Wednesday, May 29, 2013

400

Two weeks ago, it was revealed that there is currently 400 parts-per-million of CO2 in our atmosphere. The last time this happened, humans were not on this planet. There are detrimental consequences. As I searched around the web for a variety of different bad news, I was surprised at the good news I was finding. The good news is surprising and encouraging, but it by no means suggests that we are really making the revolutionary changes we need to sustain our planet's health. Regardless, I thought about sharing some of the news:

There's some good news.

1. The U.S. has actually lowered its emissions. As much as I would like to credit the current administration for this, much of it is due to factors outside of the government's control. And unfortunately, a large part of it is due to the recession, as people have cut back on energy use because of the economic conditions. Additionally, the shale boom is credited with lowering CO2 emissions because natural gas is becoming more prevalent in the U.S. and is about half as dirty as coal or petroleum. With coal being "dead man walking" and the increasing price of oil , natural gas seems to be benefiting the U.S.; for example, "Made in America" is making a comeback and "Made in China" is declining as it's becoming cheaper to produce goods in America than it is in China.

Supposedly, the U.S. has actually reduced its emissions the fastest, falling to levels even below what the U.S. pledged at Copenhagen several years ago. (I find this hard to believe; as the Vancouver Observer put it, "The Americans?  Really?")

But President Obama and his team deserve some credit. They have reduced pollution from cars, cut harmful emissions from power plants and proposed the first regulations of CO2-producing factories, limiting the amount of emissions from these plants. Additionally, the Recovery Act, arguably the best piece of legislation from his administration, contained over $4 billion in tax cuts for individuals to energize their homes more efficiently and $13 billion in tax cuts for  renewable energy production; the law was clearly the largest energy bill in the history of the country with vast environmental reach, covering electric vehicles, smart grids, renewables, etc. (See Michael Grunwald's glowing defense of the Recovery Act called "The New New Deal.")

But has the U.S. actually lowered its emissions? Read the bottom.

2. There are other serious steps in the right direction.  Carbon sequestration is happening. With the help of Energy Star products, last year, Americans prevented 242 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions. You hate the way those eco-friendly compact florescent light bulbs take a long time to light up? Then look to the impressive (and cost-efficient) LED lightbulbs that are taking over. South Korea, one of my favorite countries, plans to launch the most aggressive carbon-trading market in the world. Bill McKibben has organized one of the most effective environmental activist groups, 350.org, and there are many other activist groups, like fossilfree.org. People are still interested in this and people are still making a difference.

3. The rise of EFH (Energy from Heaven). The price of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells per watt has immensely decreased from a high of $76 per watt to a low $0.74 per watt this year. Portugal is apparently operating at 70 percent renewable energy! Has this incredible ingenuity of renewable energy that is taking place in Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and even the United Arab Emirates been happening in America?

A little bit. Perhaps the most obvious example is renewable energy in Chicago.  Chicago and other cities have enough usable wind for energy, but as you can see in the video, conventional wind turbines are safe to use in open areas but dangerous to use in urbane areas. To solve this, scientists developed a propeller based on DNA strands (they call it "the Helix") so that it can safely power buildings. In New York City, Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been given about $50 million from the Sierra Club to fight coal based on public health grounds. Additionally, he's presiding over a city with massive potential for solar energy and other renewable energy sources.    







     


And some bad news.

The biggest concern is that these steps are not enough. The U.S. still is one of the two major culprits in carbon dioxide emissions. Kevin Matthews argues that this decline in U.S. emissions is highly misleading, that he U.S. actually increased its emissions and that the EIA report does not factor in methane emissions (so stop eating cows). Shakeb Afsah and Kendyl Salcito at Think Progress argue that natural gas has had a limited effect on replacing coal, that in fact the vast majority of the emissions decrease has to do with the reduction of petroleum and coal use and the increase of EFH; natural gas (an "energy from hell"), in essence might have replaced coal in some areas but actually offset its decrease by its increase in other sectors (see the graph to the right for the increase during the shale gas boom period of 2006-2011). Even those who trumpet natural gas should recognize that natural gas is not a long-term solution to this problem.    

We've made some steps in the right direction, but it's clearly not enough. We're still having fun, and we shouldn't be.





environment, 400, 350, natural gas, oil, emissions, CO2, renewable energy, Obama, New Deal, Recovery Act

0 comments:

Post a Comment