Regional Cap and Trade: A Work in Progress

By TIM FAULKNER/ecoRI News staff

Natural gas prices have dropped significantly below coal and oil, and are now about four times cheaper.A new report is touting the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) for helping cut carbon dioxide emissions in the Northeast. The news is somewhat hazy for Rhode Island, however, and overall the data show that the cap-and-trade program is still a work in progress.

Environment Northeast (ENE), a nonprofit that tracks the 10-state, carbon-cutting RGGI program, said emissions from power plants are down 11 percent from last year, and are well below a cap set in 2009. The reason, ENE stated, is power plants are burning more natural gas and less high carbon-packed fuels such as coal and oil. Renewable energy, mild weather and improvements in energy efficiency also are being credited for helping reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.

All good things for cutting carbon pollution, but much of the progress appears to derive from a single factor: the price of natural gas. Since 2005, natural gas prices have dropped significantly below coal and oil. As of Dec. 31, gas was about four times cheaper than oil.

As prices move, transmission companies within the New England power grid have the ability to ramp up or draw down electricity from individual power plants, and have been doing so to take advantage of low-cost natural gas. So, for example, as natural gas prices fall, coal power plants such as Brayton Point in Somerset, Mass., can simply scale back electric production, while Providence's gas-powered Manchester Street plant can ramp it up. 

More than 95 percent of electricity generated in Rhode Island comes from natural gas power plants — oil delivers less than 1 percent, zero for coal, and some 1.5 percent from renewable energy. Therefore the drop in natural gas prices has steadily increased local power generation to the point where Rhode Island's carbon emissions have spiked 37 percent above the state's emission cap level.

While Rhode Island has the lowest per capita energy consumption in the country and has been climbing the national energy-efficiency rankings, greenhouse-gas emissions from local power plants are up, way up — about 50 percent between 2005 and 2011. The state, however, isn't penalized for exceeding the emissions cap, as RGGI states are more than 30 percent below their combined cap.

ENE touts RGGI as the first and only successful carbon cap-and-trade program in the United States. Since it began in 2009, fossil-fuel utilities with capacity of 25 megawatts or more must buy allowances for every ton of carbon emitted. Regardless of whether emissions are above or below the cap, emitters have to pay. So far, $1.6 billion has gone back to the RGGI states, presumably for programs to help consumers cut energy usage and further curb greenhouse gases.

Rhode Island has so far received $11.6 million, all directed through National Grid to fund low- and no-interest energy-efficiency loans to residents and business and to fund energy-saving upgrades and weatherization. RGGI money also pays administrative costs at the Rhode Island Office of Energy Resources and Department of Environmental Management.

The improvements have added up to about 200,000 megawatts of current and anticipated energy savings across Rhode Island. The programs have helped some 22,000 participants save energy and money through energy audits and upgrades, or by simply cutting the cost of products such as energy-efficient light bulbs.

An independent analysis concluded that RGGI has or will create $1.6 billion in econmic value and 16,000 jobs across the region. The reduced emissions and a general lull in demand for electricity also has meant no new dirty power plants are being built, while new solar, wind, geothermal and other renewable energy projects are slowly working their way into the power grid.

Still, in these first years, RGGI works more like a tax on utilities than a system with concrete incentives to cut emissions. A big concern is that the initial cap on emissions was set too high, so power plants have little reason to make substantial improvements in emissions reductions or to start building renewable energy projects to replace high-carbon plants. The revenue heading back to states also is declining because the carbon allowances bought by power companies are declining in value. Allowances are purchased through quarterly auctions and, as emissions drop, so has the need for more allowances. As a traded commodity, the allowances have fallen so much in value that they currently sit at an artificial floor price set when RGGI began.

RGGI member states are expected to work on lowering the emissions cap at a meeting some time this year. But there could be delays, especially during an election year. RGGI has been a politically radioactive in some states. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie wants to drop out, while the New Jersey Legislature supports the program. New Hampshire politician also are having doubts. However, most RGGI states support the effort, as has Gov. Lincoln Chafee — although Chafee has been mostly quiet regarding any environmental initiatives since he took office last January.

