Saturday, February 25, 2017

Friday Five: February 24, 2017 ($1 short edition)

Boycotts - both intentional and unintentional - produce consequences of varying degrees. I find it fascinating the degree to which some organizations think their actions occur in a vacuum, while others have such a strong concern for their brand that even a minor blemish that does not affect the bottom line will still cause a reaction. In the end, even with information fatigue and consumer apathy, it still appears that voting with one's wallet will have an impact.
After Travel Ban, Interest in Trips to U.S. Declines
"The short-term weaker demand for travel to the United States aside, the bigger concern for travel analysts is the ban’s potential to damage the country’s lucrative tourism industry in the coming years. Statistics from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, part of the United States Department of Commerce, show that tourism-related spending in the United States was $1.56 trillion in 2015; tourism created 7.6 million jobs in the United States that same year."
Why #DeleteUber and Other Boycotts Matter
"According to research from King, at Northwestern, it might not matter if boycotts never go mainstream. Most companies are worried enough about their reputations that they’ll change their behavior, even if the number of people partaking in the boycott is rather small. When boycotts receive national media attention—as 25 percent of boycotts do, King says,—a company will react, even if sales aren’t affected."

Consumers have a more difficult time using those same tactics on monopolies. Since electricity monopolies govern much of the power generation in the country, we must find an alternative way to force that shift.
How electric utilities could revive their sagging fortunes and decarbonize the country
"There is a clear and fairly well-understood path to zero carbon for electricity. The same cannot be said of energy services that run on liquid fuels — think gasoline for transportation and natural gas for heating. Efficiency can reduce those fossil fuel emissions, but it can’t eliminate them, and no economical zero-carbon liquid-based alternatives have emerged.

'An alternative path toward significant decarbonization of these sectors,' the Brattle authors write, 'is to aggressively pursue electrification of transportation and heating.'"


One way to accomplish this lies in our public policy. Arguments abound as to whether governments at any level should get involved in picking winners and losers, however as a matter of public health, governments can say how we want the power generation sector to perform and then allow the best technologies to succeed in getting us there.
Lawmakers in California and Massachusetts Introduce Bills for 100% Renewable Energy
"The California Senate leader has introduced legislation that would require the Golden State to get 100 percent of its electricity from climate-friendly energy sources by 2045. That's a big step up from the state's current renewable energy mandate, 50 percent by 2030 -- a target that's only been on the books for a year and a half, and that California is still a long way from meeting."
"Three Massachusetts legislators have filed a bill that would require that all electricity used in the state be generated from renewable sources such as solar and wind by 2035, and fossil fuels be eliminated as power sources for heat, transportation, and anything else by 2050."

Bill would increase Nevada renewable energy mandate to 80% by 2040
"The bill, AB 206, introduced by Assemblyman Chris Brooks (D), calls for a phased-in approach that would increase the RPS goal by 4% every two years, starting in 2018-2019 when the goal would be set at 26%."

Citizens can also advocate that energy companies include all the cost - including the cost of risk - associated with their product. Too often we allow companies to push the cost of secondary effects of energy systems onto taxpayers. As we learn more about the consequences, we need to shift those costs back to where they belong. Only in this way can the market work effectively.
Fracking Caused Pennsylvania Earthquakes, New Report Confirms
"Evidence indicates that induced earthquakes occur when the separation between Utica Shale and basement rocks is lessened during drilling operations. That means, when someone drills too close to basement rocks, there can be earthquakes.

Pelepko said that seems to have been the case in Lawrence County, where the basement rock is shallow compared to other areas in the state.

The distance between Utica Shale and basement rocks were between 2,500 to 3,000 feet at the fracking site."


Truly transformative action also requires that we think ahead and mitigate impacts to people, planet, and economy to the greatest extent possible. Driverless, electric vehicles will provide a boost to the quality of life and eventual transition to a decarbonized electricity system, but they will also cause a seismic shift in the job market. We need to plan now so that shift happens gradually and not all at once.
Here's where jobs will be lost when robots drive trucks
"'Issues around regulation and the business model' will delay full automation even after the technology is ready, said Princeton professor Ed Felten, who worked on this issue while serving as Deputy U.S. Chief Technology Officer in the Obama White House. Automaker Daimler, for example, estimated in 2015 that it could take 10 years to bring truck automation technology to market."

Happy Friday!


No comments:

Post a Comment