Green Options

Alaskan frontiersman Bernie Karl keeps his ice hotel frozen all summer long with the energy of hot springs. For a hundred years, Chena Hot Springs has attracted tourists who come to soak in its healing waters. But Karl — bearded and bursting with can-do spirit — saw the springs as a natural source of untapped energy. “I always knew that the value was in the hot water; I knew I would make electricity,” says Karl, in an original one-hour Discovery Channel TV special premiering Wednesday, March 11 at 10 pm (ET - check your local listings).  Though not your typical energy guru, today Karl is considered a pioneer of geothermal energy.

Karl is just one of the many entrepreneurs and inventors profiled in the Discovery special who are creating new ways to power our planet — tapping sunlight, wind and water, and heat embedded in the Earth. Based on the companion book, The New York Times bestseller Earth: The Sequel, the show details the tremendous strides being made across the nation to solve the energy crisis and curb carbon emissions through new technologies.  From start-ups harnessing hydro-power from New York’s East River to solar power in New Mexico’s high desert, the show chronicles dazzling ingenuity and possibility.

A “green economy” can be built in China in less than 20 years, argues a new McKinsey report. The new study, “China’s Green Revolution“, offers the most comprehensive quantitative analysis to date of China’s abatement cost curve.

Previous studies of a similar ilk, like the Stern Review, have incorporated social benefits to partially offset the cost of scaling up energy efficient and clean technologies. In contrast, the latest McKinsey report considers only technology-related costs and attaches a figure to the cost of green initiatives in China.

So what is the final damage? While costs are negative for upgrades in some industries, like buildings, due to the savings generated from energy efficiency improvements, a total 1.5-2 trillion yuan (USD 220-295 billion) would have to be spent every year until 2030 in order to reach McKinsey’s alternative scenario.

Agricultural development is a missed opportunity in Africa

Early in the morning, Mary Kanyaire, 33, collects water and firewood, and then prepares a meal for her two school-going children before she heads out to the fields, approximately 3 kilometers away from her homestead. Alone, under the hot sun, she weeds groundnuts in a sandy field with a hoe.

Although she knows she will not get a good yield, she strives on, buckets of sweat pouring down her face.

For Kanyaire and millions like her, subsistence farming is the only source of survival and is practiced with absolutely no support from the government. In recent years, climate change, which has resulted in an inconsistent rainfall pattern, has dealt a heavy blow to the prospects of subsistence farming. Yet in Zimbabwe, as in many parts of Africa, the government offers little or no support to subsistence farmers, leaving them to the vagaries of the elements and economic and political shake-ups.

Agriculture in Africa is primarily a family activity, and the majority of farmers are smallholders who own between 0.5 and 2.0 hectares of land, as determined by socio-cultural factors. Women provide about half of the labor force and produce most of the food crops consumed by the family. Many of the men leave for urban areas in search of better opportunities, and when they make it in the city, they invest little in their rural areas.