Home » Opinion » Foreign Views
Green R&D far outshines lights-out Earth Hour
By Bjorn Lomborg |
March 19, 2013, Tuesday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
ON the evening of March 23, 1.3 billion people will go without light at 8:30pm, and at 9:30pm, and at 10:30pm, and for the rest of the night - just like every other night of the year. With no access to electricity, darkness after sunset is a constant reality for these people.
On the same evening, another billion will participate in the environmental event Earth Hour by turning off their lights from 8:30-9:30pm.
The organizers say that they are providing a way to demonstrate one's desire to "do something" about global warming. But the stark reality is that Earth Hour teaches all the wrong lessens, and actually increases CO2 emissions.
As the UK's National Grid operators have found, a small decline in electricity consumption does not translate into less energy being pumped into the grid, and therefore will not reduce emissions.
Moreover, during Earth Hour, any significant drop in electricity demand will entail a reduction in CO2 emissions during the hour, but it will be offset by the surge from firing up coal or gas stations to restore electricity supplies afterwards.
And the cozy candles that many participants will light, which seem so natural and environmentally friendly, are still fossil fuels - and almost 100 times less efficient than incandescent light bulbs. Using one candle for each switched-off bulb cancels out even the theoretical CO2 reduction; using two candles means that you emit more CO2.
Electricity has given humanity huge benefits.
Dung and twigs
Almost 3 billion people still burn dung, twigs, and other traditional fuels indoors to cook and keep warm, generating noxious fumes that kill an estimated 2 million people each year, mostly women and children.
Likewise, just a hundred years ago, the average American family spent six hours each week during cold months shoveling six tons of coal into the furnace (not to mention cleaning the coal dust from carpets, furniture, curtains, and bedclothes).
In the developed world today, electric stoves and heaters have banished indoor air pollution.
Similarly, electricity has allowed us to mechanize much of our world, ending most backbreaking work. The washing machine liberated women from spending endless hours carrying water and beating clothing on scrub boards. The refrigerator made it possible for almost everyone to eat more fruits and vegetables, and simply to stop eating rotten food.
Labor saving
The electricity that people in rich countries consume is, on average, equivalent to the energy of 56 servants helping them.
Even people in Sub-Saharan Africa have electricity equivalent to about three servants. They need more of it, not less.
Today, we produce only a small fraction of the energy that we need from solar and wind - 0.7 percent from wind and just 0.1 percent from solar. Even with optimistic assumptions, the International Energy Agency estimates that, by 2035, we will produce just 2.4 percent of our energy from wind and 0.8 percent from solar.
To green the world's energy, we should focus on inventing new, more efficient green technologies to out-compete fossil fuels.
If we really want a sustainable future for all of humanity and our planet, we shouldn't plunge ourselves back into darkness.
Tackling climate change by turning off the lights and eating dinner by candlelight smacks of the "let them eat cake" approach to the world's problems that appeals only to well-electrified, comfortable elites.
Focusing on green R&D might not feel as good as participating in a global gabfest with flashlights and good intentions, but it is a much brighter idea.
Bjorn Lomborg, an adjunct professor at the Copenhagen Business School, founded and directs the Copenhagen Consensus Center. He is the author of "The Skeptical Environmentalist" and "Cool It." Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2013.www.project-syndicate.org. Shanghai Daily condensed the article.
On the same evening, another billion will participate in the environmental event Earth Hour by turning off their lights from 8:30-9:30pm.
The organizers say that they are providing a way to demonstrate one's desire to "do something" about global warming. But the stark reality is that Earth Hour teaches all the wrong lessens, and actually increases CO2 emissions.
As the UK's National Grid operators have found, a small decline in electricity consumption does not translate into less energy being pumped into the grid, and therefore will not reduce emissions.
Moreover, during Earth Hour, any significant drop in electricity demand will entail a reduction in CO2 emissions during the hour, but it will be offset by the surge from firing up coal or gas stations to restore electricity supplies afterwards.
And the cozy candles that many participants will light, which seem so natural and environmentally friendly, are still fossil fuels - and almost 100 times less efficient than incandescent light bulbs. Using one candle for each switched-off bulb cancels out even the theoretical CO2 reduction; using two candles means that you emit more CO2.
Electricity has given humanity huge benefits.
Dung and twigs
Almost 3 billion people still burn dung, twigs, and other traditional fuels indoors to cook and keep warm, generating noxious fumes that kill an estimated 2 million people each year, mostly women and children.
Likewise, just a hundred years ago, the average American family spent six hours each week during cold months shoveling six tons of coal into the furnace (not to mention cleaning the coal dust from carpets, furniture, curtains, and bedclothes).
In the developed world today, electric stoves and heaters have banished indoor air pollution.
Similarly, electricity has allowed us to mechanize much of our world, ending most backbreaking work. The washing machine liberated women from spending endless hours carrying water and beating clothing on scrub boards. The refrigerator made it possible for almost everyone to eat more fruits and vegetables, and simply to stop eating rotten food.
Labor saving
The electricity that people in rich countries consume is, on average, equivalent to the energy of 56 servants helping them.
Even people in Sub-Saharan Africa have electricity equivalent to about three servants. They need more of it, not less.
Today, we produce only a small fraction of the energy that we need from solar and wind - 0.7 percent from wind and just 0.1 percent from solar. Even with optimistic assumptions, the International Energy Agency estimates that, by 2035, we will produce just 2.4 percent of our energy from wind and 0.8 percent from solar.
To green the world's energy, we should focus on inventing new, more efficient green technologies to out-compete fossil fuels.
If we really want a sustainable future for all of humanity and our planet, we shouldn't plunge ourselves back into darkness.
Tackling climate change by turning off the lights and eating dinner by candlelight smacks of the "let them eat cake" approach to the world's problems that appeals only to well-electrified, comfortable elites.
Focusing on green R&D might not feel as good as participating in a global gabfest with flashlights and good intentions, but it is a much brighter idea.
Bjorn Lomborg, an adjunct professor at the Copenhagen Business School, founded and directs the Copenhagen Consensus Center. He is the author of "The Skeptical Environmentalist" and "Cool It." Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2013.www.project-syndicate.org. Shanghai Daily condensed the article.
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