Nevertheless, utilities are not actively lobbying Congress to drop out of the program, according to Peter Shattuck, a policy analyst with ENE. "The fact that you haven't heard any public opposition to RGGI from the energy companies speaks volumes," he said.

Power companies, he added, realize that cutting carbon emissions is unavoidable. RGGI, despite its flaws, is a major positive for the environment, Shattuck said. "It lets energy companies know that carbon emissions aren't going to go unchecked anymore."

Giving Voice to Poor, Minorities on Climate Change

By DAVE FISHER/ecoRI News staff

PROVIDENCE — Rhode Island is one of a handful of states that is taking a proactive approach to climate change. The Rhode Island Climate Commission, a 28-member board consisting of representatives from a bevy of governmental and non-governmental organizations, recently convened for the first time and is tasked with developing a plan for adapting and mitigating the inevitable effects of climate change on the Ocean State.

It’s no secret that low-income communities and neighborhoods of color have been overwhelmingly affected by the march of technology when it comes to environmental pollution, and that pollution has certainly contributed to the problem of climate change. Consequently, climate change poses a greater threat to those traditionally underserved communities. Fortunately, a group of local environmental and social justice organizations has banded together to ensure that those communities have a voice within the R.I. Climate Commission.

“Decision makers tend to overlook vulnerable populations, ECRI wanted to make sure that didn’t happen within the state’s attempts to address climate change," said Michael Roles, the Environmental Council of Rhode Island's lead for the project.

The "Beats of Resilience" project — formulated by ECRI and funded through grants from The Rode Island Foundation and the National Wildlife Foundation — includes several agencies, such as the Environmental Justice League of Rhode Island, English for Action and the Rhode Island Student Climate Coalition. The project has already drafted several recommendations to the Climate Commission intended to protect marginalized communities:

Develop a master plan that ensures proper upgrades and maintenance to access roads, bridges, storm drains and public buildings within and near dense and low-income communities for disaster preparedness and response measures.

Promote green space, permeable surfaces and trees in all planning for future land use and roads in urban centers, especially those in watersheds and near the coast.

Implement a plan for the clean up of sites with high concentrations of toxics and waste, where flooding could exacerbate the problem to nearby properties.

Establish and improve access to cooling centers that can provide sanctuary and shelter to the indigent during extreme heat.

Promote urban and regional agriculture by making unused public land, including school grounds, city land and park land, accessible for long-term use for personal, nonprofit and micro-enterprise organic and sustainable food production, prioritizing projects that are culturally appropriate, create green-collar jobs for low-income residents and direct food produced to low-income communities through retail, food banks and schools. Require and supply assistance in soil testing and remediation.

Improve the accessibility of energy-efficiency programs for low-income residents, and allow tenants who receive Low Income Home Energy assistance (LIHEAP) to live in affordable housing and/or pay their own energy bills to make energy-efficiency upgrades with greater sovereignty from landlords.

Promote energy-efficiency upgrades with owners of property in urban centers.

 “We believe that the communities that will be the most adversely affected by climate change will come up with the best solutions,” Roles said. “The conversation about climate change has been almost exclusively framed for the middle and upper class, but low-income communities need solutions that are not based on consumerism.”

Roles said the project is already addressing climate change in these communities with tree planting programs, increasing access to weatherization programs and, come this spring, will be building a community garden on the South Side.

“The problem of climate change certainly overlaps the problems of social inequality and wealth distribution. It’s understandable that these vulnerable communities are fed up with a political system that largely ignores them,” he said. “But we need an integrated approach to climate change that doesn’t overlook the concerns of these communities.”

The project is maintaining a blog that features updates about ongoing efforts and initiatives Membership in the project is open. Any group that wishes to be involved in the project should contact Roles, via e-mail, at beatsofresilience@gmail.com.

