Snapshot of Virginia - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


PPT – Snapshot of Virginia PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 7b7bdb-Y2I4M


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation

Snapshot of Virginia


Snapshot of Virginia s GHG Activities Ensuring Environmental Justice, Efficiency and Efficacy When Developing Virginia's Response to Climate Change – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:29
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 49
Provided by: thomasj171


Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Snapshot of Virginia

Snapshot of Virginias GHG Activities Ensuring
Environmental Justice, Efficiency and Efficacy
When Developing Virginia's Response to Climate
Change Session V - Tuesday, October 16,2007,
Responses130 500 pm Climate Change GHG
Inventories Management Emerging Regulation and
Responses David W. Schnare, Esq. Ph.D., Senior
Energy and Environmental Fellow Thomas Jefferson
Institute for Public Policy
A Starting Point for Evaluation of Virginias
Energy Plan
  • Assume global warming will cause catastrophic
    ocean level rise within decades.
  • Recognize the inevitability of preventing this
    catastrophe through geo-engineering at minimal

  • The First Three
  • Catastrophic Events
  • Greenland Ice Sheet Collapse
  • West Antarctic Ice Sheet Collapse
  • East Antarctic Ice Sheet Melt

Time Scale of the Greenland Ice Sheet Destruction
300 1,000 years IPCC (2001) 100 300 years
Hansen (2005) IPCC (2007) 20 40 years Hansen
(2007) Flannery (2007)
If we have not already passed the dangerous
level, the energy infrastructure in place ensures
that we will pass it within decades not
centuries. James Hansen NASA (Aug. 2007)
We passed the tipping point in 2005 Tim
Flannery (Aus.) (Oct. 2007)
  • Greenland Ice Sheet will melt at 2ºC
  • 2ºC Temperature rise at 440 ppm
  • 2005 C02 levels 455 ppm

The inevitability of geo-engineering
Preventing a planet wide meltdown is not a goal
that can be achieved with current energy
technology. We need to admit that and start
thinking about geo-engineering." Professor Marty
Hoffert, New York University.
We need an alternative to the policy myopia that
sees emission reductions as the sole path to
climate change abatement. Jay Michaelson (JD
MANHATTAN PROJECT, Stanford Environmental Law
Efforts by societies to restrain their greenhouse
gas emissions might be politically infeasible on
a global scale, or might fail. In this
eventuality, other options may be incapable of
countering the effects, and geo-engineering
strategies might be needed. National Academy of
Science Policy Implications of Greenhouse
Warming (1992)
The very best would be if emissions of the
greenhouse gases could be reduced so much that
the geo-engineering would not need to take place.
Currently, this looks like a pious
wish. Paul J. Crutzen, Nobel Laureate for his
work on the ozone hole
Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming NAS
1992 1.  Does it appear feasible that
engineered systems could actually mitigate the
effects of greenhouse gases?
NAS 1992 Response -
Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming NAS
2.  Does it appear that the proposed systems
might be carried out by feasible technical means
at reasonable costs?
NAS 1992 Response -
Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming NAS
3.  Do the proposed systems have effects, besides
the sought-after effects, that might be adverse,
and can these be accepted or dealt with?
We Dont Know
NAS 1992 Response -
Caldeira 2006 -
Apparently no significant local climate changes,
and no harm from particles
Caldeira (Stanford U.) concluded that shading the
sunlight directly over the polar ice cap by less
than twenty-five percent would maintain the
"natural" level of ice in the Arctic, even with a
doubling of atmospheric CO2 levels. By increasing
the shading to fifty percent, and the ice shelves
grow. Further, the restoration happens fast.
Within five years, the temperature would drop by
almost two degrees, stabilizing the ice, saving
the polar bears and the Inuit population, and
demonstrating the efficacy of planetary
engineering for 1/36th the amount appropriated
to assist in recovery of the hurricane flooding
disaster in New Orleans. Because the aerosols
are launched only over the Arctic, there is
little danger of directly impacting humans. As
well, the approach is incremental and can be
expanded or shut down at will so that temperature
effects dissipate within months, returning the
region to its "natural" state.
(No Transcript)
The Relative Cost of GHG Reduction and
Marginal Cost per Carbon Ton Equivalent
GHG Reduction 1,400.
Geo-Engineering 0.02
The Relative Cost of GHG Reduction and
Annual Per capita Cost (world population)
GHG Reduction 470.
Geo-Engineering (pv40) 0.003
The economics of geo-engineering arethere is no
better word for itincredible. Scott Barrett,
Johns Hopkins The geo-engineering option may be
considered costless. William Nordhaus,
Yale Cost would not play any significant role in
a decision to deploy geo-engineering because
the cost of any such system is trivial compared
to the cost of other mitigation options. Prof.
D.W. Keith, University of Calgary
With the inevitable use of geo-engineering to
prevent catastrophic ocean level rise understood,
Lets turn to some background on Environmental
Justice Only then can we examine what do we do
about greenhouse gas emissions?
Who are Virginias Minorities and Poor?
(No Transcript)
(No Transcript)
(No Transcript)
(No Transcript)
2007 HHS Poverty Guidelines
Persons In Family or Household Poverty Level
1 10,210
2 13,690
3 17,170
4 20,650
SOURCE  Federal Register, Vol. 72, No. 15,
January 24, 2007, pp. 31473148
The Relative Cost of GHG Reduction and
Annual Per capita Cost (world population)
GHG Reduction 470.
Geo-Engineering (pv40) 0.003
Environmental Justice Goal
No segment of the population, regardless of race,
color, national origin or economic status,
suffers disproportionately from adverse human
health or environmental effects, and all people
live in clean, healthy, and sustainable
Environmental Justice Policies
  • Ensure those who live with environmental
    decisions have every opportunity for
    participation in the making of those decisions.
  • Craft regulations to ensure the distribution of
    human health, social, and economic impacts of
    rules and programs do not fall disproportionately
    on minorities and the poor.

