Will Lieberman-Warner global warming bill pass the Senate? Should it pass the Senate?

(Photo of Capitol Building from Flickr and photographer Eamonn O'Brien-Strain)

Weekly Angst: A “compromise” global warming bill (S. 2191) will head to the Senate floor for debate the first week in June. It has a fine line to tred between those who want to make it weaker and those who think it must be stronger.

Sponsors Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and John Warner (R-Va.) are working hard to get more converts, so it can pass the 60-vote test to avoid a filibuster. Environment Committee Chair Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) is working with them, even though she proposed a stronger bill herself. But Boxer vows to pull the bill from the floor if it is weakened further.

Lieberman said last week he has 45 firm votes and 15 leaning heavily toward approval. That means he needs every single one of those votes, and he suggested there would need to be changes to win them. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lieberman’s Republican buddy whom he’s supporting for president, is a “leaning” vote because he wants more money for nuclear energy in the bill.

Cap-and-trade system
Lieberman-Warner (America’s Climate Security Act) is a cap-and-trade bill. That means a cap will be placed on overall greenhouse gas emissions and will steadily be lowered each year. Companies that do not cut emissions that much must buy credits from those that exceed their goal.

The bill calls for:
*A 4% reduction of GHG emissions in 2012, steadily increasing to 70% (from 2005 levels) by 2050. (Boxer would like to see that amended to 80%)
*An auction for 26.5% of the credits in 2012, rising to 79.5% by 2031. The rest of the credits would be given away free. (Boxer wants more credits paid for.)
*Distribution of auction income for jobs, deploying advanced technology, helping low- and middle-income people with increased energy costs, and mitigating negative impacts of climate change abroad.

The bill covers electric utilities, transportation, most manufacturing and natural gas, the sources of 87% of GHG. That means the actual total reduction will be 66% by 2050.


Efforts to weaken the bill
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who famously called global warming a “hoax,” says he will propose 40 amendments and lead a filibuster against the bill if he can. Inhofe has support from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers and Alliance for Energy and Economic Growth.

The National Mining Association wants more money to research carbon capture and storage.

Some want the bill to pre-empt action by the states that want to do more. Boxer, from a state that is already doing more, said she will pull the bill before she lets that happen.

Others are asking for a “safety valve” if carbon prices get too high, or for more money for nuclear energy.

A coalition of energy companies and other businesses are on a 17-state blitz to undermine the bill, citing loss of jobs and higher energy prices.

Environmental groups
Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace oppose the bill as not going far enough. The National Wildlife Federation supports it. The Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, Environmental Defense and World Wildlife Fund appeared with Boxer at a news conference last week, but some of them are saying the bill must be strengthened.

The dilemma for many environmentalists (in and out of Congress) is whether it’s better for the Senate to pass something, even if it’s just a first step.

The bill, of course, has two more hurdles. Passage of a similar bill in the House, which Energy Chair John Dingell (D-Mich.) says needs more deliberation and likely won’t get through the House until the end of 2008. Then there’s a likely veto from George Bush, who never has bought into the cap-and-trade idea.

An optimistic Lieberman gives his bill a 50-50 chance of becoming law, but says a new president in 2009 will increase those chances to 90%.

So some are saying why not just wait, and get a stronger bill. Others say let’s take the first step.

Frankly, I’m torn. I'd like to see 80% by 2050 and 100% auctioned credits, but we’re so far overdue in taking action I hate to put it off another year. And doing so could affect international negotiations for a climate treaty. We have been the largest cause of global warming up to now, so most of the stuff up there is ours. Maybe passing a bill, even if it doesn’t do it all, is a show of good faith and something to build on.

What do you think?

(Sources: E&E Daily, Greenwire, Boston.com, E&E PM, and America’s Climate Security Act. )
For a one-page description of the act go to Lieberman’s Web site.

