Sustainability and policy - Climate Change: Biological and Human Aspects - page 479

and 1.3 billion, respectively (CIA, 2008), together they represent around 38% of the
Earth's total population and consume (in 2004) 18.7% of fossil carbon produced
globally. It is these countries that will generate much of the new climate forcing
expected this century. Finally we look at Australia and New Zealand as examples of
two developed nations with smaller populations.
All told, in 2010 the USA and China accounted for just over 40% the planetary
fossil carbon consumption (BP Economic Unit, 2011) and coincidentally together had
nearly the same proportion of the global population. However, the average US citizen
individually consumes more energy than their Chinese and Indian counterparts (see
Figure 7.1).
Turning away from purely carbon concerns, energy policy will seem - to some -
to have little to do with human ecology. Indeed, in the past many countries had little
regard for the environmental impact of energy-resource utilisation. This has slowly
changed, at least among the most developed (OECD) nations. Nonetheless non-
fossil energy-policy decisions do affect fossil energy use (consider France's nuclear
energy policy in the latter half of the 20th century). And even fossil energy-policy
decisions can affect the degree of a nation's anthropogenic climate impact (consider
the late 20th century's so-called dash for gas). Both non-fossil and fossil energy-
policy decisions have implications for environmental sustainability. These then are
the reasons why anybody trying to understand the biology of climate change needs
to have an appreciation of the energy-policy implications for human ecology.
Each of the nations in the case studies that follow has a fossil carbon and energy
graph (Figures 8.3-8.9, below) that conveys its carbon energy relationship for at least
the last three decades. Each depicts the nation's fossil fuel energy consumed (the total
of gas, oil and coal) in million tonnes of oil equivalent (mtoe) and the fossil fuel energy
produced. If the production line (dashed lines) is below the consumption line for fossil
fuels (thin solid lines) then the nation is not managing its needs self-sufficiently (this
is just one, limited, aspect of sustainability). The separation between these two lines
indicates the amount of imports required. Conversely, if the fossil fuel production
line is above the consumption line then the nation is a net exporter of fossil fuel. The
thick solid lines denote the nation's total energy requirements including non-fossil
carbon energy. Therefore, the gap between that and the line for fossil fuel consumed
denotes the amount of non-fossil energy that the country produces (mainly nuclear
power and HEP but also including wind and other renewable energy). This gap can
be viewed (the finite nature of global uranium notwithstanding) as indicative of the
proportion of sustainable energy that a nation has in its energy mix.
8.3.1 Casestudy:USA
As noted in the last chapter, the USA, with less than 5% of the planet's population,
generates nearly a quarter of the Earth's anthropogenic greenhouse gases. In part this
is due to the individual high energy consumption of US citizens. Such per-capita
consumption has been growing steadily since the Industrial Revolution and in no
small part is due to the nation's indigenous resources: initially of wood and then coal
and oil. However, the finite nature of US oil became apparent as long ago as the late
1940s.