WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:01.000 align:middle line:90% 00:00:01.000 --> 00:00:02.500 align:middle line:90% [SQUEAKING] 00:00:02.500 --> 00:00:03.500 align:middle line:90% [RUSTLING] 00:00:03.500 --> 00:00:10.000 align:middle line:90% [CLICKING] 00:00:10.000 --> 00:00:12.390 align:middle line:90% DAVID HSU: My name is David Hsu. 00:00:12.390 --> 00:00:15.780 align:middle line:84% I'm a professor at MIT in the Department of Urban Studies 00:00:15.780 --> 00:00:16.470 align:middle line:90% and Planning. 00:00:16.470 --> 00:00:18.480 align:middle line:84% I'd like to welcome you to another lecture 00:00:18.480 --> 00:00:22.570 align:middle line:84% in my series on Urban Energy Systems and Policy. 00:00:22.570 --> 00:00:24.490 align:middle line:84% Today, we're going to talk about cities 00:00:24.490 --> 00:00:26.590 align:middle line:90% and industrial emissions. 00:00:26.590 --> 00:00:30.850 align:middle line:84% And what I want to do in this class, in this lecture, 00:00:30.850 --> 00:00:35.110 align:middle line:84% is connect cities to the larger issues of industrial emissions, 00:00:35.110 --> 00:00:37.300 align:middle line:84% partly because industrial emissions don't always 00:00:37.300 --> 00:00:39.280 align:middle line:84% seem to be very present in cities 00:00:39.280 --> 00:00:41.680 align:middle line:84% or don't seem to connect to cities as centers 00:00:41.680 --> 00:00:44.170 align:middle line:84% of consumption, as I've been talking to you 00:00:44.170 --> 00:00:45.910 align:middle line:90% about in this lecture series. 00:00:45.910 --> 00:00:49.450 align:middle line:84% But also, industrial emissions are a considered an extremely 00:00:49.450 --> 00:00:51.370 align:middle line:90% tough-to-decarbonize sector. 00:00:51.370 --> 00:00:54.140 align:middle line:84% We have to replace the electricity, 00:00:54.140 --> 00:00:55.930 align:middle line:90% but also crucially the heat. 00:00:55.930 --> 00:00:58.510 align:middle line:84% And the materials we use in industrial systems 00:00:58.510 --> 00:01:01.660 align:middle line:84% to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, that doesn't always 00:01:01.660 --> 00:01:05.920 align:middle line:84% seem to be an area or a scale at which cities 00:01:05.920 --> 00:01:08.470 align:middle line:90% can affect this kind of policy. 00:01:08.470 --> 00:01:11.050 align:middle line:84% But we'll explore today in this lecture 00:01:11.050 --> 00:01:15.610 align:middle line:84% how cities can affect or reduce their industrial emissions. 00:01:15.610 --> 00:01:17.960 align:middle line:84% The materials for today are all in syllabus. 00:01:17.960 --> 00:01:19.870 align:middle line:84% If you have the PDFs, then please go ahead 00:01:19.870 --> 00:01:21.520 align:middle line:84% and you can link to these materials 00:01:21.520 --> 00:01:22.990 align:middle line:90% to read them before the lecture. 00:01:22.990 --> 00:01:25.720 align:middle line:84% The lecture will build on these materials. 00:01:25.720 --> 00:01:29.230 align:middle line:84% And the themes I want to focus on today 00:01:29.230 --> 00:01:32.385 align:middle line:84% are consumption as a mechanism of greenhouse gas emissions. 00:01:32.385 --> 00:01:33.760 align:middle line:84% That's something I've said to you 00:01:33.760 --> 00:01:35.620 align:middle line:90% before in previous lectures. 00:01:35.620 --> 00:01:39.530 align:middle line:84% I want to emphasize consumption as a connection to larger 00:01:39.530 --> 00:01:40.580 align:middle line:90% energy systems. 00:01:40.580 --> 00:01:43.640 align:middle line:84% I think I've said to you also in previous lectures how we often 00:01:43.640 --> 00:01:47.550 align:middle line:84% focus on changing the energy system, how energy is produced, 00:01:47.550 --> 00:01:49.850 align:middle line:84% how it is transmitted, but not always thinking 00:01:49.850 --> 00:01:53.610 align:middle line:84% about how we can change how energy is consumed. 00:01:53.610 --> 00:01:55.890 align:middle line:84% I'll also argue, too, in today's lecture 00:01:55.890 --> 00:01:58.650 align:middle line:84% that industrial emissions have very 00:01:58.650 --> 00:02:02.040 align:middle line:84% strong environmental justice implications. 00:02:02.040 --> 00:02:04.770 align:middle line:84% It also is perhaps connected to our urban-rural, 00:02:04.770 --> 00:02:06.660 align:middle line:84% regional, and political polarization 00:02:06.660 --> 00:02:08.880 align:middle line:90% over climate action. 00:02:08.880 --> 00:02:13.050 align:middle line:84% And then we'll finish today an in-class discussion, thinking 00:02:13.050 --> 00:02:15.960 align:middle line:84% about how we might transform this industrial system 00:02:15.960 --> 00:02:20.040 align:middle line:84% both within cities and from cities also. 00:02:20.040 --> 00:02:23.310 align:middle line:84% And so if we just start with MacKay's calculation in chapter 00:02:23.310 --> 00:02:27.000 align:middle line:84% 15, he talks about lifecycle analysis. 00:02:27.000 --> 00:02:32.670 align:middle line:84% He talks about the energy or sustainable energy required 00:02:32.670 --> 00:02:37.590 align:middle line:84% to obtain raw materials, how do we produce finished goods out 00:02:37.590 --> 00:02:41.580 align:middle line:84% of the raw materials, how do we use those materials, acquiring 00:02:41.580 --> 00:02:42.360 align:middle line:90% energy. 00:02:42.360 --> 00:02:48.360 align:middle line:84% And ultimately, how do we dispose or get rid of materials 00:02:48.360 --> 00:02:49.410 align:middle line:90% by calling it waste? 00:02:49.410 --> 00:02:52.230 align:middle line:84% It's something we talked about in the last lecture on energy 00:02:52.230 --> 00:02:53.580 align:middle line:90% efficiency. 00:02:53.580 --> 00:02:56.400 align:middle line:84% And the materials he goes through briefly in chapter 15 00:02:56.400 --> 00:02:58.560 align:middle line:84% are the production of raw materials 00:02:58.560 --> 00:03:02.790 align:middle line:84% like aluminum or steel, packaging, chips, 00:03:02.790 --> 00:03:07.560 align:middle line:84% semiconductors, paper, building, construction, and roads, 00:03:07.560 --> 00:03:08.640 align:middle line:90% automaking. 00:03:08.640 --> 00:03:11.280 align:middle line:84% And of course, MacKay makes the point that a lot of things 00:03:11.280 --> 00:03:14.010 align:middle line:84% aren't necessarily made in the UK anymore. 