California bill seeks carbon labeling to show life-cycle GHG emissions of products

(Photo of Simon enjoying his yogurt from Flickr and photographer rikhei)

Nutritional labeling of foods has helped people eat healthier – well, some people. Now get ready for carbon labeling on your yogurt and soft drinks. Carbon labeling, showing how much greenhouse gas was emitted by producing the product, not only will let consumers buy ‘greener’ but will make manufacturers more aware of cutting carbon emissions. The UK is already doing this. Now comes a bill in the California legislature that calls for voluntary CO2 labeling as a first step toward what we may all see on most products in the next decade. In Britain, there are labels on everything from yogurt to soft drinks to fast-food snacks to diapers. Cadbury Schweppes and Coca Cola have acknowledged it makes them think more about their carbon footprint. An organization called Carbon Label California is pushing the concept. (ClimateWire 3/13)

Canada feels effects of climate change

(Photo of retreating Columbian Icefields from Flickr and photographer Bruno Bolzano)

News Update: Retreating glaciers in the west, sea level rise on Price Edward Island and a dramatic drop in water in the Great Lakes are all the results of climate change, according to a new study on Canada. No region is unaffected, says the report by Natural Resources Canada. There are some advantages: more summer tourism and more land available for forests. But the melting permafrost in northern Canada will damage infrastructure (not to mention release of GHG methane), more likely droughts in the prairies will hurt farmers, and water shortages will impact Ontario. On average, Canada has warmed 1.3 degrees Celsius (2.34 Fahrenheit)since 1948, twice the global average. The province of Quebec has heated up 2 degrees C (3.6 F) just since 1993. For more, see globalandmail.com, 3/11

Etc.: Sweden has a target of 49% renewable energy by 2020, under the EU plan. Already at 40%, nearly all Sweden’s energy, except for transportation, is fossil-fuel free. See PlanetArk, 3/6

Car stickers will show a global warming score in California, starting with the 2009 models. They will be rated 1-10, with 10 the best. Other states are likely to adopt the idea. See the blog, Climate Progress.

Fate of renewables lies with Senate

Congressional Round-up: Under pressure from more than 100 businesses, trade groups and environmentalists, the Senate continues to look for a way to extend tax credits for renewable energy and efficiency. The House has twice passed a bill extending the credits, due to expire at the end of the year, but both time the Senate fell 1 vote short of the 60 needed to avert a filibuster. Some GOP senators and the White House don’t so much object to extending the credits as they dislike the means of paying for them – rolling back tax incentives for oil companies. Senators were looking at the budget reconciliation bill as a way to extend the credits with the money coming from somewhere else, but that fell through this week. Options left include getting that extra vote (how about you, Sen. McCain?) or finding some other way to pay for it. GE and BP both added their voices to the call for extension. Both have investments in wind energy. Advocates say the extensions would create new jobs and help lower the cost of energy. Without them alternative energy projects are at risk, and investment is already slowing down. (Source: E&E Daily)

Two reps unveil bill to force EPA to grant tailpipe waiver
Reps. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) and Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) were to introduce a bill Thursday to force the EPA to grant a waiver that would give California and 12 others states authority to implement their tailpipe emissions bills. The EPA’s denial of the waiver “defied science, defied the states, and defied common sense,” Welch said. Called the Right to Clean Vehicles Act, the bill had 42 co-sponsors Wednesday, most of them Democrats. Call and ask your Congressman to add his/her name (202-224-3121). Senate Environment Committee Chair Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) introduced an identical bill (S. 2555) in the Senate more than a month ago and has said she will subpoena communications between the EPA and White House on the matter, to see if there was undue influence. The EPA director clearly ignored his staff’s opinion in refusing the waiver. Meanwhile 15 states have filed suit to have the EPA decision overturned. (Source: E&E News PM)

Dingell issues white paper on pre-emption of state auto rules
Two leaders of the House Energy Committee have raised a concern about state and local global warming laws, acknowledging they have led the way, but saying a federal law may have to pre-empt them. Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), Energy Committee chair, and Rick Boucher (D-Va.), say that a patchwork of global warming laws could cause job loss in states that don’t have them, especially in the auto industry, which Dingell champions. The “patchwork” includes a tailpipe emissions law passed by California and 12 other states (currently blocked by the EPA), global warming emissions laws by California, Hawaii, Maine, Minn., N.J. and Ohio, emissions trading by regional groups involving 39 states, and several governors who have set emissions targets. In addition, more than 800 cities and villages have committed to meeting the Kyoto requirements of cutting GHG 7% below 1990 levels by 2012. The states, the two say, will probably need to do the monitoring, pass building codes and plan for land-use. The white paper, one of several related to global warming, is meant to stir debate of the issue and doesn’t offer specific answers, the authors said. (Source: Greenwire)

Cars come in 'clean' and 'dirty'

(Photo of traffic on Lake Cook Road in Buffalo Grove, Ill., from Flickr and photographer Isipeoria)

Weekly Angst: It’s outrageous. Did you know auto manufacturers make two versions of each model. Some spew more smog-causing hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxide, more carbon monoxide and particulates than others. It all depends on what state you live in and whether it has adopted California’s clean-car regulations. If it hasn’t, you get the dirty kind.

Conn., Maine, Md., Mass., N.J., N.Y., Ore., Pa. R.I., Vt., and Wash. have all adopted the California law. They’ve seen a change in air quality. Ariz., Colo., Fla., Ill., Iowa, Minn., N.M. and Utah have it under consideration. And environmental groups are pushing those states to pass the law, even though the U.S. EPA has blocked the latest change, reducing CO2. (Another outrage.)

Many believe the EPA will be overruled by the courts, or a new administration, or the bill introduced by Senate Environment Committee Chair Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), and states that adopt California’s law may soon be able to regulate greenhouse gases too, more stringently than the federal CAFE law allows.

The California standards cut greenhouse-gas tailpipe emissions 30% by 2016, though the EPA-forced lag may change that because it was supposed to start with the 2009 model.

The Sierra Club and other environmental groups are asking for e-mails or calls to your state reps to co-sponsor and support a clean car bill. In Illinois you can do that through the Environmental Law and Policy Center's action network.

Clean cars for Illinois
Illinois is No. 6 in emitting greenhouse gases in the U.S.A. Not a record you want to have. Education maybe, or employment, but not No. 6 in GHG. And transportation contributes about 28% of the global warming pollution in the state.

When Illinois passes a clean car bill, it might cause a tipping point, advocates say, benefiting the entire country. A populous state, with 9 million cars on the road, a victory here could lead to manufacturers deciding it no longer pays to make two versions and all their cars could become cleaner.

The bill in Illinois (H.B 3424) has passed out of committee with House Speaker Michael Madigan (D) as a co-sponsor. It requires 2011 models to meet the stricter emissions standards, which would reduce GHG an estimated 18% by 2020 and 27% by 2030.

Global Warming Solutions Act
The clean car bill is also part of a larger package called the Illinois Global Warming Solutions Act (S.B. 2220). A shell bill, with the details not yet revealed, the Solutions Act also will deal with power plants, efficiency and cap-and-trade. It contains major recommendations from the Illinois Climate Change Advisory Group, appointed by Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D), and helps meet goals of the Midwest Governors Conference. (Stay tuned for more on this package.)

RES already law
If you’re wondering about a renewable electricity standard for Illinois, one was already passed last year. Advocates took advantage of the electric utilities’ request for a rate hike and added in an RES that increases the proportion of renewable energy 2% a year until 2015 and then 1.5% until it reaches 25% in 2025. One caveat though – the changes have to stay within the rate cap set for the utility. Many other states have passed their own RES, which is good because while the U.S. House passed one mandating 15% by 2020, the Senate has rejected it. (Sources: Environment Illinois, Sierra Club, Environmental Law & Policy Center)

Global Warming win short-lived

Weekly angst: The victory didn’t last very long. A comprehensive energy bill to curb Global Warming passed the House on a 235-181 vote Thursday afternoon. But by Friday morning, opponents had defeated a cloture motion in the Senate, and negotiations were under way to strip the bill of some of its main provisions in order to get the 60 votes needed for passage and have a prayer of getting the president’s signature.

Likely to survive are the 35 mpg corporate fuel economy (CAFE) standards and the biofuels section (though that may be changed). Most likely to go are the requirement for private power plants to get 15% (actually just 11%) of their power from renewable sources like wind, solar and biomass by 2022 and the shift of $21 billion in tax breaks from oil and gas to renewable energy development and efficiency.

But without those provisions, how the devil will we make the switch from fossil fuels to renewable energy quickly enough to prevent catastrophic warming? Big oil, coal and power plants won this round and we lost. The fossil fuel economy is barely dented.

The cloture vote, which showed the votes aren't there to prevent a filibuster, put most Democrats on the right side of the issue and most Republicans on the side of fossil fuels. There were some exceptions. GOP Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins (Maine), Norm Coleman (Minn.), Arlen Spector (Pa.), Gordon Smith (Ore.) and John Thune (S.D.) voted with the good guys. (Collins, Coleman and Smith have tough re-election campaigns against Democrats next year). And Dems Evan Bayh (Ind.), Mary Landrieu (La.) and Richard Byrd (W.Va.) voted with the bad guys. If you live in any of their states, let them hear from you.

What was in the House bill
In addition to the 35 mpg CAFE standard for cars and light trucks combined in 2020, and the 15% RES for large investor-owned electric power plants (4 percentage points of which could come from buying offsets) the same year, the bill included:
• A nearly 5-fold increase in biofuels, to 36 billion gallons in 2022, with 21 billion from “advanced” (mostly cellulosic) fuels that cut GHG 50-60% (as opposed to corn, which cuts very little).
• A $21 billion tax package with $13 in new taxes (or eliminated tax breaks) for oil and gas, and incentives for energy efficiency in buildings, appliances, furnaces and lighting, renewable energy sources and plug-in hybrid cars.
• Increased testing of carbon capture and sequestration, the main hope for “clean” coal.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was credited with tough negotiations (mainly with fellow Democrats) to get such a strong bill approved.

The importance of CAFE
The 35 mpg CAFE standard would cut oil consumption by 1.1 million barrels a day in 2020, or the equivalent of taking 28 million cars off the road. This is the first move to raise mileage standards since the oil crisis of the 1970s. In fact, by 1988, with the crisis behind us, the auto companies were building larger cars again and were allowed to meet a 27.5 mpg standard, not the scheduled 28.5. That, of course, didn’t include SUVs, which are classified as light trucks and have a 22 mpg standard. Why is CAFE politically acceptable this year? We can probably thank the lofty price of oil. People are ready to save money at the pump. And the auto industry and UAW were won over by concessions granted to their champion, House Energy Chair John Dingell (D -Mich.), in the form of flex-fuel credits and money to retool.

Efforts to salvage renewables and taxes
Sen. Energy Chair Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) and Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) said Friday they would negotiate through the weekend in an effort to find some middle ground and salvage the RES and tax portions of the bill – at least partially. They need an additional 7 votes. While 20 states already have their own renewable electricity standards, the Southeast and some Midwest states are concerned they don’t have enough wind to meet the standard. One GOP Senator suggested a much smaller tax package might be OK’d. A chief opponent, the retiring and ill Sen. Pete Domenici (N.M.), ranking member of the Energy Committee, wants nuclear loan guarantees in the bill and reportedly prevailed on fellow Republicans to oppose the bill passed by the House.

Bush veto threat
A final concern, of course, is a presidential veto. Bush doesn’t like the $13 billion in oil and gas taxes or the renewable fuels provision. He wants to include coal-based transportation fuels (which release more CO2 than gasoline) and to pre-empt state laws on alternative fuels. Many in Congress would like to see CAFE standards and energy efficiency, at least, signed into law.

Next step
The aim is to come up with a bill that can pass the Senate with at least 60 votes, and has some chance of getting the president’s signature. Once passed by the Senate, it will have to go back to the House for a vote. Leadership wants to accomplish this before the planned Congressional recess on Dec. 22.
(Sources: PlanetArk, Greenwire, E&E News PM, The End of Nature by Bill McKibben)

Congressional round-up

Lieberman-Warner bill passed out of Boxer's committee
In another milestone this week, the Senate passed its first mandatory cap-and-trade bill out of Sen. Barbara Boxer’s (D-Calif.) Environment and Public Works Committee by an 11-8 vote. The compromise bill, which most environmentalists think is too weak, and opponents think is too strong, will now go to the floor for what promises to be a lively debate, though no one is saying when. The bill covers 80% of the economy, mandating 70% in GHG cuts by 2050. The vast majority of allowances would be given to industries that will be affected, with only a small portion auctioned. Fee credits will be phased out by 2031.

News in brief

Green economy will result in more jobs, studies say
The move from a fossil-fuel to a “green” economy will have a net worldwide job gain, according to a new UN report. In addition to “green collar” jobs, there will be construction, transportation, engineering, manufacturing and sustainable agriculture and forestry jobs, the report said. In Brazil, the ethanol business has created a half-million jobs, and in China 150,000 are employed in solar heating. The jobs will more than make up for layoffs in old fossil-fuel industries, showing a small net gain, the report said. A second study, by the American Solar Energy Society, estimates that in the U.S., policies favoring renewable energy sources and energy efficiency could produce 40 million new jobs and $4.5 trillion in new revenue by 2030. Most of the jobs, 32 million, would be in efficiency measures such as retrofitting buildings, while 8 million would be in the renewables sector, with solar, wind, ethanol and hydrogen cells seeing the most growth. (Source: Greenwire)