Higher Tides Hurting R.I. Marshes

By TIM FAULKNER/ecoRI News staff

Matunuck Beach in South Kingstown has one of the highest coastal erosion rates on the East Coast.Sea levels are rising faster than most scientist predicted, and Narragansett Bay is no exception. Since 1930, the water level in the bay has climbed some 8 inches, or about an inch a decade.

In recent months, however, tide levels in Rhode Island have climbed about 4 to 5 inches higher at both high and low tides. This phenomenon has been happening since June, so scientist say it's too early to link the tidal increase to climate change or other causes. But while the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Ocean Service tries to explain the deviation, the added water is already having an impact on the environment. In some parts of the bay, salt marshes struggle to drain the excess water, turning the vegetation into mud flats.

Wenley Ferguson, Save The Bay's director of restoration, said if the problem persists marshes will deteriorate "more dramatically and more quickly." Coastal habitats such as Colt Park in Bristol and the Narrow River in Narragansett are among several sites being monitored for increased marsh erosion.

Matunuck Beach in South Kingstown, which has one of the highest coastal erosion rates on the East Coast, provides an early example of the situation that will be faced all along the Ocean State’s coastline with sea-level rise and increasing coastal storms, according to Save The Bay’s Jane Austin.

To deal with the problem, the town has applied for a permit from the Coastal Resources Management Council (CRMC) and secured $2.5 million in Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) funding to build a sheet-pile bulkhead against coastal erosion along a 900-foot stretch of Matunuck Beach Road. A hearing on the project is tentatively scheduled for sometime in January.

These concerns aren't going unnoticed. Projects by the University of Rhode Island, Save The Bay, the CRMC, NOAA and the state Division of Planning are monitoring the impacts of extreme tides and sea-level change across the bay and entire state. These organizations also offer public education campaigns.

This fall, Save The Bay launched a program using volunteers to take photos of trouble spots during storms and monthly moon tides. The project will resume in March. The Sea Grant program at URI organized a similar statewide volunteer photo project over three days in October. 

In January, CRMC plans to hold seminars for citizen reporters to observe high-water events such as road flooding and beach overwash.

These efforts fit in with other state initiatives to help city and town planners build, or even abandon, roads and other infrastructure projects exposed to encroaching water. All the projects are tied in with the centralized mitigation and adaptation policies being drawn up by the newly formed state Climate Change Commission, which held its first meeting Dec. 6.

But citizen involvement is critical to educating the entire state about climate-change adaptation as its happening. The volunteers, Ferguson said, "become ambassadors to share their stories and get the word out to the public that this is a reality and something we have to deal with."

Click here for more information about Save The Bay's tide monitoring program.

Here's a new map of simulated sea level rise in Rhode Island.

State Climate Committee Gets Going

By TIM FAULKNER/ecoRI News staff

PROVIDENCE — Photos and maps of Rhode Island coastal areas at risk or already suffering from rising sea levels and storm surges were displayed Dec. 6 at the inaugural meeting of the Rhode Island Climate Change Commission. 

The 28-member board authorized in 2010 by the General Assembly brought together state lawmakers and organizations representing businesses, environmental groups, the education sector and government agancies.

Committee chairman Sen. Josh Miller, D-Cranston, expressed optimism that the group would fulfill its goal of crafting legislation for comprehensive climate-change adaptation. But, he said, "there's a little bit of urgency and anxiety around this issue. There always has been. That's the nature of the issue."

Any concrete legislation likely won't be introduced until the 2013 legislative session.

"When you rush to that February (2012) deadline you don't ordinarily get a good product," said committee member Rep. Arthur Handy, D-Cranston, who also heads the House Environment and Natural Resources Committee.

Subcommittees are expected to hold meetings early next year, while the entire board plans to meet again in March.

"There's a lot of groundwork to lay to present this to the legislature and the general public," said committee member Jane Austin of Save The Bay.

The meeting was hosted by The Rhode Island Foundation at its downtown headquarters. The foundation provided staff and administrative support for organizing the committee.

