He s one of the best-known Italian

Transcription

1 No to the catastrophe theory, but beware of population growth: in 2050 there will be 9 billion people on earth. But technology will save us. Europe has a good plan to control emissions: now we have to make Rubbia: An Alternative? I Can See At Least Three ENERGIES 1 edited by Vittorio Borelli and Donato Speroni it work. And convince the sceptics. As for alternatives to oil, there are three feasible solutions: the new thermodynamic solar energy, third generation biomass technologies, and ocean currents He s one of the best-known Italian scientists in the world, but Nobel Prize winner Carlo Rubbia is not just a theoretical physicist, he s also much appreciated for organising research and experimentation in a number of fields. For the last few months he has been an alternative energy consultant to the Italian Government. Professor, the media give a lot of coverage to studies and research that suggest a number of more or less catastrophic pictures of the world in 2050: vast areas of desert, widespread marine flooding in coastal regions, hundreds of thousands of people compelled to migrate. What is your vision of the future? Setting aside the sometimes over-alarmist views often circulated in the mass media, the fact remains that in 2050 the world may find itself in a very serious situation if everyone in the world continues to carry on business as usual. In other words, to ensure that forthcoming generations will have an acceptable future we need to make real and immediate changes in our attitude to policies to balance energy and environmental needs. Today there are 6.5 billion people on earth. In 2050 there will be 9 billion. Even if, compared to climate change, they are not subject to as much media hype, there are other serious problems lying in wait for us, problems related to famines caused by insufficient crops though today there is still a surplus and to water shortages. Looking at things in the short term, some scenarios depict gradually increasing problems (in the IPCC reports for example) and others present a dramatic acceleration of climate phenomena rather than a linear process of deterioration. A scenario published by the Pentagon even suggests that a change in the course of the Gulf Stream will cause a crisis in Europe in As a scientist, what do you expect? Dramatic change due to the Gulf Stream changing course certainly won t take place by 2010, but it could happen, because of the loss of the polar icecaps and the changes in the salinity of the oceans. These phenomena are possible if temperatures increase by at least 4o centigrade in a century, that is to say about double the present estimates. However, there is still a great deal of uncertainty and we must remember that a similar phenomenon has already occurred more than once in the history of our planet. 64

2 Contrasto

3 RUBBIA: AN ALTERNATIVE? I CAN SEE AT LEAST THREE Climate, energy and water are three very closely related global problems. Don t you think that in the past international organisations and governments lacked a systemic approach? Certainly I do, and in Italy there s often not even a coordinated approach among the various Ministries. In general, we see a wide gap between political rhetoric about climate change and the priorities applied when allocating the relevant resources and finance. A huge disparity persists in what decisionmakers at all levels have to say about climate change and the hard reality of budgets and other priorities. A new perception is needed urgently. It s only new and immediate R&D efforts and sufficient funding being channelled toward new sources of energy that will allow us to succeed in altering the current trend. We need massive new developments in science and industry. Can technology save us? Can we hope for technical advances that will let us take a quantum leap to meet all these problems and, if so, which fields will the advances come from? The answer to these crucial problems will come mainly from technology. Like today s nuclear energy, current first and second generation renewable energies are unable to meet the challenge of replacing fossil fuels Hydrogen is not a new source of energy (free hydrogen is not naturally plentiful) but a carrier for energy produced by other methods. Concern over fossil fuels leads to the conclusion that hydrogen must be produced from renewable energies. But as of today we do not have the methods to allow us to do so cost effectively. 66

4 ENERGIES 1 completely. Today there are three solutions that are feasible from the scientific and economic point of view. The new thermodynamic solar energy which is rapidly gaining ground in many countries, for one. Then there are the third generation biomass technologies: though not much is being said about those yet, compared to existing techniques they can make much more efficient use of solar energy in ethanol production, with an increase in conversion efficiency of up to factor 10. Finally, _Polar glaciers are one of the most sensitive thermometers with which to measure climate change. Many of the most catastrophic forecasts of the consequences of global warming are based on a partial meltdown of the glaciers we must explore the possibilities of using the ocean currents. The Kyoto Protocol expires in The European Union has committed itself heart and soul to a programme that will run until 2020 and it also hopes to bring in the United States and the large developing countries. Nonetheless, many European countries are already defaulting on the limits set for carbon emissions and you have already said that the European targets are not strict enough. Can we really speed things up? First of all I d like to point out that many countries, including Germany, France and the UK, are within the Kyoto parameters. Corbis

