Editor’s note: This commentary is by Rep. Curt McCormack, of Burlington, a Democrat who represents the Chittenden 6-3 district in the Vermont House of Representatives and is the chair of the House Committee on Transportation.
If the Covid-19 pandemic can reduce our carbon emissions in one month by the same amount as we need to reduce per year, 7%, to avoid catastrophic climate change, can we not do this on purpose, in an orderly well-planned fashion? Or do we have to depend on pandemics as our strategy against global warming?
The media has repeatedly pointed out that we have not seen such disruption in the economy or product shortages since the Great Depression of the 1930s. They like to compare the disruptions and the global efforts to beat back the pandemic menace to World War II. I would agree with this comparison and add one more: climate change.
Can the U.S. reduce its insatiable consumption of energy and make a rapid switch to energy efficiency and non-carbon means of electricity production, and transportation as we reduced our energy consumption (and many other things) and retooled in just one year at the beginning of WWII?
World War II is credited for being the major force that ended the Great Depression. Can a WWII response to climate change be beneficial to today’s economy? It most certainly can. As President-elect Joe Biden is proposing, an economic recovery can be built on the retooling to non-carbon energy. The Covid recovery stimulus package being negotiated in Congress instead of just dumping more money into the economy, could provide a portion targeted to investments that reduce carbon emissions. This is an opportunity to bring about the electrification of transportation — cars, trucks and expansion and electrification of rail (instead of bailing out airlines again), the expedited replacement of older fossil fuel power plants and making all buildings and transportation vehicles energy efficient. Like WW II investments, these create more and good jobs better than any other investments we could make.
Unlike WWII, with climate change we slowly prod along improving technologies but so slowly that our increased consumption of energy continues to outpace the efficiency improvements. Even environmentalists are loath to suggest we simply use less energy, even if only until the technical fixes have penetrated the economy enough to achieve the 7.6% annual (for 10 years – UN International Panel on Climate Change) net decrease in carbon emissions.
In the year before the U.S. entered WWII, 1941, federal agencies such as the War Production Administration were created to force the retooling of the automobile and other heavy industries to switch to the machines of war in order to win the war. By the end of 1942, Americans were no longer building cars and passenger planes. Not only were no automobiles manufactured but most every consumer good or service one can think of was scarcely available or was being rationed. Substantial reduction in the consumption of energy was accomplished by rationing.
In 1941 more than 3 million automobiles were manufactured in the U.S. In all of 1942, ’43, ’44 and ’45 combined, only 19 were. Manufacturers had no choice other than to make a rapid shift to military aircrafts, ships, tanks, jeeps, trucks and ammunition. World War II historian William Klingaman reports: “The War Production Board (WPA) ordered an end to the manufacture of a variety of metal and plastic consumer goods for the duration of the war.”
These mandates resulted in no more new refrigerators, radios, electric mixers, radiators, lawn mowers, electric toasters, roasters, dishwashers, percolators, phonographs, Christmas lights, electric razors, TVs, metal zippers, sewing machines, jukeboxes, flashlights, irons, vacuum cleaners, coat hangers and playground equipment. WPA director Donald Nelson said: “We expect the complete conversion of the men, materials and machine tools formerly devoted to these pursuits to war production.” That, and much greater personal sacrifice by some, is how we won World War II.
There is a level of seriousness that we are falling far short of in both the climate and Covid wars. To win the climate war, we only need to do a very small fraction of the retooling that was done in 1942. We have a little more time than they did and we need to make no personal sacrifices this time. The Covid war is even easier again. So what are we waiting for?
CDC Director Robert Redfield has repeatedly told us that if everyone wore a mask and socially distanced when outside the home, we would have Covid-19 under control in four to eight weeks. So what are we waiting for? This needs to be mandated. We can do this at any time. It is not too late.
We only need to reduce carbon emissions by 7.6% per year for 10 years to avoid catastrophic climate change. So what are we waiting for? This is easily done by the retooling and efficiencies mentioned above.
Both are accomplished when we take them more seriously, only a tiny, tiny fraction as seriously as we took WWII.