* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download transitioning to a green economy
Global warming wikipedia , lookup
Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate change feedback wikipedia , lookup
Economics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on humans wikipedia , lookup
Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Economics of climate change mitigation wikipedia , lookup
Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup
Energiewende in Germany wikipedia , lookup
Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup
Climate change mitigation wikipedia , lookup
Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in the United States wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Canada wikipedia , lookup
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia , lookup
German Climate Action Plan 2050 wikipedia , lookup
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme wikipedia , lookup
Politics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Low-carbon economy wikipedia , lookup
Mitigation of global warming in Australia wikipedia , lookup
1 TRANSITIONING TO A GREEN ECONOMY HANS MARTIN PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS & THE POLICY PROCESS UMASS DARTMOUTH DECEMBER 5, 2014 TRANSITIONG TO A GREEN ECONOMY TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction II. Key Legislation III. Official and Unofficial Actors IV. Theoretical Approaches V. Alternative Policies VI. Conclusion and Interesting Findings 2 Transitioning To A Green Economy I. Introduction A. Industrial Revolution and Population Growth 1. Industrial Revolution, beginning around 1750, led to tremendous economic progress, greatly improving standards of living for millions of people and lifting them out of poverty. 2. Use of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas) provided the energy making the economic boom possible, powering factories and transportation systems and providing electricity for industrial, commercial, and residential uses, resulting in a tremendous increase in production and efficiency. 3. World population exploded from around 1 billion in 1820 to 7.2 billion today. 3 Transitioning To A Green Economy I. Introduction B. Unsustainable Environmental Pressures on Earth’s Systems 1. This tremendous economic prosperity, combined with population growth, have placed an enormous strain on Earth’s environment, which is not sustainable. 2. Continued economic growth, particularly by developing countries, and continued population growth, expected to reach 9 billion people by 2050, will require ever greater amounts of energy, land, and natural resources, further straining Earth’s systems. 3. Energy and agricultural sectors, in particular, are having a profoundly dangerous affect on Earth’s environment and systems. 4 Transitioning To A Green Economy I. Introduction C. Energy and its Pressures on Earth’s Systems 1. Our burning of fossil fuels emits greenhouse gases (GHG), including carbon dioxide, causing global warming, climate change, and ocean acidification, severely threatening and damaging coral reefs and marine life. 2. Global warming, and the resulting climate change, is causing more extreme storms, flooding, glacier and ice melt, and sea level rise, threatening populations living in coastal regions and in small island countries, causing loss of life, property, and livelihoods. 3. Global warming and climate change is causing more severe droughts, resulting in decreased agricultural production, food insecurity, and rising food prices in different parts of the world. 5 Transitioning To A Green Economy I. Introduction C. Energy and its Pressures on Earth’s Systems The 2 Degree Limit 4. Carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations in the atmosphere have increased from 280 parts per million (ppm) prior to the Industrial Revolution to 400 ppm today, causing the Earth to warm by .8˚ Celsius since the Industrial Revolution. Earth will continue to warm by another .6˚ C even if CO2 emissions were immediately stopped today. 5. In 2009, at the Conference of Parties in Copenhagen, the world community agreed to a goal of preventing Earth’s temperature from rising more than 2˚ C, in order to prevent the worst consequences of global warming and climate change (the 2˚ limit). If this goal is to be met, the CO2 concentration in Earth’s atmosphere cannot be allowed to exceed 450 ppm. 6 Transitioning To A Green Economy I. Introduction C. Energy and its Pressures on Earth’s Systems The U.S.’ Disproportionate Responsibility 6. The U.S. has been responsible for 26 percent of the world’s cumulative GHG emissions from 1751 to 2012. 7. Americans use far more energy per capita than any other country, currently accounting for more than 20 percent of all of the world’s energy use, and over 15 percent of CO2 emissions, despite having less than 5 percent of its population. 