Is Climate Change Really Changing the World?

Today, The Georgia Chapter of Sierra Club, Green Law, and Friends of the Chattahoochee issued a press release announcing that Futon County Superior Court Judge Thelma Wyatt Cummings Moore will be hearing arguments on Tuesday, June 3^rd at 9:30 AM in the reconsideration of a permit issued by Georgia EPD for the construction of a new coal fired power plant in Early County.

 

The permit in question was issued in May of 2007, a month after the US Supreme Court ruling in the case of Massachusetts versus EPA, highlighted in our recent post Cometh the Climate Change Cavalry?.  In this case, the Court concludes that greenhouse gases are pollutants that EPA has a right and an obligation to regulate.

 

The US Supreme Court decision also supports the ability of states to provide leadership in this evolving area of regulation.  The case Judge Moore will hear on the 9^th could have far reaching and long-term consequences not only for Georgia, but eventually for the rest of the country and the world.

 

Based on her biography, Judge Moore is an accomplished woman who is accustomed to breaking new ground, so she is well suited to this task.  It may be that fifty years from now we will look back and say that she changed the course of history.

Cometh the Climate Change Cavalry?

Last Thursday, the White House released a new study on the effects of human-induced climate change on the United States.  The New York Times reports that the study concludes, as you might expect, that spread of warmth-loving pests and loss of low-lying lands to rising seas are potential effects of the climate change.

 

The study also comes to some new conclusions:  “An increased frequency and severity of heat waves is expected, leading to more illness and death, particularly among the young, elderly, frail and poor.”  Additionally, the report included new projections of how the poor, elderly and communities with lagging public-health and public-works systems will face disproportionate health risks from warming.

 

To us at Fifty Forward this is a particularly timely report.  The aging of the Baby Boomers and all the potential attendant impacts to our society are beginning to seriously capture the attention of policy makers.  And the issues of health care are becoming increasingly important in our national debate. 

 

Both of these issues take on new significance in light of this report, which raises some hopeful questions.

 

Are regulations on carbon emissions far behind?

 

Will the EPA finally grant carbon emissions the status of a threat to human health, as the Supreme Court says it should?

Don’t Send a Person to do a Robot’s Job

Climate change science is constantly improving.  But like any science, improvement is data driven.

 

There is less and less doubt about the melting of sea ice.  But what is still one of the biggest unknowns is the scale and pace of ice melt.  Dr. Derrick Lampkin of Georgia Tech says, “The changing mass of Greenland and Antarctica represents the largest unknown in predictions of global sea-level rise over the coming decades. Given the substantial impact these structures can have on future sea levels, improved monitoring of the ice sheet mass balance is of vital concern.”

 

The problem is that the ice sheets that need to be measured are often too delicate to support the weight of an adult and the data can’t be accurately gathered from satellites.  So where do we go from here?  To the technologically savvy and innovative team at Georgia Tech, which has developed a robotic rover to take the necessary measurements.

 

Creating the future by integrating multiple policy areas such as innovation and education to meet societal needs like those generated in the quest for sustainability is what Fifty Forward is about.  The series of decisions stretching back to October 13, 1885 with the founding of the Georgia Institute of Technology could end up having a significant impact on the future of our planet.

 

Fifty Forward will result in a long-range vision for the Atlanta metro area.  But the development of the vision is only the first step, thoughtful and future altering decisions will have to be made routinely over the next half century to ensure the realization of that vision.

 

When the founders of Georgia Tech linked formalized higher education to technological innovation 123 years ago, they knew nothing about global warming.  But they probably did know that they had the potential to change the future.

 

And so do we.

Can Coke Cool the Planet?

Well not alone they can’t, but they are making a run at it.  In an AJC article today, Craig Simons highlights Coke’s plans to buy 100,000 new beverage coolers that work using compressed carbon dioxide as opposed to hydrofluorocarbons.  Given that these flourocarbons are 1000 times more potent as greenhouse gases than is carbon dioxide, this is a significant step for one of the Atlanta region’s major international corporations.

 

While speaking at a lecture in Beijing organized by Greenpeace, Coke’s CEO Neville Isdell said, “We cannot wait for consumers or governments or technologies or price to move us towards sustainable solutions … so we’re doing what we can within our own business.”

