 99% of the CO2 introduced to the solution can be converted or sequestered.

At this point, photobioreactors are much more expensive to use than conventional open-pond systems but companies are working around that.

In another advance on the green front, Reva, the Indian car company known for the manufacturing of small, eco-friendly commuter cars is about to release two new vehicle models with an invisible reserve fuel tank that can be activated when necessary by sending a text message or making a phone call to a specified number, so that drivers are never left stranded should they run out of charge! On display at the ongoing Frankfurt International Motor Show, Reva has at present around 3,000 vehicles on the road in over 24 countries.

Needed: $1 trillion

India has been adamant about not accepting binding emissions reductions even as its emissions are set to rise from 1.6 bn tons per year in 2005 to 6.5 bn tons in 2030. A new report from McKinsey & Company calculates the cost of roughly halving carbon emissions growth by 2030 as $1.1 trillion (about 2.3% of GDP), spent mostly on energy efficiency efforts and renewable energy.

Unless action is taken, consequences could be dire! In India the report estimates that by 2030 significant drought could produce countrywide agricultural losses of more than $7 billion, decreasing the income of 10% of the population. Under the high climate change scenario, severe droughts occurring historically every 25 years could happen every eight.

However, referring to the state of Maharashtra, mitigation measures such as more efficient irrigation, better drainage construction and crop engineering could eliminate much of this loss due to drought.

Though India recently climbed to the fourth-place position in terms of national emissions, its per-capita emissions remain among the lowest in the world -- 1/20th of those in US in fact, but growing at twice the world average rate.

According to the Economics of Climate Adaptation Working Group's Shaping Climate Resistant Development report, by 2030 climate risks could cost nations 19% of GDP, with developing nations most vulnerable. But existing cost-effective measures exist can prevent 40-68% of expected economic losses.

The report looked at estimated economic losses in eight different case study regions (China, United States, Guyana, Mali, United Kingdom, Samoa, India, and Tanzania) and under three different scenarios -- under today's climate (no further climate change impact), moderate climate change (middle of the road climate projections), high climate change (the outer range considered possible by 2030).

Where will the $1 trillion come from?

Taxes and human well-being

He has known to be bold. Now we must hand it to French President Sarkozy. He is among very few world leaders to be brave as well. He has begun advocating for robust carbon tax coupled with rebates or tax reductions.

The tax would be initially based on the market price for carbon dioxide emissions permits, which is now euro17 ($24.74) per ton of carbon dioxide. The government expects to raise euro3 billion, which will be entirely returned to households and businesses through a reduction in other taxes or repaid via a "Green Check”.

This will shift the tax burden from other revenue sources to energy derived from fossil fuels in an effort to discourage their use.Gasoline, diesel fuel, coal and natural gas will be subject to the tax, but not electricity.

France is a charter member of the world's largest carbon cap and trade program, the EU ETS. The ETS (some believe it has done a good job, others don’t) is limited in scope to major emitters of carbon such as power plants and industrial facilities. By applying a carbon tax to home heating fuels and transportation fuels, France can price carbon comprehensively across the economy. Boldly going where others have hesitated.

As though that were not enough to qualify, Sarkozy has gone ahead with the reports of a study and called for a more comprehensive view of economic well-being, one that puts human well-being in driver's seat.

U.S. economist Joseph Stiglitz, winner of the 2001 Nobel economics prize and a critic of free-market economists, who co-authored the report, believes: "GDP is an attempt to measure one part of what is going on in our society which is market production. It is what I call GDP fetichism to think success in that part is success for the economy and for society.”

It was Bhutan that started it all with its adoption of GNH or gross national happiness as against the GDP.

How does one measure something as subjective as happiness? By the number of times one has a hearty laugh? By the number of people seeking redress from stress? Interestingly the state of Iowa has struck a double deal in reducing work days from five to four. Travel hours weekly is reduced, and hence energy saved. And everyone is happy with the end result. Do share your thoughts on carbon taxes and GNH.

Can we hope for global cooperation?

