Paris Climate Talks: What does it mean for the Bay

For the past two weeks, negotiators from across the globe have convened in Paris for the 21^st United Nations conference on climate change. One hundred eighty six countries have come with ambitious pledges to limit greenhouse gas emissions. While past conferences have attempted to negotiate a treaty that would keep warming to 2 degrees Celsius, over 100 countries have now pushed to try and keep warming to 1.5 degrees.

It is unclear if this goal is possible given the amount of carbon we have already added to the atmosphere and the voluntary pledges being offered so far. Our current path including these pledges sets us up for 5 degrees, and we have already passed the 1 degree mark. Meeting a goal of only half a degree more of warming would require an unprecedented shift to a decarbonized economy across the world and would also require removing large amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Because of the urgency, the final treaty will likely have specific requirements to “ratchet up” the promises from each country. The goal is that by the year 2030, all countries would be on a common pace to revise these promises every five years.

Much of the focus at the conference has been on lowering the demand for fossil fuel and using technology to limit emissions while switching to renewable energy. This directly ignores the scientific consensus that 80% of known fossil fuel reserves must say in the ground for us to remain below 2 degrees of warming. Keeping it in the ground is not being discussed at this point, and here at home, the United States promotes and subsidizes fossil fuel development while trying to limit carbon emissions – a very difficult task.

In Paris, and here at home, you will hear two major topics of discussion when it comes to climate change: mitigation and adaptation. Mitigation includes activities that will reduce or prevent greenhouse gas emissions, such as switching to renewable energy or preventing deforestation. Adaptation includes activities that reduce harm from the effects of climate change, such as removing infrastructure from flood prone areas, planting trees and treating stormwater.

Much of Save The Bay’s work in habitat restoration falls under adaptation. We are restoring salt marshes so that they provide habitat value for as long as they can be sustained. We are supporting dam removal as a way to connect rivers so that fish can migrate. We are helping cities and towns to move flooded infrastructure and treat stormwater. We also support mitigation by using solar panels at the Bay Center and advocating for renewable energy. On Tuesday, the RI Governor signed an executive order that will direct state agencies to get 100% of their energy use from renewable sources by 2025. It also supports zero emission vehicles, public transit and green buildings. 

There is a third piece of the puzzle, however, and that deals with loss and damage.

The problem, of course, is that no matter what we do in the coming years, some amount of sea level rise and temperature rise are already “baked in” and this will bring significant loss and damage to everyone on the planet to varying degrees. Already, Pacific Island nations are faced with abandoning areas that are uninhabitable, and droughts and floods are forcing people off their land.

This loss and damage is a bone of contention at the talks because poor countries feel that wealthy developed nations should shoulder the burden for making payments to them as restitution for causing much of the problem. Beyond money, assistance would include providing these countries with the capacity to cope and welcoming refugees from climate change disaster zones.

The sad reality is that so much damage has already been done we are beyond talking about mitigation and adaptation and are realizing that we could soon be dealing with a vast humanitarian crisis. The scale of that crisis depends on the strength of this and future climate agreements and how quickly they are acted upon by all the countries of the world.

Celebrating one year of gas free driving during Drive Electric Week

Last summer, I interviewed Save The Bay’s Facilities Manager about his decision to lease a Chevy Volt. The Volt is an electric drive vehicle with a gasoline engine for extended range. The all electric range is about 40 miles, after which a gasoline engine takes over. This is slightly different from a hybrid engine which switches back and forth from gasoline power to electric power during driving. After doing some research of my own, I decided last September to lease an all-electric Nissan Leaf, and go gasoline free. I like the simplicity of having one engine and virtually no maintenance other than tires and brakes.

Driving an all-electric car does take some planning ahead, and is best for city driving. The range varies widely depending on outside temperature and driving conditions. On good days, the range can top 90 miles with moderate driving speeds, but winter weather and use of the heat lowers the range under 80 miles. The car starts to warn you when running with under 20% of the battery remaining, so I generally take 20 miles off my effective range when planning my driving. With a battery instead of a gas tank, I feel like there is a direct feedback and connection to my own energy consumption and driving habits.

Rhode Island Supports Electric Vehicles

In 2013, Rhode Island partnered with National Grid to install 50 public charging stations through the ChargePoint Network. These stations are free to network members for the first four years while owners pay for the electricity. After four years, owners of the stations can decide to keep them free or begin using a fee based system. The stations are distributed throughout the state and are located at the state beaches, malls and restaurants such as Cilantro Grill and Chili’s, and at other locations such as Rhode Island College and Bryant University.

