As
Bill McKibben and other climate leaders keep reminding us, the cost
of solar and wind energy keeps dropping. They assure us that if
government continues to incentivize private investment with
guarantees of profitable it would make these renewable sources
competitive with fossil fuels and lead to a green capitalism.
This
thinking is based on a seminal 2006 paper by Nicholas Stern, former
chief economist at the World Bank. However, “Working Paper No. 10”
(http://unionsforenergydemocracy.org/resources/tued-publications/tued-working-paper-10/),
recently released by the Trade Unionists for Energy Democracy (TUED),
proves that the “Stern Review” was a pipe dream and urges labor
organizations to fight like the devil for an alternative
course—public ownership of energy systems run under democratic
control.
According
to the International Energy Agency and the International Renewable
Energy Agency (IEA-IREA), the investment needed to keep global
warming below the threshold of two degrees Celsius would have to
double the 2016 levels of investment to $600 billion a year and reach
$14 trillion invested in solar and wind by 2030. The chances of this
happening, under the current paradigm of public-private partnerships
that guarantee profits and mitigate risk to private investors,
according to the “Working Paper No. 10” authors Sean Sweeney and
John Treat, is zero. In fact, they argue, based on a close study of
the situation in the UK, that the idea that we can reach safe levels
of renewable energy via aid to private profiteers is “the greatest
policy failure ever.”
Public
money, they argue, is already responsible for the vast bulk of the
world’s energy deployment. But it takes ever-increasing amounts of
public funds to actually get private industry to make even token
commitments to renewables in the midst of a capitalist crisis full of
risk for stockholders. The net result is that wind and solar today
generate just 4.6% of global electricity. In a world full of idle
capital, and a decade of government incentives, the current levels of
investment in a transition to renewable energy will doom us to an
unlivable planet. Sweeney and Treat explain that as long as there are
more profitable and less risky places to invest, private capital will
continue to refuse to be part of humanity’s effort to secure its
home.
The
historic task of decarbonizing energy generation, Sweeney and Treat,
explain, “will require virtually unprecedented levels of long-term
planning, coordination, and cooperation” that are completely at
odds with the way that capitalist markets work. “Ending the market
that never was by reclaiming energy systems open up an altogether
different set of possibilities and an entirely new energy transition
scenario where there can be full attention paid to the technical
challenges without the policy-afflicted distractions generated by
obstructive and destructive ‘competition’ between different
private actors and interests,” they say.
Perhaps,
most importantly, they insist that “unions and their allies are
well positioned to challenge the myth that a transition to renewable
energy can be accomplished by catering to the interests of big
companies and private investors. The global labor movement can and
should demand and fight for a viable transition pathway—one that is
anchored in public financing, social ownership and democratic
control.”
To
popularize this vision, TUED has mounted an animated video explaining
the need for social ownership and workers control of energy on its
website. It is called “This is What Energy Democracy Looks Like and
is available at http://unionsforenergydemocracy.org/resources/video/.
It is designed to be show at union meetings and other gatherings of
workers and can lay the basis for the sharing of written arguments
for the nationalization and municipalization under democratic
control.
What
is missing from “Working Paper No. 10” and this introductory
video is a full discussion of just how the unions and unorganized
working people might successfully carry out a struggle to implement
this strategy. In the United States most union leaders limit their
political advocacy to positions acceptable to the Democratic Party
and their corporate backers. In order to educate the ranks and
mobilize them in numbers sufficient to put public ownership on the
agenda, the union leadership will need to break through this obstacle
and chart a course for “a living wage on a living planet” that is
independent of both capitalist parties.
After
such a break, the labor movement will then need to also repair their
broken relationships with immigrant workers, with the Black and
Latino communities, with women, and youth. This vision will certainly
animate the best class-struggle fighters in the coming period.
>> The article above was written by Christine Marie, and is reprinted from Socialist Action newspaper.
No comments:
Post a Comment