7 Transitioning To A Green Economy I. Introduction D. Agriculture and its Pressures on Earth’s Systems 1. Our agricultural processes are threatening Earth’s natural systems. 2. Deforestation for agricultural purposes has caused loss of habitat, biodiversity loss, and contributed to global warming. 3. Our use of nitrogen and phosphorus based fertilizers have greatly increased our agricultural yield with which to feed the world’s population, but has caused negative consequences to Earth’s natural nitrogen and phosphorus cycles, and the runoff has polluted Earth’s waterways, further threatening sea life. 4. Our use of pesticides and herbicides have also increased agricultural yields, but have poisoned soils and environment, negatively affecting biodiversity. 8 Transitioning To A Green Economy I. Introduction D. Agriculture and its Pressures on Earth’s Systems 5. We are depleting much of Earth’s available groundwater for irrigation faster than it can be replaced through rain and Earth’s natural hydrological cycles. 6. In addition to deforestation, food transport and livestock digestive processes produce GHG emissions, contributing to global warming and climate change. 7. All of these activities are causing Earth to undergo its sixth great extinction, this one being the result of man’s activities. 9 Transitioning To A Green Economy I. Introduction E. The Policy Problem 1. If we continue to maintain the status quo, global warming, climate change, and environmental degradation, and all of their negative consequences, will continue to worsen. 2. As a result, the world community must transition to a green economy by decoupling economic growth from human-caused environmental damage. 3. The U.S. has a special moral obligation to do its part, as a member of the world community, to transition to a green economy, given its disproportionate contribution to the problem. 4. The problem is determining how this transition can be accomplished in time to avoid catastrophic consequences, given our long entrenched reliance on fossil fuels, the powerful fossil fuel industry, the political and cultural dynamics present in the U.S., and the technological challenges, and in a way that provides economic opportunities for lower income households, in light of the great inequality in the U.S. 10 Transitioning To A Green Economy II. Key Legislation There are numerous pieces of environmental legislation that could impact a transition to a green economy. Given its increasing importance in combatting climate change, this presentation will focus on the Clean Air Act, and the associated policy process for which it has been used to combat climate change. A. The Clean Air Act (CAA) 1. For several decades, climate scientists have identified climate change as a growing problem. However, throughout most of its history, from 1970 to 2000, the CAA was used as a tool to control non-GHG pollutants. During the George W. Bush and Obama Presidencies, regulations under the CAA to combat climate change began to be contemplated. 2. Despite increased public awareness and increased advocacy, President Bush refused to address climate change, instead focusing on other policy matters. Several states and environmental groups, having failed to get climate change on the national agenda, sued Bush’s EPA to compel it to regulate CO2 and other GHG as pollutants. 11 Transitioning To A Green Economy II. Key Legislation A. The Clean Air Act (CAA) 3. In 2007, the Supreme Court found that GHG fit into the CAA’s definition of a pollutant, and it ruled that the EPA had the authority to regulate GHG emissions on vehicles. This decision was a major victory by climate change activists, and paved the way for legitimization of future carbon emissions regulations from the Obama Administration. 4. Despite the financial crisis, the recession, and other crises and competing priorities, President Obama has repeatedly tried to keep climate change on the national agenda, using natural disasters and economic reports detailing the costs of inaction. These efforts have been met with stiff resistance from the fossil industry, their Congressional allies, and grassroots conservatives. 12 Transitioning To A Green Economy II. Key Legislation A. The Clean Air Act (CAA) 5. In 2011, President Obama’s EPA forged an agreement with numerous automobile manufacturers requiring them to raise the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) standards for cars and light-duty trucks to 54.5 MPG by model year 2025. The Supreme Court decision on the CAA undoubtedly brought the automobile manufacturers to the negotiating table with the EPA, knowing that they could now be regulated by the EPA for their GHG emissions. 6. President Obama’s EPA is continuing to use the CAA to regulate GHG emissions, proposing new rules in 2013 and 2014 for new and existing power plants, which are the single largest source of carbon pollution in the U.S. The proposed rules would, by 2030, cut carbon emissions from the power sector by 30% below 2005 levels. The EPA rule on existing power plants will be finalized in June 2015. 