TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Beyond simple fixes in the fight against climate change
While electrification of transportation has the potential to reduce emissions and improve air quality, the benefits are often limited to wealthier communities who can afford electric vehicles (EVs).
Change text size
Gift Premium Articles
to Anyone
Share the best of The Jakarta Post with friends, family, or colleagues. As a subscriber, you can gift 3 to 5 articles each month that anyone can read—no subscription needed!
Plant for life: Students plant sago trees on Aug. 20, 2024 in Sagu Bityai Pai Sabron Yaru village in Jayapura regency, Papua, as part of the commemoration of the 79th anniversary of Indonesia’s independence. (Antara/Gusti Tanati)
D
uring a recent session at the oldest and largest public university in Indonesia, I addressed a group of nuclear engineering and engineering physics students, whose future work ties directly to climate solutions. We discussed an issue central to their studies and their future: reducing global temperatures and addressing climate change.
As the conversation unfolded, I posed two important questions: "How much will the temperature be reduced if we focus solely on renewables, spending trillions of dollars?" and, "What if we focus only on electrifying transportation, also requiring the spending of trillions of dollars which might be more useful in hiring teachers and building schools serving early childhood education?"
The room fell silent. Despite their knowledge and enthusiasm, the students hesitated. When prompted, some confidently answered, suggesting that focusing on renewables could reduce temperatures by 1.5 degrees Celsius and electrifying transportation by 1.2 degrees, assuming everything else remains constant (ceteris paribus).
The students' confident responses revealed several gaps in understanding. They were unaware that we only have 1.8 degrees left to maneuver before reaching the critical 1.5-degree threshold. Their assumption that renewables or electrification alone could solve the problem reflects a broader misconception that the climate crisis can be addressed by a single solution.
They also lacked understanding of the global impacts of a 3.3-degree rise, or the significance of the 1.5-degree limit for preventing severe consequences.
This gap in understanding likely stems from the lack of a deeper logical ability. Many people rely on shallow information from quick videos or digital snippets, hindering their ability to grasp complex issues like climate change. The pursuit of in-depth knowledge is diminishing, leading to a reduced understanding of the gravity of climate science.
The deeper concern is that without strong logic, we risk building a society that is unable to comprehend or act upon the complexities of the challenges we face.
