How might Clean Energy Policies Support or Undermine Sustainable Development and Population Health?
Human activities have had the largest contribution to global warming and greenhouse gas emissions over the last 50 years (National Climate Assessment, 2020). The effects of greenhouse gas emissions have been well documented, where some outgoing energy from the Earth is trapped, which results in our atmosphere retaining extra heat (US EPA, 2020b). This can have many effects such as creating warmer climates, rising sea levels, changing ecosystems, and more, all of which impact on sustainable development and population health as a consequence. When we look at each sector of the economy in terms of greenhouse gas emissions, energy generation has the largest contribution, making up over one third of greenhouse gas emissions overall (Green Economy Tracker, 2019). In the coming decades, developing nations are expected to be responsible for the majority of the world’s energy consumption (Mohamed & Lee, 2006), however, there is currently no reliable access to clean energy for developing nations. Clean energy can be defined as “energy derived from renewable, zero-emissions sources (“renewables”), as well as energy saved through energy efficiency (“EE”) measures” (NC Sustainable Energy Association, 2020). Although developing nations are expected to be responsible for the majority of greenhouse gas emission growth, they are also in a position to be disproportionately affected from the effects of climate change due its associated disease burden. Clean energy policies have the potential to improve public health conditions, prevent serious climate damage, and promote economic development (Haines et al., 2007). This essay will explore clean energy policies and their potential to support or undermine sustainable development and population health through case studies and examples of clean energy policies.
Clean energy policies are a vital step to curbing climate change and promoting sustainable development and population health. The Stern review estimated that the economic impact of climate change inaction would be substantially more than the economic cost of near-term climate action, where roughly 5% of gross world product (GWP) could be lost by mid 21st century, with this increasing to approximately 20% of GWP if the full scale of health, environmental and economic impacts are considered (Stern et al., 2006). Furthermore, if the world continues on a business-as-usual scenario and does not implement sustainable clean energy policies now, there is about a 50% probability that climate temperatures will increase by approximately 5 degrees Celsius by the mid 22nd century, causing a variety of economic and health issues (Haines et al., 2007). This highlights how imperative clean energy policies are in promoting and maintaining a sustainable and liveable future. For a clean energy policy to be sustainable it must have two key considerations: 1) ensuring modern, clean energy sources are affordable and accessible, and 2) implementing the right mix of energy resources and efficiencies to mitigate the adverse effects of climate change whilst providing the necessary sources of energy to populations (Mohamed & Lee, 2006).
A successful example of the impact clean energy policies can have on sustainable development and population health is exemplified by China’s policy action targeting air pollution. Air pollution has immediate and long-term impacts on population health, with non-communicable health-related issues ranging from cardiovascular disease, respiratory problems, heart and lung stress, and in extreme cases, a shorter life span (Sparetheair.com, 2020). Population health has also been directly linked to economic development, where a healthy population is a key driver behind a productive workforce, ultimately supporting macroeconomic development (Cylus, Permanand & Smith, 2018). As referenced above, China has shown the positive links between clean energy policies targeting air pollution and sustainable development and population health. Chen et al. (2007) conducted a study investigating the impact of ambient air pollution on health and economic development using various low-carbon energy schemes in Shanghai, China. They found that up to 23,100 deaths resulting from particulate matter inhalation could be avoided with the implementation of clean energy policies, corresponding to an economic benefit of up to $6,192 million US dollars over a period of 10 years up to 2020 (Chen et al., 2007). Furthermore, another study from China found that the economic benefits associated with increased population health as a result of improved air pollution actually offset the costs associated with any actions taken to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by up to 20% (Aunan et al., 2007). Thus, there is a strong link between sustainable development and population health from the implementation of clean energy policies related to air pollution.
Another example of a sustainable clean energy policy comes from Malaysia. Malaysia’s energy demand from non-renewable energy resources is growing at an estimated rate of 5-6% year on year (UK Trade & Investment, 2003). This is due to Malaysia’s energy sector being heavily reliant on non-renewable sources of fuel for energy such as fossil fuels and natural gas (Mohamed & Lee, 2006). Whilst non-renewable sources of fuel are depleting and finite, the government also recognised the harmful impact of non-renewable energy on the environment. It is for this reason that the Malaysian government further diversified their energy mix by adding renewable energy to their four-fuel policy under the 8th Malaysia Plan, making it now the five-fuel policy (Mohamed & Lee, 2006). This policy had the aim of generating up to 5% of Malaysia’s electricity from renewable energy by 2005, which was expected to save the economy up to $1.32 billion US dollars over a 5-year period (Mohamed & Lee, 2006). This is an admirable effort on the part of the Malaysian government to diversify their energy mix, and they were successful in minimising their greenhouse gas emissions and raising the importance of renewable energy in the country. However, this policy was limited in effectiveness as it did not address the affordability of modern renewable energy sources, impacting on its competitiveness as an alternative source of energy compared to conventional, non-renewable sources of energy. In the future, this barrier can be overcome by encouraging cooperation between regions across the country to establish local task forces, supplemented by economic benefits from the government, to create more sustainable development and energy use. This is enabled by targeted local penetration and competition standards of renewable energy sources that are suitable and affordable for local regions. In fact, Busche (2010) further highlights the importance of local governments in creating an environment conducive to the adoption of clean energy policies. If local governments are put in a position of power to adopt clean energy policies in such a way that specifically addresses their unique circumstances, it is more likely that local populations will realise the benefits and help build adoption for clean energy resources. Such a decentralised approach to clean energy policy implementation enables more policy experimentation at the local level than a federal approach would allow for, and because the adoption approach is unique it is able to target the specific development and population health needs of local municipalities (Busche, 2010).
