Though the world had almost realized the problem of global warming but still there are some who say global warming may or may not be a problem. This “ may” in this issue is creating a lots of hurdles in taking major steps against global warming because if global warming don’t exist and the world apply too much resources to solve that problem which don’t even exist then that will be a great loss of world’s resources and billions of people will have to face then poverty.
On other hand if global warming problem exists and we don’t do anything about it then it will become a disastrous problem for mankind in future. So it is more important to see what steps we can take that would prove beneficial whether or not anthropogenic global warming turns out to be a problem. These steps can be termed “no regrets” policies.
How can be a “No Regrets Global Warming Policy” made? Well a global warming policy can be termed “ no regrets” as long as it:
-
When the greenhouse gases amount is reduced being emitted in the atmosphere.
-
To make less such things, prevent or reduce harm associated with global warming.
-
Providing greater capacity for dealing with problems associated with global warming.
-
Making such policies for global warming that wont affect the economy and are beneficial.
Top Five “No Regrets” Policies
1 – Eliminate all subsidies to use
Subsidies to energy R&D cost taxpayers millions of dollars while producing minimal benefits. Though these programs may be relatively small according to the size of domestic energy markets, they server little, if any, useful purpose while subsidizing large corporations at taxpayer expense. Whether threat of global warming is real or not but that is a one more reason to eliminate these subsidy programs. There is an international agreement that aimed at ending energy subsidy with binding targets would be a significant victory for emissions reduction. While Kyoto forces on energy starvation diet on its participants, such a treaty would be a move to combat energy obesity.
2 – Repeal the Federal Flood Insurance Program
More concern about potential global warming in U.S. is the rising of sea level, which will cause the floods. That’s why much of the investment in potentially vulnerable areas is a result of the Federal flood Insurance Program. This program helps for building in vulnerable areas by acting as a moral hazard that’s why people take greater risk because government had ensured to help to bear that risk.
More realistic view of that issue will be that reform will reduce the moral hazard connected with building in vulnerable area and transferring the risk from the taxpayer to the private sector.
3 – Reform Air Traffic Control Systems
More demand for air travel means more flights and that means greater fuel use and a large amount of emissions. Current air traffic control system in U.S. is based on a 1929s-era system of beacons, which may hinder innovations that could reduce fuel use and emissions. As its generally known that a shorter flight consumes less fuel. Neither of airlines or pilots are having freedom to choose more economical air route. If pilots will be given freedom to map their own course in an attractive and desirable change in the eyes of industry and for environment it will be a great impact. That will also save considerable amounts of greenhouse gas emissions, and it will be having significant impacts in terms of time and expense to the U.S. economy. Same like that significant reductions in service levels associated with more routine applications of emissions reduction policy will be proffered to that approach.
4 – Facilitate Electricity Competition
Energy waste and emissions will reduce considerable by rejecting the model of central regulation and letting suppliers to meet their customer’s needs more exactly while relying on distributed generation. It will be economically beneficial by reducing the energy waste and even if emissions themselves do not cause any problems.
5 – Reduce Regulatory Barriers to New Nuclear Build
There is no doubt about that there is no other technology than nuclear which is proven to be capable of providing emissions-free energy at the scale required to make significant reduction in carbon emissions. But problem for that a nuclear plant takes a long time to be built. Because of that development and construction costs get higher up to the level where it is not economically competitive with higher emitting forms of electricity generation like coal and natural gas. According to nuclear energy institute a nuclear power plant take 10 years from concept to operation, from those 10 years only 4 years are for construction, 2 years for permit application development and 4 years Nuclear Regulatory Commission takes for deciding.
You might also like
|
|
|
|
|