00:03:14.010 --> 00:03:15.760 align:middle line:90% They're quite often imported. 00:03:15.760 --> 00:03:19.800 align:middle line:84% So that is embodied energy in the form of materials and goods 00:03:19.800 --> 00:03:22.560 align:middle line:90% being brought into the UK. 00:03:22.560 --> 00:03:25.290 align:middle line:84% And surprisingly, if we look in his stats-- 00:03:25.290 --> 00:03:28.240 align:middle line:84% we haven't visited revisiting this concept for a while. 00:03:28.240 --> 00:03:29.980 align:middle line:84% If you look at all the previous chapters, 00:03:29.980 --> 00:03:32.490 align:middle line:84% we've talked about heating and cooling and jet flights 00:03:32.490 --> 00:03:33.750 align:middle line:90% and cars-- 00:03:33.750 --> 00:03:35.640 align:middle line:84% stuff and the transporting of stuff 00:03:35.640 --> 00:03:38.130 align:middle line:90% is the largest category so far. 00:03:38.130 --> 00:03:41.400 align:middle line:84% And so far, by chapter 15, he is tipping us 00:03:41.400 --> 00:03:45.270 align:middle line:84% over into more consumption than we can produce from sustainable 00:03:45.270 --> 00:03:48.710 align:middle line:90% energy resources on the right. 00:03:48.710 --> 00:03:51.320 align:middle line:84% If we just think about some of these energy 00:03:51.320 --> 00:03:54.410 align:middle line:84% uses on the same footing, the stuff 00:03:54.410 --> 00:03:57.260 align:middle line:84% per person that MacKay calculates in Appendix H 00:03:57.260 --> 00:04:00.540 align:middle line:84% around is 41 kilowatt hours per day. 00:04:00.540 --> 00:04:04.970 align:middle line:84% That's 41 kilowatt hours per day as a rate of energy use. 00:04:04.970 --> 00:04:07.730 align:middle line:84% Hot water, hot air, and cooling add up 00:04:07.730 --> 00:04:11.910 align:middle line:84% to roughly about 37 kilowatt hours per day. 00:04:11.910 --> 00:04:15.510 align:middle line:84% And the construction of the house that MacKay estimates-- 00:04:15.510 --> 00:04:18.660 align:middle line:84% I think a typical English house, just the shell of the house 00:04:18.660 --> 00:04:22.950 align:middle line:84% itself is about 42,000 kilowatt hours over 100 years. 00:04:22.950 --> 00:04:24.940 align:middle line:84% The house is assumed to last 100 years. 00:04:24.940 --> 00:04:26.880 align:middle line:84% So if you put that on equal footing, 00:04:26.880 --> 00:04:30.200 align:middle line:84% it's only 1.2 kilowatt hours per day. 00:04:30.200 --> 00:04:33.130 align:middle line:84% So we might conclude from these back-of-the-envelope numbers 00:04:33.130 --> 00:04:36.070 align:middle line:84% in MacKay's book that materials and construction aren't really 00:04:36.070 --> 00:04:37.600 align:middle line:90% a problem. 00:04:37.600 --> 00:04:39.490 align:middle line:84% Well, let's just question this for a second. 00:04:39.490 --> 00:04:42.040 align:middle line:84% There's obvious reasons why by putting things 00:04:42.040 --> 00:04:45.550 align:middle line:84% in the same footing, by amortizing this energy over 100 00:04:45.550 --> 00:04:48.220 align:middle line:84% years, we might be missing some things. 00:04:48.220 --> 00:04:50.680 align:middle line:84% First, the houses that we construct now 00:04:50.680 --> 00:04:53.740 align:middle line:84% in this calculation are assumed to last for 100 years. 00:04:53.740 --> 00:04:57.490 align:middle line:84% Not only does that assume we don't retrofit or modify 00:04:57.490 --> 00:05:01.210 align:middle line:84% them or redecorate them or demolish in the next 100 00:05:01.210 --> 00:05:03.880 align:middle line:84% years, which is obviously an assumption that probably does 00:05:03.880 --> 00:05:06.790 align:middle line:84% not hold in many North American cities, let 00:05:06.790 --> 00:05:11.530 align:middle line:84% alone vast developing countries, but also, it 00:05:11.530 --> 00:05:14.470 align:middle line:84% assumes that the house construction that we do today 00:05:14.470 --> 00:05:15.640 align:middle line:90% is essentially baked in. 00:05:15.640 --> 00:05:18.340 align:middle line:84% We're locking in that energy construction now. 00:05:18.340 --> 00:05:20.050 align:middle line:84% We're locking the energy implications 00:05:20.050 --> 00:05:21.880 align:middle line:90% of that house construction now. 00:05:21.880 --> 00:05:25.880 align:middle line:84% And we're actually omitting the carbon emissions of that now. 00:05:25.880 --> 00:05:29.230 align:middle line:84% So not only do we calculate this energy basis 00:05:29.230 --> 00:05:31.630 align:middle line:84% and average it over the next 100 years, 00:05:31.630 --> 00:05:34.120 align:middle line:84% but it matters much more if we actually do 00:05:34.120 --> 00:05:37.240 align:middle line:84% a lot of construction and emit a lot of carbon now-- much more 00:05:37.240 --> 00:05:39.013 align:middle line:90% today than 100 years from now. 00:05:39.013 --> 00:05:40.930 align:middle line:84% As I've said to you multiple times this class, 00:05:40.930 --> 00:05:43.420 align:middle line:84% we have a mid-century goal of 2050. 00:05:43.420 --> 00:05:45.820 align:middle line:84% If we assume that we're going to stop 00:05:45.820 --> 00:05:48.460 align:middle line:84% doing any construction after this next 10 years, 00:05:48.460 --> 00:05:49.540 align:middle line:90% that might be one thing. 00:05:49.540 --> 00:05:54.730 align:middle line:84% But we've still frontloaded our energy or our carbon emissions 00:05:54.730 --> 00:05:56.113 align:middle line:90% today for the next 100 years. 00:05:56.113 --> 00:05:57.280 align:middle line:90% We can make this assumption. 00:05:57.280 --> 00:06:00.130 align:middle line:84% So perhaps averaging everything over 100 years 00:06:00.130 --> 00:06:02.390 align:middle line:84% is not the way we should think about it. 00:06:02.390 --> 00:06:04.540 align:middle line:84% But another argument I want to make to you 00:06:04.540 --> 00:06:07.600 align:middle line:84% is that there's definitely different implications 00:06:07.600 --> 00:06:10.855 align:middle line:84% of industrial emissions for livelihood and climate action. 00:06:10.855 --> 00:06:12.230 align:middle line:84% In one of the previous lectures-- 00:06:12.230 --> 00:06:14.200 align:middle line:84% I think even the second lecture for this class, 00:06:14.200 --> 00:06:16.090 align:middle line:84% I talked to you about Robert Bullard. 