There's No Brexit From Climate

In the 20th century, we witnessed the rise of the first truly global challenges and, in response, global political structures arose to try to solve them. They could have done better, sure, but one can't ignore the role of institutions such as the UN or the European Union in the drastic reduction of international conflict. They have also led to new problems but, just like you can't expect to solve the problems of capitalism by returning to feudalism, tackling the challenges of globalism via nationalism is futile.

And talking about global challenges, there's none quite as troubling as climate change. We're in front of a new kind of problem that requires a new kind of institution. Not an old one. Brexit is just the opposite, and it's when you talk about climate change that this becomes so apparent.

I'm not going to recommend this article for being unique or extremely well written. While it's absolutely correct and quite complete, it's a mere summary of a Chatham House report. It's not particularly gripping and it doesn't uncover anything we didn't know. However, I think it's important to reflect on the topic, and this is the most complete summary in layman terms I've found: You can Brexit from capital fluxes, migration policies or draconian bureaucracy, but you can't Brexit from climate change. Sorry. That's a problem that will require some compromise.

The core problem is that electricity is very hard and expensive to store. Because you can't store it, you need to consume it as it's produced. Therefore, when we move to 100% renewables, we're going to need really collaborative grids that can take surplus energy on demand from one side of the network to another. The EU has been working towards that, and the UK must sort out how to get integrated in this grid, which is now a given as a member state. Leaving it would mean they would need to cut their emissions by 61% instead of the current 57%.

Here you have a good guide to the situation, and the possible solutions. Read on!