According to the 2010 Climate Risk Reduction Act (pdf), the average temperature in Rhode Island has increased 1.5 degrees since 1970; winter temperatures are up 4 degrees. It notes that if fossil-fuel emissions continue at their current rate, the annual number of days more than 90 degrees is expected to grow sharply from about five a year today to about 50 at the end of the century.

URI Brings Science to Disaster Planning

By TIM FAULKNER/ecoRI News staff

KINGSTON — With the all science and engineering research done to adapt to the the worst Mother Nature can dish out, you would think it would be easy to prepare for floods, earthquakes and even climate change. 

But then there's reality and, of course, politics. 

Just look at New Orleans and Christchurch, New Zealand. Both endured major natural disasters that destroyed whole portions of eacy city. Yet planners in both metropolitan areas have taken different paths to rebuilding.

Christchurch abandoned whole neighborhoods, including most of its financial district, to avoid the cost and headaches of inhabiting high-risk areas. Other neighborhoods adopted rigid design standards to withstand future quakes.

New Orleans, however, has enacted mostly smaller fixes. Seemingly common-sense changes such as matching the height requirement of new buildings  to the depth of the flood created by Hurricane Katrina were prevented by infighting, according to at least one planning expert.

"Politics trumps safety, security and science," said Doug Alhers, an authority on disaster planning who spoke at the University of Rhode Island on Dec. 1.

Ahlers, a URI graduate and faculty member at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, helps at-risk and already-devastated communities around the world adapt to manmade and natural catastrophes.

The buzzword for this work is "resilience," or how to lessen disaster damage. New zoning rules are of course important. But so are the development of natural and manmade projects, such as waterfront barrier parks and levees in areas prone to tsunamis, or even floating homes in flood-prone places like the Netherlands.

Since 2000, URI's Coastal Institute has been been working with the state Department of Environmental Management (DEM) and the state Emergency Management Agency to develop disaster response programs. Lessons from the 1996 North Cape oil spill in particular helped to create the "marriage between science and emergency response," said Judith Swift, director of the response program at the Coastal Institute.

URI offers the brains and expertise from organic chemists and biologists to determine hazards and offer the best and fastest cleanup for say an oil spill. URI economists analyze economic impacts and how much and what to buy for the cleanup.

"It's very proactive," said Peter August, a professor in URI's Department of Natural Resources Science.

Swift and August helped develop the Scientific Support for Environmental Emergency Response.

Climate change adaptation in Rhode Island and around the world also relies on resilience practices. Alhers predicted that the insurance industry also will likely play a big role in determining where and what gets built in threatened areas. 

But most of all, he said, "It takes a political will that certainly didn't exist in Louisiana."

R.I. Senators Say 'Get Off Oil'

By KARA KAUFMAN/ecoRI News contributor

PROVIDENCE — Both Rhode Island senators have issued strong rationales for eliminating the nation’s dependence on fossil fuels. 

Sen. Jack Reed linked fossil fuels to two problems: oil spills and political instability. At a recent Brown University forum titled "Get Off Oil," he challenged the government to use oil subsidies in more productive ways and increase the fees for offshore drilling “from a trivial amount to a less-trivial amount.”

The speeches took place as part of a Nov. 4 forum sponsored by Environment Rhode Island in partnership with Brown University's student environmental organization EmPower.

Policies that provide incentives for renewable energy instead of oil will go a long way, Reed said, despite the fact that “we’re not getting a lot of cooperation (for such policies) from the oil and gas companies.”

Reed reminded the audience of the dangers of fossil fuel by recalling the Deepwater Horizon spill in 2010 that killed 11 oil workers. The 1996 North Cape spill off South Kingstown, the worst ever in Rhode Island, dumped 828,000 gallons of home heating oil and caused long-term environmental and economic challenges. Nevertheless, Reed said, the government still heavily subsidizes the oil industry.

A broad coalition of professors and experts joined Reed and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., to discuss the need to eliminate fossil fuels from the national energy policy.

Reed, a former Army Ranger and member of the Armed Services Committee, said the military recognizes the need to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. If we don’t, he said, “we will be in a strategic straightjacket.”

