I just wanted to flag what I thought were some pretty good items out and about in the media lately.
China and Climate Change – One of the go-to guys for progressive economics, Paul Krugman, has a column today, Empire of Carbon, that is both pessimistic and optimistic. (Boy, do I know that feeling when it comes to climate change!) The bad news is that China is going to swamp the climate system with its coal-generated CO2 if it stays on the trajectory it’s on now. China doubled its output from 1996 to 2006, making it the world’s leading emitter of greenhouse gases last year. Krugman gives a good précis here of the arguments that China makes for not changing course. But, if the US, EU and other big developed economies throttle back our emissions – and there’s reason to believe it’s happening and will continue to happen (see last post below, among others) – then the Chinese and the other rapidly industrializing nations should have no excuse not to get on board.
The good news, according to Krugman, is “…that the very inefficiency of China’s energy use offers huge scope for improvement. Given the right policies, China could continue to grow rapidly without increasing its carbon emissions.” Can you say renewables and energy efficiency? It’s all there, just for the taking.
What if China and others don’t play ball? “Sooner than most people think, countries that refuse to limit their greenhouse gas emissions will face sanctions, probably in the form of taxes on their exports.” I think China will play ball. For my reasons for thinking this, see China and Trade here. As Krugman puts it: “It’s time to save the planet. And like it or not, China will have to do its part.”
(For more on China and climate change, see the FPA blog on China.)
More on Cap-and-Trade – See this recent column from Krugman and this editorial from the “NY Times.” Both are unequivocal in support of cap-and-trade. Krugman notes “…a commitment to greenhouse gas reduction would, in the short-to-medium run, have the same economic effects as a major technological innovation: It would give businesses a reason to invest in new equipment and facilities even in the face of excess capacity. And given the current state of the economy, that’s just what the doctor ordered.”
The Smart Grid – Here’s a great article from the “Financial Times” on the intersection of the smart grid and information technology. There are huge business opportunities and the IT folks are all over that. As the reporter says, “An unlikely marriage is being consummated. On one side is a monolithic industry, cautious, highly regulated and focused on ubiquity, reliability and affordability. On the other is an aggressively competitive sector with rapid product cycles and an insatiable hunger for innovation.” It could turn out to be the proverbial “marriage made in heaven.”
Geoengineering – This is one of my least favorite of the red herrings being brought to you today by concern over the looming climate change crisis – see also nuclear power and carbon capture and storage (CCS). A recent story in the FT series on Climate Change focused on this approach: “altering the Earth’s systems.” Giant sunshades in space, seeding the atmosphere with sulfur, making clouds at sea – all ideas, among others, that are advancing, in spite of the incredible costs involved and the potential to wreak even more havoc than the warming these schemes are intended to abate. I was a little surprised – and alarmed – to learn that White House science advisor, John Holdren, said recently that geoengineering should not be “off the table.”
The pursuit of geoengineering is a considerable distraction to us in seeking to make the transition to a zero-carbon, sustainable world economy. As Alex Steffen, the guiding hand at Worldchanging, wrote in February: “Our goal should be to cool the planet in ways that reinforce and restore the resilience of its natural systems.” In a book I’ve just reviewed, one of the authors says: “If our goal is to produce a sustainable society, then to a certain extent, we will eventually need to mimic (and possibly enhance) natural systems.”
Speaking of Nukes … – I often watch some of the excellent C-Span programming during my lunch break. (Am I a policy nerd or what?) I just caught Exelon CEO John Rowe at the National Press Club talking about his company’s main product: nuclear power. According to their website, “Exelon operates the largest nuclear fleet in the United States, the third largest commercial nuclear fleet in the world, and is generating nuclear energy more efficiently than ever.” Mr. Rowe seems like a genuinely thoughtful and nice fellow. One thing he said caught my attention: Until we have a plan in place to store waste in the long term, then we ought “to go slow” on expanding nuclear power. (These comments appear toward the end of the video, during the Q&A. Start around 51:25.)
Waste is but one of several major concerns about nuclear power. For a really in-depth and smart analysis from folks who’ve been studying nuclear power for decades, see Nuclear Power in a Warming World from the Union of Concerned Scientists. I used this as a reading in my climate change class and it’s informative and useful.
