By Marc Korman.
The Maryland Commission on Climate Change issued its action plan in August. The plan sets ambitious goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Maryland in the coming years. When I read through the plan, I found myself thinking about a recent Bethesda-Chevy Chase Breakfast Club meeting with Maryland Attorney General Doug Gansler. At the breakfast, Gansler spent a lot of time discussing chicken manure. Not the best topic to discuss during a meal, but as it turns out an important one for Maryland’s future. Why?
Maryland farms produce 1.2 billion pounds of chicken manure a year, some of which usefully fertilizes farms but much of which ends up polluting the Chesapeake Bay. Gansler wants to lure a power plant into the state that would use 500 million pounds of chicken manure a year to generate power. Maryland has a renewable portfolio standard, which requires that 20% of the state’s electricity comes from renewable sources by 2022. Gansler helped lobby the legislature to classify converted chicken manure as a renewable source for the purpose of the law.
But the need for alternative energy sources is not just about the environment. Recently, the Public Service Commission and Governor O’Malley have been warning of possible rolling blackouts in the state in 2011 or 2012. Instead of building more coal fired power plants or other fossil fuel energy sources, reusing chicken manure offers a cleaner, working alternative. There are complications, for example chicken manure has many of the harmful substances in it that our chickens do, such as small amounts of arsenic. But Gansler is working on regulating those as well so that the burning of chicken manure is not harmful.
Gansler’s work, although not complete, is part of Maryland’s broader progress in addressing 21st century energy challenges and climate change. Last month, Maryland participated in the first mandatory carbon emissions cap and trade auction in the United States, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). The RGGI caps carbon emissions from power generators and requires them to purchase credits from the government for the right to emit carbon. The cap starts high, but will be reduced downward so that by 2018 there will be a 10% reduction in emissions. Six states participated in the first auction, with Maryland receiving $16.3 million from the auction. The money will be divided between low income energy assistance, residential rate relief, efficiency and conservation programs, and clean energy programs.
The Renewable Portfolio Standard, RGGI, and other actions have helped give the state a big start towards its greenhouse gas reduction goals. The Maryland Commission on Climate Change has set statewide goals: 10% reduction by 2012, 15% reduction by 2015, 25% to 50% reduction by 2020, and 90% reduction by 2050. With actions already taken, Maryland is approximately 60% of the way towards the lower end of the 2020 goal. With forty-two commission recommendations to implement, plus better public awareness of the need to conserve and increased transit ridership, Maryland may even surpass its emission reduction goals.
Acting alone, Maryland has no chance of blunting global climate change. But if individual states all step forward and set goals like Maryland’s, it could make a big difference. Alone, Maryland emits as much greenhouse gases as Sweden and Norway. Other states emit even more. Maryland has not waited for the federal government to act or a new international agreement to be reached. That is not to say that Maryland is perfect. The Global Warming Solutions Act failed in the state house and transportation funding cuts are disproportionately affecting cleaner and greener transit projects. But as Maryland strives to do better, other states should follow our lead.