Whitehouse called for investment in renewable energy for the health of Rhode Islanders and the health of our oceans and coral reefs. The current politics in Washington, he said, have “turned the Capitol building into one of the few places on earth where climate change in still denied.”

Due to the lack of respect for climate science, the federal government subsidizes the oil industry despite its $100 billion in profits, he said.

Pollution from burning oil, coal and natural gas sweeps into Rhode Island on wind currents from the Midwest, causing health problems for residents, according to Whitehouse. Out-of-state pollution is so severe, he said, that Rhode Island could turn off all energy-using devices and cars and still not be in compliance with clean air standards.

The burning of oil, coal and other fossil fuels also makes the oceans more acidic, killing fish, invertebrates and coral reefs. “Let me put it this way,” Whitehouse said, “you are not in a good environment if you are soluble in it.” 

Whitehouse said the government should increase its investment in renewable energy companies such as Newport Biodiesel and T.H. Malloy & Sons, and companies that use algae to create fuel.

Brown University professor Stephen Porder outlined the need to invest in “collective life insurance,” given the fact that the chance of our planet warming by more than 11 degrees by the turn of the century is much greater than the odds that lead us to buy life or car insurance.

T.H. Malloy & Sons and Newport Biodiesel, as well as community organizations People’s Power & Light, Ocean State Clean Cities and Project Get Ready, also discussed alternatives to oil, including electric vehicles, increased public transportation and “green power programs."

The panelists maintained that oil is not the only answer. Americans have the technologies and grassroots support for renewable energy and stronger, locally dependent communities. Biodiesel, electric plug-in vehicles and community empowerment programs are all part of the fabric of the solutions for Rhode Island to get off oil, improve our health and create a sustainable future, they said.

R.I. Cities and Towns Adapting to Climate Change

By TIM FAULKNER/ecoRI News staff

PROVIDENCE — There are still a number of climate-change deniers out there, but at least here in Rhode Island, businesses and local and state governments say it's a reality that can't be ignored.

"As a public utility, we need to take a serious look at the impacts and effects of climate change," Janine Burke, general manager of the Warwick Sewer Authority, said during a seminar on climate-change adaptation Monday at Save The Bay's headquarters.

The event was part of an ongoing campaign run by Save The Bay to offer city and town planners ideas for addressing flooding, erosion and other potential dangers to public infrastructure brought on by climate change.

With tropical storm Irene and the floods of March 2010 still fresh in their minds, municipal officials and environmental advocates alike didn't need to be convinced of the need to plan for future natural disasters. 

"We're aware of the local effects of a global problem," said Jonathan Stone, director of Save The Bay.

Driving home the point is the ballooning cost of repairs from natural disasters. During the past 15 years, expenses nationally have jumped from about $10 billion annually to more than $100 billion. "So the money is going back to Mother Nature," said Louis Gritzo of business insurer FM Global.

Gritzo recommended that business and municipalities plan as if every year could bring the devastating 500-year storm. "Doing nothing is not part of the solution," he said.

Protecting buildings rarely requires relocating, he said, but typically includes relatively low-cost upgrades such as roof fasteners and portable flood gates for doors.

Cities and towns need large-capacity storm drains, higher roadways and additional open space to withstand flooding, storm surges and higher tides. San Diego and Milwaukee are protecting acres of land to curtail flooding. "What it means is (more) green space and trees, so less water is running into the system," said Edwin Pinero, sustainability officer for waste and drinking water consultant for Veolia Water.

Michael Lewis, head of the state Department of Transportation (DOT), said Rhode Island is "a little bit ahead of the curve" compared to the rest of the country when it comes to planning climate-change adaptation. Currently, the DOT has been studying geographic, tidal and rainfall data to determine where changes are needed.

Paying for the upgrades will vary by community, but the state, Lewis said, will look for the bulk of its funding from federal programs. Yet, each municipality must decide if threatened areas should upgrade infrastructure or simply abandon and let nature take control, which is already happening in some parts of the country such as Alaska.