00:06:16.090 --> 00:06:18.790 align:middle line:84% Robert Bullard is an environmental justice scholar-- 00:06:18.790 --> 00:06:21.640 align:middle line:84% really in some ways, the father of environmental justice. 00:06:21.640 --> 00:06:24.280 align:middle line:84% And as I said to you in the second lecture, 00:06:24.280 --> 00:06:27.760 align:middle line:84% he discovered early on in his career as a sociologist 00:06:27.760 --> 00:06:30.100 align:middle line:84% that 100% of the landfills in Houston 00:06:30.100 --> 00:06:32.110 align:middle line:84% were located in Black neighborhoods, 00:06:32.110 --> 00:06:34.720 align:middle line:84% though the Black population was only 25% 00:06:34.720 --> 00:06:36.760 align:middle line:90% of Houston's population. 00:06:36.760 --> 00:06:39.520 align:middle line:84% At the same time, this paper we read 00:06:39.520 --> 00:06:41.700 align:middle line:90% by Sandeep Pai and others-- 00:06:41.700 --> 00:06:42.700 align:middle line:90% this is the same author. 00:06:42.700 --> 00:06:45.970 align:middle line:84% He recently wrote a book called Total Transition. 00:06:45.970 --> 00:06:48.220 align:middle line:84% And it's called The Human Side of the Renewable Energy 00:06:48.220 --> 00:06:51.640 align:middle line:84% Revolution because he focuses on workers in the fossil fuel 00:06:51.640 --> 00:06:55.060 align:middle line:84% industries, and argues that if we have a renewable energy 00:06:55.060 --> 00:06:57.640 align:middle line:84% revolution, it is going to disproportionately affect 00:06:57.640 --> 00:06:58.350 align:middle line:90% these workers. 00:06:58.350 --> 00:07:01.570 align:middle line:84% So he investigates the situations of workers 00:07:01.570 --> 00:07:04.610 align:middle line:90% both in India and in Canada. 00:07:04.610 --> 00:07:07.750 align:middle line:84% And these two things are not unconnected. 00:07:07.750 --> 00:07:12.280 align:middle line:84% First, the environmental justice implications of fossil fuel use 00:07:12.280 --> 00:07:16.000 align:middle line:84% and consumption and production, focused on 00:07:16.000 --> 00:07:17.980 align:middle line:84% by Robert Bullard and Shalanda Baker-- 00:07:17.980 --> 00:07:21.760 align:middle line:84% if you remember that article we read maybe a few weeks back. 00:07:21.760 --> 00:07:23.680 align:middle line:84% But Sandeep Pai also says that in terms 00:07:23.680 --> 00:07:26.410 align:middle line:84% of justice implications, there's obviously 00:07:26.410 --> 00:07:28.720 align:middle line:84% a very large literature review focusing 00:07:28.720 --> 00:07:31.510 align:middle line:84% on a large literature looking at why this is going to affect 00:07:31.510 --> 00:07:34.090 align:middle line:84% workers and why workers might resist 00:07:34.090 --> 00:07:37.060 align:middle line:90% trying to take climate action. 00:07:37.060 --> 00:07:40.000 align:middle line:84% A similar argument has been made by Matto Mildenberger 00:07:40.000 --> 00:07:41.980 align:middle line:90% in his book Carbon Capture. 00:07:41.980 --> 00:07:46.890 align:middle line:84% He argues that our coalitions for climate action are also, 00:07:46.890 --> 00:07:48.900 align:middle line:90% we have to recognize, split. 00:07:48.900 --> 00:07:51.360 align:middle line:84% Business and labor have influence 00:07:51.360 --> 00:07:57.610 align:middle line:84% on the left and right coalitions for or opposing climate action. 00:07:57.610 --> 00:08:00.480 align:middle line:84% So he argues that climate action in multiple countries 00:08:00.480 --> 00:08:05.700 align:middle line:84% has been stymied by the fact that even for coalitions that 00:08:05.700 --> 00:08:08.345 align:middle line:84% argue for climate action, business and labor have 00:08:08.345 --> 00:08:12.300 align:middle line:84% had substantial influence in stopping or exempting 00:08:12.300 --> 00:08:15.640 align:middle line:84% certain industries from climate action. 00:08:15.640 --> 00:08:18.420 align:middle line:84% And so just to give you another sense of how cities 00:08:18.420 --> 00:08:20.525 align:middle line:84% are connected to industrial nations, 00:08:20.525 --> 00:08:21.900 align:middle line:84% quite often in this class, you're 00:08:21.900 --> 00:08:24.390 align:middle line:84% talking about cities that have relatively high population 00:08:24.390 --> 00:08:26.700 align:middle line:90% density and population. 00:08:26.700 --> 00:08:29.870 align:middle line:84% Looking at the population density and population 00:08:29.870 --> 00:08:31.620 align:middle line:84% in the United States, this vertical axis 00:08:31.620 --> 00:08:34.230 align:middle line:84% is the log of population density. 00:08:34.230 --> 00:08:37.080 align:middle line:84% The horizontal axis is the industrial greenhouse gas 00:08:37.080 --> 00:08:39.630 align:middle line:84% emissions as a percentage of the total greenhouse gas 00:08:39.630 --> 00:08:42.059 align:middle line:90% emissions for the county. 00:08:42.059 --> 00:08:45.210 align:middle line:84% This is all calculated from EPA'S industrial greenhouse gas 00:08:45.210 --> 00:08:46.050 align:middle line:90% figures. 00:08:46.050 --> 00:08:49.380 align:middle line:84% You can click on this link and see the numbers there, 00:08:49.380 --> 00:08:51.550 align:middle line:84% or calculate them yourself if you want. 00:08:51.550 --> 00:08:53.160 align:middle line:84% But the point is for cities, if you 00:08:53.160 --> 00:08:56.040 align:middle line:84% look at the log of population density, 00:08:56.040 --> 00:08:59.190 align:middle line:84% you can see in the United States we have a nice bell curve. 00:08:59.190 --> 00:09:01.710 align:middle line:84% If you put a histogram on the side or a density plot 00:09:01.710 --> 00:09:04.035 align:middle line:84% on the side, the log of population density, 00:09:04.035 --> 00:09:06.900 align:middle line:84% it is relatively bell curve-shaped. 00:09:06.900 --> 00:09:11.112 align:middle line:84% You can see, that means if we take the population density, 00:09:11.112 --> 00:09:13.320 align:middle line:84% we have a few cities that are very high in population 00:09:13.320 --> 00:09:14.708 align:middle line:90% density like New York. 00:09:14.708 --> 00:09:17.250 align:middle line:84% And the vast majority of cities are lower population density, 00:09:17.250 --> 00:09:22.190 align:middle line:84% but I take the log because it makes the data clearer. 