But what About the Electricity?

If you are interested in a direct comparison of energy consumption and costs for an electric car and a gasoline car, here are some of the things I have learned. One gallon of gasoline has the equivalent amount of energy as 34 kilowatt hours (kWh) of electricity. Our second car, the Honda Fit, gets about 34 miles/gallon or about 1 mile per kWh. My Leaf diagnostics tell me that I average about 4.6 miles per kWh, or the equivalent of about 156 miles per gallon. The 2015 Nissan Leaf advertises an average miles per gallon equivalent of 114 miles, so either I am very efficient or my car is not very accurate.

The 2015 Nissan Leaf battery holds 24 kWh of energy. This means that a full charge at 16 cents per kWh costs about $3.84. I have been using about 200 kWh at home every month, for a cost of about $32. It also means that at an average of 4.6 miles per kWh, I should have a range of 110 miles, which is kind of pushing it. I have heard that the diagnostics are not very accurate, and that is something being worked on. 

To me, all those numbers mean that my electric car is almost five times more efficient than my gasoline car, regardless of the fuel type. Because of regenerative braking technology, the brake pads last up to three years longer. Fewer fluids and oils means less contribution to stormwater pollution. No exhaust means I am not contributing to low level ozone pollution, the major cause of air quality alert days in the heat of the summer. In addition, electric vehicles emit only 19.8% of the total heat emitted by conventional vehicles per mile, reducing the heat island effect in cities.

What About other Sources of Pollution?

Electric vehicles do create more pollution during the manufacturing process, and they do require electricity to be generated somewhere, using some type of energy source. The best scenario would be to plug in to a solar panel array or to purchase green energy through your electric company. Not all parts of the country are set up to distribute electricity from clean sources of fuel. The east and west coasts, however, happen to be areas where the electricity mix is steadily becoming more and more renewable.

According to the Sierra Club, in Massachusetts EVs have about 70% lower greenhouse gas emissions than conventional cars. If you are interested in seeing the energy mix going into New England’s electricity generation in real-time, check out this site from ISO New England (our energy grid operator).

The Future of Electric Vehicles

In October 2013, eight states which include Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Maryland, Washington and California, signed a pledge to get 3.3 million EVs on the road by 2025. I am fairly confident that we will soon reach a tipping point and this goal will be easily surpassed. When the 2018 models start rolling out, we will see range go up over the 200 mile mark and electric cars will be mainstream. Electric options are available from most major car companies already.

The problem with being an early adopter, however, is that depreciation is relatively high, given that the technology is getting so much better with each new car model. This does provide some opportunities, however, if you are looking to get into the electric car game and save a bunch of money. I am very happy with my choice and am looking forward to seeing what happens. I am already fighting for space at the public charging stations that I use, so I know there is a growing crowd out there with me. 

Responding to Our Changing Shorelines

This week, the habitat restoration team has been at work on projects that will help create resilient shorelines along the Bay. In Warwick, we have been removing pavement at the ends of roads where they dead-end on the shoreline. Many of these roads were damaged during recent storms, or are under water at very high tides. The pavement was located in areas that would otherwise be wetland, and they provide important public access points to the shoreline. We have been able to preserve the public access paths while creating an area for stormwater to infiltrate and for plants to grow. See this article in the Warwick Beacon.

These projects are part of a larger effort for Save The Bay and the Coastal Resources Management Council to adapt to rising sea levels and coastal flooding. As our shorelines retreat, removing infrastructure from harm's way is an important way to save money and protect the public. We are also helping salt marsh to remain and transition to new areas.

Another project has been taking place at King's Park in Newport. This pubic beach has also been eroding as sea level rises, and the park often floods during high tides and storms. Natural erosion control is being created with sand filled coconut fiber envelopes that protect the shoreline. This low-lying area of Newport, near Wellington Avenue often floods when water backs up through the storm drains and into the neighborhoods. This article in Newport This Week helps to explain the project.

More Weather Extremes Greet us in the New Year

I am sure that you have heard the superlatives from the recent storm that covered the United States. It was the largest storm, in terms of the area of the country that it covered, that we have ever seen. Florida is the only state that does not have snow cover. Australia, in the mean time, is suffering under summertime floods and cyclones, unprecedented in their size. I have heard theories related to various climate forcing elements - the polar vortex and changes in the jet stream, changes to ice cover over the Great Lakes and the Arctic Ocean. Weather extremes are here to stay, but what they say about our future is still unclear.

