Finley-Brook Mary, Holloman Erica L
Department of Geography and the Environment, University of Richmond, Richmond, VA 23173, USA.
Southeast CARE Coalition, Newport News, VA 23607, USA.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016 Sep 21;13(9):926. doi: 10.3390/ijerph13090926.
The U.S. is experiencing unprecedented movement away from coal and, to a lesser degree, oil. Burdened low-income communities and people of color could experience health benefits from reductions in air and water pollution, yet these same groups could suffer harm if transitions lack broad public input or if policies prioritize elite or corporate interests. This paper highlights how U.S. energy transitions build from, and contribute to, environmental injustices. Energy justice requires not only ending disproportionate harm, it also entails involvement in the design of solutions and fair distribution of benefits, such as green jobs and clean air. To what extent does the confluence of state, civic, and market processes assure "just" transitions to clean, low-carbon energy production involving equitable distribution of costs, benefits, and decision-making power? To explore this question we assess trends with (1) fossil fuel divestment; (2) carbon taxes and social cost of carbon measurements; (3) cap-and-trade; (4) renewable energy; and (5) energy efficiency. Current research demonstrates opportunities and pitfalls in each area with mixed or partial energy justice consequences, leading to our call for greater attention to the specifics of , , and in research, policy, and action. Illustrative energy transition case studies suggest the feasibility and benefit of empowering approaches, but also indicate there can be conflict between "green" and "just", as evident though stark inequities in clean energy initiatives. To identify positive pathways forward, we compile priorities for an energy justice research agenda based on interactive and participatory practices aligning advocacy, activism, and academics.
美国正经历着前所未有的远离煤炭的转变，在一定程度上也在远离石油。负担沉重的低收入社区和有色人种社区可能会因空气和水污染的减少而获得健康益处，但如果转型缺乏广泛的公众参与，或者政策优先考虑精英或企业利益，这些群体可能会受到伤害。本文强调了美国的能源转型如何源于环境不公正并加剧了这种不公正。能源公正不仅要求消除不成比例的危害，还需要参与解决方案的设计以及公平分配利益，如绿色就业机会和清洁空气。国家、公民和市场进程的融合在多大程度上确保了向清洁、低碳能源生产的“公正”转型，包括成本、利益和决策权的公平分配？为了探讨这个问题，我们评估了以下几个方面的趋势：（1）化石燃料撤资；（2）碳税和碳的社会成本计量；（3）总量管制与交易制度；（4）可再生能源；（5）能源效率。当前的研究揭示了每个领域的机遇和陷阱，其能源公正的后果好坏参半或只是部分实现，这促使我们呼吁在研究、政策和行动中更加关注公正转型的具体情况、公正分配以及公众参与。具有代表性的能源转型案例研究表明了赋权方法的可行性和益处，但也表明“绿色”与“公正”之间可能存在冲突，清洁能源倡议中明显存在的严重不平等就是明证。为了确定积极的前进道路，我们基于倡导、行动主义和学术相结合的互动式参与实践，编制了一份能源公正研究议程的优先事项。