00:09:22.190 --> 00:09:25.510 align:middle line:84% And so if you consider, for example, the highest population 00:09:25.510 --> 00:09:28.210 align:middle line:84% density and population counties in each state, 00:09:28.210 --> 00:09:31.820 align:middle line:84% Cook County is the seat of Chicago, Illinois. 00:09:31.820 --> 00:09:34.270 align:middle line:84% You can see how it's mostly low individual greenhouse gas 00:09:34.270 --> 00:09:36.550 align:middle line:84% emissions as a percentage of total. 00:09:36.550 --> 00:09:39.520 align:middle line:84% For the other highest population density and population counties 00:09:39.520 --> 00:09:42.490 align:middle line:84% in each state, that's true for Maricopa County, which 00:09:42.490 --> 00:09:46.960 align:middle line:84% is the home of Phoenix, Arizona, Dallas County, which 00:09:46.960 --> 00:09:51.160 align:middle line:84% is the seat of Dallas, Texas, King County, Washington, 00:09:51.160 --> 00:09:54.970 align:middle line:84% Seattle, as well with low industrial emissions. 00:09:54.970 --> 00:09:58.940 align:middle line:84% Wayne County is the seat of Detroit. 00:09:58.940 --> 00:10:02.930 align:middle line:84% And New York County is one of the four very high population 00:10:02.930 --> 00:10:05.720 align:middle line:90% counties that comprise New York. 00:10:05.720 --> 00:10:07.100 align:middle line:84% And so generally, the way we talk 00:10:07.100 --> 00:10:09.110 align:middle line:84% about cities as centers of consumption, 00:10:09.110 --> 00:10:10.940 align:middle line:84% if these are the cities that come to mind, 00:10:10.940 --> 00:10:13.970 align:middle line:84% then yes, we have relatively low industrial emissions 00:10:13.970 --> 00:10:15.650 align:middle line:90% associated with cities. 00:10:15.650 --> 00:10:17.210 align:middle line:84% But now let's look at this chart. 00:10:17.210 --> 00:10:18.710 align:middle line:84% If we look at this chart, we can see 00:10:18.710 --> 00:10:20.870 align:middle line:84% that there's all these other cities out here that 00:10:20.870 --> 00:10:23.370 align:middle line:84% have much higher industrial greenhouse gas emissions. 00:10:23.370 --> 00:10:24.410 align:middle line:90% Which cities are those? 00:10:24.410 --> 00:10:26.390 align:middle line:90% Which counties are those? 00:10:26.390 --> 00:10:28.760 align:middle line:90% If we look at the-- 00:10:28.760 --> 00:10:32.360 align:middle line:84% Philadelphia also has relatively low industrial emissions 00:10:32.360 --> 00:10:34.523 align:middle line:90% as a percentage of its total. 00:10:34.523 --> 00:10:36.190 align:middle line:84% But if we look at the highest population 00:10:36.190 --> 00:10:39.040 align:middle line:84% density and relatively high industrial-emitting counties 00:10:39.040 --> 00:10:41.470 align:middle line:84% in each state, then we get to a different set of cities 00:10:41.470 --> 00:10:44.500 align:middle line:84% that we don't often talk about in urban planning. 00:10:44.500 --> 00:10:49.180 align:middle line:84% Tulsa, Oklahoma, Newcastle, Delaware have about a quarter 00:10:49.180 --> 00:10:54.340 align:middle line:84% of their greenhouse gas emissions are from industry. 00:10:54.340 --> 00:10:58.680 align:middle line:84% Denver, Colorado, has relatively high greenhouse gas emissions. 00:10:58.680 --> 00:11:01.890 align:middle line:84% Jefferson County in Alabama has relatively high greenhouse gas 00:11:01.890 --> 00:11:03.150 align:middle line:90% emissions. 00:11:03.150 --> 00:11:06.600 align:middle line:84% Dallas, again, shows up on this list, and about 20% 00:11:06.600 --> 00:11:08.580 align:middle line:84% of its emissions are from greenhouse gas-- 00:11:08.580 --> 00:11:11.340 align:middle line:84% 20% of its greenhouse gas emissions of its total. 00:11:11.340 --> 00:11:14.610 align:middle line:84% So it's higher than other cities that we looked at. 00:11:14.610 --> 00:11:18.480 align:middle line:84% And Cuyahoga County in Ohio, the seat of Cleveland, 00:11:18.480 --> 00:11:22.410 align:middle line:84% also has surprisingly higher, but still relatively low, 00:11:22.410 --> 00:11:23.808 align:middle line:90% greenhouse gas emissions. 00:11:23.808 --> 00:11:25.350 align:middle line:84% Let's look at some of the cities that 00:11:25.350 --> 00:11:27.390 align:middle line:84% have extremely high industrial emissions 00:11:27.390 --> 00:11:29.010 align:middle line:90% as a percentage of the total. 00:11:29.010 --> 00:11:31.380 align:middle line:84% What are those cities and counties? 00:11:31.380 --> 00:11:33.630 align:middle line:84% If we look at the highest industrial-emitting counties 00:11:33.630 --> 00:11:36.990 align:middle line:84% with high population densities, East Baton Rouge, 00:11:36.990 --> 00:11:41.390 align:middle line:84% Saint John the Baptist County, Calcasieu County-- 00:11:41.390 --> 00:11:44.430 align:middle line:84% mispronounced that, and St. Charles County and Ascension 00:11:44.430 --> 00:11:47.340 align:middle line:90% County are all in Louisiana. 00:11:47.340 --> 00:11:49.087 align:middle line:84% In fact, if we go back to Robert Bullard, 00:11:49.087 --> 00:11:51.420 align:middle line:84% the reason why he started studying environmental justice 00:11:51.420 --> 00:11:54.510 align:middle line:84% the first place, you can see that the highest population 00:11:54.510 --> 00:11:57.030 align:middle line:84% density and industrial-emitting counties 00:11:57.030 --> 00:12:00.070 align:middle line:84% are all in Louisiana, Texas, Virginia. 00:12:00.070 --> 00:12:01.890 align:middle line:84% These are not only places that are 00:12:01.890 --> 00:12:04.200 align:middle line:90% concentrated in a few states. 00:12:04.200 --> 00:12:07.050 align:middle line:84% Remarkably high proportions of their greenhouse gas emissions 00:12:07.050 --> 00:12:08.730 align:middle line:90% come from industry-- 00:12:08.730 --> 00:12:13.320 align:middle line:84% about 70%, up to 92%, in Covington, 00:12:13.320 --> 00:12:16.770 align:middle line:84% Virginia that have extremely high populations 00:12:16.770 --> 00:12:18.000 align:middle line:90% for their area. 00:12:18.000 --> 00:12:20.050 align:middle line:84% They have very high population densities. 