In 2015, the Obama administration set the following target for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions:
“The U.S. target will roughly double the pace of carbon pollution reduction in the United States from 1.2 percent per year on average during the 2005-2020 period to 2.3-2.8 percent per year on average between 2020 and 2025.” - White House Press Release: U.S. Reports its 2025 Emissions Target to the UNFCCC [United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change]; March 31, 2015
In other words, the administration’s goal was to lower GHG emissions by 18% from 2005-2019 and up to 17% from 2020-2025 (I changed the end of the first period to 2019 to avoid overlapping periods). So how much progress has the US made in lowering GHG emissions through 2019?
“Overall, U.S. greenhouse-gas emissions fell by 2 percent in 2019, which is a 12 percent decline relative to 2005 levels.” - Eco-RI News: No Progress Made to Reduce U.S. Greenhouse-Gas Emissions January 22, 2020
Ok, the US missed the original 2019 emissions target by 6%. To catch up and meet the 2025 target, I’m going to increase the emissions target to 4% a year from 2020-2025, or 24% total. For the purpose of this post, this target applies only to energy-related sources of GHG emissions, which represents around 76% of all US GHG emissions. I’m also going to assume that without Covid-19, the US would have maintained an annual emissions reduction of 2% per year, on average, over the same period - 12% total. The challenge, then, is to figure out how to reduce energy-related emissions an additional 12% by 2025.
As it turns out, the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) recently forecast that US energy-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions would decline by 11% in 2020. Since CO2 emissions account for around 97% of energy-related emissions, we will likely lower CO2 emissions by 10.7% this year alone. Mission almost accomplished.
How can we lower emissions even more? By keeping workers at home as much as possible for the foreseeable future. Thanks to Covid, an astounding 42% of the U.S. labor force already work at home and a number of companies are making plans to continue remote work arrangements post-pandemic. Of course, not everyone can work at home, but according to one survey, close to 50% can, at least part-time - especially workers who can carry out a good portion of their jobs on computers, such as professionals, administrative staff, sales reps, managers, and finance workers I’m talking a “massive transition to widespread at-home work”. Employers want it, workers want it. It’s a doable win-win way of cutting US GHG emissions.
How much more could the US lower GHG emissions if 50% of US workers worked at home an average of two days a week? I figure around 1% a year* That would get us beyond the emissions target set by the Obama administration five years ago.
—
* Here’s how I arrived at 1% emissions reductions per year: the transportation section is responsible for 28% of US GHG emissions and cars account for 59% of transportation sector emissions. That would make cars responsible for 16.5% of US emissions. Commuting to work accounts for 28% of household vehicle miles per year. That means commuting to work is responsible for about 5% of US GHG emissions a year. If half of US workers worked at home an average of two days a week, commute-related emissions would be cut by 20% a year (two work days out of five work days = 20%) and 20% x 5% of US emissions = 1% lower emissions.
Links:
https://ngtnews.com/eia-co2-emissions-will-decline-by-11-percent-in-2020
https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/fast-facts-transportation-greenhouse-gas-emissions
https://ngtnews.com/eia-co2-emissions-will-decline-by-11-percent-in-2020
https://news.stanford.edu/2020/06/29/snapshot-new-working-home-economy/
https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/greenhouse-gas-emissions-typical-passenger-vehicle