How has climate change impacted you, your family, and your community?
Climate change is impacting my community in the increased frequency and severity of weather events. My parents met in Alexandria, Virginia, 20 minutes from my house. Since Alexandria, Virginia was founded in 1749, the Potomac River’s sea level has risen one foot. Many would respond that one foot is “no big deal” and we can deal with climate change later, but store owners in Alexandria would not agree. 2018 was the wettest year on record for Washington DC, Alexandria and many other cities. The street in front of the restaurant Chadwicks, for example, only a block away from the river, flooded 30 times in one month, costing the business tens of thousands of dollars. Sea levels in and around Washington DC are rising twice the global average, so such flooding will increase in frequency and intensity.
Another way that climate change affects my community is through increased temperatures. Humidity, for example, has increased 5 to 10 percent since 1970, increasing the perceived temperature by five degrees. In a study of cities around the US and world, researchers found that poorer communities and often those of color experience temperatures as much as ten degrees higher than their wealthier counterparts. Such a disparity is significant because extreme heat is one of the leading causes of weather related deaths. Policies such as redlining have concentrated poverty, pollution and lack of resources in communities of color. In a study of the Mid-Atlantic region, in which I live, researchers found that people of color (African America, Asian American and Latino residents) are exposed to 66% more air pollution. Air pollution is related to climate change in the sense that almost all air pollution originates in the burning of fossil fuels, the main driver of climate change. The fact that, according to the US Department of Health and Human Services “black children are 4 times more likely to be admitted to the hospital for asthma, as compared with white children” reflects the consequences of such a disparity.
Are there existing programs or strategies that you or your community are using to address climate change that could be implemented at the federal level?
My state of Virginia recently passed the Virginia Clean Economy Act that requires Dominion Energy and Appalachian Power to be 100% carbon-free by 2050 and coal-fired power plants to be closed by the end of 2024. The law prioritizes lowering the energy costs of low income consumers and mandates Dominion to hire local workers from “historically disadvantaged communities” to work on offshore wind projects. The law also seeks to facilitate the expansion of rooftop solar.
At the federal level, such mandates on hiring workers from historically disadvantaged communities such as communities of color, would be beneficial in addressing the social justice aspect of the climate crisis. Similarly, requiring the federal government to source energy from 100% renewable sources would go a long way in addressing the climate crisis, creating jobs, improving air quality, and signalling the long-term direction of the renewable energy market. At the national level, however, a carbon fee and dividend remains by far the most simple, comprehensive, and effective proposal.
What national policies do you currently support that will mitigate climate change and improve American lives?
An example of a similar plan that already has 80 cosponsors in the House of Representatives is the Carbon Dividend and Energy Innovation Act. The legislation puts a gradually increasing price on carbon that begins at $15 and rises $10 each year. The border-adjustment aspect of the plan would encourage other countries to increase their environmental standards and prevent carbon leakage. Since the carbon fee is revenue-neutral, its proceeds would be returned to the American people, benefiting a family of four, for example, with $4,410 in annual dividends in year ten that could help Americans, particularly poorer Americans, adapt to rising energy costs that a transition may entail. In ten years, the bill is projected to create 2.1 million local jobs across America. Presently, the environmental and health costs of fossil fuels cost the United States $240 billion per year. Due to the improvement of environmental quality, the bill would save 295,000 lives through 2030 from improved air quality. As previously mentioned, due to the disproportionate exposure to pollution of communities of color and poor communities, such benefits would also address structural inequalities in our society. Finally, and perhaps the most important, the bill would reduce US carbon emissions by 40% in the next 12 years.
What types of federal investments do you see getting the biggest return in terms of mitigating climate impacts?
While other legislation would be necessary to address other aspects of the climate crisis, carbon fee and dividend is the single most effective policy to decarbonize our economy. A carbon fee and dividend is so effective because it represents an economy-wide solution and gives businesses long-term certainty in determining investments. At present, businesses have less incentive to make long term investments in renewable energy because they know that such rules and regulations will change with the advent of a new administration. Enacting carbon fee and dividend legislation would give businesses and investors long-term certainty on the direction of the economy toward a clean energy future. That is why so many businesses support the solution. Republicans, known to be in favor of business, also support the solution. While the polarization of politics have led each party to somewhat seek legislative ‘wins’ at the expense of the other party, two thirds of voters say they support charging fossil fuel companies for their carbon emissions and giving the money back to Americans with the goal of cutting emissions. Thus, a carbon fee and dividend policy has strong bipartisan support.
Have federal incentives prompted you or others in your community to purchase electricity from renewable sources, an electric car, or other low-emission technologies? If current incentives have not, what types of incentives might be more appealing?
The carbon fee and dividend policy is the most appealing because it provides families with increased income as the tax increases. Families could thus spend the money received on increased energy costs that will be associated with decarbonizing the energy grid and transportation system. Increasing the scope of public transportation such as the metro would make it easier for my community to take advantage of such options instead of using a private car, one of the leading causes of air pollution. The metro could be improved by ensuring that the trains actually come on time, are relatively clean, and operate at a reasonable frequency such as every five to ten minutes. Other incentives could include making it more difficult to drive by converting streets to bicycle only areas or having walk-only centers of cities. I live and attend school in France and many cities in Europe have walk-only city centers, which are much nicer for air quality and general quality of life. I appreciate your consideration of these ideas and hope that you will take substantial action, with your Republican colleagues, to address the climate crisis.