00:12:20.050 --> 00:12:21.750 align:middle line:84% But also, what I want to emphasize 00:12:21.750 --> 00:12:23.850 align:middle line:84% to you is that they have extremely high nonwhite 00:12:23.850 --> 00:12:27.420 align:middle line:84% populations that, in this case, not only are 00:12:27.420 --> 00:12:29.910 align:middle line:84% the people subject to the consequences 00:12:29.910 --> 00:12:32.460 align:middle line:84% or the burdens of industrial emissions. 00:12:32.460 --> 00:12:35.250 align:middle line:84% But these are all people who also may work 00:12:35.250 --> 00:12:36.790 align:middle line:90% in these industries as well. 00:12:36.790 --> 00:12:40.500 align:middle line:84% So this hopefully brings into focus the way 00:12:40.500 --> 00:12:42.630 align:middle line:84% that these different ideas about livelihood 00:12:42.630 --> 00:12:46.410 align:middle line:84% and environmental burden and climate action can coincide. 00:12:46.410 --> 00:12:49.380 align:middle line:84% All of these counties are extremely high percentages 00:12:49.380 --> 00:12:53.480 align:middle line:84% of nonwhite population, in many cases African-Americans. 00:12:53.480 --> 00:12:54.980 align:middle line:84% They have high population densities. 00:12:54.980 --> 00:12:58.520 align:middle line:84% These are essentially highly urbanized areas, 00:12:58.520 --> 00:13:00.080 align:middle line:84% and they are areas that also have 00:13:00.080 --> 00:13:03.010 align:middle line:90% very high industrial emissions. 00:13:03.010 --> 00:13:06.610 align:middle line:84% This is an area in Louisiana, I guess, 00:13:06.610 --> 00:13:09.760 align:middle line:90% known recently as Cancer Alley. 00:13:09.760 --> 00:13:13.375 align:middle line:84% It's a phrase used in this ProPublica investigation about 00:13:13.375 --> 00:13:16.540 align:middle line:84% "Welcome to 'Cancer Alley,' Where Toxic Air Is About to Get 00:13:16.540 --> 00:13:18.368 align:middle line:90% Much Worse." 00:13:18.368 --> 00:13:20.410 align:middle line:84% The article is about how air quality has improved 00:13:20.410 --> 00:13:22.270 align:middle line:84% for decades across the United states, 00:13:22.270 --> 00:13:25.720 align:middle line:84% but Louisiana's backsliding because their analysis found 00:13:25.720 --> 00:13:28.210 align:middle line:84% that many new industrial plants will increase 00:13:28.210 --> 00:13:30.520 align:middle line:84% the concentration of cancer-causing chemicals 00:13:30.520 --> 00:13:33.290 align:middle line:84% in predominantly Black and poor communities. 00:13:33.290 --> 00:13:35.980 align:middle line:84% So if we think about cities' industrial emissions, 00:13:35.980 --> 00:13:38.780 align:middle line:84% it's not only cities like New York that are perhaps 00:13:38.780 --> 00:13:40.000 align:middle line:90% centers of consumption. 00:13:40.000 --> 00:13:43.240 align:middle line:84% But other cities actually have high concentrations 00:13:43.240 --> 00:13:46.150 align:middle line:84% of industrial pollution within the city boundaries, 00:13:46.150 --> 00:13:49.620 align:middle line:84% or the county boundaries as well. 00:13:49.620 --> 00:13:53.150 align:middle line:84% If we look at how fossil fuel infrastructure is distributed 00:13:53.150 --> 00:13:55.880 align:middle line:84% across the US, these are some graphics 00:13:55.880 --> 00:13:59.690 align:middle line:84% that my student Darryle Ulama and I made a few years ago 00:13:59.690 --> 00:14:03.470 align:middle line:84% from the US Energy Information Administration and Homeland 00:14:03.470 --> 00:14:04.640 align:middle line:90% Security data. 00:14:04.640 --> 00:14:06.590 align:middle line:84% You can see power plants are relatively 00:14:06.590 --> 00:14:08.300 align:middle line:90% distributed across the US. 00:14:08.300 --> 00:14:12.200 align:middle line:84% This graphic of coal, natural gas, and petroleum plants 00:14:12.200 --> 00:14:15.800 align:middle line:84% effectively follows the population or the urban pattern 00:14:15.800 --> 00:14:17.360 align:middle line:90% of the United States. 00:14:17.360 --> 00:14:18.950 align:middle line:84% But you can see that natural gas is 00:14:18.950 --> 00:14:21.320 align:middle line:84% highly concentrated in the exact places we've just 00:14:21.320 --> 00:14:22.010 align:middle line:90% talked about-- 00:14:22.010 --> 00:14:24.740 align:middle line:90% Texas and Louisiana prefer. 00:14:24.740 --> 00:14:27.680 align:middle line:84% Virginia is a different case, I think, out there. 00:14:27.680 --> 00:14:30.890 align:middle line:84% If we look at natural gas, it's highly concentrated here, 00:14:30.890 --> 00:14:32.870 align:middle line:84% partly because import and export, 00:14:32.870 --> 00:14:35.240 align:middle line:84% but also because of petrochemical refining 00:14:35.240 --> 00:14:37.430 align:middle line:90% and production. 00:14:37.430 --> 00:14:39.670 align:middle line:84% And if we look at only oil and petroleum, 00:14:39.670 --> 00:14:43.270 align:middle line:84% you can see our pipelines again run from Texas, Louisiana, 00:14:43.270 --> 00:14:47.580 align:middle line:84% pretty much following the urban patterns of the United States. 00:14:47.580 --> 00:14:49.800 align:middle line:84% We look at cumulative impacts, yes, we 00:14:49.800 --> 00:14:53.520 align:middle line:84% see fossil fuel infrastructure concentrated across the United 00:14:53.520 --> 00:14:54.210 align:middle line:90% States. 00:14:54.210 --> 00:14:56.250 align:middle line:84% But clearly, based on the industrial emissions 00:14:56.250 --> 00:14:58.590 align:middle line:84% we looked at before, the industrial emissions 00:14:58.590 --> 00:15:01.300 align:middle line:84% are very differently distributed across urban areas 00:15:01.300 --> 00:15:03.730 align:middle line:84% the United States, which brings me 00:15:03.730 --> 00:15:06.880 align:middle line:90% to the Ahman et al, 2017, paper. 00:15:06.880 --> 00:15:08.530 align:middle line:84% Just to focus on this paper, it's 00:15:08.530 --> 00:15:10.630 align:middle line:84% about global climate policies for 00:15:10.630 --> 00:15:12.860 align:middle line:90% energy-intensive industries. 00:15:12.860 --> 00:15:15.130 align:middle line:84% We're going to go through a bunch of acronyms here. 00:15:15.130 --> 00:15:17.890 align:middle line:84% At the global level, we have energy-intensive industries 00:15:17.890 --> 00:15:21.910 align:middle line:84% like steel, cement, aluminum, fertilizer, and plastics. 