Carbon Emissions How Can We Solve It
introduction:
The Earth is a barren wasteland. The Arctic is nothing, but another big ocean. Coastal cities are abandoned concrete structures submerged in water. Oceans that used to be filled with fish and life and rainforest filled with exotic animals are gone, replaced by barren deserts. This might sound like a dystopia tale, but this is our future if we do not stop climate change. Every year according to according to The World Counts we emit 43.1 billion tons of carbon dioxide which is 76 percent of all gas emissions we give out, and out of the 43.1 billion tons of carbon dioxide, 72 percent comes from the energy sector. With that much carbon dioxide being emitted into the atmosphere it enhances the greenhouse gas effect which will lead to our world being transformed into a dystopian future.
The Problem:
Before we talk about carbon dioxide solutions, we need to talk about what would happen if we don’t stop emitting. Climate change is very real and is happening right now. Climate change is caused by the greenhouse gas effect. What it means is that the gases we emit, which are mostly made up of carbon dioxide, are released into the atmosphere. Normally the heat from the sun hits earth and then gets reflected away, but the greenhouse gas effect makes it so that the heat gets trapped on earth, warming the entire planet. Climate change is a broader term. It includes both global warming and its impact on the earth’s weather. When the world heats up due to climate change droughts and floods will happen a lot more often, causing some communities to be unable to sustain themselves. deserts will expand. Extreme weather events like hurricanes will happen a lot more often, causing lots of damage. Coastal cities would be flooded by the ocean because the polar ice caps are melting. Coral reefs which contain 25 percent of all marine life would die and the marine life that relies on them would be forced to relocate or become extinct. With this grim future in mind, it is no wonder why the world health organization (WOT) would consider climate change to be the greatest threat to global health, and why so many people are working hard to try to solve this problem.
So how exactly can we solve this problem?
Alternatives to fossil fuel:
Unfortunately, unless carbon capture machines could instantly capture all 43.1 billion tons of carbon dioxide, we emit each year. We cannot just put a stop to climate change instantly, but we still need to stop the number of emissions we emit each year as fast as possible. The sector that is most responsible for the emissions is no doubt the energy sector. After all, it emits 72 percent of all carbon dioxide. According to Wikipedia 31.2 percent of energy comes from oil, 27.2 percent from coal 24.7 percent from natural gas. This means a whopping 83.1 percent of all energy comes from unsustainable energy sources. This is unacceptable if we want to stop climate change, so we must investigate alternate 0 emissions sources.
Number 1: solar power
Solar power, at first it might sound like a very promising alternative since it is 0 carbon emission and is easy to install and the price has been dropping every year making it more affordable. But the downsides start to show the further you look into it. First, it takes up a lot of space, pollutes the environment during manufacturing, it is expensive to keep the energy stored and of course the biggest problem, it only works when the sun is out. Pairing this problem with the fact that it is very hard to store the energy and we currently do not have the batteries needed to store the energy we need, and because solar energy doesn’t work during nighttime and that is the time we use energy the most, we can say that solar energy does not have the ability right now to replace fossil fuels.
Number 2: wind power
Wind power is one of the cleanest energy sources there is, having no pollution unless it was during manufacturing the metal, and it doesn’t interfere with farmland operations that might happen underneath it. But just like solar power, there are serious downsides to it. First off, windmills are loud, and it does not look very pretty, also it is hard to build and they are a threat to local wildlife according to Ferris from Energy Monitor, windmills kill 538000 birds per year, and the nail in the coffin, it only works when there is wind. It has the same problem with solar energy as it can’t be stored with current technology making it unable currently to replace fossil fuels.
Number 3: hydro energy.
