The cause of climate change is pretty easy to understand, and I will try my best to explain it to you. You know the process of convection? Have you ever been in a sauna or greenhouse? I will explain the greenhouse as I think it is the best example. It's the name of course.
Greenhouse gases are basiclly what caused climate change. But, dont think that means they are all bad. Without them earth would basiclly be a giant snowball, as we need some heat from the sun trapped in so we can live. When we have too much however, we eventually bake earth, and disrupt a number of natrual processes that just make life a lot more difficult. This in the modern world is an easy solution, that involves cooperation with goverments and their people
The United Nations provides the following information here
Climate change has many dangerous effects, some of which are obvious but others are a bit more complicated
In addition if we go to far with fossil fuels the economic damages will be catastrophic in many different ways
Natrual gas is the gas form of fossil fuels and is still very much hazardous, although emits less than other sources. The process of fracking is exteremly dangerous and inefficent. The process of fracking involves the use of dangerous chemical addatives that are used in combination of water which can pollute the surrounding enviroment, pollute nearbye aquifers or well water, as well as many other issues. The biggest issue is this huge amount of contaminated water doesnt return to the water cycle. And when we burn the natrual gas we are causing the warming of earth which leads to melting ice caps and glaciers, which potentially risks further water contamination
Many different people have been recording data on this subject and it becomes very clear that something is wrong. With our current weather patterns its pretty obvious something is different. Even if we didnt know it was real then having renewable energy would be much better for the economy and overall a smart plan for the future
Climate change is easily preventable! its just we have people in goverments, predominatly of major world powers, that refuse to give in to change despite impending consequences that may be irreversable. We have no real reason not to switch to alternitive energy (see below) in fact cnet recorded that Solar Enegry for instance has doubled in efficency and become 10 times cheaper since 2010. Scientific American has several spectaular artcles on things such as air-conditoners that do not emit fluorinayyed gases. Kurzgesagt in a video made the agrument that by giving up and thinking its hopeless we are letting ourselves loose. We've made amazing prpogress and just need to finish it!
1 coal power plant produces 3,500 Gwt hours per year but also emits many millions of tonnes of Co2 which heats our planet resulting in many dangerous results over time. Take a look at some of the energy sources below. Many produce far more energy than coal and don't emit Co2!
View descriptions, effiency and pros and cons below
For reference: The average American household uses 10,800 kWh (Kilowatt Hours) per year.
Energy Form | Description | Pros | Cons | Developments | How much to make Gwts |
Solar Power | Captures the immense energy from earths sun and converts it to usable electricity | Very compact and easy to use. In recent years have become more efficient and is cheaper. With it you can generate your own power for a much better long term investment at home | Enviormental pollution from manufacturing can be a concern, space can be limited for some places, and is dependent on sunlight. Energy generation may also not be enough for some houses | As mentioned efficiency is rapidly increasing and very well should in the future as well as making them cheaper and more readily avaliable. | 1.5 Kwh per day per solar panel with 6 hours of sunlight. That means about 20 solar panels are needed to power a house per year, with 6 hours of sunlight per day. Keep in mind individual solar panels are relativly small |
Hydropower | Uses the flow of water to generate electricity. Like a bunch of waterwheels sort of. Can actully be quite efficient | Efficient and meets electricty demand. In the long term its inexpensive | The upfront cost to build can be expensive. Not every area has a reservoir | New turbine designs increase efficiency and cost effectivness | Depends as they can vary in size, but some large onces which power entire chunks of nations such as the Three Forges Dam in China produce an insane 80-100 Terrawatt hours, or about 100,000 Gigawatt hours per year, enough to power 9 million American homes. Hydropower already produces 20% of our energy. If we eliminate fossil fuels and expand our other forms we should be able to generate enough to support the demand in our world |
Geothermal | Uses the energy provided by the extereme heat inside earth. | Generally small effect on the surrounding land. Reliable source of power. Can be large or small scale | Depends on the location. High starting costs. Can lead to instability of the surface | The use of geomthermal power and the surrounding industry is expanding | Geothermal energy is very efficient! It has an efficiency of 300% to 400% according to gov.mb.ca and 1 power plant. Currently geomthermal provides U.S citizens 2700 megawatts or enough to power 3.5 million homes. This is also only a very small fraction of the amount of energy we could generate! If we keep constructing more plants in any of the methods listed we can generate a ton of energy |