A major new World Bank report titled ‘World Development Report 2010’ concludes that the world can fight poverty and climate change at the same time. But it won't be easy, and it won't be cheap. So, anything new about that?? We did know it will be tough.

The biennial global economic assessment, which this year focuses exclusively on the threat of climate change, estimates that nations will need nearly $500 billion annually by 2030 to both develop clean energy technologies across the world and cope with natural disasters.

The report calls on governments, research institutions and individuals to overcome a worldwide "inertia" of dependence on fossil fuel. The World Bank study estimates that poor nations will bear between 75 and 80 percent of the cost of floods, increased desertification and other disasters caused by global warming.

Among the near-term impacts of climate change, the authors estimated that India's crop yields would likely decline 4.5 to 9 percent within the next three decades.

What is needed is decisive, immediate action, they say. Finally!

In a related study, a group of environmental scientists and economists propose a much stronger focus on regional and worldwide cooperation to deal with human-caused crises.

The researchers, writing in Science, say that “energy, food and water crises, climate disruption, declining fisheries, ocean acidification, emerging diseases and increasing antibiotic resistance are examples of serious, intertwined global-scale challenges spawned by the accelerating scale of human activity,” have proven beyond national governments and institutions to deal with adequately.

Since these crises are planet-wide, they require a much more cooperative, i.e. global, response, according the group of economists and scientists, who themselves represent an international front coming from Australia, Sweden, the United States, India, Greece and The Netherlands.

Both studies do not really throw up any newer scenario than has been parrotted by many before them. Both are commendable. But what impact they will have is the question. In times of scarce resources, how many nations will open up rather than shut doors? Hiding behind financial meltdown, how many developed nations will fund mitigation scenarios in the south? How many governments will acknowledge that the future is threatened, and work to avert threats? Very few. For it takes the brave, and the brave seem a small number today. It may well take a strong force to dislodge us from our collective inertia.

Co(a)ld facts

Birth defects, abnormalities and cancers in children of Punjab’s cities Bathinda and Faridkot are being linked to uranium contamination. Not from nuclear plants, but coal-fired power stations!

Tests have showed massive levels of uranium in their bodies, in one case more than 60times the maximum safe limits of WHO.

Uranium occurs naturally throughout the world, but is normally only present in low background levels which pose no threat to human health. But an Observer investigation has now uncovered disturbing evidence to suggest a link between the contamination and the region's coal-fired power stations.

It is already known that the fine fly ash produced when coal is burned contains concentrated levels of uranium and a new report published by Russia's leading nuclear research institution warns of an increased radiation hazard to people living near coal-fired thermal power stations.

The findings have implications the many countries planning to build new coal-fired power plants, including China, Russia, India, Germany and the US.

What a shame!

While on the topic of waste, here’s a teaser. Food waste is a climate issue. That is one of the conclusions from the book ‘Waste: uncovering a global food scandal’. Written by Tristam Stuart who spent years eating from bins of supermarkets, the book traces the waste trail from farmers to supermarkets and restaurants to consumers.

The average UK household bins throw £8 of food each week while supermarket profligacy is yet another story. Much of the food is rejected right at the market level and not for nutrition/hygiene but for trivial reasons of colour and size!

Is food waste the big unspoken environmental crisis of our times? Stuart thinks so when he places it right up next to deforestation, water scarcity, even global warming. In Europe, about 20% of the greenhouse emissions come from processing and producing food.

The amount of processed food consumed today is increasing, even in developing nations. And for processing, energy and water is further consumed. Is it morally right to waste food?

For more listen in to http://www.downtoearth.org.in/tristram_stuart.asp

Transition beyond 2012

Excuse the length of this post but the subject simply warrants it. Read on and share your thoughts.

The doomsday predictions are back in circulation. This time it is based on the Mayan Calendar, which talks of December 12, 2009 as the end of the world as we know it. Will it be an asteroid delivering the dinosaurian fate to mankind? Or towering waves unleashed by uncontrolled climate change? Sony will release its popular genre film 2012 this winter based on such an apocalypse.

