24. Carbon Zero Cities

A new book by Alex Steffen called "Carbon Zero: Imagining cities that can save the planet" delves into the challenges and opportunities for how we can grow our cities and seize a better future in the face of climate change. It makes some bold statements about the situation we have created and how we can respond ... here are a few quotes to get a flavour.

Humanity will either bring its climate emissions down to a number in balance with the capacities of the planet (and have begun a worldwide effort to pull carbon out of the atmosphere) or face worsening, destabilizing disasters. Our choice is binary: carbon zero or climate chaos.

So, it's not about doing a little or trying our best. It's about getting to zero carbon and quickly.

I believe that planetary limits and human creativity are now inextricably bound together. Design constraints often deliver better results than complete freedom. Quite the opposite of imposing hardship, carbon zero targets may very well spur a renaissance in urban creativity.

As the saying goes - necessity is the mother of invention.

In just the next couple decades we must achieve net-zero climate emissions. That target, zero carbon, presents a stupendous challenge. Our cities, though, give us amazing opportunities to reduce our climate emissions while improving both our economy and our communities.

It will be very hard. But in cities, we can make deep cuts in emissions and create a social and economic boom from our innovations.

We can’t build, though, what we can’t imagine. Carbon Zero takes on the task of imagining how all these innovations might work together, and gives you the tools to reimagine the possibilities of your city. It’s not a blueprint. It’s not a manifesto. Carbon Zero is an invitation to imagine winning the climate fight.

Indeed, we need to break away from understanding the future based on today, and let our imagination free!

23. Guns or kids, me or us?

The horrific shootings at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in the USA have captured the attention of the world, as we again witness the impacts of public gun ownership. I have been following the news, reading blogs and watching debates unfold on Facebook (as we all have been doing). The calls for greater gun control in the USA have started. But will we see any change? In short, no. The more likely response in the USA is to see security guards placed at schools, more training for teachers and children, and perhaps even the arming of principles and teachers. Sounds crazy? Not in the USA. When you look closely at those that argue for gun ownership what you see is that they are arguing for individual rights. In the USA, this seems to trump everything else. It is argued that individuals have the right to own a gun and it is not the realm of governments to regulate or control this 'god given' right. So guns are protected more than kids? But if we jump to Sweden or Australia we see a totally different take on how society works. Both these countries have enforced strict gun control, and therefore have very few (if any) shootings like those experienced in the USA. In Sweden, there is a deep understanding by the vast majority of people that 'I am better off, if we are better off'. This means people are willing to 'sacrifice' something for the greater good. So nobody has guns, and virtually nobody gets killed by guns (in comparison to the USA). But this thinking extends further. In Sweden, you cannot drink and drive (the blood alcohol limit is set so slow that it has created a culture of no drinking if you plan to drive). Because if you drink and drive you endanger the lives of others and yourself. All of these issues are also inter-connected with a child-friendly society that puts kids in focus! And it goes further, Sweden has committed to deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions because, you guessed it, the greater (global) good. In the USA, they cannot commit to any kind of global agreement on climate change because this can infringe on individual (and national) rights ... and the more I look across these issues, the more I see that it is all about shifting from 'guns and me' to 'kids and us'. The USA could learn a lesson from Sweden and Australia on these matters.

22. Exporting GHG emissions

An interesting article appeared in The Age today that had also been published on The Conversation recently about the use of coal in Australia and more importantly the export of coal and the associated GHG emissions. A few quotes sum up the key points ...

Australia's domestic emissions represent ''only'' 1.5 per cent of the global total. Yet this makes us the world's 16th largest national contributor to global warming.

Australia is the world's largest coal exporter. If emissions from Australia's exported coal are added to its domestic emissions, our carbon footprint trebles. Our coal exports contribute at least another 3.3 per cent of global emissions. 

In aggregate, considering coal exports, Australia is now the source of at least 4.8 per cent of global emissions. Our carbon footprint is the world's 9th largest.

By 2020, our coal export boom — based on ''locked in'' projects alone — will make Australia's carbon footprint the world's 6th largest, after China, the US, Russia, India and Indonesia. 

Our mitigation efforts are swamped by our exports. We are a growing super-contributor to climate change: our responsibility is of global proportions.

And this is where the challenge lies for Australia. In order to make deep cuts in GHG emissions, the coal industry will need to be phased-out. This is both our domestic use and exported coal. The article ends with a clear-cut picture of the future ...

Ultimately, change will be forced upon us whether or not we like it or are prepared. We can choose a rapid, planned scale-down in coal exports now. Or we can continue to boost our coal export sector and then allow market forces and climate change to combine in a perfect storm.

21. Nation and industry building policy

An article on The Conversation today laments that there is an ever-widening gap between rising greenhouse gas emissions and the steps necessary to keep global temperatures within the generally agreed – but increasingly difficult – 2°C safe limit above pre-industrial levels. It goes on to argue that the type of transformation needed would require the world to wake up tomorrow and embrace a new green industrial revolution whereby new economic development is focused on establishing a large and rapidly growing non-polluting energy sector as the vehicle to meet new energy and jobs demand. We are not talking about incremental changes and low-cost solutions. Rather, the challenge is structural changes and high-impact strategic decisions.

I recently gave a talk at the annual Bioenergy Australia conference entitled "How to build a bioenergy industry? From Sweden to Australia". I presented the rather dramatic transformation of the energy system in Sweden from the 1970s when imported oil dominated supply by about 70-80%. But over the past 4 decades, oil has declined to about 30% and bioenergy now provides about 32%. And the trends are for bioenergy and renewable energy to keep growing, and oil shrinking. The driver behind these changes is simple - strong government policy designed to build up new industries by creating conditions for investment, and a clear intent to phase-out fossil fuels.

20. Learning, travelling and doing

I was just thinking about how important it is for more of our political, business and community leaders to better understand the challenges and solutions to climate change and global change. And in my inbox I found an email about applications to a fantastic, international Masters course that involves my institute in Sweden, and provides students with extrodinary opportunities to learn from a mix of universities in Europe and North America. Check it out!

MESPOM is an Erasmus Mundus Masters course in Environmental Sciences, Policy and Management operated by four leading European and two North American Universities and supported by the European Commission. MESPOM prepares students for identifying and implementing solutions to complex environmental challenges, especially in an international context. The MESPOM study programme is in English and lasts two years.

The students study in at least three out of six consortium universities: the International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics at Lund University (Sweden), the University of Manchester (UK), Central European University (Budapest), the University of the Aegean (Lesvos, Greece), Middlebury College and its affiliate Monterey Institute for International Studies (MIIS) (USA), and the University of  Saskatchewan (UoS) (Canada).