Towards a new Carbon Neutral Electric World...

The next industrial revolution, resulting from a deep and almost total decarbonization of the economy, is possible. It is still "in the making" and will generate millions of jobs. There is no planet B, it is just the only way out of the climate crisis. Here is how companies can seriously consider closing the carbon cycle…

By Nicolas Breyton,

The average temperature in 2020 increased by 1 ° C compared to the pre-industrial era. And then, you would argue that “we are still not so bad”, right? But what we forget to see is that this rise is not homogeneous: the temperature above the continents has already grown 80% faster than this average global temperature. Already + 1.8 ° C above the continents, while the air over the oceans has only warmed by 0.8 ° C. And guess what, ...100% of humans live on the continents!

In fact, it is just beyond comprehension. We have not yet all understood, in our own guts, the sense of urgency. All the IPCC / IPCC computer simulations for 2100 are now convergent, precise and corroborate perfectly with what has happened in the past 30 years. The scenario "Business as Usual”, which is privileged, is between 3.5 and 5 ° C in 2100. And it is the most realistic, not the most pessimistic. It means an increase of 5 to 8 ° C above the continents, and 2.5 to 4 ° C above the oceans. And Humanity, I hope, does not stop in 2100: I am not talking here about the year 2200 or 2300: we would multiply these figures by at least two if nothing changes (but fossil fuels should dry up before). We all learn about the French Revolution of 1789 at school, but no one is interested in the history of the year 2251, despite the distance to 2020 is the same.

The climate response will not be linear. We already know that the “climate feedback”, that is an amplification phenomenon, will be strong. Among other things, permafrost is already melting much faster than expected, releasing the methane hydrates contained in frozen Siberian soils and potentially adding around 0.5 to 1 ° C. The average annual position of high-pressure systems will change, threatening all forested areas strongly, which could cause fires of an unknown size, far beyond what happened this year in Australia. All our carbon offsetting efforts, by sequestering CO2 via reforestation, could therefore vanish in smoke.

There, you think, " enough catastrophism!" ... And you are right, then read this article until the end! I am not trying to be a catastrophist here, but just realistic and close to scientific facts, catastrophism would perhaps be, to add to this list, other probable but not yet scientifically proven feedbacks; such as a non-linear rise in water oceans due to the sudden dislocation of the Ross Sea ice sheet in Antarctica, and many other phenomena that are even more difficult to predict.

People confuse optimism and denial, pessimism and just taking into account the scientific knowledge to develop an action plan. Listening to scientists is not just about being pessimistic, but it is more about being able to react with realism and seriousness. And the most scientifically realistic future is the world described above, not the world of teddy bears in which we live today. Some say that I shouldn't be emotional. I disagree, because staying in the cerebral understanding of the problem is not enough to get in motion. This stuff has to go into the reptilian brain to take action ... And we must take action now to save our own children!

And here I am fighting fatalism and the idea that this destiny is inevitable. We can no longer hide behind the tree, that hides the forest. We really know what will happen if we don't change much, and we also know that we have everything in our hands to succeed in changing the course of history…

It is when the man is cornered that he is most inventive. And it is now. We no longer have so many choices, we are no longer in 2010 ... The urgency forces us to immediately replace the blood of the economy, at full speed. A plan for rapid substitution of all fossil fuels, far beyond cosmetics, is inevitable. It is just impossible to continue the "Business As Usual". Even financially, deep down, we all know it already.

So… Is it impossible? How to do it? We must launch the next low-carbon revolution.

This next industrial revolution is to achieve an economy that can close the carbon cycle. It is financially accessible (about 5% of world GDP per year), it is technically possible, and this the most profitable long-term project!

A 100% electric, low-carbon world is the only one that can provide enough energy to avoid a punitive environmentalism, a world of of eco-taxes and inequalities, a world of depression and decline with huge potential social suffering. This environmentalism would quickly become socially unbearable, even more so in emerging countries, where almost all the future growth in global GDP and CO2 will come from.

This will go through a small revolution in two segments: The Nuclear sector, and the Oil & Gas sector.

