Just got back from the Step It Up: Chicago Education & Leadership Forum. As my first experience being part of the organization of an event, I was quite happy. I've learned some things, met new people and had a good time.
It was a great turnout too, maybe 170. We had some great speakers too. Jack Darin, of Sierra Club, made some great points about the opportunities we have in Illinois to affect national auto policy by adopting the California emissions standards. It's only part of the solution, but it's one piece that looks nearly within grasp. If we adopted those standards, which several other states have done as well, the size and central position of Illinois would make it less economic for manufacturers to produce both a clean and dirty version.
Overall the Sierra Club campaign sounds like a well thought out effort individuals can connect with. It's simple, yes, but efforts like that need to reach a great number of people, so that's good.
We also heard presentations from Tim Montague of Climate Justice Chicago and Anthony Star of the Center for Neighborhood Technology. Anthony had facts out the wazoo on Chicago's impact and the sources of the impact. Some were non-surprising but well-illustrated, such how drastic the difference in per-capita impact is between the urbs and the suburbs (cities win in case you were wondering).
The elected official turnout was light due to the recent crisis in Springfield. Still, we had three, State Representative Greg Harris, County Commissioner Mike Quigley and Debra Shore, Commissioner for the MWRD (Water Reclamation District).
Mike talked about all ways local governments can put their buying power to use, and what Cook County has done. It's important that people like Mike push those ground level efforts forward. Change takes time, and getting a head start is blazes a path for others as well as making an impact right now.
The one thing missing from the whole event was a consensus around carbon pricing/trading/capping. We heard a lot about Chicago and the great efforts going on here. We really need to have national or even global impacts too, though. The two efforts aren't exclusive in any fashion.
What is overlooked, I think, is the effects national wins have on local efforts. Local efforts always begin with the low hanging fruit. It's easy to do this locally, and smart, because you're working at such a low level that you can manage the details involved with things like distributing individual light bulbs, rain-water barrels or just putting more focus on locally grown foods.
But there is only so much low hanging fruit on a tree. National impacts don't generally have the same immediate feedback that local efforts do, but they are important because they put more fruit within reach. There's really only one way to win the war, and that is at the national level.
At the national level, you need different tactics as well. It's not possible to deal with the same level of detail. At the national level what we need more than anything else is a system that puts a price upon carbon. I have opinions about what technology (solar) or executive action is more important, but those are secondary to the need for an economic system that "raises the bar", for the entire nation and puts more fruit within reach.
Do this well and all of the local efforts will feel much more rewarding. It should be obvious that if dirty is more expensive than clean, two things will happen. First more companies and people will do the math and figure they need to do clean things. Secondly, once they start doing that, they'll do more, and faster, because they can actually afford to.
In the longer term there's one more important element. Raising that bar insures that those who lead the way, will reap the benefits of their foresight. That's justice.
Posts
