Years of ‘fake news’, vested interests, confused public debate and weak government policy has generated a haze of white noise drowning out sensible discussion around how to switch from fossil fuel-based power generation to clean (often renewable) alternatives.
Global Agreements
The Paris Agreement came into force in November 2016 and committed signatory countries to implement changes to keep global temperature increases in the 21st century to well below two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. This global collaboration was preceded by the December 1997 Kyoto Protocol that bound signatory countries to set greenhouse gas emission reduction targets. Along with other local and international programs, the goal was a transition to a low-carbon emitting world where the cost, effort, and benefits, were shared.
Agreements such as Paris and Kyoto formalised a global will to act. Unfortunately, these intentions have been hijacked such that the very belief in climate change and its effects still remain debated.
Focusing on Public Health
There is a way to cut through the vested interests and wilful ignorance while simultaneously empowering governments to implement legislation that will lead to real change in global baseload power generation: switch the goal to one of improving public health.
Governments regularly update legislation to improve health outcomes for its citizens, where revenue is available and outcomes can be reasonably predicted. An argument can be made for governments to switch baseload power generation to clean alternatives as a public health matter, rather than focusing on climate change mitigation.
According to information released by the World Health Organisation in early 2018, deaths attributed to severe illnesses such as lung cancer, chronic respiratory disease and stroke are reduced by improving air quality. The same report outlined how air pollution can be improved via a variety of methods, which includes switching power generation to cleaner alternatives.
The World Health Organisation outlines a measurable correlation between reducing particulate matter (a common proxy for air quality) and reducing the deaths attributed to it. Therefore, legislators can determine the likely benefits of improving air pollution based on policy changes regarding the mix of power generation implemented. This empowers governments to implement change and win over support from their constituents in a conversation centred around health.
There is public will for change that governments can leverage to improve health outcomes via accelerating the switch to clean power generation. A poll conducted by the Lowy Institute, in the first half of 2018, found that ‘59 per cent of Australians … say “global warming is a serious and pressing problem” about which “we should begin taking steps now even if this involves significant costs”’. Further, 84 per cent of respondents asked that their governments focus on switching power generation and implement the necessary infrastructure to support it.
The World Health Organisation makes it clear that air pollution is closely aligned to climate change.
Australian governments have been legislating improvements in vehicle emissions standards since the early 1970s to reduce air pollution. These standards are now similar to European requirements that aim to reduce particulates, CO2 and other chemicals in light vehicle emissions. This is important as light vehicles account for ten per cent of Australia’s total greenhouse gas emissions, according to the Climate Change Authority.
Public Will
There is a will and acceptance for improving health outcomes related to vehicle emissions that has resulted in quantifiable health improvements in recent decades. Light vehicle manufacturers have been improving exhaust emissions in alignment to government legislation and market expectation. However, further improvements are needed. The World Health Organisation states that, globally, seven million people die each year as a direct result of air pollution. Air pollution is also responsible for 33 per cent of all deaths caused by heart disease, stroke and lung cancer.
Applying a similar level of legislative and social will that has seen improvements in light vehicle emissions, to that of power generation, can provide significant improvements in public health while also achieving needed action on climate change. This switch in focus provides an opportunity to convince those still unsure about changing power generation to cleaner alternatives. Anyone still resisting removing fossil fuel-based power generation as a climate change minimisation strategy may be more likely to accept the public health benefits instead.
Phasing out fossil fuels as an urgent public health matter, similar to that of establishing ever more stringent car exhaust legislation, takes the focus away from the pointless quagmire of opinion masquerading as fact around the ‘science’ of climate change. Vested interests campaigning for the continuance of fossil fuels in power generation can have their influence and power diluted by a public health focus. Such a change makes it harder for governments to further delay or obfuscate their responsibility but also empowers them to focus on a primary consideration for their constituents: health.
Read more about renewable power sources in: Renewable Energy: A Primer for the Twenty-First Century, by Professor Bruce Usher.
