Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Epigraph
- Dedication
- Contents
- Analytical table of contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- Acknowledgements
- List of abbreviations
- 1 Introduction
- 2 The global energy system
- 3 Virtue and energy efficiency
- 4 Utility and energy externalities
- 5 Energy and human rights
- 6 Energy and due process
- 7 Energy poverty, access, and welfare
- 8 Energy subsidies and freedom
- 9 Energy resources and future generations
- 10 Fairness, responsibility, and climate change
- 11 The imperative of making just energy decisions
- Index
- References
5 - Energy and human rights
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 October 2014
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Epigraph
- Dedication
- Contents
- Analytical table of contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- Acknowledgements
- List of abbreviations
- 1 Introduction
- 2 The global energy system
- 3 Virtue and energy efficiency
- 4 Utility and energy externalities
- 5 Energy and human rights
- 6 Energy and due process
- 7 Energy poverty, access, and welfare
- 8 Energy subsidies and freedom
- 9 Energy resources and future generations
- 10 Fairness, responsibility, and climate change
- 11 The imperative of making just energy decisions
- Index
- References
Summary
The externalities and premature deaths associated with energy production and use elaborated on in Chapter 4 raise another interesting ethical dilemma: how are we to value human life when we weigh costs and benefits? Imagine that it is a quiet autumn afternoon in Washington, DC, and you are sitting in your office at the US EPA, preparing your memorandum to the Assistant Administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation. She has asked you to recommend a permissible level for toxic emissions coming from large electricity generating plants. You know that stricter standards will cost significantly more in terms of air pollution equipment (and result, ultimately, in higher energy prices), but you also know that tougher standards will save many lives from death or ruin by reducing the health effects of mercury and other heavy metals emissions.
Thus, there is an obvious tradeoff between protection of human health and costs of emissions control. How can you turn this from an abstract, “gut reaction,” personal-values comparison to a quantifiable one of “deaths and dollars” that you can present for recommendations and debate? On the one hand, the electric utility industry asserts that stricter standards could result in the closure of sixty-eight coal-fired power plants – 8 percent of the country’s entire fleet – risking blackouts and massive job layoffs. The industry will also have to spend $11 billion by 2016 installing better scrubbers and pollution abatement equipment at their power plants, costs that will be passed onto households. On the other hand, EPA analyses and National Academies of Science studies suggest that stricter pollution controls will yield annual monetized benefits of $59 to $140 billion through 17,000 fewer annual deaths caused by PM and mercury pollution. As the EPA’s own report concludes, “the benefits outweigh costs by between 3 to 1 or 9 to 1 depending on the benefit estimate and discount rate used.”
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Global Energy JusticeProblems, Principles, and Practices, pp. 157 - 190Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2014
References
, “Will the EPA’s Mercury Rule Cause a Wave of Blackouts?,” Washington Post, December 24, 2011Google Scholar
, Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Final Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (Washington, DC: EPA-452/R-11–011, December 2011)Google Scholar
, , , and , “A Global Perspective on Energy: Health Effects and Injustices,” Lancet 370 (September 15, 2007), pp. 965–977CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, Additional Guidance and Oversight of Mines’ Emergency Response Plans Would Improve the Safety of Underground Coal Miners (April 2008, GAO-08–424)
, Coming Clean: The Truth and Future of Coal in the Asia Pacific (Washington, DC: World Wildlife Foundation, 2007)Google Scholar
and , “Electricity Generation and Health,” Lancet 370 (2007), pp. 979–990CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, “Radioactive Wastes from Uranium Mining Enterprises and their Environmental Effects,” Atomic Energy 70(5) (1991), pp. 348–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Uranium Mining in Australia: Environmental Impact, Radiation Releases and Rehabilitation,” in (ed.), Protection of the Environment from Ionizing Radiation: The Development and Application of a System of Radiation Protection for the Environment (Vienna: IAEA, 2003), pp. 179–189Google Scholar
