so, it's been a while since you all have heard from me and i'm sure the
sight of this letter in your mailbox brought joy and anticipation!
setting up the groundwork for writing an honors thesis next year has
been quite time consuming, but exciting. as you could imagine, my
thesis will be concerning climate change. so get set, here comes a
letter that's probably longer than any other i've written and probably
longer than any of you really want to read, but it's ok. i'm confident
after a week or three someone might have actually gotten through this
whole thing without deleting it first.
in the past few weeks i've been attending many lectures on
environmental justice, as well as the economic potential hidden in
climate change.
quick summary of what i'm bout to write on and some fast explanations:
1. environmental justice, or EJ, refers to the belief and enforcement
that all human beings deserve equal rights to life resources, most
importantly access to clean water and clean air. this is a big problem
domestically, and around the world.
2. the future market for clean energy may prove to be the viable
foundation for sound environmental policy and planning for a warming
climate.
It may come as a surprise to those of you in the DC area (mom,
mikey,chris, married mike!) to find out that the drinking water has
high levels of lead, oftentimes beyond set legal limits. pipes? lies?
i dont know, but Vernice Miller-Travis from the EPA sounded very
convincing about this and many other injustices.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
in the march issue of national geographic, an article on west virginia
strip-mining was particularly disturbing. draw a swath headed
northeast from the southwest portion of the state (near rawl, or
switzer) sweeping past the south of charelston, and you will see an
area of the appalachians being devastated by mining practices. over
400,000 acres in the appalachian region undergo mountaintop removal, or
"mountain-topping" (because the tops of mountains are literally blown
off and then used to fill in valleys, flattening the landscape in the
end. for strip malls of course), which leads to unprecedented
contamination of water resources and the air.
this process is wreaking havoc on the communities of the appalachians,
a case for environmental justice (which the government doesn't really
want to pay much for these days). countless law suites are in the
courts concerning massive waste spills and contamination of vast
regions of the app's. for example, a disaster at a kentucky mine in
2000 dumped 250 million gallons of toxic slurry into an underground
mine shaft, eventually merging into the hydrologic system. what
happened? 20 miles of stream declared an aquatic deadzone, shutting
down the water systems for 10 counties. similar scenarios are waiting
to happen as mining companies infringe on small towns, sometimes
holding similar loads of sludge as close as 2 miles away... uphill.
there needs to be some authority that will stand up for people
suffering these injustices.
so yeah, there's my rant on EJ. i hope it wasn't to biased sounding,
i'm just trying to do a little reporting here. the goal of
environmental justice programs are to enforce the rights afforded to
all human beings, of every color, every income: to be allowed health
and life. i don't really want to get into new orleans cause i've
already talked enough, but a similar case of environmental injustice
exists there. an 80 mile strip between baton rouge and n'awlens called
"cancer alley." check it out.
BUSINESS OF CLIMATE CHANGE
OK, totally different topic now. a more hopeful one as well.
as i mentioned earlier, i've also been hearing many presentations and
lectures on the business case for global warming policy. many great
ideas have been put forth and acted on concerning the reduction of
greenhouse gases (GHGs), particularly CO2. alternative energy has been
a hot topic for a while now, but the stigma behind renewables such
wind, solar, geothermal, etc. tends to spark words like "expensive" or
"unaesthetic" or more often in the business world "why should i if i'm
already doing business cheaper?" well we may come to find out in the
next decade that inefficient energy practices could become a costly
mistake of business owners, and that it may be the business advantages
of going "green" that could drive the federal decision to limit GHGs.
as you may or may not be familiar with, much of europe already has
carbon restrictions in place and people are not only subscribing to
more reliable energy sources, but the economy is actually stimulated by
the practice of carbon trading, and people are making a lot of money
while (whether they actually care or not) doing some good for the
global community.
