Climate Change
2026-05-07 Can We Still Prevent Civilisation Collapse ?
Abstract
This paper asks a specific engineering question: is it physically feasible, using technology that already exists, to limit global warming to 2 °C and reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2070 — the outer boundary consistent with avoiding the most catastrophic climate tipping points? The answer, after examining energy, food, transport and the built environment, is: yes, but only under conditions that are currently far from being met. The window is narrow and closing. This paper sets out what those conditions are, why the financing objection does not hold, and why the precautionary principle demands we act as though the answer must be yes.
2024-10-12 A Note on Climate and Energy
I watched videos on climate change by Professors Johan Rockstroem and Stefan Rahmsdorf of the Potsdam Climatological Institute in Germany.
This prompted me to create the document ‘2024-10-12 A Note on Climate and Energy’.
2024-07-12 The Road to Net Zero Can Save Government Funds
Remove government funding of Sizewell C, SMR, ANF and FNEF £ 1155 million
Remove government funding of nuclear fusion Up to £ 650 million to 2027
Remove tax relief for the oil and gas industry Up to £ 5.7 billion/y from 2022 to 2025
Remove government funding of CCS £ 20 billion over 20 years from 2023
Remove government funding of imported biomass for Drax etc £ 606.8 million in 2022
Total of above About £ 8.6 billion a year
2022-06-14 Energy Transition Technologies
This is prompted by the Energy Hierarchy of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers.
From the most to the least sustainable,
Tier 1 is Energy Demand Reduction,
Tier 2 is Energy Efficiency,
Tier 3 is Utilisation of Renewable, Sustainable Resources,
Tier 4 is Utilisation of Other, Low-GHG-Emitting Resources, and
Tier 5 is Utilisation of Conventional Resources as we do now.
2021-02-11 The Role of Hydrogen in Achieving Net Zero
A Select Committee of the House of Lords invited submissions on the Role of Hydrogen in Achieving Net Zero.
Here is my submission.
2018-07-04 Climate and Energy Transition to Zero Carbon
See: 2016-09-07 Quantifying the Narrowing Net-energy Pathways to a Global Energy Transition
2018-06-30 Savings and Renewables - The Way to Zero Carbon by 2050
Electricity 29%
Transport 24%
Heat 30%
Agriculture 10%
Other 7%
2017-07-10 Climate and Energy Topics
Topic 1) emphasises the urgency of energy transition.
Topic 2) is the main focus of the document, with the paper by Sgouridis et al, 2016.
This identifies the relationship between the remaining fossil fuel emissions cap, the transition time, and the required investment in Renewable Energy (RE) supply plant.
Topics 3) and 4) refer to the initial conditions prior to the energy transition.
Topic 5) compares the Energy Return on Investments (EROIs) of Renewable Energy (solar and wind power) supply measures with the weighted average value of 20 assumed by Sgouridis et al.
Topic 6 is concerned with the global limits of renewable power sources.
Where Topics 3) and 4) deal in UK quantities, Topic 6) deals in Global quantities. However, the UK must expect to use only a proportionate share - e.g. equal per capita.
Topics 7) and 8) consider energy demand measures as complements of the supply measures assumed by Sgouridis et al. They refer to two papers by Cullen and Allwood et al, 2010 and 2010.
Including energy demand measures will greatly ease an energy transition within the constraints, such as 2 C global warming.
2017-06 Avoiding Climate Change Disaster
Within the available carbon budget we must limit global warming to 2 degrees with a viable sustainable energy supply thereafter.
This first graph shows a business as usual approach to energy consumption and a slow increase of renewable energy production. As we approach our carbon budget (the pink area), we speed up our renewable energy production capability. But, it is too little, too late, and the outcome is that we are able to meet only a small fraction of our energy needs with renewable resources.
This second graph shows a concerted effort to reduce our energy demand in combination with an earlier and faster increase in renewable energy production. This allows our carbon budget to go further, leaving us with a much larger installed capacity for production of renewable energy and a lower energy demand. The outcome is a sustainable energy system capable of maintaining a workable civilisation.
2016-12-19 Limiting Global Climate Change
Unless there is a rapid transition to 100% renewable energy, humankind will lose control of climate change, with the planet entering the Anthropocene era. Severe global warming of 4 - 8 C would disrupt world food supplies, leading to mass starvations, migrations and war.
