This post is by Sheryl Canter, an Online Writer and Editorial Manager at Environmental Defense.
Today Senators Joe Lieberman and John Warner introduced America’s Climate Security Act (ACSA), a comprehensive climate change bill that would cap and then cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Capping emissions is a crucial step in the fight against global warming, and this bill may be the one that gets us there.
The centerpiece of the bill is a mandatory cap on emissions from facilities that emit more than 10,000 CO2-equivalents of greenhouse gas in any year. These covered facilities are responsible for about 75 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.
Covered facilities would have to bring their emissions down to 2005 levels by 2012. Then from 2012 to 2050, their emissions would be cut an additional 1.8 percent of 2005 levels each year. This would bring down emissions in covered facilities to 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, and 70 percent by 2050.
The bill calls for some emissions permits to be auctioned and some to be given away – more free in the beginning, transitioning to a higher percentage sold at auction in later years. The best formula is probably yet to be worked out. The auction revenue would be distributed as follows: 52.25 percent to climate-friendly technology, 19 percent to low-income energy consumers, 19 percent to wildlife adaptation, 5 percent to climate change and national security, and 4.75 percent to a worker training program.
The bill includes an energy efficiency section that strengthens residential efficiency standards and building codes. The sponsors estimate that these policies would result in a total economy-wide reduction of up to 19 percent from 2005 levels by 2020, and 63 percent by 2050.
Importantly, the Lieberman-Warner bill contains an effective approach to managing costs that minimizes economic impacts without compromising climate protection. Other cost management proposals would jettison emissions caps if the price of reducing emissions reached an arbitrary ceiling. Instead, Lieberman and Warner would allow companies to bank emissions allowances, and borrow emissions allowances from future years.
Lieberman and Warner are the chairman and ranking member of a key global warming subcommittee of the Environment and Public Works Committee, and the bill is winning strong bipartisan support. They plan to bring the bill to a markup in their panel within the next few weeks.
5 Comments
We can’t borrow CO2 from future years so why should they borrow allowances from the future? Who decides when that loan has to be paid? What if there is a protracted increase in the cost of CO2 – that doesn’t change the physics of global warming and the need to reduce emissions.
There are OTHER other bills that do not provide the get-outs that are in the Lieberman-Warner bill – the get-outs that we know will be used and abused, will add to the cost of implementation, and will reduce effectiveness. I don’t know why you’ve chosen this bill – what about Barbara Boxer’s? I have waited 20 years for a bill, I can wait another year for the right bill, instead of rushing through a half-measure.
I just love Environmental Defense and AGW is my number one issue but I’m not supporting the bill you’ve picked.
This window isn’t open for a brief window and we have to clutch whatever compromise bill we can. To use another analogy – the horse is out of the barn and the urgency and desire for change is only going to increase as weeks and months go by. States are acting, companies are acting, individuals are acting, the world is acting. When we act we should do it right.
Do you believe that the L-W bill has highest environmental standards of the current bills in committee?
If not, why support it? And if the standards aren’t high enough in any of them don’t support any bill but lobby for a better one.
Sebb
I just read that Barbara Boxer also supports your favorite bill now (she must have dropped her own). I’d be really interested in a side-by-side comparison of the bills and the action that scientists tell is is required to limit temperature rise to 2 degrees (C or F, I forget?).
Sebb
The Pew Center has a chart comparing all the bills [PDF].
It moves like this, a customer searches for a keyword on Google. You have published an article which targets this word and gain subjected it to a internet site which Google likes. The customer finds your clause on page one, reads it, clicks on your website link, and visits your website. All release well, you will have some affiliate link click-throughs, and special sales in there! That’s the beauty of affiliate marketing.:)
Your good blog is definitely worth a read if anyone comes across it. Im lucky I did because now Ive got a whole new view of this. I didnt realise that this issue was so important and so universal. You definitely put it in perspective for me, thanks for the nice info.
25 Trackbacks
[…] Overview of Climate Security Act from our Climate 411 blog […]
[…] Overview of Climate Security Act from our Climate 411 blog […]
[…] Last night the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee passed the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act (CSA) of 2007, a comprehensive climate change bill that would set mandatory caps on U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. This landmark vote brings us one step closer to passing national climate legislation. (See my previous post for more on the legislative process.) […]
[…] By far the loudest and most important was the news about the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act (CSA) being approved by the full committee in the U.S. Senate. […]
[…] Overview of Climate Security Act from our Climate 411 blog […]
[…] Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act (CSA) is a solid bill, but it’s not perfect. And this is the last year of the Bush […]
[…] support the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act (CSA)? It’s pretty good, but not perfect. If we wait until after the election, maybe we can […]
[…] Today we are seeing the culmination of this effort. The three banks – Citigroup, J.P. Morgan Chase, and Morgan Stanley – have announced that they will require utilities seeking financing to prove the new plants would be economically viable under an expected federal cap on greenhouse gas emissions. […]
[…] long-term target in the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act is not at the level that the best science recommends, but its near-term cap is aggressive – more […]
[…] wild success of the cap-and-trade system that reduced acid rain. Banking also is a feature of the legislation currently before Congress, and indeed of every serious legislative proposal that’s been […]
[…] Energy – The Center for American Progress published a detailed and well-documented analysis of the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act and how it would affect the economy. They say, "The bill would make significant reductions in […]
[…] to a new analysis from Environmental Protection Agency [PDF] (EPA), the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act – a cap-and-trade bill – can be implemented without significant harm to the economy. EPA says U.S. […]
[…] is this so? A firm cap with no "safety valve", as in the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act of 2008, informs the market of the size of demand for emissions reductions and offsets, and informs […]
[…] Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act of 2007 (CSA-07) is the most promising climate change legislation we’ve seen yet. You may have heard that it’s "out of subcommittee" and "scheduled for mark-up on December 5th". But what does that mean? […]
[…] President Fred Krupp testified before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works about America’s Climate Security Act (ACSA). "There is no more important legislation that this Committee will ever consider than […]
[…] to avert the global warming crisis. A key Senate subcommittee just passed the Lieberman-Warner America’s Climate Security Act (S.2191) – a bipartisan bill to cap and reduce America’s global warming […]
[…] A climate change bill hasn’t yet been introduced in the House, but the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act already has passed out of committee in the […]
[…] Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act is scheduled for Senate debate and vote the first week in June. We’re closer than we’ve […]
[…] good to hear, but the president still isn’t crazy about bills like the Climate Security Act, which would place mandatory caps on emissions from facilities that emit more than 10,000 […]
[…] hot summer in the world of climate policy. The U.S. Senate will debate the Lieberman and Warner Climate Security Act in June. California regulators are putting the finishing touches on a broad set of recommendations […]
[…] Senate is set to vote on landmark global warming legislation in early June – just a few short weeks away. Here are our top five reasons why they must act […]
[…] afternoon, the Senate approved a procedural motion that forces the Senate to take up the Climate Security Act. But the Senate is the Senate, and people who are set on ignoring the urgent need to act are using […]
[…] coming vote on the Climate Security Act is our best chance to pass climate legislation this year – something the science, the politics, and […]
[…] the bill, many see it as an important step in the right direction. The bill would put in place a cap-and-trade system for heavy emitters, as well as building regulations and efficiency standards for residential areas. Obviously the […]
[…] the bill, many see it as an important step in the right direction. The bill would put in place a cap-and-trade system for heavy emitters, as well as building regulations and efficiency standards for residential areas. Obviously the […]