Ohio Energy's Resources: Project to combat CO2 and Green House Gas Emissions

Ohio has begun to tackle a very serious problem in the world: CO2 emissions and climate change. They’re website: http://www.ohioenergyresources.com/ is the go to site for all information regarding this blog entry. I shall be referring to it frequently, so I will not be citing it.

ALL CONTENT COMES FROM: http://www.ohioenergyresources.com/

Ohio declares three main forms of emissions:

Stationary – Factories, plants, ect…

Mobile – Cars, and non-road vehicals

Area Sources – these are from county-level estimates of heating water or cooling water ect..

Wherein the whole idea of this project is to cover those three sweeping fields and help create a better future. The project goes through 5 tasks to help decide its course of actions. I have already talked about Task 1: Take an inventory of Ohio’s Main Emissions. In this task I believe that Ohio has done a pretty good job.  They have looked at Stationary modes, as well as mobile. Even County-to-County searches at what exactly are emitting CO2.

     Task 2: Look at Federal Policy and how it interacts with Ohio’s policy. In this respect the project took a close look at all aspects of climate change legislation; from Off-Balances in Agriculture to Manufacturing Sectors, and business growth opportunities. In the Off-Balance section (referred to as Chapter 3) the article is about how Ohio is trying to offset what farms are doing (whether it be deforestation or biological carbon pollution) and how farms can also off set the CO2 levels by using something called Carbon Sequestration, or having a lot of trees that can take in the CO2 and release O2 into the air. In the Business Growth Opportunities (referred to as Chapter 7) it tackles the myth that with legislation businesses will fail. It tells us instead that we would be able to invest in markets that are all about being Green! From Advanced Energy to Aerospace and Aviation.

In this aspect Task 2 is very well done. They offer many examples of how Ohio can use such legislature in favor of Ohio businesses as well as CO2 emissions. It offers a broad overview for someone who may not even understand what legislature is, or how it works to effect a state and it’s businesses.

     Task 3: Share the information with the public, investors ect... (Not much to really talk about here)

     Task 4: State Policy Options. In this task we take a look at what exactly Ohio could do to help off-set the CO2 emissions and climate change. Referred to as Chapter 7. It mentions first as the criteria for how the policies would be judged. 1) How directly a policy is targeted at climate change. 2) Locus of author for design, adaptation and implementation. 3) level of resources required from Ohio Government. The chapter then goes forward and discusses different ways to combat climate change. Mostly Taxes and Caps, Green requirements, Standards, and conservation programs.

Once again I think Ohio is doing an excellent job.  It’s very comprehensive. I’ll be honest, I didn’t write out all the information contained within that section, mostly because it was A LOT. Each ‘option’ was then put to the test by the 3 criteria that was offered at the beginning of the chapter. I really don’t think Ohio could do much more with that, they’ve done great so far.

      Task 5: Model Scenarios.  Finally Ohio begins to look at possible scenarios for climate change. Using the data from 1,2,4 The Millennium Institute and The Ohio State University came up with these models. Referred to as Chapter 9. The scenarios go from what exactly the federal government could do, to what the Ohio government could. It calls that Ohio could in fact start placing restrictions on levels of CO2 emissions.

     Now, in this task, well…I don’t think caps and trade work. It just doesn’t. What should make the business want to tell the truth about their emission levels? I mean, if Factory is A is polluting 300tons of CO2 every day, but they really can only pollute 200tons of CO2, which means a cut in production, and perhaps a cut in money. If the factory gets a cut in money…well they’ll have to lay off workers, when they lay off workers people become poor and yadda yadda yaddda. Further, if Ohio alone comes up with these caps, well, other states won’t exactly be holistic. So from state to state it would be completely different. I just think there needs to be more sweeping change. Total reform maybe. I think the federal government needs to pull up their big boy pants and start actually putting real holistic measures on capping emissions. I think once that is done then we can really start looking at the future of emissions.

     All and all I am very happy with this effort. It is very well done and thought out to a T. All the models and forecasts are done precisely and in a real-world effort. I am quite impressed and cannot wait to see if any of these limitations or rules will actually go into effect. I believe this effort isn’t lofty like some are.  The goals aren’t crazy, but very attainable and when goals are attainable and when they want to be met (which I think America/the World is still in a GREEN GREEN GREEN phase) I think Ohio will be successful. Only, however, if they actually stick to this plan; because it’s a GOOD plan.

The Coffee Problem

I knew that coffee growers in South America had to deal with poor conditions, who spend all their lives working through horrible conditions and usually low pay. Now, I always knew that we overpay for the coffee that these big companies push on us (Starbucks, Dunkin’ Doughnuts, ect…). It really is a fine aged wine in many aspects. How much work and thought goes into a bag of Coffee beans. Importation, well…wow. I did NOT know how much importation was done on Coffee alone. Let alone the problems faced by those in Columbia.  10 million bags/year? Wow. That is quite a number, and a lot of cups of coffee. Especially when you think about how much those workers are getting paid, at that big of a discrepancy between payment and what we pay for that cup.

I am all for free trade. It should be done. Why should the company get $3.40 for everycup and the grower gets a whopping 50 cents of those profits. It isn’t fair (Of course life isn’t very fair to begin with, but I digress).  There needs to be some sort of balance, right? Perhaps they could split things more equally. Even a 55% v. 45% profit margin would be better than what they are getting now. Companies from the US and other first world countries should accept a lower profit margin, so those in the poor countries can at least get by.

                The IMF and World Bank seemed to play a hand in this over supply. I don’t think they did this out of bad or ill-will toward Columbia. Just that they wanted both countries to become financially secure and have an ability to develop into first world countries. Now, the question becomes should they be forced to make less coffee? Should we ask them to stop their production so that we can get rid of the oversupply of the coffee? Perhaps if we did the issue of underpayment would be clarified and stopped. On the other hand, it could result in economies in those towns to crash. Unemployment would run rampant, thousands of people without jobs.

Will I stop drinking coffee? No. Sorry, I can’t. Can you? I know you very much enjoy your cup of Starbucks everyone morning during class, so could you stop? Lets be honest here. I don’t think any of us could stop. Coffee is addictive, and with Starbucks we can have coffee seven-ways-to-Sunday. Now, perhaps we could slow our drinking of coffee. Or, only buy from certain countries. Even then though, that doesn’t seem like the best idea. It’s like asking someone who smokes, well now that you know you will get cancer will you stop? Wanna know how many people stop? Not too many. It’s the same thing in this respect. We just can’t stop drinking coffee, it’s like Crack.

                Now when it comes to how exactly we can fix this issue, I’m not too sure. It’s a very complex issue. It’s not just us, but the growers as well. Like I pointed out earlier, when the IMF World Bank told Vietnam to start planting coffee beans, it was going to lead to over production.  However, I mean we drink a lot of coffee, I have friends whom go to Starbucks at least 2 times a day. That’s a lot of coffee and money. So can the issue be all that bad? I think the real is issue is the fact that most coffee bean farmers are paid almost nothing to every dollar the big box houses are making.  So I think the issue here is the need for reform in how exactly people get paid. I think once we work out that solution, we’ll have the exact solution to the problem. Perhaps if we pay the farmers more, they will be able to invest in more property. Even then maybe we can solve the ‘over-farming’ problem by allowing some companies to sell their assets to Columbia. Of course, the problem becomes who says Columbia should be the ones to keep their farming? What gives them the right to it? However, that is another issue that we will have to solve when we get there.