Climate 411

The voices of a new clean energy future

By Rebecca Rasch / Published: June 2, 2010

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has declared June “Energy Month” yet the fate of the best option Americans have for energy reform, a comprehensive climate and energy bill, hangs in the balance.

Top senate democrats will debate their willingness to take up a comprehensive climate and energy bill on June 10th and unless constituents start declaring their support for comprehensive legislation now, Senators will be tempted to take the easy way out and postpone the issue indefinitely.

This option is not acceptable.

We have never been closer to passage of comprehensive climate legislation and unfortunately, it may be years or even decades, before we get this close again. Our economy, our energy security and our climate are at stake and we can not afford to wait.

We applaud the concerned citizens, industry members and politicians who have been stepping up to voice their support in this crucial time.

Poll after poll shows that the public is in support of comprehensive action and in the wake of the BP oil tragedy, that support for environmental protection and energy reform has only grown stronger.

Thanks to all of you for making your voices heard. Let’s keep the pressure on. Key senators and the President have already begun to take note. With a united push in this final stretch, they will also take action.

Below are just a few of the voices of a new clean energy future. We will be updating this list as pieces come to our attention. Please let us know if you spot a great opinion piece so we can add it to the list.

May 27, 2010 – Huffington Post –  “Every Day We Delay”

Pete Altman, climate campaign director, Natural Resources Defense Council

“As the Gulf Coast oil disaster shows, America has a failed national energy policy. We need a new clean energy policy to break our addiction to oil, enhance our national security, limit carbon pollution and lead us to clean American energy.”

May 28, 2010 – Northwest Herald – “Pass American Power Act”

Bruce Ratain, field associate, Environment Illinois

“While some opponents of energy reform attack transitioning to clean energy over supposed economic impact, today we clearly see that the real economic disaster is our continued dependence on fossil fuels…. We call on Congress to prevent this type of catastrophe from happening again by finally passing the American Power Act – comprehensive legislation to transition our nation to clean, renewable energy – and by strengthening the act to reduce our dependence on oil.”

May 28, 2010 – The Salon – “Will the Gulf oil disaster mark the turning point for meaningful energy legislation”

Andrew Leonard, technology reporter, Salon

“But here’s the amazing thing. With each day that BP fails to stop the leak, the job of passing energy legislation becomes a little less difficult, and little more simple common sense.”

May 28th, 2010 – CNN – “What if carbon dioxide were as black as oil?”

Christopher Reddy, associate scientist and director, Coastal Ocean Institute

“But while we have readily and rightfully committed ourselves to understanding the cause of the spill, its effects and how to help restore the affected Gulf Coast region, we still can’t seem to come to grips with a much more dangerous, far-reaching pollutant that is changing the fundamental chemistry of our entire planet: carbon dioxide.”

May 28, 2010 – Huffington Post – “The Beginning and the End of Our Oil Addiction”

Amy Davidsen, U.S. executive director, The Climate Group

“As we witness the destruction caused by the latest oil spill in the Gulf, the need to reduce our dependence on oil has never been more tangible. The good news is that we don’t need to look far for a solution…  On Thursday, both the House and the Senate introduced bi-partisan legislation to scale up the use of electric vehicles in the US.”

“The legislation introduced yesterday represents the start of this exciting process. If it’s adopted, it would mark a new era in US transportation – and a welcome beginning to the end of our oil addiction.”

June 2, 2010 – Huffington Post  – “Coming of the Green Industrial Revolution”

Stephan B. Tanda, managing board member, DSM

“We are at the beginning stages of the development of a green industrial landscape that has the power to transform our modern economy into a more sustainable economy.”

Posted in News / Read 1 Response

Blog highlights from the past few days

By Rebecca Rasch / Published: June 2, 2010

On Grist, Michigan is in the spotlight as a state with huge clean energy job potential.

