economics

The gap between rich and poor as a result of mitigating climate change could become overwhelming if policymakers aren’t careful to evaluate the steps needed to ensure both effectiveness and social justice, a new report from the University of Southern California warns.

The analysis by USC’s Program for Environmental and Regional Equality (PERE) essentially tries to identify the impact that climate change — and its remedies — will have on people at the lower end of the socioeconomic scale.

Think of it as seeing trees in an attempt to define a forest.

The Climate Gap report focuses on human rights, public health and social justice from a climate change and climate change amelioration perspective, defining those areas most likely to impact the poor, beginning with extreme heat and ending with biofuel production.

Two weeks ago, British economist Nicolas Stern suggested the reasonableness of 350 ppm as a target for atmospheric CO2 if we hope to preserve the climate as we know it. It was the latest in a slew of commentary about 350 ppm, including support from IPCC chief Rajendra Pachauri.

This is a much sounder scientific and ecological goal than the 2007 IPCC assessment calling for 450 ppm. Mounting evidence suggest catastrophe is incipient. For some, it’s already here.

NASA scientist James Hansen has been calling for 350 ppm for close to two years now, so Pachauri and Stern may be a little late to the party, but the flip side is that it may be a little early to celebrate.

To see why, it’s worthwhile to remember why Stern used to call for 450 ppm — or even 500 ppm — as opposed to the 350ppm or lower level that many climatologists and ecologists now think is necessary in order to avert the cataclysm.

Part I of a three-part series on U.S. energy policy and student activism

On Friday, more than 10,000 students from universities and colleges across the United States will converge in Washington, D.C., for Power Shift, a four-day conference and lobbying effort geared toward climate change solutions.

These future leaders are more prepared than ever to engage their representatives and senators and communicate a message of hope and informed engagement for a green economy.

They'll come armed with climate research and energy reports, including an energy cost-effectiveness study published by the Associated Students Environmental Affairs Board of UC Santa Barbara. Written by myself and Nicholas Allen, US Electricity Policy 2009 documents important market trends and hidden costs within the U.S. electricity sector. It provides a valuable synthesis of information and a solid basis for engaging policy makers.

The largest contributor to the U.S. electricity supply, the coal sector, is the focus of this first of three articles looking at the energy concerns students will be talking about on Capitol Hill.

Lawmakers, listen up.

The United States' role in climate disruption is far greater than most people realize. Not only does the U.S. emit more carbon dioxide (CO2) than any other nation besides China, not only does the U.S. have one of the highest per-capita emissions levels in the world, but the U.S. economy also accounts for a massive amount of emissions released by the rest of the world.

I crunched the numbers to see just how much CO2 the United States economy is actually responsible for. The results are disturbing.