Senate Democrats Push for a Climate Change Bill

On June 25, the House passed the American Climate and Energy Security (ACES) Act by a 219 to 212 vote. ACES calls for a 17 percent cut in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2020 from 2005 levels, and an 83 percent reduction by 2050. Yesterday, Senate Democrats in Senate began to push a Senate the climate change bill.

The House bill (ACES) calls for a 17 percent reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2020 from 2005 levels, and an 83 percent reduction by 2050. It would create a cap-and-trade program which would require U.S. industries to purchase emissions permits.

Some environmental groups criticized ACES. Greenpeace called it a piece of legislation “already in need of improvement when first released as a discussion draft in March and has become severely worse.” Phil Radford, Greenpeace USA Executive Director, issued the following statement about the House bill:

“Despite the best efforts of Chairman Waxman, this bill has been seriously undermined by the lobbying of industries more concerned with profits than the plight of our planet. While science clearly tells us that only dramatic action can prevent global warming and its catastrophic impacts, this bill has fallen prey to political infighting and industry pressure. We cannot support this bill in its current state. We call on President Obama and leaders in Congress to get back to work and produce a bill, based on science, which presents a clear road map for significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions, transforms our economy with clean, renewable energy technology, generates new green jobs and shows real leadership internationally.”

Friends of the Earth (FOE) criticized ACES because it would eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency’s current authority to reduce GHG emissions under the Clean Air Act. FOE called the cap-and-trade system ACES would create “flawed,” and stated that it would “undermine investment in technology development.”

FOE also criticized ACES for lacking “significant penalties for corporations that violate it,” unlike the Clean Air Act. If the cap-and-trade system experiences problems, “the EPA will not be allowed to step into the breach.”

David Hamilton of the Sierra Club questioned the effectiveness of ACES cap-and-trade system, but hoped that environmental groups would be successful in pushing for a better Senate bill. "Do, at some point, we try to bank what the politics allows?" Hamilton said. "Our judgment in this case is that we're going to keep trying with the bill" in the Senate.

Frank O’Donnell of the Clean Air Watch said “We’re saying it sure as heck ought to get better in the Senate, or it’s going to be a sorry day.”

Democratic House members who voted for the bill expressed their objections to it. Rep. Dennis Kucinich (OH) said, in a statement, ACES “might make the problem worse.” He listed aspects of the bill he thinks are problematic:

1. Overall targets are too weak.
2. The offsets undercut the emission reductions.
3. It delays significant emissions reductions.
4. EPA’s authority to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the short- to medium-term is rescinded.
5. Nuclear power is given a lifeline instead of phasing it out.
6. Dirty Coal is given a lifeline instead of phasing it out.
7. The $60 billion allocated for Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) is triple the amount of money for basic research and development in the bill.
8. Carbon markets can and will be manipulated using the same Wall Street sleights of hand that brought us the financial crisis.
9. It is regressive. Free allocations doled out with the intent of blunting the effects on those of modest means will pale in comparison to the allocations that go to polluters and special interests.
10. The Renewable Electricity Standard (RES) is not an improvement. The 15% RES standard would be achieved even if we failed to act.
11. Dirty energy options qualify as “renewable.”
12. It undermines our bargaining position in international negotiations in Copenhagen and beyond.
13. International assistance is much less than demanded by developing countries.

Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Tex.) issued a statement saying he couldn't support the bill as written because “it is too weak to greatly spur new technologies and green jobs.”

U.S. Expects Less from China

Last week a U.S. delegation meet in Beijing with Chinese officials to talk about the next climate change treaty. Dr. Jonathan Pershing, head of the U.S. delegation, said that developed countries “would take additional action in line with their historical responsibility and capacity,” than developing countries.

“Our intention is to get an agreement we can bring home and have ratified, and we’re pretty optimistic about that,” Pershing said. “US engagement has changed the dynamic of the conversation here. That’s the kind of shift the world community has been waiting for.”

Todd Stern said that China is not expected to “take a national cap at this stage.” The U.S is instead expecting China to continue its efforts to increase energy efficiency and develop renewable energy, “so that China’s emissions can grow slower and start to come down eventually.”

“We understand China's paramount need to grow and develop for its people,” Stern said. “Our demand is that the development, with the available technologies, is based on low-carbon growth.”

