Category Archives: Opinion

Tesla Powerwall home battery storage system (Image: Tesla)

Why is the Domestic Battery so Important?

Earlier this year I saw an all in one inverter and domestic battery unit on display at the Bosch stand at CES.

2 years ago I stayed with my friend Simon Hackett in Adelaide, Australia and saw his line up of domestic batteries in sturdy cabinets outside his home. Simon’s house is covered in solar panels, he makes more electricity than he can use and he runs three electric cars from this power source.

Yesterday Tesla announced its domestic battery range.

Tesla Powerwall home battery storage system (Image: Tesla)
Tesla Powerwall home battery storage system (Image: Tesla)

So, is this yet further ‘playthings for the rich’ as so many suggest to me on the Twitters?

What role can a domestic battery have for the ordinary Joe/Joanne?

With the advent of ever cheaper and more effective lithium ion battery technology, something government supported scientists have been working on for the last 40 years, a new paradigm is beginning to emerge.

On a personal level, if you have a few solar panels and a battery in your home, this doesn’t mean you can ‘live off the grid’ but it does mean you can reduce your electricity bill by a much larger amount that you can at the moment. You can obviously store the electricity coming from your panels during the day when you are not home and use it in the evening when you return.

But that really isn’t the story.

If a thousand homes had solar panels and domestic batteries fitted, it wouldn’t make any difference to the national picture.

Those homeowners would benefit from greatly reduced bills and maybe feel smug, but that’s about it.

If ten thousand houses had them, it might be possible to register the reduction in peak demand at the National Grid control room I visited for a Fully Charged episode.

If a million homes had them, solar panels or not, it would make a very profound difference.

If 10 million homes had them, well, everything would change.

But why?

Read more: Llew Blog

(Image: D. Bacon/Shutterstock/Economist)

Bad News About Oil Prices

I have very bad news about oil prices. In the foreseeable future (12 months), their most likely trajectory is… volatile. That is right, bullish and bearish oil price narratives will be proven to be unsatisfactory and overly simplistic. The best bet would be to invest in volatility plays.

What explains this heightened volatility in oil prices? The short answer is the death of OPEC. The U.S. geopolitical deleveraging out of the Middle East has created a disequilibrium, with Iran and Saudi Arabia engaged in a competition for regional hegemony. This competition is unlike anything investors have seen in the Middle East because it takes place in the context of global multipolarity. The U.S. is no longer willing to expend increasingly scarce resources to micromanage the Middle East and no other power is going to step in to fill the vacuum. OPEC cannot survive in this environment because a cartel cannot be maintained when its members are openly at war with each other.

How important is the death of OPEC for oil prices? My colleague Robert Ryan, Chief Strategist of BCA’s Commodity & Energy Strategy, and I think that it is transformative. In our report – titled End Of An Era For Oil And The Middle East – we argue that the salient feature of the global oil market for the past 85 years has been coordinated control of production. Oil markets will see truly free-market pricing for the first time since 1930, when amidst a chaotic production free-for-all spawned by the oil boom the Texas Railroad Commission began pro-rating production in the state to control prices.

In addition to free-market pricing, oil prices are also no longer directly proportional to geopolitical risks in the Middle East. Geopolitics will now fatten both the left and right tails of the oil price probability distribution curve. Gone are the days when geopolitics of the Middle East played an obvious, unidirectional role that simply raised the risk premium on oil prices. The new paradigm, one of disequilibrium, will create headwinds and tailwinds to oil prices.

Read more: Linked In

The sun sets on drilling (Image: Pexels)

War, hedge funds and China: why oil will hit $100 a barrel

Oil prices are heading higher and could soon return to $100 per barrel as war in the Middle East and speculators drive market

It wouldn’t be the first time that oil experts have got it spectacularly wrong when predicting the price of crude.

Goldman Sachs went against the prevailing mood in 2008 when it famously predicted that crude would hit $200 per barrel within months. Instead, oil crashed to levels around $40 per barrel as the global financial crisis punctured world demand.

