In November 2008, the United Kingdom set a major precedent for our planet. The British government passed the Climate Change Act. The new law requires greenhouse gas emissions to be reduced to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. The act also provides for support from an independent Climate Change Committee that will provide a series of "carbon level budgets" leading to reduced emissions down the road (Green America, spring, 2009).
The UK legislation addresses the "greenhouse effect" and global warming. In essence the British plan is to reduce their "carbon footprint" in terms of carbon consumption and transfer to atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). It will require the cooperation of the UK government, industry, business leaders and the consumer population.
Since the goal of the new legislation is to reduce emissions and improve the UK climate, one must view their Climate Change Act as a sincere but symbolic gesture. The Climate Change Act has no provisions for fines or sanctions to ensure meeting future emission targets. At present the law is based on voluntary compliance but is likely to be connected to lower industrial profits and higher consumer prices.
The UK climate is only a tiny slice of an interactive world ecosystem. Any thought of changes in the British climate affecting the world climate is virtual reality. To achieve world climate change would require international agreements. What would be the probability of such agreements in the face of huge economic and political issues, dwindling energy reserves and rising future demands? The track record for this level of international cooperation in human history speaks for itself. Essentially, the UK climate Change Act addresses "an inconvenient truth" that's too inconvenient.
Reducing CO2 emission can be achieved by preventing the clearing and burning of forests (deforestation) and reducing ocean pollution for sensitive marine vegetation. By protecting all our plant life "producer" populations we provide safe passage for removal of CO2.
Reduction in fossil fuel usage is clearly the highest priority for reducing release of CO2. However, major reductions can also be made by reducing the need for fossil fuels in the first place. To control global warming and still meet long term energy demands, we need to use a "reduction by replacement" policy. In essence this policy describes continuous incremental levels of fossil fuel replacement "down the road" of incremental development of an alternative energy source.
The UK projects a 40 year period to achieve a questionable 80% reduction in 1990 emission levels for their country (not total emission levels). With the recent history of US solar energy development, could we predict a 50% reduction of total US emission levels using "reduction by replacement" in half this time? Could we imagine this 50% reduction in 10 years enhanced financial support? Besides US energy independence and obvious economic benefits, this is not WMD technology that can't be shared with other nations to achieve global climate impact.
The solar energy alternative is clearly a responsible approach for a clean environment, a stable climate, and the long term energy needs of humanity. From the explosive origins of our planet, energy for the human race has always been based on capturing energy from the sun. The sun belongs to every person in every nation. It doesn't generate foreign policy, just clean limitless energy. With supplementation by wind and other safe natural sources, we can progressively meet the remaining technical solar challenges.
The work of NASA, several corporations, and the current solar industry have created photovoltaic cells converting solar energy into electricity. We have experimented with solar-hydrogen power producing safe water vapor byproducts. We have manufactured photovoltaic cell products such as calculators, solar pumps and solar battery chargers for our ipods and laptops. We have developed larger voltaic cell devices for the solar panels we use in space or the ones we use for residential heating and cooling. We have designed simple liquid or air solar collectors for residential heating or more complex focusing collectors or heliostats for high temperature solar furnaces.
If stabilizing global warming, providing a cleaner environment, achieving energy independence and boosting the economy are top priorities, we need federal financial support. These funds would provide for research and development by corporations, universities, and the current solar industry infrastructure. We also need additional consumer tax relief at all governmental levels.
Considering the incredible technical challenges we have overcome in the past, a "reduction by replacement" energy policy could mean complete fossil fuel replacement by the end of the next decade. This should also represent the end of continued global warming and the start of a future shining in energy rich sunlight.