00:15:21.910 --> 00:15:24.100 align:middle line:90% That's EII. 00:15:24.100 --> 00:15:26.800 align:middle line:84% BATs are the best-available technologies. 00:15:26.800 --> 00:15:29.050 align:middle line:84% But crucially, the paper argues that they only 00:15:29.050 --> 00:15:32.312 align:middle line:84% reduce emissions 15% or 30% So hopefully, 00:15:32.312 --> 00:15:34.270 align:middle line:84% in the five years since this paper was written, 00:15:34.270 --> 00:15:35.830 align:middle line:84% we've come up with more ideas for how 00:15:35.830 --> 00:15:37.540 align:middle line:90% to decarbonize industry. 00:15:37.540 --> 00:15:40.390 align:middle line:84% But at least the best available technologies five years ago 00:15:40.390 --> 00:15:44.560 align:middle line:84% only reduced emissions a fraction of what we need. 00:15:44.560 --> 00:15:46.440 align:middle line:84% There's a number of other acronyms 00:15:46.440 --> 00:15:50.160 align:middle line:84% quite often about international climate negotiations-- 00:15:50.160 --> 00:15:53.700 align:middle line:84% common-but-differentiated responsibilities, CBDRs. 00:15:53.700 --> 00:15:56.070 align:middle line:84% Clean development mechanism, CDM-- 00:15:56.070 --> 00:15:58.650 align:middle line:84% this is a mechanism intended for rich countries 00:15:58.650 --> 00:16:01.560 align:middle line:84% to help poor countries decarbonize and meet 00:16:01.560 --> 00:16:05.070 align:middle line:84% their INDCs, their intended nationally-determined 00:16:05.070 --> 00:16:05.903 align:middle line:90% contributions. 00:16:05.903 --> 00:16:08.070 align:middle line:84% This is what we said in the Paris Climate Agreement. 00:16:08.070 --> 00:16:10.830 align:middle line:84% Every country came, said what their intended 00:16:10.830 --> 00:16:13.830 align:middle line:84% nationally-determined contribution was of the INDC. 00:16:13.830 --> 00:16:15.690 align:middle line:84% Basically, every country came and said 00:16:15.690 --> 00:16:18.337 align:middle line:84% this is the best we could do on climate change. 00:16:18.337 --> 00:16:19.920 align:middle line:84% Of course, there's a lot of discussion 00:16:19.920 --> 00:16:23.290 align:middle line:84% now in climate policy about border carbon adjustments. 00:16:23.290 --> 00:16:25.200 align:middle line:84% These are the border carbon adjustments 00:16:25.200 --> 00:16:27.630 align:middle line:84% that rich countries might use to try 00:16:27.630 --> 00:16:33.180 align:middle line:84% to account for the embodied energy that they're importing, 00:16:33.180 --> 00:16:36.660 align:middle line:84% but also that's hopefully not causing additional leakage 00:16:36.660 --> 00:16:38.310 align:middle line:90% of jobs to other countries. 00:16:38.310 --> 00:16:40.500 align:middle line:84% In other words, if other countries 00:16:40.500 --> 00:16:44.100 align:middle line:84% seem like they have low greenhouse gas consumption 00:16:44.100 --> 00:16:45.960 align:middle line:84% or emissions associated with consumption, 00:16:45.960 --> 00:16:48.750 align:middle line:84% and maybe because they're actually exporting their goods 00:16:48.750 --> 00:16:49.690 align:middle line:90% to rich countries. 00:16:49.690 --> 00:16:53.130 align:middle line:84% So both rich and poor countries have proposed border carbon 00:16:53.130 --> 00:16:55.440 align:middle line:84% adjustments, where we can hopefully 00:16:55.440 --> 00:16:59.310 align:middle line:84% account for this at the border when materials and goods are 00:16:59.310 --> 00:17:00.690 align:middle line:90% imported. 00:17:00.690 --> 00:17:02.670 align:middle line:84% And finally, CCS is something we're 00:17:02.670 --> 00:17:04.859 align:middle line:84% going to talk about a lot going forward. 00:17:04.859 --> 00:17:06.720 align:middle line:84% Carbon capture and storage, often 00:17:06.720 --> 00:17:11.619 align:middle line:84% called carbon capture, utilization, and storage now. 00:17:11.619 --> 00:17:14.290 align:middle line:84% Just to give you a sense of where greenhouse gas 00:17:14.290 --> 00:17:18.980 align:middle line:84% emissions have gone, this is a plot from the Ahman paper. 00:17:18.980 --> 00:17:21.099 align:middle line:84% If the data is normalized in 1990, 00:17:21.099 --> 00:17:23.319 align:middle line:84% when the UN started accounting, you 00:17:23.319 --> 00:17:26.980 align:middle line:84% could see that world emissions have gone up. 00:17:26.980 --> 00:17:29.980 align:middle line:84% Emissions in Japan and the EU have gone down. 00:17:29.980 --> 00:17:32.260 align:middle line:84% In the US, they've stayed relatively flat, 00:17:32.260 --> 00:17:35.110 align:middle line:84% either industrial, direct greenhouse gas emissions. 00:17:35.110 --> 00:17:37.150 align:middle line:84% But obviously, rapidly developing countries 00:17:37.150 --> 00:17:40.660 align:middle line:84% like China, India, and Brazil have rapidly 00:17:40.660 --> 00:17:42.610 align:middle line:84% increased their greenhouse gas emissions. 00:17:42.610 --> 00:17:44.860 align:middle line:84% But we should also recognize that these greenhouse gas 00:17:44.860 --> 00:17:48.130 align:middle line:84% emissions have increased in these countries because 00:17:48.130 --> 00:17:52.030 align:middle line:84% of their exports to the rich and developed world. 00:17:52.030 --> 00:17:54.090 align:middle line:84% And so this brings up fundamental issues 00:17:54.090 --> 00:17:57.810 align:middle line:84% of efficiency, equity, and fairness. 00:17:57.810 --> 00:17:59.220 align:middle line:84% There's a lot of issues that need 00:17:59.220 --> 00:18:01.230 align:middle line:84% to be negotiated within and between countries 00:18:01.230 --> 00:18:03.060 align:middle line:90% around industrial emissions. 00:18:03.060 --> 00:18:04.930 align:middle line:84% There's the idea of carbon leakage. 00:18:04.930 --> 00:18:07.380 align:middle line:84% This is where there will be a loss of competitiveness 00:18:07.380 --> 00:18:11.660 align:middle line:84% and relocation of industry to other countries. 00:18:11.660 --> 00:18:13.820 align:middle line:84% There's questions about political stability, 00:18:13.820 --> 00:18:16.340 align:middle line:84% transportation infrastructure, labor legislation 00:18:16.340 --> 00:18:19.910 align:middle line:84% and protections, access to markets and feedstock, 00:18:19.910 --> 00:18:21.640 align:middle line:90% and industrial policy. 