This time around, the US investment bank decided to follow the consensus view on Wall Street when earlier this year it downgraded its short-term forecast for the price of a barrel to around $40 per barrel.

But instead of falling, oil has rallied strongly. Brent crude now trading above $63 per barrel is up 36pc since reaching its year low in early January. At this rate oil will be back at $100 per barrel by the end of the summer driving season in the US when middle-class America hits the great open roads to visit their ‘Aunt Agatha’ in Pennsylvania.

The sun sets on drilling (Image: Pexels)
The sun sets on drilling (Image: Pexels)

So why has the short-term outlook for oil changed overnight?

Lower prices have started to filter through to boosting growth in the world’s most advanced economies and with it demand for gasoline, which is once again on the rise.

Here are six reasons why oil is heading back to $100:

The market is tighter than you think: World demand for crude oil is beginning to rebound. After growth in consumption slowed last year the early signs are that demand is beginning to pick up led by developed markets that are responding to a period of lower prices. The Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (Opec) expects demand for oil to grow by 1.17m barrels per day (bpd) in 2015 but this is a conservative estimate. Another 500,000 bpd of crude would erase the current 1.5m bpd surplus in the market. Remove this tight surplus and oil is back above $100 in a heartbeat.

Read more: Telegraph

Half of U.S. Fracking Companies Will Be Dead or Sold This Year

Half of the 41 fracking companies operating in the U.S. will be dead or sold by year-end because of slashed spending by oil companies, an executive with Weatherford International Plc said.

There could be about 20 companies left that provide hydraulic fracturing services, Rob Fulks, pressure pumping marketing director at Weatherford, said in an interview Wednesday at the IHS CERAWeek conference in Houston. Demand for fracking, a production method that along with horizontal drilling spurred a boom in U.S. oil and natural gas output, has declined as customers leave wells uncompleted because of low prices.

There were 61 fracking service providers in the U.S., the world’s largest market, at the start of last year. Consolidation among bigger players began with Halliburton Co. announcing plans to buy Baker Hughes Inc. in November for $34.6 billion and C&J Energy Services Ltd. buying the pressure-pumping business of Nabors Industries Ltd.

Weatherford, which operates the fifth-largest fracking operation in the U.S., has been forced to cut costs “dramatically” in response to customer demand, Fulks said. The company has been able to negotiate price cuts from the mines that supply sand, which is used to prop open cracks in the rocks that allow hydrocarbons to flow.

Oil companies are cutting more than $100 billion in spending globally after prices fell. Frack pricing is expected to fall as much as 35 percent this year, according to PacWest, a unit of IHS Inc.

While many large private-equity firms are looking at fracking companies to buy, the spread between buyer and seller pricing is still too wide for now, Alex Robart, a principal at PacWest, said in an interview at CERAWeek.

Fulks declined to say whether Weatherford is seeking to acquire other fracking companies or their unused equipment.

“We go by and we see yards are locked up and the doors are closed,” he said. “It’s not good for equipment to park anything, whether it’s an airplane, a frack pump or a car.”

Source: Bloomberg

Storm blackouts in Australia will push consumers to battery storage

Up to 200,000 business and household customers in New South Wales face extended blackouts of up to a week, or even more, following the dramatic storms in the Sydney region and to its north.

And the impact could have as galvanising an effect as Hurricane Sandy had on the New York region of the United States – causing utilities, business and household customers to consider battery storage and even micro grids.

NSW has more than 260,000 households with rooftop solar, but any houses with solar on their roof would still be without power, because their inverters are usually connected to the grid. So when the grid goes down, the inverters go down too.

The only way to be able to use that solar power is to have battery storage and a special battery storage inverter, which effectively creates its own mini grid, and can operate on its own when the main grid goes down.

“Every storm we get a surge of inquiries,” says Glen Morris, the vice president of the Australian Energy Storage Council, and the owner of a solar-storage business. (Morris also lives in an off-grid community).

