Δ KNOWLEDGEBASE
« Responding to Climate Change
Excerpt from In Search of Environmental Excellence:
Moving Beyond Blame
by Bruce Piasecki and Peter Asmus
CHAPTER 3
A Global Greenhouse: Framing the Debate
Page 10 of 14
« 1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 • 7 • 8 • 9 • 10 • 11 • 12 • 13 • 14 »
The Lawrence Berkeley Lab, led by conservation guru Art Rosenfeld, thinks big, and their goals are quite honorable: to reduce energy intensity by 3.5 percent over the next twenty years. If we followed their route, America could keep its energy usage at current levels and save from $1.3 to 2.2 trillion (in 1987 dollars).18 The fundamental message is clear. We can tackle the challenge of global warming, and improve America's industrial edge in the process.
This is how LBL summarizes the benefits of its recommendations: "Investments in improved efficiency would provide U.S. industry with a better competitive position in world markets, and free up more than $100 billion annually for capital investments in other U.S. industries. The poor would benefit from lower energy costs and additional jobs. Reduced emissions of carbon dioxide and other pollutants would lessen environmental damage and reduce the impact of global warming."
Steven Schneider, a climate expert at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, calls this approach a "tie-in strategy," since it would enable Americans to reduce the trade deficit, enhance competitiveness, free up capital for research, and reduce greenhouse gases all at once.
A recent U.S. Department of Energy report echoes many of LBL's findings, noting that through energy conservation measures, the United States could stave off a projected thirty-eight-percent rise in carbon dioxide emissions by the year 2010. This same DOE report underscores the fact that what is needed is a global response to the greenhouse effect, one that entices multinationals to get off the petrochemical treadmill as much as possible.19 Even if the United States reduces its emissions of carbon dioxide to 1985 levels, however, global levels would only decrease seven percent, without similar efforts by other nations.
At present, the tilted playing field that favors the production of more fossil-fuel-based energy over conservation is common around the globe. In many planned economies and the developing world, it is business as usual to subsidize fossil-fuel supply and dismiss efficiency demands. A striking image of the inadequacy of some nations' energy policies, in spite of China's overall gains in reducing energy use, comes from Beijing. Even though winters in Beijing are as cold as in Boston, brand-new buildings are uninsulated and are heated by heavily subsidized coal burning.
Less Is More
The discovery that conservation is a resource is a clear demonstration of the principle of "Less is more." The oil crisis of the seventies began this revolution, spurring the first generation of efficiency reforms and product-design innovations. The second wave of innovations, propelled by what might be called the second oil crisis — the Valdez spill — will need the helping hand of government to further sharpen the tools we already have.
Consider the following facts: Any person can "produce" energy by using light bulbs that use one-fourth as much energy as standard bulbs. Houses, through use of new insulations, can cut energy use by nine-tenths.
Ironically, in the absence of strong federal leadership on energy, states have played the critical roles in implementing energy conservation and efficiency programs. The New England Power Service Company has a remarkably advanced state conservation program. In 1989, the company spent $40 million to install energy-efficient lights, insulate water heaters, and improve industrial efficiency throughout its service area. By 1991, the utility hopes to displace 100,000 tons of coal by way of this program. Over the fifteen-year planning horizon, the savings will equate to one-third of the utility's energy requirements.
Another forward-looking state effort comes from the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, which was formed in 1975 as a public-benefit corporation mandated to fund alternative energy concepts. A good example is NYSERDA's many district heating and cooling programs. Many of the older heating systems in American cities are extremely inefficient and waste vast quantities of energy. Comparing the old systems to the new is a little like comparing a Model T to a 1990 Celica. Jamestown, Rochester, and Buffalo are current success stories, as these communities now save between twenty and forty-five percent of past energy bills. Not only do these upgrades improve air quality, they also serve as economic-development boons.20
Next Page »
Footnotes
-
The required retrofits would cost $300 million to $500 million, yet they would also reduce the trade deficit by $20 billion to $40 billion annually because of the ability to reduce oil imports by 2 million to 3.5 million barrels per day.
LBL proposes a number of innovative policies to accomplish these goals. One of the more fascinating is a "gas guzzler/sipper fee/rebate program" for automobiles. This revenue neutral fee/rebate scheme would propose a fee on new cars based on their fuel efficiency. Efficient cars such as the Honda Civic American would receive, based on 1987 calculations, a rebate of $1,250, whereas gas guzzlers like the Ferrari Testarossa would pay large fees. During a transition phase, the rebates would be paid in proportion to American-made content and labor, in order not to alienate the American auto manufacturers, allowing them to gradually shift production away from the less efficient cars that currently dominate their sales. Additional registration fee incentives, along with a modest ten-cents-per-year gas tax, would, according to LBL's Rosenfeld, allow the marketplace to promote better efficiency without severe economic dislocation.
Other proposals include sliding-scale hookup fees and rebates for new commercial and residential buildings, and developing a carbon dioxide tax for all fifty states, with rebates given to those utilities who shift away from the petrochemical treadmill fastest. It is these kinds of specific adjustments, once freed from this age of environmental blame, that will bring substantive reforms into the world. [« back]
-
It is ironic, considering how closely allied DOE is with oil interests, that their own reports encourage getting off the petrochemical treadmill. DOE has drawn most of its leaders, appointed by the president, from among oil people. It wasn't until the Hanford and Savannah problems described in Chapter 2 became so large that James Watkins, an ex-nuclear navy official, became the first secretary of energy with a background outside the oil industry. [« back]
- New York's efforts are impressive, but in the Soviet Union, seventy percent of residential users participate in district heating and cooling programs, while the U.S. overall percentage is infinitesimal. Nevertheless, much of this coordination in the Soviet Union is wasted because of a lack of temperature controls. The most common method of interior temperature control is opening windows, even in winter. [« back]
