I’m old enough to remember when John Kennedy inspired the nation in 1961 and called for a program to land a man on the moon and bring him back safely to earth “before this decade is out.” Neither he nor anyone else had more than general ideas on how to do this in 1961. But the goal and the time to achieve it were things that everyone could understand.
This launched the Apollo program. Americans rallied and met the challenge. Along the way they invented new technologies and generated good American jobs.
The 60s were troubling times. Apollo raised our spirits and renewed our confidence.
There is broad agreement among climate scientists that carbon dioxide [CO2] emitted by burning fossil fuels is increasing the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere and this is contributing to dangerous global warming. There have been many proposals to reduce CO2 emissions and slow this warming.
Usually these proposals are drafted to reduce emissions by some percentage of a base-year amount by some future year. For example, the American Power Act [APA], that Senators Kerry and Lieberman introduced this year, uses 2005 as the base year. It set goals of emission reductions of 17% by the year 2020, 42% by the year 2030, and 83% by the year 2050.
An 83% reduction in CO2 emissions over four decades will be accompanied by major changes in the way we live and do business. Almost everyone in the country will be affected. There must be broad public buy-in for this program or it will not be successful. The people must understand the goal for the program and embrace it.
I propose that we set a simple goal that everyone will understand: Progressively reduce burning of fossil fuels in the US and stop entirely by 2050.
The preindustrial concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere was about 280 ppm [parts per million]. It is now about 390 ppm. This increase is already enough to produce significant global warming. Climatologist James Hansen believes that we need to bring the level back down to 350 ppm. [Hansen 2009] There is no safe amount of CO2 that we can add to the atmosphere. We need to slow emissions as much and as fast as we can. And we need also to work hard to find ways to remove CO2 from the atmosphere.
If we don’t make zero CO2 emissions a goal, there will be people who will think that their emitting activities can continue. No activity should be exempt from the effort to reduce emissions.
The mid-century year of 2050 is a good one to plan for. Almost all emission reduction plans provide targets for 2020 and 2050, and those in the APA are typical. In his book, Beyond Fossil Fools: The Roadmap to Energy Independence by 2040, Joseph M. Shuster outlines a plan to substantially stop burning fossil fuels by 2040. The Rocky Mountain Institute is building a roadmap called “Reinventing Fire” to move the US off fossil fuels by 2050.
The US emitted 6.0 gigatons [billion tons] of CO2 in the pre-recession year 2007. An 83% plan would remove 5.0 gigatons and leave 1.0 gigaton. Without a detailed examination of the whole economy, we have no grounds to claim that we can remove the first 5.0 gigatons, but not the remaining 1.0 gigaton.
If my boat sinks when I’m 600 feet from shore, I don’t set my goal to swim 500 feet.
As with Apollo, we don’t know precisely how to achieve the goal. But with strong leadership I am confident that the American people will rally again and meet the challenge. As with Apollo, we will invent new technologies and generate good American jobs. As with Apollo, this will raise our spirits and renew our confidence.
The goal can be described as getting off fossil fuels by 2050. This leads to a name for the program: OFF by 2050. A simple name for a program with a simple goal, The program itself will be long, complicated, and difficult. But the name will help keep our eyes on the goal.
Bill Allen, August 13, 2010 <> OFFby2050
One Response to Why OFF by 2050?