|
Lester Brown, author of Plan B 3.0, shows us how
we can change in enough time to save life on earth, as we know it.
Of all the resources needed to build an economy that will sustain
economic progress, none is more scarce than time. That is one of
the key messages of PLAN-B 3.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization,
the newest book by Lester Brown - available as a free download at
earthpolicy.org.
Plan A - the western fossil-fuel-based, auto-centered,
throwaway economic model - is not going to work for China, India,
or the 3 billion other people in developing countries, and it will
not continue to work for the industrial countries either.
It's time for Plan B - an all-out response at
wartime speed proportionate to the magnitude of threats facing civilization.
The four overriding goals of PLAN B 3.0 are to
stabilize climate and population, eradicate poverty, and restore
the earth's damaged ecosystems. Failure to reach any one of these
goals will likely mean failure to reach the others as well.
"We are crossing natural thresholds that
we cannot see and violating deadlines that we do not recognize,"
says Brown. "These deadlines are set by nature. Nature is the
timekeeper, but we cannot see the clock."
Lester Brown has been described by The Washington
Post as "one of the world's most influential thinkers."
After working with the Department of Agriculture in international
agricultural development, Brown helped establish the Overseas Development
Council, then founded Worldwatch Institute, publishers of annual
State of the World and Vital Signs reports. In 2001, he left Worldwatch,
founded Earth Policy Institute, and published Eco-Economy: Building
an Economy for the Earth.
TERRENCE McNALLY:
When you were involved in agriculture in the Kennedy administration,
few thought about the environment, unless it was about conservation
or wilderness. A bit later, environmentalism was usually local --
a polluting factory or a threatened forest. Yet very early you had
a global understanding of environmental issues. How did that happen?
LESTER BROWN: It was probably due to, first,
living two and a half years in villages in India in 1956, where
I could see the food/population problem beginning to unfold; and
second, my training in the sciences, which gave me a feel for how
natural systems work.
McNALLY: What has
driven you to write Plan B, and then Plan B 2.0 and Plan B 3.0?
BROWN: One of the goals of the Earth Policy Institute is to provide
a vision of a kind of world we want, and a sense of how we get from
here to there. Plan B was the first version of this.
With 3.0, we've changed the subtitle from Rescuing
a Planet Under Stress and a Civilization in Trouble to simply Mobilizing
to Save Civilization. We used to think about saving the planet,
and that's still essential, but what's really at stake now is civilization
itself.
We have a growing backlog of unresolved problems
in the world: deforestation, collapsing fisheries, expanding deserts,
falling water tables, eroding soils, you can go down the list. The
fallout from these problems is becoming more and more difficult
to manage, especially for governments in developing countries.
A number of countries have developed enough to
bring down mortality but not enough to bring down fertility. With
a rapid rate of population growth, they're caught in what demographers
call "the demographic trap." If you can't break out of
it, eventually you begin to break down.
17 of the top 20 failing states have rapid rates
of population growth. These are the countries where most of the
70 million people added each year are being born. As this list of
failing states grows each year, we have to ask how many failing
states before we have a failing civilization? No one knows the answer.
We haven't been there before.
On top of traditional environmental problems,
we now have new stresses like soaring oil prices that put a lot
of pressure on low and middle-income oil-importing countries. Then
as the United States converts a growing share of our grain into
fuel, we drive world grain prices to all-time highs, creating instability
in low and middle-income countries that import grain. We face the
risk that the combination of rising oil and food prices will greatly
increase the number of failing states. I think the number of failing
states in the world is now the key indicator as to whether civilization
is going to succeed or fail.
McNALLY:The enormous
global inequity in income and wealth breeds inequity in health,
in education, and in all phases of life, doesn't it?
