environment

I wrote this article for the Huffington Post.  It can be seen in its original context here.



Van Jones and others have so successfully argued for green collar jobs—defined by Green for All as a job that does something for the planet, pays family wages and provides opportunities for upward mobility–that the term has become ubiquitous among politicians, environmentalists and social activists.  This should come as no surprise, particularly in the current economic climate: after all, who can argue against creating more jobs for American families, jobs that also enhance our infrastructure, national security and environment?  In fact, President-elect Obama recently announced a plan to create 2.5 million jobs over the next two years, and many of those will certainly be green collar.

But lost in all the talk of green collar jobs is the fact that there is a significant portion of the target population–low-income, people of color, the unemployed and underemployed–who want to be green collar entrepreneurs.  For example, roughly 25% of the people that graduate from a green job training program in my hometown of Providence, Rhode Island want to start their own business.  According to Mark Kravatz, who runs the program, the enthusiasm among these entrepreneurs is inspiring; they see how green can be good for them, their family and their community, and they want to get in on the game. So what’s the problem? Simply put, they have little to no options for accessing the capital they would need to make their idea a reality. 

Just because Congress has allowed the ban on drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf to expire doesn’t mean we need to throw our hands in the air and watch idly as the oil companies swoop in and make a profit.  In fact, we don’t even need to allow all this petty, ridiculous talk about “Drill Here, Drill Now” to distract us from the larger challenge of lowering energy prices, getting off foreign oil and addressing climate change.  Despite the fact that our leaders have already said ‘yes’ to offshore drilling, it isn’t too late to change that answer to ‘thanks, but no thanks.’ All we need is for 306,000 people willing to show our leaders how eager Americans are, as Thomas Friedman likes to say, to do nation building here at home.

Let’s first, as many have already done, put the whole offshore drilling debate in perspective.  The U.S. currently imports 630 million gallon of oil a day.  According the Department of Energy, additional offshore drilling would bring online an additional 153 million gallons of oil A YEAR by 2017, reaching a maximum of roughly 300 million gallons by 2030.

I wrote this article for the Huffington Post.  It can be seen in its original context here.

There are a lot of similarities between the current financial crisis and the climate crisis, except for the urgency with which the two are being addressed.  On the one hand, the present state of the financial markets hasn’t been seen since the Great Depression of the 1930’s; on the other, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in on pace to reach levels not seen in the last 500,000 years.  There is a near consensus among economists that something needs to be done to stabilize financial markets, with the only debate being about how best to do that.  Likewise, there is a near consensus among scientists that climate change is happening, is man-made and must be addressed, with the only debate centering around the cost of mitigation and adaptation, as well as the implication of various scenarios (e.g., how much sea level rise at a given CO2 level).

In response to the sub-prime mortgage crisis and the collapse of Lehman Brothers and other storied financial institutions, both Democrats and Republicans have set aside their traditional core “beliefs” (not that it’s hard for them to set those beliefs aside), with Republicans temporarily forgetting about their hatred of government regulation, and the Democrats doing away with their dislike of giving a government official unlimited powers-in this case the Treasury Secretary (I know, they did the same with Bush after 9/11; I’ll get to that in a moment).  And despite the fact that there has recently been some opposition from both sides to the current proposal for a $700 billion bailout plan, in all likelihood the plan will pass, albeit with some minor changes.