Techno-Fixes to Extend the Fossil-Fueled Oblivion

Rating: 3
Total Votes: 25

Often, we believe that we can maintain the status quo simply by using technology. While this may be possible in the short-term, it doesn't hold much promise for long-term sustainability.

The idea that all environmental issues, especially climate change, can be solved using a "techno-fix" bandage developed by some clever engineer, scientist, or entrepreneur while business-as-usual can continue is only a dream. Drastic changes to our energy generation and distribution infrastructure along with changes in the way we live are the only ways that the problem can be permanently solved. Actions such as tapping the forces of nature, like water, wind, sunlight, and geothermal energy, along with reducing our need for other natural resources through more sensible use, efficiency, and recycling, better urban and agricultural planning, and controlling population growth (not via retroactive means such as nuclear bombing of "inferior" people as is often proposed by a few uninformed people, jokingly or otherwise) and learning that we cannot simply consume like there is no tomorrow are the only path to long-term peace and sustainability. Applying a techno-fix today only leads to greater problems down the road.

There are almost seven billion people, all of whom would probably love to live like Americans. The problem is that it would take at least five Earths to sustain such a society - and there is only one Earth - one that is our home and we can't leave.

Techno-fixes, especially those which allow the business-as-usual fossil-fueled oblivion to continue create even more resource demand tomorrow, meaning an even higher cliff to fall off of when resource depletion and environmental degradation begins to become a more widespread and serious problem.

William Stanley Jevons noted this when the newer, more efficient Watt steam engine actually increased coal consumption compared to the inefficient Newcomen engine, because it allowed more work to be done with less coal, making steam power affordable for more people. This phenomenon is called "Jevons Paradox", because it goes against the conventional thinking of Jevons and most people. It is something we must deal with when considering development options and future energy sources.

Jevons Paradox can be seen today in every aspect of society. Electricity-consuming devices have continuously become more energy efficient over the years, with a growing amount of useful output being created for every joule of input. Electricity consumption, however, has increased steadily. Go figure...

Our mechanical engineers have done a fantastic job at increasing the efficiency of the clanky old internal combustion engine. But fuel economy has stayed flat in the United States for over twenty years! (They used those efficiency gains to make the vehicles bigger and more powerful, rather than more fuel efficient).

I see Jevons Paradox in action when people switch their light bulbs over to fluorescent from incandescent. Now, the light stays on 24/7 rather than being turned off because simply installing the fluorescent was enough to take away the guilt of wasting the electricity. All of the electricity savings that would otherwise have been achieved have gone down the drain.

Technology has a role to play in developing a sustainable society and I am not saying that it has not improved our lives or that it will not continue to do so. But we must understand that there is not going to be some technology that can simply overcome the basic laws of nature and forever allow mankind to continue its rampage of development, growth, war, and consumption.

Some Proposed Techno-Fixes

This CNET article, the inspiration for writing this article, describes some of these in more detail. These technologies are designed to deal with climate change and energy supply, as these are among the top sustainable development issues today.

"Artificial Volcanoes" - Putting Sulfate Aerosols into the Atmosphere to reflect light back to space.

Haven't we spent billions of dollars putting scrubbers on coal-fired power stations and metal ore smelters for the sole purpose of capturing these gases so that they do not cause health problems and rain acidification? Now people want to spend billions more to intentionally release them into the atmosphere?

"Artificial Trees" to capture carbon dioxide from the air.

As I understand, capturing and sequestering or converting carbon dioxide takes energy - either a direct electrical or mechanical input or some chemical substance with an energy potential (such as calcium oxide - limestone that has been calcined in a kiln at 2700F under the heat of pulverized coal combustion, producing CO2 both from the calcination process and the coal combustion.) Why not put in some REAL TREES that get energy from the sun? Then we can burn that biomass for energy and say goodbye to fossil fuels altogether!

Mirrors in Space over Greenland to reflect sunlight back to space.

When we start putting things in space, there is a serious risk of damage from all of the junk (both natural and man-made) that is flying around up there. Also, this is an idea with less proof-of-concept than carbon sequestration. We have renewable energy and efficiency tactics - which are mostly commercially-proven technology. A space mirror, however, is more of a distraction from the real problem. There are also huge political issues that would surround such a device (who controls the space mirror?) Fiddling with the amount of sunlight coming down to the surface is even worse a case of "fooling with the climate" as burning fossil fuels is. Ocean plankton seeding comes with similar "fooling" risks.

Coal Power Carbon Sequestration

Capturing the carbon dioxide gas from the combustion of billions of tons of coal per year in remote (they have to put the plant in a place where the gas can be stored) centralized power stations and sending it underground someplace. Think of the chemistry and thermodynamics of this for a second - we are taking solid carbon, burning it for the purpose of taking the energy from the chemical reaction between carbon and oxygen, and then we are trying to reverse the entropy created by this reaction by compressing the CO2 (which is a GAS with mass three times that of the original carbon) and stuffing it in the ground someplace. The fossil fuel industry has huge support behind this unproven technology, despite the fact that renewables can provide energy without producing carbon dioxide in the first place.

We would not only have to rebuild our power grid to support these sequestration plants, but we would have to build a grid of pipes to carry the carbon dioxide to sequestration sites. Why not just rebuild the power grid so that it can tap into the vast amount of renewables that are available?

Solar-Power Satellites

The idea is to put the solar farm in space and beam the juice back to the surface in the form of microwaves. More energy can be captured per unit of area in space, but what about the loss along the 22,000 mile microwave journey? The energy supply would be affected by weather just as much as terrestrial solar energy is - not only earth weather, but solar weather as well. One big solar storm could knock that multi-million (or billion) dollar satellite out, and there goes a whole bunch of people's electricity - not for one cloudy day, but for a long, long time. And the economics of launching large objects into space was never very good. It only seems fitting to get terrestrial solar energy working on a large scale first.

Fusion Energy

People such as myself are often criticized for "worrying too much about the future and not enough about the present.". That's why I don't support pumping massive amounts of funding into nuclear fusion research. We will not obtain nuclear fusion reactors on Earth any time soon, if ever. Therefore, let's concentrate utilize the perfectly-functional fusion reactor in the sky that throws 2 trillion barrels of oil at us every single day. Once we've got that working, then we can worry about Earth-based nuclear fusion, Dyson Spheres, and other such theoretical technology.

Last Modified: 5/25/2008
Created On: 5/24/2008

Why does CBLL.net Look like this?

Techno-Fixes to Extend the Fossil-Fueled Oblivion

Some Proposed Techno-Fixes