13 Transitioning To A Green Economy II. Key Legislation A. The Clean Air Act (CAA) 7. After finalization, the EPA rules will be implemented by a state-federal partnership, whereby the states are to design their own programs to meet certain state-specific goals. The state plans are due by June 2016. 8. The EPA’s rules will likely have to survive court challenges before becoming fully legitimized. 9. The CAA has been used only recently to regulate GHG emissions, and it is too early to evaluate the effectiveness of the policy actions taken under the CAA. 14 Transitioning To A Green Economy II. Key Legislation B. Other Recent Legislation Impacting a Transition to a Green Economy 1. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 was signed into law by President Bush on December 19, 2007, to promote energy independence. The law promotes increased development and use of renewable fuels, increased efficiency in buildings and products, increased CAFÉ standards for automobiles, improved energy efficiencies in the Federal Government, and research and development in carbon capture and storage (CCS). President Bush had previously sought greater energy independence through exploration of oil and gas reserves in areas such as the Artic National Wildlife Refuge, but those efforts were repeatedly defeated in Congress. 15 Transitioning To A Green Economy II. Key Legislation B. Other Recent Legislation Impacting a Transition to a Green Economy 2. The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 passed the House of Representatives in 2009, but never passed the Senate. The bill included provisions for a cap and trade system to reduce carbon emissions, increase energy efficiency, and promote the development of alternative energy sources. The bill was an early attempt by the Obama Administration to address climate change. 3. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (The Stimulus Package) was signed into law by President Obama in 2009 in response to the recession. The law provided for green stimulus spending of approximately $50 billion which was used for energy from wind and solar, weatherizing homes, restoring land, high speed rail, and smart meters. 16 Transitioning To A Green Economy III. Official and Unofficial Actors A. Official Actors 1. President and Executive Branch Administrative Agencies President Bush resisted strategies to combat climate change, instead focusing his energy policy on energy independence through energy conservation and oil exploration and development. President Obama has tried to keep climate change on the national agenda, supporting cap and trade legislation early in his Administration, and using the EPA to implement his climate change strategies, first with the fuel efficiency agreement with automobile manufacturers, and secondly by the issuance of rules regulating carbon emissions of power plants. President Obama recently entered into a climate agreement with China to reduce GHG emissions, and will be seeking a climate agreement with the world community at COP 21 in Paris in 2015. 17 Transitioning To A Green Economy III. Official and Unofficial Actors A. Official Actors 2. Congress In 1992, the Senate ratified the first climate change agreement, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). In 1997, the Senate refused to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, which would have bound the U.S. to certain emission standards. Refused to allow oil exploration and development of the ANWR region, as President Bush desired. In 2009, the Senate refused to pass cap and trade legislation to regulate carbon emissions. Given the political makeup of the next Senate due to take office in January, they will undoubtedly refuse to ratify a climate treaty in 2015. 18 Transitioning To A Green Economy III. Official and Unofficial Actors A. 3. Official Actors The Courts The Supreme Court ruled that the EPA could regulate GHG emissions under the CAA, which has allowed the President Obama’s EPA to proceed with rules regulating GHG emissions. Undoubtedly, the courts will be used to challenge these new EPA rules by those who oppose them. Therefore, until such time as new legislation is passed, the courts will be the decisive official actor in determining whether or not President Obama’s most significant climate change initiatives have a chance to be successful. 19 Transitioning To A Green Economy III. Official and Unofficial Actors B. Unofficial Actors 1. Political parties (e.g. Republican and Democratic Parties) 2. Alternative energy companies and their trade associations, such as the American Wind Energy Association and the Solar Energy Industries Association. 