A Brief Analysis of Energy Policy in 2018

A Brief Analysis of Energy Policy in 2018 Energy consumption and production are not sustainable at current levels. The production of greenhouse gasses (carbon dioxide, methane, etc.) and the consequential greenhouse effect is central to the discussion of global warming. Like the glass of a greenhouse, Earth’s atmosphere is transparent to visible and infrared radiation emitted by the Sun. These wavelengths are absorbed at the Earth’s surface and re-emitted as a longer wavelength infrared which are unable to escape our increasingly dense atmosphere. As energy increases and global warming ensues, we begin to observe dramatic ecospheric shifts such as higher-intensity storms, reduction in biodiversity, and rising sea levels. In fact, the rate of species going extinct is at present 100 to 1000 times the usual background rate, and populations of large ocean fish are said to have declined 90% since 1950. Researchers in 2014 claimed the Western Antarctic Ice Sheet has been irreversibly destabilized, implying an approximate 3 meter rise in sea level in coming centuries. Meanwhile the human population is expected to exceed 9 billion by 2050 (UN 2002), implying a three fold increase in energy demand from 2000. De-carbonization in the next 50-100 years is thus the central challenge of global energy policy. How we proceed in this new epoch in Earth’s history has been widely debated throughout governments. In October of 2016 Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau announced a national carbon tax, starting at $10 ($8 U.S.) per ton in 2018 and rising to $50 by 2022. Just three months later, only hours after Donald Trump’s inauguration, the young administration demonstrated a dangerous rebuke of Obama-era policy, removing the White House webpage on climate change and publishing “An America First Energy Plan”. Such radical moves have prompted some states to act independently. On the same day as the inauguration, California announced an effort to reduce emissions from oil refineries in the state and increase the number of zero emissions vehicles on its roads. Reinforcing the states previous goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 40% less than 1990 levels by 2030. If global emissions are to be cut drastically by 2050, new routes must be plotted to increase the efficiency of an ever growing, energy dependent society. Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS), while still in the development phase have already provided electricity to grids in both the United States and Australia. EGS is perhaps the most promising of the immediately available solutions. The potential hazards associated with EGS such as induced seismicity are considered minimal in comparison to naturally occurring earthquakes and previous disasters associated with nuclear reactors like that of Chernobyl. If either EGS or expansive solar farms are to mature as our principle energy source(s), battery storage must become fully integrated into the mainstream power sector. Thus, refinements in battery performance, safety, and regulatory barriers must be overcome. A singular form of energy storage known as pumped hydropower has dominated the power sector for more than a century, though in recent decades, chemical energy storage has begun to emerge as a viable alternative in particular areas. The increased manufacturing of lithium-ion over sodium-sulfur chemistries has driven costs down and performance up. Leaving companies who are already heavily invested in battery advancement like Tesla Motors in a position to profit from secondary application of their research and development, ranging from households with photovoltaic panels, to off-grid islands and rural electrification, and in the long-term, our entire infrastructure. Many proposals have been made in the past to control or sequester the amount of atmospheric CO2. Economic controls such as taxing or selling permits haven't been implemented at the international scale required to affect serious emissions decline. And while a common mineral called serpentine is capable of absorbing up to 2/3 of its own weight in CO2 when ground. Absorbing the approximate 37 gigatonnes (82,880,000,000 lbs) of CO2 emitted in 2010 would requisite 55 gigatonnes of serpentine. A less than practical solution. Fascinatingly, actively cooling the Earth is an actual possibility. Proposals have been made to place aerosols in the stratosphere over the arctic during the summer, partially filtering the Sun’s intense radiation. If current trends continue we may be forced to accept direct control of the climate. A great deal of research is still needed and this method won’t resolve ocean acidification. Which is a problem with eight times as much phosphorus currently flowing into oceans than the natural background rate. In oceans, eutrophication has created about 400 dead zones, from 1 to 70,000 km2 in area. EGS may be the best near-term solution to satisfying our energy production needs, though wind and solar power have each individually impelled large economic returns, and advanced fission reactors are also in a position to make serious contributions given adequate funding is supplied. Most likely the future of the grid exists as an amalgam of these systems. It's unfortunate that a more progressive technology like fusion power isn't slated to serve as the principle source of energy in our lifetime. Projects like the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) and the National Ignition Facillity (NIF) aren't setup to be making contributions into the grid. Even assuming one of these projects succeeds in reaching ignition in the next 15-20 years, presumptively there would be little build incentive for a grid-embedded fusion reactor if the power-sector is already being dominated by 100% clean energy suppliers. That assumes however that the U.S. and other nations have indeed reached that threshold. In summary, governmental chaos and scattered funding may be the biggest threats to stabilizing the climate. Ultimately, solving global warming requires a streamlining of research funds into the most viable avenues. For projects like EGS to be successful they require funding from governments who are ambitious about addressing global warming. These governments cannot be lead by individuals who publicly adjudicate climate change as a hoax, pull funding from climate research, and attempt to revitalize the coal industry in an effort to 'bring back jobs' that have already been replaced by solar and wind technologies. Though implementation of solar facilities is now slated to decline due to the recent taxes placed on imported panels by the Trump administration. In response to the recent repeal of the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, The Union of Concerned Scientists has started a petition as an expression of disdain to EPA administrator/litigant Scott Pruitt. Click Here to Sign --> https://www.ucsusa.org Have suggestions about future content or need help solving a physics/math problem? Tweet @ThePhysicsBlog