Balancing Energy Transition and Climate Justice :

A Look at Policy Efforts and Challenges in Inclusive Transitions

 by Carlos João Parreira

As the impact of greenhouse gas emissions on our climate worsens, the need to pivot towards low-carbon energy sources becomes ever more paramount. Despite this mounting pressure, energy policy efforts during this transition will need to consider and safeguard vulnerable communities, often disregarded or outmaneuvered by commercial entities, political forces, and other interests.

Peter Baker and Blake Tims (2019) spoke of this tension in the context of the expansive Appalachian region of the United States, which has long struggled to recover from coal’s decline -- once a cornerstone of its economy. Peaking in World War II and declining ever since, insufficient investment has been made back into the communities, leaving them unprepared for a post-coal future. As of 1963, a third of the Appalachian population was in poverty, with recent metrics continuing to show Appalachia lagging national quality-of-life levels. Baker and Tims (2019) go on to specifically highlight West Virginia, the nation’s second-largest producer of coal, which ranks as one of the worst in healthcare and education, and dead last in energy and infrastructure (USEIA, 2022; US News, 2020).

Tianna Bruno and Wendy Jepson (2017) address an alternate scenario, where the energy industry is strong, but at a great cost to the local fenceline communities. In Texas, Port Arthur’s predominantly African American population is detrimentally impacted by toxic pollution from the seven petrochemical plants in town including US’s largest, Saudi Aramco’s Motiva Refinery. As of 2010, one third of its residents lived below the federal poverty levels, with unemployment estimates ranging from 11-25%. In terms of quality of life, Port Arthur’s levels of asthma, cardiovascular disease, and risk of cancer are higher than the state average. When Bruno and Jepson discuss industrial communities on a broader scale, despite suffering the most consequences they receive few benefits in return and are the least involved in decision-making.

Locals are facing headwinds from governmental agencies along with commercial interests (Bruno & Jepson, 2017). Collective action was found to be de-prioritized by the USEPA, instead tasking individuals with reporting and monitoring, as preferred by industry. In lieu of the regulatory enforcement and policy reform called for by the community, government-sanctioned financial incentives by the polluters were found to be ineffectual and out of reach for many, failing to significantly address the resident’s health concerns or help the community change course towards a more economically sound future.

Proposed policy solutions have varied in scope and ultimate success. Michele Betsill and Dimitris Stevis (2015) explore Democratic Colorado Governor Bill Ritter’s efforts towards a “New Energy Economy”. Ultimately leading to the adoption of a 30% Renewable Energy Standard in 2010, its messaging and key players proved adaptable to shifting dynamics, forming a lasting coalition of disparate interests. Its environmental intentions found better success when framed as economic progress and employment opportunities, broadening possible alliances between political parties. Should chamber and governorship change hands, policies with connections across the aisle have a lower chance of being overturned, as discussed in Barry Rabe’s 2015 examination of the durability of nationwide cap-and-trade policies.

Colorado’s energy transition was to originally rely on shifting to renewables, but when this was threatened by recession challenges within the industry, priorities transferred to the idea of pivoting away from coal to lower-carbon natural gas. From a climate justice perspective this clashed with the more activist wing of the coalition, who considered environmental efforts too compromised to satisfy the original intent. This friction between incremental progress, with a higher chance of success but blunted effect, and more radical approaches, with a higher risk of failure but when successful can more closely achieve stated goals, is an ongoing discussion within social justice movements. In the case of Colorado’s efforts, Betsill and Dimitris (2015) argued that it allowed for the continued progress towards the better option of natural gas over fossil fuels, albeit not a final nor perfect solution.

Nevertheless, compromises are challenging. The ideal of a just transition goes beyond new technology, to new paradigms that can better address societal challenges. This might be a harder path, but not an impossible one. Shalanda Baker (2019) spotlights South Africa’s approach to energy auctions, directly considering the injustices of apartheid in their legislation. Policymakers incorporated minimum percentage requirements of black ownership and local community involvement, a direct contrast to what was shown in Port Arthur where the community have little to no access to decision-making. In California, 25% of the proceeds from its cap-and-trade program must be invested in programs that benefit communities of color and disadvantaged groups, including those most affected by climate change (Baker, 2019). Of this investment, nearly half must be specifically directed to geographical areas of high risk.

Ultimately, more favorable outcomes are possible when strong coalitions are built. David J. Hess (2017), in an article that predates his research on energy decentralization with Dasom Lee, mapped four prototypical energy-transition coalitions to identify critical components that foster inclusive transitions. From social movements to political coalitions, Hess analysed differences in goals, strategies, and organizational structures and how these evolved to enable productive integration across coalitions. His biggest take-away is the importance of “bridge-broker organizations”. Coalitions that seem disperse can be unified by players that identify a broader but equally important message that can resonate strongly. The banner message he identified as most effective was “Energy Democracy”. Within this broader concept, several goals have coexisted: Development of renewable energy sources and phasing out fossil fuels; increased public participation in policy making and energy generation; energy sector jobs and other economic support of lower- and middle-income families.

Exact definitions and components of each can be seen differently and evolve throughout the process, depending on the priorities of those involved. Hess points to the success of RGGI, which leveraged this level of flexibility in framing to allow different but overlapping interests to coexist, ultimately integrating towards a common goal. To ignore or overrule interests can be counter-productive for progress – both incumbent organizations and activist groups can present significant challenges, possibly threatening or derailing efforts altogether. Ideally, Energy Democracy has the potential to be what it implies – coalitions coming together to establish a more just society.

References

Baker, P., & Tims, B. (2020). Coal shines a light on the need for a just energy transition in the United States. Buffalo Environmental Law Journal, 27(1), 87. https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/belj/vol27/iss1/3

Baker, S. (2019). Anti-Resilience: A Roadmap for Transformational Justice within the Energy System*. https://harvardcrcl.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2019/03/Baker.pdf

Betsill, M., & Stevis, D. (2015). The politics and dynamics of energy transitions: lessons from Colorado’s (USA) “New Energy Economy.” Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 34(2), 381–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263774x15614668

Bruno, T., & Jepson, W. (2017). Marketisation of environmental justice: U.S. EPA environmental justice showcase communities project in Port Arthur, Texas. Local Environment, 23(3), 276–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2017.1415873

Hess, D. J. (2018). Energy democracy and social movements: A multi-coalition perspective on the politics of sustainability transitions. Energy Research & Social Science, 40, 177–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.01.003

Rabe, B. G. (2015). The durability of carbon cap‐and‐trade policy. Governance, 29(1), 103–119. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12151

U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2022, December 15). West Virginia - State energy profile overview. Www.eia.gov. https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=WV

U.S. News. (2020). Where does West Virginia place in the U.S. news best states rankings? U.S. News & World Report. https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/west-virginia