Bill Gates and Climate Change
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.
Comments
Post a Comment