3. Environmental groups and think tanks, which promote climate change and sustainable development strategies, such as the National Resources Defense Council, the Environmental Defense Fund, 350.org, World Resources Institute, Worldwatch Institute, the Nature Conservancy, Center for American Progress, the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Sierra Club, and Greenpeace. Many environmental groups and states sued President Bush’s EPA for failure to regulate carbon emissions under the CAA. 20 Transitioning To A Green Economy III. Official and Unofficial Actors B. Unofficial Actors 4. Oil, gas, and coal companies, their wealthy principals, as well as their trade associations, including the American Petroleum Institute, the National Mining Association, the American Coal Council, and the American Gas Association, which have fought against GHG regulations. Some of these actors have funded front groups promoting climate change denial and libertarian policies, which undermine government intervention and regulation. 5. The conservative media, led by Rupert Murdoch, has seemingly pursued a public relations strategy aimed at convincing the public that government is inefficient and ineffective and should not tax or regulate business, the economic engines and job creators of our economy, thereby undermining efforts to combat climate change. 21 Transitioning To A Green Economy III. Official and Unofficial Actors B. Unofficial Actors 6. The pivotal group amongst all of these unofficial actors may be the big non-energy corporations and their trade associations, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, the Business Roundtable, and others. Publicly, thus far, most of these organizations have refused to back specific action aimed at curbing GHG emissions, because they believe any such action should be international in scope and should not harm the economy. However, they may begin to support climate action if they determine that it is economically beneficial for them to transition to renewable energies, either due to energy savings or due to the costs of climate change’s negative consequences. 22 Transitioning To A Green Economy IV. Theoretical Approaches Elite Model versus Public Choice Model A. Elite Theory Overview 1. A few elites from the upper socioeconomic class shape public opinion on policy matters more so than the masses, who are apathetic and ill informed. 2. Elites establish public policy, which flows downward and influences the masses, rather than from the masses upward. Pubic officials and administrators carry out the will of the elites. 3. Elites seek to preserve this system by valuing private property, limited government, and individual liberty. Therefore, changes in public policy tend to be incremental. 23 Transitioning To A Green Economy IV. Theoretical Approaches Elite Model versus Public Choice Model B. The Elite’s Influence on Energy/Climate Change Policy 1. Energy policy in the U.S. has been dominated by the oil, gas, and coal industries, and the wealthy, powerful, and influential elites associated with these businesses. 2. Our nearly complete reliance on fossil fuels for so long have caused these industries to become so entrenched into the fabric of our economy, giving the elites in these industries unprecedented power and influence in our political system. 3. These elites, with their money, power, and influence, have largely controlled the national political agenda on energy, rarely allowing any significant changes that could threaten their privileged position. In 1992, the world community entered into UNFCCC to address climate change, but in the over 20 years since then, the fossil fuel elites have defeated any serious attempt to curb their GHG emissions, recent pending EPA rules aside. 24 Transitioning To A Green Economy IV. Theoretical Approaches Elite Model versus Public Choice Model B. The Elite’s Influence on Energy/Climate Change Policy 4. In 1997, the U.S. Senate did the bidding of the fossil fuel elites, refusing to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, which would have required the U.S. to curb its GHG emissions. 5. In 2009 and 2010, the fossil fuel elites used their influence to block Senate passage of the cap and trade bill that had passed the House. 6. The elite’s funding of a vast network of groups, which promote denial of humancaused climate change, opposition of regulations to curb emissions, and libertarian and limited government policies, all of which strike a chord with their large grassroots base, will make significant policy change extraordinarily difficult. 7. Ratification of any international climate agreement in 2015 will, in all likelihood, be impossible given their influence with the Republican controlled Congress. 25 Transitioning To A Green Economy IV. Theoretical Approaches Elite Model versus Public Choice Model C. Public Choice Theory Overview 1. Argues that individuals coalesce together in politics, reaching an agreement for their mutual benefit and enhanced well being. 2. Individuals act collectively through government for a common good. 3. Recognizes that there are certain market failures, such as externalities, which the government must remedy. 