Regardless of the solution, municipal planners learned they won't be able to go it alone in preparing for the next big storm. "Homeowners, municipalities, businesses, everyone has to work together," Pinero said.

Climate Change Policy Demands Clean Focus

By DAVE FISHER/ecoRI News staff

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — The second half of the MIT/Knight Foundation seminar on the failure of elected officials to take climate change seriously, and hence, failure to enact any sort of comprehensive policy regarding it began with a keynote speech by Ralph Cicerone, president of the National Academy of Sciences, followed by a panel discussion entitled "What can scientists do? What can the public do?"

Cicerone said climate change is happening, and that human activities are the greatest contributing factor.

“If you take all human energies in all forms, and spread them all over the world, it amounts to about a fortieth of a watt per square meter; about 10,000 times less than the incoming solar energy," he said. "The extra heat trapped by the greenhouse gases that are solely of human origin is a number 100 times bigger than the dissipation of all of the energy we use. This calculation shows the enormous leverage that the greenhouse effect provides over the planetary energy budget. We are changing the earth’s atmospheric chemical composition.”

Cicerone exhibited data that has been confirmed by hundreds of scientists all over the world using many different techniques. The planet’s atmospheric carbon content has gone from about 312 parts per million (ppm) to nearly 390 ppm. On top of that, he said, the geological record has shown that greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations have shifted to a greater degree in the past hundred years than during the previous four ice ages, and though carbon in the atmosphere has spiked prior to these ice events, the carbon content of the atmosphere during those periods never approached 390 ppm.

“Whatever is going on is not only unnatural and significant, but it’s very fast. And it’s growing in time,” Cicerone said.

Polar ice loss and the subsequent sea level rise associated with increased GHG emissions is another concern, according to Cicerone. That loss is a great example of the dreaded positive feedback loop. Polar ice reflects the sun’s energy; dark sea water absorbs that energy. But as ice caps shrink and become sea water, less of the sun’s energy is reflected back into space and more is retained in our oceans, increasing the planet’s atmospheric temperature, which melts polar ice, which becomes sea water, etc., ad infinitum.

Cicerone said adaptation and mitigation techniques have to be implemented, and sooner rather than later. “We have to manage the unavoidable (adaptation) and manage the unavoidable (mitigation)," he said.

There are many barriers, in addition to the scientific challenges, to adopting comprehensive climate policy, according to Cicerone. Those include the false and much-promulgated idea that man’s impact on climate change is insignificant; temporary and regional reductions in warming; understanding and characterizing extreme weather events; and observations must be continuous and in conjunction with proper assessments by the scientific and media communities. Not to mention the extreme and unprecedented polarization in our current political atmosphere.

Leah Christian, senior researcher at the Pew Center for People and the Press, where she focuses on public opinion with a special interest in environmental policy, presented some disturbing, yet unsurprising, poll data on the public’s opinion concerning climate change and environmental policy in general.

Poll after poll has shown that there is a disturbing trend downward in the amount of people who think that global warming is a serious or somewhat serious problem. “From 2008 to 2010, there has been an 11-point drop in the percent saying that it (global warming) is a problem,” she said.

The unsurprising part is that the drop occurs almost exclusively along party lines. In the past four years, the percentage of those polled who identified themselves as Republicans that think climate change is a serious problem has dropped by 25 percent.

Polls by the Pew Center also have shown that environmental and energy concerns invariably rank higher than climate change on people’s priority scales, in spite of the fact that these issues are inextricably linked. Christian said these same polls also show that 41 percent of Democrats believe that climate change should be a top priority for our nation’s leaders, as opposed to a mere 10 percent among Republicans.

Possibly the most frightening data that Christian presented was a poll that showed that a mere 36 percent of people believe that global warming is mostly anthropogenic, or man-made; again with Democrats believing at a much higher rate than Republicans in our impact on the global climate.

William Moomaw, the director of the Center for International Environment and Resource policy at Tufts University, said the failures of the Kyoto Protocol, and the more recent climate change summits in Copenhagen and Cancun, are because they were, in his words, “unprincipled negotiations, that is, they had no guiding principle.”