Here are a number of interesting articles related to extreme weather. This article in the New York Times suggests that warming of the Arctic Ocean has weakened the polar vortex, or jet stream, that keeps the cold air to the north.

This blog entry from the National Wildlife Federation suggests a link to heavier snow with less ice on the Great Lakes and hence more moisture in the atmosphere.

If you want to read more about the effects of extreme weather, changes in sea ice and and the research behind these theories, read this NY Times blog entry and this page from the NWF.

Weather extremes are becoming the norm, and we are going to need to adjust quickly. We can adjust, to an extent, but what about wildlife? Weather extremes send confusing signals to animals and plants about when to migrate, when to flower, when to mate, and when to search for food. This will cause disruptions to habitats, plant and animal communities, and the availability of water and food. Some species that are mobile will be less vulnerable than those that aren't - especially trees and other plants, including food crops that we all rely on. Already food and water insecurity are helping to de-stabilize global communities and political regimes. Climate disruption has been a big part of our human past and it will continue to be in the future.

It is up to us to solve the climate crisis

"Stand with Tuvalu" was the rallying cry at the Copenhagen climate summit. Tuvalu, the Maldives and other island nations are looking at a harsh future where rising sea levels will swamp their homelands. This was their chance to have a voice, and now the entire world knows their fate, but they went away overshadowed again by the US and China. While many may be disappointed in the outcome of the summit, we can all be proud that it was the NGO community that took the stage along with small developing countries and small island states, those that stand to lose the most in this crisis, to rally the world toward a meaningful science-based solution.

No one disputes that the UN system of consensus is difficult if not impossible when you have 193 countries trying to agree on something this huge. It all comes down to politics, money and survival. When you look at the science, the summit was a failure. No deadlines for a legally binding agreement were set. No individual committments were made by any country. The science tells us we need to reduce emissions by 40% below 1990 levels by 2020. The EU is pledging 20%, the US a mere 3%. Every year that we delay makes the goal harder to meet.

What came out of the summit in the end was this: a political agreement crafted in a last minute meeting between China, Brazil, South Africa, India and the US, a meeting that Obama just happened to walk in to. China and India agreed to report their emissions reductions and submit to international analysis, and the US and others agreed to provide $30B a year over the next 3 years to a development fund for developing nations with a goal to have $100B per year by 2020. (Bangladesh quickly made it clear that the developing world was looking for something closer to $600B a year.) Again, money vs. power in a huge game of climate chicken.

What I find heartning, however, is how a country like Brazil made such a large turn around. On one of the last days of the summit, they pledged to contribute to the development fund (even though they are a develping nation that stands to gain from it as well). While they are one of the largest emitters of CO2, those emissions are largely due to deforestation, something they want and need to solve. Domestic policital pressure from within their country from environmental groups and others has completely changed internal politics to make Brazil a willing participant in negotiations.

What some are saying now, is that the 30-35 countries that represent 90-95% of the worlds carbon emissions need to lead this process, something that Obama has begun with the Major Emitters Forum. The US and China have to stop fighting and make some real movement. China is developing the technology and the US needs to keep up. Political pressure has to remain strong in every country, especially here at home to develop strong legislation, strong regulation and a strong green economy. That is where we come in. Our work and yours, working with our Senators, developing green solutions, conserving energy and above all educating others is the most important work of all. Thank you for all you do.

Negotiating over climate gets increasingly desperate

Here is a very brief update from the saga of climate change politics over the last two days.
Yesterday:

• German Chancellor Angela Merkel speakes to a joint session of Congress and pleads for action on climate change to silence from Republicans and cheers from Democrats.
• EU leaders including the British Prime Minister call on the US to contribute to an aid fund for developing nations to adapt to climate change.
• European Commission President meets with President Obama to ask for US action before Copenhagen - which will be a "defining moment" for world leaders.
• At climate talks in Spain, a coalition of African nations boycotts talks until developed nations agree to significant cuts in carbon emissions.
• In the US, Senate Republicans boycott the Environment and Public Works Committee mark-up session - threatening to walk out until the EPA gives them more economic analysis.

Today:

• Senate Republicans are still absent from the EPW committee, delaying a final committee vote. The Senate Majority leader has pledged to do a full economic summary of the bill when it is ready for the Senate floor, but this has not and will not move Republican leaders.
• The bill will not reach the Senate floor for several months and definitely not before December 7th (the start of international negotiations).
  
