PrintPast Policies
Policy decisions made in the past are relevant as well, because business-as-usual assumes that we continue doing what we have done in the recent past, which in turn is based on policies that were adopted further in the past. Consider the case of rural electrification and wind.
As told below (click on link below) before his election as US president, Abraham Lincoln gave a speech highlighting the value of learning and inventing, and in particular pointing out the potential for wind power in places such as his home state of Illinois. Rapid development followed, with the wind power initially used primarily for pumping water, but increasingly with generators and batteries to provide electricity for remote farms.
Many people are surprised that Lincoln was a promoter of wind energy, but he believed deeply in education and the good that science and engineering could do for people. He was an inventor, the only US president with a patent to his name, as described in this clip from the Earth: The Operators’ Manual team. And, in signing the bill founding the US National Academy of Sciences, he gave the US and the world a highly respected source of unbiased information on science. Take a look at this slightly longer than 5-minute clip to learn more.
Earth: The Operators' Manual
Video: Abraham Lincoln and the Founding of the National Academy of Sciences (5:11)
We've been in this situation before a time of war a nation divided and science called upon to deal with matters of national security that's why we're here at the Lincoln Memorial most of us know Abraham Lincoln was a great president you may not know he's the only u.s. president to hold a patent for an invention he came up with an ingenious way to use inflatable pontoons to get river boats over shallows there's no evidence it was ever made but it shows his interest in science and engineering and the challenges he faced his commander in chief during the Civil War also had to do his ships in 1862 the Confederate ship Virginia sides have been armored with iron plates the origin of the name ironclad sank two wooden ships from the Union Navy and threatened their the arrival of the u.s. ironclad monitor saved the third ship as the two vessels fought to a draw it was clear that a new era of naval warfare had dawned and everyone would need to adjust.
There were two serious problems one is that iron rusts really rapidly in salt water and the other you can see here this is a civil war-era compass you don't have to be an expert to know that iron interferes with it if you're trying to navigate in battle and you're not sure whether your compass needle points north you really are lost at sea Lincoln and his advisors came up with a new idea on March the third 1863 the Senate and House passed an act to incorporate the National Academy of Sciences two months later the Department of the Navy asked the new Academy to figure out how to deal with the problem of compasses onboard ironclads some of the nation's leading scientists took part always volunteers and for no pay something that's still the tradition for all National Academy panels the solution was to use an array of small magnets to offset the effects of the iron plates and the invention was good enough to keep the ships on course.
Some 50 years later when Woodrow Wilson wanted advice about military preparedness. It was once again the Academy he turned to and when president George W Bush wanted impartial advice on the reality of climate change it was the academy he asked to do a new assessment their report included a prominent skeptic but still it concluded greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth's atmosphere as a result of human activities causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise we cannot rule out that some significant part of these changes is also a reflection natural variability but the committee generally agrees the assessment of human-caused climate change presented in the IPCC report when you need a compass to steer by us we do now in matters of energy and climate you can't do better than to rely on an assessment by the National Academy of Sciences.
In 2007 the National Academy began to study how to reach America's energy future their report found that energy efficiency can provide the most immediate step forward reducing projected usage by about one-third by 2030. They said America needs an improved electricity grid to support smart meters and integrate large amounts of wind and solar energy renewables could be one-quarter of us energy supply by 2035 as China's doing the Academy supports aggressive research and development on carbon sequestration to see if coal can realistically contribute energy without pollution and co2 emissions in transportation they see a continuing role for gasoline cars with better miles per gallon but also liquid fuel from non-food biomass plus electric vehicles.
They say next generation nuclear should be explored if cost and safety can be handled but overall they find that the US will benefit from long-term solutions and consistent sustained action America has to make hard choices and soon fewer than a billion and a half people were alive on earth to mourn Lincoln's death more than seven billion of us now wonder how long the oil and coal will last and whether their exhaust will click our future but with a little help from wind water Sun and atoms and a lot of brain power we can make a blinkin proud greet the new century with 10 billion smiling people for Earth the operator's manual this is Richard alley.
Credit: Earth: The Operators' Manual. "Abraham Lincoln and the Founding of the National Academy of Sciences." YouTube. October 6, 2012.
However, beginning in 1935, the US Government supported a program of rural electrification, providing loans and in other ways promoting centrally sourced electricity for remote farms, often with coal-fired generation systems. The advent of such centralized, subsidized power made off-the-grid systems less competitive. Many other forces were at work as well, but the government actions on topics including rural electrification and interstate highways have contributed to increased fossil-fuel use.
Video: Rural Electrification (1:07)
PRESENTER: This picture from the US National Archives shows the TVA, the Tennessee Valley Authority, during the 1930s, engaged in rural electrification, bringing power to the people. They built dams to make hydroelectric power, but they also used coal, and the government helped bring the wires that brought the electricity to people.
