Quote:
Originally Posted by nik-
First we need to define what "there" is. Is "there" our current energy demands completely replaced by renewables? 80% replaced? 60%?
If it's fully, then no, we won't get there in our lifetimes. I don't think 80% either. 60%? Now we're talking attainable.
I fully believe that the replacement of fossil fuels for electricity generation is fully possible in our lifetimes. This is what the government should be pushing and it would be a massive impact. Unfortunately for some environmentalists, this means nuclear. The fear of nuclear has to be eliminated.
As far as transportation. Once the energy that supplies the batteries power is green, electric cars will actually be green. Manufacturers and consumers will take care of that switch without government intervention. It will take a little time, but will happen naturally.
Planes and Shipping. I don't see it changing in our lifetimes.
|
https://www.iea.org/publications/fre...ishversion.pdf
See the chart Page 8
This is one attempt (of many) to develop a pathway that gets to a 50% chance of achieving 2 degrees of warming by 2040.
The world moves from over 75% of the energy it consumes being fossil fuels to slightly less than 50% in 2050. That doesn't tell the full story because there will be CCS on a bunch of that fossil fuel consumption. If you don't think CCS will scale then you need to reduce it by a further 40% or so.
Anyway, most credible scenarios to deal with climate change still includes a large role for fossil fuels. Just not a dominant role. And clean technologies takes over as the prime movers of choice.
Again, though if you look nuclear is not the keystone of the scenario either. It increases sure, but it's not as you claim that we will "require" people to be more comfortable with nuclear. Seems that renewables and energy efficiency can get the bulk of the job done.