Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Five Reasons Regulation of Greenhouse Gasses is Good for Labor

EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gasses Is Good for Labor: Five Reasons Why

 

Labor Network for Sustainability

November 30, 2010

 

http://www.labor4sustainability.org/

 

With the collapse of climate protection legislation in

Congress, the Environmental Protection Agency, acting under a

mandate from the US Supreme Court, is stepping in to regulate

the greenhouse gas emissions that are causing climate change.

At the end of 2009 it issued an "endangerment finding" that

greenhouse gases in the atmosphere "threaten the public

health and welfare of current and future generations." New

regulations are scheduled to go into effect early in 2011.

 

While American labor unions have been heavily involved in the

discussion of climate legislation and green jobs, since the

defeat of climate legislation few have publicly raised their

voices yet on EPA regulation of greenhouse gasses.  Here are

five reasons they should support it.

 

1. Labor has identified "green jobs" as the key to its

future.  But recent experience shows that there is no way to

grow green jobs without putting the pressure on to reduce

emissions - that's why green jobs have been growing so slowly

in the US.  EPA regulation is a powerful tool to do that.

Only with such pressure will the many players in the US

economy use whatever subsidies and public investments are

made to actually create green jobs by transitioning to a

lower-GHG basis.  Compared with overall spending in the

economy, spending on environmental protection and clean-up

employs more than twice as many workers in construction (11

percent versus 4 percent) and 25 percent more in

manufacturing (20 percent versus 16 percent). Plant closings

and layoffs in response to environmental regulation are very

rare, affecting only 1/10th of 1 percent of all layoffs

nationwide. Science-based targets and timelines are essential

to spur investment and create green jobs. [More...]

 

2.  US standards are necessary to keep other countries from

capturing the entire climate protection industry.  In the

absence of carbon reduction policies, US companies have

little incentive to invest in low-carbon energy technologies

like wind and solar.  As a result, corporations have actually

been taking manufacturing jobs away from the US and moving

them to countries like China that are investing heavily in

carbon-reducing technologies.  A strong domestic clean-energy

industry will only develop when we have a strong domestic

demand for clean energy.  Right now EPA regulation is a

crucial means to achieve that.

 

3.  EPA regulation will strengthen domestic manufacturing.  A

recent study by the World Resources Institute shows that new

restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions will lead to

corporate investment in energy efficiency.  That in turn will

lead to energy cost savings for American manufacturers.  Not

to mention new jobs created by that investment.

 

4.  Climate change is already threatening millions of

American jobs.  A study from the University of Maryland

concludes that, "The true economic impact of climate change

is fraught with 'hidden' costs."  These costs will vary

regionally and will put a strain on public sector budgets.

For example, even under current conditions, the combined

storm impact for the nation since 1980 has surpassed $560

billion. More frequent and intense storms would raise the

price tag even higher.  A recent study of the economic

effects of climate change on California found that the

damages if no action is taken will include tens of billions

of dollars per year in direct costs, even higher indirect

costs, and trillions of dollars of assets exposed to climate

risk.

 

5.  Climate-destroying greenhouse gas emissions must be

reduced to the level climate science says is acceptable - the

consequences of not doing so are just too devastating.  With

labor-supported climate legislation defeated, EPA regulation

is the primary means available now to get started.  While the

cuts mandated by the EPA are far less than those in labor-

supported climate legislation, and far below targets

established by climate scientists as necessary to avoid the

worst effects of climate change, they do provide an

opportunity to start moving in the right direction.  For the

sake of its members, their communities, and their children,

organized labor must help take the lead.

 

Of course, the fossil fuel lobby, climate change deniers, and

right-wing ideologues are trying to scare American workers

that climate protection will mean vast loss of jobs.  But

most studies indicate exactly the opposite: money invested in

the transition to clean energy will produce far more jobs

than continuing to expand the use of fossil fuels. For

example, a research group at the University of Massachusetts,

Amherst estimates that $150 billion in clean-energy spending

will generate 1.7 million new jobs.

 

With so much to gain from effective climate protection,

American labor should strongly support EPA regulation of

greenhouse gasses.  We should be insisting that EPA

regulation maximize the creation of new green jobs.  And we

should be taking the lead in recommending ways to protect any

specific groups of workers from being inadvertently harmed

along the way.  Labor should insist that every worker who may

be adversely affected by climate change policies receive a

package like the "GI Bill of Rights" that provides guaranteed

income during transition, pensions, health care, and

education and financial support for new careers.  And we

should insist that communities dependent on fossil fuel-

related jobs in regions like Appalachia, the Midwest, and the

Gulf Coast be targeted for massive community and regional

development programs focused on new, renewable forms of

energy.

 

Only if organized labor constructively engages with the EPA

regulation process are we likely to have a result that

protects both workers' jobs and the health and welfare of

workers, our children, and our communities.

___________________________________________

 

No comments: