In February 2022, the UK-based Jet Laboratory announced the exciting news of a breakthrough in the development of nuclear fusion, which has the potential for producing "unlimited supplies" of clean energy with no greenhouse gases. And unlike nuclear fission, nuclear fusion doesn't produce radioactive waste. That was a WOW announcement that should have been followed by a proposal for a massive investment to fully develop the technology. Instead, the announcement cautioned that it will take as many as two decades to develop the technology and possibly additional decades to scale it up. Considering the dire threat of a climate apocalypse, this timetable seems ludicrous.
In 1961 when JFK set the goal of putting a man on the moon within a decade it sounded like science fiction since scientists knew virtually nothing about space travel then. Similarly, in 1942, when FDR officially launched the Manhattan Project to harness atomic energy to create a bomb to end World War II. science knew little about accessing atomic energy. But with commitment, determination, sufficient funding, and teams of expert scientists from around the world, the "impossible" was achieved in three years.
Shouldn't the same success be possible for advancing nuclear fusion to reasonably high functional capacity? And similarly for carbon-capture technology to efficiently capture carbon emissions before they reach the atmosphere and also efficiently extract CO2 from the atmosphere. Add to these a fast charging 1000 mile battery that would mark the end of combustion engines for vehicles, which are a major polluter of greenhouse gasses in the world. In the U.S. alone trucks and cars account for as much as twenty percent of greenhouse gasses. Current vehicle batteries can travel an average of 250-300 miles on a single charge. Tesla claims a distance of 405 miles on a single charge for one of its models. Full recharges for most batteries can take as long as 8 hours.
The encouraging news is that for the three technologies scientists already have a trove of knowledge.
In a telephone interview on August 18, 2022, with professor Troy Carter, Director of the Plasma Science and Technology Institute at UCLA and a leading expert on nuclear fusion, I asked about the prospect of developing fusion technology in time to slow or defeat climate change. Dr. Carter is optimistic. He lamented the relatively skimpy funding for nuclear fusion compared to funding for other technologies and programs when nuclear fusion offers so much for resolving the climate change crisis by potentially replacing fossil fuels with an unlimited supply of clean energy. Nevertheless, he said, even at current levels of funding the dedication and tireless commitment of scientists around the globe working on fusion could bring the technology to limited functionality by 2040 and much greater functionality sooner with the unlimited financing that I suggested. His infectious enthusiasm about the prospects for getting the job done was inspiring.
Some might say that advancing these promising technologies to sufficient levels in time to prevent a climate apocalypse would require a miracle. If so, which is more likely to produce a miracle? Science or governments and industries? Science has a history of turning what appears to be science fiction into reality. Governments and industries have a history of creating mirages. As you take a closer look at their commitments they evaporate.
The Thompson Reuters Foundation reported on Oct. 28, 2021, that researchers at the World Resources Institute have estimated that climate finance needs to raise as much as $5 trillion a year globally by 2030 to successfully fight climate change. They warned that "transformation across economies is too slow to meet international temperature goals." The UN and other organizations have made projections of $90-150 trillion of mammoth financing requirements. These immense funds, if raised, would be used to expand the same strategies and programs that have not slowed the accelerating advance toward climate doomsday. Just a single infusion of $1-3 trillion for the rapid development of proven technologies might have a greater possibility of defeating climate change.
The odds for which path is more likely to yield success is clear. It's time to face the truth and make a big bet on science. Let's give science whatever resources are necessary to fully develop the technologies that can defeat climate change. On Feb 19. 2021, John Kerry Special Presidential Envoy for Climate said "Earth has 9 years to avert the worst consequences of the climate crisis."
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