4. Politicians adopt policy positions to win elections(i.e. attracting the most votes), rather than winning elections to formulate policy. 26 Transitioning To A Green Economy IV. Theoretical Approaches Elite Model versus Public Choice Model C. Public Choice and its Influence on Energy/Climate Change Policy 1. There is a growing movement among the masses, placing increasing pressure on political leaders to address climate change. In September, hundreds of environmental and activists groups, consisting of hundreds of thousands of individuals, marched in New York City and around the world demanding action on the part of their political leaders. 2. This movement, if better organized, could potentially wrestle some of the power and influence from the elites. It could spur a green cultural revolution by undertaking a massive public relations campaign aimed at the following: Support and investment in renewable and sustainable companies. Divestiture of fossil fuel companies and a boycott of companies which operate in unsustainable ways. Encouragement of individuals and corporations to take responsibility for reducing their own carbon footprints. Boycotting of tourism in those states with the worst records on carbon emissions and sustainability. Making climate change the number one issue in the 2016 Presidential campaign. 27 Transitioning To A Green Economy V. Alternative Policies ALTERNATIVE A: MAINTAINING THE STATUS QUO 1. Despite the UNFCC, the global annual GHG emissions rate has increased by an average of 2.2% from 2000 to 2010. Maintaining the status quo could result in a rise of Earth’s temperature of 4˚ to 9˚ C by the end of the century. 2. The greater our GHG emissions, the greater amount of global warming, sea level rise, ocean acidification, and frequency and intensity of extreme weather. 3. An increase of “only” 2˚ C would result in sea level rise of .3 to .8 meter by 2100 and would continue to rise by 1.5 to 4.0 meters by 2300. 28 Transitioning To A Green Economy V. Alternative Policies ALTERNATIVE A: MAINTAINING THE STATUS QUO 4. 5. Global warming of 4˚ C would cause a severe and irreversible impact, threatening economic growth and man’s ability to adapt. Sea levels would rise by .5 to 1.0 meter by 2100, and would continue to rise by several meters in the coming centuries, resulting in coastal flooding and affecting a very significant percentage of the world’s population. Oceans would acidify by over 150%, causing severe negative consequences to ocean ecosystems, coral reefs, and marine species. There would be severe heat waves, droughts, and floods. Summers would be very hot making it difficult to grow crops. North America, as a region, is at a medium level of risk for water shortage, water pollution, air pollution, and biodiversity loss. In the U.S., maintaining the status quo in agriculture will result in ever increasing amounts of climate change, water shortages, water and air pollution, and biodiversity loss. Other parts of the world would experience even greater catrostrophic changes. 29 Transitioning To A Green Economy V. Alternative Policies ALTERNATIVE B: ENVIRONMENTALY SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC GROWTH Overview Alternative B provides a rod map of how the U.S. can transition to a green economy by 2050. It incorporates the following 5 components: 1. President Obama’s short and medium term plan addressing climate change. 2. A long term climate change plan from the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN). 3. A Martin Think Tank plan promoting compromise strategies amongst the fossil fuel industry, alternative energy industries, and the government. 4. Plans to promote economic opportunity for low income Americans during the transition to a green economy. 5. A sustainable agricultural plan. 30 Transitioning To A Green Economy V. Alternative Policies ALTERNATIVE B: ENVIRONMENTALY SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC GROWTH Component 1: Short and Medium Term Plan – President Obama’s Climate Action Plan a) Reduces GHG emissions by 17% below 2005 levels by 2020. b) New EPA rules for power plants will cut carbon emissions by 30% below 2005 levels. c) Doubles the country’s use of renewable energy by 2020 through the issuance of permits on public lands. d) Increases funding for long-term clean energy innovation, including for biofuels, nuclear, clean coal, and carbon capture and sequestration (CCS). e) Established a goal for federal government to derive 20% of its electricity from renewable sources by 2020. f) Development of post-2018 fuel economy standards for heavy duty vehicles, to go along with the CAFÉ standards of 54.5 mpg for automobiles by 2025. g) Doubles energy efficiency by 2030 relative to 2010 levels. h) Aims to preserve the role of forests in mitigating climate change, which remove nearly 12% of total GHG emissions per year. i) Climate deal with China committed the U.S. to reducing its GHG emissions by 26 to 28% below 2005 levels by 2025. 