Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
ment, whose progress and ultimate success are hard to predict”, such as
hydrogen fuel cells for cars (considered too undeveloped to be employed
in the first scenario). Moreover, all technologies would be intensively
deployed in such a way that the top marginal cost of saving or avoiding
CO
2
might rise to $450 a tonne of CO
2
. Using all 13 technologies this
intensively to halve today's emission level would cost between $12.4 tril-
lion and $14.9 trillion.
The table gives us an idea of where our two big priorities should be:
Energy efficiency
The table demonstrates the big efficiency savings
that can be made in buildings. Likewise, big savings could be made by
increasing the efficiency of conventional cars. However, notable also is
the soaring cost of thoroughly decarbonizing the transport fleet via the
widespread development and deployment of electric and hydrogen fuel-
cell vehicles.
Power generation
The importance of making carbon-capture
and storage work is clear, as is the significant, albeit more modest,
contribution that wind, solar and biomass could make (the last is not
featured in the table for reasons of space). Notice, however, how little
extra benefit there would appear to be from a crash programme of
nuclear power development.
What should the UK focus on?
In recent decades the UK governments, of whatever political complexion,
have been allergic to the industrial strategy of picking winners. This is
born partly out of the belief that if you set the right economic framework
then a thousand flowers will bloom - the sort of approach which can work
in a big, vibrant economy like the US, but which might be a little optimis-
tically laissez-faire for Britain. And it is partly out of nervousness at the
UK's past failure to pick winners - think of Britain's government-backed
computer and car companies - as Germany has done with mechanical
engineering and France with nuclear power. Nonetheless, the urgent
necessity of acting to mitigate climate change, and the squeeze on public
money, are causing a shift of attitude.
Dr Garry Staunton is Technology Director of the UK Carbon Trust,
whose job it is to set priorities, has this to say on the matter. “It would be
great if we had a large number of alternatives to pick winners from. But
the flip side is that you have to drop losers, on which you may have spent