2016-12-01 Energy Solutions for Sustainability
Humankind requires not energy but energy services such as illumination, movement and thermal comfort. Germany realises
that it is not enough to set targets for reducing carbon emissions; policies, plans and actions are also required. It has adopted
the ‘Energiewende’ energy transition plan for 80 to 95% carbon reduction by 2050. 1 Solutions for sustainable energy services
can be determined by following a few fundamental principles and metrics, enumerated in this document.
2013-07-22 Carbon Budgets and Switching to Renewables
2012-08-14 Regarding 'Solar Energy in the Context of Energy Use'
2011-09-26 Geo-Engineering Debate: Transport Fuel, then ‘Roll-back’
2011-03-08 100% Energy From Wind
This slide shows how surplus wind energy could be used to synthesise methane, which can be stored and used in existing gas-fired power plants to meet the electricity demand at any time, including when wind speeds are low.
2010-09 Energy Resources and Rates for Depletables and Renewables
This presentation shows that the peak discovery of depletable fuels, such as oil, gas, coal and uranium, occurs some 35 years before peak production, so giving ample warning.
However, this slide shows that depletable energy sources suffer declining ‘net energy’ and finally an ‘energy cliff’.
2007-08-13 Response to 'Planning for a Sustainable Future'
The first consists of the consultation questions and my answers.
The second is grouped into topics.
2007-07-03 Energy Criteria for Sustainable Energy Solutions
2005-04-22 Why Not Hydrogen ?
2004-07-30 Energy Solutions for 60% Carbon Reduction – Part II
2003-04-15 The Future of the Hydrogen Economy: Bright or Bleak?
Ulf Bossel, Baldur Eliasson, and Gordon Taylor
I found on the Internet an early version of this paper, authored by Ulf Bossel and Baldur Eliasson. I had been doing desk research in the same general area, and offered a number of comments and contributions over a period of some months. Eventually I became a co-author of the final version, dated 2003-04-15.
2003-01-19 Energy Solutions for 60% Carbon Reduction
Recent articles
2026-05-07 Can We Still Prevent Civilisation Collapse ?
Abstract This paper asks a specific engineering question: is it physically feasible, using technology that already exists, to limit global warming to 2 °C and reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2070 — the outer boundary consistent with avoiding the most catastrophic climate tipping points? The answer, after examining energy, food, transport and the built environment, is: yes, but only under conditions that are currently far from being met. The window is narrow and closing. This paper sets out what those conditions are, why the financing objection does not hold, and why the precautionary principle demands we act as though the answer must be yes.2024-07-12 The Road to Net Zero Can Save Government Funds
Action Government SavingRemove government funding of Sizewell C, SMR, ANF and FNEF £ 1155 millionRemove government funding of nuclear fusion Up to £ 650 million to 2027Remove tax relief for the oil and gas industry Up to £ 5.7 billion/y from 2022 to 2025Remove government funding of CCS £ 20 billion over 20 years from 2023Remove government funding of imported biomass for Drax etc £ 606.8 million in 2022Total of above About £ 8.6 billion a year2024-10-12 A Note on Climate and Energy
I watched videos on climate change by Professors Johan Rockstroem and Stefan Rahmsdorf of the Potsdam Climatological Institute in Germany.This prompted me to create the document ‘2024-10-12 A Note on Climate and Energy’.2024-09-17 Britain’s Atomic Bomb Scandal (Channel 4 programme)
Channel 4 made a multi-part series of programmes with this title.The sub-title was: The dramatic, shocking story of Britain’s race for the nuclear bomb, the devastating fallout for the servicemen at the tests, and the veterans’ long fight for justice'. I watched all the parts, and made notes.Then I typed up the notes and followed up mentions and links to produce this document.2021-09-29 Nuclear Power and the EU Taxonomy
Around September 2021, the European Commission considered the inclusion of nuclear power in the taxonomy for future investments in energy. This was based on a single report from the European Joint Research Centre, which still has close links with the nuclear industry and is widely perceived as playing a promoting role for nuclear energy within the European Union. The JRC Report ignored the report of the German Ethics Commission for a Safe Energy Supply of 2011, which had lead to Germany phasing out nuclear power by 2023. The European Commision also ignored 'Sustainability at risk, A critical analysis of the EU Joint Research Centre technical assessment of nuclear energy with respect to the "do no significant harm" criteria of the EU Taxonomy Regulation, of 2021-09 by Dr. Christoph Pistner, Dr. Matthias Englert and Dr. Ben Wealer, for the Heinrich Boell Foundation.2023-06-06 Nuclear Power Has No Future
