03. November 2024

Interview with Mr Lizard

BREAKING NEWS: An exclusive interview with Mr Lizard.

"So, Mr Lizard, tell me about your water problem."

"I could do with a cost-effective, DIY, energy efficient biochar hydrogel (day/night cycle), or even 'elastocaloric cooling' (powered continuous cycle) AWH system. When I go to the beach, a QuenchSea 3.0 would be handy too."

It seems even lizards need a secure water source. What got me was the Amazon River drying up and causing increased rainfall in the Sahara Desert. There's a lot of climate science out there now, many publications with dire predictions for the future. How can this be factored into sensible energy and water policy, let alone biodiversity protection? So, I asked Mr Lizard,

"What do you think about a 'Just Green Transition'?"

"Well, to be honest, 'Just' could mean a lot of different things to different people [and lizards] but could imply a democratic and inclusive process. 'Green' - from my perspective a transition that works towards securing my habitat, including water. 'Transition' could mean a movement towards clean and Carbon negative energy sources for a stable climate system but there's a lot more to it than just energy. But, I should mention that I don't see the end of fossil fuel mining anytime soon, however, there could be a 'phase out' of fossil while renewables are ramping up, with net Carbon removal at the goal posts. The 2050 'Net Zero emission' target I believe is understated as there's already a huge amount of CO2, CH4 etc. in the climate system that are causing heating that need to be removed permanently. And then there's new Carbon emissions too...Biochar Carbon Removal will probably be the key driver of the transition and will create many jobs in the future."

Hmmm...those goal posts seem to go further out every year that passes with little or no fossil fuel mining reductions around the world. I'm waiting for the day when fossil fuel mining becomes 'uneconomic'. I wanted to dive deeper on the topic of oil, so I asked Mr Lizard,

"Can we do without oil?"

"Yes but electrification of transport and green chemistry for fossil fuel product replacement is just firing up. We're past 'Peak Oil' and it's now a 'Race for what's left' from politically unstable Nations and environmentally risky and/or destructive sources but for now - we're stuck with it."

"Can we do without coal and natural gas?"

"Absolutely. No doubt about it. Developing Countries should 'leap frog it' altogether and transition to renewable energy as fast as possible."

"So, what are your thoughts about 'Net zero' fossil fuel business operations?"

"Mildly ambitious but don't be deceived - it's only part of the puzzle. A 'Life Cycle Assessment' (LCA) should be used instead for the entire fossil fuel cycle. What about the Carbon footprint of the product itself? In other words, a fossil mining Country should accept waste found in the climate system from the fossil fuel cycle, which is similar to Flinders University Associate Professor Haydon Manning's argument for the Uranium Fuel Cycle 20 years ago - essentially, turning fossil into a 'Carbon neutral' energy source with a permanent offset or CDR with a focus on BCR in the origin Country of fossil mining. But seriously - Carbon neutral fossil aside, Countries should follow Denmark's lead and create well funded and ambitious BCR plans. Failing that - just don't mine fossil or at least have an agnostic 'climate trigger' legislation with teeth in a new Federal EPA that can block high Carbon emitting projects but in some petrostates like Azerbaijan hosting COP29 in Baku, a move towards renewables is underway, just like in Australia - well, kind of - I'm not exactly calling Australia a petrostate as it seems a transition towards and away from renewable energy is evident on the path to become both a fossil AND renewable energy superpower. I guess you could call it a 'Green petrostate' in the making but it doesn't have to be that way - it's a democracy, after all. Half full or half empty? Or both, like 1 and 0 in a quantum superposition but not quantum energy necessarily, such as quantum well energy storage materials. Kind of like spooky action at a distance - like COP29 and this commentary."

Wow. Mr Lizard should be a salesman, comedian and a ?logician. That would be a LOT of Biochar produced in Australia to remove the same amount of CO2ee produced from combusting fossil fuel both in Australia and overseas for 'Carbon neutral' fossil energy!! Quantum wells. WTF.
Lucky Mr Lizard is camouflaged or he could be in a lot of trouble. That's biomimicry for you...https://biomimicry.org/

"What are your thoughts on Government fossil fuel subsidies?"

