In my last blog, I discussed the importance of keeping environmental sustainability goals in mind when rebuilding the economy as we weather and eventually emerge from this global health crisis. I think it’s crucial to note that not only is it important to rebuild sustainably, but it is also entirely feasible, and actually the strongest option economically. I think the public has this general conception of there being a need to wait for some kind of miracle solution that scientists need to labor over for many more years to come, before the transition to renewables can occur. This is far from the case. Research on solutions to climate change is well supported, the technology needed to transition already exists, and the only thing still lacking is the public’s understanding of the facts of climate change, so that policies will finally support what scientists have long known. The time for the public to come to this realization is now, as we look beyond this year of chaos and horror into a still-undetermined future.
In 2011, Stanford University Professor Mark Jacobson co-founded The Solutions Project, an advocacy group with the goal of promoting a policy shift to support 100% renewable energy by 2050. The project’s comprehensive research details how switching to renewables actually leads to a huge cost decrease for top-emitting countries like the United States. As the world’s top emitter of carbon per capita, the health and energy security of the country are at stake if the U.S. doesn’t speed up its transition. If the current energy norms continue, the estimated aggregate private and social costs are $2.1 and $5.9 trillion per year, respectively, whereas those of wind-water-solar energy are both $0.77 trillion per year.
Social cost refers to the full cost to society of adding one additional ton of CO2 to the atmosphere, and is used to understand both current and future climate damages, and to set policies like a carbon tax. 63,000 deaths caused by air pollution-related illnesses in the U.S. could be prevented by 2050 if we switch to 100% renewable energy. The switch would also create two million net long-term, full-time U.S. jobs. As a whole, a complete U.S. transition would reduce yearly aggregate energy costs, health-care costs and mortality, climate damage, and would create jobs—all vital aims after a year that has seen the U.S. plunge into recession, the unemployment rate soar, and the healthcare system become more burdened than ever as a result of the pandemic.
The early implementation of renewables will translate to enormous savings in money not lost to rescues after major hurricanes (which are caused increasingly by climate change), infrastructural damage, and abandoned property. The transition would also make the U.S. less dependent on foreign sources of energy, which could be hugely beneficial politically. Fear of attacks on the energy grid would be greatly diminished by the flexibility that renewables provide, making energy infrastructure a matter of national security. In short, if the use of fossil fuels is not rapidly diminished, rising demand for increasingly scare fossil energy will lead to economic, social, and political instability, enhancing international conflict.
Power providers can often build wind and solar farms more quickly than larger‐capacity conventional generating plants. This can enable them to meet incremental demand growth with less economic risk. The employment of renewable energy systems diversifies the fuel mix of utility companies, thereby reducing the danger of fuel shortages, fuel cost hikes, and power interruptions, while meeting demand for reduced greenhouse gas emissions. This translates to a higher energy resilience due to the nature of distributed renewable energy, which is far more difficult to disrupt than a centralized power plant.
Beyond the indisputable facts and figures, I believe so strongly in switching to renewable energy sources because I’ve witnessed the effects of climate change firsthand, where I grew up in Miami, and where the water levels are rising rapidly. I remember tense drives home from school after hours of thunderstorms, when half a dozen cars stalled on the street because the flooding from the rain reached their tailpipes. We had to navigate our car through water that was in some places several feet high. Driving to South Beach on weekends, we complained of the endless construction—as soon as one project to raise the barriers between the canals and the street concluded, the next began to raise them even higher. Still, despite the increase in devastating hurricanes that tear through my hometown almost yearly, another result of climate change, we watch as skyscrapers continue to be built along the few remaining undeveloped stretches of beach. It would be a laughable exercise in denial if it weren’t so sad to think that I have no idea if the city will be recognizable just a few decades from now. Here too, the cost is not just personal, but also financial. A new study shows that if action isn’t taken, the damage to South Florida will surpass $38 billion by 2070. Prioritizing raising and floodproofing streets and buildings, and armoring the coast, over the continued short-sighted investment in real estate could in the not-so-long term save billions of dollars and create countless jobs.
As a whole in my hometown, the rest of the U.S., and the world, transitioning to renewable energy has proven social and economic benefits. We already know what to do, and how to do it, and why it’s important. The miracle solution we’ve been waiting for is this— the realization that we can still fix this, now.
Featured Image from Physics World
Written by Francesca von Krauland, Columbia University Masters Student in Global Thought and Climate Justice Now Intern.
