Fighting climate change: data, investment, innovation and bold decisions 

We are at a crucial time for mankind: on the one hand, climate change is an unquestionable phenomenon that must be combated immediately. On the other hand, geopolitical tensions, the war in Ukraine, and the different interests of the world’s major powers make it difficult to achieve the cooperation and coordination required to bring about a change in the global energy paradigm. 

What is the current situation of the global energy system? What data do we need to get an idea of the magnitude of the energy system and its sources? What new energies could be used and what would be the complexity and cost of changing energy models? Is there an alternative to fossil fuels? Are there technical and social options that can be widely adopted over the next generation to reverse or stop climate change? 

We talked about all this with a global eminence. As part of our Future Trends Forum Building a net zero world, we conducted an interview with Vaclav Smil, a scientist and social and political analyst of worldwide influence, who took part in it, along with thirty other experts. 

Vaclav Smil is professor emeritus at the University of Manitoba, Canada. He researches areas of global significance, such as energy, environment, food, population and economics. He has written 36 books and is one of Bill Gates’ favorite authors, who always recommends reading him.  

If you missed the live interview, you can watch it here: 

Below, we summarize some of the multitude of ideas, reflections, and data from the interview with Prof. Smil: 

The complexity and importance of the global energy system 

The global energy system is by far the most complex creation that humans have ever made: it consists of multiple networks of multiple systems that combine extraction, conversion, transport and transmission of different types of energy. 

It is a system that has been growing and transforming for the last 150 years and continues to grow at an accelerated pace due to the enormous economic progress of China, India and other developing countries. 

The basic fact that we have to realize about this super system is that it is based on fossil fuels. 

The energy sources in use today are: 

• Coal 
• Oil 
• Natural gas 
• Hydroelectric power 
• Nuclear fission energy 
• Wind energy 
• Solar 
• And in an almost testimonial way, geothermal and biofuels. 

Now, 83% of all energy produced comes from fossil fuels (coal, oil and natural gas). 

The world’s energy system has always been evolving, with a common characteristic: it has done so slowly, due to the complexity of the processes and the system. 

First, we went from traditional biomass (wood, charcoal and straw) to coal, and then we gradually replaced it with oil, natural gas, nuclear energy, hydropower. And now we have renewables (solar and wind). 

But a change of the world energy system in a rapid manner is impossible. Let’s take a look at some facts: 

The energy transition to date

Given the complexity noted above, a relatively fast energy transition is only possible in small countries or areas. Prof. Smil illustrates this with the case of Denmark, which has achieved 70% of its energy from wind power in just a few decades. 

To give an idea of the possible pace of transition, in the year 2000, global dependence on fossil fuels was around 90%. Twenty years later, with active decarbonization policies, this percentage has only dropped to 83%. In other words, it has only been reduced by 7% in 20 years. 

In the case of a country that has made a firm commitment with aggressive policies and budgets since 2000, such as Germany, which has spent half a trillion dollars in these 20 years, it has gone from a dependence on fossil fuels of 84% to a dependence of 76%, i.e., little better than the global level. 

It is therefore most likely impossible to go from 83% to zero in the next 30 years. 

Net zero

That is why we talk about net zero, because almost everyone knows that in 2050 there will still be energy production based on fossil fuels, especially natural gas. So the idea is that the CO₂ that will continue to be produced will be captured and stored (with what are called CCS – Carbon Capture and Storage – technologies). 

The problem with this is the immense scale of the challenge: to get an idea, in 2019, 37 billion tons of CO₂ were generated. To reduce for example 10% per year of those emissions, it would be necessary to capture and store about 4 billion tons per year of CO₂, which requires developing a whole new global CCS industry, practically non-existent today. 

So far, we have only been able to capture and store about 0.1% of the emissions, so the CCS capacity of the planet needs to be multiplied by a factor of 100. 

Prof. Smil emphasizes that humanity has never before faced challenges on this scale. 

Complexity does not allow shortcuts

Many things will become cheaper, many techniques will become more affordable. There will be many innovations and many technical advances. Both for producing and storing/transporting renewable energies and for another fundamental point that the professor points out: the improvement of energy efficiency in all areas of human life, from heavy industries to personal consumption, buildings, means of transport, etc. 

What seems clear is that the process cannot be accelerated just by investing huge amounts of money or creating policies and regulations that subsidize clean energy or its use. 

To put it into perspective, the entire US space program to the Moon cost, in today’s money, $265 billion between 1961 and 1973. This is equivalent to 0.5% of US GDP. The cost of switching much of the energy produced by fossil fuels to renewables, and capturing the necessary CO₂, is estimated at $275 trillion between now and 2050, or about $10 trillion a year, equivalent to more than 10% of world GDP. 

Can the world devote 10% of GDP to this task? Only in a scenario where the richest countries subsidize the neediest could it happen. 

On the other hand, the technological complexity of the challenge is also immense: more than half of the technologies needed have yet to be invented, and those already invented must go through the process of scaling up and becoming massively competitive, the professor tells us, quoting Bill Gates. 

What can feasibly be done in the next 30 years to reverse climate change? 

According to Smil, humanity is progressing and moving in the right direction. We have decarbonized fairly steadily over the last few decades. But the most important component so far of decarbonization has not been renewables, but nuclear and hydro. 

Especially because of China’s efforts with hydro and nuclear. Today about 10% of global energy is nuclear, which together with hydro produces much more energy than wind and solar. 

Also contributing to decarbonization are the steps taken to replace coal with natural gas as a raw material: to generate the same amount of energy, natural gas produces 30-40% less CO2 than coal. 

Finally, one of the most important tasks for decarbonization is the improvement of energy efficiency, which is underway and still has a long way to go. These are slow but steady improvements that can decarbonize between 1.5 to 2% per year, which in a decade could mean an improvement of between 15 to 20%. 

The path to net zero 

In such a complex system, there is no one simple solution. We have to strive for many things in parallel: inventing and innovating new technologies and materials, while working on optimizing energy efficiency and, of course, adapting to new scenarios as they arise. 

Role of hydrogen 

Today we produce some 90 million tons of hydrogen, most of it for fertilizer production and refinery use. But we are not generating green hydrogen. Most of what is produced today comes from methane (CH4).  

It is necessary to create a global green hydrogen industry from the electrolysis of water, which can be scalable, and to create a global transport and storage network. In other words, there must be billions of electrolyzers if it is to be a global solution. 

Some final thoughts 

– Long-term policies and regulations must be based on the fact that we live conditioned by maximum uncertainty.  

– The solution to the energy transition will not come because people consume less. Globally, energy consumption will continue to grow. 

– Only one recipe for climate change: We must always do the best we can as soon as possible. Individually and collectively. 

– Countries need to set binding targets. 

– It is easier and more durable to move towards clean energy production rather than to CCS solutions. In other words, CCS solutions should be the last alternative for CO2 that it is impossible to eliminate in energy production. 

– The problem of the agri-food system: The food production system needs to be rethought and remade to avoid 30-40% of food being wasted. This would save between 30 and 40% of the energy needed to produce it, in addition to water, fertilizers, and savings in arable land that could be used for reforestation. 

– Nuclear fusion will not be a reality, if at all, before 2045. 

– Nuclear fission does not have much of a future because of public opposition. 

Prof. Smil’s interview is a masterclass on the global energy system and its evolution. Don’t miss it: