“We gave you 17 percent, what do you mean you want more?”
That was the response of Duke Energy CEO Jim Rogers when I told him recently I’d like him to reconsider Duke’s actions to weaken the Waxman/Markey climate change bill. As the U.S. youth representative at a recent meeting of world business leaders in Copenhagen, I approached Mr. Rogers after the Executive Director of one of the world’s largest environmental organizations helped 4 other youth representatives and me “find” our way into the private conference dinner. Explaining my role as a representative of SustainUS and the Energy Action Coalition, I proceeded to tell him that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change calls for reductions of 25-40 percent from a 1990 baseline (not the weaker 2005 target in Waxman/Markey) to reduce the chances of catastrophic climate change that threatens future generations. I told Mr. Rogers that the actions of Duke Energy are unacceptable to the youth climate movement, and that the survival of future generations is being endangered with such a modest climate bill that companies like his have tried to further weaken.
That wasn’t the last run-in I had with one of the U.S.’s biggest blockers of climate progress. During the dinner, I sat next to another executive from Duke. I explained to him why I was at the conference and who I was representing, and how disappointed we are with the bill in its current form. I added that young people are concerned about the potential for reaching a deal in Copenhagen when the U.S. is bringing reduction targets to the table that are far below what science says is necessary. I also asked why Duke feels they deserve to receive billions of dollars worth of free permits. Mr. Duke (I’ll just call him that) explained that the federal regulatory commissions are a major obstacle to implementing clean energy, and that free credits are necessary early in the carbon market (and by early he meant all the way until 2025 or 2030), because we can’t trust how the government will invest auction revenue. He was adamant that by receiving giveaways, Duke will pass along all savings directly to the consumer. In response to the question about U.S. targets this December, Mr. Duke said that 2020 targets are less important because the technology will allow us to catch up in later years. What he didn’t seem to understand is that young people don’t trust Duke Energy and don’t trust the dirty energy industries to do what is right, because they haven’t done it before. The best available science says we need to start reducing our emissions now. If we wait until 2020 to take serious action, it will be too late, as climate change will start rapidly accelerating. Mr. Duke didn’t seem to understand that we are literally fighting for our future, and that we will not stand silently as companies such as Duke dismantle our first legislative attempt at a clean energy future. It is up to young people to let Duke Energy know that we see through them and their attempts to manipulate the legislation that will shape our future.
Since January, the U.S. climate movement has seen unprecedented government action to reduce emissions. Unfortunately, the nation’s first chance at comprehensive energy and climate legislation became dramatically weakened as it moved through the House Energy and Commerce Committee. This bill is now nowhere near where science says is necessary to minimize the chance of catastrophic climate change in our lifetimes. International negotiators are meeting monthly between now and the 15th Conference of Parties (COP 15) in Copenhagen, where world leaders will likely settle on a successor agreement to the Kyoto Protocol. The Copenhagen Climate Council, a coalition of government, NGO, and businesses determined to reach a strong deal at COP 15, sponsored the conference I attended to bring together top executives to build support for a global deal.
I guess Duke didn’t get the message.
The conference definitely had its promising moments, though: major business leaders agreed that technological and adaptation support to developing countries is essential in reaching a global deal; Ban Ki Moon, Tim Flannery, and Kate Blanchett gave impassioned speeches for business leaders to take action on climate, always invoking the need to protect future generations; and we saw the launch of a global youth petition called Planet Call to bring together youth networks from all over the world in support of a strong global treaty. Add your name to the petition at www.planetcall.org, and continue to let Duke Energy and Congress know that the only climate bill we will accept is one that protects the Earth for us to inherit.
The weakening of ACES by corporate interests really takes the wind out of our electoral “victories” in 2008. Even with two heavily Democratic houses of Congress, a very progressive (by American standards) president and a growing grassroots movement, the industries we need to reign in are still writing the policies that regulate them. This isn’t democracy, it’s corporatocracy.
Our means of engagement and influence over our government are clear – we can lobby, work on campaigns, vote, etc. But how do we effectively exercise influence over Duke energy? Rogers clearly doesn’t care about our generation’s future. Indeed, in a rational sense, he shouldn’t – his job is maximizing current profits for shareholders. Boycotting Duke energy doesn’t seem feasible, and numerous sit-ins and other direct actions don’t seem to have changed any corporate policies.
So what’s next? Do we have to make stopping global warming profitable for the dirty energy industry that has caused it? I suppose that’s what ACES in its present form is trying to do. Frankly, I’d live with the massive handouts to dirty industry over the next 20 years, if only it came with a scientifically based reduction target and equally massive investment in clean energy research, development and deployment and in green jobs programs and efficiency.
Is there a way to reconcile all of this? It seems like enough value should be created with a real permit system that it could be allocated to both satisfy corporations (for a decade or two), invest in the technologies we need to maintain a good economy based on clean energy, and fund all of the low-cost efficiency measures that can employ millions.
Maybe the next step is for us to unseat the members of congress who’ve let Duke (etc.) run all over them…
Alex, I love those next steps. We should start a campaign to de-seat those trying to defeat our future. We voted in record numbers, we showed up in DC, we followed up with district meetings, we are educated on the issues and we are making it known. I love positive campaigns but this is ridiculous and with all these recent events and the political map finally in our favor its time to act with force.