Doomsday deniers have scorned the many scenarios spawned by the industry as a mere excuse for sitting back and doing nothing. They are supremely confident that the human race will ride the rough waves on the boats of science and technology.
But some optimists have interpreted this as a time of reawakening, a beginning of a spiritual era, of a collective consciousness. A transition.

Transition is also a world we believe in. Transition to more efficient, less wasteful ways. Transition to new and clean energy sources.

Whether things will come to a grinding halt on December 12 or no, there are indications plenty that choppy seas await us. Population piles up. Food production goes down. Water is going beyond our reach. Climate change adds on biceps with every passing day. And viruses are getting stronger. Do we really need more evidence to show how unsustainable we are?

Whether cosmic forces will play their hand or we will bring it on to ourselves, remains to be seen. If not December 2012, sometime very soon. Unless we halt in our tracks and make a change. A visible change.

For this we need to accept some things. One, that resources are limited whether it be fossil fuels or water or fertile soil. Is it not better to wean away before we run out of these? Two, that we are but a small line in the web of life that connects all living things and resources. That is how it has evolved.

Take for instance, the fate of Zabbaleen, a Coptic Christian community of recyclers who reside in Cairo, Egypt. Their main profession is collecting and disposing of the city's waste through reusing and recycling materials and feeding food waste to livestock - mainly pigs.

Due to the outbreak of swine flu the Egyptian government ordered the culling of the country's pigs. A majority of these pigs were raised by the Zabbaleen and used in the first stage of recycling the thousands of tons of organic waste generated daily in Cairo. The future of these garbage collectors is now unclear as they have lost an integral part of their garbage disposal system.

Wars will become more frequent s nations try to stockpile crucial resources which were hitherto exported under a globalised economy. A draft report by China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology has called for a total ban on foreign shipments of terbium, dysprosium, yttrium, thulium, and lutetium. Other metals such as neodymium, europium, cerium, and lanthanum will be restricted to a combined export quota of 35,000 tonnes a year, far below global needs.

China mines over 95pc of the world’s rare earth minerals, mostly in Inner Mongolia. The rare earth family are hard to find, and harder to extract.

Terbium is a key ingredient in low-energy light-bulbs. Neodymium that enhances the power of magnets at high heat and is crucial for hard-disk drives, wind turbines, and the electric motors of hybrid cars. Cerium and lanthanum are used in catalytic converters for diesel engines. Europium is used in lasers. Any modern day gadget, ipod, mobile phones, computers, lap up rare earth minerals. The Chinese move is not an attempt to get the rest of the world on its knees, as much as hoarding for its own growth.

Nations will be forced to take stock of their own welfare as critical resources become scarce. Wars and famines will follow. How soon? 2012? Write in to say what you think we need to do? About energy, about food, climate change, water…

Up or down, does it matter?

Pumped hydro storage is a simple technology already in wide use. Pump water up a hill when you have available energy, let it fall when you need its power.

But Riverbank Power; a new start-up is trying out a new idea. Instead of using hills for the height, it will go the other way. Down into the ground.

Their Aquabank would let gravity drop water underground to turn turbines and make hydro electricity. That electricity would be sent from underground to the grid day time. At night, when excess wind is available; wind powered electricity would gently push the water back up to replenish its surface source.

Each project would use a source of water at ground level, an excavated cavern approximately 2,000 feet below ground and four 250-MW generators in a below-ground powerhouse.

The surface footprint would be only 5 to 10 acres, mainly for the water diversion structure and transmission infrastructure. The underground footprint would be about 100 acres.

It would use about 1 billion gallons of water for six hours of electricity production. It would take eight hours to pump out the cavern. The remaining sixteen hours each day the water supply would not be diverted.

To avoid sucking up fish inadvertently, the initial intake from the river is extremely slow and filtered so that the natural flow of the river remains unaltered, unlike conventional hydro power.

Given that the water is stored underground only for a short time, the pumping does not change the quality or temperature of the water before it is returned to the river.

So is this simply a tweaking of what was already done? Down instead of up? What are the advantages of going down? For one, you don’t need hills around. What else? Write in to us.