I recently had the opportunity to visit some of Haiti’s little-known fishing islands, where fishermen build dense communities on tiny islets located in good fishing waters. Unfortunately, these islands are in trouble: sea level rise and severe hurricanes are wiping them off the map; some of the islands have even been rebuilt with conch, dirt, and garbage brought in from the mainland. These are among the communities most vulnerable to climate change.
This weekend’s Earth Day celebrations give an opportunity to reflect on climate change and its impact on my own home: Atlanta and Georgia. Our state doesn’t face an existential threat from climate change like the fishing islands in Haiti. But the risks are significant and the costs are high.
Extreme weather is detrimental to agricultural productivity, threatening a bedrock industry in our state. Last year’s peach crop was destroyed by a warm winter; this year’s pecan and cotton crops were crippled by Hurricane Irma. Large-scale farmers usually insure their production from such catastrophes, insulating them somewhat from short-term losses. But insurers and reinsurers are taking notice. Higher premiums and volatile yields harm the agricultural industry upon which so much of Georgia’s economy depends: trucking, equipment supply and maintenance, food manufacturing, and so on.
Coastal Georgia faces graver risks still, with sea level rise and storm surge directly threatening our vulnerable coasts, putting critical port and tourism industries at stake. We should also look to Florida and its considerable climate risk — not just for its sake, but for our own. Florida’s behemoth tourism industry led directly to Atlanta’s rise as a leading transportation and distribution hub, which is the bedrock of Atlanta’s modern economy.
And beyond risks to our key industries and resources, climate change costs all of us personally. Reduced crop yields and rising insurance premiums harm farmers, pushing up food costs at the grocery store. Like other Southern states, Georgia suffers ballooning hail damage on automobiles. Extreme weather events wreak havoc on our airport — and travel plans. Hotter summer temperatures increase energy use and exacerbate health problems, among many other negative effects. These problems affect us all, and not just in our day-to-day living expenses, but also in hidden, unseen ways like increased health risk or job opportunities never realized due to reduced economic growth.
In the face of Georgia’s considerable climate risk, where does our state stand in the national debate on the subject? As a business-focused Red state, Georgia is well-poised to advocate for a reasoned, economically efficient solution that addresses not only the existential threats from climate change in places like coastal Georgia, Florida, and Haiti, but also protects our state’s short- and long-term economic interests.
A carbon fee and dividend approach is favored by economists as an effective and efficient way to reduce long-term carbon emissions. The relatively small number of producers and importers of fossil fuels would be taxed at the point of production or importation, and the revenue from this tax would be distributed to American taxpayers as a dividend. The plan would be revenue-neutral, simple to administer, and incentivize businesses and citizens to make investments and build infrastructure with reduced carbon emissions. This approach recognizes that the best way to address climate change is through market forces and incremental adjustments—we won’t find a lasting solution in schemes that disrupt our way of life or establish new bureaucracies.
I encourage the business and political leadership of Georgia — Republican and Democrat — to advocate for this market-friendly, middle-ground solution. The carbon fee and dividend approach can offer the dramatic emissions reductions Democrats have always wanted: as much as 50 percent below 1990 levels, according to a study by Regional Economic Models Inc. Republicans will appreciate simplicity of the solution, along with the job creation that a carbon fee and dividend will stimulate: 2.1 million more jobs in the first 10 years, according to the same study. And every constituent, no matter their party affiliation, will benefit from a healthier climate and a thriving economy.
For our representatives in Congress, this an opportunity for bipartisanship and cooperation. Many voters represented by Rep. John Lewis, Rep. Karen Handel, Rep. Hank Johnson, and Rep. Rob Woodall would love to see them join the bipartisan Climate Solutions Caucus in the House of Representatives and participate in the national discussion about solving climate change. Climate change could become one of the defining struggles of our times, but a framework to reduce emissions gradually and incrementally should be the easy part.
Alex MacGregor is a member of the Atlanta chapter of Citizens’ Climate Lobby.
About the Author
