In the wake of the midterm elections, little optimism is being expressed for regulating greenhouse-gas emissions.
The influx of Republican lawmakers—many of whom hail from coal states, where carbon caps are deemed politically risky—may mean an impasse in devising a comprehensive federal policy on energy and fossil fuels. Almost all of the Republican candidates were indifferent or hostile to climate-change science. Political observers see that attitude translated into policy.
“Voters effectively pressed the reset button on climate legislation,” say reporters who cover the environment.
For colleges, the shift may mean a halt to, or at least a slowing of, sustainability projects, particularly those paid for by state and federal funds.
President Obama’s economic-stimulus bill included about $75-billion directed toward the higher-education sector, in areas like campus renovations, student loans, federal work-study programs, technology, and climate research. Of that sum, $4-billion was directed toward job training and $500-million to the Department of Labor for green-jobs education and training.
That training, however, may be the kind of project most at risk in the new political climate. Industries and colleges may have to make planning decisions based on Washington’s long-term policies, not on occasional efforts like the stimulus package.
In rural Oregon, for example, investments in renewable energy have had tremendous effects, but they need more support to maintain their pace. Dan Spatz, an officer at Columbia Gorge Community College, says spending on wind-energy projects in The Dalles, a city on the Washington border, allowed the college to scale up its program to graduate 106 wind technicians a year. It’s not yet enough to meet local demand, estimated at about 1,000 workers, but he calls it a godsend for the economically depressed area: “We’ve doubled the net valuation of two different counties out here.”
But without a long-term policy on energy and climate, he worries that local companies won’t be willing to invest in any projects other than the ones they’ve already begun developing.
The debate over whether to keep supporting such programs has more to do with political rhetoric than real-world policy making. A chart published today in The Chronicle shows that Republican rule on the whole has had a smaller impact on spending than some might assume. So perhaps the outlook for some higher-education programs is not so gloomy.
Paul Rowland, executive director of the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education, is one who remains optimistic. “Jobs were what the election was about,” he says, “even if some of the funding that jump-started sustainability and green-jobs programs disappears. The election may have deferred some dreams, but it didn’t dash them.”
