Now that the COVID-19 pandemic is showing serious signs of slowing down, at least in North America, it’s a good time to ponder ways to invigorate the economy. One way would be to confront another societal threat climate change by taking the necessary steps to decarbonize the economy.
U.S. President Joe Biden has talked often about the need to “build back better.” Indeed that’s the thrust of his massive infrastructure plan that started at $2 trillion and has steadily been whittled down to half that. As this went to press, it looked doubtful that the whittled version would receive enough support from Republicans to avoid dying in the Senate.
The equipment industry through groups like the Associated Equipment Distributors and the Association of Equipment Manufacturers were already fierce proponents of expanded infrastructure spending even before the pandemic. Post-pandemic, those groups have become even more enthusiastic boosters of Biden’s plan, particularly the part that focuses on rebuilding the nation’s roads, bridges, power grids, water systems and the like.
Yes, those industries have a lot to gain from that massive government spending. But it would also be money well-spent. In 2017, the American Society of Civil Engineers gave U.S. infrastructure a D+ rating and estimated that national infrastructure spending would fall $2.1 trillion short of addressing the need by 2025. President Donald Trump had proposed a $1.5 trillion plan, which would have greatly narrowed the gap, but it never did gain any traction either.
If Trump couldn’t get his fellow Republicans to back such massive spending, one has to wonder how Biden will be able to do it. He might feel compelled to do something smaller when what’s really is needed to go bold and bigger.
Perhaps the president could enlist the aid of Bill Gates, whose recent book, How to Avoid a Climate Disaster, outlines how to take the world to net-zero carbon emissions by mid-century. The book might be subtitled, “Build Back Better,” although its actual subtitle is “The Solutions We Have and the Breakthroughs We Need.”
Gates has no share of detractors, including those on the left who despised his cut throat business practices when he ran Microsoft. Those on the right don’t care for him either because he’s open to left-leaning ideas such as the benefits of national governments playing a big role in public policy.
But they should all avoid such ad hominem attacks and just read his very readable book because it clearly spells out the challenges of reducing carbon dioxide emissions to zero, the small hops already taken, the skips underway, and the huge jumps needed in the near future.
Gates may have a reputation as a nerd, but he recognizes that the necessary shifts will be disruptive. “You don’t have to be a political scientist to think that national leaders who champion getting to zero will find more support for their ideas if they understand the concerns of families and communities whose livelihoods will be hit hard and they take those concerns seriously,” he writes.
Sure, a lot of Republicans remain in denial about the threat of carbon emissions. But they don’t need to believe in the problem. They just need to heed the message of that famous Joel Pett cartoon from USA Today where an attendee at a climate summit belts out, “What if it’s a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?”
As reported in the last edition, automobile makers are already taking a leap toward creating that better world, for nothing or not. When an executive of Ford says the company is “all-in on electric,” it’s clear that big changes are coming.
However, as Gates points out in his book, transportation is only one of five major sources of greenhouse emissions. And it’s far from the largest one. “Getting around,” as he calls it, in planes, trucks, cargo ships and the like account for just 16 percent of global emissions. “Making things” like cement, steel, and plastic tops the list of categories. “Plugging in,” namely electricity generation, is second at 27 percent. “Growing things” plants and animals causes 19 percent. Last on the list is “keeping warm and cool,” heating and refrigeration, at nine percent.
To a large extent, addressing all of them is going to involve investing in new infra- structure as well as enacting policies and taxation to create incentives that will nudge markets toward a greener future.
“The real value of government leadership in R&D is that it can take chances on bold ideas that might fail or might not pay off right away,” he writes.
He cites the human genome project as an example; it returned $141 to the economy for every $1 spent on it.
“There are markets worth billions of dollars waiting for someone to invent low- cost, zero-carbon cement or steel, or a net- zero liquid fuel,” Gate points out. Then 10 pages later, he notes: “No one has cornered the market on effective solutions to climate change.”
