Shifting Public Views and Actions on Climate Change

Submitted to the Piney Woods Journal as the first of a three-part series on climate change

Louisiana residents have a stronger stake in decisions and actions taken on many complex environmental and energy issues than most Americans. Many of us have jobs and incomes based on our abundant energy and environmental resources in this state.  We also spend quality time in our great outdoors enjoying a diversity of recreational activities. There are many outdoor, nature and wildlife interests that Louisiana residents care about and support.  A simple review of our state specialty license plates indicate the following interests: America’s Wetlands, Animal Friendly, Coastal Conservation, Delta Wildfowl, Ducks Unlimited, Endangered Species, Environmental Education, Honey Bees, LA Black Bear, LA Largemouth Bass, Protect Our Forest, Protect Wild Dolphins, Quail Forever, Whitetail Deer, and Wild Turkey Federation.  Other plates, such as 4H, LA Agriculture, Agricultural Education, LA Energy State, and LA Seafood, remind us of interconnections and dependencies in our state’s natural resources. 

Few of us have the scientific backgrounds or spend that much time trying to digest the many recent reports associated with issues of climate change.  Much of this discussion about what needs to be done is highly charged, and as polarizing or divisive as any other public policy issue.  Public education, so important for voting and policy decisions, though, demands at least a basic level of citizen knowledge on this and other key issues, especially as these concerns impact our own nation and state.

Depending on your background and reading or viewing preferences, you probably already have some basic views concerning climate change.  Increasingly, we see the terms “climate crisis, emergency, or chaos.” You might even be a New Green Deal advocate or a climate change denier.   Many Americans have been aware of the issue of climate change or global warming for decades, and have still not formed definitive conclusions concerning the degree of peril or more appropriate remedies involved.  I remember writing a short chapter for an academic book about 15 years ago on this issue, and one concern then was for “intergenerational equity.”  Were we confronting the issue honestly and ethically then or “kicking the can down the road” for our children and grandchildren to confront and suffer?    

There were reasons why at least some scientists and politicians several decades ago disputed and denied global warming due to intensifying greenhouse gases.  Some argued against existing evidence of climate change, while others claimed that human activities did not have a significant role in causing these changes or we would not be capable of curtailing these changes.  There were also those who suggested delaying action on this challenge because technologies of the future would be developed and applied before the more adverse climate changes occurred and heavily affected normal human lives.  Actual public and private sector responses to the threat of adverse climate changes in the past two decades have been relatively limited, partially because it appeared to many that significant costs or investments would be needed and the price of inaction seemed still decades away.  Political gridlock, too, played a role in our inability to negotiate a few practical responses to growing evidence of climate change.

Recent polls regarding climate change show most Americans now view climate change as a serious, or our most critical, threat and one that requires urgent responses.  Beyond increasing public support for initiatives to combat climate change, scientific and technological studies have become focused much more on approaches that greatly reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  One example is Project Drawdown.  This nonprofit, global organization of scholars, scientists, and entrepreneurs founded in 2014 has been mapping, measuring, modeling, and proposing a large number of substantive solutions to reaching zero emission levels.  They and others are proposing methods that apparently produce much greater paybacks than their investment costs.   

Many Republicans and conservatives now strongly support federal investments in such carbon-capture technologies and low- and zero-emission resources.  Their Green “Real” Deal proposal, introduced by conservative Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz in April, does not set specific goals or timelines though for clean energy generation, unlike Green New Deal proposals. Moderate Democrats unveiled in July an alternative decarbonization plan than those proposed by the Republicans or by progressive Democrats.  The House Energy and Commerce Committee’s goal was net-zero emissions across the United States economy by 2050. Hearings on particular approaches and technologies to reach this goal (called 100by 50) are beginning. 

We can expect hundreds of billions or even trillions of dollars in investments to be spent over the next decade or so in green research and green manufacturing regardless of the parties controlling the legislative or executive branches. Part of this intended investment is simple recognition that many of our major trade partners and technology competitors are well ahead of us, having signed on before to environmental agreements and protocols and then undertaking work on many fronts.  The UK is just one nation with ambitious plans to cut greenhouse gas emission, beyond its already world-leading Climate Change Act.   

State and local legislation and actual initiatives in the USA are occurring sooner and more significantly in the Northeast and West Coast and in larger metropolitan areas. However, the impact of both climate change and diverse efforts to combat it will likely be greater on states in the Midwest and Deep South with dependence on traditional agricultural, mining, energy, and natural resources.   While states like Louisiana are not expected to assume high-profile or early leadership roles in greenhouse gas emission reduction efforts, our future economic and environmental livelihood will depend upon how prepared and proactive or adaptive we can be in confronting these challenges. 

What are the sectors in our state economy that will be affected more by climate change and by efforts to combat these more drastic and dangerous impacts in the next few decades?  What threats and opportunities seem to exist for those in these industries and for others in this state?  You can bet that strategic planners in many corporations and in many state governments have been and are currently focusing on these concerns.  In my next PWJ article, I will outline more obvious areas of necessary change and responses to climate change in Louisiana.