“People realise that if they have got solar PV and a grid connected inverter it doesn’t work when the power goes down, so they must have storage.”

Muriel Watt, head of energy policy at renewable energy consultants IT Power Australia, says the number of customers looking at battery storage were likely to increase dramatically as a result of the blackout, and when an estimated 146,000 households in NSW come off their premium 60c/kWh tariff next year.

“With so many households now having PV, it is making even more sense for them to consider adding storage and an inverter which allows them to switch to off-grid mode,” Watt said.

“This would at least keep the lights on and prevent the ‘fridge defrosting. Japanese people have been very aware of this option after losing power for weeks after the Kobe earthquake, but prices for PV and batteries have fallen considerably since then.

“Cost effectiveness is never the only consideration for household investments – emergency power would rate quite high on the list if we are to have more frequent severe weather events.”

As for costs, Morris says it is currently making a 10-15 year payback. But like Watt, he says that is not the main consideration.

But, he notes, the cost of battery storage is coming down quickly – around 20 per cent in 2014 for lithium-ion batteries, and another 25 per cent fall expected in 2015, battery manufacturers tell him. That is the same price trajectory as solar modules over the past 5 years.

How much storage was needed depended on what the customer needed. One household recently installed a 4kWh battery storage system, but because they were careful with their energy use, that was enough for a full day.

Many households or businesses would want storage just to ensure the TV, lights and radio are kept on, and possibly the fridge. Others use storage to bank the output from their solar panels and use later in the day.

That’s because new owners are either getting paid little or nothing to export back to the grid, or are prevented from doing so.

Businesses, particularly those with refrigeration needs who find they are paying $40,000 to $50,000 for a back up generator with high maintenance, are also finding rooftop solar and battery storage is a cheaper and more effective alternative.

Some forecasts suggest that within a few years, it will be economic for households in city suburbs to disconnect from the grid. Some suggest one-third may do so within the next few decades.

Right now, though, Morris says even the market operator does not know how many battery storage systems are in place. That’s because most people installing storage are adding it to pre-existing solar systems.

Michael Anthony, from Solar360, says the bulk of his company’s business is now centred around storage. He says about 40-60 new storage systems are being installed each month, much of it in regional areas, but also in the city – both for businesses and households.

“Most dealers are trying to sell just solar, but they haven’t understood that adding storage gives a better result.”

Anthony says the levelised cost of energy for added battery storage systems is at the same level as grid power.

Ironically, Morris was speaking from the northern NSW town of Ballina, where he was hosting a course on battery storage for technicians from the local network operator.

The main grid operator in the Sydney, Hunter region, Ausgrid had to put out a warning on Wednesday in response to reports that desperate households and businesses – facing another week without power – were rushing to hardware stores to buy generators.

Morris said this was both illegal, and stupid. Generators could only work when powering appliances directly. If they are fed into a household wiring system, they can be incredibly dangerous, both for the occupants and network linesmen.

Source: RenewEconomy.au

Earth Day 2015: 8 reasons to buy an electric car

Why 2015 can be the year you go green

We love electric cars. They’re almost always pleasant to drive, and the amount of power available at low speeds makes them incredibly fun to use. More importantly however, they help reduce harm to the environment, contribute to a more sustainable level of energy usage, and create a cleaner urban environment.

The Nissan Leaf is a spacious city car, the dinky Smart ForTwo is perfect for slinking around city streets, and the Renault Zoe is the cheapest car to run according to our Driver Power survey. The Tesla Model S is an incredible car and beats many conventional fuel-burners, with its 0-60mph time of 3.1 seconds and top speed of 155mph.

Still need convincing? Here are eight reasons to buy an electric car this year:

1. Electric cars are quiet

One of the most striking features of an electric car is the silence with which it operates. We’re accustomed to the noise generated by an internal combustion engine, but pulling away from the lights in a Ford Focus Electric makes no noise at all. The result is a very calming driving experience, as well as a quieter environment.