BROWN: There is
a vast opportunity gap, and those born into societies with few opportunities
become recruits for international terrorist groups. In Africa, revolutionaries
who want to overthrow governments simply recruit kids -- 10, 12,
14 years old -- give them guns and let them go. As I look at the
world today, terrorism is a problem and a threat, but even bigger
threats are the persistence of poverty, continuing population growth,
and climate change.
McNALLY: In one
of the earlier versions of Plan B, you pointed out the danger of
our attention to terrorism distracting us from these other issues.
In 3.0, you've knit those problems together even more clearly. Now
you're saying they're no longer "either/or", but they
are inextricably linked.
McNALLY: No question.
The money we lay out to deal with things like population growth,
environmental degradation, spreading water shortages, climate change,
etc. is really the new security budget because these are the real
threats.
The climate change threat is enormous. Last August
an area of Arctic sea ice twice the size of Britain melted in one
week. Scientists have never seen anything like this before.
Greenland has an ice sheet a mile thick or more, covering almost
the entire island, which is three times the size of Texas. The rate
at which it's melting now is extraordinary. There's a large glacier
on the west coast, where the ice sheet flows into the sea, 3 miles
wide and a mile deep, and it's flowing at 2 meters an hour. Glaciers
normally flow at 80-100 meters per year. This is 2 meters per hour!
McNALLY: How much
has global temperature risen so far?
BROWN: About one
degree Fahrenheit over the last several decades. By the end of this
century, temperature could rise anywhere from 3 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit.
McNALLY: But it's
much greater than that at the poles, isn't it?
BROWN: Yes. We
report temperature changes as a global average, but we have to keep
in mind that temperature rises faster over land than over oceans,
faster near the poles than near the equator, and faster in the interior
of continents than in coastal regions. In parts of Alaska, Northern
Canada, Siberia and areas around the Arctic Circle including Greenland,
temperatures have already gone up 3 to 7 degrees.
The west Antarctic ice sheet is not really on the continent itself,
but is supported by a number of islands. When it starts to go, it
could break up very quickly.
McNALLY: What might
be the repercussions of that?
BROWN: If Greenland
melts entirely, that adds 23 feet to the sea. The west Antarctic
ice sheet adds 16 feet - so together almost 40 feet. If that happens,
many of the world's coastal cities would be under water. This is
not going to happen in years or decades, but will be spread out
over we hope at least a century or two.
But still the rate becomes alarming. Even a one-meter
rise in sea level threatens a lot of cities.
A large share of the world's population lives pretty close to the
coast. If sea level were to rise 39 feet, there would be at least
600 million rising sea refugees. What happens to the price of land
in the interior, if vast numbers are forced inland?
McNALLY: When people
talk about melting glaciers, they usually refer to Greenland, the
Arctic and Antarctica. You point out that throughout the world we
depend on mountainous glaciers for a steady supply of water. Los
Angeles, for instance, is vulnerable to this.
BROWN: Mountain
glaciers are melting everywhere. The Alps and Andes could be almost
entirely gone in half a century. But I'm even more concerned about
the Tibetan plateau. All the major rivers in Asia originate in the
Himalayas: the Indus, the Ganges, the Mekong, the Yangtze, and the
Yellow River.
McNALLY: These
rivers sustain huge numbers of people.
BROWN: During the
dry season, the Ganges is fed by the ice melt from the Gangotri
glacier, a vast glacier that could be gone entirely by mid century.
If we can't close enough coal-fired power plants fast enough to
save it, then the Ganges will become a seasonal river that no longer
flows during the dry season. Imagine the consequences of that. Think
about the Yellow and Yangtze Rivers that irrigate the wheat and
rice fields of Asia.
McNALLY: Along
with the US, China and India are two of the three largest grain-producing
countries.
BROWN: The two countries most affected by the
melting of the glaciers in the Himalayas and the Tibetan plateau
will be India and China, which happen to be the two countries now
building most of the world's coal fired power plants.
McNALLY: In other
words, they're putting up more and more greenhouse gases at a time
when their very survival is dependent upon cutting them back. Those
kinds of connections and interactions are some of our biggest blind
spots, aren't they?
BROWN: We face
four big challenges right now. We need to stabilize climate, stabilize
population, eradicate poverty and restore the earth's damaged eco
systems.
We probably cannot stabilize population growth
humanely unless we eradicate poverty. Stabilizing population means
making sure that all youngsters get at least an elementary school
education, girls as well as boys. It means providing basic health
care, immunization against childhood diseases, the basic fundamentals
of health care at the village level.
We have to provide reproductive health care and
family planning services as well. There are at least 200 million
women in the world who want to limit their number of children, but
who lack access to family planning programs. The cost of family
planning for these women over a year would be a tiny fraction of
what we're spending in Iraq.
McNALLY: Iraq is
now about 3 billion a week. Two years of Iraq funding could solve
almost all the biggest problems we're facing. Talk about misspent
resources!
BROWN: In terms
of annual expenditures, the total bill for Plan B is less than $200
billion a year. I call it the New Defense Bill, because - terrorism
notwithstanding - the real threats to our future now are climate
change, continuing rapid population growth, continuing destruction
of the economy's environmental support systems, the things that
lead to failing states.
McNALLY: I've always
said that the key to minimizing the threat of terrorism is to make
terrorists pariahs in their own societies.
BROWN: I can remember
what we did in the post World War II period. Normally after you
win a war, you pillage. Instead we launched the Marshall Plan to
rebuild the very countries with which we'd been engaged in one of
the most deadly wars in history.
McNALLY: We did
the opposite after World War I, and the result of that was World
War II.
Let's imagine civilization is our patient. We've talked about some
of the symptoms: climate change, peak oil, loss of water and soil.
Briefly, what are the diagnosis and the recommended treatment?
BROWN: Looking
at the world through an ecological lens, I see a mounting backlog
of unresolved problems, many of them associated with population
growth including deforestation, expanding desert, deteriorating
grasslands, eroding soils, falling water tables. Very few of these
trends have been turned around; instead they're getting worse and
becoming more difficult to manage. Now add to that climate change
and peak oil.
McNALLY: Peak oil
is the moment at which we've taken half of the oil out of the earth.
One might say, "Only half ... we're in good shape." But,
once we reach peak oil, we've used up the easiest half, and every
subsequent barrel becomes more expensive.
BROWN: We have
spent our lifetimes in a world where, except for an occasional blip
here and there, oil production has always been increasing. In a
world where oil production is no longer increasing, no country can
get more oil unless another gets less, and that's a very different
world. It creates a lot of tensions. It creates a politics of scarcity
and rising oil prices.
As the United States shifts an ever larger share
of its grain harvest into the production of fuel, the world is now
facing quite possibly the worst food price inflation in history.
McNALLY: When we
did an interview on Plan B four or five years ago, you predicted
the current battle for grain. Does it go into the gas tank of a
rich person or the mouth of a poor person?
BROWN: Nearly 20
percent of the 2007 grain harvest has been used to produce ethanol
to satisfy, at most, 4 percent of our automotive fuel needs. From
an agricultural point of view, the automotive fuel demand is insatiable.
The grain required to fill a 25-gallon SUV tank with ethanol would
feed one person for a year.
McNALLY: So the
shift of grain to ethanol raises grain prices for us and the rest
of the world, condemns millions to starvation -- all to supply a
speck of our energy demand.
BROWN: We're in
an ironic situation where as taxpayers we are subsidizing the conversion
of grain into ethanol, and therefore a rise in our own food prices.
So we pay twice, on April 15 when we settle our taxes and then every
time we go to the supermarket checkout counter.
McNALLY: Let's
shift to solutions -- eradicating poverty, family planning, education
and so on. You say that for $200 billion a year we could solve them.
