Bill Gates and Climate Change

 

           Roscommon/Crawford Chapter

Bill Gates’s Big Ideas About Climate Change

 

Bill Gates has some big ideas about climate change. So many ideas, in fact, that he wrote a book about them. The book is now being pitched on various mediums, (think radio, TV, podcasts, and magazines) and I must admit, seeing this much marketing effort to sell books made me a little suspect about the content, especially since Gates’ previous philanthropy and expertise has not involved climate science. Full disclosure: I haven’t read the book yet, only several reviews that have shown Gates’ considerable data and engaging thoughts about the topic.

 

Here is what I have learned from the things I have read about his book “How To Avoid a Climate Change Disaster.”

 

Gates says we need to get to zero greenhouse gas emissions promptly. He uses an engaging simile; It’s like filling your bathtub, he says, with the end result being that everyone drowns. We now have the water spigot on our tub turned to full open and we need to shut it completely off, not just part-way. If we let it drip, drip, drip, it will just be a matter of time before the tub is completely full (and we all drown).

 

Gates says humans should be working to first eliminate the biggest, most important things that are causing greenhouse gas emissions. Using his categories, these things are:

           

                        Making things                           31% of total emissions

                        Using electricity                      27%

                        Growing things                        19%

                        Transporting things                 16%

                        Cooling & heating things         7%

                                                                        100%

 

We need to implement new technology to work on the things that are most important. The rational thing to be done is to work on the issues that have the best chance of success which translates into doing first, those that have the lowest premium cost to implement. Here is an example. Everyone knows that burning fossil fuels causes release of greenhouse gases. Most people know there is a ready solution to this problem. and it is using, solar panels and wind turbines. The cost premium to use these alternate means for generating electricity is very low, and in some cases zero. We should immediately changeover to these alternate means for making energy since every year that we delay means we have that much more work to do and that much less time to do it.

 

The harder things to do will require time to develop the technology to get them done. We should be working on improving the technology now to implement it for improvements in preventing further pollution as soon as possible. In the category of ‘Making Things,’ emissions from making steel and concrete are given as examples where new technology is needed.

Making concrete is a huge emissions source of greenhouse gases. The ancient technology of roasting limestone to make cement gives off loads of carbon dioxide. In the US, we use about 600 pounds of concrete per person per year, meaning we emit lots of carbon dioxide from this source. And China uses even more concrete than we do. So, how do we fix it? Some companies are experimenting with the idea of putting C02 back into the concrete as it cures, thus permanently locking up the pollutant. Gate intimates that we should be funding demonstration projects to help prove this approach or others that promise similar results, even at added cost.

 

Steel-making is another example of producing high CO2 emissions. The process of treating iron ore with coke to make steel, releases huge amounts of pollution. In fact, making one ton of steel releases nearly 2 tons of CO2. Experimental work has been done to eliminate the use of coke and replace it with electricity to make steel. It is likely that both the concrete and steel making changes will add cost to making things. However, if we get ourselves in the position where it is mandatory to eliminate CO2 emissions, these changes may be required regardless of their cost. New technology may reduce the cost to allow us to continue using concrete and steel.

 

Another change that could be implemented to reduce emissions is the notion of “Use less stuff.” The idea here is to determine what kind of stuff causes the most emissions and then consider remedies for using less of THAT stuff. Clothing based on denim is a good example. For some reason, making denim fabric is highly energy intensive compared to other fabrics; on a yard for yard basis denim causes more CO2 to be emitted than most other fabrics suggesting that re-use, re-purposing, and salvaging end pieces of commercial rolls of denim can offer real benefits in reducing emissions. There are now some entrepreneurs who are beginning to do these denim-saving things.

 

You should know that not everyone lauds Gates’ new book. Bill McKibben, the highly respected researcher and spokesman for all things involving climate change is a critic of Gates and his book. McKibben points out that Gates is often on the wrong side of the political divide involving the fossil fuel industry by investing in entities that promote that industry and those in government who direct research dollars. McKibben also notes that Gates’s cost premium arguments are woefully out of date. McKibben uses the extraordinary declines in the cost of solar panels as an example. He says the costs for new batteries have also been dropping precipitously allowing them to help make energy at lower costs than fossil fuels can, invalidating many of the old arguments.

 

I believe McKibben based on his years of work in the field, however, I think all debate on the issue of climate change is helpful; with Gates’ new book and his Microsoft reputation, we might even be able to convince a few more folks that climate change is a man-made phenomena that threatens us all.