Total de visualizações de página

terça-feira, 29 de dezembro de 2015

SOLAR PANEL COVERING THE SAHARA DESERT?

As reported in BBC News

Dr Gerhard Knies co-founded TREC, a network of experts on sustainable energy that gave rise to the Desertec initiative, which aimed to provide Europe with clean energy by harnessing sustainable power from sun-rich deserts. 
"Fifteen minutes after I learned about the nuclear accident at Chernobyl, I made an assessment of how much energy comes from the sun to the earth. It was about 15,000 times as much as humanity was using, so it was not a question of the source, it was a question of the technology. 
"When the climate change issue became more prominent, I said we have to pull forward this solution, because it solves the industrial vulnerability problem of our civilisation, and at the same time, the climate vulnerability.
"My strategy was to look for amplifiers. A very good one was The Club of Rome, with its president, Prince Hassan from Jordan. We had a seminar with experts. We included European participants, but also people from North Africa, Jordan and the Middle East. They all said 'Yes, that would be great for us to have such a thing.' 

We did a study so that we had numbers which are scientifically sound, based on the present knowledge in a clear way. We got support from Greenpeace and from several scientific institutions and big companies.
"We didn't want politicians in the game; it should just be scientifically sound and economically viable. But politicians liked it, and when the Desertec Industrial Initiative launched in Munich in July 2009, we were flooded with politicians. When they see the potential for a solution they get interested. 
"The Desertec Initiative was made to study the plan from the angle of industry and see if they find flaws or if everything was right to pave the way for investments, but not to do the investments. [After that work was done] they began to fight about which direction it should go in and dissolved.
"The second stage is now called the Desert Energy Industrial Initiative and they want to organise implementation, and that is beginning.
"At the time when [the idea] was conceived, North Africa looked quite different. Now, this turbulence changes the whole business environment, and the region has to go through that. But the demand, the need to tap into the solar energy in deserts, has not disappeared."

Tony Patt: Beware political complications
Tony Patt is professor of climate policy at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich. He leads the research for the European Research Council on whether the Saharan sun could power Europe.
"The technology is good. It's matured a lot in the last few years in terms of thermal storage. That allows you to take the heat that you capture from the sun and store it for, let's say, up to a day, and produce the power later. That means you can generate it around the clock.

"And the Sahara desert is so big that if there is cloudy weather, it's localised, and with thermal storage, it can provide absolutely reliable power. 
"Where I'm from in the US, Boston gets a huge amount of electricity from northern Quebec, which is about 1,000 miles away, via a single power cable. They're not hard to build as long as you get political approval from all the jurisdictions you're going through.
"They don't lose much power. Maybe over 1,000 miles you lose 2%. 
"The biggest potential pitfall is that it's politically complicated. You're not going to develop solar energy in the Sahara unless you have a very strong state involvement, both on the side of the consumers and the project developers. 
"Solar electricity is still a little bit more expensive than electricity from fossil fuels. It's becoming competitive, but it's not clearly competitive yet. So it's nothing that the private sector is doing on its own.
"There are a lot of political battles that need to take place to figure out where we're going to build the infrastructure, how it's going to get paid for. And perhaps more critically, how and when we're going to turn off the old infrastructure.

"Over the last 15 years, Germany has taken vast steps to support solar energy, but that was tied to building it within Germany, creating jobs for Germans. There's less of a clear case for European governments to support what is still more expensive energy when it's people in other parts of the world who are getting those jobs."
Daniel Egbe: Africa must share the benefits 
Danie Egbe is an evaluator for the World Bank, a chemist, an academic and the founder of ANSOLE, a network of Africans for Africa, with a focus on renewable energy. He co-authored a book on renewable energy in Sub-Saharan Africa.
"Africa has an acute energy problem. Only around 30% of sub-Saharan Africans have access to electricity. Economic growth in Africa is now around 5.5%, but this is hampered by lack of energy.  
"The presentations which were given in the past have arrows showing how energy will be funnelled to the north. But there was no arrow pointing down to sub-Saharan Africa.
"As an African, knowing the history about the exploitation of the continent, where there is a big gap when it comes to riches, and Africa is still poor due to the colonial past and the slave time, nobody can just come and do things as if we are still in the past.

"Things have changed. Africans are self-confident now, they want to participate in their development, and they want to have part of their resources, they are not just there to always give to the rest of the world and remain poor.
"The African Network for Solar Energy is there to see that the African interest is taken into consideration".


