|
| | Over the years, I have developed a belief related to both environmental and
energy matters, as they are so intertwined. My calculations have shown that to
maintain the present level of greenhouse gases (i.e., not to cause a continuing
increase), we must reduce our consumption of all fossil fuels by 55-60 per cent,
as quickly as possible. This is obviously, in the short term, a Utopian dream;
in this dream, I imagine a benign dictator waving a magic wand and implementing
my credo, worldwide. In the medium term, I believe we shall have to face the
realities of a shortage of energy and increasing pollution and my dream may just
see the light of day, in a few enlightened countries, initially.
Please feel free to discuss this document at this
forum or to suggest additions or modifications.
My Credo:
- Stopping all fossil fuel power stations throughout the world: I
believe that we shall have to stop all electricity generation from natural
gas, coal and oil in the very shortest time frame. This will be necessary to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions to an acceptable level.
- Implementing constant renewable power stations: I believe that we
shall have to use a maximum of electricity generation from
waste
incineration, biomass etc., which can ensure a constant power supply. Small
scale hydroelectric supplies, especially without large dams, could also be
considered, provided that their implementation does not cause environmental
harm or the destruction of unique biotopes; large scale projects, similar to
Three Gorges, Grande Dixence or Hoover dams should not be entertained.
- Implementing variable renewable power stations: I believe that we
should generate as much electricity from wind, solar, tide and waves as
possible, consistent with a reliable supply. This is generally limited to
about 20% of peak demand to ensure grid stability.
- Implementing nuclear fission power stations: I believe that only
nuclear power stations should be permitted to supply the electricity demand
that cannot be supplied by constant renewable sources. Obviously, their
supply would be reduced when the variable sources were producing. Only MOX and fast breeder
reactors, with maximum fissile fuel recycling, should be permitted, to limit
resource depletion and to minimise radioactive waste.
- Implementing pumped hydroelectric storage: I believe that small
scale pumped hydroelectric storage systems, where feasible, with an
aggregate capacity of up to 1 hour at peak demand would permit variable
renewable power station capacity to be doubled.
- Eliminating "gas guzzlers": I believe that removing all
private cars with a consumption >4 l/100 km from the road
would significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and dangerous pollution.
- Encouraging biofuel production: I believe that this should
be done where the resources make it practicable, but not at the cost of reducing food
production, nor if the holistic energy requirements are higher than the
energy contained in the produced biofuels.
- Stopping all fossil fuel consumption in private households: I
believe that, for heating or cooking, clean carbon-free electricity will do the job
more efficiently. Where feasible, solar water heating should be implemented.
- Implementing thermal efficiency: I believe that mandatory
thermal insulation to a high standard in all buildings
must be implemented, with architectural design suited to profit best from
the local climate.
- Stopping transport of goods by road vehicles: I believe that all
goods should be transported by rail, except in a local radius.
- Implementing high-speed rail networks: I believe that rail
networks à la TGV for the intercity transport of people and goods, with good RSR-style rail networks radiating outwards from each TGV hub,
would reduce greenhouse gases and pollution and would reduce road accidents.
- Stopping short-haul air travel: I believe there should be no inland air travel for distances <1000 km; the TGV would be more convenient and faster.
- Taxing air travel: I believe a 100-200% tax on all air tickets (half deductible for bona fide business expenses)
would discourage trivial travel and reduce business travel, which can often
be replaced by electronic communications.
- Reducing leisure consumption: I believe all sports events (athletics, football etc.) must be performed in daylight and all car parking closed for 20 km around (certified handicapped persons excepted), with adequate public transport feeding the sites (also for large exhibitions and other venues).
- Reducing electricity consumption: I believe all appliances and light bulbs etc. must be high-efficiency types.
- Recycling wisely: I believe recycling should be maximised and factored according to the holistic environmental impact and not according to the economics
or perceived effects with buzzwords
(e.g., the European Union WEEE and
RoHS Directives are stupidly worded and
are already causing more environmental harm than they will prevent).
- Taxing carbon: I believe that a carbon tax imposed on ALL fossil fuel producers/users of €5/kg of equivalent CO2, including on that needed for non-fuel purposes, such as petrochemicals, plastics, fertilisers etc. and on all fuel losses (emissions, evaporation, leakages etc.)
should increase awareness of the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
- Stopping carbon trading: I believe that each and every
source of greenhouse gases should be dealt with on its own merits. Permitting
trading of carbon benefits will only delay the implementation of measures of
the worst polluters, who are wealthy enough to purchase "a permit to pollute".
- Implementing a market economy: I believe that we should scrap ALL
subsidies and duties, world-wide, in all sectors but especially in energy (including food production); economics would go back
100 per cent to the rules of supply and demand. I would make one exception:
if a material can be supplied in large quantities from recycled sources, but
is more costly than supplied from virgin sources, then the latter should be
taxed so that the consumer cost is equal to that of recycled material.
- Eliminating privileges: I believe that privileges enjoyed by heads
of state, elected representatives, public servants, corporate executives and
others, and including their families, and which may engender a costless
increase in consumption of energy or create pollution, should be eliminated
(e.g., a company car should be used only for business purposes).
- Encouraging energy research: I believe that we
should encourage research into new ways of producing energy, provided that
there is a sound scientific base to the ends: we should equally discourage
the far-fetched, such as cold fusion, perpetual motion, "zero"
energy and suchlike. To this end, decisions to fund research should be left
to a peer review of proposed projects by qualified scientists and not by
politicians who are generally unqualified to pontificate on the merits of a
project.
- Reducing other pollution: I believe that every effort must
be made to reduce pollution worldwide. Although much air pollution is
energy-related, some of it isn't. For example, too much ozone-depleting
substances are still being emitted. Even more catastrophically, too much
water is being rendered unfit for use by industrial and agricultural
polluters.
- Increasing water supplies: I believe that more effort must
be made to allow every person in this world to have adequate supplies of
clean water, free from any risk of causing disease of any type.
You will observe, I hope, that my credo assumes that there will be no real
reduction in the standard or quality of life, even within the rich nations; in
fact, it will improve life for the whole world. There will be far less pollution
(the WHO estimates that energy-related pollution kills about 3,000,000 people
every year) and health care will cost less as such modern diseases as juvenile
asthma, various cancers, emphysema, cardio-vascular disease and many others are
reduced with a cleaner air to breathe. Doomsayers forecast that, as fossil fuels
become scarcer and more costly, there will be anarchy as people fight to obtain
resources, even down to the individual level. I believe that this could happen
if no substantive measures are taken to reduce fuel-dependency, hence greenhouse
gas emissions, pollution and health-care costs, perhaps along the lines I
suggest. I believe also that we should not allow this to happen by acting
rapidly and effectively.
Brian Ellis. Updated:
4 March 2006 |