Practical Environmental Justice - I -
  • When developing regulatory alternatives, conduct
    and publish for public comment Environmental
    justice assessments comprehensive analyses of
    the potential disproportionately high and adverse
    impacts arising from a proposed activity that
    will fall upon minorities and the poor.

Practical Environmental Justice - II -
  • Balance social programs to ensure sustainability
    of the community, the culture and the
  • Do not impose impacts whose costs make the
    benefits of the action irrelevant.

Practical Environmental Justice - III -
  • Do not allow adverse environmental impacts to
    fall disproportionately on those least able to
  • Impose only affordable costs, in the context of
    all social needs.

Evaluation of the Virginia Energy Plan
Overall Score -- ????? The Plan is practical,
realistic, fair, economic and honest. It
accounts for those who most need environmental
justice while addressing the public concern about
global warming. If fails to the degree that it
poses as a solution to global warming.
Evaluation of the Virginia Energy Plan
Affected People Participation -- ????? Only
2 of 35 represented the people directly affected
by the plan. There were several environmental
organizations, but their interests conflict with
the pocket book interests of the poor.
Evaluation of the Virginia Energy Plan
  • Proportionality of
  • Impacts -- ?????
  • Low-income weatherization assistance
  • Fraud protection
  • Increase consumer education

Evaluation of the Virginia Energy Plan
  • Cost-efficiency and
  • Affordability -- ?????
  • Industry-implemented efficiency/
    conservation/demand management (cost-efficiency
  • Objective validation of efforts

Evaluation of the Virginia Energy Plan
  • Reliance on Market and
  • Market-based Incentives -- ?????
  • Expanded Energy Star approach that shows energy
    use of products
  • Education and promotion of voluntary, rather than
    regulatory programs.

Evaluation of the Virginia Energy Plan
  • Environmental Justice
  • Evaluations -- ?????
  • Any portfolio of electric energy conservation
    activities should be evaluated for cost
    effectiveness. Virginia should use a mix of the
    Total Resource Cost Test, Societal Test,
    Utility/Program Administrator Test, Participant
    Test, and Rate Impact Measure Test.

Evaluation of the Virginia Energy Plan
  • Balancing of
  • Social Programs -- ?????
  • Increase tax-benefits for consumer investments in
    energy efficiency contingent on acceptable
    revenue impact.