“The problem is really the way we develop economically,” he said. “We tend to think that development equals carbon emissions.”

There are significant roadblocks to international climate policy. One of the most pressing problems in that arena is the idea of burden-sharing. Countries have argued about who should pay for the necessary adaptation and mitigation and what percentage of that financial burden should be paid by the developing and developed world. To get any kind of comprehensive, international climate policy, Moomaw said, "What we really need to do is reform the argument from (economic) pain to (environmental) gain.”

Daniel Schrag, MacArthur fellow and professor of geology at Harvard University’s Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, put forth three major points: climate responds to cumulative emissions; the timescale of climate change is 100 years, that is, even if we stopped emitting GHG’s today, the planet would still warm for the next 100 years; and our goal should be to achieve a net-zero emissions scenario.

“A significant fraction of the carbon dioxide that we put into the atmosphere today,” he said, “will still be there in 20,000 years. We will deglaciate the planet. It’s a question of when not if.”

Schrag worries that the science community is focusing too much on the reduction of black carbon, methane and chlorofuorocarbons. “Not because I don’t think that it’s a good idea to reduce these emissions, but because I believe that it shifts the focus away from carbon dioxide, which due to its timescale, is the bigger problem," he said.

For instance, in the European Union, if you are a major carbon emitter, you can get carbon credits for flaring off methane, which is valued at a 25-to-1 ratio to carbon dioxide. He also expressed concern over percentage-based goals concerning GHG reduction. "They don’t really get us to net-zero emissions," he said.

Schrag sees the most viable way to get to a net-zero emissions scenario as a quantum leap in clean energy technology that will "provide a cheap, energy dense alternative to burning fossil fuels.”

Climate Change Problem Needs 'Criteria for Success'

By DAVE FISHER/ecoRI News staff

This map shows a worst-case scenario of what southern New England's coastline would look like if all of the polar ice melted. Click the map for a larger version. (Map by Paul Jordan, URI)CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — Communicating on climate change is a difficult thing to do. There is a lot of science and math that inevitably leads to the MEGO — or my-eyes-glaze over — reaction in a large portion of the populace. It's even more difficult in the wake of the lack of response to the problem from our elected leaders.

That was the topic of an all-day seminar, sponsored by the Knight Foundation on Journalism, held last week at the Bartos Theater on the campus of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

Panelists in the first discussion — titled "What is the Meaning of Policy Failure on Climate Change?" — included Ronald Prinn, Noelle Selin, Naomi Oreskes and John Reilly.

Prinn, director of the Center for Global Change Science at MIT, unleashed a rapid-fire assessment of the future of climate change, in which he laid out several scenarios. The first was a dire picture of the future Earth, one in which no policy is adopted by the United States, the current champion when it comes to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

“Even if it is a 50-50 split,” he said, referring to the man-made vs. natural occurrence of global temperature rise, “we have a severe problem.” His proposed scenarios don't get much rosier, even with massive reductions in GHG emissions.

The dangers of global temperature rise he indicated were the loss of sea ice, which reflects the sun’s energy rather than absorb it like sea water; the instability of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets, which, if completely melted, could create a nearly 40-foot sea level rise; the decreased function of the deep ocean as a carbon and heat sink, a function that is hindered by decreased sea ice and increased flow of fresh water into the sea; the instability of the permafrost and Arctic tundra, which together sequester 1,670 billion tons of carbon — greater than 200 times our current emissions levels; the shifting of climate zones, which would have a disastrous effect on natural habitats and food systems; and the increased destructiveness of hurricanes and other weather events that have already increased 2-3 times in force since the 1960s.

“Climate change, without a national and global policy,” he said, “is a gamble with low odds of winning.”

Selin, assistant professor of engineering systems and atmospheric chemistry at MIT, stressed the necessity of identifying the consequences of action or inaction on global climate change and the need for the expansion of intervention options.

