Twin Crises: Climate change and systemic inequality
The urgency for change has grown exponentially in the past decades as humans have driven the Earth to the brink of a devastating collapse. The Special Report on Global Warming outlined Earth’s climate ultimatum: global temperatures can’t surpass 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels or we will face irreversible destruction. The report stated that global warming above 2 degrees will cause $500,000,000,000 in lost economic output, mass migration, worsening extreme weather events, and trillions in the loss of infrastructure and coastal real estate. Many have acknowledged this impending threat to human life and devised a transformative resolution: The Green New Deal (GND). The GND is a fleeting opportunity to right the climate wrongs while addressing interlocking systemic injustices.
The main objectives of the GND are to sustainably restructure energy dependency and economic infrastructure, to promote racial and economic equality, and to ensure basic human rights for all Americans (including health care, education, housing, income, and access to food and clean water). While climate reform is central to the purpose of the GND, the priority is that benefits are distributed to minority communities, specifically indigenous populations, that have bore the brunt of economic and environmental issues. Amidst said national transition, the second priority area must include redirecting jobs into new sectors to prevent displacement.
The first policy approach concerning the climate must address energy dependency and national infrastructure. To lower our collective footprint, the U.S. will invest in renewable energy and strive for net-zero emissions. California exemplifies what is necessary on a national scale. California has one of the lowest per capita energy consumption levels in the United States despite its large population. California has steadily shifted energy dependence from fossil fuels to renewable sources under the Clean Energy Act, stating by 2045 the state will run on 100 percent clean energy. Similarly, Iceland runs completely on renewable energy, highlighting it is not only possible but an extremely beneficial investment in the long run. This is the best way to address the urgency of the climate crisis because energy use creates the most pollution of any source. Shifting toward renewable energy is the first big step to carbon neutrality.
Beyond the first key objective of investing in renewable energy, the second objective is to rebuild an infrastructure system that maximizes sustainability. This looks like expanding high-speed rail and low-emission public transit. It would upgrade buildings and impose sustainable architecture practices that maximize energy and water efficiency. Investing in infrastructure would repair lead pipes that disproportionately pollute the water in low-income areas. Although these projects collectively seem like an overwhelming feat, renewable energy and green infrastructure are both critically important to the climate and financially viable as it creates jobs and cuts costs in the long run.
However, major concerns regarding these transformative economic shifts include job loss and economic displacement. The GND would redirect fossil fuel-dependent jobs into the renewable energy sector. It’s a myth that we need fossil fuels to remain economically profitable. Nearly 3.3 million Americans work in clean energy which outnumbers fossil fuel workers by 3-to-1. By expanding this with the GND, we only establish more jobs.
These environmental injustices we aim to overcome are inextricably linked to systemic issues as vulnerable and minority communities are disproportionately affected by environmental destruction and pollution. So, by addressing the climate crisis in the ways stated above, we , in turn, confront issues of inequity. However, the GND must further include direct measures to bring justice to frontline communities. Poverty and inequality kill 250,000 Americans annually. The main objective of the social contract in the GND is to ensure basic rights for every American citizen and lift communities disproportionately affected by poverty. This includes creating universal education and accessible health care. The GND would demilitarize the police, which unjustly targets these groups, and inject funds directly to frontline communities. Lastly, the GND would impose annually adjusted living wage.
A systemic issue worsened by the last New Deal concerns Indigenous liberation. Since colonialism was established, Indigenous land and rights were stripped from them. It’s a priority to collaborate with Indigenous people to decolonize and establish set sovereignty. Indigenous liberation under the GND includes directing resources towards Indian Health Services (encompasses housing water and sanitation), ending mining and oil pipelines on native land, and protecting their right to exercise their culture.
This is the best approach to a GND because, unlike the last, history can be used as a tool. FDR’s New Deal was implemented to counteract the destruction of the Great Depression. While it was successful in many ways to uplift Americans from the depression, it ignored and arguably worsened inequality in the United States. It helped lift white America out of the depression, but left behind minority populations and neglected Native Americans. This GND is set up to prioritize frontline communities that were oppressed in the first New Deal.
While the scathing amount of issues can feel impossible to take head-on right now, the GND paints an optimistic picture for the future. The legislation strives to create a country made for everyone to benefit. We don’t rely on fossil fuels and have broken up monopolistic domination. It’s a place where one’s ability to attend college and pursue a career is not defined by the economic status they are born into. We have rightfully restored and protected land to indigenous people and decolonized their people. A family in Flint, Michigan has access to clean water, healthcare, and safe housing. Some might label this an unrealistic picture of our future. However, in the most “powerful” country with the resources for everyone to live comfortably, this should be the bare minimum.
However, even though the GND stands to benefit all Americans, it has become the rope in a game of tug of war between political ideologies. Threatened by progressive change, the current proposed resolution has been ridiculed by conservatives. The opposition to the GND dismisses it with claims that it is radical and raises questions like “where will you find the money?”
As with every other federal project, from past wars, tax cuts, and space programs, Congress will authorize expenditures, like loans and direct spending. Additionally, carbon taxes are a viable source of finances. In 2021, the tax would start at $60 per metric ton of carbon dioxide. This would help supplement these congressional expenditures while continuing to hold companies responsible. Even if the government deficit spends and passes on debt to future generations, the implications of economic and climate collapse are far worse.
In the grand scheme of things, the fixed costs of a GND are minuscule in comparison to the damages if we remain bystanders to the climate crisis and worsening income inequality. In fact, constructing a completely renewable energy infrastructure is cheaper than running existing coal plants. With the course we’re on, wildfire and extreme weather alone rack up an expensive bill, not to mention mass migration and real estate loss by sea-level rise.
It’s like a kid that procrastinates their homework. While not working on the assignment is easier in the short term, more work will eventually pile on. Suddenly, their future self is paying a much steeper price and experiencing more drastic repercussions than just doing it now. Issues of climate change and inequality are only intensifying and costing us more as time passes. We must do our “homework” now or we will reach a point beyond repair.