Terrence Mullens

OutlineGlobal/International PoliciesFederal/National PoliciesState/City/Local PoliciesPersonal Policies (i.e. What YOU are doing)

Recall…IPCC

Assessments suggest human influence on climateUse climate models to predict future temp changes

Kyoto ProtocolIn effect in Feb 2005Sets emission targets for 37 industrialized nationsReduce GHG emissions 5% below 1990No target for developing countriesUS did not signExpires next year! Several possible successors have been considered

(Copenhagen, 2009, Washington, 2007)

ChallengesOne of the biggest challenges is how to allow

developing countries to continue their growth without increasing Greenhouse Gasses.

Kyoto practically allowed for them to use whatever means necessary to develop, while asking developed countries to reduce their emissions.Seems very fair, but it’s the reason why the

United States did not sign it.

UN Climate Change Conference“Copenhagen Summit” or COP157-18 December 2009 in Copenhagen, DenmarkFollow-up to Kyoto protocol

Intent to establish policy beyond 2012A follow-up to many UN CCC’s

Bali Roadmap created at COP13 in Bali, Indonesia in 2007

Says binding agreements to be made at Copenhagen

High expectations for legally binding agreements at Copenhagen!

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon

Israeli President ShimonPeres

Copenhagen AccordDrafted by US, China, India, Brazil, South AfricaPrimary stipulations:

Keep global temp increase below 2°CCut GHG emissions (each country to establish their

reduction goals)Raise funds to help developing countries grow

sustainablyReduce deforestation and promote sustainable land

useUS proposed to cut GHG levels by 17% below

2005 levels by 2020

Problems of Copenhagen AccordNot legally binding, no firm commitments

madeMany countries (especially developing)

oppose, as well as NGO’sCountries stated their proposed actions, but

no agreement reachedMany perceive COP15 and Copenhagen

Accord as a failure.

Copenhagen AccordFierce negotiations took place during

conference, near end of conference it seemed no agreements could be reached

Large protests, 40,000-100,000 peoplePeople wanted “strong and binding

agreement” between countries on climate change mitigation

By end of Jan 2010, 140 countries “agreed” to Copenhagen accord

Copenhagen accordFurther negotiations have occurred and are

planned. COP 16 in Cancun, Mexico in 2010COP 17 in South Africa in 2011Either Qatar or South Korea in 2012It’s quite likely that the 2012 meeting will be

soon enough to prevent a gap in the commitment periods between Kyoto and Copenhagen

Other attemptsWashington Declaration, 2007 (aka the G8 + 5)

A NON-BINDING agreement between most developed countries, as well as several developing countries. (The U.S., U.K., Russia, France, Germany, Italy, Canada, and Japan (G8), and Brazil, China, India, Mexico, and South Africa) Global cap-and-trade system that would apply to both

developed and developing countries. Hoped to have this in place by 2009… obviously we all

know that didn’t happen. This agreement obviously leaves out many other

foreign countries

Assembly Bill 32California Global Warming Solutions Act Signed by Gov. Schwarzenneger 2006Sets 2020 emissions reduction goal as a

law1990 emission levels target for 2020

Stipulations of AB 32Firm limit on emissions for all consumers/producersPer capita reduction from 14 tons CO2/year to 10

tons/yearReduction in 30% of vehicle GHG emissions by

2016Improved appliance efficiency standardsAdd 1 million solar roofs, alternative energy

sourcesAdopt green building practices, green existing

buildings for efficiencyMore efficient agricultural equipment, distributionEmissions audit for largest 800 emitters in CA Reduce methane from landfills with high recycling,

zero waste programs

Opposition to AB 32Concern it will cost small businesses money,

place restrictions on small businessConcern it will drive business and industry out

of stateGreen jobs fastest growing job market in CA!

Concern it will add thousands to household bills/homeowner costsEfficient appliances, buildings reduce bills

AB 32 rules and market mechanisms to take effect Jan 1, 2012, and become legally enforceable!

Proposition 23Called the “California Jobs Initiative” by it’s

supporters and the “Dirty Energy Initiative” by opponents.

If passed, it would have suspended the implementation of AB 32 until the state’s unemployment rate dropped below 5.5% for four consecutive quarters (a fiscal year)This has only occurred four times in the past 30

years… so essentially, Prop 23 would have killed AB 32 for quite a while.

Proponents argued that it would spur job creation by making the state more business friendly.

Prop 23 Protests

Is reducing environmental regulations the only thing that creates jobs?Does the money saved by companies due to

deregulation even go into job creation?

What are alternative ways of creating jobs?Outsourcing?Green Jobs?“Stimulus Projects”?Infrastructure improvements?

