Insight: Can We Really Live Without Fossil Fuels
From cooking food to keeping blast furnaces operational to fuelling jet planes, fossil fuels have been at the centre of civilization for the last few hundred years, and over the last few decades, stakeholders have engaged in meetings, roundtables and international forums on finding ways to shun these carbon-intensive sources of energy.
However, there are a number of reasons why we won't be able to entirely phase out fossil fuels in the near future. In this article, we go into why.
Why fossil fuels?
Energy can be produced effectively from fossil sources. They can generate a lot of power from a small amount of fuel due to their high energy density. They can be utilised for a variety of purposes, such as heating, transportation, and electricity generating, and are also portable and easy to store.
Additionally, fossil fuels are established and practical. For more than a century, they have been the main source of energy, and we have constructed a significant infrastructure around them, including pipelines, refineries, power plants, automobiles, and factories.
Changing this system would require huge investments, innovation, and coordination.
Are alternatives feasible?
It is not practical to stop obtaining and utilising fossil fuels right now. To meet the rising demand brought on by population expansion, urbanisation, and progress, the world still requires a lot of energy.
Although they are gaining popularity, renewable energy sources like solar, wind, and hydro, still have issues with intermittency, variability, scalability, storage, and integration. Another low-carbon option is nuclear energy, although it has issues with safety, waste management, and public acceptance.
Nuclear energy potential
The world will continue to rely on fossil fuels, according to an analysis by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which states: “nuclear energy has been a ray of hope”. Even if a majority of nations switched to wind turbines and solar panels and all cars were electric, fossil fuels would be needed to make the turbines, the panels, and the batteries that powered the electric cars.
Emissions are produced during the creation of these ‘sources’, and this is where energy-intensive nuclear power can be crucial.
According to Diana Furchtgott-Roth, director of the Heritage Foundation's Centre for Energy, Climate, and Environment, "Only nuclear energy can displace oil, coal, and natural gas, yet too many proponents of reaching net-zero emissions by 2050 also oppose nuclear power."
The Joe Biden-led US administration has initiated a US$6 billion initiative to save nuclear power reactors that were in danger of shutting down, stressing the necessity of preserving nuclear energy as a carbon-free source of power that aids in the fight against climate change.
Similar to this, the UAE's Barakah Nuclear Energy Plant significantly contributes to the country's Net Zero by 2050 ambitions by continuously producing clean electricity while reducing carbon emissions by millions of tonnes.
Is curbing progress justified?
Environmental justice is frequently associated with green projects, however, a common objection we hear in the global discussion is that it is unfair to increase the cost of transport and electricity for the poor, thereby depriving them of employment opportunities, and prohibiting them from providing for their families.
Another common criticism is that it is unfair for the wealthy to forbid citizens of sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and other developing countries from using fossil fuels to better their level of living.
The argument goes that no nation should be prohibited from utilising contemporary technology to accomplish such fundamental economic goals as reliable electricity and running water.
Ms Diana Furchtgott-Roth stated: “The celebrity approach to climate change is economically harmful and morally vacuous. There is a need for more sensible and practical ways to help the environment, keeping the developing and under-developed nations in mind.
"A basic way we can do this is by planting trees, which last for decades and sometimes for centuries, and act as carbon sinks.”
Expectations from COP28
The 28th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP28) to the UNFCCC will convene from 30th November to 12th December in Dubai. According to UAE’s Minister of Industry and Advanced Technology, Dr. Sultan Al Jaber who is also the COP28 President – Designate, making a dent in the climate crisis is not just about decarbonising oil and gas operations.
Dr Al Jaber emphasised: “Power generation is the sector where the biggest impact can be made in the shortest amount of time.”
Speaking at the Copenhagen Climate Ministerial held recently, Dr Al Jaber said: "Technology that no one can afford isn’t much use to anyone.
"Governments should therefore adopt smart policies to incentivise breakthroughs in battery storage and commercialise carbon capture and the hydrogen value chain. Scale up all available zero-carbon energy sources, while minimizing the emissions from all other energy sources."
The COP28 Presidency has called on participants to drastically ramp up their renewable energy ahead of the key summit later this year.
Is it possible to stop using fossil fuels?
An alternative energy source must be able to equal fossil fuels in terms of their fuel efficiency, accessibility to their energy, and social integration for it to be a practical replacement. Since fossil fuels have been used for nearly 200 years, they have left some pretty enormous shoes to fill.
Quitting fossil fuels is not an easy task. It requires a lot of political will, social change, technological innovation, and global cooperation. However, it is also necessary if we want to avoid the catastrophic impacts of climate change on our planet and our future.
Fossil fuels are undeniably excellent fuels, but the negative externalities of their use—their harm to human health, the environment, and society—are matters of great concern which outweigh any benefit of continuing their use.
Striking a balance
Certain qualities of fossil fuels are difficult to replicate, such as their energy density and their ability to provide very high heat. To decarbonise processes that rely on these qualities, we need low-carbon fuels that mimic the qualities of fossil fuels.
Solar power, wind power, hydroelectric power, tidal and wave power and biomass are some of the main alternatives to fossil fuels that are available today.
However, there are also other emerging technologies that could potentially provide more sustainable and efficient sources of energy in the future, such as nuclear fusion, geothermal power, hydrogen fuel cells, artificial photosynthesis, and nanotechnology.
The UAE Government has recently approved its National Hydrogen Strategy, which aims at strengthening the country's position as a producer and exporter of low-emission hydrogen over the course of the next eight years.
The challenge we are going to face is striking a balance between fossil fuels and renewable energy which is a complex task that requires a combination of technological, economic, social, and political actions.
World at a crossroads
The world today stands at a crucial juncture. Actions such as improving energy efficiency and conservation; increasing the share of renewable energy in the electricity mix; using fossil fuels more sustainably and efficiently; and promoting global cooperation and coordination is likely to bridge this gap and address the challenge to a good extent.
Aforementioned are a few possible ways to level the usage of fossil fuels and renewable energy. However, there is no one-size-fits-all solution for every country or region. Each situation requires a tailored approach that considers the available resources, needs, preferences, capacities, and goals of the stakeholders involved.
Read More: Insight: The Cascading Effect of Climate Financing on Supply Chains