2. Electric cars are fast

An electric drivetrain enables a car to use almost all of its power immediately. A petrol or diesel car won’t be able to use all of its power until the engine is turning at a specific speed – an electric motor is always generating as much power as it can. The effect? A quick car – the Tesla accelerates faster than an Audi R8.

3. Electric cars are reliable

There aren’t many moving parts in an electric car. Those parts that do move are relatively simple and robust – electric motors are clean, safe technology. Fossil fuel cars, meanwhile, rely on combustible fuel and a plethora of perishable, metallic components that wear out and need replacing.

4. Electric cars are cheap

They might not be as cheap as their gas-guzzling counterparts, but they’re not far off. The Tesla Model S is obviously a bit of an anomaly, as – despite its supreme value – it’s a very high-end product. But electric cars start at well under £20,000 and finance options are available, making them easily attainable to most drivers and families.

5. Electric cars are good for the planet

It’s barely worth mentioning, but electric cars are vastly better for the environment than their petrol or diesel counterparts. The generation of electricity depends partly on fossil fuels, but the percentage is falling and it’s still a more efficient process than burning petrol on an individual basis.

6. Electric cars are good for your town

“The environment” includes your personal one. Towns and cities, especially congested ones like London, suffer from pollution caused by conventional vehicles. Pollution warnings are becoming common in the capital – everyone’s life would improve if petrol and (especially) diesel cars were replaced with electric vehicles.

7. Electric cars are cheap to run

The Renault Zoe is the cheapest car to run according to Carbuyer and Auto Express readers who contributed to the Driver Power survey. You can expect to pay a couple of pence per mile, and sophisticated charging systems enable you to charge your car when electricity demand is at its lowest nationally (and therefore prices are at their lowest). What’s more, a lack of maintenance overheads and a wide variety of incentives and discounts make owning an electric car a clever financial move.

8. Electric cars are probably the way of the future

Fossil fuels are a finite resource. The way we depend on them for transport is going to have to change, and the best option we have at the moment is electricity. They’re likely to become the norm in the next few decades, so the question isn’t so much whether you should buy an electric car – it’s when.

Source: Car Buyer

Do electric vehicles take a long time to charge? Mostly it doesn’t matter and here’s why.

The concern: EV’s take a long time to charge don’t they?

When I meet someone new to electric vehicles, the first two questions about them are usually “How far can EVs go?” quickly followed by “How long does it take to charge?” The response most want to hear is “1000 miles” and “Blink and it’s done”.

Concerns with charging time are the product of a mind-set that comes from driving cars with internal combustion engines; you drive around until near empty, de-tour to a petrol station, swiftly slake your vehicle’s unyielding thirst for explosive hydrocarbon and continue onwards. It’s because of this that people can be a little sceptical when it comes to matters of re-charging. To make my point I usually offer the sceptic the worst case scenario; “a Nissan LEAF has a real world range of about 80 miles and could take up to 10 hours to charge from a 13A socket” and watch them fall about laughing. For a bit anyway…

When trying to convince a sceptic some might try and point out that faster charge times are possible with rapid chargers but not only is this still not as fast and thus “good” as a petrol pump, it is fighting the wrong fight.

Why it doesn’t matter: Your car can charge when it’s stopped, which is most of the time.

Read more: Pod-Point

Go Ultra Low members boast 15 ULEVs across a range of segments (Image: OLEV)

Can Electric Vehicles Take The Private Transportation Crown?

Of late, there has been a lot of buzz related to electric vehicles. Volatility in oil, and thus fuel prices has the world in search of an alternative that can reduce the consumption of gasoline, motor oil and other fossil fuels. An electric vehicle (EV) is one such alternative that is muscling in on the market. So what can EVs offer to compete with conventional vehicles?

