Comment
Our energy future iven the evidence before us, it is frustrating to observe how world leaders, especially in the developed countries, give our energy future so little attention. I refer not only to politicians, but also to the leaders of business, finance, and the otiier institutions that will play a major role in determining our future. One can only conclude that they are caught up in the short-term gains of global expansion and are blind to the energy and environmental issues that seem to be just over the horizon. Our energy future is clearly tied to two major growth patterns that world society is now experiencing. One is population growth, and the omer is increasing consumption of energy and materials. Linked to these issues is the growing evidence that carbon dioxide emissions need to be cut, or at least stabilized, which is a wild card that can change the way the entire game must be played. World population growth may be slowing down and may stabilize in 2025 at 8 billion rather than at 10-13 billion as was once expected. But do not be encouraged. According to Werner Fornos, President of the Population Institute, this is like saying that a coastal city is going to be hit by a 90-foot tidal wave rather than one that is 100 feet high. These 8 billion people will be consuming materials and energy (and generating wastes) at a rate without precedent in human history. Already, there is evidence that this is occurring. According to the International Energy Outlook 2000, ,n annual lrporr teleased March 16, ,000, by the Energy Information Agency, world energy consumption will rise 60% from 1997 to 2020. Significantly, consumption in developing nations will grow by 121% twice the global rate Combine this population and economic growth with the growing evidence that the planet is warming, and we have a problem—one that is exacerbated by the other environmental effects of a robust, carbon-based economy. The only escape is for nonfossil fuel energy sources to drive this development, but there is no indication that this will happen. Rather, it appears that India and China, for example, will fuel their economic expansion with their abundant coal reserves. Moreover, no practical nonfossil fuel alternative is on the scene now except for nuclear fission. Proponents of that technology continue to insist that it is not as evil as its opponents claim, but one cannot
G
© 2000 American Chemical Society
imagine a global economy for 8 billion people primarily fueled by fission power. The alternative global energy regime may be the diverse mix of renewable energy sources that some propose, but it is not clear how such a complex, diversified system would work in our capitalistic system. We need to move forward with our study of this alternative and see how it can be optimized. In addition, we must develop an organized worldwide R&D agenda to seek alternative energy technologies that are environmentally responsible. It is obvious that the developed countries should fund such studies, but unfortunately, at the present time, we are not setting a good example. Of the alternative energy technologies that are on the horizon, those based on biological or biomimetic science appear to be the most attractive to me. Why are we not involved in a worldwide program to enhance the scientific basis for the production of biofuels? Beyond ethanol, we now know that certain forms of algae are capable of direct production of hydrogen, but the research budget to exploit this and related knowledge is trivial compared to the amount we spending on the exploration of space Why are we not moving ahead to understand these organisms fully to enhance their capability to produce hydrogen on an industrial scale and to engineer synthetic catalysts based on their enzymes which will achieve the same result in abiotic systems? On the other side whv are we not pushing fusion research? In the long term fusion technology aDDears to have great potential source of electrical energy but there are manv many technical environmental and socioeconomic issues to be dealt with before this terhnolosv can become a sis nifirant part of onr enerev rppimp Whv is this not a nri oritv in the Unitpd States and a world nriority of the u- u
*
·* A OTAru
• A
At
highest magnitude? Why, indeed?
William H. Glaze, Editor (
[email protected])
JULY 1, 2000 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY / NEWS • 2 8 9 A