• On the electrical side, we must continue to develop solar and wind power for extensive use. We must also dare to accept and disrupt nuclear power on a large scale: as the main electrical baseload, as a follow-up of intermittences, and as a vector for the production of decarbonated fuels, because power storage in the form of chemical batteries at the level of national networks, and on a weekly and seasonal scale, is still far from existing. Do not listen to journalists, merchants of fear, who mix up the concept of risk and danger. Civil nuclear is dangerous (if we eat waste!), but surprisingly provides a very reduced risk per KWh. French civil nuclear power has killed zero people per year in 60 years, and the most risky, the Russian civil nuclear sector, about 80 to 100 people per year over 60 years if you consider Chernobyl, whose unsafe design has not been marketed anymore for quite a while. It will quickly become more socially acceptable than coal and oil, which has proven to be responsible of over 7 deaths each year from city emissions. As in medicine, we must make brave choices, not media-driven but rationally-driven choices, with a serious "risk-benefit" analysis that is simply explained to the population. And it's not that complicated! For the base of electrical production, we must not delude ourselves, the real choice is between coal / fossil gas and nuclear. As for nuclear waste, the long-term risk of fossil waste (CO2, CH4) is dramatically greater than storable and solid radioactive waste, the volume of which is tiny and could even become the fuel of the next gen’ nuclear plants. 

• On the hydrocarbon side, the oil and gas companies must cope with geological and climatic problems. Actually, the strategy of these companies is evolving rapidly. They will stop drilling, this was in the 20th century: in the 21st century, they will have to use decarbonated electricity to produce synthetic hydrocarbons on a large scale. Repsol was the first oil company to announce, in December 2019, committing to be carbon neutral by 2050, even if they are not yet sure how to achieve it. But the change in strategy is radical and can be a game-changer. They are indeed moving from a green washing strategy , buying a photovoltaic image, while in the same time they subsidized Greenpeace to kill any potential nuclear competition, to a green core business strategy, where they will have to produce CO2 free-hydrocarbons by all means, in particular considering that "nuclear power is no longer my competitor, but my best partner for the future". To do this, a merger will naturally take place between the electricity and the oil & gas industries.

The collection of CO2 will then become a precious commodity, and a real price of CO2 will emerge, beyond the carbon market considered as a “waste” market. It will be collected and recovered in large plants for the electrolysis of water at high temperatures. This will make it possible to produce “zero carbon” hydrogen and methane: the efficiency of this operation (from 20 to 30%) is not so bad, if there is cheap decarbonated energy source upstream. The rest of the carbon-free hydrocarbons could naturally come from biomass (algae, green waste).

As a conclusion, we need to invent a new, very electric and carbon neutral world, with a mix of energy efficiency, solar, wind, smart grids, and nuclear. We also need enough decarbonated hydrocarbons for non-substitutable applications, biogas and finally, reforestation …

No need to oppose solutions between them, we need them all. And we must jointly stop upstream emissions and in the same time, sequester downstream (reforestation). If we act only downstream (CO2 sequestration through forestation), the compensation is partial and delayed by 30 years, therefore dangerous (a tree does not grow so quickly and can burn because of climate change). Without changing our upstream primary energy production model, carbon offsetting is very likely to be vain, because it will re-emit by fire what it will have taken 30 years to sequester …

To be successful, global finance and industry must join their efforts.

First, on the financial side, a real war effort is needed: approximately 5% of world GDP must be allocated, associated with the creation of a world currency (green bonds), and with a signed moratorium at the United Nations to ban fossil fuels in 2050. Let's be positive, this deep decarbonization of the economy has the potential to transform and generate millions of jobs.

Then, it is necessary to radically innovate in the nuclear sector to produce a sufficient low-carbon electrical baseload and disrupt with new generations of renewable nuclear (and yes, it is possible!).

And finally, huge subsidies are also needed for the Oil & Gas sector to help these giants transform their business model from 100% fossil fuels to 100% carbon-free fuels. Companies in this sector, who will accept this challenge, like Repsol, will transform their image of planet gravediggers into saviors, and those who will not play the game will be marginalized by a "Shame & Blame"campaign. It’s not impossible, here are the business reasons why:

1. First, everyone knows that the image of a company is one of the most important assets for its own customers and shareholders.

2. Secondly, their shareholders must accept to temporarily see their profitability decline in order to preserve their own financial future, as in the digital sector, where the shareholders of Amazon have not been remunerated for a long time because they rightly believed in bigger returns resulting from the transformations pushed by the company.

3. Third, it is the only way for this sector to avoid giant weather trials and to be let go by their insurance companies. Finally, the first to operate this transformation will be the most competitive.

4. Even if they are far from controlling the entire sector, the oil “majors” are opinion leaders, and the smaller domestic producers will have no choice but to follow the world trend, imposed by a UN moratorium on banning the extraction of fossil fuels by 2050.

No one has a planet B, including the oil & gas world, and we all want a prosperous future for our children, including workers at Repsol, Total and Exxon.

So everything is still possible. The worst is never certain, and the real change is starting now: the decarbonization of the economy is very exciting, full of business opportunities, and twists and turns. The story is just beginning …