Option 2 Final Paper (2-3 ideas from KSR and Hawken)- FINISHED

Environmental Ethics

Final Paper KSR/Hawken

Abby Moseley

11 November 2022

 

            In both Kim Stanley Robinson’s Ministry for the Future and Paul Hawken’s Regeneration, many ideas are set forth attempting to solve the climate crisis. Solutions ranging from planting kelp forests  to affecting a societal change in priorities, whether it be through law or suffering national disasters, readers get a new perspective on the multifaceted threat of climate change. In this essay, I will discuss the benefits of implementing a carbon coin/carbon tax, net-zero cities, and urban gardens. Individually, these solutions offer benefits in assisting with the climate crisis, however, if implemented altogether, they could quickly provide a stable and long-lasting foundation for sustainable living across the world.

            Though Robinson’s proposal of a carbon coin/carbon tax are technically two separate ideas, if implemented together, they have the potential to be ten times more effective than implementation of just one. The idea of the carbon coin is to essentially incentivize corporations, businesses, and individuals to sequester carbon. Whether it be through switching to renewable energy, working on carbon sequestering projects such as reforestation, or using public transport instead of a personal motor vehicle. The carbon tax is a progressive tax rate that can tax corporations, businesses, wealthy individuals, etc., for emitting carbon into the atmosphere. For example, a billionaire could be taxed at a higher rate for using a private jet than an average citizen could be taxed for using a commercial flight. The implementation of a carbon coin/carbon tax not only motivates the general public to think about their relationship with carbon, but also could bully wasteful corporations into either affecting sustainable change or closing due to eventual bankruptcy as a result of high carbon emissions. This method is also efficient for the top 1% as many of the wealthiest people in the world want to remain wealthy and will likely abide due to the progressive tax rate. Additionally, if the carbon tax was implemented, governments around the world would get an influx of money due to taxation and could use the new funds to achieve net-zero cities, develop better public transit, or redistribute among the masses to alleviate stress in poor/less developed areas.

Carbon tax (vid)

            Net-zero cities offer a multitude of benefits for both the public and the environment. A net-zero city is a city the produces sustainable energy equivalent to or exceeding the energy it consumes. This can be achieved through utilizing green architecture, urban gardens, either well developed public transport, electric transport, or walkable communities, etc. There are many benefits of living in a net-zero city, for example, assistance or a “buffer” to  harmful effects of a natural disaster. Just this year there was a hurricane in Florida that caused most residents to lose power/electricity aside from a small solar powered community. Despite some physical damage to homes, everyone still had access to internet which allowed them to track the progression of the storm, phones were still working, meaning they could get help if there was an emergency, and food lasted longer because refrigerators were still running. As the climate crisis gets worse, having these sustainable buffers between us and disaster could be a priceless investment. Furthermore, in net-zero cities, due to less carbon emissions, there is less air pollution which directly improves the physical health of the resident. The use of electric vehicles/transport or walkable communities decreases noise pollution which is directly related to high levels of stress and anxiety, meaning these mechanisms can also improve the mental health of the residents in a net-zero city. Implementing a carbon coin/tax in addition with creating the goal of reaching net-zero motivates the community and businesses to act fast, inherently confronts unsustainable corporations and businesses within the city and demands change, and provides funds that can be used to help the city achieve net-zero or alleviate stress in poor areas that cannot afford to get to net-zero by themselves.

https://carbonneutralcities.org/cities/copenhagen/ 

Copenhagen (vid)

            Urban farming and gardening is a mechanism that can be used in cities to help achieve net-zero as well as enrich small communities within the city. Urban gardens are often created in vacant lots, abandoned buildings, and on rooftops, allowing for a variety of benefits. Rooftop gardens are popular in big cities with densely packed building a few vacancies. Not only do they provide fresh and healthy food for the community, they also assist with increased temperatures in buildings and cities often caused by dark colored rooftops which attract sunlight. Likewise, they can also capture rainwater which eventually saves money of roof repairs and can be redistributed through irrigation. The presence of food and flowers in an otherwise concrete jungle attracts pollinators and hence helps with plant growth, seed dispersal, and germination. In cities that used to be more densely population and are now filled with vacant lots and buildings as well as deteriorating neighborhoods, such as Detroit, urban gardens have provided both relief from food deserts and unification of the community. In these areas, residents now have access to fresh and healthy food as well as the knowledge required to grow it. These techniques can be passed to future generations as children begin to develop a relationship with the food they eat. The use of urban gardens specifically in abandoned buildings can be used to address problems of homelessness and food insecurity. Homeless people would be able to move into the buildings where the gardens are located and could tend to the plants, prepare, or serve in a community cafeteria. If the urban garden was implemented in a city trying to achieve net-zero, the building could already be renovated to utilize renewable energy and either the community or government could pay for the renovation until it pays for itself. Additionally, if the community had small farm animals, the could ensure clean protein and animal byproducts versus store-bought, corporation-owned animal byproducts. In areas where vacant lots are the location for urban gardens, the increase in pollinators in the area could bring back local flora and fauna would eventually follow.

(Pictured: Urban Gardens in Detroit (vid))

            Ultimately these three ideas for mitigating the climate crisis work together from a large to small scale. Carbon coin/tax would be the largest scale, this could be international if everyone was committed to affecting sustainable change. Net-zero cities would be about medium scale, much smaller than international, however still a massive feat to undertake as some cities are dense and rigid like New York versus more easily adaptable such as some small rural town in Tennessee. However, if the carbon coin/tax was in place, individual and corporate interest in sustainability would spike and achieving net-zero would be easier due to decreased backlash. Urban gardens and farming are small scale, directly affecting the community. Many communities have already taken initiative to utilize urban gardens, though if a carbon coin/tax was implemented, large cities that need to enact change fast would likely use this mechanism as it has multifaceted benefits. Urban gardens cut carbon emissions due to not having to transport food, they replace food deserts with areas producing fresh, healthy food for the community, they attract pollinators which ensures successful germination and seed dispersal, and it forces the community to interact and slowly build itself out of a previously individualistic crowd. Ultimately, if all three of these mechanisms were implemented at the same time, we would see quick, efficient, and long-lasting changes in community, health, and carbon emissions.