Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

bananas

(27,509 posts)
15. That won't come close to what's needed.
Mon Feb 6, 2012, 08:19 AM
Feb 2012
http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/01/10/207320/the-full-global-warming-solution-how-the-world-can-stabilize-at-350-to-450-ppm/

The full global warming solution: How the world can stabilize at 350 to 450 ppm

By Joe Romm on Jan 10, 2011 at 4:32 pm

In this post I will lay out ‘the solution’ to global warming.

This post is an update of a 2008 analysis I revised in 2009. A report by the International Energy Agency came to almost exactly the same conclusion as I did, and has relatively similar wedges, so I view that as a vindication of this overall analysis.

<snip>

This is what the entire planet must achieve:
1 wedge of albedo change through white roofs and pavement (aka “soft geoengineering) “” see “Geoengineering, adaptation and mitigation, Part 2: White roofs are the trillion-dollar solution“
1 wedge of vehicle efficiency “” all cars 60 mpg, with no increase in miles traveled per vehicle.
1 of wind for power “” one million large (2 MW peak) wind turbines
1 of wind for vehicles -another 2000 GW wind. Most cars must be plug-in hybrids or pure electric vehicles.
3 of concentrated solar thermal (aka solar baseload)- ~5000 GW peak.
3 of efficiency “” one each for buildings, industry, and cogeneration/heat-recovery for a total of 15 to 20 million GW-hrs. A key strategy for reducing direct fossil fuel use for heating buildings (while also reducing air conditioning energy) is geothermal heat pumps.
1 of solar photovoltaics “” 2000 GW peak
1 wedge of nuclear power – 700 GW
2 of forestry “” End all tropical deforestation. Plant new trees over an area the size of the continental U.S.
1 wedge of WWII-style conservation, post-2030 [this could well include dietary changes]

Here are additional wedges that require some major advances in applied research to be practical and scalable, but are considered plausible by serious analysts, especially post-2030:
1 of geothermal plus ocean-based renewables (i.e. tidal, wave, and/or ocean thermal)
1 of coal with biomass cofiring plus carbon capture and storage “” 400 GW of coal plus 200 GW biomass with CCS
1/2 to 1 wedge of cellulosic biofuels for long-distance transport and what little aviation remains in 2050 “” using 8% of the world’s cropland [or less land if yields significantly increase or algae-to-biofuels proves commercial at large scale].
1 of soils and/or biochar- Apply improved agricultural practices to all existing croplands and/or “charcoal created by pyrolysis of biomass.” Both are controversial today, but may prove scalable strategies.

That should do the trick. And yes, the scale is staggering.

<snip>

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

If I understand recent arguments... phantom power Feb 2012 #1
To throw a monkey wrench into it XemaSab Feb 2012 #3
They aren't "sacrificing the desert" - the deserts are growing - because of global warming. bananas Feb 2012 #2
In the article it says that a land area as big as LA, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties XemaSab Feb 2012 #5
You really don't seem to understand what's happening: "Dust-Bowlification" bananas Feb 2012 #14
The historical Dust Bowl was due to a combination of drought and breaking up the topsoil XemaSab Feb 2012 #17
Hopelessly flailing against the very solution to the global warming problem still I see. txlibdem Feb 2012 #18
I have a problem with destroying open space in order to save it. XemaSab Feb 2012 #29
So we should destroy people's homes and livelihoods before relocating a turtle to another place? txlibdem Feb 2012 #33
It's too bad there aren't any big, flattish, unused, sunny surfaces in cities. LeftyMom Feb 2012 #35
We need those for green roofs to combat the heat island effect txlibdem Feb 2012 #37
In the areas we're talking about green roofs don't make much sense. LeftyMom Feb 2012 #38
The exception that proves the rule? txlibdem Feb 2012 #42
After about 30 seconds of looking, these all look like great areas: XemaSab Feb 2012 #40
Angels dancing on the head of a pin txlibdem Feb 2012 #41
You might not be losing as much as you think XemaSab Feb 2012 #44
That's why residents of those cities can put up solar panels... just don't bulldoze their homes txlibdem Feb 2012 #57
“…they represent but a pin prick compared to the scale of solar thermal plus solar PV that we need…” OKIsItJustMe Feb 2012 #54
Industrial sites? Interesting thought pattern. txlibdem Feb 2012 #58
One problem with these numbers OKIsItJustMe Feb 2012 #55
Again, I'd really like to see numbers on transmission loss XemaSab Feb 2012 #59
I'd rather see a focus on incorporating solar pannels... ellisonz Feb 2012 #4
That won't come close to what's needed. bananas Feb 2012 #15
The scale is massive, yes, but no more massive than other projects we have built txlibdem Feb 2012 #20
You're talking about inches when we need miles. AtheistCrusader Feb 2012 #24
I crunched some numbers in post #29 XemaSab Feb 2012 #30
+1 ellisonz Feb 2012 #39
Reduce Reuse Recycle AtheistCrusader Feb 2012 #47
How is this saving the earth? RC Feb 2012 #6
These plants are loathesome. hunter Feb 2012 #7
This was predictable. Whenever a renewable sources becomes workable... Odin2005 Feb 2012 #8
What's wrong with deserts? XemaSab Feb 2012 #9
Nothing, but it's the best place to put large solar plants. Odin2005 Feb 2012 #10
There's plenty of desert that's already trashed... hunter Feb 2012 #12
You forgot ATV's XemaSab Feb 2012 #13
Me thinks you need to go back and read the OP RC Feb 2012 #11
Should we "mow down" your city instead? txlibdem Feb 2012 #21
What makes you think that desert species are barely eking out an existence? XemaSab Feb 2012 #22
Yet even a small change to their environment will spell certain peril for their species txlibdem Feb 2012 #26
We've had 300-year droughts here before XemaSab Feb 2012 #31
I call BS on that. You're going to have to provide some supporting evidence txlibdem Feb 2012 #34
I didn't say there was literally no water for 300 years XemaSab Feb 2012 #45
Your post is hyperbole yet still serves to prove my point txlibdem Feb 2012 #56
A few points: XemaSab Feb 2012 #60
Since you missed this the first time, I post it again. RC Feb 2012 #43
The earth will be fine.. Javaman Feb 2012 #16
word AlecBGreen Feb 2012 #63
Sorry desert! OKIsItJustMe Feb 2012 #19
How many homes are powered for each square mile destroyed? XemaSab Feb 2012 #23
And how many square miles of land will be yielded uninhabitable by a solar accident? OKIsItJustMe Feb 2012 #27
What about fracking? Dead_Parrot Feb 2012 #36
I'm not a fan of fracking OKIsItJustMe Feb 2012 #48
Not to mention the coal mines... hunter Feb 2012 #25
+1. Truth is stronger than any cult. txlibdem Feb 2012 #28
So let's use our existing uranium XemaSab Feb 2012 #32
Or, even better XemaSab Feb 2012 #46
Let me introduce you to a word ... "subsidence" Nihil Feb 2012 #49
Yeah, I know a shopping plaza that was built on top of a landfill OKIsItJustMe Feb 2012 #50
That is super cool XemaSab Feb 2012 #51
Methane capture OKIsItJustMe Feb 2012 #53
I'd not be worried about flat (especially flexible) PV ... Nihil Feb 2012 #61
Even if you wanted to use some sort of concentrated solar… OKIsItJustMe Feb 2012 #62
I was thinking more like open pit mines XemaSab Feb 2012 #52
The pits could be sealed and back filled with the tailings. hunter Feb 2012 #64
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Sacrificing the desert to...»Reply #15