, , and , “Uranium Mining and Milling: Navajo Experiences in the American Southwest,” in (ed.), The Energy Reader (London: Wiley–Blackwell, 2010), pp. 132–146Google Scholar
, Uranium Mining for Belgian Nuclear Power Stations: Environmental and Human Rights Impacts (Brussels: Friends of the Earth, 2008)Google Scholar
, , and , Severe Accidents in the Energy Sector, 1st edn., PSI Report No. 98–16 (Villigen, Switzerland: Paul Scherrer Institute, November 1998)Google Scholar
and , “Comparison of Accident Risks in Different Energy Systems: How Acceptable?,” IAEA Bulletin 41 (January 1999), pp. 25–30Google Scholar
, , , and , “Severe Accidents in the Energy Sector: Comparative Perspective,” Journal of Hazardous Materials 111 (2004), pp. 57–65CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
and , “Resource Wars: The Anthropology of Mining,” Annual Review of Anthropology 32 (2003), pp. 283–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
“Shell Pays Out $15.5m over Saro-Wiwa Killing,” Guardian, June 9, 2009
, “Reassessing Energy Security and the Trans-ASEAN Natural Gas Pipeline Network in Southeast Asia,” Pacific Affairs 82(3) (Fall 2009), p. 482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Righteous Oil: Human Rights, the Oil Complex, and Corporate Social Responsibility,” Annual Review of Environment and Resources 30 (2005), pp. 373–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Cursed by Crude: The Corporatist Resource Curse and the Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan (BTC) Pipeline,” Environmental Policy and Governance 21(1) (January/February 2011), pp. 42–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Reconfiguring Territoriality and Energy Security: Global Production Networks and the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) Pipeline,” Journal of Cleaner Production 32(9) (September 2012), pp. 210–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Corporate Social Responsibility and the Mining Industry: Conflicts and Constructs,” Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 11 (2004), pp. 23–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Open Letter to Financial Institutions Investing in Global Coal Management regarding the Phulbari Coal Project, Bangladesh (Association for Sustainable Human Development et al., August 2008), available at
, “Islamic Republic Corruption Scandal: $11 Billion in Oil Money Missing,” March 28, 2011, available at
and , “Nigeria Oil Corruption Highlighted by Audits,” Reuters News Service, March 8, 2012Google Scholar
“Nigeria’s Oil: A Desperate Need for Reform,” Economist, October 20, 2012, p. 44
“Courage: Mon Brave,” Economist, March 2, 2013, pp. 8–9
and , Transparency and Accountability in Africa’s Extractive Industries: The Role of the Legislature (Washington, DC: National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, 2007), pp. 36–37Google Scholar
“Kenya, South Sudan, and Uganda: Pipeline Poker,” Economist, May 25, 2013, pp. 47–48
“Recovering Stolen Assets: Making a Hash of Finding the Cash,” Economist, May 11, 2013, p. 63–64
, “Oh Canada: How America’s Friendly Northern Neighbor Became a Rogue, Reckless Petrostate,” Foreign Policy (July/August 2013)Google Scholar
“Gazprom: Russia’s Wounded Giant,” Economist, March 23, 2013, pp. 68–69
, “Corruption in the Energy Sector: Criminal Fines, Civil Judgments, and Lost Arbitrations,” Energy Law Journal 34 (2013), pp. 195–259Google Scholar
, Congo’s Energy Divide: Hydropower for Mines and Export, Not the Poor (March 2011), pp. 1–4
, “Observations on the Oil for Food Program,” Testimony before the Committee on Foreign Relations, U. S. Senate (Washington, DC: US GAO, April 7, 2004)Google Scholar
, “Oil and Revolutionary Governments: A Toxic Mix,” Paper Presented to the 50th Annual Meeting of the International Studies Association, New York, February 15–18, 2009Google Scholar
, “Oil and Revolutionary Governments: Fuel for International Conflict,” International Organization 64 (Fall 2010), pp. 661–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Blood Barrels: Why Oil Wealth Fuels Conflict,” Foreign Affairs 87(3) (May/June 2008), pp. 2–8Google Scholar
, “Pariahs and Prophets: Nuclear Energy, Global Warming, and Intergenerational Justice,” Columbia Journal of Environmental Law 17(2) (1992), pp. 245–326Google Scholar
and , Environmental Protection and Human Rights (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011), pp. 151–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “An Introduction to the History of Human Rights Law,” GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 346 (August 2007)Google Scholar