Nuclear | Uses radioactive elements to generate an extreme amount of energy | Doesnt take up a ton of land. Very high power output. Reliable source of energy. Safe if properly maintained | Accidents can be catastrophic. Nuclear waste disposal is a problem as the current best method is just to bury it deep underground in concrete vaults. very high upfront costs to build safe infistructure. Uranium is rarer than other materials | Better saftey features are being developed. According to IAEA "Fast reactors, thorium reactors and other new technologies can provide novel fuel cycle solutions" | A huge 876 Gigawatts is produced if a plant is run for a year. |
Ocean Energy | Uses waves from the ocean to provide energy | Predictable production rate,super high output of energy | Expensive inital costs. Some say enviromental impacts but really it isnt that bad and doesn't pollute much | Ongoing development. Can power many many homes so support ocean energy! | OCEAN WAVES ARE POWERFUL. Ocean energy can generate in shallow waters: 3,800 terawatt-hours per year. |
Sources: https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=97&t=3,https://www.energy.gov/eere/water/hydropower-basics, https://www.marketwatch.com/guides/solar/power-solar-panels-produce/#:~:text=The%20average%20solar%20panel%20has,to%20eight%20kilowatts%20(kW), https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/geothermal/use-of-geothermal-energy.php, https://www.energysage.com/about-clean-energy/geothermal/pros-cons-geothermal-energy/, https://www.smu.edu/dedman/academics/departments/earth-sciences/research/geothermallab/labresearch/oilandgas/whyusegeothermalenergy#:~:text=Geothermal%20Energy%20Power%20Highlights,geothermal%20energy%20in%20the%20U.S, https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=104&t=3, https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/hydropower/wave-power.php#:~:text=Ocean%20waves%20contain%20tremendous%20energy,scale%20electricity%20generation%2C%20in%202023.
Credit: allen watkin from London, UK
Note: the emissions are just steam from the immense heat. Credit: Posted by Maria Robinson https://blog.advancedenergyunited.org/
Emissions are steam. Credit: Stefan Kühn wikimedia commons
Credit: https://cleantechnica.com/2023/02/22/us-pokes-the-sleeping-giant-of-ocean-wave-energy/
Some very efficent energy options that don't emit CO2 and are renewable are geothermal, ocean power, and hydropower as well as nuclear power
A major concern about eliminating the use of Coal, Oil, and Gas is the loss of jobs and I understand the concerns. In many places such as rural pennsylvannia where work is hard to find coal mines produce an honest living, however new sources of power will still create jobs, in fact the demand for other mineral resources for new energy sources will likley result in more jobs in the same feild. Other jobs too such as plant workers will increase too so there are plently of places.
Biofuel will not solve the climate change crisis in most current forms as it still does produce more CO2 than our planet can handle at the rate of consumption. Ive noticed a lot of mixed information so I decided to consult a goverment paper on this which can be found Here
As the article states biofuel does have a significant reduction in the emissions with the ideal types being and 86% cut. We can assume future developments may even make cleaner forms.
Another problem that we will establish as one of our big things to tackle later in the article is the energy used to make the biofuel. That energy is comming from burning fossil fuels for the most part!
Research on zero emission biobuels has and is being done! Currently methonal and biodiesal seem to be some of the best biofuels, but personally I belive we should not focus on biofuel unless a net zero or very close to biofuel is produced in large enough quantities. For now the best thing we can do is switch our power plants
A topic that strongly relates to climate change in enviormental importance is water conservation. Earth is made up of 70% water! Only 2.5% of that water is drinkable (however desalinization is possible but expensive) and we all need water to live obviously. Of that most about 68% is within glaciers which due to rising tempretures caused by burning fossil fuels will melt and become contaminated. Processes such as fracking for natrual gas use dangerous and harmful chemicals to erode the rock away which pollute ground water as shown above in the fracking section. We have a process called the water cycle on earth that allows our water to be renewable but pollution from climate change related activites takes water out of this cycle and could be a serious threat if unresolved
Image source: ShinRyu Forgers Wikimedia Commons
The future doesnt have to be a bleak world where we all have to limit everything! We just have to be responable. Using renewable energy sources to power our homes and buildings, having solar panels on the roofs of new homes so we generate our own energy
Electric cars are a clean, efficent, and fast alternative to gas, and we will compare the pros and cons of them here.
It is nessisary that we switch as our cars emit a very large amount of greenhouse gases
Electric cars are just as cool as gas! They as you should see above are actully faster than gas powered ones
For electric cars to take off more companies need to switch to them, legslation to promite and/or bennifits should be passed for owners, and prices should be kept affordable. Charging should also be easily accsesable at stations like gas is currently (2024). Battery life and charging speed are both factors that are improving as time goes on
To make a change 3 things need to happen. Goverment cooperation, passing of laws, and interest and education of the people. These fundimental things can help spread awareness and help people transition without any long term economic damages to them