An electric vehicle is powered by one or more electric motors instead of a conventional internal combustion engine. Based on the source and method of electricity production, EVs are divided into: a. EVs requiring a continuous electric supply source such as trolley buses. b. EVs running on an electric battery or a flywheel, these are also referred to as Zero Emission vehicles (ZEV’s) and c. Hybrid EVs (HEVs) that uses a combination conventional engine and an electric motor) and Plug in EVs ( PHEVs).

If sales figures are an indicator, we see that the demand for EVs has risen at an incredible rate in the last few years. With around 320,000 new registrations in 2014, the total global count of EVs stood at around 740,000 vehicles with China, US and Japan having the highest EV growth rates of 120%, 69% and 45% respectively. Encouraged by growth rate of EVs, several automobile companies are investing in this technology.

Nissan is one such company that has invested heavily in developing and improving EV technology. The company has invested close to £1.4 billion (approximately $2 billion) in its facilities at Sunderland to manufacture EVs such as the highly successful all electric Nissan Leaf. The Chevrolet Volt, the Toyota Prius and Tesla’s vehicles are some other popular EVs available in the market today.

Read more: Oil Price

Oil and biofuels vehicles, check your mirror; the car behind you might be electric

Time was when humanity seemed to take endless leaps forward in terms of technology. There was a sense that everyone was pushing forward at the same time and in the same direction. In today’s world, when investing in the next big tech, the great diaspora of ideas can be a challenge that divides investment funds, and has the ability to muddle that sense of direction, that notion of collective tech-progress.

Which brings us to cars. Combustion engines surely can’t go on for ever, that much is clear, but in that maelstrom of ideas, could the electric car now be attaining a critical mass? And could the two great energy and transport rivals — oil and biofuels — be developing a blind spot around their rise?

For years now the rising clamour between the biofuel sector — buoyed by the immediate aftermath of crude’s jump to $147/b, then sent reeling by the shale explosion — and the conventional oil sector has enlivened energy markets for commentators and campaigners alike.

It’s been a complicated development, with analysts and experts predicting the dominance of the internal combustion engine to be challenged by increased engine efficiency, hybrids, hydrogen cars, growth of LPG-fuelled vehicles and electric cars.

It’s a far cry from the good old days. Back then, history could be relied upon to sweep away any legacy of the also-ran; leaving a good, clean narrative that shows inventor after inventor lining up to bolt on improvements to the generation’s clear defining concept. Take the development of the steam engine; the boiling kettle on the Watts’ family stove drove England and then the world into Industrialisation.

You see it in the combustion engine. Rudolf Diesel tried compression as a means of ignition. In the airspace too; in some quarters, the genius of the Wright brothers was not that they were first to fly, but simply that they were the first to remember to pack the camera. The Wright Flyer in itself being just one of a number of competing, but broadly similar, concepts that were proving that even the hitherto unyielding constant of gravity could be no barrier to humanity’s progress.

The development of alternative modes of powered transportation, to wean us off our dependence on oil, have been suffering from an identity crisis issue. Once, biofuels — perhaps driven most prominently by ethanol — were the standout favourite in that race, attracting legislative backing to make a good concept economically palatable.

Biofuels hits a critical mass

The indication was that this was the way forward — the sector attracted investment, a critical mass was attained and the road ahead seemed clear. For the conventional energy sector, the establishment of the E10 requirement in the US and other energy mandates from the rest of the world, including Europe’s Renewable Energy Directive, must have caused the odd convulsion. If the thin end of the wedge was feared, calls for E15 and — gasp — E85 must have confirmed the worst.

If lobbying expenditure is anything to go by, then the burgeoning battle for the hearts and minds (and votes) of US senators and members of congress quickly saw investment of a different sort mounting up.

According to opensecrets.org, the oil and gas sector spent $141,370,272 on lobbying the US government in 2014, versus agribusiness’s spend of $126,498,021. While those numbers are declining year on year, they still represent an approximate doubling of the spend at the turn of the century – both clocking in around the $70 million a year mark.

