Answering Critics of Obama's CO₂ Reduction Plans

Earlier this month an opinion piece appeared in newspapers across the U.S. that claimed President-elect Barack Obama's plans to reduce U.S. carbon dioxide emissions 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 "would be very costly and require a wrenching transformation of our way of life."

Part of Obama's plan to reduce carbon, first to 1990 levels by 2020, is to invest $150 billion over ten years in a clean energy economy, which includes the next generation of biofuels and fuel infrastructure, plug-in hybrids, renewable energy, a new digital electricity grid, and job training to "to help workers and industries adapt to clean technology development and production."

The Center for American Progress, founded by Obama's transition chief John Podesta, recommends a $100 billion investment in six "green infrastructure" areas, including  retrofitting buildings, constructing a ‘smart' (digital) electrical grid, renewable energy, and next generation biofuels.

Studies support a ‘green' investment

Numerous studies support an investment in "greening" the U.S. economy. The Economic Policy Institute's study, A Plan to Revive the American Economy, cites "reliable economic models" which show the every $1 billion of public investment creates "between 27,800 and 77,000 jobs."

"A greener American economy can and will create jobs," according to a joint study by the Center on Wisconsin Strategy, The Workforce Alliance, and The Apollo Alliance titled Greener Pathways. However, the amount of jobs created "depends on the scale and terms of future investment."

In a case study by the city of Berkeley, California "green collar jobs" are characterized as an "important new category of work force opportunities because they are relatively high quality jobs, with relatively low barriers to entry, in sectors that are poised for dramatic growth." Training people with "barriers to employment" to do green collar jobs "can be an effective strategy" to provide "access to jobs."

Investing in energy efficiency

Another part of Obama's plan to reduce carbon levels is creating building efficiency goals. The first goal would be improving new building efficiency by 50 percent and 25 percent for existing buildings over the next decade. The second goal is for all new buildings to be carbon neutral, produce zero emissions, by 2030. Obama calls for a grant program to be established for early adopters of either goal, and an expansion of federal efficiency grants.

The state of California has enacted energy efficiency measures which "enabled California households to redirect their expenditures toward other goods and services," the October 2008 study Energy Efficiency, Innovation, and Job Creation in California asserts. During the years 1972 to 2006, Californians have benefited from "well-documented household energy savings of $56 billion."

Seventy-three percent of the sixteen organizations surveyed by real estate consultant Charles Lockwood and Deloitte stated retrofitting their buildings caused cost reductions. The majority of the organizations paid a cost premium of 10 percent or less for their retrofits.

The organizations surveyed reported other benefits, including an improvement in workforce productivity by 87 percent, goodwill/brand equity increased for 100 percent, improvement in employees' health by 75 percent, and greater employee retention for 81 percent.

An April study by the Co-Star Group reported similar results. The study looked at 1,300 buildings and discovered that those which are LEED-certified have rent premiums of $11.33 over conventional buildings. They also sell for an average of $171 more per square foot, and have a 3.6 higher occupancy rate.

The 2007 study, Cost of Green Revisited, found "no significant difference in average costs for green buildings as compared to non-green buildings." Most new green buildings cost less than one percent, and some cost even less, according to recent studies by the IFMA Foundation and Turner Construction.

The U.S. Green Building Council lists the economic benefits of green buildings, which include: a reduction of operating costs, enhanced asset value and profits, improvement in employee productivity, and the optimization of life-cycle economic performance.

Obama plans to phase out incandescent light bulbs by 2014, which he estimates will save American consumers $6 billion every year on electricity bills. Replacing one light bulb in every American house would save over $600 million annually, according to the website for ENERGY STAR. Compact fluorescent light bulbs (CFL) certified by ENERGY STAR use 75 percent less energy, last up to ten times longer, and save $30 in electricity costs during the lifetime of the light bulb.

Global stimulus package through green investment

Robert Pollin, economist at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, believes the type of investments Obama has promised will create jobs. "It is not just the construction workers that show up on the site. It's the people who serve them lunch. They also get a job boost. It's the truck drivers who deliver the materials. It's the accountants. All of these types of jobs get created through a green investment agenda."

Achim Steiner, United Nations (UN) Under-Secretary General and executive director of UN Environmental Program said, "Combating climate change is the stimulus package needed to power the planet out of its current malaise and set the stage for a 21st century 'Green Economy'-one that prizes resource efficiency, innovation and decent employment in developed and developing societies alike."

Related Reading:
The Economic Case for Good Corporate Citizenship When it Comes to The Environment
As Canadian Green Industries Grow, So Does Available Training