Clean energy policies may also undermine sustainable development and population health if they are not accessible or affordable to the populations that are most heavily impacted, typically those in low-income countries or vulnerable populations. This goes back to the two key considerations important in implementing sustainable clean energy policies mentioned above. Using South Africa’s energy economy as a case study, we can see that South Africa emits one the highest rates of greenhouse gases in comparison to other developing nations due to its economy being predominantly coal based and energy intensive (Winkler, 2007). Whilst the majority of urban South Africa has access to clean energy, rural populations do not reap the benefits of enacted clean energy policies, such as those aimed at air pollution, due to their affordability. Rural populations rely most heavily on coal and wood for cooking and other indoor energy uses such as heating and lighting as it is the most accessible and affordable energy solution available to them (Kasangana, Masekameni & Saliwa, 2017). This greatly increases their risk for non-communicable diseases due to their time spent in close proximity to air pollution. Whilst South Africa has implemented clean energy policies to promote the use of electricity over coal, such as the poverty tariff that provides up to 50 kWh of free basic electricity to households every month (Winkler, 2007), the use of coal and wood as a primary energy source will not change in rural South Africa if the policies do not specifically target how households use this energy. The poverty tariff is a useful clean energy alternative for electricity used for entertainment purposes, however, Kasangana, Masekameni and Saliwa (2017) found that rural households spend up to 44% of their energy consumption on cooking and up to 37% on heating. Thus, the tariff would have minimal impact on air pollution as households still need to rely on coal and wood for cooking and indoor heating. Therefore, clean energy policies may not affect sustainable development nor contribute to improved population health if they are not accessible and diversified enough to target to the crux of the pollution source.
Between 2000 and 2005, the global production of ethanol more than doubled to produce 36 billion litres (Yuksel & Kaygusuz, 2011). Additionally, in the United States, transportation is the largest contributor of greenhouse gases accounting for approximately 28% of total greenhouse gas emissions (US EPA, 2020a). This flags transportation as a critical industry for clean energy policies to target, however success in implementing sustainable policies targeted at transportation has varied between countries. The United States has the potential to replace petroleum fuels used for transportation with biofuels by up to 75% (Yuksel & Kaygusuz, 2011). The energy mix for transportation can be further diversified by increasing the use of electric vehicles and hydrogen, all of which can be implemented without the need for additional developments in infrastructure, making it an economically attractive option (Yuksel & Kaygusuz, 2011). Reducing the use of petroleum in transportation also contributes towards population health due to decreased air pollution, further boosting its opportunity for increased sustainable development and population health. However, countries such as Turkey have had less success. In 2002, Turkey introduced a consumption tax on diesel and gasoline, and in the five years post its implementation, Turkey’s use of motor fuels per GDP unit decreased (Yuksel & Kaygusuz, 2011). Whilst this appears like a promising result, the tax rate for diesel fuel with a sulphur content between 0.05 and 0.20% was lower than the tax rate for diesel fuel with a lower sulphur content of 0.05%, providing the wrong economic incentive from an environmental standpoint (Yuksel & Kaygusuz, 2011). Additionally, cars are typically a luxury expensive and many low-income populations do not own a car, therefore the tax only applied to middle- and high-income populations. Therefore, Turkey’s attempt to introduce clean energy policies does little to promote sustainable development or population health, and mainly benefits the government in the form of increased tax revenue.
