Hope on the global warming issue

I'm taking a great class right now - Energy Regulation and the Environment. For one of our last classes, one of my classmates Carla Peterman, who is getting her Ph.D. from the Energy and Resources Group here at UC Berkeley, gave a talk on "cap and trade" systems for carbon emissions. You may be familiar with this concept as it has been in place for years with sulfur dioxide (which causes acid rain) and NOx emissions. Basically, there is a cap on the amount of these materials that may be released into the air, and in order to release them you must have a permit. The permits are traded similarly to shares of stock - you buy shares on a market that correspond to the number of tons that you need to release in your industrial process. There are only so many shares to go around, so when the shares reach a certain price there is a monetary incentive to modify your facility such that you no longer release these materials. The program has been very successful.

So now the groundwork is being laid for this exact same thing to take place with greenhouse gas emissions (GHG). By far, the largest GHG emission is carbon dioxide. But other GHGs are much more efficient at trapping heat, molecule for molecule, than carbon dioxide. For instance, methane traps around 20X more heat than carbon dioxide, while the most potent GHGs can trap up to 20,000X as much. Fortunately the emissions of these compounds are low (SF6 and other perfluorinated compounds - refrigerants), yet extremely potent.

Currently, the United States does not regulate the emission of a single molecule of carbon dioxide even though the U.S. emits 25% of the world's carbon dioxide (with 5% of the global population). However, the Kyoto Protocol went into effect February 2005 and there are now eight carbon markets in Europe, the largest of which is the European Climate Exchange. The Kyoto Protocol uses a cap and trade system, with one share of carbon equaling one ton of carbon. The current cost of one share is 26.95 euros while the penalty for emitting without a permit is 40 euros. Slowly, the penalties rise and the number of shares decrease. This incentivises investment in energy sources that do not emit carbon (wind, solar, nuclear).

What's going on in the U.S.?
There is a multi-prong approach to this problem, taken on by the States, since the policy of the Bush Administration and the federal government is to do nothing.

RGGI
A 7-10 state coalition (MD, PA, MA, and RI have joined, dropped out, joined again, etc.) in the N.E., called the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), announced its final plans in January to create a cap and trade system. It will work similarly to the Kyoto Protocol.

California PUC
California has a very aggressive 45 year plan to reduce GHG emissions to 80% below those of 1990. California matters because only 9 nations emit more carbon than California alone. The plan was initiated by Gov. Schwarzenegger and is now being developed by the California Public Utilities Commission. The first stage goal is to attain 2000 carbon dioxide emission levels by 2010, 1990 levels by 2020, and 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. (Word document explaining goals and process).

Litigation
8 States' Attorneys General have come together to sue the 5 largest carbon emitters under a common law action of nuisance (air pollution). This is one of the only options for now since the EPA will not enforce GHG emissions under the Clean Air Act (there are other significant lawsuits against the EPA in process right now too). The suit is making its way through the federal court system. At issue in the upcoming argument before the 2d Circuit is whether or not the federal common law claim of nuisance will succeed. I think that the argument is in June. Should that suit succeed it will put tremendous pressure on the emitters, who will then lobby the federal gov't to do something on a national level.

Update: article on the 10-state suit against the EPA

Of course these state by state approaches are terribly inefficient, but luckily we have some very dedicated people who are laying the groundwork for a system of carbon emissions regulation.

Remember the Ozone Hole? Well, its still there and will be for a long time, but it will eventually repair itself due to cooperative international efforts to completely eliminate chloroflurocarbons. Remember acid rain? We still have it, but not as bad as it could have been had sulfur dioxide not been regulated. With international cooperation we can do the same for global warming.

There is so much to be said on this issue - I have presented only the most basic overview of current efforts to overcome our polluting practices. My feeling is that there is hope on this issue - people are working hard, attitudes are changing, and eventually we will have a working system in place so that our grandchildren's world is not too hot (and all the consequences that go along with that - a whole 'nother can of worms).