Washington can’t afford Initiative 2117. Here’s how it would increase risks we face | Opinion

I am a climate scientist. My research at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (from which I am retired) estimated a 70% reduction in the average mountain snowpack in the western U.S. by the end of this century, for a carbon emissions scenario like the path the world is on today.

Since 70% of river flow in the western U.S. is from snowmelt, such a loss of snowpack implies a 50% reduction in average western U.S. river flow during the dry summer months.

The impact on water supplies would not be as severe for heavily dammed rivers such as the Columbia , but its tributaries such as the Yakima, which have insufficient storage capacity to ride out the seasonal cycle in precipitation, will suffer chronic shortages of irrigation water during the growing season, unless more aggressive action is taken to reduce the global emissions driving climate change.

Moreover, the loss of mountain snowpack means mountain soil dries sooner during spring and summer, leading to a longer and more intense wildfire season.

That means both loss of commercial timber, forest dwellings and animal habitat, and an increase in the duration and severity of the hazardous smoke pollution that affects all of us and even kills those sensitive to smoke.

Fortunately, in 2021 the Washington State legislature passed the Climate Commitment Act (CCA).

While the emissions reductions and carbon removal it aspires to are insufficient to alone substantially limit global warming, Washington is at least doing its share of reductions and removal, so it serves as an example that other states and countries can follow. Much more is needed to drive down emissions from China and India, for example.

And 15% of the revenue generated by the sale of carbon permits under the CCA is being used to mitigate the impacts of climate changes already occurring, such as a $10 million state grant program that helps local governments and landowners clear brush near structures.

Prescribed burns of the understory are also being funded by CCA to reduce fuel load that drives intense fires. These investments will reduce the intensity and smoke production by forest fires.

In addition, the CCA invests almost half of the CCA revenue for clean transportation (5000 new public electric vehicle charging stations, electric vehicle rebates for low-income families, support for zero-carbon school buses and commercial vehicles and charging, electrification of trains and ferries, free public transit for youth under 18, and bike paths and safer street crossings), 15% for clean buildings (heat pumps and energy efficiency subsidies for low-income housing, small businesses, and public buildings), 10% for clean energy subsidies, and 8% for forest preservation and health and for reducing methane emissions from dairy farms and landfills.

Many of these investments will substantially reduce operating costs for vehicles and heating costs for homes and buildings.

However, all of these programs will be lost if Washington Initiative 2117 passes. Instead of a fee on pollution being paid by emitters, I-2117 would shift the burden of paying for the impacts of pollution back onto communities, workers, and families.

So, if you value these programs and the climate that our civilization is adapted to, vote NO on I-2117 on your November ballot, and tell your friends and family to as well. We can't afford passage of I-2117.

Retired climate scientist Steve Ghan leads the Tri-Cities Washington Chapter of Citizens Climate Lobby, builds homes for Habitat for Humanity, leads crews that remove logs from the Pacific Crest Trail, and serves as Treasurer for the Three Rivers Folklife Society.