Evaluation of the Virginia Energy Plan
  • Why Not Five Stars?
  • Transit oriented development doesnt actually
  • Higher density for LEED projects transportation
    effects not included, and competitive programs.
  • Conservation easements has nothing to do with
    energy and increased density in wrong place.
  • Subsidize tipping fees for waste to energy
    projects these should pay for themselves.
  • Hybrids on HOV work best at lowest speeds.

Evaluation of Executive Order 48 (2007)
  • Rating ?????
  • A mixture of cost-effectiveness and green-washing
    with good management diluted by political

Evaluation of Executive Order 48 (2007)
  • Aggressively pursue
  • all energy-savings activities whose costs are
    recoverable in one fiscal year, such as use of
    screw-in fluorescent and other high-efficiency
    lighting in place of incandescent bulbs and other
    less efficient lights

Rating ?????
Evaluation of Executive Order 48 (2007)
  • Aggressively pursue
  • Renovations of existing buildings consistent with
    LEED (including the use of Virginia forest
    products with alternate certifications)

Rating ????? (Only if cost-effective)
Evaluation of Executive Order 48 (2007)
  • Actively Pursue
  • Energy Star requirements

Rating ?????
Evaluation of Executive Order 48 (2007)
  • Aggressively pursue
  • Purchases of renewable energy.

Rating ????? (Only if cost-effective)
Evaluation of Executive Order 48 (2007)
  • Actively Pursue
  • Every Agency Energy Manager for an agency or
    institution with energy costs exceeding 1
    million shall be certified as an energy manager
    by the Association of Energy Engineers by June
    30, 2008.