Tropical zones expanding as the Earth gets warmer
Tropical regions are pushing north and south toward the poles at a rate much faster than expected. In the past 25 years, they have moved 2.5 degrees latitude, or 140-330 miles, according to a study in the journal Nature Geoscience last week. Climate models had predicted it would take 100 years to move just 2 degrees. The expansion brings with it a shift in high-altitude wind and rain patterns, and affects agricultural zones and water availability. (Source: Greenwire)

Skiers, marchers, bikers protest against climate change
Protestors called attention to Global Warming Sunday in 50 cities around the world. In Berlin, a sculptor carved a polar bear in ice at the Brandenburg Gate. In Auckland, 350 formed “Climate SOS” by lying in the grass at a park. In Taipei, 1,500 marched with signs saying “No carbon dioxide.” In Manila, hundreds rallied with windmills on their heads. In Helsinki, 50 skied on asphalt streets saying, “Give us our snowy winters back.” And here in the U.S., 50 took a polar bear plunge into Walden Pond. (Source: Associated Press)

News from Bali

Climate scientists lose patience, plead for radical action
More than 215 leading climate scientists, some of whom have taken no stance up to now, petitioned the delegates at the Bali UN climate conference to halve global greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. The petitioners come from more than 2 dozen countries. “The science community is basically fed up,” one signer from Canada told the Associated Press.

Other headlines this first week of the Dec. 3-14 190-nation conference:
* Saving rainforests is a high priority but one about which there is disagreement. The conference is likely to launch pilot projects trying two approaches – trading on the carbon market and using a fund to compensate countries for stopping slash-and-born. Deforestation was not in the Kyoto Protocol but causes 20% of GHG worldwide. Many want it in the next international treaty.
* Carbon capture is not on the Bali agenda. The technology is still unproven and would cost about $1 billion per plant, though ultimately it may be the answer to low- or no-carbon use of coal. Perhaps carbon capture and storage will be part of future talks, Yvo de Boer, top UN climate official, told Reuters.
* The U.S. delegation continues to oppose mandatory cuts of GHG, and made light of the passage of the first cap-and-trade bill from committee onto the Senate floor last week. The National Environmental Trust blasted U.S. greed and waste, saying the country is responsible for 27.8% of cumulative Global Warming.
* Host country Indonesia planted millions of trees to offset the estimated 47,000 tons of carbon dioxide caused by the 12-day conference. The estimate includes air transport to and from Bali. Hosts also eliminated cars from the conference site and provided 200 bicycles for ministers to use if they didn’t want to walk. (Sources: PlanetArk, AP, India Times)

Xtreme weather watch

Rainfall and snowstorms are now more severe. Since 1948, the number of intense storms has increased between 22-26% in the U.S., a new report from Environment America shows. New England and the mid-Atlantic states have been hit the worst. Mass., R.I., Vt., N.Y. and La. have all seen an increase of more than 50%. Climate scientists say this is consistent with Global Warming because warm air holds more moisture. For more, see http://environmentAmerica.org. (New York Times)

Did a cyclone just hit the Northwest? Heavy rain and hurricane-force winds of up to 129 mph hit Oregon and Washington in back-to-back storms last Sunday and Monday. In Bremerton, Wash., rainfall was recorded at 11.78 inches. The storms, which washed out roads, caused mudslides, and resulted in at least 5 deaths, were among the worst in memory. More than 100,000 people were without electricity. One Portland resident noted, “This was really a hurricane – or cyclone – and we never get those here.” (AP)

The cyclone that smacked low-lying Bangladesh last month left a huge humanitarian crisis, the UN said last week. Some 2 million residents need immediate help to save their lives. They need food, shelter, drinking water and sanitation. A total of 8.5 million were affected, more than a half-million homes were completely destroyed and 1.5 million livestock were wiped out. Cyclone Sidr hit with 155 mph winds and a 5-foot storm surge Nov. 15. International aid so far tops $143 million. (PlanetArk)

Take Action

In this season of packages and bags and wrapping paper, think green. Carry one or more canvas or reusable bags with you to put your purchases in. Tell store clerks to keep their paper and plastic bags. Use recycled wrapping paper. And when possible re-use packaging that comes to you from online or catalog items.

Make a year-end donation to environmental groups that do research and fight the good fight for all of us – in Congress, statehouses, elections and courts. They include the Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, League of Conservation Voters, Environmental Defense, World Wildlife Federation and Union of Concerned Scientists. And that doesn’t exhaust the list, if you have another favorite. Without them, there would be little, if any, progress.