Mitigating Climate Change Effects: A Global Approach
Authors: Nordén Bengt 
Published: September 2022

The following theses are claimed, several contrasting current climate policies and taxonomies. Analysis, based on solely carbon dioxide emission and energy budget, concludes a set of concrete solutions for mitigating climate change effects. Some of the theses violate more orthodox policy which is thus protested against in order to move forward.

• Our long-term goal must be to stop using all carbon-containing fuels, including natural gas and other fossil products as well as biofuels. • We must electrify society and industry, with electricity from only non-carbon-based power including nuclear power, hydro-electric, wind and solar power. • We must prepare ourselves for changes. Even if the present emission volumes of carbon dioxide were possible to stop immediately, various lag effects are inevitable and negative development will therefore continue for considerable time. • We must count with continued melting of land ice, the complete liquifying of the Antarctica ice expected to lead to a global sea level rise by some 60 m, flooding most capitals. Among various solutions to mitigate the effects of ice melting, including lowered global temperatures, the following is proposed. • To mitigate sea level rise, stationary water reservoirs should be built around the world. With estimated melting rates it would require ca 1 million reservoirs be deployed or expanded during the next 20-40 years. • Such reservoirs could also solve the emergent problem of lack of fresh water in many places. They could also be used for local storage of hydroelectric energy by using pump storage hydroelectric (PSH) technology. • All energy production sources should be analyzed according to a Total Balanced Energy Budget (TBEB) with the main objective of minimizing the emissions of greenhouse gases. • For each region/country, a table of available or conceivable complementary electric energy sources should be made and ranked according to TBEB—the sources given priority weights depending on feasibility, significance, and environmental friendliness. Tables are presented for Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Germany, France, Ukraine, California, Massachusetts, Maine, Peru, Australia, China and Japan. Generally, we find the following rank of priority applicable. • Solar energy from desert arid areas is given highest priority in replacing carbon-based forms of energy. Submarine electric cables may be deployed along the Australia-Singapore model, if the available power grids are insufficient for the energy transport. • Electrolysis of water producing clean hydrogen gas is given very high priorityboth for using hydrogen as fuel as well as for energy storage. Improved efficiency should be achieved by the development of electrolysis catalysts. • Hydroelectric power in combination with PSH is given high priority to mitigate both grid power fluctuations as well as source (solar and wind) intermittence. • False hope should not be seeded among society and politicians by inflating projects that are less realistic or suboptimal for technological, economic or other reasons. Here, probably most forms of “biofuels” (which although being “carbon neutral” do produce carbon dioxide) and “carbon capture” (catching carbon dioxide gas at the combustion site, compressing it to liquid and depositing it in salt mines or empty oil fields) are considered less significant compared to other more direct solutions. Both biofuels and carbon capture may be associated with social and environmental issues. • Political legislation and instruments (“taxonomy”) invented with the original objective of mitigating negative climate change effects should be reanalyzed and changed if not functional. The EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS)—a market for outlet rights, for example, is a local initiative which despite its valuable ambition might be suboptimal with respect to goal of efficient decrease of carbon dioxide emission globally. Similarly, “climate taxonomy” can create loopholes bypassing a sound TBEB. • Science-based targets (SBT) to decarbonize the private sector as part of global efforts to achieve the temperature goal of the Paris Agreement should be further encouraged. • Solve economic and political challenges allowing and promoting establishment of required international energy collaborations (e.g., for solar energy cross-continental transport programs).