After a season of record-breaking hurricanes in the US and floods across Asia, it would be easy to despair about the accelerating pace of climate change. Yet, despite the apocalyptic omens, an energy transformation big enough and fast enough to curb the spike in global temperature remains within reach.
Better still, we do not need to wait for new inventions to implement the changes we need — the transformation can happen right now, with profitable solutions delivered by businesses and driven by markets.
Limiting the increase in global temperature to within 2°C of pre-industrial levels — the target set by the 2015 Paris climate agreement — will require decreasing reliance on fossil fuels, and changing how the world grows crops, harvests timber and uses land.
New research by the Rocky Mountain Institute shows that both outcomes are possible and that, together, the impact can “positively” disrupt the trajectory of climate change.
According to our analysis, there are pathways for the future supply and demand of energy, and for how forests and land store carbon, that, if followed, would dramatically slow the pace of warming. By accelerating the clean-energy transition that is underway, it is possible to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions below what would be expected under current consumption patterns.
This scenario is not as far-fetched as some might believe.
The world is already switching to cleaner energy, to electric mobility, and to smarter power and land-use systems faster than anyone, including experts, anticipated.
It is not the first time the pace of change has exceeded expectations. In 1980, for example, AT&T hired McKinsey & Co to forecast the number of mobile phones that would be in use in the US within two decades. The consultants predicted that by 2000, the US mobile phone market would support about 900,000 devices. In fact, more than 100 million phones were sold that year. Today, the planet has more phones than people.
Solar and wind energy have suffered similarly flawed projections.
For decades, experts at the International Energy Agency and the US Energy Information Agency underestimated how quickly supplies from these sources would grow. They consistently guessed low, increasing their forecasts only slightly every year, without ever catching up to reality, but as clean-energy businesses innovated, the cost of production from wind and solar declined.
Energy became cheaper and usage increased as a result. Government models typically do not account for such expanding returns.
Another reason for underestimating the speed of today’s energy transition is that the scale is different from previous conversions to new technologies.
When people switched from burning wood to burning coal, and then to burning oil, the “new” energy sources came from very large capital projects, such as coal mines, offshore oil and gas fields, and refineries. The high costs of deploying these projects were then passed on to consumers.
By contrast, in today’s energy market, consumers have more control.
Consider how easy it is to install rooftop solar panels; it can be done in a single day. Millions of small machines — photovoltaic cells, wind turbines, batteries and smart appliances — are driving today’s energy transformation. Each new device in this distributed system is cheap and pays off quickly, so experimentation is affordable and the technology can improve rapidly. The result is a huge field of global competitors, with faster innovation and new business models that are helping to achieve economies of scale.
The hardware of the clean-energy revolution has more in common with mobile phones and laptops than with mines and refineries. Because it can be sold in very large markets, with scalable production chains and still-maturing technologies, the transition to cleaner power is happening faster than many experts predicted.
Still, not even a rapid shift toward “green” energy would be enough to keep global average temperature within 2°C of pre-industrial levels.
To achieve that, the world also needs to take more greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere.
Fortunately, that, too, is already possible.
By incorporating carbon-reducing strategies into agriculture and land conservation, more heat-trapping gases can be locked up in forests and soils, but while the techniques already exist, success would require increasing the use of no-till farming, adopting permaculture principles, better managing wetlands and using rotational grazing techniques, among other measures.
The power of markets to drive radical changes in energy and land use is great, but as the storm season this year should remind us, the climate emergency we face requires vigorous and urgent action.
Transforming the way people acquire and consume energy, and use land, will require strong incentives and policy frameworks to set the course for success, but do not despair: there is still time to save our climate.
The transformation has already begun — and it will play out faster than most people expect.
Jules Kortenhorst is chief executive of the Rocky Mountain Institute.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US