• Africans have rejoined the conversation in Spain after assurances that developing nations would negotiate on carbon emissions.
• Senators Kerry and Graham are meeting with Obama officials to get their position on nuclear energy - and may be ready to compromise with the nuclear and oil industries.
  

Where is the US, and will Obama go to Copenhagen? Sources say he will go, but may not agree to firm targets without the backing of Congress.

Legislative wrap up and update

RI General Assembly Wraps up its Session
The Rhode Island legislature finished up its business last week and passed several important environmental bills in the process. Congratulations must go out to all involved with the Coalition for Water Security which wrapped up four years of work on a comprehensive water management bill for Rhode Island, the Water Use and Efficiency Act. This bill will go a long way in supporting water conservation and efficiency, and will help water suppliers preserve their rate structures while conserving resources.

Rhode Island will now also have a salt water fishing license, a new federal requirement. The fees collected from the seven dollar license will be used for fisheries conservation, monitoring and public fishing access. The license program will aid the federal government in their monitoring work and will allow for easier data collection on recreational fishing.

The Green Buildings Act also passed the General Assembly. It will require the Department of Administration to create regulations that establish policies for a green building standard using either the US Green Building Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards, or similar standards. All new public buildings over 5,000 square feet will be required to be built to a green standard.

During the regular session, we scored another victory for the environment with the passage of the polluter fines bill which raises daily fines for polluters from 1 thousand to 25 thousand dollars a day. We will now look forward to the next session in January. Some issues that we know will come up again next year include CRMC reform and the Energy Independence and Climate Solutions Act. Read more on our Legislative Agenda page.

US Senate Climate Change Bill Markup
Today is the final day of markup for the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee to work on the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, the Senate version of a climate bill. This bill will then go to other Senate committees which will make their own changes. The bill has given rise to all the partisan politics and political bickering one could ever want to see. This morning, the Republicans on the committee have boycotted the markup session because they want to see more EPA economic analysis of the bill, even though the EPA spent 5 weeks reviewing over 300,000 pages of documentation about this bill and the House's Waxman Markey legislation.

In response to the Republican delay tactics of this morning, the Senate majority leader has pledged to have the EPA do another 5 weeks of analysis on the final bill when he marries all the versions from various committees into one piece of legislation that would go to the Senate floor. This will delay full Senate debate by at least seven weeks or more, which will most likely put a Senate vote after the first of the year, after an international climate treaty has been negotiated in Denmark. This will put much more pressure on the United States delegation to make concessions and pledge emissions cuts. The European Union pledged support to developing countries during recent meetings in Spain, so the United States will really need to step up during negotiations.

Rhode Island rallys for 350

Saturday, October 24th was the international day of climate action, organized by 350.org. Over 180 countries participated, and over 5,000 separate "actions" were logged into the web page. People gathered in cities and towns all over the globe, on mountaintops and coral reefs, deserts and glaciers to bring light to the number 350ppm, the number of parts per million of carbon dioxide many scientist feel is a safe upper limit for the atmosphere. The challenge is to get our national and international leaders to take up 350 as a number for negotiations when a new climate treaty is written in December in Denmark.

Rhode Island held several events for the day of action. Lectures and celebrations were held in South County, Newport and Providence. The Neighborhood Energy Challenge was kicked off for Aquidneck Island and Jamestown, with over 80 people in attendance including senate president Paiva-Weed and Newport Mayor Jeanne Marie Napolitano. Lectures were held at the First Unitarian Church in Providence, followed by a rally at Waterplace Park. We displayed tape marking the future sea level in waterplace park to highlight the flooding risk for downtown Providence. Members of the Watson Institute for International Studies spoke about the issues that are facing African countries due to changes in climate. It was an inspiring and hopeful day.

Blogging Climate Change - A Call to Action

As part of Blog Action Day 2009, over 7,000 bloggers are writing today about finding a sustainable solution to climate change. Here in Rhode Island, climate change has some big implications. We are experiencing rapid changes that are already having an impact on the Bay and its tributary rivers.

We know for certain that Narragansett Bay is warmer on average than at any other time in recorded history. Over the past 30 years, the average mean temperature of the Bay has gone up two degrees Fahrenheit; the average mean winter temperature has increased four degrees. As water temperatures rise, we have seen a major shift in fish populations, with severe declines of the classic cold-water species like winter flounder, cod, and other bottom fish. We have seen increases in fish that tolerate warmer water like striped bass, summer flounder, and menhaden. Lobsters and scallops are declining, while squid and various species of crabs are up.