"I'm not against a big solar project. They can exist, but can only be in certain parts of the countries. If I want to supply electricity to very remote areas, the off-grid approach is the best, where somebody has his own solar panel, or a group of villagers can share one, and they control the production. 
"If those conditions are fulfilled, why not? Solar energy is for the whole world. But let's not just come and say 'Okay, Joe has something, I come and take it from him and I leave him alone.' No I have to see, 'Okay, Joe has something, maybe he can share it with me, and we can benefit from it?'"
Helen Anne Curry: Technology alone is rarely the answer 
Helen Anne Curry is a lecturer in the Department of History and Philosophy of Science at Cambridge University
"I am interested in exploring the persistent optimism that surrounds new technologies, even after multiple failures.
"The technological fix is appealing; it's exciting to think we can solve problems without fundamentally having to change the way we live, the way we get to work every day or the number of cheap flights we take. 
"But you can't just take one point in the system and say 'that's solved'; there is much more that extends outwards. 

"Think of the work that was done to solve local air pollution in the mid-twentieth century, which was to build super-tall smokestacks. 
"But they don't eliminate the pollution from the air. They just throw it up much higher in the atmosphere, so in fact it circulates further. One of the subsequent problems of building these was they created acid rain in places that didn't have this kind of concentrated industry. 
"We can use our science and technology knowledge to bring other peoples of the world into the quality of life that the global north has enjoyed for far longer.  
"Yet if you look back on 60 years of policy work and intervention, there's a lot of ways in which we've failed. We haven't been able to deliver the social, scientific and technological progress which we envisioned.
"I think the only reason to pursue [solar panels in the Sahara] would be if it were a stopgap measure in which the long-term goal would be to reduce consumption of energy and to change our lifestyles to be more sustainable, so that subsequent generations don't have to deal with as many problems as we're going to leave them."



segunda-feira, 28 de dezembro de 2015

WHAT AMOUNT OF MONEY WILL REVERSE THAT SITUATION?

As reported in BBC News


The cause of the burst is still unclear but the Brazilian government has filed a lawsuit against Samarco, the joint venture between mining giants BHP Billiton and Vale, which owned the dam. 
The area was closed off for four weeks while rescue workers and investigators searched the mud.
A month after the disaster, Brazilian journalist Nina Nives and photographer Ismael dos Anjos travelled to Bento Rodrigues and nearby Paracatu de Baixo to examine the damage caused. 
A federal court has ruled that the potential damages from the disaster could be about 20.2bn reais ($5.2bn; £3.4bn). The companies' assets were frozen amid concerns that Samarco does not have enough resources to cover the cost of damages and compensation.
BHP's statement said the court had ordered Samarco to put 2bn reais into a court-managed bank account within 30 days. A daily fine of 1.5m reais applies for non-compliance with this deadline.

sábado, 19 de dezembro de 2015

YOU SHOULD EAT INSECTS . I SAID...'YOU', NOT WE!!!

From BBC News (11 December 2015)


Older report from BBC (13 May 2013):

Eating more insects could help fight world hunger, according to a new UN report. 

The report by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization says that eating insects could help boost nutrition and reduce pollution.

It notes than over 2 billion people worldwide already supplement their diet with insects. 

However it admits that "consumer disgust" remains a large barrier in many Western countries. 










Wasps, beetles and other insects are currently "underutilised" as food for people and livestock, the report says. Insect farming is "one of the many ways to address food and feed security". 

"Insects are everywhere and they reproduce quickly, and they have high growth and feed conversion rates and a low environmental footprint," according to the report. 

Nutritional value

The authors point out that insects are nutritious, with high protein, fat and mineral content.

They are "particularly important as a food supplement for undernourished children".

Insects are also "extremely efficient" in converting feed into edible meat. Crickets, for example, need 12 times less feed than cattle to produce the same amount of protein, according to the report. 

Most insects are are likely to produce fewer environmentally harmful greenhouse gases than other livestock. 

The ammonia emissions associated with insect-rearing are far lower than those linked to conventional livestock such as pigs, says the report.


Delicacies
A festival-goers enjoys an 'insects pizza' at one of the many food stalls during the 34th edition of the Paleo festival on July 22, 2009 in Nyon.The report calls for insect dishes to be added to restaurant menus

Insects are regularly eaten by many of the world's population, but the thought may seem shocking to many Westerners. 

The report suggests that the food industry could help in "raising the status of insects" by including them in new recipes and adding them to restaurant menus. 

It goes on to note that in some places, certain insects are considered delicacies. 

For example some caterpillars in southern Africa are seen as luxuries and command high prices.

