Clock is ticking on climate measures
It seems the warnings by climate scientists grow ever more grave. To prevent widespread climate collapse, they told us three years ago that we have to cut back on the carbon we throw into the air nearly 50 percent by 2030. This year during the COP26 climate summit, Carbon Action Tracker published a report saying that “even with all new Glasgow pledges for 2030, we will emit roughly twice as much in 2030 as required for 1.5 degrees.” A rise of 1.5 degrees is considered the limit for a climate that’s safe for human society.
So, we have to go beyond the COP26 promises and take drastic action worldwide. Now some argue that we should put a big tax on products that spew carbon dioxide and gradually make the tax bigger and bigger. The argument is that this will give people incentive to cut back on products powered by fossil fuel. In other words ration fossil fuel by price. Working people and middle class would have to cut back. The rich would squawk, but in truth they’d barely feel it.
The organization I work for, Promoting Enduring Peace, is calling for a different kind of rationing, rationing by need, the kind that was done during World War II. Then you had cards that you had to present when you bought gasoline and fuel oil. Today we have computers and apps that could do the job. The first priority would be to get people to work and to heat their homes. Travel for fun would be a far lower priority and supersonic jets and space jaunts for billionaires would be in last place.
Rationing by need is just one part of what we think needs to be done. Another is for a popular takeover of fossil fuel industries to speed their gradual elimination. Also necessary is forest preservation (like Remington Woods in Bridgeport) and rewilding of a tremendous amount of land with trees. Mature trees are the best carbon capture “devices” on the planet.
Those are all far-reaching measures. We also propose something smaller, the ending of the use of gas-powered offroad engines. A law to that effect was passed in California in October and over 100 cities in the U.S. have their own laws on the subject. The climate effects of leaf blowers, hedge trimmers and lawn mowers, etc. are quite substantial. An EPA report in 2015 found that these engines produced 4 percent of the carbon dioxide sent into the air in the U.S. a year. That may not sound like much, but in our desperate battle to cut back CO2 emissions that 4 percent is important.
All kinds of other pollution come out of those machines. One reason is that they don’t have catalytic converters and the other anti-pollution devices found in cars and trucks. Back in 2011 the car site Edmunds studied the matter and found that “hydrocarbon emissions from a half-hour of yard work with the two-stroke leaf blower are about the same as a 3,900-mile drive from Texas to Alaska in a [Ford] Raptor.” Their work hasn’t been refuted.
Lawn care workers suffer the most harm. For hours a day they breathe in aerosolized fuel, butadiene, formaldehyde, carbon monoxide and fine particulates, a stew of toxic and cancer-causing agents. Many of these workers wear noise ear protectors from sound that can be as loud, according to a Harvard study, as a jackhammer, but seldom do you see a worker with even a face covering to protect against particles. Homeowners don’t face as much danger because they use the machines just a few hours a week, but many towns have outlawed leaf blowers because of the noise effects alone. Quiet afternoons shouldn’t be considered some luxury just for the 1 percent and quiet is actually a necessity for the growing numbers who work from their homes.
When the California law was passed Rep. Joe Gresko, D-Stratford, told Hearst Connecticut Media that the “Environment Committee he co-chairs has no plans to adopt any new law limiting small-engine use.” He implied it was a local problem. It is not. It’s a danger to workers, to homeowners and to the earth’s climates. The Environment Committee should think this over again and it should look into the idea of exchanging gas-powered machines for free electric ones. The issue is that critical.