31 Transitioning To A Green Economy V. Alternative Policies ALTERNATIVE B: ENVIRONMENTALY SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC GROWTH Component 2: Long Term Plan - Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) a) Reduces emissions by 80% by 2050, consistent with the 2˚ C limit, taking into account increases in population and economic growth. b) Due to the uncertainties inherent in a long term plan, the SDSN plan consists of a main case plan, as well as 3 alternatives, that differently emphasize the use of renewables, CCS, or nuclear power. c) The main plan, as well as the alternatives, incorporate the same energy efficiency strategies. Despite a projected doubling of economic growth from 2010 to 2050, total final energy use would be reduced by over 30%, resulting in a 74% reduction in energy intensity. d) All of the SDSN plans eliminate use of coal without CCS and reduce petroleum use by 90% (use of electric cars) . e) Under the main SDSN plan, there would be a gradual shift in the mix of energy sources, resulting in an energy mix in 2050 of: 40% renewables, 30% nuclear, 30% fossil fuels with CCS. f) Under the high renewables SDSN plan, an assumption was made that CCS technology was not sufficiently developed or cost effective. The energy mix under this plan in 2050 would be: 75% renewables, 20% nuclear, 5% natural gas. g) Under the high CCS plan, the energy mix would be: 50% natural gas with CCS, 15% nuclear, 35% renewables. h) Under the high nuclear plan, the energy mix would be: 60% nuclear, 35% renewables, 5% natural gas. 32 Transitioning To A Green Economy V. Alternative Policies ALTERNATIVE B: ENVIRONMENTALY SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC GROWTH Component 3: Compromise Strategies – Martin Think Tank Plan President Obama’s short and medium term plan are vulnerable to reversal by another President. Additionally, the long term SDSN plan will require public support not currently present, over the course of many decades. Therefore, this component provides for a compromise strategy amongst the different parties. The Martin Think Tank Plan (MTTP) includes several elements, but the core element is described below. Formation of a consortium amongst the fossil fuel industries, alternative energy companies, and the government, to determine the maximum pace at which fossil fuels can be scaled down and alternative energy capacity scaled up, in such a way that meets energy demands. Fossil fuel companies would gradually cut production and government would pay them for their lost profits through tax cuts or other reimbursements. Alternative energy companies would also be required to pay a portion of their profits to the fossil fuel companies, thereby gradually decreasing government expenditures as alternative energy scales up. Lost profits could be guaranteed for a certain number of years (e.g. 50 years). The plan would include a job training and placement program for workers losing their jobs as the fossil fuel industry contracts. The large government expenditures required would be offset by cuts to social programs, such as those proposed by the Simpson-Bowles Commission, which was supported by many Democrats, and could possibly obtain greater support amongst Democrats given their greater concern for climate change than the national debt. Although this would constitute a massive government intervention in the free market, Republicans may support this plan, because it is budget neutral and shrinks the size of government over the very long term. The fossil fuel companies, if under pressure from nonofficial actors (Public Choice Theory), may seriously consider this option, not knowing how future regulations and the long term energy environment will affect them. If they decide to go along with the plan, Republicans will follow. Implementation of this core element, as well as others included in the MTTP, would fully commit the country both substantively and culturally to a green economy. 33 Transitioning To A Green Economy V. Alternative Policies ALTERNATIVE B: ENVIRONMENTALY SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC GROWTH Component 4: Economic Opportunities for Lower Income Americans a) A transition to alternative energies such as Alternative B proposes would create 4.2 million jobs and result in a net increase of 2.7 million jobs taking into account the loss of jobs in the fossil fuel industry. b) Potential for green job growth more broadly in a green economy is immense. It includes construction and professional jobs to make buildings more energy efficient, green automobile manufacturing jobs, mass transit jobs, recycling jobs, re-manufacturing jobs from scrap materials, afforestation and reforestation. c) Requires significant and sustained investment in the private and public sector and increased