"I think it's a great system for the fossil Corporations who donate millions to major political parties in return for, if the Party is elected to govern, billions of dollars of public taxpayers money with an opportunity cost in the rest of the economy. I mean - presumably, it's not like the fossil industry is starving. Trillions of dollars are spent propping up fossil operations every year around the world with the IMF counting USD$7 trillion in 2022 taking into account economic externalities. This is not a free market. It doesn't appear the Oz Gov is subsidising crude or crude-related products very heavily. In fact - they have a whopping tax on petrol and diesel at the pump that the consumer pays for, known as the fuel excise tax which is adjusted during the year. There are rebates though for some industries such as mining but not for motorists. Not all of that tax earned is spent on road infrastructure either. If the fuel excise tax was dropped it would ease the cost of living crisis for motorists still using fossil powered vehicles. There could also be legislation to protect motorists from fuel retailers price gouging at the pump. I would support ending fossil subsidies for coal and natural gas projects and build a robust Carbon export tax for them which would offset the removal of the fuel excise tax, as most of their product is exported and not used domestically so the energy independence argument here is a deception. Garnaut and Sims are onto it. This tax money could be used for road infrastructure as well as 'Green housing' which could be linked in to 'Green manufacturing'. I should also mention that there is no sanctuary from climate change - 'Earth Ships' are about as close as you can get but there are many other natural building options too, such as hempcrete load bearing blocks or preformed panels, if you can access the materials and know how to build or can access and afford to pay a builder. If those coal and gas fossil subsidies alone were spent on seed funding for greentech or apptech startups we could 'Save the Planet' many times over. Climate change will also inevitably cause more smaller wars, mainly over water insecurity though there are excellent greentech solutions being engineered now for AWH and desalination. A war on climate change can be a 'good' war if it stays positive, proactive and creates many local and regional jobs eg. apptech manufacturing and regenerative agroforestry. Leveraging enormous climate finance for Countries most at risk for 'sustainable adaptation' strategies without the human cost and ecological cost of something worse has gotta be a 'good' thing."

"How could the climate finance be used effectively?"

"I imagine a new funding model will be needed to provide communities or NGOs on the front line of climate change with direct cash injections for, say, local appropriate technology manufacturing eg. metal and plastic 3D printers, welding gear eg.lasers, plasma cutters, grinders, '3 in 1' press brake, guillotine and rolls, off-grid solar and battery systems etc.; skills training and transfer; materials eg.steel for flame cap biochar kilns and TLUD stoves; high tech components eg. AWH condenser tubes or even complete goods from accredited greentech/apptech companies. Cut out the middle man. History is full of arguably many failed development models and ideas eg. the Green Revolution, large dam projects on the Mekong River and now in Nepal, palm oil and blue gum plantations, oil mining in the Amazon etc. Best not to repeat the same mistakes. Projects should be community led where possible, such as the biochar Citizen Science network in Nepal, Planboo in Thailand and Columbia, PlantVillage in Africa, CarbonKapture in Ireland, Warm Heart Worldwide, Engineers Without Borders, Permaculture Research Institute, cifor-icraf.org and more! People, not just pollies, need to take more risks now to adapt to climate change but strategies need to be well planned and financed."

"One last question, what do you think about mining?"

"Difficult to predict future technology and the mining needed for it. As mentioned before, a 'Phase out' of fossil is needed so no new fossil mine expansions and new mines. I think some minerals are critical for the future renewables sector like Copper and Iron ore. Others, like Lithium, you roll the dice with renewable energy as Lithium is being replaced with Sodium in many battery scenarios. Biotechnology could be considered as largely mining plants, which includes Biochar production, essentially Carbon mining, and will grow exponentially. It can be used for both batteries and solar PVs as well as many other applications. Water efficient mining should be a priority for the mining sector. Vertical integration should be a goal for mineral processing or Biochar value adds making connections between mining and regional manufacturing, though I'm not against exporting minerals only that anything that moves has a Carbon footprint. Traditional Owner permission for mining projects should always be sought before mine approval. I'm tired of, at times, a blatant disregard of Land Rights. We should get this right for future generations."