Following on from our blog post earlier this week, today we’ll be publishing another runner-up for the sixth form essay competition: Zinzi Mlotshwa from Great Western Academy, who included some very interesting considerations of CCS as well as the carbon footprint of the Internet.
“Developing new technology is the most important factor in addressing climate change”. Discuss.
Our dynamic environment demands flexible ideas. Climate change has now, more than ever, been made more relevant and prevalent in our lives with the rapid rate of environmental degradation and atmospheric pollution that has been occurring over the past few decades. With Earth reaching nearer to its threshold of a state from which we cannot return, the decisions we make today regarding innovation can affect the decision that need to be made tomorrow. I somewhat disagree with the notion that developing new technology is the most important factor in addressing climate but is still an influential one, nonetheless, in reaching the goals of the 2015 Paris Agreement.
Innovation is a quintessential factor in redressing climate issues. This refers to any “method, idea, or product” that can help reconceptualise the way we tackle the climate crisis. It is this key term, “innovation” that separates itself from “technology” which connotes to “machinery and equipment developed from the application of scientific knowledge”. Technology implies that only innovation on an industrial scale can create any real influence in rectifying climate change, but this seems almost contradictory as technological innovation is arguably what created, amplified, and perpetuated this very crisis. Although technology does play a vital role, we often get so excited by the concept of a new idea that we don’t contextually consider its unintended consequences and impracticality. As exemplified in The Industrial Revolution, the whimsical creation and implementation of new technologies without considering advantages and disadvantages can end up silently exacerbating the climate crisis. Harari’s “Sapiens” appreciates humans’ historical relationship with the environment, such as The Agricultural Revolution some 10 000 years ago, and our constant need to conquer it which has led to both our prosperity and demise. Arguably, this is when humanity severed symbiotic ties to nature for largely economic gain. This separation led humanity to become so detached from nature that we began to reconstruct our physical and biological world to create a new Quaternary epoch – the Anthropocene. This Anthropocene has led to rapid climate change therefore the decisions humanity make henceforth will be fateful and critical. This facilitates critical consideration about the supposed advancements we’ve made towards sustainability and the challenges associated with sustainable development.
Using technological innovation to fight climate change can create more damage than solutions. This is exemplified by the geoengineering phenomenon of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) which is utilised to lower carbon emissions. CCS is the process of trapping carbon dioxide before it enters the atmosphere, transporting and storing it for centuries using large industrial factories and equipment. These technologies could decarbonise the atmosphere, regenerate fossil fuels and improve economies. As revolutionary as this innovation is, it comes with a fair set of its own complications regarding cost, scale, and general viability. The construction of such mega-plants alone could increase carbon emissions, never mind the fuel needed to operate these industrious technologies. Some of the disadvantages that are rarely considered when debating the usefulness of carbon capturing technologies are: the time commitment that CCS plants need which is a limited resource; investment competition with renewable energy schemes ; historic evidence of CCS failing to reach hypothesised storage capacities ; and most worryingly, the possibility that CCS can be abused for enhanced oil recovery (which the extraction of oil is counterproductive in a society trying to refrain from using and regenerate fossil fuels). CCS is a useful tool – exemplified by Teesside Renewable Energy Plant – but presents too many challenges to be a viable option. The Rinorea niccolifera – plants that bio-accumulate metal so can therefore be strategically positioned to restore polluted mines and soils – sparked consideration into how biogeography can influence innovation. This facilitated further thought of how progress is not invariably defined by new technology but can innovatively modify natural process to create solutions. This is epitomized by soil carbon sequestration that austerely decreases atmospheric CO2 more efficiently than most autotrophs without having as many adverse effects. While atmospheric carbon is increasing, soil-carbon levels are additionally rapidly depleting from soil organic matter decomposition. Although soil-carbon loss has increased atmospheric CO2 levels, it presents an opportunity to restore carbon in soil. The exchange rate between the atmosphere and soil is projected to be higher than that of the atmosphere and ocean therefore soil carbon sequestration is a natural and useful way to decrease emissions. Cities such as Boulder, Colorado and San Francisco epitomise this by utilising this method in agriculture to lower overall their emissions.
The technological innovation of the internet is another famous example of machinery that claims to reduce the impacts of climate change but invertedly creates more, unforeseen environmental strain. The introduction of the worldwide web in 1993 paved the way for a paper-free movement that eradicated the need therefore the market for pulp which in turn decreased the felling of trees. As useful as the internet has been in creating a paperless society, it is often overlooked that the computers that hold all our digital information must be stored in a physical place with millions of other computers who, when computing, generate heat. These overheating computers must be kept cool, so these large warehouses of hot computers are kept conditioned using large and elaborate cooling systems which use electricity to operate. The average server in a data house consumes 500 – 1000 watts hourly, 20 400 watts daily and 7446 kWh annually. Allegedly, data centres worldwide use over 90 billion kilowatt-hours daily, tantamount to the output of 34 coal-powered power plants. Globally, 3% of all electricity goes to data centres.
In conclusion, as much as technology is a useful tool that helps solve one aspect of climate crisis, the complexity of the strains these advancements create on the fragile natural world can be detrimental, if not counterproductive. If new technologies were to be introduced to tackle climate change, we must not repeat the mistakes of our forefathers in not considering inadvertent effects but must reflect holistically on how flexible these new technologies are in our dynamic environments and even more complicated human systems.