Daniel Dudek, chief economist with the Environmental Defense Fund, said, “People, I think, are really trying to understand the negotiating territory and what is in the art of the possible between the two nations," Dudek told China Daily. He added that the U.S. may eventually expect more from China.

The Chinese Vice Premier Li Keqianq told Stern during their meeting, “China has noticed the change of the U.S. government on climate change as well as the positive measures it has taken.”

Stern spoke on June 3 at the Center for American Progress. During the speech he made it clear that reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions will not be possible “if we don’t find a way forward with China.”

Stern made it clear that developing countries, including China, will “do not need to take the same actions that developed countries are taking, but they do need to take significant national actions that… are ambitious enough to be broadly consistent with the lessons of science.”

Watch the video of Stern's speech:

Watch This Video and Pass It On

The environmental group, 350.org is asking everyone to take part in actions on October 24 to raise awareness about climate change. Watch the short video by 350.org, and then pass it on:

Developed Countries Needs To Do More

"The Copenhagen package must be comprehensive and balanced, where mitigation and adaptation is supported by finance and technology transfer to developing countries," said Shyam Saran, India's chief negotiator at the climate change talks in Bonn. "So anything that strays from this is of concern to us." 

Saran said that reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions needs to be "accompanied by clear detailing of equitable burden sharing." He added, "You cannot just do the arithmetic and say developing countries must play their part. Science cannot trump equity."

Must developed countries are "nowhere near meeting their targets." India chief negotiator accused developed countries of "trying to muddy the waters." He cited Japan's effort to shift the baseline for GHG emissions reductions from 1990 to the current date. "All these are efforts to get away from the legal document and to gloss over the fact that they are not meeting their legal targets."

According to a February article in the Guardian, developing countries have received less than 10 percent of the funds developed countries promised them to help them mitigate climate change. The past seven years, developed countries promised almost $18 billion, but actually gave less than $0.9 billion.

"It's a scandal. The amount the developed countries have provided is peanuts. It is poisoning the UN negotiations. What [the rich countries] offer to the poorest is derisory, the equivalent of one banker's bonus. It's an insult to people who are already experiencing increasingextreme events," said Bernarditas Muller of the Phillippines, the chief negotiator for the G77 and China group of developing countries.

UNEP Report Calls for Ecosystems Management

In order to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, ecosystems such as forests need to be managed better, according to a report released Friday by the U.N. Environment Program. Restoring peatlands and better agricultural practices can also help reduce carbon emissions. As the report puts it, "Managing ecosystems for carbon can not only reduce carbon emissions; it can also actively remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere."

Investing in ecosystem management is more cost effective than investing in carbon capture and sequestration. In addition to being more cost effective, ecosystem management also improves water supplies. 

"We need to move toward a comprehensive policy framework for addressing ecosystems," said co-author Barney Dickson.

"Tens of billions of dollars are being earmarked for carbon capture and storage at power stations with the CO2 to be buried underground or under the sea," said Achim Steiner, UN Under-Secretary-General and UNEP Executive Director. "But perhaps the international community is overlooking a tried and tested method that has been working for millennia, the biosphere. By some estimates the Earth's living systems might be capable of sequestering more than 50 gigatones (Gt) of carbon over the coming decades with the right market signals."

Obama Believes U.S. Can Be Enviornmental Leader

During the press conference in Dresden on Friday, President Obama expressed optimism about the U.S. becoming a leader on climate change. "I’m actually more optimistic than I was about America being able to take leadership on this issue, joining Europe, which over the last several years has been ahead of us on this issue." 

Obama mentioned the climate change legislation in Congress. “We are seeing progress in Congress around energy legislation that would set up for the first time in the United States a cap and trade system. That process is moving forward in ways that I think if you had asked political experts two or three months ago would have seemed impossible.”

In six months world leaders will meet in Copenhagen with the goal of creating a new climate change treaty. Obama pointed out that "the world is going to need targets that it can meet." He added, "It can’t be general, vague approaches. We’re going to have to make some tough decisions and take concrete actions if we are going to deal with a potentially cataclysmic disaster."

