TED Conversations

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Can we switch to renewables much faster if we just set aside 2 years worth of fossil fuels we burn annualy as EPBT is 2 years?

We have a storehouse of fossil fuels that'll last decades/centuries. Suppose v hacked the economy in some strange way that nations SET ASIDE a special pool of fossil fuels that corresponds to 2 YEARS of world wide consumption. Now we are allowed to use ALL THAT ENERGY without paying anything to the govt to make solar panels/wind turbines from raw materials. This powerplant can provide for the needs of the entire planet say 15 TW. We keep this pool separate from the traditional demand and supply markets to avoid wreaking economies.

Initially we could use this new energy to sequester CO2. They could be loaned out to poor countries in Africa to magically raise their standard of livin rapidly. The rest of the plants could reinvest the energy produced in making even more renewable power plants acting as a solar breeder.

The rate of production of these new plants will only be determined by limits of manufacturing scalability. With so much wealth sloshing around and extremely rapid growth some companies would definitely profit from it which is fine and good. We just need to have a process to prevent greedy people escaping from the system after gobbling up a lot of fuel.

Over time the fossil fuel plants can be shut down or some how re purposed to run on solar hydrogen.

I am not an economist, but there seems to be no problems with the physics or chemistry or the math that I can think of. Are the needs of maintaining artificial scarcity of fuels though supply and demand so important that we have to wait for decades until we slowly integrate renewables into our energy supply?

Can we hack our economies so that we can make the switch in fewer decades, thus significantly reducing the total emitted CO2 as every day the new emissions accumulate. So the faster the better.

If it was a silly idea, sorry 4 wasting ur time. I ain't an economist. But what I am saying is that governments need not cut funding to something else to make the investment in renewables happen

progress indicator
  • Sep 29 2012: Believe it or not we can reduce the use of fossil fuels in a huge percentage within months. Aternative fuels that can be used by any car exist. In my country there is a story about it. Political, and burocratic issues are the only obstacle for this change. Because the companies that produce energy with fossil fuel know that there are alternative forms of renewable energy we can start using now. Some of them by the patents for new alternative fuels and store them in a desk. So they dont become a threat for their interests. Ethanol based fuels can be made out of sugar cane and corn, In fact some ethanol plants are self efficient. They produce ethanol for the market, and they produce the energy they need with their own ethanol. We must remember that Henry Ford's Model T could run on gasoline, kerosene and ethanol, but ethanol it was not used because the Prohibition of 1920 that banned the used of alcohol. There would be an impact in the oil based industry yes. But petroleum is not only used by cars, Also planes and other types of vehicles, and its only application is not in fuels. Even ethanol based fuels are mixed with a small amount of "normal" fuel so their industry will not disappear at all. But the change can be made if we all want it to happen.