Severe storms have increased 88% in Rhode Island in the past 60 years. Storm-related coastal erosion will force tough decisions to be made in towns and cities throughout the Bay, including where to protect or relocate infrastructure and where and how to rebuild after the next storm. Coastal managers are telling us that we have to plan now for an eventual 3-5 feet of sea level rise. Over the next decades, we are likely to lose neighborhoods and important coastal buffer zones to the effects of sea level rise and coastal storms.

Increased storm intensity also places added pressure on our water and wastewater infrastructure. Our current infrastructure is 30% undersized - pollution from sewage and stormwater exacerbates water quality problems by causing algae blooms that cloud the water and accumulate on the bottom and on our shorelines. These algae decompose, robbing the water of vital dissolved oxygen and contributing to large-scale dead zones and fish and clam die-offs.

Here is a call to action for Narragansett Bay:

• We need to further reduce sewage, stormwater, and nutrient pollution by investing in advanced treatment technologies and infrastructure in our coastal communities.
• We must continue to preserve and restore salt marsh habitat so that coastlines can retreat.
• We must continue to remove obsolete dams and restore fish passage to tributary rivers.
• We must invest in clean, sustainable, and renewable energy sources and crack down on old dirty power plants.
• We need accurate data to give us the information we need to adequately plan for and manage coastal development.
• We must take these steps now to increase our resiliency for the future. It will take political will and pressure by all of us to make it happen.

Federal Climate Legislation Passes the House

Last Friday's vote on the floor of the US Congress was certainly historic, but it may not have been the victory environmentalists have hoped for. The fact that climate legislation including a cap and trade provision even passed at all symbolically represents what is already a shift toward a new energy economy in America. It was very important for President Obama to get legislation passed to show the rest of the world that we are making progress, and he certainly pushed hard right up to the vote. The House leadership helped out by refusing to allow strengthening amendments that would hurt chances for passage. Concessions were made to almost every group that needed them.

While Congressman Langevin and others worked hard to strengthen the bill, their efforts were put on hold by the House Speaker while each member's yes vote was negotiated. Much has been said about the fact that so much was added at the last minute no one read the bill they finally voted on. Putting the politics aside and looking at the science, there are some serious flaws with the legislation.

The most eggregious is that it preempts the EPA's authority to regulate greenhouse gasses under the Clean Air Act, a recent ruling that would have prevented the development of many new coal fired power plants that now may move forward. The coal and oil industries will get billions in free allowances and money for unrealistic carbon capture technology. The renewable energy standard was weakened to 15% by 2020, and 85% of carbon allowances will be given away.

With a weak cap on carbon and additional offsets, the bill barely keeps us at a business as usual position when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions. So, maybe the vote was just a symbolic victory, but it was important and historic. The next step is to work to strengthen the bill in the Senate, which will certainly be very difficult, but we have dedicated champions in Senators Whitehouse and Reed.

The new EPA under the Obama administration is obviously a much stronger and more threatening agency, because much of the climate bill was used to undue and remove its authority. That should tell us where the battle will be. Industries do not like to be regulated. The dying fossil fuel sector is grasping at straws to prop itself up, but it won't stand the test of time. This is more evidence that we have reached peak oil, and a new energy economy needs to take its place. Unfortunately, we are not doing enough to make it an easy transition. Onward we march.

Federal Climate Legislation Markup This Week

The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 now has a number - HR 2454. The text of the bill was released on Friday by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Environmental groups are cautiously praising this compromise legislation, and Al Gore is rallying his supporters, saying that it will help build momentum going into the Copenhagen climate talks. The compromise version is far weaker than many environmentalists would like - it calls for emission reductions of 17% below 2005 levels by 2020. Al Gore points out, however, that other provisions in the bill such as a renewable energy standard of 15-20% by 2020 may actually lead to larger emissions reductions. Once the shift begins, he believes, the change to renewable sources of energy will be "unstoppable".

While a bill with weak targets may be hard to swallow, there are other far reaching elements of this legislation that will increase funding and support for climate adaptation, such as agreements to use carbon allowances to prevent tropical deforestation, help with adaptation efforts and protect natural resources in the US and globally. According to the press release from the Nature Conservancy, support for US efforts to protect critical wildlife and natural resources could reach $4 billion. Markup of the bill will begin today at 1 pm.