Rating ?????
Snapshot of Virginias GHG Activities Ensuring
Environmental Justice, Efficiency and Efficacy
When Developing Virginia's Response to Climate
Change Session V - Tuesday, October 16,2007,
Responses130 500 pm Climate Change GHG
Inventories Management Emerging Regulation and
Responses David W. Schnare, Esq. Ph.D., Senior
Energy and Environmental Fellow Thomas Jefferson
Institute for Public Policy
References and Readings Anderson, S. and R.
Newell (2004). Prospects for Carbon Capture and
Storage Technologies. Annual Review of
Environment and Resources, 29 109-142. Ansolabehe
re, S., J. Deutch, M. Driscoll, P.E. Gray, J..P.
Holdren, P.L. Joskow, R.K. Lester, E.J. Moniz,
and N.E. Dodreas (2003). The Future of Nuclear
Power An Interdisciplinary MIT Study, Cambridge,
MA Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Barrett
, S. (2006a) Climate Treaties and Breakthrough
Technologies. American Economic Review, Papers
and Proceedings 96(2) 22-25. Barrett, Scott,
(2007), The Incredible Economics of
Geoengineering, Johns Hopkins University, School
of Advanced International Studies (in press,
Environmental and Resource Economics). Bodansky,
D. (1996). May We Engineer the Climate?
Climatic Change 33 309-321. Caldeira, K., Jain,
A. K., and Hoffert, M. I. (2003) Climate
sensitivity uncertainty and the need for energy
without CO2 emission, Science 299
2052-2054. Carlin, Alan, 2007, Implementation
and Utilization of Geoengineering for Global
Climate Change Control, Sustainable Development
Law and Policy, 7(2) 56-8 (Winter), available at
ment/2007/07winter.pdf?rd1 Carlin, Alan, 2007a,
Global Climate Change Control, Is There a Better
Strategy than Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions?
University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 155(6)
1401-1497 (June), available at http//
m/issues/articles/155-6/Carlin.pdf Carlin, Alan,
2007b, New Research Suggests that Emissions
Reductions May Be a Risky and Very Expensive Way
to Avoid Global Climate Changes, Working Paper
No. 2007-07, National Center for Environmental
Economics, USEPA, available at http//yosemite.epa
.gov/EE/epa/eed.nsf/WPNumberNew/2007-07. Carlin,
Alan, 2007c, Risky Gamble, Environmental Forum,
24(5) 42-47 (September/October), available at
rum.pdf Cicerone, R.J. (2006). Geoengineering
Encouraging Research and Overseeing
Implementation. Climatic Change 77
221-226. Crutzen, P.J., 2006, Albedo Enhancement
by Stratospheric Sulfur Injections A
Contribution to Resolve a Policy Dilemma?
Climatic Change, 77 211-219, available at
Govindasamy, B. and Caldeira, K. (2000)
Geoengineering Earths Radiation Balance to
Mitigate CO2-induced Climate Change, Geophysical
Research Letters 27(14) 2141- 2144. Govindasamy,
B., Caldeira, K., and Duffy, P. B. (2003)
Geoengineering Earths Radiation Balance to
Mitigate Climate Change from a Quadrupling of
CO2, Global and Planetary Change, 37 157-168.
Govindasamy, B., S. Thompson, P.B. Duffy, K.
Caldeira, and C. Delire (2002). Impact of
Geoengineering Schemes on the Terrestrial
Biosphere. Geophysical Research Letters 29(22),
2061, doi.1029/2002GL015911, 2002. Hansen, James,
et al., (2005), Earths Energy Imbalance
Confirmation and Implications, Science,
308(5727) 1431-1435). Hansen, James et al,
(2007) Climate change and trace gases Phil.
Trans. R. Soc. A 365, pp. 19251954 Intergovernme
ntal Panel on Climate Change (2007), Climate
Change 2007 The Physical Science Basis, Summary
for Policymakers available at http//
SPM2feb07.pdf. Keith, D.W. (2000).
Geoengineering the Climate History and
Prospect, Annual Review of Energy and
Environment, 25 245-284. MacCracken, M.C.
(2006). Geoengineering Worthy of Cautious
Evaluation? Climatic Change 77 235-243.
National Academy of Sciences, 1992, Committee on
Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, Policy
Implications of Greenhouse Warming, pp. 433-460,
available at http//
_id1605. Nordhaus, W.D. (1994). Managing the
Global Commons The Economics of Climate Change.
Cambridge, MA MIT Press. Nordhaus, W. D. and
Boyer, J. (2000) Warming the World Economic
Models of Global Warming, Cambridge, MA MIT
Press. Panel on Policy Implications of
Greenhouse Warming (1992), Policy Implications of
Greenhouse Warming Mitigation, Adaptation, and
the Science Base. Washington, DC National
Academy Press. Rees, M. (2003). Our Final Hour,
New York Basic Books. Robock, A. (2002) The
Climatic Aftermath, Science 295
1242-1243. Royal Society (2005) Ocean
Acidification Due to Increasing Atmospheric
Carbon Dioxide, London The Royal
Society. Schelling, T.C. (1996). The Economic
Diplomacy of Geoengineering. Climatic Change 33
303-307. Schnare, David, 2007, Responses to
Climate Change and their Implications on
Preservation and Restoration of the Chesapeake
Bay, Testimony Before the United States Senate
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Washington, D.C., Wednesday, September 26, 2007,
available at http//
df. Schneider, S.H. (2001). Earth Systems
Engineering and Management. Nature 409 417-421.
Stern, Nicholas (2007), Cambridge Cambridge
University Press. The Economics of Climate
Change The Stern Review Sterner, T., M. Troell,
S. Aniyar, S. Barrett, W. Brock, S. Carpenter, K.
Chopra, P. Ehrlich, M. Hoel, S. Levin, K-.G.
Mäler, J. Norberg, L. Pihl, T. Söderqvist, J.
Wilen, J. Vincent, and A. Xepapadeas (2006).
Natural Disasters and Disastrous Policies,
Environment 48(10) 20-27. Teller, E., Hyde, R.,
Ishikawa, M., Nuckolls, J., and Wood, L. (2003)
Active stabilization of climate inexpensive,
low risk, near-term options for preventing global
warming and ice ages via technologically varied
solar radiative forcing, Lawrence Livermore
National Library, 30 November. Travis, D.J., A.M.
Carleton, and R.G. Lauritsen (2002). Contrails
Reduce Daily Temperature Range. Nature 418
601. Wigley, T.M.L. (2006). A Combined
Mitigation/Geoengineering Approach to Climate
Stabilization. Science 314 452-454.