education, training, and skill development programs in a wide array of occupations. The green economy will offer better paying opportunities than the economy as a whole for low and middle skilled workers with little formal education. Median wages within this segment are 13% higher than the national average. The price of photovoltaic solar installations has fallen resulting in rapid solar expansion for middle and upper income households, but not for low income households. Low-income households spend a greater percentage of their income on energy costs, and access to solar power could significantly reduce their energy costs below utility rates. However, many are unqualified for credit, ineligible for tax credits, and are tenants, making access to solar power difficult. Therefore, state and local governments should establish programs to help lower income households gain access to solar power, as is being done in the states of California, Louisiana, and Colorado. 34 Transitioning To A Green Economy V. Alternative Policies ALTERNATIVE B: ENVIRONMENTALY SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC GROWTH Component 5: Sustainable Agriculture The agriculture sector must also transition to a green economy so that rising food yields, which will be needed for a growing population, are decoupled from unsustainable use of water, fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and land. This can be done by implementation of the following agricultural practices: a) Use of precision farming so that precise amounts of fertilizers can be applied, in the places and in amounts where needed, to reduce runoff in waterways and the atmosphere. This involves increased use of information technology, including detailed mapping of soil types and global positioning systems, to ascertain the soil health in particular areas of farms. b) Use of no-till farming which increases: water efficiency by increased water infiltration into the soil, retention of organic matter, and nutrient cycling in the soil. This practice reduces soil erosion, improves soil quality, and sequesters carbon and nitrous oxide in the soil, thereby preventing additional GHG emissions. c) Development of drought resistant seed varieties. d) Improved water efficiency so that “more crop per drop” is obtained. e) Better harvesting, storage, and transport of crops to avoid large losses due to pests, rodents, rotting, and exposure to natural elements. f) Healthy food types should be subsidized, rather than feed grains that support over consumption of beef. 35 Transitioning To A Green Economy V. Alternative Policies ALTERNATIVE B: ENVIRONMENTALY SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC GROWTH Feasibility of Alternative B – Politics, Technology, and Cost a) The biggest challenge in implementing Alternative B is politics. The elites in the fossil fuel industry have a great amount of influence with our politicians, making long term regulations of GHG emissions uncertain. The MTTP provides an unconventional path forward through political compromise that may or may not be feasible, but it at least provides a starting point for discussion which should be considered. b) The second biggest challenge to this Alternative is technology. Meeting the 2˚ C limit is dependent upon the development of technologies which can be deployed at large scales and which are not cost prohibitive. Many of the technologies needed to transition to a green economy are already available and are being deployed at increasing scales (e.g. energy efficient technology, wind and solar renewables, electric cars). Other technologies are not sufficiently mature to deploy at large scales or are cost prohibitive. These include technologies to store the energy from wind and solar so it can be later used during intermittent periods. They also include CCS, advanced nuclear reactors, lengthening the range of electric vehicles for large scale deployment, and development of liquid biofuels. The SDSN component provides for flexibility in the mix of the different energy types used, due to the inherent long term uncertainties with respect to the pace of technological advances, market forces, and politics. Due to these uncertainties, each technology option should be vigorously pursued to see which becomes the most feasible over time. c) The actual costs of transitioning to a green economy are relatively low, especially when compared to the long term costs caused by climate change if the status quo continues. The first 2 components of this Alternative will cost about $200 billion annually from both public and private sources, or about 1.2% of current U.S. GDP. The cost of energy efficiency investments would be recouped in 3 years, after which net positive gains would ensue. Most renewable sources of energy will be cost competitive by 2017. In contrast, global warming of 3˚ C would result in $150 billion of economic damages every year into perpetuity. 