When it comes to tackling Canada’s carbon emissions, the fuels that power our cars and heat our homes garner the most attention, but the steel and concrete that go into those vehicles and buildings are also highly carbon intensive. Concrete and steel together account for 14.7% of global carbon dioxide emissions, which cause most global warming. Most of the technologies we need to drastically reduce these emissions already exist: in patents, in some engineer’s lab or in commercial use where conventional technology doesn’t work as well.

Another way to cut emissions is by encouraging design that uses less steel and cement altogether – and uses them more strategically combined with other materials, like wood and sustainable plastics. Updated building and infrastructure codes or regulations that put a price on carbon would encourage builders to try out alternatives.

Other game-changing technologies are within reach, but they need developmental support or guaranteed early markets to build economies of scale: primary steel made with hydrogen and electricity instead of coal, and new cement chemistries and processes that are virtually carbon-free, in line with the 2050 goal for net-zero CO2 emissions the Canadian Steel Producers Association has set for itself.

Here’s a breakdown of how a $1 billion federal investment a year through 2025 could begin to bring these climate game-changers to scale:

• $100 million per year to develop measurement and verification systems to allow carbon pricing and regulations to operate more effectively, and allow already lower emissions producers to capture market share;
• $200 million per year for research and development; and
• $700 million per year in smart, dynamic subsidies to help emerging technologies and approaches prove their effectiveness for broader use (the less GHG-intensive the technology, the greater the subsidies).

These would apply to ultra-low-emissions steel, cement and chemical products and their substitutes for public infrastructure, buildings and vehicles. The subsidies could go towards making all new and retrofit government buildings and infrastructure low emissions in both materials and energy use.

With this $1 billion green jolt to the steel, cement and other materials sectors, the government could stimulate the economy in the short run, reduce Canada’s emissions and improve our long-run competitiveness in a low-carbon world.

Chris Bataille is an energy economist who serves as a lead author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

The post Getting the carbon out of concrete and steel appeared first on Corporate Knights.

Lately, this motto has been put to the test.

In October, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) painted a stark picture of the high cost we can expect to pay if global temperatures rise by 2˚C instead of 1.5˚C. The half-degree of extra warming doubles the decline in crop yields, fisheries, species extinction, and portion of the population exposed to extreme heat, which in turn adds up to 150 million premature human deaths, mass species extinction and hundreds of millions of climate refugees this century. The problem, based on the Climate Action Tracker models, is that we are currently on track to heat up the planet 3.3˚C by 2100 – a “Hothouse Earth” scenario in which all bets are off.

The IPCC says any hope of hitting even 2˚C requires that global emissions peak and begin rapidly falling in the next 12 years. Up until quite recently, this looked in the cards with global emissions stabilizing in 2014-2016 alongside modest economic growth. This inspired then President Obama to pen a piece in Science magazine declaring that carbon emissions had been decoupled from economic growth in the U.S., citing economic growth of more than 10% over his two terms in office despite a 9.5% fall in CO2 from the energy sector. The decoupling point was particularly hopeful, as the only other ways to reduce emissions (curtail economic growth, population controls, energy rationing) are political non-starters.
Unfortunately, industrial carbon emissions have roared back with a vengeance – rising by 1.7% in 2017 and an estimated 2.7% in 2018 to reach an all-time high, mainly because economies grew faster than clean energy supplies, according to the Global Carbon Project.

The “yes, we can” optimism concerning decoupling was panned by economists Enno Schröder and Servaas Storm as “wishful thinking” in their paper Economic Growth and Carbon Emissions: The Road to ‘Hothouse Earth’ is Paved with Good Intentions. The authors conclude that nothing short of a revolution that reverses the prevailing economic logic favouring lax regulation, deference to the fossil fuel lobby and short-term financing interests can avert climate catastrophe.

Meanwhile, it’s hard to imagine two more unlikely proponents of such a revolution than the current chief occupants of the White House and Brazil’s Palácio da Alvorada. These two zealots recall the Once-Ler villain in my son’s favourite book, The Lorax, with their respective enthusiasms for smogulous [coal] smoke and hacking down [Amazon rainforest] trees.

Thankfully, whatever backwards-looking politicians or statistical analysis may say, however, is less relevant than what is happening right in front of our eyes. Donald Trump and his lot can flap their fossil-fuel marinated wings all they want, but it’s not going to stop the high-carbon, pollution-intensive economy from crashing down to earth.

To wit, since Trump’s inauguration, a U.S. coal plant has been shut down every 15 days, with 2018 being the nation’s top coal-plant killing year ever. This is happening for the same reason that China and the entire developing world installed more new renewables than fossil power last year for the first time ever and why 42% of global coal fleets are unprofitable: Renewables are now cheaper in many major power markets. And we’re just at the beginning of the innovation S-curve for renewables and storage.

In other portents for the future, 2018 likely marked the peak production of internal combustion engine vehicles, according to Accenture, which are imminently set to be made obsolete by cheaper electric and fuel cell vehicles. And satellite imagery tells us that global tree cover expanded about 2.24 million km2, or 7.1%, between 1982 and 2016.

So yes, we have our work cut out for us, and a little political leadership wouldn’t hurt, but we also now have powerful examples and affordable tools to get on with it. We are not slaves to the past or the present. In the fullness of time we can achieve whatever future we want. That’s why in spite of reality, I am still optimistic.

The post Optimistic in spite of reality appeared first on Corporate Knights.