BROWN: Yes - one
fifth of global military expenditures which are now over a trillion,
or 1000 billion per year. $100 billion weapon systems are almost
useless now. You can't use them to deal with the problems we're
facing.
McNALLY: What are
the solutions?
BROWN: To slow
climate change, we've devised a plan to cut carbon emissions 80
percent -- not by 2050, which is what politicians like to talk about
-- but by 2020.
McNALLY: An 80
percent reduction in 12 years. How do we do it?
BROWN: There are
three components to the plan: first, dramatically and systematically
raise the efficiency of the world energy economy; second, massive
investment in renewable sources of energy; and third, increase the
earth's tree cover by planting billions of trees.
On efficiency, let me offer one simple example
that most people are familiar with. If we replace incandescent bulbs
with compact fluorescents, we can cut global electricity use 12
percent, allowing us to close 700 of the world's 2360 coal fired
power plants.
40 percent of the world's electricity currently comes from coal,
but by 2020 we see wind providing 40 percent.
McNALLY: In a dozen
years you see wind replacing coal as the dominant energy source?
BROWN: There's
100,000 wind turbines in operation today, so that means building
about a million and a half more producing two megawatts each: 3
million megawatts in global wind generating capacity. But a million
and a half wind turbines over a dozen years is peanuts compared
with producing 65 million cars a year, which we do now.
The Texas state legislature and the Republican
governor, Rick Perry, are putting together a package to harness
that state's abundant wind energy. They're planning about 23,000
megawatts of wind energy, which will do away with 23 coal-fired
power plants and supply half the state's residential electricity.
McNALLY: How quickly
will that happen?
BROWN: By 2020.
They're moving very fast.
We can install a million and a half wind turbines and combine that
technology with plug in hybrids. Add a second storage battery and
a plug-in to a Toyota Prius and you can recharge the batteries at
night. The car's batteries become a storage facility for wind energy.
McNALLY: Toyota
says they'll have plug-ins by 2010, and they're in competition with
other companies who say they'll have it quicker.
BROWN: The big
competition right now is between Toyota with the modified Prius
and GM with the Chevrolet Volt. The gasoline equivalent cost of
running cars on cheap wind-generated electricity is less than a
dollar a gallon.
McNALLY: Wow! Will
it take tax subsidies or incentives to get us to ramp up wind and
renewables?
BROWN: The key
is to get the market to tell the environmental truth, and right
now the market does not do that. The market does a lot of things
well, but it does not do a good job of incorporating what we call
the "indirect cost" or what economists call "externalities."
For example, the climate change and pollution costs of fossil fuels.
The simple way to do that is to add carbon taxes and offset that
increase by lowering income taxes.
McNALLY: Make it
tax neutral, so that your pocket book bite is the same at the end
of the year. But instead of taxing labor or work, which we want
more of; we tax pollution and greenhouse gases, which we want less
of.
BROWN: So we end
up with more jobs and less climate destruction -- a win/win situation.
McNALLY: In terms
of transforming our industries, you point to World War II, which
you lived through.
BROWN: In his State
of the Union address one month after Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt
announced that we were going to produce 25,000 tanks, 60,000 planes,
20,000 artillery planes. It was extraordinary. No one had ever seen
arms production like this.
Then he called in the leaders of the auto industry and said, "Guys,
guess what, we're going to ban the sale of private automobiles in
the United States." The automobile industry had no choice but
to switch to producing arms. And we didn't produce just the 60,000
planes, which was the goal, we produced 229,000. We exceeded every
one of those arms production goals.
McNALLY: So it
is your sense that we could make that same kind of a massive shift
if leaders take this seriously?
BROWN: No question.
It didn't take decades to restructure the US industrial economy.
It didn't take years. We did it in a matter of months. That's the
exciting and encouraging thing about what we're challenged with
now. It is entirely doable.
We have it in our power to restructure the world
energy economy and avoid disastrous climate change. All we need
is the leadership, the vision, and the will.

|