Obama made it clear that industrialized countries will have to take the lead in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. “Unless the United States and Europe, with our large carbon footprints, per capita carbon footprints, are willing to take some decisive steps, it’s going to be very difficult for us to persuade countries that on a per capita basis at least are still much less wealthy, like China or India, to take the steps that they’re going to need to take.”

“So we are very committed to working together and hopeful that we can arrive in Copenhagen having displayed that commitment in concrete ways."

World Leaders Meet for Talks in Bonn

A 12-day conference for the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) began on Monday in Bonn, Germany.  In December world leaders will meet in Copenhagen, Denmark to negotiate a new climate change treaty.

Yvo De Boer, the U.N.'s leading climate change official, spoke optimistically about a new climate change treaty.  "The political moment is right to reach an agreement. There is no doubt in my mind that the Copenhagen climate conference in December is going to lead to a result."

Success in Copenhagen depends on four "political essentials," according to De Boer. The four essentials are: 

• Clarity on how much industrialised countries would reduce their emissions up to 2020
  
• Clarity on what developing countries would do to limit the growth of their emissions
  
• Stable finance from industrialised nations for the developing world to mitigate climate change and adapt
  
• A governance regime
  

June marks the deadlines for developed countries to propose greenhouse gas (GHG) emission targets. China and Russia are the only two developed countries that have not yet submitted a proposal. However, a new document was posted on the website of China's National Development and Reform Commission. The document stated that developed countries should reduce GHG emissions 40 percent by 2020 from 1990 levels, and contribute 0.5 to one percent of their GDP to help developing countries cope with climate change.

Experts believe that a successful climate change treaty depends on the U.S. and China cooperating with each other. "This trip is one piece of what is going to be an extended interaction with the Chinese at all levels," Todd Stern, top climate negotiator for the U.S., said. "So yes, the vision that we have is of a clean energy and climate partnership bilaterally with the Chinese."

Watch the following Video from the Bonn climate change talks:

The Most Effective Way to Reduce Emissions

The recently released report, Consensus Recommendations for Future Federal Climate Legislation in 2009 published by various environmental and business organizations, states that energy efficiency is the must effective way to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Energy efficiency improvements, as experience in many states indicates, cost an average three center per lifetime kilowatt-hour saved compared to seven to thirteen cents per kilowatt-hour for conventional energy.

The power sector generates the largest amount of GHG emissions in the U.S., 37 percent. Carbon emissions from the power sector are greater than GHG emissions of all other countries but China. A report titled Carbon Caps and Efficiency Resources by Richard Cowart calls energy efficiency the "low-cost equivalent of a carbon scrubber for the electric power sector" and the key resource to create a "low-carbon power sector."

Polices are needed to "realize the full potential of energy efficiency" according to a report, A Call for Action by the U.S. Climate Action Partner. The report recommends climate legislation to create federal and state policies that "align financial and regulatory incentives with utilities' business interests."  The report also recommends that stronger energy efficiency codes and standards, plus incentives and tax reform measures by enacted. 

NASA Scientist Warns Obama Has Four Years to Stop Climate Change

Twenty years NASA scientist James Hansen warned Congress about the negative effects of climate change. Last year he warned that in order to stop climate change, carbon dioxide levels need to be 350 parts per minute (ppm). Currently carbon levels are 380 ppm. In 1960 they were at 315 ppm. A few weeks ago, Hansen warned that President Obama only has four years to help stop climate change.

"We cannot afford to put off change any longer," said Hansen. "We have to get on a new path within this new administration. We have only four years left for Obama to set an example to the rest of the world. America must take the lead."

Hansen believes the idea of cap-and-trade schemes "must be scrapped." He pointed out that the U.S. "did not sign Kyoto, yet its emissions are not that different from the countries that did sign it. It's just greenwash."

Concerning future climate talks, Hansen said, "I would rather the forthcoming Copenhagen climate talks fail than we agree to a bad deal," Hansen said.

Hansen favors a "carbon tax" imposed on oil and gas companies. He also is apposed to coal because it is "responsible for as much atmospheric carbon dioxide as other fossil fuels combined and it still has far greater reserves." He believes "we must stop using it."

For further reading:

Obama Starts Reversing Bush Environment Policy
The Stimulus Package and the Environment
Too Much for Roads, Not Enough for Public Transit
Obama's Weekly Address


Gina-Marie Cheeseman