This government decision had a lot of winners that included the people they got the power, it included people who were building coal fired power plants, and people building dams. It also had losers, including people who made windmills, because with the government supporting this centralized power coming in through the wire, getting your own distributed power from your own windmill was less favorable.And so when governments make decisions, they really do have winners and losers. And the situation we have now, with more coal than wind, in part comes from decisions that were made in the past by the government.
Activate Your Learning
You may hear people say that it is not the government's business to regulate energy or subsidize renewable energy research and infrastructure. What examples could you provide to show that the government has been supporting energy projects for a long time, and many of these projects have favored fossil fuels?
Click for answer.
So, recognize that there are more reasons for disagreement on the nature of a fossil-fuel subsidies than on the radiative effects of the CO2 from burning the fossil fuel. And, Dr. Alley would be happier reporting the current state of policies if the relevant literature were broader and deeper, with more impartial assessments.
Still, the sources cited here are reliable, and together present a clear picture. Suppose we ask where we are on a spectrum of possible policies, extending from “work really hard now to reduce future global warming” through “neutral” to “work really hard now to accelerate future global warming.” Based on the sources cited here, the best estimate of the net effect of past and ongoing government policies and government-funded research is still on the “accelerate global warming” side of neutral for the world and for the US. Policies probably are moving toward neutral, with renewables gaining in research and subsidies, but with more to do to reach a balanced approach, and even more to reach an economically efficient position. And, considering the inertia of the current system, moving well past neutral may be required to really overcome the history of fossil-fuel promotion.
For a little more Enrichment on policies, have a look at this short clip. This is a very U.S.-centered piece, and while we in this course have tried to avoid telling you what to do, some of the people interviewed in this clip were happy to offer their opinions.
Earth: The Operators' Manual
Video: Avoid the Energy Abyss (4:18)
Narrator: Old energy technologies can be cleaned up. New ones can come online. Other nations are moving ahead. What will it take to keep the lights on in the United States, and Avoid The Energy Abyss. There's no question that transitioning to clean and renewable energy is going to be a huge task. But America has done similar things before. Take the Hoover Dam, and the electrification program of the 1930s. Or the building of the Interstate highway system.
Hofmeister: Well, I am optimistic. John Hofmeister is a former oil man, based in Texas. He headed up Shell in the United States. He also wrote a book entitled Why We Hate The Oil Companies, and he's worried that today America isn't making the right decisions about energy.
Hofmeister: You need to think of energy in a 50-year time frame. And our elected officials are thinking of energy in two-year election cycles. That's ridiculous! And it is going to take us, as a nation, to an energy abyss, because you can't design an energy system to replace the 20th century, which is growing old, and running out in some cases, you can't replace that with two year cycles of decision making.
Narrator: Other nations have changed. Look around Copenhagen and you see pedestrian walkways and bikes as a major form of transportation. In response to the Oil Shocks of the 1970s, Denmark turned away from fossil fuel and toward sustainable energy.
Soren: In Denmark we had car-free Sundays where nobody was allowed to drive their cars on Sundays. And there was a rationing of fuel and gas.
Lykke: These are sort of things that people remember, "Well, we need to change."
Narrator: The U.S. also experienced the Oil Shocks, with gas lines and angry citizens. And for a while, America got serious about exploring alternatives to imported gasoline and fossil fuel. Here's the energy share of all Federal, non-defense Research and Development investment from 1957 through 2011. Investment ramped up in the Oil Shock, but then went down, down, down. And without serious new commitments, the 2009 stimulus funds for energy, will just have been a temporary upward blip.
Hofmeister: We're not making the decisions at the national level that need to be made, in terms of the next decade, and the next several decades after that.
Narrator: Hofmeister and other experts look around the world and see other countries moving ahead to defend their nation's energy security.
Hofmeister: Places like China have a clear plan, and they are driving forward. And they are building an energy infrastructure for the 21st century, which will perhaps one day supply energy to the world's largest economy-- China, not the U.S.
Narrator: In America, energy policies change with each new Administration, if not sooner. Since our interview, Denmark's government has changed parties, but now former Minister of Climate and Energy, Lykke Friis, doesn't expect energy policy to change that much.
Lykke: Even if we are kicked out of office, this will not lead to a huge change in our energy policy. Hofmeister: We need decisions that go beyond a single term of a President, that go beyond a single Congress, with a Republican or a Democratic majority. And we're not doing it. Other parts of the world are.
Lykke: All countries have to embark upon this transformation. And the lesson is, it can be done, because Denmark, we've had also growth rate by 80% since the 80s. But our energy consumption and CO2 emissions have been more or less stable.
Hofmeister: We're going to find ourselves as a nation, entering third world status when it comes to the reliability of our energy system, within a decade, if we don't get with a different program. And I don't see any inclination now to make hard decisions. I see divisiveness, I see partisan paralysis, I see short-term political time thinking, and I see dysfunctional government.
Credit: Earth: The Operators' Manual. "Avoid the Energy Abyss" (Powering the Planet)." YouTube. April 22, 2012.