 

These coolers cost about 25 percent more than the current industry standard.  So, Mr. Isdell and Coke are to be congratulated for going to the extra expense to help protect the environment we all share.

 

But there is more that can be done. Coke replaces 1 million refrigeration units annually.  With that kind of buying power, Coke is poised to help drive down the cost of these environmentally friendlier coolers.  Hopefully, other corporations will follow suit.

 

Coke isn’t a perfect company, but it’s adding its waves to a ripple effect that might one day lead to a more sustainable world.

If You Can’t Stand the Heat….Capture It!

When power plants generate electricity, a lot of heat simply goes up the chimney, so to speak. Estimates are that for every three units of fuel — like coal, natural gas or oil — that are burned to make electricity, two are lost in the process, most of it as waste heat that just drifts away. Likewise, many manufacturing operations such as steel mills produce waste heat.

 

Ten years ago, an Indiana steel mill began capturing heat above its coke ovens to make electricity. That operation, along with other energy recycling processes employed at the plant, creates about 250 megawatts of power every day, about half of the plant’s needs for electricity. In the process, the company says it has reduced CO₂ emissions by 1.3 million tons a year.

What would happen if more companies and electric utilities captured heat and used it to make electricity? It’s a common practice in Europe. Denmark generates close to 55 percent of its electricity this way. In the Netherlands and Finland, the figure is closer to 40 percent, and in Germany it is 35 percent. But, energy recycling in the U.S. accounts for only 8 percent of the nation’s electrical power, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.

 

Recent EPA and Department of Energy studies suggest U.S. industries waste enough heat to generate an estimated 200,000 megawatts of power — nearly 20 percent of what this nation uses. That’s enough electricity to replace up to 400 coal-fired power plants.

So what’s the problem?

State and federal laws often prohibit companies like the Indiana steel mill from selling excess power, and few electric utilities have chosen to install energy recycling equipment at older power plants because under New Source Review, they will then be subject to newer, stricter environmental regulations.

We recycle beverage cans. Wouldn’t it make even more sense to recycle energy, to use the waste heat that goes up the chimney to produce electricity and, in the process, save millions of tons of carbon from entering the atmosphere?

By the Power of … TVA

Just a quick follow up to yesterday’s blog; TVA is stepping up to the plate and reducing their carbon footprint in a substantial way.

From a Chattanooga Times Free Press article:

 

The federal utility, which last year derived 64 percent of its energy production from coal-fired power plants that emit the most carbon, set a goal of reducing that share to below 50 percent in the next 12 years.

“We’re going to do what we can to make sure these (carbon emissions) are less than they are today by 2020,” TVA President Tom Kilgore said. “TVA will strive to have at least 50 percent of its generation portfolio be from low-carbon and zero-carbon sources.”

 

Which power company will be the next to set a carbon reduction goal? And, which power company will be the last holdout to address its carbon emissions?

 

On a related note, the DOE reports that the U.S. can get 20 percent of its electricity from wind by 2030 if it increases turbine installation and upgrades the transmission line infrastructure.

 

The report states that turbine installations would have to increase from around 2,000 in 2006 to nearly 7,000 in 2017.

 

Some parts of Georgia are ideal for wind turbines but others, not so much.  There’s all kinds of research going on into other alternative energy sources.

 

Given the political climate, and the natural climate, it’s a safe bet that our future reliance on coal will be greatly diminished.

 

What will the skies over Atlanta look like then?

Full Disclosure

On April 13, in the New York Times, Abby Schultz points out that all three of the current presidential candidates say they are in favor of some type of cap on carbon emissions and astutely concludes that any such legislation could have significant impact on power companies.  More specifically, such caps will likely increase the cost of electricity generated through the burning of fossil fuels.

 

In the article, a senior analyst at Innovest Strategic Value Advisors suggests that not all of these costs will be able to be passed on to consumers.  Some of the costs will have to be absorbed by shareholders in the power corporations.  Obviously, some companies will be better prepared for carbon caps than others…and consequently a more attractive investment.  See our previous post “Carbon’s Gonna Get Expensive” which highlights the Big 3 financial institutions’ decision to more closely scrutinize loans for the construction of new carbon emitting power plants.