The literature reviewed in this essay highlights that the success of clean energy policies in promoting sustainable development and population health is dependent on a number of factors. In general, it appears that clean energy policies do in fact promote sustainable development and population health on the whole. This is exemplified by their ability to target air pollution, whereby improved air quality leads to a more productive workforce and, consequently, contributes directly to economic development (Cylus, Permanand & Smith, 2018). Although developing nations are expected to be responsible for the majority of the world’s energy consumption (Mohamed & Lee, 2006), it is important to note that it is unrealistic for developing nations to play a leading role in the implementation of clean energy policies due to the barriers of affordability and accessibility. However, this barrier can be overcome to some extent if federal governments implement decentralised clean energy policies that are flexible and specific to meet the needs of local populations. This would require careful considerations from the federal government on the trade-offs between the diversity of energy sources and their cost of implementation. Overall, a diversified portfolio of energy sources seems to be the most sustainable solution in the short run as it allows for a gradual increase in the use of renewable energy alongside a gradual decreased reliance on non-renewable energy sources. This sentiment is confirmed by The Stern review who succinctly state that the cost of near-term climate change action would be substantially less than the long-term economic effects of inaction (Stern et al., 2006).
References
Aunan, K., Berntsen, T., O’Connor, D., Persson, T.H., Vennemo, H. and Zhai, F., 2007. Benefits and costs to China of a climate policy. Environment and Development Economics, pp.471-497.
Busche, S., 2010. Clean Energy Policy Analyses: Analysis of the Status and Impact of Clean Energy Policies at the Local Level (No. NREL/TP-6A20-49720). National Renewable Energy Lab.(NREL), Golden, CO (United States).
Chen, C., Chen, B., Wang, B., Huang, C., Zhao, J., Dai, Y. and Kan, H., 2007. Low-carbon energy policy and ambient air pollution in Shanghai, China: a health-based economic assessment. Science of the Total Environment, 373(1), pp.13-21.
Cylus, J., Permanand, G. and Smith, P.C., 2018. Making the economic case for investing in health systems: What is the evidence that health systems advance economic and fiscal objectives?.
Green Economy Tracker. 2019. Clean Energy Policy. [online] Available at: <https://greeneconomytracker.org/policies/clean-energy-policy> [Accessed 25 September 2020].
Haines, A., Smith, K.R., Anderson, D., Epstein, P.R., McMichael, A.J., Roberts, I., Wilkinson, P., Woodcock, J. and Woods, J., 2007. Policies for accelerating access to clean energy, improving health, advancing development, and mitigating climate change. The Lancet, 370(9594), pp.1264-1281.
Kasangana, K.K., Masekameni, D. and Saliwa, S., 2017, April. Exploring access to clean energy for various domestic uses in Mpumalanga province, South Africa. In 2017 International Conference on the Domestic Use of Energy (DUE) (pp. 116-120). IEEE.
Mohamed, A.R. and Lee, K.T., 2006. Energy for sustainable development in Malaysia: Energy policy and alternative energy. Energy policy, 34(15), pp.2388-2397.
National Climate Assessment. 2020. Climate Change Impacts In The United States. [online] Available at: <https://nca2014.globalchange.gov/> [Accessed 25 September 2020].
NC Sustainable Energy Association. 2020. What Is Clean Energy. [online] Available at: <https://energync.org/what-is-clean-energy/> [Accessed 25 September 2020].
Sparetheair.com. 2020. Spare The Air: Health Effects Of Air Pollution. [online] Available at: <http://www.sparetheair.com/health.cfm#:~:text=Long%2Dterm%20exposure%20to%20polluted,bronchitis%2C%20emphysema%2C%20and%20possibly%20cancer> [Accessed 25 September 2020].
Stern, N.H., Peters, S., Bakhshi, V., Bowen, A., Cameron, C., Catovsky, S., Crane, D., Cruickshank, S., Dietz, S., Edmonson, N. and Garbett, S.L., 2006. Stern Review: The economics of climate change (Vol. 30, p. 2006). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
US Trade & Investment, 2003. Power market in Malaysia. [Online] Available at: <http://search1.tradepartners.gov.uk/text/energy/malaysia/pro- file/overview.shtml> (Accessed 25 September 2020).
US EPA. 2020a. Carbon Pollution From Transportation. [online] Available at: <https://www.epa.gov/transportation-air-pollution-and-climate-change/carbon-pollution-transportation#:~:text=reduce%20carbon%20pollution-,Transportation%20and%20Climate%20Change,greenhouse%20gas%2C%20into%20the%20atmosphere.&text=Between%201990%20and%202018%2C%20GHG,Global%20emissions%20by%20economic%20sector> [Accessed 25 September 2020].
US EPA. 2020b. Greenhouse Gases | US EPA. [online] Available at: <https://www.epa.gov/report-environment/greenhouse-gases#note1> [Accessed 25 September 2020].
Winkler, H., 2007. Energy policies for sustainable development in South Africa. Energy for sustainable Development, 11(1), pp.26-34.
Yuksel, I. and Kaygusuz, K., 2011. Renewable energy sources for clean and sustainable energy policies in Turkey. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(8), pp.4132-4144.