“Ford is spending $10 million to retool one plant in Rawsonville to assemble battery packs for next generation clean vehicles, and $125 million more in another plant in Sterling Heights to build electric drive transaxles. The $135 million investment, made possible by $62.7 million in federal clean vehicle grants from Obama’s 2009 stimulus act, will lead to 170 new jobs, said Ford, and bring work currently occurring in Mexico and Japan back to the United States.”

Corporations in a host of industries are rallying behind the climate bill on E2.

“A group of 60 companies, environmental groups and other parties, in a letter Thursday, say the U.S. ‘must take control of its energy and economic future while enhancing our national security….It’s time for Democrats and Republicans to unite behind bipartisan, national energy and climate legislation that increases our security, limits emissions, and protects our environment while preserving and creating American jobs.'”

Kate Sheppard, via Ezra Klein, discusses how the gulf oil tragedy is affecting American attitudes on energy.

“Overall public opinion is changing, on offshore drilling in particular and the environment in general. It is becoming clear to many Americans that our current energy system is dangerous and unsustainable, and that the environmental risks aren’t worth it.”

Also posted in Climate Change Legislation, Science / Comments are closed

Hail to the Chief, Indeed: President’s truck order will bring fuel-saving technologies to scale

By Jason Mathers / Published: May 25, 2010

This was originally posted on the Innovation Exchange blog.

There is no question that tools exists today to significantly reduce fuel consumption by medium and heavy-duty trucks. The recent National Academy of Sciences’ report on reducing emissions from these vehicles explored this in-depth as did another recent report from NESCAUM. The key question is: can we deploy these tools at an acceptable cost?

The answer is closer to “yes” than ever before, thanks in part to President Obama’s statement last week instructing the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop rules to reduce emissions from medium and heavy-duty trucks – which consume over a quarter of the nation’s liquid fuels.

The most advanced of our fuel-saving tools, such as the hybrid system for medium-duty trucks, face a significant upfront cost barrier. While these systems can payback over the lifetime of the vehicle, the ROI timeline is too extended for most businesses to justify the cost without external incentives. Other, more incremental strategies such as single-wide tires face cultural and cost barriers as well. The resulting upfront capital cost versus long-term operating savings conundrum slows the adoption of these tools and delays emission reductions.

Fuel-saving components need to be produced at a large enough scale to spread out the fixed costs over time while simultaneously bringing the dollar cost down. By creating a nationwide standard for greenhouse gas emissions, the President has put us on a path to finally reach this scale. Imagine that instead of spreading the fix costs of developing and producing medium-duty hybrid powertrains, or single wide tires over a few hundred vehicles a year, these costs are spread over tens of thousands of trucks annually. The ROI for any one unit will instantly be much more attractive. This is what can happen with a strong federal rule.

How will this impact the business community? Consumers, shippers and carriers will be better off with more efficient, cleaner trucks. Operating costs will be lower and less exposed to fuel price volatility. The increased capital costs should be manageable with the advantages of scaled economies. Some of the increased upfront cost will likely be recouped through hire residual values too.

Of course, technological improvements alone aren’t sufficient. There remain many opportunities to reduce emissions through better operational practices, particularly for freight. From reducing empty backhauls, cutting idling, dropping curb weight, decreasing packaging and improving trucking loading, every truck trip can get more done. Some trips can be avoided all together or simply moved to more efficient modes of transportation.

Medium-and-heavy duty trucks will continue to play a vital role as we transition into a carbon constrained world. These trucks are needed to deliver food and beverages to restaurants and stores, drop off packages at homes and offices, and move goods across the nation. However, they will use less fuel for each of these actions. That’s a good thing for the environment, our pocketbooks and energy security.

Also posted in Cars and Pollution, Climate Change Legislation, Science / Comments are closed

New Poll Shows Majority of Voters in ME, MA and FL Support American Power Act

By Rebecca Rasch / Published: May 21, 2010

A new poll conducted to gauge the popularity of the American Power Act shows strong public support for the bill in key states.