She pointed to the climate’s effect on air pollution, particularly the increased mobilization of particulates, ozone, persistent organic pollutants and mercury to the heat sink that is the Arctic. “Mitigation techniques in particular areas may be less effective due to regional temperature fluctuations," Selin said. “The climate has changed, and will continue to change. Effective policy will require that we understand the atmosphere as a system that has natural and human impacts, as well as natural and human responses.”

Best known for her book "Merchants of Doubt," Oreskes, professor of history and science studies at the University of California, San Diego, said one of the reasons that it's so difficult to get conservatives on board for climate change policy is that it puts forth the perceptions of increased market influence by the government and a decrease in personal liberty.

“Adaptation is necessary,” she said,” but mitigation is urgent. Why we have failed (to enact policy) is a social science question. Better physical science is unlikely to resolve this failure. Better social science might.”

Reilly, an agricultural economist and senior lecturer at MIT’s Sloan School of Management, said one of the biggest problems with a lack of cohesive policy on climate change is the non-existence of targets and goals.

“We have to define our criteria for success,” he said.

He posited that these criteria should include short-term targets and long-term goals; chosen targets have to have positive cost-benefit ratios; a method of measuring progress in the short-term; the cost efficiency of targets and goals met; and understanding the complexity of a negotiable problem.

“Tax subsidies for green technologies are impermanent from one administration to the next," Reilly said. "We seem to be at a deadlock about who (globally) pays for these mitigations and adaptations. We need to figure out what we can reasonably expect, not only from a policy perspective, but from a progress perspective as well.”

Climate Change, Stormwater Major Issues for N.E.

H. Curtis Spalding, EPA Region 1 administrator.By DAVE FISHER/ecoRI News staff

WARWICK — Last week, Curt Spalding, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency’s New England division, spoke to a group of about 50 professionals from the Rhode Island Society of Environmental Professionals (RISEP). RISEP membership includes engineering and environmental consulting firms, industry/manufacturing, academia, attorneys, government agencies and environmental technology businesses.

Spalding, a Rhode Island native and former Save The Bay executive director, said, “The two biggest threats to the environment in New England are climate change and stormwater management.”

Rhode Islander’s learned the hard way, back in March and April, that stormwater treatment and mitigation have to be addressed in all future and most current development.

“For too long, the EPA has been an organization that was concerned with the end of the pipe,” he said. “We know now that we have to start thinking about what is going into the system as well.” He also mentioned an upcoming investment by the Department of Energy, facilitated by the EPA, in Rhode Island's wastewater system, to increase efficiency and explore renewable energy installations in the state's wastewater treatment plants.

The EPA has done a pretty good job of controlling point-source pollution during the past 40 years, but hasn’t ever really addressed the mounting problem of nonpoint-source pollution. That, according to Spalding, is about to change. The National Research Council has been tasked with assessing the sustainability of every one of EPA’s programs.

Under national administrator Lisa Jackson, he said, “EPA is shifting its focus and is trying to have a more holistic view. Climate change is happening and we need to figure out how to adapt and mitigate.”

Adaptation is a necessary component to dealing with climate change. Infrastructure such as the Fox Point hurricane barrier may have to be reinforced to deal with more frequent and violent weather patterns. The Ocean State's coastal areas will have to adapt to sea level rise which, according to some studies, could be as much as 20 feet in the next few centuries. Keep in mind that for every foot that the ocean rises, the shoreline recedes 10 feet.

Stormwater management goes hand in hand with climate mitigation. For instance, increasing green cover and decreasing impervious surfaces in urban areas would mitigate what is known as the “heat island” effect, and slow stormwater runoff.

Spalding said the state Department of Environmental Management (DEM) will be a priority for his administration, because, “DEM division funding is at, or below, the level I’d like to see.”

 “All of this,” he said, “is a way for us to restore our green capital. That’s how we’re looking at it."

RISEP is a nonprofit organization that provides a collective voice for the environmental services sector in identifying key regulatory issues and reforms that affect industry and commerce, and provides technical expertise to the regulators and legislators for reviews and guidance.