Clean Power global warming

Published on December 16th, 2015 | by Tobias Engelmeier

17

4 Ways In Which You Can Contribute To Reducing Global Warming

December 16th, 2015 by  



global warmingThe Paris Agreement on reducing global warming got everyone very excited. The leaders of the world came together and agreed on a deal that arguably helps and has some teeth. That is really good news. However, it’s not enough. And it is a topic too important to leave to politics.

This is where we are: We need to stop global warming to save the planet (cheesy, but true), and we have about 30 years to do it. Given the size of the task at hand, that is a very short amount of time. The good news is: we can do it. “We” meaning each one of us, individually.

Global warming is the struggle of our generation. Its effects are happening as you read: droughts, threatened harvests, rising sea levels, vanishing ecosystems, more extreme weather. There is more than enough scientific evidence that global warming is a man-made problem, linked to the rise in carbon emissions witnessed since the beginnings of the industrial era in the 19th century.

Sometimes, the vastness and complexity of the issue, the lack of progress, and the repeated apocalyptic messages can dull our senses or scare us into looking the other way. Let’s not let that happen. We don’t need to wait for others to sort this out. We can do our part – here and now.

You might be surprised at how much power we, as individuals, have to fight global warming, if we really care and make it a part of our everyday decisions. You can make a difference as a consumer, as a voter, as an investor, and as a professional. Here is my “Everyday Climate Warrior Guide:”





Tags: , ,


About the Author

is working towards a low carbon world. He believes that this is a great opportunity rather than a sacrifice and that it will be driven by business and economic fundamentals rather than by political directive. Developing countries, who can still make a choice about their future energy infrastructure, are in a particularly good position to get the most out of the renewable energy and energy efficiency solutions available. The good news is: A global energy transition is inevitable. The bad news is: current market designs in most countries are not conducive enough and could delay this inevitable transition for just too long to save our climate. So that is what we need to work on: better market designs. (Disclaimer: views in motion...) Companies I am involved with: TFE Consulting (www.tfeconsulting.com) www.bridgetoindia.com (sustainability solutions for India), www.indiagoessolar.com (helping consumer go solar in India), www.gridhub.com (the business platform for the global renewables industry).



  • Nimesh Shukla

    Thanks Tobias for such an informatic article & i like the references too.

  • There is also an interesting discussion about technology: do we really already have the technology we need and it is just a matter of scale through deployment, continued improvement and cost reduction – as many of the current technology companies seem to think? Or do we need to invent new solutions (new storage, nuclear fusion, climate engineering, carbon capture, etc.) as Bill Gates and The Economist seem to think?

    • Bob_Wallace

      We need to bring the cost of storage down. Both for grid and EV use.

      Do that and we can replace fossil fuels while lowering the cost of both electricity and driving.

      We need no new technology although, obviously, improvements are improvements.

      We don’t have a solution for pulling carbon out of the air and re-sequestering it. That’s the one place we need developments which could be called “breakthroughs”.

      It feels like Gate doesn’t have a good handle on where we are with wind and solar. It may be that he thinks the solution must be more “complicated”. We’ve got simple and simple does the job.

      • rockyredneck

        We have a very simple method of pulling carbon out of the air, trees and plants. By using them to manufacture durable goods we sequester carbon for long time.

        • Bob_Wallace

          That is true. But limited. We can’t plant and grow enough trees to grow ourselves out of this problem. That math has been done.

          • Kraylin

            Do you mean at current levels of emissions? Surely our only hope is reducing emissions to the point where plants/trees are able to process the co2 efficiently enough… If this is not possible, aren’t we already doomed?

          • Bob_Wallace

            No, I mean that once we reach zero CO2 emissions we can’t plant trees and pull back existing CO2 as fast as we need to.

          • rockyredneck

            No other single method has any better chance of success so why do you reject this method as a partial answer?

          • Bob_Wallace

            I did not reject the partial solution of planting more trees.

            I pointed out that it was not sufficient.

  • ben welgoed

    One serious omission: 5) Have less or NO offspring.
    This should really be pt #1 considering the after-effect is eternal.

  • Roger Lambert

    ” The good news is: we can do it. “We” meaning each one of us, individually.”

    Seriously, this canard again?

    A thirty trillion dollar high tech project should be a matter of individual action? On the other hand, maybe we should take this endeavor a bit more seriously than a book group. The past thirty years has shown us pretty darned conclusively that getting rid of carbon is something that CAN NOT be left to laissez-faire economics or the actions of individuals.

    This is a titanic problem which can only properly by handled by national government. And the sooner we get serious about demanding that government shoulder its responsibilities, the sooner we will actually start building the new renewable energy infrastructure that is our only hope.

    We have billions of PV panels to manufacture and install. We have millions of large wind towers to erect. Tens of thousands of tidal/wave machines to design and deploy. Smart grids to be build over the globe.

    Governments build those things. Not individuals.

    • Brent Jatko

      Agreed, but it is vitally important to change minds as well, and that works best on an individual level.

    • I think you missed the point… governments are made of people.

      We are the government. We are the investors. We are the consumers. We are the businesspeople. I thought the point was made clearly enough, but maybe not.

      • Actually John Kerry made that point in Paris. He said “we need to make climate change a voting issue”. Currently, in the US it is not, I think. In fact, funnily, denying climate change seems to be more of a voting issue. The political deadlock in Congress severely limits what the US government can do in terms of national energy policies and international climate treaties. So: Care as a voter.

      • Dragon

        I think there are two valid points here. One is that “change starts with yourself” has been a talking point for decades, and a small percentage of the population has embraced that, and we’ve had almost no effect on slowing climate change. Sometimes the talking point has actually been used to delay corporate or political action, as if individual action were enough to solve the problem and that’s likely where Roger’s tone of frustration comes from.

        A second point is that in a democratic society we ultimately have the ability to elect officials that will do something about climate change. We haven’t done so because the issue is too low a priority for most people who vote. This article says we should change that, and that’s a good message.

        I think the ultimate answer is we need EVERYTHING. We need economics, voters, leaders, and individual actions. None of them are enough on their own. All of them together still might not be enough. All we can do is keep pushing.

  • JamesWimberley

    Not everybody will like the analogy, but we are roughly at the point on Omaha Beach when the GIs have landed under withering fire, and the survivors are sheltering behind beach obstacles. Then some decide their chances are better if they keep moving forward towards the sea wall, and take it.

Back to Top ↑