Few have forgotten the anguish of stunted crops and terror of devastating forest fires last year because of the meager snowpack that yielded paltry irrigation water and tinder-dry soils. The snowpack was far below normal last year, not for lack of precipitation (which was normal), but because of how unusually warm it was. Much more of the mountain precipitation fell as rain rather than snow.
Mountain snow is invaluable as a natural reservoir of water, storing winter precipitation for use during the dry growing season; 70 percent of runoff in the western U.S. is from snowmelt. Moreover, snow keeps the soil moist and vegetation green during summer, limiting the spread of forest fires when lightning strikes. It is the “lifeblood of the west” (Capital Press, Jan. 1, “Heavy snow eases Oregon drought concern, but uncertainties remain”).
Research has shown that Cascade snowpack has decreased 25 percent over the last few decades as the climate has warmed in response to the atmospheric accumulation of carbon dioxide (CO2), primarily from burning fossil fuels.
My own research concludes a 50 percent reduction in snowpack by 2050 and a 70 percent reduction by 2100 are likely, unless global CO2 emissions are substantially reduced. Meager snow years like last year will become normal.
A recent study by the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University found that 84 percent of economists say that agriculture, fishing, insurance and health services stand to lose the most productivity as a result of climate change.
To save the snow, we need a cost-effective way of reducing fossil fuel use without hurting the economy.
Farmers cannot alone reduce global CO2 emissions enough to make a significant difference. But when it comes to climate change, everyone has skin in the game, and no one can expect others to reduce emissions if they don’t reduce emissions themselves. This interdependency explains the success of the Paris Climate Conference, which secured commitments of 184 of 196 nations to substantially reduce carbon emissions, a remarkable achievement.
Yet the Paris agreement is not sufficient to save the Cascade snowpack. Moreover, by relying on emissions caps it could harm the economy. A more effective and efficient approach is needed.
Economists agree that the most effective and efficient method of reducing carbon emissions is to put a steadily increasing national fee on fossil carbon at the source (mine, well, or import) and return all of the revenue to the economy. This spurs the market to meet energy demand with cost-effective carbon-free substitutes for fossil fuels without hurting the economy. Government regulations and emission caps are unnecessary. A border tariff adjustment could refund our agricultural exporters, discourage businesses from relocating to other countries and incentivize those countries to adopt an equivalent price on carbon.
Regional Economic Modeling, Inc., estimated the economic impact of such a carbon fee that returns the revenue as a dividend to every legal resident. It concluded CO2 emissions decline 33 percent after only 10 years, and 52 percent after 20 years, national employment increases by 2.1 million jobs after 10 years and 2.8 million after 20 years, 13,000 early deaths from coal mining and respiratory illness are prevented annually after 10 years, the Gross Domestic Product increases by $70-$85 billion from 2020 on, and agriculture is not impacted.
Not considered in the REMI analysis are the $100 billion annual cost of U.S. military to ensure access to Middle East oil no longer needed as fossil fuels are phased out, or the larger economic damages from lost Cascade snowpack and permanently flooded coastal property avoided as the accumulation of CO2 is mitigated.
It is sometimes hard to imagine farming without fossil fuels, but fossil carbon-free technology is already available. It just needs a clear market signal to replace fossil fuels. The tractor manufacturer New Holland has already developed hydrogen fuel cell tractors, but has not marketed them because they cannot compete with subsidized fossil fuels. By enacting a carbon fee and dividend to encourage the transition to a carbon-free economy, we can save our snowpack and preserve our water supply for future generations, and continue to compete in the global agricultural market.
Steve Ghan is a climate scientist and volunteer with Citizens Climate Lobby.
Commented
Sorry, there are no recent results for popular commented articles.