Environment / Energy
What a treasure we have here in this sliver of
the planet we call our home.
Wisconsinites understand, probably better than most, that we are merely stewards
of this great gift for the next generation and
all the generations to come.
What’s the worst that could happen if we made
Wisconsin
“green”? Well, the air would
become cleaner, and the water would become cleaner, and we’d take a
giant step forward toward a sustainable future.
Some people think that doing the right thing for the environment
would damage our economy.
Wrong. Let’s look at what
happened in Portland,
Oregon.
In 1993, Portland
became the first local government in the US to adopt a plan to address global
warming. Joined by Multnomah County in 2001, the revised plan,
Local Action Plan on Global
Warming, outlined over one hundred long- and short-term actions to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Despite rapid population and economic growth, last year local
emissions fell below 1990 levels (the benchmark year established in the
Kyoto Protocol), an achievement unequalled in any other major US city.
These accomplishments are the result of a diverse array of
efforts spanning public agencies, local businesses, nonprofit
organizations, and citizens.
Without going into the details of the plan and its successes, which are
numerous and impressive, one of the more pleasant by-products of the
program was the emergence of new industries which have sprung up in
response to the need for the new technologies to implement their
strategies, spurring economic growth and creating new jobs in the
Portland area. [For
more information see
http://www.portlandonline.com/osd/index.cfm]
The good news is that Portland is not alone.
Since February 2005 when the Kyoto Protocol went into effect for
the 141 ratifying nations, 672 US
cities have joined the US Mayors
Climate Protection Agreement, pledging to meet the Kyoto Protocol in
a bipartisan alliance spearheaded by Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels.
The best news is that 15 Wisconsin
cities have signed on.
The bad news is that our federal government has yet to
take any action. In every
State of the Union address
he’s ever given, President Bush has talked about our dependence on
foreign oil. Yet we’ve
become more dependent each year of his presidency.
By September 2006, 70% of the oil used in the
US
was imported and in September 2007 the price of that oil rose to a
record $83 a barrel. It’s
time we really do something about it.
Wisconsin depends heavily on three polluting
energy sources that are produced entirely out of state: coal, natural
gas, and oil. Each year,
Wisconsinites spend over $9 billion on importing energy — more than half
of which goes toward petroleum products (including heating oil,
gasoline, and diesel fuel) whose costs are likely to rise as a result of
global resource depletion, and are highly unstable due to natural
disasters and political upheaval in producing regions.
According to the Center on
Wisconsin Strategy, a comprehensive energy policy for the state should
include four parts: energy
efficiency, including the state’s public and private buildings;
renewably generated electricity; efficient vehicles and renewable
automotive fuels; and smart metropolitan growth and regional transit
policies.
On June 26, 2007, Governor Doyle announced the
creation of the Great Lakes
Bioenergy
Research
Center at the
University
of Wisconsin – Madison.
Partnering with universities and research institutions across the
country, the GLBRC is charged with developing innovative biotechnology
solutions to our energy needs, as part of the governor’s larger POWER
Initiative. According to the
US Department of Energy, Wisconsin could replace
over 13 million tons of coal if it converted the 15 million tons of
biomass in the state.
The Canadian Office of Energy Efficiency, in
cooperation with agencies and private industry across Canada, has done extensive research in hydrogen
fuel cells, establishing
Canada
as a world leader in the development and commercialization of hydrogen.
Hydrogen is what “fuels” the sun.
Hydrogen has the highest energy content per unit of weight of any
known fuel, is abundantly available from such sources as water, and when
used in a fuel cell its only “waste” is
water (from The Whitehouse Fact Sheet
Hydrogen Fuel: a Clean and
Secure Energy Future).
NASA has used hydrogen fuel cells in spacecraft since the 1960s.
Considerable research needs yet to be done, but hydrogen promises
to be one of the best hopes for the future.
The proposal has been put forward that we need an
“Apollo Program” for our energy policy.
President Kennedy announced in 1961 the goal “… before this
decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to
Earth.” That goal was
accomplished on July 20, 1969.
What amazing things we can do when we focus our energies and
resources. We need this kind
of concentration again. If
this had been done in response to the “Oil Crisis of 1973”, we’d all be
driving electric cars by now.
Instead, ExxonMobil and Chevron make record profits as gas prices
soar.
Consider the boon to the economy as we wean ourselves
off fossil fuels. The
research and development needed for new technologies will create
high-tech, high-paying jobs; the implementation of these technologies
will spawn new companies, again creating new jobs; the auto industry
would become revitalized as it engineers new vehicles to respond to the
new fuels; once-closed plants could be reopened to manufacture wind
turbines or solar panels; etc, etc, etc.
Oh, and the environment would dramatically improve.
Yes, it will take a huge investment and dedicated commitment, but
everybody wins!
We need a massive
energy initiative that includes conservation, efficiency, renewable
resources, waste reduction, and a sustainable future.
We need to fix the environment now and for future generations.
It is simply the right thing to do.