00:18:21.640 --> 00:18:24.140 align:middle line:84% The reason why we're talking about it in this urban planning 00:18:24.140 --> 00:18:26.630 align:middle line:84% class is that we think about all these as issues 00:18:26.630 --> 00:18:29.300 align:middle line:84% to be negotiated within and between countries. 00:18:29.300 --> 00:18:31.460 align:middle line:84% The key issue for cities is how do we 00:18:31.460 --> 00:18:35.390 align:middle line:84% negotiate these issues between cities and within countries? 00:18:35.390 --> 00:18:39.230 align:middle line:84% In other words, again, if we have centers of consumption, 00:18:39.230 --> 00:18:41.330 align:middle line:84% quite often on the coasts, we are 00:18:41.330 --> 00:18:43.220 align:middle line:84% drawing on industrial emissions that 00:18:43.220 --> 00:18:44.630 align:middle line:84% are in other parts of the country 00:18:44.630 --> 00:18:46.220 align:middle line:90% or other parts of the world. 00:18:46.220 --> 00:18:48.440 align:middle line:84% How do we account for this consumption? 00:18:48.440 --> 00:18:52.760 align:middle line:84% What do relatively rich developed areas, such as cities 00:18:52.760 --> 00:18:56.870 align:middle line:84% in North America, have to do to account for their emissions 00:18:56.870 --> 00:19:01.070 align:middle line:84% or how to make up for their consumption? 00:19:01.070 --> 00:19:03.190 align:middle line:84% So this again is a good time to focus 00:19:03.190 --> 00:19:06.400 align:middle line:84% on how we can scale down some of these national policies. 00:19:06.400 --> 00:19:09.250 align:middle line:84% And I'll argue to you that a lot of these policies that 00:19:09.250 --> 00:19:11.860 align:middle line:84% exist at the national level that are discussed in this Ahman 00:19:11.860 --> 00:19:17.130 align:middle line:84% paper also have equivalents at the urban scale. 00:19:17.130 --> 00:19:19.670 align:middle line:84% For example, in the first policy here, we 00:19:19.670 --> 00:19:21.440 align:middle line:84% have mitigation policies and measures 00:19:21.440 --> 00:19:23.570 align:middle line:84% that have an intended, direct effect. 00:19:23.570 --> 00:19:25.940 align:middle line:84% We have mitigation policies and measures with intended 00:19:25.940 --> 00:19:26.900 align:middle line:90% long-term effects. 00:19:26.900 --> 00:19:29.900 align:middle line:84% In the EU, we had a regulated target for industry 00:19:29.900 --> 00:19:32.390 align:middle line:84% together with the power sector to reduce its greenhouse gas 00:19:32.390 --> 00:19:35.870 align:middle line:84% emissions via the emissions trading scheme. 00:19:35.870 --> 00:19:38.840 align:middle line:84% We've obviously discussed possible emissions 00:19:38.840 --> 00:19:40.520 align:middle line:90% trading schemes in the US. 00:19:40.520 --> 00:19:43.640 align:middle line:84% Not only does California have an emissions trading scheme 00:19:43.640 --> 00:19:45.020 align:middle line:90% within California. 00:19:45.020 --> 00:19:48.620 align:middle line:84% We have the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, RGGI, 00:19:48.620 --> 00:19:52.550 align:middle line:84% on the East Coast, trying to trade emissions within the East 00:19:52.550 --> 00:19:54.420 align:middle line:90% Coast or mid-Atlantic states. 00:19:54.420 --> 00:19:55.940 align:middle line:84% We also have the Clean Power Plan, 00:19:55.940 --> 00:19:59.360 align:middle line:84% which would allow the power sector in different states 00:19:59.360 --> 00:20:02.630 align:middle line:84% to meet emissions targets in different ways. 00:20:02.630 --> 00:20:05.210 align:middle line:84% Regulations reducing emissions of industrial gases-- 00:20:05.210 --> 00:20:07.280 align:middle line:84% I think some states have increased, 00:20:07.280 --> 00:20:10.820 align:middle line:84% like RGGI in California, having these regulations designed 00:20:10.820 --> 00:20:13.280 align:middle line:84% to reduce emissions of industrial gases. 00:20:13.280 --> 00:20:15.260 align:middle line:84% And there's energy efficiency directives 00:20:15.260 --> 00:20:19.550 align:middle line:84% that can be applied differently at the city and state level. 00:20:19.550 --> 00:20:22.440 align:middle line:84% We also have, in our most recent legislation, 00:20:22.440 --> 00:20:23.930 align:middle line:90% the Inflation Reduction Act. 00:20:23.930 --> 00:20:26.390 align:middle line:84% We have funding for demonstration of carbon capture 00:20:26.390 --> 00:20:29.690 align:middle line:84% and storage and bioenergy for sure. 00:20:29.690 --> 00:20:32.610 align:middle line:84% Japan has implementation of voluntary action plans 00:20:32.610 --> 00:20:35.672 align:middle line:84% by industries for promoting energy efficiency. 00:20:35.672 --> 00:20:37.130 align:middle line:84% Obviously, in the last few classes, 00:20:37.130 --> 00:20:38.547 align:middle line:84% we've talked about how cities have 00:20:38.547 --> 00:20:41.557 align:middle line:84% implemented different energy efficiency programs. 00:20:41.557 --> 00:20:43.640 align:middle line:84% We also have subsidies for increasing the adoption 00:20:43.640 --> 00:20:45.720 align:middle line:90% of best-available technologies. 00:20:45.720 --> 00:20:49.820 align:middle line:84% We have a low carbon technology roadmap relevant to steel. 00:20:49.820 --> 00:20:52.850 align:middle line:84% I think we have that in our new Inflation Reduction Act 00:20:52.850 --> 00:20:53.990 align:middle line:90% legislation. 00:20:53.990 --> 00:20:58.310 align:middle line:84% We definitely have roadmaps for low carbon production 00:20:58.310 --> 00:21:00.680 align:middle line:90% of industrial production. 00:21:00.680 --> 00:21:02.750 align:middle line:84% And finally, the ENERGY STAR program for industry 00:21:02.750 --> 00:21:05.060 align:middle line:84% for adopting energy-efficient technologies, 00:21:05.060 --> 00:21:07.730 align:middle line:84% this is purely a US-level policy. 