36 Transitioning To A Green Economy V. Alternative Policies Recommendation This presentation recommends that the policy proposed in Alternative B be implemented and that the country transition to an environmentally sustainable and green economy. To many supporters of sustainable development, having to make a choice between these two alternatives may seem almost laughable, like a debate among the round earth and flat earth societies. The problem though is that the flat earth society in this case is presently the more powerful. Although maintaining the status quo may sound irrational to many, it is not irrational to the powerful fossil fuel industry and their base of climate denier supporters. Their influence with politicians, who are largely interested in the very short term, versus the very long term nature of this problem, will make implementation of Alternative B extremely difficult. The policy choice of inaction and maintaining the status quo is a distinct possibility, unless the masses create their own green cultural revolution, and force their political leaders to take action. 37 Transitioning To A Green Economy VI. Conclusion and Interesting Findings In summary, our use of fossil fuels has provided the energy for tremendous economic growth, improving the economic prosperity of millions. However, this economic growth, combined with population growth, have placed an enormous strain on Earth’s environment, causing global warming, climate change, and ocean acidification, along with all of its negative consequences – sea level rise, more frequent and severe weather, floods, droughts, and loss of marine biodiversity. Similarly, our agricultural processes used to feed a world population of 7.2 billion and growing, has also caused a tremendous strain on Earth’s environment. Deforestation and our use of fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides, have caused global warming, loss of habitat, biodiversity loss, water scarcity, polluted waters which threaten sea life, and interfered with nature’s nitrogen and phosphorous cycles. The problem lies in determining how to transition to a green economy fast enough, before the worst consequences materialize, given our entrenched reliance on fossil fuels, the powerful and influential fossil fuel industry, the political dynamics present in our country, as well as the technological challenges. The fossil fuel industry elites, along with their allies in Congress and their grassroots climate-denier supporters, have thwarted legislative attempts to curb GHG emissions. Recently, however, President Obama’s EPA has used the CAA to begin curbing GHG emissions. 38 Transitioning To A Green Economy VI. Conclusion and Interesting Findings We can either maintain the status quo and bring upon ourselves, and all living things, all of its negative consequences, or we can transition to a green economy that promotes economic growth in a sustainable manner. Alternative B provides a long term plan to transition to a green economy. It includes various options in the mix of energy types, depending on which becomes the most feasible. Alternative B also includes a compromise strategy, opportunities for low-income households, and strategies for sustainable agriculture. This presentation recommends implementation of Alternative B, but its success will depend upon the masses creating a green cultural revolution to overpower the elites and to pressure our political leaders to make the changes necessary to transition to a green economy. 39 Transitioning To A Green Economy VI. Conclusion and Interesting Findings Some of the more interesting things that I learned in this study included the following: The impact that agriculture has on environmental degradation. One species, man, uses 40% of Earth’s land surface for himself, using all but the least inhabitable land. Most of man’s land use is for agriculture, which has caused severe loss of habitat and biodiversity loss. 70% of the agricultural land is used to support livestock. It takes 10 to 15 kilograms of grain to produce 1 kilogram of beef. Most of man’s water use, 70%, is for agricultural purposes, and is causing water scarcity. The different theoretical public policy approaches – in this case, the power, wealth, and influence of the fossil fuel elites (Elite Theory) versus the potential revolutionizing power of the masses (Public Choice Theory). I do believe that the masses have the power to pressure our politicians into action, and that they can revolutionize a cultural change which transitions our country to a green economy. In so doing, they will have finally prevailed over the fossil fuel elites. The role that the courts have played in legitimizing policy. The CAA was originally passed with little, if any, contemplation of GHG. Yet, the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA could regulate GHG under the CAA, giving President Obama’s EPA the authority to issue regulations of GHG emissions. 40