 

The Carbon Disclosure Project attempts to analyze the investment risk in corporations based on their environmental practices.  The organization has published a report for the last six years.  The report was published on behalf of 315 investors who manage assets worth $41 trillion.  This is enough to get anyone’s attention. 

 

One potential way of reducing the cost of the production of electricity, as well as a improving company’s rating in the Carbon Disclosure Project report is through investment in cleaner power generation technologies.

 

We understand that the looming carbon crises did not materialize over night.  It took decades for us to arrive at this point and will likely take decades for us to correct the problem.  But if we don’t start soon, where will be 50 years from now?

Carbon’s Gonna Get Expensive

In February of 2008, three of the largest financial institutions in the United States adopted The Carbon Principles. 

 

Citi Group, JP Morgan Chase, and Morgan Stanley have agreed to encourage cost-effective energy efficiency, renewable and low-carbon energy alternatives and to begin including an assessment of potential environmental liabilities in lending decisions regarding new power plants.

 

(You might want to read that last sentence again. It’s as if those three companies know something that other institutions in our society don’t know, or choose to ignore.)

 

The Carbon Principles were developed in coordination with leading NGOs and power companies and it appears that some power companies are taking them seriously.  In an earlier post, “The Energy to Change”, we mentioned that the CEO of Duke Energy is promoting energy efficiency and alternative energy sources as a way to de-carbonize his company.  Atlanta’s own Southern Company has taken a more conservative approach and is encouraging energy efficiency.

 

As power companies, and subsequently the rest of us, are encouraged to more thoroughly account for the costs of the power we use, we could see energy costs continue to rise.  An important response to increased energy costs will be additional investment in R&D on power generation mechanisms.

 

According to research by Professor Gregory Nemet of the Center for Sustainability and the Global Environment at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, public and private investment in energy related R&D has been declining since the mid 1980s.

 

Where would another 20 years of stagnant or declining investment in research and development of energy related technology leave the Atlanta region?  It’s hard to say, but I’ll bet it would leave us pretty poorly prepared for an increasingly global approach to mitigating climate change as well as the continued urbanization the world is experiencing.

 

Is that something the Atlanta of 2060 can afford?

Join the Movement Towards Tomorrow Today

Atlanta’s not perfect. We’ve got a long way to go to become that idyllic international city. But every now and then we should take a deep breath and relax. Maybe, just maybe, we could even laugh about it.

 

This film humorously pokes fun at all of Atlanta’s faults. It’s a subtle spoof on Atlanta’s self-promotional tendencies and entertainingly tours all of the region’s shortcomings.

 

Warning: There’s one cussword and you WILL laugh out loud, especially at the part when the narrator talks about the bricks at Centennial Park. (“Their blood is the mortar that holds this city strong.”)

 

The film also playfully makes fun of the region’s love affair with branding slogans: “Atlanta, Yesterday’s City of Today. Because Tomorrow is Soon.”  

 

Hey, that’s not bad.

 

According to the YouTube page, “This film was created in 50 hours as a part of the 2008 Rapid i Movement Film Competition. It won 1st Place and will be seen at the 2008 Atlanta Film Festival.”

 

We love it. And we want more! PLEASE post links to any and all similar films here in the comment section. We’d love to see them.

Drought and Climate Change

Over the last year, drought caught up with traffic as THE topic of conversation around the region. When we began the year, better than half the state was experiencing ‘exceptional drought,’ most severe rating the U.S. Drought Monitor has.

 

The question arises: How will climate change affect water supplies and water quality?

 

There growing consensus that, while we probably won’t have more frequent droughts, the ones we have are likely to be more severe and perhaps last longer.

 

Warmer temperatures are likely to lead to increased water use, at a time when stream flows are lower.

 

We are likely to experience more weather extremes, including more powerful thunderstorms, hurricanes and tropical storms. That could mean more flooding, more run-off and more erosion.

 

Increased water temperatures will lead to lower levels of dissolved oxygen affecting aquatic life in rivers, streams and lakes. Pollution may be more concentrated.

 

What’s the answer in a future that may be marked by wild swings in rainfall and accompanying variations available water supplies?  

 

More conservation? More reservoirs? Desalination?