00:21:07.730 --> 00:21:09.890 align:middle line:84% But as I spoke to you about benchmarking, 00:21:09.890 --> 00:21:13.010 align:middle line:84% benchmarking is essentially built on ENERGY STAR. 00:21:13.010 --> 00:21:15.862 align:middle line:84% We have benchmarking programs to encourage 00:21:15.862 --> 00:21:17.570 align:middle line:84% adoption of energy efficient technologies 00:21:17.570 --> 00:21:19.620 align:middle line:90% in buildings and so on. 00:21:19.620 --> 00:21:23.690 align:middle line:84% Now, the interesting part for cities and industrial emissions 00:21:23.690 --> 00:21:28.640 align:middle line:84% is the policies that exist in developing countries arguably 00:21:28.640 --> 00:21:31.490 align:middle line:84% could be applied to cities that are producing 00:21:31.490 --> 00:21:33.890 align:middle line:84% a lot of industrial emission-- like we talked about, 00:21:33.890 --> 00:21:38.280 align:middle line:84% Louisiana, Texas, and Virginia, and other parts of the country. 00:21:38.280 --> 00:21:41.150 align:middle line:84% We have major programs on energy efficiency in industry. 00:21:41.150 --> 00:21:43.490 align:middle line:84% In China, we have mandated phase-out 00:21:43.490 --> 00:21:45.710 align:middle line:90% of outdated backward industries. 00:21:45.710 --> 00:21:48.930 align:middle line:84% We have pricing policies that favor energy efficiency. 00:21:48.930 --> 00:21:53.060 align:middle line:84% And we have major clean development mechanisms 00:21:53.060 --> 00:21:58.970 align:middle line:84% to help China basically phase out non-CO2 gases. 00:21:58.970 --> 00:22:02.360 align:middle line:84% We have other schemes in India and Brazil, 00:22:02.360 --> 00:22:04.350 align:middle line:84% such as sectoral plans for industry, 00:22:04.350 --> 00:22:06.470 align:middle line:84% including energy conservation programs. 00:22:06.470 --> 00:22:09.380 align:middle line:84% These are all things that can and are being applied 00:22:09.380 --> 00:22:13.430 align:middle line:84% to industrial emissions in cities that have more 00:22:13.430 --> 00:22:15.700 align:middle line:90% higher industrial emissions. 00:22:15.700 --> 00:22:17.860 align:middle line:84% This brings me to the Rissman paper-- 00:22:17.860 --> 00:22:20.200 align:middle line:84% this Rissman paper with many co-authors. 00:22:20.200 --> 00:22:21.700 align:middle line:84% We're going to use this as the basis 00:22:21.700 --> 00:22:24.510 align:middle line:90% for our discussion in class. 00:22:24.510 --> 00:22:27.010 align:middle line:84% And what I want to emphasize to you, just maybe a few points 00:22:27.010 --> 00:22:30.280 align:middle line:84% in the paper before we go into the discussion together, 00:22:30.280 --> 00:22:33.490 align:middle line:84% this is a figure showing emissions by sector. 00:22:33.490 --> 00:22:38.450 align:middle line:84% The left-hand side has the groupings by sector, including, 00:22:38.450 --> 00:22:40.420 align:middle line:84% let's say for buildings, indirect 00:22:40.420 --> 00:22:44.950 align:middle line:84% and direct energy-related emissions is 24% of heat, 00:22:44.950 --> 00:22:47.710 align:middle line:84% and electricity emissions is aggregated. 00:22:47.710 --> 00:22:51.700 align:middle line:84% If we group heat, electricity, and heat emissions together, 00:22:51.700 --> 00:22:54.190 align:middle line:84% buildings only seem to be about 8%. 00:22:54.190 --> 00:22:55.750 align:middle line:84% But this is a considerable divergence 00:22:55.750 --> 00:22:57.670 align:middle line:84% from where we started the lecture from. 00:22:57.670 --> 00:23:01.390 align:middle line:84% In other words, buildings consume a very large portion 00:23:01.390 --> 00:23:05.560 align:middle line:84% of energy in this aggregated view of both heat 00:23:05.560 --> 00:23:07.810 align:middle line:90% and electricity emissions. 00:23:07.810 --> 00:23:10.660 align:middle line:84% If we group it together, then we hide some of the building 00:23:10.660 --> 00:23:14.040 align:middle line:90% emissions in the power sector. 00:23:14.040 --> 00:23:16.680 align:middle line:84% But if we look specifically at how much energy 00:23:16.680 --> 00:23:18.360 align:middle line:84% or how much emissions are associated 00:23:18.360 --> 00:23:20.400 align:middle line:84% with different sectors by industry, 00:23:20.400 --> 00:23:22.710 align:middle line:84% you can see the number two or three 00:23:22.710 --> 00:23:26.970 align:middle line:84% are iron, steel, chemicals, and plastics and cement. 00:23:26.970 --> 00:23:29.670 align:middle line:84% Aluminum, refining, machinery, pulp and paper-- 00:23:29.670 --> 00:23:33.930 align:middle line:84% all of these various manufacturing or production 00:23:33.930 --> 00:23:36.900 align:middle line:84% activities result in high greenhouse gas emissions. 00:23:36.900 --> 00:23:39.930 align:middle line:84% These are a significant fraction of the world's greenhouse gas 00:23:39.930 --> 00:23:41.890 align:middle line:84% emissions we've been talking about. 00:23:41.890 --> 00:23:44.160 align:middle line:84% So what we'll talk about in our class discussion 00:23:44.160 --> 00:23:46.170 align:middle line:84% are various policies and interventions. 00:23:46.170 --> 00:23:47.690 align:middle line:84% On the supply side, some of the ones 00:23:47.690 --> 00:23:49.440 align:middle line:84% that students were interested in last year 00:23:49.440 --> 00:23:52.710 align:middle line:84% were carbon capture utilization storage, low carbon development 00:23:52.710 --> 00:23:54.210 align:middle line:90% for developing countries. 00:23:54.210 --> 00:23:56.220 align:middle line:84% How could we apply that to cities? 00:23:56.220 --> 00:23:59.520 align:middle line:84% Worker retraining programs, firms influencing 00:23:59.520 --> 00:24:03.840 align:middle line:84% government decisions, low-carbon steel production, electrolysis, 00:24:03.840 --> 00:24:06.510 align:middle line:84% renewable energy production, electrification, 00:24:06.510 --> 00:24:08.520 align:middle line:90% hydrogen production and use. 00:24:08.520 --> 00:24:10.980 align:middle line:84% On the demand side, students discussed 00:24:10.980 --> 00:24:12.630 align:middle line:84% [INAUDIBLE] material substitution, 00:24:12.630 --> 00:24:15.510 align:middle line:84% material efficiency, reduced material use, 00:24:15.510 --> 00:24:18.090 align:middle line:84% sharing of public goods, efficiency standards, 00:24:18.090 --> 00:24:20.910 align:middle line:84% the circular economy, data transparency, 00:24:20.910 --> 00:24:23.810 align:middle line:90% and of course building codes. 00:24:23.810 --> 00:24:24.770 align:middle line:90% Thank you very much. 00:24:24.770 --> 00:24:28.470 align:middle line:84% I look forward to our discussion in class in person. 00:24:28.470 --> 00:24:39.000 align:middle line:90%