65% of Massachusetts voters, 57% of Maine voters and 50% of Florida voters said they support the measure. These percentages jump up to 80%, 74% and 71% respectively in support of a bill that will create new clean energy jobs.

According to a new study by the Peterson Institute for International Economics, the American Power Act is set to increase average annual employment by 200,000 jobs from 2011 to 2020. On Huffington Post, there is a great analysis of the Peterson study by Nathaniel Keohane, Director of Economic Policy and Analysis at the Environmental Defense Fund, which explains in greater detail how the American Power Act will stimulate the economy and create jobs.

The surveys were conducted May 14th through 16th 2010 by Public Policy Polling.

Also posted in Climate Change Legislation, Jobs / Comments are closed

Top climate highlights plus NAS video

By Rebecca Rasch / Published: May 20, 2010

On E2, Reid says he’s serious about energy and is planning to convene a Democratic caucus next month to

“discuss how to proceed on energy and climate change legislation.”

On Grist, David Roberts applauds Thomas Friedman on his New York Times op-ed in which Friedman worries that Obama won’t make a strong push for climate legislation in the wake of the Gulf oil disaster and compares it to George W. Bush’s lack of vision when dealing with the public outcries and aftermath of 9/11. Friedman explains:

“No, the gulf oil spill is not Obama’s Katrina. It’s his 9/11 — and it is disappointing to see him making the same mistake George W. Bush made with his 9/11. Sept. 11, 2001, was one of those rare seismic events that create the possibility to energize the country to do something really important and lasting that is too hard to do in normal times. President Bush’s greatest failure was not Iraq, Afghanistan or Katrina. It was his failure of imagination after 9/11 to mobilize the country to get behind a really big initiative for nation-building in America.”

Green focuses on the three new studies released by the National Research Council, part of the National Academy of Sciences, calling for action on climate change.

“The report states that the most efficient way to reduce carbon dioxide pollution is to put a predictable and rising price on it.”

Dot earth also has the story which includes an interesting video which explains the significance of the three reports in the wider climate policy debate.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AY94AB6o-D8&feature=player_embedded#!

Also posted in Climate Change Legislation, Science / Comments are closed

Top Climate News from the Past Few Days

By Rebecca Rasch / Published: May 19, 2010

On E2, an environmental coalition asks the White House to step up its support for clean energy and climate legislation.  Here is an excerpt:

“Mr. President, we ask you to urgently convene all stakeholders and lead the effort to craft a comprehensive clean energy and climate policy that will be enacted this year and will move America toward energy independence built on clean American power.” The coalition includes the World Wildlife Fund, the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Pew Environment Group and others.

On Grist, Scott Luthcke, a NASA climate scientist, explains how he has spent the last 6 years weighing Greenland. And she has been losing a lot of weight – an average of 183 gigatons, per year, for the last six years – due to ice melt.

Dave Roberts of Grist makes the case for supporting the American Power Act.

“So is it worth doing? Is the bill worth fighting for with the kind of passion that was brought to health care or even the presidential election? I believe the answer to that question is an absolute, unqualified, overwhelming yes. However flawed and inadequate, Kerry’s bill would represent a sea change in American life. It would lend desperately needed momentum to the global fight against climate change. Failure would be a tragedy and passage a huge, vital victory.”

Grist also tackles the pressing issue of how the American Power Act will affect farmers.

“Last year, the Environmental Protection Agency predicted that such a program could provide annual net benefits to farmers as high as $18 billion — an amount that could fundamentally change the way America farms.”

On Green we learn that the United Nations has chosen a new head of the climate secretariat: Christina Figueres of Costa Rica.

Climate Progress highlights new NASA data showing that 2010 has had the hottest January to April temperatures on record. A new NOAA report with similar findings is highlighted here on E2.

Ezra Klein explains the implications of the proposal currently being discussed in the Senate which would limit EPA’s ability to regulate carbon.

“Murkowski’s bill would disagree with the EPA’s finding that carbon is a danger and needs to be regulated.”

Also posted in Climate Change Legislation / Comments are closed