'Going green' has become one of the most popular catch phrases of 21st-century jargon, but what does it really mean?
Magazines and newspapers around the country are filled with tons of "easy tips" on how to reduce your carbon footprint and live a more environmentally friendly life. Companies and organizations like Starbucks, Patagonia, Ikea, Nike, Hewlett-Packard, Yahoo, UPS, and MTV (not to mention our very own Bowdoin College) have already taken steps towards more environmentally friendly practices and have learned that it can save them quite a lot of money. Said the executive director of the Environmental Defense Fund, David Yarnold, "going green" "can create competitive advantage" and "strengthen the bottom line."
On the campaign trail, President Obama made the case for a "green" America, proclaiming, "I'll invest $150 billion over the next decade in affordable, renewable sources of energy—wind power and solar power and the next generation of biofuels; an investment that will lead to new industries and 5 million new jobs that pay well and can't ever be outsourced." He also noted the added benefit of decreasing our reliance on volatile governments who use oil as a bargaining chip, as well as the obvious environmental necessity of such a plan.
His ambitious plan aims to save more oil within 10 years than we currently import from the Middle East and Venezuela combined, put 1 million plug-in hybrid cars on the road by 2015, ensure 10 percent of our electricity comes from renewable sources by 2012, and 25 percent by 2025, and implement an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent by 2050.
Although these plans sounded great during the campaign, the more pressing concern for most Americans is what it means for the economy.
Strong arguments have been made against the notion that "going green" is good for the economy, the best of which is the cost disparity between "clean" energy and the current reliable, cheap energy that fuels our economy today.
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the government currently subsidizes solar energy at $24.34 per megawatt-hour (MWh) and wind power at $23.37. In comparison, it subsidizes natural gas at just 25 cents per MWh, coal at 44 cents, hydroelectricity at 67 cents, and nuclear power at $1.59.
Despite government mandates for renewable energy and significant handouts aimed at supporting the growth of these industries, solar and wind power contribute less than one-half of 1 percent to the U.S. electricity grid.
Obama's lofty campaign rhetoric not withstanding, the new administration's plan will inevitably have the effect of increasing energy costs for U.S. companies and citizens, which in turn could cause companies to move jobs overseas where energy would presumably be much cheaper.
As economist William Pizer put it, "I am skeptical that [dealing with climate change] is going to make money. You'll have new industries, but they'll be doing what old industries did but [at] a higher net cost...You'll be depleting other industries."
So what should we do? Do we continue using cheap, dirty energy sources because it is economically beneficial even when there is an undeniable environmental necessity to change?
Perhaps it is time that we do more than look out for our own well-being. We have become too caught up in trying to live in as much comfort and with as little effort as possible.
Our economy is not doing well. That is not in question. However, neither is the fact that failure to address climate change now will make the lives of future generations much more difficult.
The United States accounts for 26 percent of the world's energy consumption despite representing only 5 percent of the world's population. As countries like China and India continue to develop, their energy consumption levels will rise exponentially.
If we have not already transitioned the world to using clean energy by then, we will undoubtedly experience significant changes to our world's climate—changes that probably will lead to a dramatic, unfavorable shift in how we live our lives.
The long-term benefits of acting now far outweigh the short-term economic drawbacks.
It's everyone's dream to save the world. So let's respond to those signs you see around campus with a resounding "Yes" and help America reclaim its rightful place in the world.
We've been playing the villain for too long, what do you say we play the hero again?
Craig Hardt is a member of the Class of 2012.