Bush, Climate And The Technology Illusion - Truthout

[hatrack]

EDIT

The problem, of course, is that its relevance is not assured. Mr. Bush effectively cites a series of techniques that present two characteristics: They're not operational and their success is not guaranteed. The first cited by Mr. Bush, and which arouses a vast interest in industrial milieus, is "advanced clean coal technology." It aims to bury the carbon dioxide gas produced by coal underground. However, on the one hand, its effectiveness remains to be proved, and, on the other hand, should it be successful, the first adapted thermal power station will not go on the market before 2020, so that all the power stations built between now and then will fling their gases into the atmosphere.

The second solution proposed: "secure nuclear power." George Bush refers to what specialists call the fourth generation of nuclear reactors, presenting minimal risk of an accident, minor production of radioactive waste, and a design that thwarts finding any military application for them. But if this fourth generation comes to be, it would not be - according to the most optimistic forecasts - until around 2040. As for the possibility of increasing the share of nuclear power with the technology we have now in the balance of global electricity production, that is not envisaged by the International Agency for Atomic Energy, which even forecasts, in its "World Energy Outlook 2006" report, a reduction of that share from 16 percent today to 10 percent in 2030!

The wind and the sun, cited by Mr. Bush: Are they the solution, then? Their contribution - and that of other renewable energies he forgot, such as wood and geothermal energy - is certainly called upon to grow. But not in proportion adequate to satisfy energy demand that continues to grow, unless some unexpected technological leap occurs. The other technologies cited - second generation agro-carburants and hydrogen vehicles - suffer from the same major flaw: In their present state of development, they do not perform adequately to respond to today's problems and the ones to come. We cannot exclude the possibility that they may succeed in doing so, but not before 2040 on a large scale.

The problem of deadlines is fundamental here. Why? Because the same IPCC report mentioned by Mr. Bush concludes that we must not start reducing our emissions in 2040 or in 2050, but right now. Climatologists fear that if the concentration in greenhouse gases continues to increase, warming will exceed 2 degrees Celsius, the threshold above which an uncontrollable breakdown of the climate system is likely. Consequently, we must begin to reduce our emissions starting now, without waiting for the technologies to become available. Thus, a policy of "responsible stewardship" leads to applying today the most effective means available, which is to reduce energy consumption. That does not imply curbing the research into new technologies, but it does imply the obligation to accept that developed countries' present way of life must change. That also supposes a modified allocation of financial resources: If it is useful to invest in technologies that could be available in forty years, it is no less necessary to invest in the improvement of known and effective means to reduce energy consumption.

EDIT

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/101607G.shtml