When we read about efforts to combat climate change, we often hear certain technologies praised as the only viable solution to the problem. This refrain is often heard when people talk about nuclear power, either “small, modular nuclear fission” or nuclear fusion. I’ve also heard it with reference to sustainable airline fuels, hydrogen, lab grown meat, and carbon capture and storage. There are people who insist that a 100% renewables grid is the only way to go, and others who call this a pipe dream. It can be pretty maddening at times. The reality is that no single technology is going to save us.
In fact, technology really isn’t even the main issue. A system that allows gross overconsumption of resources, particularly by a tiny percentage of extremely wealthy people, is never going to be sustainable. There is no magic technology that’s going to allow us to continue consuming at our current levels indefinitely.
The reality is, we need to change our consumption behaviors, and invest in research and development. We need to implement the solutions we have now, while developing new ones. We must focus on systemic changes and work within the systems that already exist.
This idea of a silver bullet reminds me of the Ancient Greek dramatic concept of “deus ex machina” in which a god of some type swoops down at the last minute to save the protagonists. It’s comforting to think that really smart people are inventing something that will save us all. We like to believe that our current personal behaviors are not the problem, and that we can pretty much go on living as we’ve always gone and everything will be fine. This is a fantasy.
Unfortunately, behavior change is unlikely to come voluntarily. Either through government coercion or, maybe worse, natural disasters and resource shortages, we will be forced to change the way we live. The sooner we understand this, the better it will be for everyone.
When we look at the conversation around climate change, a lot of people like to push these magic technology fixes. It’s not surprising, since most of them are personally invested in the fossil fuel economy. Someone like Joe Manchin who personally makes over $300,000 a year from fossil fuel investments is not going to give that money up without a fight. He continues to push this idea that we can innovate our way out of the crisis and continue to burn fossil fuels. Noted crank Bjorn Lomborg made the same argument in his book Cool It. These guys think that we can innovate our way out of anything.
Maybe they’re right. But if they’re wrong, we’re all screwed. You can think of it like a Pascal’s Wager for the climate. The only logical way to move forward is to assume there are no magic fixes. No nuclear fusion, no economic carbon capture, no zero carbon jet fuel, or any other too good to be true innovation that will solve the crisis. We don’t want to be in a situation were our technological salvation doesn’t come. At the same time, we should continue to invest in R&D for climate tech. Zero carbon jet fuel, Carbon Capture and Storage, Nuclear fusion, these are all great things and if they existed at scale, they would be extremely helpful. The point of this post isn’t to denigrate innovation, the point is that we can’t rely on solutions that don’t exist yet.
The Mangrove 