Hydro energy uses water to spin a turbine which creates energy. Unlike solar and wind, it runs 24/7 without stopping. It is reliable, it stores drinking water, and it helps stop floods because we use dams regardless of hydro energy why not kill 2 birds with 1 stone and generate some energy while we are at it. Slight problem with this though, and it is that building dams aren’t cheap, they are massive projects that take a lot of material and manpower to make it. Also, to make the dam you would need to relocate millions of people that live in the area, sometimes with bad organization and a lack of a plan that could end in disaster. For example, in 1982, 369 people were killed in Guatemala during the construction of a dam. Not to mention the fact that there are only so many dams we can build which means fossil fuel still has hydro energy beaten on numbers.
Number 4: nuclear energy.
When people think of nuclear energy they think of Chornobyl and Fukushima. This is reasonable after all these two reactor meltdowns are the most serious ones we had, it caused miles of land to be so radiated, that it became uninhabitable, and people that were close to the reactors suffered radiation poisoning which cause the death of hundreds. But how much death does nuclear power result in and how does it compare to other energy sources. According to Madhumitha Jaganmohan from statista.com coal causes 100,000 deaths per thousand-terawatt hour. Oil causes 36000 deaths, natural gas causes 4000, hydro causes 1400, wind causes 150, and nuclear only causes 90. The lowest of the bunch, not to mention nuclear energy, is 0 emissions energy source that runs 24/7 nonstop. But a slight problem is that it produces nuclear waste that is hard to get rid of. But personally, it is better to live with some nuclear waste than to see our world crumble. So by the looks of things, the only energy that can stand against fossil fuels is hydro and nuclear but can nuclear work on a large scale. According to Wikipedia in 2020, 78 percent of Frances’s energy comes from nuclear energy, so the answer is yes, nuclear can work on a large scale.
solving the problem locally:
although solar panels aren’t usable currently on a large scale, that isn’t true on a small scale, local areas won’t use as much energy as a large city so there will be less battery required, and the Achilles heel of solar panels is the lack of storage, on a local level this can be overlooked. solar panels are easy to install and it isn’t expensive. not to mention you could install it on the roof making space not an issue. communities that use this already exist using solar power to power their homes. so far solar power is the most popular choice for local power generation. Windmills are massive, they take a lot of effort to put up and it is very loud and obstructive. Hydroelectric dams are huge and require so much time and money to build and maintain it, that no small community would have the resources to build one. let’s be honest, no one wants to live next to a nuclear reactor. so locally the best way of solving the energy problem is by using solar panels.
conclusion:
So the future of energy looks like it’s going to be replaced by nuclear energy or not change at all right? Well no. If you look at this chart from Wikipedia.

image from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#cite_note-aeo-14
The prices of renewable energy between 2010 and 2020 are drastically different. Both wind and solar power prices have dropped drastically. Meaning the longer these technologies exist, the cheaper they will get. Keep in mind that wind and solar energy is still very early in development and this chart proves that wind and solar energy has the potential to replace fossil fuels, which is our goal. The more people buy and use these technologies the cheaper they will get, the cheaper they get the more people to buy. Together we can stop a dystopian future from happening, but we need to put the effort into stopping the carbon emissions.
Works Cited
(no author shown) C2ES Center for Climate and Energy Solution. www.c2es.org/content/what-we-can-do/.
(Nick Ferris) Energy Monitor. abcbirds.org/blog21/wind-turbine-mortality/.
(no author shown) )Our World in Data. ourworldindata.org/ghg-emissions-by-sector.
(Madhumitha Jaganmohan) Statista. www.statista.com/statistics/494425/death-rate-worldwide-by-energy-source/.
(no author shown) US EPA. www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions.
Wikipedia. (no author shown) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_France#:~:text=Energy%20in%20France%20is%20generated,for%2019.1%25%20of%20energy%20consumption.
Wikipedia. (no author shown) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy#:~:text=Renewable%20energy%20is%20energy%20that,are%20sustainable%2C%20some%20are%20not.
(no author shown)The World Counts. www.theworldcounts.com/challenges/climate-change/global-warming/global-co2-emissions/story.
Recent Comments