If you recognize my name or photo, it's probably because of my public support for legalizing marijuana in Alaska in 2014. But while I was working on that issue, I kept hearing a voice in my head saying, "If you're going to be an advocate, you should really focus on that other topic you care about, the one that you know is far more important: climate change and biodiversity loss."
The fact is, finding solutions to climate change is a far more complex task. Ending environmental degradation involves a huge number of changes that run up against a vast breadth of vested interests.
Yet, change is possible. In the 1970s and '80s when it became clear that releasing chemicals like chlorofluorocarbons, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides into the air caused environmental damage, the U.S. mandated steps to reduce their emissions. Why has carbon dioxide emission, which causes climate warming and ocean acidification, taken so much longer to even begin to be addressed?
The American Petroleum Institute knew the danger of carbon dioxide causing climate change more than 45 years ago, at least 20 years before it was brought into mainstream discussion by scientists like James Hansen.The Stanford Research Institute presented a report to the API in 1968 that warned, "If the Earth's temperature increases significantly, a number of events might be expected to occur including the melting of the Antarctic ice cap, a rise in sea levels, (and) warming of the oceans ..." Last year, it was revealed that ExxonMobil knew of climate change as early as 1981, only to spend millions of dollars over the following 27 years to promote climate change denial.
Intentional misinformation has certainly been a major cause of delay in reducing carbon pollution. But even among those who acknowledge the problem, many countries and corporations are waiting for somebody else to act. Since everyone's carbon pollution affects everyone else on the planet, ending it requires an approach with national and international impact.
The best idea I've heard is the market-based solution advocated by the Citizens' Climate Lobby. This plan will put money directly into the pockets of American consumers, which will offset the increased costs of some products as increasing fees are gradually imposed on fossil fuels. Here is now the carbon fee and dividend will work: (1) Place a steadily rising fee on coal, oil and gas; (2) Give all of the revenue from the carbon fee back to households; (3) Use a border adjustment to discourage business relocation, so foreign governments must adopt the same carbon price levels as we do or pay at our ports for the privilege of polluting.
Economists say the carbon fee and dividend is the best first step to reducing the catastrophic effects of climate change. Adopting it will put America in a leadership position on climate legislation and green technology. It will decrease our dependence on foreign oil, substituting low-carbon energy made in the U.S. When we substitute green energy for fossil fuels it creates jobs, and some of those jobs will be right here in Alaska.
We can finally change America's carbon emissions policy after decades of misinformation and delay. If you have been waiting for something that will really work to reduce carbon pollution, learn more about the carbon fee and dividend at citizensclimatelobby.org.
Tim Hinterberger is a professor of developmental biology at the University of Alaska Anchorage.
The views expressed here are the writer's own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary@alaskadispatch.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@alaskadispatch.com or click here to submit via any web browser.