San Jose Green VisionWithin 15 years, the City of San José in tandem with its residents and businesses will:1. Create 25,000 Clean Tech jobs as the World Center of Clean Tech Innovation2. Reduce per capita energy use by 50 percent3. Receive 100 percent of our electrical power from clean renewable sources4. Build or retrofit 50 million square feet of green buildings5. Divert 100 percent of the waste from our landfill and convert waste to energy6. Recycle or beneficially reuse 100 percent of our wastewater (100 million gallons per day)7. Adopt a General Plan with measurable standards for sustainable development8. Ensure that 100 percent of public fleet vehicles run on alternative fuels9. Plant 100,000 new trees and replace 100 percent of our streetlights with smart, zero-emission lighting10. Create 100 miles of interconnected trails

San Jose Green VisionTry to keep San Jose at forefront of innovationMeasurable goals! Helps with public

motivationLaunched in 2007Give incentives for clean tech companiesIncentives for solar panelsImprove transit systemAdopt and encourage efficiency products

(ex: lighting)Green building ordinancesIncrease recycled H2O

Thin film solar technology

San Jose energy use goals

How San Jose’s doing

Other Policies:Carbon OffsetsPeople can purchase carbon offsets to reduce

their carbon footprintEx- flight to Europe adds 3-4 tons to your

carbon footprint!Purchase carbon credits at $5-$20 per ton to

“offset” carbon emitted by your actionsCarbon trade companies invest in projects

that reduce GHG’sInstall windmills, geothermal, solar energy

projects

Carbon Trade CompaniesMake sure you use a reputable company.

Research their standards and practices.Gold Standard companies adhere to strictest

regulationsSome notable, respected companies:

Airshed (New Zealand)Climate Care (UK)GEQ (Chile)ZeroCO2 (Canada)Native Energy (US)

Compliance vs. Voluntary MarketSome businesses, governments are required

to purchase carbon offsets under Kyoto Protocol if not meeting their goals

Compliance marketLarge share of carbon tradeCountries/governments can trade with

countries with carbon surplus or purchase credits

Most businesses, local governments, NGO’s and individuals part of voluntary market

Trading volumes much smallerNo established rules, regulations. Purchasing

credits to help reduce GHG’s

rebates and incentives

Local and Federal government programs offer rebates and incentives to individuals and small businesses

Not manditoryDesigned to increase efficiency and lower

amount of energy used by individual/businessMain categories:

Building materialsAppliancesEnergyWater

Examples of Rebates/IncentivesPhotovoltaics (solar) installed on home or business

Tax credit of 30% of cost from US Dept of EnergyFrom excess solar energy created by your system

$1.10-1.90 per watt given to public utility system from CA Public Utilities Commission

Energy efficient building materials (roofing, doors, insulation, windows, lightingRebates both local and federal

Rebates for energy efficient appliances (Energy Star)

In Monterey County, $25 rebate per 100 gallons up to 25,000 gallons for installing water catchment system

Challenges to a “Carbon-Friendly” LifestyleMuch of the carbon-friendly infrastructure is

still considered extremely costly to individuals. Toyota Prius: $23,250Solar Panel instillation: at least $8,000 (Before

30% credit)Even more energy-friendly appliances are most

costly… though those costs can quickly be offset by energy savings… so there is a benefit.

More practical ways to reduce carbon footprint…Eat more energy efficient foods

Chicken, Fish, and especially vegetables are much more carbon-friendly

More practical ways…Traveling a short distance (say, less than 5

miles)? Ride a bike, or walk!Longer distance? Public Transportation and

Carpools are great!Here in the Bay area, we have an excellent

public transportation system, making it easy to get around, even long distances.

Traveling even further?Consider taking the

train!While it takes longer, it

is about 20% more energy efficient than flying, and about 30% more than driving. (Source: US Department of Energy)

In addition to being more efficient, taking the train offers some great views!

The Green NinjaAn inter-departmental

effort between the SJSU College of Science and the College of Humanities and Arts.

A “Climate Action Superhero” who battles Global Warming by showing people how to live more energy-efficient lifes.

The Green Ninja: Pilot Episodehttp://www.youtube.com/user/

GreenNinjaTV#p/a/u/1/b1olSYWclvI

ConclusionsThe Global Policy Issue in dealing with climate

change deals with allowing developing countries to develop.

The Federal/State Policy Issue in dealing with climate change deals with creating an eco-friendly yet economical/job-creating state.

The more local and individual policy issues deal with both affording eco-friendly infrastructure and lifestyles as well as encouraging more practical steps to reducing carbon footprints.

Final thoughtsWhile Climate Change and Environmental issues are

often sensationalized into major issues such as GLOBAL warming and GLOBAL/FEDERAL steps to counteract it, this perspective makes it hard for us to feel like we can/do make a difference.

An alternative approach is to incorporate a more individualistic view on what can be done. In other words, don’t get overwhelmed with the big picture. Seek many smaller steps in your own life to make the

world a better place, such as using your car less, or recycling, or even by not littering. If everyone did this, the larger problems wouldn’t be so large.

ResourcesAir Resources Board www.ARB.ca.govCOP15 www.denmark.dk/en.cop15.dkGreen Vision San Jose

www.greenvision.sanjose.govUS Department of Energy www.energysavers.govTufts Climate Initiative

http://www.tufts.edu/tie/carbonoffsetsEnvironmental Protection Agency www.epa.govGold Standard www.cdmgoldstandard.orgWikipedia www.en.wikipedia.orgThe Green Ninja http://www.greenninja.org/

Participation

You have discussed challenges we face with climate change and ways to mitigate climate change and greenhouse gas emissions

Write down:3 things the US/California/San Jose could do to limit

global warming 3 things YOU can do as people/consumers/students

to reduce GHG and limit global warmingWas this lecture clearer/more

understandable/better overall from my last one or not? More suggestions.

If we have time…Let’s discuss this!

What can we do to heal our planet?What are some challenges to doing so? What

are some excuses to doing so?Do you really think pollution creates jobs? Or

just profit?Why should we even care? Political, Moral,

Religious reasons? Stewardship reasons (Being smart with what we have)?