|
09441
June 4, 2009
PC(USA) energy policy playing well in Washington
PDA: ‘Green construction’ in disaster areas hampered by lack of clarity
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration’s emphasis on “green jobs” and “green construction” tracks well with a Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) energy policy statement approved by last summer’s 218th General Assembly, one of the denomination’s top disaster relief officials told the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy (ACSWP) here recently.
But a lack of clarity over what newly emerging “green” standards entail makes it hard for agencies such as Presbyterian Disaster Assistance to promote the environmentally sound rebuilding practices, said the Rev. John Robinson, PDA’s associate for U.S. disaster response.
“We’re somewhat encouraged by the new administration and its green jobs initiative,” Robinson told the committee on May 15. “But when disasters happen, we’re not clear as a culture what the expectations of individuals and governments are for responding.”
There is a growing concern in the U.S. that green construction happens, Robinson said, “but the standards and technologies are so new that there’s no consensus on what green construction is.”
MIT defines “green construction” as that “which focuses on increasing the efficiency of resource use — energy, water and materials — while reducing building impacts on human health and the environment during the building's lifecycle, through better siting, design, construction, operation, maintenance, and removal.”
Robinson added, “the larger concern when disasters happen is getting families back in their homes as quickly and cost-effectively as possible. There are currently no federal benefits for green construction — which is more time-consuming and expensive than conventional construction — so green construction is viewed by too many as counter-productive.”
Another issue that has to be weighed, Robinson said, is the impact of green construction on poor communities. For instance, he said, “how do we afford toxic cleanup in sections of New Orleans?” States treat that question differently so Mississippi, for example, has better protections for families and their property than Louisiania, he said.
The General Assembly’s energy policy — “Power to Change: U.S. Energy Policy and Global Warming” — has been “very helpful” to faith groups seeking better U.S. policy, said Tyler Edgar, director of environmental justice programs for the National Council of Churches.
“The PC(USA) has the most detailed and progressive energy policy of any denomination,” she added.
Overall, “Power to Change” calls for “comprehensive, mandatory, and aggressive emission reductions that aim to limit the increase in Earth’s temperature to 2 degrees Celsius or less from pre-industrial levels. Legislation should focus on the short-term goal of reducing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions 20 percent from 1990 levels by 2020, and 80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050.”
The 10-point program to achieve those goals includes:
- a “cap and trade” approach to emissions allowances;
- shifting federal energy subsidies away from fossil fuels and nuclear power to renewable energy sources;
- increased efficiency standards for all appliances, buildings and vehicles;
- mandated percentage increases in renewable energy, including a national goal of 20 percent by 2020;
- removing market barriers (such as complicated requirements for connecting to the electricity grid) for producers of renewable energy;
- increased use of decentralized residential renewable energy systems;
- a moratorium on all new coal-fired and nuclear power plants until environmental concerns are addressed;
- limited exploration and exploitation of new fossil fuel supplies, such as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge;
- increased emphasis on public transportation, particularly rail-based public transportation; and
- revised U.S. national security policies that emphasize science-based international standards for addressing global climate change rather than industrialized nations’ dependence on fossil fuels.
| 
