Energy Abatement Can Work In Certain Circumstances

Energy abatement is a top priority in the European Union, and the continent has always been much further ahead when it comes to the issue of greenhouse gas emissions. They are firmly behind the proposal to reduce emissions by 80% through the year 2050, even though that is only a short 40 years from now. Much has to be done in the power generation sector as they have to take the lions share of any change, with other sectors expected to field a knock on effect.

McKinsey and Co., one of the most respected analysts in the business, detailed within the energy abatement curve reports that alternative energy projects must be introduced immediately. They argued that conventional fossil fuel usage within power generation technologies must be reduced to almost zero and that alternatives such as biomass, geothermal, Hydro, offshore and onshore wind turbines, solar and nuclear are critical.

The power sector must be “fully decarbonized” relatively quickly if energy abatement plans will result in emissions reduction of 80% by 2050. Other major sectors of the economy must ditch the use of fossil fuels and replace with biofuel or alternatively generated electricity. Where fossil fuel cannot be “avoided,” carbon capture and storage, or sequestration must be a feature of power generation plants.

Are we being unrealistic when we set plans for 40 years hence, knowing that it is often difficult for us to see far into our own futures? Is an 80% reduction feasible by 2050? If we look at history, we can see that it takes way more than just one generation or so to bring an alternative energy concept through to reality.

Within a couple of generations or more, is it conceivable that we can convert major power generation plants to carbon neutrality. Such energy abatement projects represent lofty goals and it may be that we will have to rely on a mix of heavy taxation and energy alternatives. Politicians now wrestle with the idea of carbon taxation or cap and trade.

Carbon capture and storage is quite expensive to implement and is as yet a much untested concept. One thing is certain, the process itself requires additional fuel and will undoubtedly drive up energy costs significantly in the early days. The process of sequestration stores CO2 as mineral carbonates underground or beneath the sea.

Energy abatement should be high on the list of priorities for everybody, including corporate decision-makers. They simply cannot sit back and wait for Congress to make decisions which have an impact on the cost of energy that they consume. They should look at alternative energy sources, significant projects to increase efficiency, software and services to adequately monitor energy use and carbon emissions.

The European Climate Foundation believes that the European Union can reach its goals through the year 2050 and be successful with its energy abatement projects. However, it does point out that any delays now will have serious repercussions as we try and play “catch up.

Daniel Stouffer has a lot of information about energy abatement and how a visit to www.verisae.com will aid you.