Matching Items (2)
Description
Many different levels of government, organizations, and programs actively shape the future of energy in Arizona, a state that lacks a comprehensive energy plan. Disparate actions by multiple actors may slow the energy policy process rather than expedite it. The absence of a state energy policy or plan raises questions about how multiple actors and ideas engage with state energy policy development and whether the absence of a comprehensive state plan can be understood. Improving how policy development is conceptualized and giving more focused attention to the mechanisms by which interested parties become involved in shaping Arizona energy policy. To explore these questions, I examine the future energy efficiency. Initially, public engagement mechanisms were examined for their role in policy creation from a theoretical perspective. Next a prominent public engagement forum that was dedicated to the topic of the Arizona's energy future was examined, mapping its process and conclusions onto a policy process model. The first part of this thesis involves an experimental expert consultation panel which was convened to amplify and refine the results of a public forum. The second part utilizes an online follow up survey to complete unfinished ideas from the focus group. The experiment flowed from a hypothesis that formal expert discussion on energy efficiency policies, guided by the recommendations put forth by the public engagement forum on energy in Arizona, would result in an increase in relevance while providing a forum for interdisciplinary collaboration that is atypical in today's energy discussions. This experiment was designed and evaluated utilizing a public engagement framework that incorporated theoretical and empirical elements. Specifically, I adapted elements of three methods of public and expert engagement used in policy development to create a consultation process that was contextualized to energy efficiency stakeholders in Arizona and their unique constraints. The goal of the consultation process was to refine preferences about policy options by expert stakeholders into actionable goals that could achieve advancement on policy implementation. As a corollary goal, the research set out to define implementation barriers, refine policy ideas, and operationalize Arizona-centric goals for the future of energy efficiency.
ContributorsBryck, Drew (Author) / Graffy, Elisabeth A. (Thesis advisor) / Dalrymple, Michael (Committee member) / Miller, Clark (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
Research confirms that climate change is primarily due to the influx of greenhouse gases from the anthropogenic burning of fossil fuels for energy. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the dominant greenhouse gas contributing to climate change. Although research also confirms that negative emission technologies (NETs) are necessary to stay within 1.5-2°C of global warming, this dissertation proposes that the climate change problem has been ineffectively communicated to suggest that CO2 emissions reduction is the only solution to climate change. Chapter 1 explains that current United States (US) policies focus heavily on reducing CO2 emissions, but ignore the concentrations of previous CO2 emissions accumulating in the atmosphere. Through political, technological, and ethical lenses, this dissertation evaluates whether the management process of CO2 emissions and concentrations in the US today can effectively combat climate change.
Chapter 2 discusses the historical management of US air pollution, why CO2 is regulated as an air pollutant, and how the current political framing of climate change as an air pollution problem promotes the use of market-based solutions to reduce emissions but ignores CO2 concentrations. Chapter 3 argues for the need to reframe climate change solutions to include reducing CO2 concentrations along with emissions. It presents the scientific reasoning and technological needs for reducing CO2 concentrations, why direct air capture (DAC) is the most effective NET to do so, and existing regulatory systems that can inform future CO2 removal policy. Chapter 4 explores whether Responsible Innovation (RI), a framework that includes society in the innovation process of emerging technologies, is effective for the ethical research and deployment of DAC; reveals the need for increased DAC governance strategies, and suggests how RI can be expanded to allow continued research of controversial emerging technologies in case of a climate change emergency. Overall, this dissertation argues that climate change must be reframed as a two-part problem: preventing new CO2 emissions and reducing concentrations, which demands increased investment in DAC research, development, and deployment. However, without a national or global governance strategy for DAC, it will remain difficult to include CO2 concentration reduction as an essential piece to the climate change solution.
Chapter 2 discusses the historical management of US air pollution, why CO2 is regulated as an air pollutant, and how the current political framing of climate change as an air pollution problem promotes the use of market-based solutions to reduce emissions but ignores CO2 concentrations. Chapter 3 argues for the need to reframe climate change solutions to include reducing CO2 concentrations along with emissions. It presents the scientific reasoning and technological needs for reducing CO2 concentrations, why direct air capture (DAC) is the most effective NET to do so, and existing regulatory systems that can inform future CO2 removal policy. Chapter 4 explores whether Responsible Innovation (RI), a framework that includes society in the innovation process of emerging technologies, is effective for the ethical research and deployment of DAC; reveals the need for increased DAC governance strategies, and suggests how RI can be expanded to allow continued research of controversial emerging technologies in case of a climate change emergency. Overall, this dissertation argues that climate change must be reframed as a two-part problem: preventing new CO2 emissions and reducing concentrations, which demands increased investment in DAC research, development, and deployment. However, without a national or global governance strategy for DAC, it will remain difficult to include CO2 concentration reduction as an essential piece to the climate change solution.
ContributorsMorton, Evvan (Author) / Lackner, Klaus S (Thesis advisor) / Allenby, Braden R. (Committee member) / Graffy, Elisabeth A. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020