By Taliah Dommerholt
As Pope Francis eloquently reiterated in his recent encyclical, global warming is one of the biggest problems of today. We are seeing higher rates of temperature change than ever before and human beings around the world are already feeling the negative impacts associated with such drastic climate change. Maybe I’m overly optimistic, but I truly believe that most of us want to see change or partake in the fight for the environment, whether due to air pollution-related health problems they or their loved ones must endure, out of concern for future generations, or a belief in the intrinsic value of nature--the list is endless. The thing about climate change is that the problem is exceedingly multifaceted and the power of action (or inaction) is difficult to comprehend. Luckily, there are some incredibly intelligent people out there who have formulated a plan that could result in vital change, and they are currently working to empower communities across the United States with a program known as the Solutions Project.
The Solutions Project is a national nonprofit organization that recently launched the 100% Campaign, a campaign designed to promote the transition to 100% wind, water, and solar power (WWS) by 2050 in all 50 states (in exciting news, the Sierra Club just formally announced its advocacy goal of getting the country to 100% clean electricity by 2030 - check out page 7 of that link). Although the ultimate objective may seem far-fetched, the campaign is by no means unfounded; it is based on extensive calculations conducted by Mark Z. Jacobson, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford University, and his associate researchers. It is the first study to provide a comprehensive outline of how each state can make the transition, and it begins by clearly defining what constitutes “renewable energy.” Clean, renewable sources are those that have the highest efficiency potentials, will benefit human and environmental health, and can contribute to economic stability; the list pointedly excludes all fossil fuels, biofuels, and nuclear sources. Researchers then made state-by-state estimates of the future energy demand for all-purpose systems including electricity, transportation, heating and cooling, and industry, if production and consumption continues in a business-as-usual (BAU) case and then in a WWS case. These estimates were determined by analyzing current energy usage of the residential, commercial, industrial, and transportation sectors in each state and then calculating how demand would change if sources were entirely electric. In total, end-use demand could decrease by an average of 39% in each state by 2050, with Maryland at a whopping 42% decrease.
The next step involved the creation of transition timelines for each state, after determining the renewable resources most accessible for each state and how to best plan utility infrastructures. Researchers examined sun and wind exposure, availability of geothermal energy, access to water bodies, and so on. In Maryland, a total switch to WWS electricity has a projected energy mix consisting mainly of offshore wind (60%) and solar PV plants (22.2%), as well as residential, commercial, and government rooftop PV (10%) and then some onshore wind, hydroelectric, and wave devices. What’s pretty cool is that we already have these technologies--they are viable alternatives. The timeline also includes policy suggestions and ways to improve energy efficiency, while considering factors like land use, job statistics, and health needs. In summary, the Stanford study advocates replacing 80-85% of all-purpose energy systems by 2030, and then replacing 100% by 2050, as mentioned above. To achieve these goals, researchers call for the termination of construction of all fossil fuel and other unsustainable resources by 2020 and between 2025 and 2030, they say all new vehicles must be electrified. The study concludes that technologically- and economically-speaking, we have the means and capacity for implementation across the United States, but a successful transition will require drastic changes from all angles, particularly in regard to energy demand, consumer culture, and state infrastructures.
The 100% Campaign describes itself as a “public awareness, consumer choice and social good campaign that invites you and everyone to help make new clean energy more accessible and affordable for all.” It is an opportunity to convey information to the public, in an effort to overcome social and political barriers and unite everyone in an effort for a plausible cause. A major objective of the campaign is to bring communities together, in a fight to overcome various boundaries and give the world and its inhabitants a better future. The campaign events feature interactive activities, celebrity appearances, solar-powered street food, and numerous other components that focus on community engagement and calls to action. A centerpiece of the campaign is to help consumers switch to clean energy by making the process more comprehensible and affordable, and showing how imperative it is that each individual make personal contributions. The strong focus on community involvement takes a bottom-up approach to the issue and will hopefully spark a national dialogue that emphasizes policy reform and a social responsibility to present and future generations.
The campaign will not come without conflict of interests. A common aversion to such drastic changes is the fear the jobs will be sacrificed, but what is so beautiful about renewable energy is that sunlight and wind aren’t going anywhere. The study predicts that the United States would have approximately 3.9 million new 40-year construction jobs and 2 million 40-year operation jobs, outweighing the 3.9 million conventional energy jobs lost. In Maryland specifically, the transition would create 51,557 construction and 35,993 operation 40-year jobs. In addition, the land use requirements to implement new technologies would take up approximately 0.42% of total land area and would probably occupy sparsely inhabited areas.
There are also significant health benefits. Converting to 100% by 2050 would reduce premature mortalities attributed to air pollution by approximately 62,000 annual deaths today, 1,350 of those occurring in Maryland. The transition could save the country approximately $600 billion/year by 2050 with reduced health, environmental damage, and energy costs, Maryland specifically saving $12.6 billion, or 2% of its GDP. To put these numbers into the global perspective, this would save the world an estimated $3.3 trillion/year spent on global warming costs caused by United States emissions in 2050. Not too shabby!
But still, is it really possible? Stanford researchers have predicted that the plan will be able to pay for itself in as little as four years in the State of Maryland, and though upfront costs can be expensive, the temporal cost will not differ significantly from fuel costs, and in my opinion, the benefits are priceless. Even with celebrities Mark Ruffalo and Leonardo Dicaprio at the forefront and some pretty impressive statistics, this can only become a reality when each and everyone of us takes a stance. In a Google Talk featuring Jacobson, Marco Krapels (Senior Vice President at SolarCity and co-founder of Empowered By Light), and Mark Ruffalo (actor and activist), Ruffalo states that “it’s about education because the truth is, we are technologically poised to [transition]...but there’s an enormous political lobbying structure in place in this country that is telling us that we can’t do it and that we are bound to be a fossil fuel nation.”This makes me angry, and I hope it makes you angry too. It is up to government authorities to represent we as a people, not the corporation. It’s not an exaggeration to say that it’s up to us and environmental organizations like the Sierra Club to make it clear to policy-makers that we want change, and some good places to start are with expanding and promoting clean Renewable Energy Standards, adopting legislation to incentivize or mandate new developments and investments, issuing WWS tax credits, or raising taxes to phase out current utilities (If you’re interested in the full list of Recommended first steps, see page 2113).
I think organizing for environmental change is often difficult because there is not always a foreseeable goal or a target to strive for that feels impactful on a wide scale. The 100% campaign is different because it has communicated exactly what its purpose is, and its message is positive and confident that if we come together as a community, we can enact change. The environmental movement may be daunting, but it also has the unique capacity to unite people from all different walks of life because in the end, climate change doesn’t discriminate.
Join the efforts by participating on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram with #100isNow and @100isNow. Power to the people!
Taliah