The UK government proposes to build nuclear power plants totalling 24 GW.This implies Hinkley Point C, Sizewell C and about six more of similar size.The Labour party proposes to include nuclear power in it’s new ‘green’ energy policy.Yet nuclear power has no future, as shown in this document of 3 pages with 52 references. The first section shows that nuclear fuel may be effectively exhausted before 2050, when the climate targets should be met. The second section shows that the costs of nuclear power have risen over time, and are now uncompetitive. So nuclear power must be replaced by sustainable and affordable options such as energy savings and renewables like wind, solar and storage. The third section shows that nuclear power conflicts with energy savings and renewables, so impairing the business case and deterring investment.So the UK should phase out nuclear power and join the rest of the world in deploying energy savings and renewables.Although this document is published after the latest Government and Labour Party proposals,I have published many earlier documents on nuclear power, dating from 2006-0-19. (See below).Most notably, my report on the Fukushima disaster was published on 2012-04-11, with copies sent to several MPs and Ministers.2022-10-05 Nuclear Nonsense
The new UK government appears to support the previous government’s proposal of building new nuclear power plants. The Labour party proposes to include nuclear power in it’s new ‘green’ energy policy. However such nuclear proposals are nonsense, as shown in this 4-page due diligence assessment.2022-08-12 Stopping Sizewell C and all nuclear power in favour of a rational energy policy
Among the last acts of the Johnson government was the approval of a new nuclear plant - Sizewell C. The claim was that it would increase energy security and reduce carbon emissions. But the invasion of Ukraine has underlined that all nuclear sites are targets, and reduce national security. Also nuclear power would be far more costly than energy savings and renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, with storage, and could not be generating electricity before 2030. They need uranium for fuel, yet almost half comes from Russia and Kazachkstan, so that the money and carbon costs would increase twice as fast. Moreover, they require huge amounts of energy to manufacture and build, so reducing energy security until construction is complete, and this energy repaid. Yet Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C are coastal sites, at risk from flooding by sea level rise and storm surge by 2100. As decommissioning and site clearance would take at least 50 years, they would need to be shutdown before 2050. Many reasons for stopping Sizewell C and all nuclear power are given in this collection of five documents.2022-08-13 Nuclear Power And Weapons Are Killing Us
The Manhattan Project in the US covered every stage of the production of nuclear weapons. This included the mining and refining of uranium, enrichment to 80 to 90% U235 for uranium bombs, fuelling nuclear reactors with uranium to produce plutonium, and reprocessing the spent fuel to extract the plutonium for plutonium bombs. It was recognised from the beginning that these processes and plants would give rise to radioactive releases that would be harmful to the plant operators and the general public, yet they were never informed. This continues to the present day, when the nuclear weapon and power industry does everything in its power to deny and understate the many and extensive harms done to all living things. To this has been added the use of uranium in bunker-breaking bombs and tank-busting shells, that spread the dust so formed over their own forces, the enemy forces, and innocent bystanders, harming them all for generations to come. The human harms include many and extensive cancers, and also non-malignant diseases such as stillbirths, deformities and mental impairment and heart disease. With so much harm already done to humans that will take up to lifetimes to express, and so much nuclear debris laying in wait to harm even more humans, it is essential to identify every strategy and measure that can reduce the total harm.This document covers the first warnings of nuclear harms in the 1950s and - following studies beginning in the 1960s - five books of evidence by Dr Ernest Sternglass in 1981, Mr Harvey Wasserman et al in 1982, Dr John Gofman in 1990, Mr Paul Zimmerman in 2009, and Professor Chris Busby et al in 2010.2022-06-14 Energy Transition Technologies
This is prompted by the Energy Hierarchy of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. From the most to the least sustainable, Tier 1 is Energy Demand Reduction, Tier 2 is Energy Efficiency, Tier 3 is Utilisation of Renewable, Sustainable Resources, Tier 4 is Utilisation of Other, Low-GHG-Emitting Resources, and Tier 5 is Utilisation of Conventional Resources as we do now.
