On Monday, Washington, D.C., commuters had more to worry about than the usual stale coffee and missed deadlines.
A ragtag group of climate protesters blocked off key roads, inspiring a cacophony of honks and probably creating more carbon emissions by forcing thousands of cars to idle. As activists throttled the roads across D.C., teenage activist Greta Thunberg implored the world to deal with carbon pollution at the United Nations Climate Action Summit.
Except … America is already doing its part, and it’s doing so with little help from federal and state rules that stifle innovation and make energy prohibitively expensive. Markets have driven and can continue to drive a cleaner world, even as the government refuses to clean up its own act.
As protesters caused headaches for miles in all directions, Thunberg scolded pretty much everybody for allegedly failing to safeguard humanity and the environment. Thunberg charged, “People are suffering. People are dying. Entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are in the beginning of a mass extinction. And all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth.”
Maybe the Swedish activist has been watching too much Squawk Box, but she is right that people care immensely about economic growth. And for good reason. Systematic, sustained economic growth across the world has lifted billions out of poverty over the past few decades.
And sure, not all growth is good for people or ecology. Even as its people starved, the Soviet Union was able to tout seemingly-impressive growth numbers for a few decades, before collapsing under its own weight. As the communist superpower “ascended,” it left in its wake a hazardous plume of air pollution that far exceeded anything produced by capitalistic America. But in the past couple of decades, markets have delivered extraordinary reductions in all kinds of emissions.
Most Thuberg admirers fail to realize that U.S. carbon emissions have declined by more than 10% since 2005. This sustained decline has spanned three presidential administrations (Bush, Obama, and Trump), and periods of economic expansion, contraction, and stagnation. The Environmental and Energy Study Institute notes that the U.S. reduction over the past 15 years “translates to a total annual reduction of about 760 million metric tons … almost as much as the reduction in the European Union as a whole (770 million metric tons).”
While costly “green” initiatives abound at all levels of government, there’s little reason to believe that strict rules or spent taxpayer dollars played any major role in the decline. According to Carbon Brief’s 2017 analysis of 2016 U.S. emissions data, the largest driver of the emissions decrease has been the nationwide switch from coal-fired energy to natural gas. Coal-fired plants have historically driven plenty of pollution and carbon emissions, but these facilities are being retired at a historic rate thanks to lower gas prices made possible by fracking. Since President Trump has taken office, 15% of America’s coal fleet has been shuttered and another 10% will likely be boarded up by the end of 2019.
Meanwhile, market dynamics and a light regulatory touch have led to a boom in natural gas exploration, which allows for low-emission energy production.
The good news isn’t limited to carbon pollution. According to data from the UN, protection of key biodiversity areas has increased in developed countries, and overall air pollution has declined over the past 50 years. That doesn’t mean there can’t be greater progress — the United States could probably achieve additional double-digit declines in its power and utility sectors by privatizing publicly owned power plants, hospitals, and water utilities. The Department of Defense could also do its part by cleaning up its (at least) 900 contaminated Superfund sites.
But there’s no need to shoot world leaders mean looks or hold up already-abysmal D.C. traffic. When it comes to pollution, things are getting better, not worse.
Ross Marchand is the director of policy for the Taxpayers Protection Alliance.