Rise of a serious electric contender

Today, the intentions of the EPA and the position of the RFS are shrouded in some confusion and oil barons are doubtless feeling more confident about their own position.

In Europe too, there’s clear signs that mandate-appetite is also not carrying the same sort of thrill as it once had. But while these efforts have been going on, the electric car has enjoyed a breakthrough. And maybe, in the manner of two bald men fighting over a comb, the energy sector — both conventional and less conventional — has witnessed the rise of a serious contender.

The breakthrough has come as the endurance and range of electric cars— and by that I embrace the hybrid option that has blazed the trail — has shot up. Just about every major car manufacturer now has, or plans to introduce, an electric version nestling in its range.

Names like Leaf and Bolt litter the role-call, although increasingly staple production models are simply being offered in petrol, diesel, and electric options. Even Aston Martin, the granddaddy of petrol consumption, has mooted an electric version from James Bond’s favoured carmaker. Imagine, 007 showing his green credentials.*

But that’s only one dimension in the development — across the UK and Europe, electricity filling points continue to sprout with all the vigour of a stout corn crop. The debate about energy content, bang for buck, second generation and food versus fuel runs the risk of being been left dawdling in the rear-view mirror.

The US has set itself out to have a million electric cars on the road by this year — a goal set out by President Obama in his 2011 State of the Union address — and the vision at the time smacked of Kennedy’s ‘man on the moon by the end of this decade’ speech.

The UK — an interesting case study since it has emerged as the biggest buyer of electric cars — saw a substantial rise through 2014, leading the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders to dub it ‘the year of the alternatively-fueled vehicle’.

Where once that legend would have masked a plethora of alternate alternatively-fuelled vehicles, there’s been little doubt that the growth in 2014 came in electric vehicles.

The number of ‘plug-in’ vehicles leaped — while it’s still a small percentage of the near 2.5 million new cars to hit the UK’s roads in 2014, some 14,000 of them were plug-in cars.

That’s a four-fold increase, according to the SMMT. Combining both the hybrids and plug ins, the total new AFV cars reached over 50,000 — some 2% of total new cars.

As ever, the blunt statistics mask some other factors — the UK government makes available a subsidy of up to £5,000 for anyone considering buying an electric car, and the latter part of 2014, wherein oil prices collapsed, coincided with a dramatic reversal in buying patterns.

Data from the European Automobile Manufacturers Association, ACEA, shows a steady upward trend quarter-on-quarter through 2014. Though Q4 2014 versus Q4 2013 saw a sharp 7.7% contraction in sales of electric vehicles across the European region.

Key to the change was the Dutch — sales of electric vehicles across the Netherlands slumped to 12,920, down nearly 50% from the near 22,500 new units shifted in 2013.

That more than overpowered the 2907% increase seen in Latvia, where sales soared from 13 to 391.

The UK came top of the league table, supplanting the Netherlands as Europe’s most enthusiastic sparkie, with Germany close behind and the Netherlands and France — a country whose faith in diesel has been shaken recently by pollution and health fears — respectively third and fourth.

While it’s easy to read too much into the mushrooming demand for electric cars, there is still a long road ahead. The experience of the Netherlands — by far Europe’s biggest buyers in 2013, their ardour cooling through 2014 as government incentives eased — and the apparent impact of lower retail fuel costs on electric car buying patterns are just two of the competing factors that may hold sway over the passenger car complexion.

Where the competition seems to be easing though, is around the central idea of an alternative to oil-powered transportation.

The electric car is here — it’s amongst us and almost indistinguishable from its oil-powered ancestors. Maybe the rise of a common rival may encourage the oil and biofuel sectors to lay aside their differences and work together? More likely though, evolution tells us that as habitats shrink, competition becomes ever fiercer.

* Aficionados will know that Bond drove a Ford hybrid SUV in Quantum of Solace.

Source: The Barrel

Economic Collapse Will Limit Climate Change, Predicts Climate Scientist

If you think your doctor is hard to understand, try talking to a climate scientist.