Most edible insects are gathered in forests and serve niche markets, the report states. 

It calls for improved regulation and production for using insects as feed. 

"The use of insects on a large scale as a feed ingredient is technically feasible, and established companies in various parts of the world are already leading the way," it adds. 


terça-feira, 8 de dezembro de 2015

FOREST FIRES IN THE AMAZON: EXCEPTIONALLY HIGH IN 2015

It's not just Indonesia's forests and peatlands that are burning - the Amazon is suffering almost as badly, with over 18,000 fires last month in Brazil alone, write Jos Barlow & Erika Berenguer. The future is looking hot and fiery.

As reported in theecologist



As world leaders meet in Paris to tackle carbon emissions, here in the Amazon we are watching forests burning unchecked, releasing carbon into the atmosphere, destroying sensitive ecosystems and making breathing difficult.

There are forests fires in the Amazon every year, but 2015 is exceptional. We've been investigating the issue in the rainforest around Santarém, a city on the south bank of the Amazon, 800km from the sea.

For the past five weeks we have woken up under a thick veil of smoke. For days we are barely able to see the sun. On many days last week visibility was less than 50 metres and the sun, once yellow, would rise red - if at all.

Even our clothes and our hair smell constantly of smoke. We have been living in the middle of a 24-hour barbecue in the middle of the world's largest tropical forest.

The El Niño phenomenon is contributing to this year's increased temperatures and changes in rainfall patterns, which means a more intense dry season across large swathes of the usually-humid tropics.

Widespread fires in south-east Asian peatland forests have released huge amounts of smoke and made the air so polluted that Indonesia set up evacuation ships for affected people. These fires are estimated to have emitted more carbon in just a few weeks than the entire German economy over a whole year.


Rainforests aren't used to fire

Although fires in the Amazon region have attracted much less attention than in Indonesia the situation is still alarming. In November alone, the Brazilian Amazon experienced 18,716 fires according to satellite data.

They are are mainly started by farmers to clear areas of fallow or to get rid of weeds in pastures. However, planned fires often escape the targeted area, invade surrounding forests and burn the vegetation.

These escaped fires may appear small and harmless but rainforests, unlike savannahs or temperate forests, have not co-evolved with periodic fires. This makes them particularly vulnerable. As a result, human-induced fires can kill up to 50% of the larger trees and most of the small-stemmed ones.

We still don't know how long it takes for a tropical rainforest to recover from fires, both in terms of biomass and biodiversity - they might never be able to regain their former glory. This is exactly one of the aims of the joint UK-Brazil research project that has brought us to the Amazon.

What we do know is that all those dead trees open gaps in the forest canopy, which allow more light and wind to reach the forest floor. The forest then becomes hotter and drier and more prone to burn once again.

Fires are also used to burn the downed forest, so newly deforested areas can be cleared of all remaining vegetation and used for agriculture. When only one hectare of forest, an area equivalent to that of a football pitch, is chopped down and burned, roughly 300 tonnes of carbon are lost.

In terms of carbon dioxide emissions, this is the same as a new car going around the world 61 times. This all adds up. In the past year, 583,100 hectares of the Brazilian Amazon were deforested. That's a lot of cars.

Almost all fires are left to burn themselves out

The smoke and fires have made life very uncomfortable. Yet for local people there is no escape. The smoke cloud that daily covers the region has serious consequences for human health, which led 12 Amazonian cities to declare a state of emergency back in October.

Task forces have been assigned to combat fires, but resources are thin and the region is too vast. Almost all fires are left to burn themselves out.

This year's El Niño has shown how vulnerable the world's largest tropical forest can be to extreme droughts. And recent forecasts have shown that such events are likely to triple by 2100. If 2015 can be used as an example, we are to expect more forest fires and much greater carbon emissions from tropical forest countries.

If world leaders at the UN climate conference are serious about limiting global warming to 2C, they must learn from this hazy present, acting immediately to protect the remaining forested areas in the humid tropics. Otherwise, we can expect a fiery future.

quinta-feira, 3 de dezembro de 2015

COP 21: JUST A PREPARATION FOR THE NEXT COP!?

Paris climate talks are doomed to failure - like all the others

Steffen Böhm, University of Essex

1st December 2015

The most significant feature of COP21 is the topics that never even made it onto the agenda for discussion, writes Steffen Böhm. And the biggest of all the growth-driven economic system that ultimately thwarts all efforts at sustainability, as it drives ever increasing consumption of energy and resources.
Reproduced from www.theecologist.org

The most significant feature of COP21 is the topics that never even made it onto the agenda for discussion, writes Steffen Böhm. And the biggest of all the growth-driven economic system that ultimately thwarts all efforts at sustainability, as it drives ever increasing consumption of energy and resources.



