Our hydrogen is grey. Our nuclear power encounters waste disposal issues. Our renewable energy sources (RES) endanger the environment they are supposed to save, plus they depend heavily on ‘dirty’ mining. How on earth are we supposed to reach our 2050 goals then?
I fear that this is really going to come down to an ethical dilemma where we will be forced to follow the utilitarian road of the “greater good”. Or lesser evil, if you prefer. The kind of logic that can potentially justify genocide if pushed to the extreme. For example, what’s the extinction of a couple (or a dozen) endangered species if we are going to save the planet and millions of other species in the process? Right? Personally, I am not so sure about that.
In a very interesting article in the Guardian, the environmentalist and founder-director of Forum for the Future, Jonathon Porritt, urges us to not believe the hype when it comes to hydrogen and nuclear power. He argues, that neither of them can get us to net-zero by 2050.