Over the past three weeks, I have expanded my understanding,
interest and working vocabulary hundred-fold as it pertains to economics.
Diving into the details of the US (and following global) financial crisis has
opened my eyes to the complexity of our current system, and given me more ideas
on how to explore my chosen my focus topic of coal exports from the PNW
coastline.
My interest in this topic stemmed from personal experience
as I introduced in my initial post. My interest stemmed primarily from the
social and environmental impacts, but I am gaining more confidence in
discussing and understanding the numerous economic drivers and consequences. My
expanded knowledge and language is helping me to zero in on the economic
factors of this issue, such as financing, market impact and investment.
I am working to step back from my personal connection with
these proposed coal export terminals, and rely on the facts to drive my
discussion. Does this mean I will lose sight of the passion and interest I
bring to the discussion? I sure hope not! I am working to bring clarity to my
readers about the issues, and drivers, while sharing my perspective on how
economic decisions impact local communities.
So what is the core issue at stake here: coal. Coal in
itself is not an issue. In the ground it is just fine. Doing no hard. Once it
is extracted and burned it becomes a problem. How it is extracted and used as
an integral part of human development and existence, and the continued exploitation
of it as an energy resource is the challenge we are facing. Spiraling out from
coal, we have the drivers of how this resource impacts society. As discussed on
my economics’ professor, Norm’s blog, coal is ample and cheap. It is therefore a centerpiece of the world’s
electricity production. Electricity production from coal requires mining,
transportation, processing, and exportation. This is the simplified production
and distribution side of the equation, and is the side that the United State is
primarily involved with. Coal use of for the creation of electricity has
dramatically decreased in the United States over the past decades in favor of
cleaner, more efficient fuels.
On the flip side, developing nations, such as China and
India, are still heavily dependent on this cheap but dirty source of energy.
They are driving demand for more and more coal and their economies and
populations require more electricity. Mitigating the environmental impacts of coal
through strategies like carboncapture and storage are not a long term solution, and really are not
financially feasible on a large scale. Mitigating emitted carbon (from burning
coal) does not seem to be the correct approach. As we look through the history
of sustainability initiatives and cultural shifts, awareness eventually evolved
most problems from reactionary (clean up, like CCS) to preventive strategy,
such as emissions limits on cars. Perhaps we should be asking ourselves (as
many people are), why are we positioning ourselves to export ever more of this
dirty fuel? Where is the preventative/proactive strategy in that? Wouldn’t we
all be better off leaving coal in the ground and focusing on cleaner solutions?
Most people are aware that burning coal is not good for the
environment. However, this is not the only issue we are grappling with as a
country. What is the #1 issue headlining presidential debates? The economy. It
is a big issue overshadowing most decisions the general public will make. When
coal export industry analysts report that the new coal terminal will generate $2 and $6 billion to the economy, that catches people’s attention. Proponents
explain the benefits of “thousands of jobs, millions of dollars in new tax
revenue,” which
yes, our economy and communities really do need According an Oregon Public Broadcasting poll, 55 percent of respondents in Washington, Oregon
and Idaho support expansion of the coal industry because of the economic
benefits.
Clearly, people in the PNW are struggling with this choice. We
could take the high road and say our communities will not support the
exportation of such a dirty fuel, regardless of the jobs it could create. Many groups
in these communities are uniting to protest this, much like a demonstration a few weeks back on the exact beach inspiring my story. One
of the realistic factors that need to be considered is this intense, high
demand for coal. The market for coal is strong overseas, and demand is
expanding with every new appliance and house connected to the grid. This
significant market will drive coal exporters to export their product. The real
question is, will they succeed in achieving this through the proposed PNW
terminals. Will the projects more forward, infiltrating communities trading
environmental and ethical concerns for profit and jobs, or will those benefits
move on to other towns and cities welcoming this opportunity for economic
development.
There are several issues at play here. Certainly the economy is the one that we hear the most about. I think the larger issue is developing countries developing and how they are going to do that. When you look at the number of people in China and India who simply want a bit better life. Who are we to tell them not to import coal? We in our big homes with our big cars? It is our country who fueled the industrial revolution, so who are we to tell others they must not do as we have done. The problem is they simply can't or the planet will self-implode. You get me thinking Lauren and I enjoy your blog post and your perspective. Thank you for sharing!
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your blog Lauren, it brought up so many complex issues I struggle with. I remember reading about the President’s decision to open coal-mining production on public land in Wyoming and the controversy surrounding that decision. Call me a skeptic, but who is in who’s pocket? It is interesting to see how big money, or the people who have big money can get the things done easily in our government. Yes the coal mining did increase jobs, and yes we need them. I struggle as you do, this is producing new jobs, but at the cost of the environment, where do we draw the line and who draws it? Ethics, integrity, and systems thinking; locally and globally.
ReplyDeleteThere should be a set of global standards for the reduction of carbon emission. We spoke about this during the intensive with our history of sustainability project; various groups have attempted to set up agreements in the past. However, not every country will sign the various agreements. We all need to produce power, but we need to be responsible for the type of power we produce and how it effects the world’s environment. Do we implement a worldwide tax system based on carbon emissions, do carbon taxes work?
Lauren,
ReplyDeleteBoth your posts and those of your readers are doing a good job of grappling with these issues -- and of turning a knee-jerk oppositional perspective into a more nuanced view that acknowledges the legitimate forces on both sides (and doesn't, for example, dismiss the proponents as greedy bastards out for their own gain).
Your posts are practically begging for a systems diagram. Hope you'll give it a try at some point. It would be great practice and a great way to deepen your understanding of the issue and your potential leverage points.