carbon trading is the product of cap-and-trade restrictions on carbon
emissions. in europe, and anywhere else that the kyoto protocol is
being adhered to, countries are responsible for cutting emissions by 1%
every year. when there is a limit to what energy companies can let
spew out of their smokestacks, it becomes profitable to be more
efficient. thus we have carbon trading: when certain companies exceed
their allotted carbon emissions, they must purchase carbon credits from
companies that did meet requirements. the more you cut back, the more
you stand to make.
currently, carbon trading is practiced in the US through an
organization called the chicago climate exchange. various states and
counties across the nation participate in this voluntary cap-and-trade
market. much of the west, particularly the northwest, as well as the
new england states are taking these steps to help promote a profitable
business out of carbon restrictions. even large energy companies that
have noticed the profit potential in this market have petitioned the
government to enact restrictions on the emissions and promote cleaner
alternatives.
as of last week, a ton of carbon in the EU was worth ~$34 (for every
ton over or under your limit, you pay or make that amount), in the CCX
~$3. the disparity is clear: restrictions boost values, boosting
profits.
alternative energy appears to be a far more profitable market of all
this were the case. the more widespread use of wind and solar would
provide a newer, more efficient energy grid. instead of loosing over
85% of the original energy produced as it travels through the aging
electrical infrastructure as we do currently, increase efficiency and
do it cleanly. you may remember the new york power grid failure, or
the '96 failure that spanned from portland to mexico. this is an aging
grid that needs replacement anyway, by having renewable resources at
local levels, these types of failures may be avoided.
(to tie this in with EJ)
instead of paying native american tribes to dump nuclear waste on their
land, we could pay them to construct wind farms - generating clean
power, opening up a job market, and protecting their rights to access
clean drinking water and grazing land.
i'm not saying that this is a perfect plan, it's true that the carbon
market could fail one day, or that some companies may try to thwart the
system by trying to remain profitable while buying credits. but when
60% of the oil burned is coming from other countries, and the energy
grid is running at 10% of it's physical potential, it might be wiser to
make some money while cutting emissions, instead of trying to choose
one or the other. i'm confident if we can make renewable energy and
carbon restrictions profitable, great strides can be made in the
environmental policies of the global community.
RENEWABLE / ALTERNATIVE ENERGY
a great renewable energy program at work out here is due to colorado
state amendment 37, which authorizes the state to pay for ~50% of your
alternative energy or efficiency upgrades you may pursue on your
private property. also, it subsidizes wind energy so that the cost of
supplying your home or business is usually cheaper than if powered by
oil or coal. it's so popular out here that there's a wait list to get
wind powered. check out this home in boulder: thefarmhouse.org
essentially the whole house came from agricultural products and
renewable energy.
one of my favorite efficiency alternatives was geothermal energy.
cheaper than you think, geothermal works by drilling a hole into the
ground under your home (slightly more complicated than it just
sounded). since the earth's near subsurface is always a cool 54
degrees F (i'm nearly positive, though it may be just above 52, i cant
remember), this keeps your home cooler in the summer and warmer in the
winter - less energy wasted on heat and AC.
another great idea is to have small heat collectors on the outside of
your house. with a few vacuum tubes, you can actually use the sun's
radiant energy to heat your home's water. one of my teachers did this
and through a few simple heat collectors and transformers, his home's
water is heated for free up to 130 degrees! this can also then be run
through pipes in the floor to heat your home in the winter! this and
other breeds of solar energy are used in the CU solar home. the CU
design won 1st place at the solar decathlon in dc last spring.
http://solar.colorado.edu/
here's an article to check out if the business stuff caught your fancy:
http://money.cnn.com/2006/04/13/technology/business2_futureboy0413/?
cnn=yes
also, if you want some more info on renewable opportunities let me
know. there are all kind of cool local programs where if you can sign
up for wind energy, buy credits to offset your carbon footprint, etc...
oh yeah, that reminds me about one last thing. the band coldplay makes
sure that they offset the the amount of emitted CO2 resulting from
their album production and tours. by contributing to reforestation and
conservation efforts, the idea is that the amount of CO2 sequestered by
the vegetation planted should equal the amount emitted through their
business practices. very cool dudes.
ok, i'm done. (deep breath)
