Climate Action

With governments around the world shoveling money out of pubic treasuries in the hopes of stimulating their economies, how about summoning a modicum of creativity to build better mousetraps that consumers might actually want to buy? I mean even at 10% unemployment, that means 90% of the population still has a job and is buying stuff. If we can come up with a few good ideas, we can put people to work making things and, hopefully, sell a few more widgets at home and abroad.

By Renee Bell, Consultant: By now, everyone has heard of the major impacts of global warming. Ice caps are melting, polar bears are drowning, and forest fires are ablaze across the globe. What people don't consider as frequently, however, is the more subtle impacts of global warming that are only beginning to emerge.

I have a friend who is living in Buenos Aires, Argentina, whom I keep in frequent touch with via email. She recently wrote to me about a curious phenomenon happening there. Argentineans are traveling in unheard of numbers to visit the famous glaciers of Patagonia. The reason for this surge in tourism? You guessed it - global warming. The glaciers are melting at such a fast rate that nobody is sure how much longer they will last; people from across the country are making the trip to see them before it is too late. This phenomenon, cleverly coined as "Doomsday Tourism" in an article by Forbes (see here), is occuring across the globe from the Galapagos Islands to Antarctica. All of this raises the question - is it appropriate, or even ethical, to travel to these endangered places? Will the rise in tourism only compound the problem and make it worse or does this tourism help raise awareness for global warming in a positive way?

My three cats are in a good mood.  Although just two weeks have passed since President Obama has taken office, he is already in the process of allowing California and 13 other states to set strict limits on greenhouse gases emitted from cars and trucks and he has proposed an economic stimulus plan that includes creating thousands of new jobs that can reduce the nation's dependence on foreign oil (not to mention he is attempting to make some peace in the middle east).  My cats are thrilled that America is on the path to create some useful climate change legislation.

In fact, it is more important to them than ever.  This last week a team of environmental researchers in the US concluded global temperatures could remain elevated for 1,000 years, even if we stop emitting carbon dioxide today (news.bbc.co.uk). 

Tea or coffee? It must be the former, because everyone I know is trying to read his tea leaves, especially when it comes to energy and environment policy.

Crystal balls and beverage dregs may be reliable methods of forecasting some things in our future, but when it comes to sustainability (and that's really what you mean when you say "energy/environment" or "climate" policy) look to California for a hint of where to focus your personal or corporate viewpoint in the coming months. Here are three big areas where the Golden State is leading and, I believe, the Obama Administration will gladly follow.

First, climate policy. On November 18, 2008, shortly after his election, then President-elect Obama delivered a speech to our Governors' Global Climate Summit in Los Angeles that left no doubt he will expand California's climate action plan - - and greenhouse gas reduction targets - - to the federal level. If you missed that important speech, visit www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvG2XptIEJk

New America's climate policy team was a key sponsor and organizer of the recent Governors' Global Climate Summit.  The summit brought together leaders from all over the world to begin to carve out a bold path to the next global climate change agreement in Copenhagen. From our point of view the summit hit a home run. Among the outcomes was an MOU to reduce emissions from deforestation, a Declaration, which committed the signers to develop cooperative actions on climate change throughout the world and most profound an announcement made by President-Elect Barack Obama to the summit attendees (and the world!).  A deep sigh of collective relief and, in some cases, tears fell as he pronounced "My presidency will mark a new chapter in America's leadership on climate change that will strengthen our security and create millions of new jobs in the process."

The summit however was not without criticism.

 By Sasha Rose Abelson, Consultant

On November 18 and 19, leaders from around the world gathered in Los Angeles to discuss the urgent issue of climate change.  For many of the participants, this was an opportunity to meet face to face for the first time. 

Day one of the summit was devoted to discussing different mechanisms that can help in the fight against global warming.   ‘Collaborting on GHG Reporting' emphasized the importance of an accurate system to to measure, monitor and report GHG emissions.  The panelists stressed that a transparent and credible reporting scheme is crucial to ensure a legitimate carbon market.  Later in the day, the sectoral approach to controlling GHG emissions was discussed.  This approach would use specific protocols to regulate different industrial sectors of the economy such as energy, transportation, cement etc. 

Day two of the summit consisted of a round table discussion between the world leaders during which they were able to explain the progress they had made in the fight against global warming as well as future goals.  The Governor of Kansas spoke of harnessing the wind power of her state, the Governor of Wisconsin spoke of other creative methods to create renewable energy (eg: using the byproduct of cheese production to create bio fuels - that's right - cheese.)

Once upon a time, there was a farm in a town called Plainville. The farmer produced natural chickens and turkeys, free from antibiotics and fed with good, plain vegetable feed, avoiding the various "additives" that consumers feared. The result was a factory, jobs, and products that everyone was proud of and, by the way, that made more money for the smart farmer than his competitors.

In fact, this enterprise became so successful that it soon outgrew Plainville. The smart farmer found a bigger farm in another state that was less costly to operate, in part because it featured an energy-efficient processing plant, used renewable energy, and included new ways of reducing waste (remember I said this farmer was very smart!). The new farm employed even more Americans in sustainable, high-paying jobs that wouldn't someday be outsourced.

But one dark cloud loomed over this great example of ingenuity, corporate social responsibility, and investing in the American dream.

The problem was that there was no longer a need for the facility in Plainville and therefore no longer a place for those workers to earn a living. Most entrepreneurs, even the smartest of them, would chalk that up to the price of progress and point to the net benefit of the enterprise, even though one community would now do better than another. But remember I said that this particular farmer - - and business owner - -  was very smart?

The day after Barack Obama was elected as our next President, Ethan Bronner wrote in the New York Times...

"There is a country out there where tens of millions of white Christians, voting freely, select as their leader a black man of modest origin, the son of a Muslim. There is a place on Earth - - call it America - -  where such a thing happens."

No matter who we supported in the election, I suspect that now each of us feels pride that our nation overcame its past and dared to reinvent its future. But in sending Mr. Obama to the White House, we did more than send "a black man of modest origin" - - we sent ourselves. Like Jimmy Stewart in "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" we sent a man that has some part in him that resembles something good and constructive in each one of us.

So why not go beyond metaphor and actually send ourselves to Washington? Given the economic crisis and the imposing challenges ahead - - from climate change to a widening gulf between haves and have-nots - - now is the time to answer the question posed to a nation more than four decades ago. Knowing that he will find his own soaring and inspirational rhetoric, I doubt Mr. Obama will repeat John Kennedy's challenge, but it's hard not to hear those words like a song we can't get out of our heads - - "Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country."

As the Presidential race nears the finish line - - with the candidates and voters both gasping for air amidst the ubiquitous onslaught of commercials on everything from lawn signs to Saturday Night Live - - there are no shortages of "new and improved" proposals for dealing with the current financial mess. Well, if politicians can constantly add to their repertoires, so can we.

Earlier this month I suggested we should consider investing in cleantech infrastructure as a way to help America (and the world) work its way out of the current fiscal crisis. That offering laid out a vision for a self-supporting revamp of our transportation system that would create jobs, wealth, and improve the environment. Here's another suggestion, this time focused on our electricity energy systems.

What do schools, fire stations, hospitals, government offices, and city halls have in common? They are all vital public infrastructure buildings and many, if not most, are pretty old. The older they are, the more likely they are to be wasting electricity. How about a National ESCO Project, where we recruit energy service companies ("ESCOs"), engineering firms, electrical contractors, builders, and others to go into these buildings and identify the outdated lighting, HVAC, elevators, and other inefficient uses of electricity? While they're at it, they could also audit water use and waste disposal.