Climate 411

Yesterday’s climate blog highlights

Grist list five compelling reasons why a comprehensive climate and energy plan is superior to an energy-only bill.

“Anyone contemplating supporting energy-only over a comprehensive bill should bear these facts in mind. And realize that whether your top priority is national security, deficit reduction, job creation, or pollution reduction, a comprehensive bill clean energy and climate bill does a lot more for our country.”

E2 has President Obama’s reactions to the Murkowski resolution. The White House said that the resolution would

“increase the Nation’s dependence on oil and other fossil fuels and block efforts to cut pollution that threatens our health and well-being.”

The statement says that:

“Obama’s senior advisors would recommend that he veto the measure.”

Green also has the story of how the White House is less than pleased with the Murkowski resolution.

“[The] White House says that if the resolution, scheduled for debate and a vote on Thursday, reaches President Obama’s desk, his advisers will recommend that he veto it. That’s what is known as a veto threat and in this case it is not a bluff.”

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

The voices of a new clean energy future – June 9, 2010

Editorial – Bangor Daily News – “Climate Leadership Needed

“Maine Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe long have considered climate change a serious problem and worked toward solutions. There won’t be serious solutions, however, without congressional action. That action begins with rejection of a measure that would undo the Environmental Protection Agency’s recent finding that greenhouse gases endanger human health and, therefore, should be regulated. The next step is for the senators to back comprehensive energy legislation that reduces greenhouse gas emissions.”

The New York Times – “The Climate Majority

By Jon A. Krosnick, Professor of communications, political science and psychology at Stanford University

“But a closer look at these polls and a new survey by my Political Psychology Research Group show just the opposite: huge majorities of Americans still believe the earth has been gradually warming as the result of human activity and want the government to institute regulations to stop it.”

“When senators vote on emissions limits on Thursday, there is one other number they might want to keep in mind: 72 percent of Americans think that most business leaders do not want the federal government to take steps to stop global warming. A vote to eliminate greenhouse gas regulation is likely to be perceived by the nation as a vote for industry, and against the will of the people.”

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

Yesterday’s blog highlights

Green takes a look at how pricing carbon with affect nuclear incentives.

“Nuclear reactors are hugely expensive to build by comparison with conventional coal and gas plants” however a price on carbon, if set high enough, could change that.

E2 has a new poll on off-shore drilling which shows that

Americans are now divided on whether the nation should continue those efforts.”

Also posted in Climate Change Legislation / Comments are closed

Blog highlights from the past few days

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, News / Comments are closed

President Obama – Connecting the BP oil disaster with the need for climate legislation

On Grist, there are signs that President Obama is ready to connect the oil spill to the need for comprehensive climate and clean energy bill. At a fundraiser in San Francisco the President said:

“The reason that folks are now having to go down a mile deep into the ocean, and then another mile drilling into the ground below, that is because the easy oil fields and oil wells are gone, or they’re starting to diminish. That tells us that we’ve got to have a long-term energy strategy in this country. And we’ve got to start cultivating solar and wind and biodiesel. And we’ve got to increase energy efficiency across our economy in our buildings and our automobiles.”

On the Financial Times, President Obama has “finally come out and linked the Deepwater Horizon accident and the continuing oil leak to the ‘dangers of fossil fuels’.” Mr Obama said

the increased risks, the increased costs” of deepwater drilling “gives you a sense of where we’re going…We’re not going to be able to sustain this kind of fossil fuel use.”

E2 also has President Obama relating the oil spill to the need for clean energy.

’This disaster should serve as a wake-up call that it is time to move forward on this legislation,’ Obama said, citing a need to develop ‘clean’ energy sources.”

Also posted in Climate Change Legislation / Read 2 Responses

On Murkowski’s “Resolution of Disapproval”

The American Power Act, the bill that would give EPA new tools to regulate carbon pollution, make us more energy secure as a nation, and enhance our competitiveness, is the best chance we have for a comprehensive climate and clean energy bill this year, maybe even this decade.

Instead of rallying around Senators Kerry and Lieberman’s “all of the above” strategy, some senators appear to be for “none of the above.”  A resolution introduced by Sen. Lisa Murkowski would strip EPA of all of its existing authority under the current Clean Air Act to reduce carbon pollution. That would make us more dependent on foreign oil, do nothing to help American manufacturing compete with China or other nations in clean energy technologies, and cripple efforts to address global warming.

How is this possible?

Basically, Sen. Murkowski’s bill would nullify EPA’s finding of scientific fact that greenhouse gases cause harmful global warming – a finding that forms the legal basis for any further steps EPA can take to address carbon pollution.  A vote for Murkowski’s bill is a vote against the strong scientific consensus that climate change is a real threat we must avoid.

Sen. Murkowski’s bill would also block a key step in fighting America’s oil addiction.  It would dismantle the government’s program to reduce carbon pollution from cars and trucks – a program that U.S. automakers and the Obama Administration agreed last year to put in place.  The program will save Americans more than 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of the affected vehicles, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.  At oil prices of $80 a barrel, that’s more than $80 billion worth of foreign oil Americans will not have to buy thanks to these standards.

Sen. Murkowski’s bill would also lead to greater red tape and conflicting regulations for our auto manufacturers (and their suppliers) at a time when many are struggling to recover in these tough economic times.  That’s because the agreement the Obama Administration and automakers reached last year also included California and 13 other states that agreed to set aside their own regulations of automobile emissions.  With no national program, the agreement would fall and states would be free once again to move forward independently, leaving the automobile industry without the nationwide uniformity that it has described as vital to its business.

It’s truly ironic that even as we watch what may end up being one of the most serious environmental and ecological disasters in our nation’s history – the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico – some senators are actively trying to block pollution regulations and hamstring the EPA’s ability to protect the public. This is both inexcusable and unforgivable.

Also posted in Climate Change Legislation / Read 1 Response