Even if the world celebrates a Paris climate deal on 11th December, the process will still have to be regarded as failure. Let me explain why.

The basic reason is that the unequal distribution of carbon emissions is not even on its agenda. The historical responsibility of the West is not on the table, nor is a method of national carbon accounting that looks at how the emissions a country consumes rather than produces.

Instead, what is on the table are expanded and new mechanisms that will allow the rich, Western countries to outsource their emission cuts so they can paint themselves green.

When the figures are in, 2015 is likely to be the warmest year on record and we've just reached 1C temperature rise since the industrial revolution, halfway to the 2C widely agreed to be the upper safe limit of global warming. It's the fastest surface temperature increase in the world's known geological history. We are now entering "uncharted territory".

The dangers of global warming have been known - even to oil company executives - since at least the early 1980s. Yet, despite 25 years of UN-led climate talks, the world is burning more fossil fuels than ever.

This is not simply the fault of big emerging economies such as China, India or Brazil. Instead, what we are dealing with is the fundamental failure of neoliberal capitalism, the world's dominant economic system, to confront its hunger for exponential growth that is only made possible by the unique energy density of fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas.

Historical responsibility forgotten

A glance at global history reveals how closely energy is linked to economic growth. The Netherlands was the first country to get a taste for exponential industrial growth back in the 16th and 17th centuries - and the Dutch empire was built on the availability of cheap domestic peat as well as timber from Norwegian and Baltic forests.

One reason the British took over the Netherlands' imperial leadership was its vast reserves of cheap coal, which started to be burned at the end of the 18th century, exponentially growing in the 19th century. Then came oil and gas, which helped make America the imperial master from the early 20th century onwards.

So there are more than 300 years of massive fossil fuel burning by the so-called West to account for. And while this historical responsibility still played a significant role at Kyoto in 1997 - resulting in emissions cuts that were only legally binding for industrialised countries - it has gradually been pushed into the background.

Now in Paris it seems almost forgotten. But the fact that about 80% of historical carbon emissions have to be attributed to the developed countries cannot simply be wished away.

The rapid rise of emissions, particularly in China and India, is often cited as reason for why these rapidly industrialising countries now also have to curb their emissions. I'm not saying that they shouldn't. Both countries clearly have their own imperial ambitions, which they hope to achieve by stimulating massive industrial expansion.

But let's bear in mind that India's carbon emissions per capita are still 10 times lower than those of the US. And China's rapidly rising emissions are to a great extent driven by export-driven industries, producing consumer goods for the West.

Creative carbon accounting for business as usual

In fact if a consumption-based approach to carbon accounting is taken, the UK's national carbon emissions would be twice as high as officially reported.

This is also true for most Western European countries and the United States, which have experienced increasing rates of deindustrialisation over the past two decades with not only jobs but also carbon emissions being offshored to developing countries.

In return the West is receiving cheap consumer goods without recognising the responsibility for the embedded carbon emissions that come with them. A clear form of carbon colonialism.

Of course, some of the exponential growth in carbon emissions by India and China is also due to increases in home-grown consumption. China apparently now has the largest middle class in the world. However, if we take a consumption-based view, then even China's emissions per capita will not reach the US's current rate for a long time - and India's lag further behind.

Yet rich countries continue to be eager to outsource their responsibilities. Carbon offsetting will see an unprecedented growth in the coming years. Countries such as Norway and Switzerland will continue to strike bilateral deals with poor nations desperate for cash. Emissions trading systems (ETS) will allow maximum flexibility for companies to offset their emissions.

These are all mechanisms designed to cement the status quo. The EU ETS has not made a significant impact on the trading bloc's carbon emissions since its inception in 2005, allowing Shell's chief executive, Ben Van Beurden, to insist even in 2015 that "The reality of demand growth is such that fossil fuels will be needed for decades to come."

Nothing significant has changed since Rio 1992 or Kyoto 1997. Paris 2015 will be no different. The talking will continue until we realise climate change is a failure of a system, which - on the back of fossil fuel - is geared towards exponential economic growth.

Nobody who sits at the negotiation table in Paris has the mandate nor inclination to ask fundamental, systemic questions of the logic of the dominant economic system and the way we consume the resources of this planet.

 


 

Steffen Böhm is Professor in Management and Sustainability, and Director, Essex Sustainability Institute, University of Essex.The Conversation

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.