Windmills in Palm Springs, California
Defining climate change as a hazard to human development is a moral, rather than scientific, dilemma: climate change is only dangerous insofar as it threatens the things we value. This is why the increasingly urgent pleadings by scientists worldwide to take mitigating measures have so far been met with skepticism, shyness and inaction. However, it seems that new winds might be blowing in the way both the American public and the political debate are approaching the issue: the majority of Americans (73%) believe that ‘global warming is happening’ – although only 18% see it as a serious, human-caused problem. A shift in the political scene is also observable, especially after the Clean Energy and Security Act was passed last June, putting a cap on U.S. carbon emissions.
Addressing energy production and consumption is significant not only because the energy supply sector is the biggest contributor of CO2 emissions (emitting approximately 13 GtCO2eq in 2004, roughly 26% of all emissions)1, but also because of its potential in triggering international conflict. Current energy production is based on fossil fuel burning, mainly natural gas and coal, whose reserves can be found in a select few countries. The trading system that now determines global access to the raw materials for energy production has proven fickle and sensitive to manipulation in the name of political interests. Thus, it is particularly sensible for countries who depend on fossil fuel imports to invest in new ways of producing energy which could be locally developed and carbon-free.
Restructuring the energy production industry implies the scaling of existing alternative energy sources, such as solar, geothermal and wind power, to account for a greater percentage of the energy demand, and the development of new technologies that complement them. It should be noted that none of the currently available renewable sources of energy is as reliable as fossil fuel combustion has been, and therefore a composite system based on various sources needs to be established. The restructuring process also requires adjustments in the relevant legislation and facilitation of financing for private enterprises to apply the technologies. As daunting a process as this seems, the most successful example of its application is the state of California, a counterintuitive candidate if we think of the lag between the U.S. and other western nations in legally-binding commitments to climate change mitigation.
Free-stadning solar panel
California’s governor Schwarzenegger passed the Global Warming Solutions Act in 2006, committing the state to reducing its carbon emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020, and requiring that all utility companies produce 20% of their energy from renewable sources by 2010, and 33% by 20202. These regulations come as the result of almost forty years of sustained energy use reductions by private citizens (who consume, on average, 40% less energy than the rest of Americans), of higher standards on building and appliance efficiency, and of education programs that redefine the value of energy. What makes California the role model for redesign of energy supply systems is the economic approach it implemented, which allowed the state to remain as one of the world’s largest economies. Combining clean energy, national security and economic development may just be a solution we can materialize.
The following video further investigates the Californian model, showing the intricacies of this not-so-smooth process and why it ultimately yields positive results. (The video is a bit on the longer side – takes about 20 minutes to watch – but is definitely worth the time.)
One of the issues the documentary touches on is wind farms. When a farmer who wants to install a windmill on his property is interviewed, he explains how one of the major concerns the community has is about the aesthetic consequences of the construction: they want to keep the pretty picture. But as humanity faces the major challenge it has ever seen, it seems an opportune moment to redesign our value structures along with our energy systems. Is it time we forgo the pretty picture for the sake of the smart picture?
1Mann, M. E. & Kump, L. R. (2008). Dire predictions: Understanding global warming. New York: DK Publishing, Inc.
2Luers, A. L., Mastrandrea, M. D., Hayhoe, K., & Frumhoff, P. C. (2007). How to avoid dangerous climate change: A target for U.S. emissions reductions. Union of Concerned Scientists.
Tags: California, Clean Energy and Security Act, climate change, fossil fuels, Gloabl Warming Solutions Act, mitigation, Solar Power, US Energy Policy, Wind
