Climate-warming pollution dips
It seems that emissions of climate-changing greenhouse gases took a dip in Maryland even before lawmakers in Annapolis agreed to reduce them.
Relying on federal data, Environment Maryland reports that carbon dioxide emissions in the Old Line State from burning fossil fuels declined 6 percent from 2004 through 2007. Maryland was in good company - 16 other states also trimmed their emissions of carbon dioxide from fossil fuel use in that time period, according to the environmental group's latest report.
The decline is interesting because it predates the recession, which experts say has dampened energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions because of reduced economic activity. The US Energy Information Administration, for instance, projects that carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel use nationwide are likely to be 5.9 percent lower this year than last.
Environment Maryland says the decline in carbon dioxide emissions in Maryland and other states shows that climate-warming pollution can be reduced without harming the economy. The group is pressing Congress to pass legislation aimed at curtailing emissions nationwide while promoting energy efficiency and renewables. Much of the debate in Washington is over how much that will increase the costs of energy and whether that will hurt the economy at a time when the nation is still grappling with high unemployment.
Environment Maryland suggests that carbon dioxide emissions dropped in states with policies and standards promoting energy efficiency. Maryland, which ranks 10th in per capita carbon dioxide emissions, came in 12th in a 2008 rating of its policies by the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, a Washington-based advocacy group.
But all that happened before Maryland lawmakers approved the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Act this year aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions in the state, and even before the state approved EmPower energy-efficiency legislation in 2008 that was pushed by the O'Malley administration. It was that bill aimed at achieving a 15 percent reduction in per capita energy consumption by 2015, that helped Maryland earn its relatively high ranking on energy efficiency.
I'm wondering if there weren't other factors at play in the 2004-2007 dip in CO2 emissions than a conscious attempt to improve energy efficiency or deal with climate change. The decline apparently happened largely as a result of power plants switching from coal and oil to natural gas and other cleaner-burning fuels. Could that switch have stemmed from government regulation of conventional air pollutants, which also are generated by burning fossil fuels, and big jumps in oil prices in the run-up to the recession?
Even if so, it's still noteworthy that climate-warming pollution dropped in Maryland and some other states while economic growth continued (albeit unsustainably).
Comments
I think people have been cutting their energy use since the 1970s. Anyone younger than 40 years old probably have no concept of what the oil embargo did to the concepts about "peak oil."
If we replace coal and oil with something else, coal and oil industries will shed jobs.
Weapons manufacturers will also shed jobs because we will no longer be using the military to support oil operations.
Additionally, without a perceived war(there is no war in Afghanistan or Iraq), there is little need to grow an all voluntary force. The lack of soldiering as an economic option for all these unemployed people will be real.
Having said that, its about time for those economies to collapse.
The solution is obvious, return a manufacturing base to the US economy or suffer incredible poverty in the upcoming "clean energy wars".
You can only have "so many" bankers and insurance giants(middlemen skimming cash but providing no service) before your economy has no foundation of goods to be based upon.
I think China can do their own banking and insurance in the future, what will America have? Hollywood? Corn?
Posted by: Earl_E | November 12, 2009 1:01 PM
I think we're seeing in Maryland a good start of what kind of approach we need to adress our greenhouse gas pollution; we've eneacted statewide efficiency policies, passed the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Act of 2009, both of which will save tremendous amounts of energy and create new jobs. But belieing these legislative achievments is the constant, proactive and tireless work of individual buisnesses, schools and nonprofit organizations. I've been fortunate enough to land one of those "green jobs" at St. Mary's College of Maryland, working for the last several months as someone whose sole job is to work on sustainable initiatives. In the past four years, St. Mary's has reduced its institutional carbon footprint substantially (preventing 16,000 tons of CO2 last year alone from being emitted)
Yesterday, Environment Maryland released its report, "Too Much Pollution" at St. Mary's College because St. Mary's serves as a microcosm within the laudable microcosm of Maryland.“St. Mary’s College has achieved on a small scale what the world needs to achieve on a larger scale,” said David Kung, associate professor of mathematics at SMCM. “Climate change requires us all to make better choices, from our own personal lives to our collective choices as Americans and as responsible global citizens. Contrary to the climate-change denialists, many of these changes will save money.”
I'm proud to live in a state and work in an institution that is proactivly dealing with climate change, but also know that the inchoate success of the past years comes to very little if we do not maintain a high level of sustained action to reduce pollution and create new jobs for Marylanders.
Posted by: Shane S. | November 13, 2009 8:32 AM
St. Mary's College of Maryland (SMCM) has reduced its CO2 emissions by 80 percent this year largely driven by student initiatives. The student body purchased Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) at a cost of about $50,000 to offset 100 percent of the carbon emissions produced by the college's electricity consumption (12,000 tons of CO2 saved). The Northeast Energy Services Company, Inc. (NORESCO) program of upgrading college facilities to save energy cut CO2 emissions by 2430 tons. The LEED-certified Goodpaster Hall reduced CO2 emissions by 610 tons. The James P. Muldoon River Center has a student-sponsored geothermal HVAC system that cuts CO2 emissions by 270 tons. The new Glendening Building has "green" features that reduce CO2 emissions by 125 tons. These and other innovations have allowed the college, which would have produced 19,500 tons of CO2 over the last year, to offset over 15,000 tons of CO2 emissions. As a result the college produced just of 4000 tons of CO2.
"The students at the college are part of a nationwide movement that is redefining the way society views environmentalism," said Emily Saari '12, co-president of the college's Student Environmental Action Coalition (SEAC). "We are tackling issues of climate change and clean energy, and creating opportunities for greater social change. This national environmental movement of which we are a part of is visionary, diverse, passionate, hopeful, and - most importantly - young: we are taking responsibility for the world we are soon to inherit."
Posted by: marc | November 13, 2009 3:05 PM