Power Surge!

In the documentary, Power Surge, they propose a simplified way of looking at cutting carbon emissions. The wedge game, as they call it, is an analysis of the area between our current projected path of carbon emissions over the next fifty years and if our carbon emissions were to plateau. The resulting figure resembles a triangle or a wedge. The movie estimates that annually, the carbon emissions to be equal to seven billion tons. The wedge theory divides these tons into seven equal parts and analyzes what can be done to cut one seventh of our total emissions over the given time period. There are 15 existing technologies in the marketplace at an industrial scale that could each cut emissions by approximately 1 billion tons over the next 50 years, or one seventh of the wedge.

There are four different categories of wedges, the yellow represents a tripling of nuclear over the next 50 years, the green represents increased energy efficiency, which is the easiest and cheapest route, the red represents solar energies and the blue represents clean coal innovation and burying their emissions. The game is played by taking the 15 existing wedges and figuring out which seven wedges combined could most efficiently plateau our carbon emissions. The documentary has gathered several experts from many different fields to speak on the plausible solutions that could cut one seventh of the problem.

The blue wedge, or carbon capture technology based off the way plants take emissions out of atmosphere. The blue wedge also includes cleaning up coal would be ideal because there is already so much infrastructures in place than can be improved upon. This is being done on a massive scale in factories burying carbon emissions a mile under the ground. The red wedge, solar power, is a very promising option, for 100 terawatts hit the earth every year and as a globe we only use 17 terawatts. The documentary refers to biofuels as solar power, for the plants obtain their energy from the sun. The green wedge, or efficiency, will not only reduce emissions, but also save a ton of money on energy bills. Nuclear, or the yellow wedge, has been standardized over the years to make them safer.

I do agree with their assessment of how to solve the problem. There is not one sole solution to the stabilization of carbon. By the end of the century, the population along with energy need is expected to triple. A combination of solutions will help us wean off our old inefficient energy habits while meeting the increased energy needs of the future.

Not all of the solutions address the effects of the environment, society and economy when they consider what alternative energies to use. When the gas is forced a mile underground into porous rock and changes the topography of the surrounding area, the impact of the changing landscape on the local environment is not discussed in depth, although the documentary does recognize it as an expensive route to complete 1/7 of the puzzle. The economic plausibility of a large-scale carbon capture technology is not discussed. The economic feasibility of solar is discussed, the issue is to make photovoltaic less expensive. The plant biology of fermenting yeast is not financially feasible. However, it would be highly adaptable to current infrastructure. The social aspect of where exactly all of these projects would be located is not discussed. The societal risk of nuclear is talked about in a vague sense, presented as the lesser of two evils. Fukashima did not discourage the nuclear advocate in the documentary: he refers to the pros and cons without specifically mentioning them.