In late 2014, the World Bank published a remarkable document that should have shaken the international business world. Titled “Turn Down the Heat: Confronting the New Climate Normal”, it drew on 1,300 publications to explore the impacts of a world four degrees centigrade warmer – the world our grandchildren seem likely to inherit before the end of this century.

Authored by climate scientists of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, the report’s three hundred plus pages are densely written and often hard for non-experts to understand. However, some passages about the impact of a 4°C temperature rise are crystal clear. Here a section on North Africa:

“There is a considerable likelihood of warming reaching 4°C above pre-industrial levels within this century… Crop yields are expected to decline by 30 percent with 1.5-2°C warming and up to 60 percent with 3-4°C warming… Large fractions of currently marginal rain-fed cropland are expected to be abandoned or transformed into grazing land; current grazing land, meanwhile, may become unsuitable for any agricultural activity…”

One sentence really caught my attention: “In a 4°C world, mean summer temperatures are expected to be up to 8°C warmer in parts of Algeria, Saudi Arabia and Iraq…” If summer mean temperatures are set to rise by more eight degrees in this already scorching region, I wondered, what about maximum temperatures? According to the study:

“In a 4°C world, 80 percent of summer months are projected to be hotter than 5-sigma (unprecedented heat extremes) by 2100, and about 65 percent are projected to be hotter than 5-sigma during the 2071-2099 period.” [emphasis in the original]

As I’ve got no idea what that actually means, I jumped at the chance to talk with climate scientist Christopher Reyer, one of the co-authors of the study, on the edge of a public event organized by the World Bank in Morocco last week.

So, I asked, what kind of maximum summer temperatures do people in Morocco’s fabled desert city of Marrakech face in a +4°C world? “That’s very hard to answer,” he told me, “but the distribution curve will shift towards the extreme ends.”

Well, yes, but considering that the average summer maximum there is already 38 degrees, and the local record maximum to date is a sizzling 47 degrees Centigrade [116 degrees Fahrenheit], what kind of heat are we looking at? Reyer told me that he’d looked over that question with his team back in Germany – I’d emailed it to him beforehand – and basically couldn’t answer it without some complicated calculations taking into account the exact shape of the city’s current temperature curve.

Exasperated, I dug further. What does ‘5-sigma’ mean? “It’s quite clear that temperatures will be warmer,” Reyer said. By way of comparison, he explained, the 2003 heat wave in Europe [in which an estimated 70,000 people died during a 2.3°C hotter-than-usual summer], was only a 3-sigma event.

So, would it be possible to survive a 5-sigma event outdoors in Marrakech? “That depends how you define ‘survive’,” answered the climate wonk, adding that it would probably be survivable if you kept to the shade and didn’t move. However, any kind of human activity would be impossible in that kind of temperature.

To wrap up the interview, I asked Christopher Reyer how much hotter he thought the planet would be by the year 2100. “I’m not sure,” he replied, “I’m not an expert on the policy side.” I persisted, asking him not for an official projection, just for his best personal guess, a single number. He visibly relaxed.

“I guess it should be between three and four degrees hotter. We used to think that we were headed for +8°C, but that will never happen. We are not even on track for +6°C because economies will be collapsing long before we get there. We know that after +2°C, dangerous things start happening, and we start passing crucial tipping points, like the West Antarctica ice sheet collapse, which has reportedly already begun.”

What will a two degrees warmer world, which we seem likely to inhabit by 2050, look like?

“Two degrees is not a picnic either. Imagine events like the 2003 European heat wave, the 2010 Russian heat wave which had repercussions on the global wheat market, and Hurricane Katrina, all of them happening simultaneously everywhere in the world.”

Oh, so that’s what the climate scientist was trying to say all along: We face an avalanche of global disasters during our lifetime, and unless we slam the brakes on carbon pollution fast, the global economy will collapse to boot.

Source: Huffington Post