5 RUBBIA: AN ALTERNATIVE? I CAN SEE AT LEAST THREE With its bold programme for controlling emissions, the EU has the merit of having put the problem at the top of the agenda. It s only through good examples that we can hope to involve other countries with a view to making everyone understand that we all live on the same planet. The problems have to be faced globally and the fact that Kyoto may only have been a taster is no excuse for failing to roll up our sleeves. Let s say that today what I see as the risk is that discussions will continue at the theoretical level and that the urgency of preparing a practical plan of action based on the development and widespread use of new eco-friendly technologies will be put in second place. Saving energy and promoting the use of renewable sources are equally important. But when it comes to policies choices have to be made. Which takes priority: promoting the new sources through incentives which will keep down costs so that they compare to those of fossil fuels, or taxing CO 2 emissions and increasing the price of pollutant energies to promote economical use? Politics should create the conditions necessary for a real market based on renewable energies. At the global level, which of the renewable sources are best? And which are best for Italy? Italy has an enormous unused resource: the sun. Every square metre of land in the South and even more in the neighbouring African regions, where there are vast stretches of desert, produces one barrel of _An ethanol production plant. According to Rubbia, a possible alternative to current energy sources is the use of solar energy to produce biomass (ethanol)

6 ENERGIES 1 The answer to environmental problems can come mainly from technology. Our current renewable energies, like today s nuclear energy, are unable to meet the challenge of replacing fossil fuels completely oil a year. Not a negligible quantity! The important processes we must develop include concentrated thermodynamic solar energy (Archimedes) and the use of solar energy to produce biomass (ethanol). Both these processes have the great advantage of being able to accumulate energy, thereby eliminating the fluctuations associated with traditional sources (PV and wind turbines). You have said you are in favour of biomass energy, but can it play a significant role in Europe or only in regions where there are large areas suitable for cultivation? In Europe today there are many areas which are not used although they are suitable for crops. They could open the door for bio-energy to be used in Italy and in the majority of European countries. There is no doubt that ethanol is just around the corner in the USA and Brazil and soon it will arrive in Europe too. Grazia Neri_AFP

7 Corbis The pros and cons of nuclear energy are well known. In your opinion, should we encourage the new generation power stations? Is it realistic to think that they could make an important contribution to solving the problem? There s no doubt that nuclear energy will continue to produce electricity in those countries that think it acceptable and in places where the technology is already in use. I would say that in countries such as France, the UK or the United States, which have invested heavily in nuclear energy, the new generation power stations will be a necessity rather than an option, in that the present installations have reached the end of their natural lifespan. However, the question of radioactive waste still needs to be solved. We must remember that today nuclear energy only produces 6% of the world s energy. If it is to replace fossil fuels at a much more significant global level, nuclear energy will have to be increased by a very large factor, especially in the developing countries, which, after 2010, will be the largest producers of CO 2! So far, not even the new power stations have solved the problems connected with risks of nuclear proliferation, which are especially critical in _Exploiting marine currents to produce energy is a possible alternative to current energy sources; for the moment, however, this solution appears to be a futuristic one those very areas. So, in my opinion, nuclear energy as we know it is not without problems and, especially with the new estimated costs, it s certainly not a cure-all. A good dose of caution definitely seems necessary. A few years ago it seemed that hydrogenpowered vehicles might be a good idea and one that was not too far off, but enthusiasm seems to have waned. What s your opinion? It s well known that hydrogen is not a new source of energy (free hydrogen is not naturally plentiful) but a carrier for energy produced by other methods. Concern over fossil fuels leads to the conclusion that hydrogen must be produced from renewable energies. As yet there are no proven methods which can replace traditional transport with hydrogen-power on a large scale and at reasonable cost. Personally, I would rather bet on ethanol from biomass technologies: the internal combustion engine has still got a great future ahead! 70