, “Beyond Public Reason on Energy Justice: Solidarity and Catholic Social Teaching,” Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy 21(2) (Spring 2010), pp. 381–398Google Scholar
, in the Introduction to , The Metaphysical Elements of Justice. Part I of the Metaphysics of Morals (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc., 1965), p. ixGoogle Scholar
, Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do? (New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2009), p. 138Google Scholar
, “The Moral Law and Autonomy of the Will,” in (ed.), Conduct and Character: Readings in Moral Theory (Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing, 1999), pp. 154–162Google Scholar
, “Kantian and Deontological Systems,” in Ethics: Discovering Right and Wrong (Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing, 1995), pp. 133–159Google Scholar
, “Humanity as an End in Itself,” in (ed.), Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals: Critical Essays (New York: Rowman and Littlefield, 1998), pp. 165–187Google Scholar
, Immanuel Kant’s Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals (New York: Harper & Row, 1964), p. 22Google Scholar
, “Climate Change, Human Rights, and Moral Thresholds,” in , , , and (eds.), Climate Ethics: Essential Readings (Oxford University Press, 2010), pp. 163–177Google Scholar
, “Coming to Terms with Atrocities: A Review of Accountability Mechanisms for Mass Violations of Human Rights,” Law and Contemporary Problems 59(4) (Autumn 1996), pp. 127–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “The World Bank’s Inspection Panel: Promoting True Accountability through Arbitration,” Cornell International Law Journal 41(30) (August 2008), pp. 577–626Google Scholar
, , and , Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Assessment: Towards an Integrated Approach (UNEP, 2004)Google Scholar
, Arctic Opening: Opportunity and Risk in the High North (London: Chatham House, 2012)Google Scholar
and , “Aboriginal Peoples and Impact and Benefit Agreement: Summary of the Report of a National Workshop,” Northern Perspectives 25(4) (Fall–Winter 1999–2000), pp. 4–15Google Scholar
, “Disclosure as Governance: The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative and Resource Management in the Developing World,” Global Environmental Politics 10(3) (August 2010), pp. 53–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Civil Society Initiatives and ‘Soft Law’ in the Oil and Gas Industry,” New York University Journal of International Law and Policy 36 (2003–2004), pp. 457–502Google Scholar
, “The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI): Voluntary Codes of Conduct, Poverty, and Accountability in Africa,” Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa 8(3) (Fall 2006), pp. 222–239Google Scholar
, “Fighting Corruption in a Global Economy: Transparency Initiatives in the Oil and Gas Industry,” Houston Journal of International Law 29 (2006–2007), pp. 327–354Google Scholar
, “Transparency in Extractive Revenues in Developing Countries and Economies in Transition: A Review of Emerging Best Practices,” Journal of Energy and Natural Resources Law 24 (2006), pp. 66–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Human Rights and Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises,” Statement before the 63rd Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, New York, October 27, 2008Google Scholar
and , “Government Clubs: Theory and Evidence from Voluntary Environmental Programs,” Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative, Working Paper No. 50 (Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, 2008)Google Scholar
, Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework (New York: UN, March 21, 2011)Google Scholar
, Better Access to Remedy in Company–Community Conflicts in the Field of CSR: A Model for Company Based Grievance Mechanisms (The Hague: Institute for Environmental Security, September 2011)Google Scholar
, Human Rights and the Mining Sector in Indonesia: A Baseline Study (International Institute for Environment and Development, October 2001)Google Scholar
, , and , “Perspectives on Community Representation within the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative,” Resources Policy 37(2) (2012), pp. 241–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, MMSD+10: Reflecting on a Decade of Mining and Sustainable Development (International Institute for Environment and Development, 2012)Google Scholar