Publications:

• Newsletters and Journals
• Annual Reports
• Research Reports
• Proceedings & Presentations
• Technical Assistance Resources
• Videos
• Subscribe
• Order

July 2008

Current Issue | Previous Issues | Subscribe

Special Research Conference Issue: Plenary Sessions

Portfolio of strategies needed to lower transportation's carbon footprint

The globe will warm in coming years, but no one knows how much. If we're unlucky, said Stephen Schneider, the planet faces catastrophic results. Winning this "planetary gamble" will take a large portfolio of energy and transportation strategies, including performance mandates, cleaner technology, and international cooperation. "Let's have a learning-by-doing feeding frenzy," he urged.

Schneider is the Melvin and Joan Lane Professor for Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies, professor of biological sciences, and senior fellow at the Woods Institute for the Environment at Stanford University. Since 1988 he has been involved with the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC); he and four generations of IPCC authors received a collective Nobel Peace Prize for their joint efforts in 2007.

Several factors complicate the climate change debate. First is the difficulty in predicting the future. Scientists are analyzing data from the atmosphere, oceans, glaciers, and ice caps, but this "partly cloudy crystal ball" won't give definitive answers any time soon, Schneider said, and not before major impacts are felt.

Second is the challenge of translating the science for politicians and the media. Citizens must understand the nature of system science to participate meaningfully in the debate, Schneider said, but the issue is not an easy one for the media to present. "All climate issues are global and long term," he added. "All politics is local and short term."

One thing is well established: the global warming of the past century and a half. A 2007 IPCC report used "unusually strong language," Schneider said, to declare the evidence is now "unequivocal" that humans are causing global warming. The report also stated it is "very likely" that human activities have caused most of the global temperature rise observed since the mid-20th century.

Scientists now have "very high confidence"—at least a 9 out of 10 chance of being correct—in their understanding of how human activities are causing the world to warm, Schneider continued, due to major advances in climate modeling and the collection and analysis of data. For North America, warming will trigger effects such as more droughts and wildfires; smoggier cities and related harm to public health; and stronger coastal storms.

The problem is no longer just technical—it is ideological, too. California has been able to escape the "partisan trap," Schneider said, because everyone agreed warming is not good for the state. "There is no such thing as a Democratic flood and a Republican wildfire," he said.

Schneider advised taking a risk management approach that models the future, estimates risk, and proposes possible actions to decision makers. For the transportation sector, this means a portfolio of options including higher fuel-economy standards, hybrid vehicles, cellulosic biofuels, cap-and-trade arrangements or a carbon tax, and smart growth and other land use changes. Technology will be a big part of the solution.

Gauging the carbon benefits of these strategies requires a life-cycle analysis: looking at what it takes to build and junk vehicles, for example, or grow and store biofuels. The first 20,000 miles of a hybrid provides less carbon benefit than a non-hybrid because of current battery technology, Schneider noted, while the carbon footprint of plug-in hybrids will depend on how electricity is generated. Likewise, biofuels made from cellulosic or waste products give real benefit, but destroying primary forests to grow biofuels wipes out gains "for a hundred years," he said.

Schneider also raised the need for "egalitarian sharing and technology development" with countries like India and China. As citizens in developing countries become more affluent, he said, "they want what we want"—a vehicle. "How do we find development pathways that allow growth and some individual choice but don't lead to a train wreck?" His answer is a risk management approach in which nongovernmental organizations, the private sector, and governments negotiate and create partnerships. Options might include patent arrangements that let countries leapfrog straight to cleaner technologies like plugin hybrids and solar or geothermal power. "A solution is needed at a planetary scale," he stressed.

California, which has the lowest CO2 emissions and energy use per capita in the country, may offer a path forward. Its energy commission reviews all products—cars, windows, light bulbs—to determine the payback of buying greener, and then determines whether to set mandates. For example, after setting standards for refrigerators, the appliances grew larger and cheaper— and cut electricity use twice that of the potential energy of the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, Schneider said. California's vehicle emissions mandate wouldn't have passed if the commission and state DOT hadn't concluded it would be cost-effective, he added. California also is banning inefficient air conditioners.

States, especially large ones like California, can make a difference. "Good ideas get copied," Schneider said. Still, he believes performance standards must be national as part of an overall energy policy.

In closing, Schneider repeated his call for ideas: "Let 50 alternatives bloom. Let's capture the low-hanging fruit. Let's do as much as we can as fast as we can as cost-effectively as we can as fairly as we can."