House of Representatives Passes Groundbreaking Climate and Energy Bill -- The American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACESA) Now Heads to the Senate for Debate
Late last week, the House of Representatives narrowly approved game-changing climate change legislation, the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACESA), also called Waxman-Markey (HR 2454), the first major environmental legislation to be approved by either the House or the Senate in almost twenty years. Much has already been said about ACES that industry may find confusing, and this alert sorts out what the bill does -- and doesn't -- do and identifies the key issues you will need to address as the debate moves to the Senate.
Continue Reading...The Importance of Incentivizing the Agricultural Industry to Participate in Climate Change Response (and How Did We Forget About Biochar)?
There has been plenty of criticism - some warranted, some not - of new language, pushed by the farm lobby, governing carbon offsets in the climate change legislation. Prior to this amendment, precisely what qualified as an offset was unstated. EPA would be given responsibility for promulgating rules that would define offsets, within broad parameters set forth in the legislation. By contrast, Title V - "Agricultural and Forestry Related Offsets" - identifies an "initial list" of specific types of agricultural and forestry practices that would qualify as offsets, and gives the Department of Agriculture authority to establish a program governing the generation of offset credits from agricultural and forestry-based sources.
Continue Reading...The Loyal Opposition -- Take 2
Recently I wrote about the need for smart criticism from those opposed to Henry Waxman's cap-and-trade plan. This week, former Virginia Governor George Allen who is out touting his new energy policy think tank, made it clear that smart criticism won't come from him. Allen did an interview with Monica Trauzzi on Energy & Environment TV. A transcript is posted at E&E here (subscription required) and Allen's talking points were positively backward. Here's a taste:
Monica Trauzzi: So, do you see a way forward about how we can handle the global warming issue legislatively then?
George Allen: Well, and this is all supposedly for global warming and they estimate 50 years from now there'll be some negligible impact on climate. Gosh, you watch the news and they'll only forecast about four or five days out and a lot of times those aren't right forecasts. I'm not a meteorologist, but they rarely get those right and they're trying to forecast 10, 50 years from now.
Continue Reading...Black Carbon Impact on People and the Planet
The justly well-regarded Health Effects Institute is out with a new study that has obvious implications for public health, but I believe it should impact the climate change debate as well.
The study suggests people exposed to airborne soot are nearly twice as likely to die from heart disease that previously thought. Here's a description from The New York Times article:
The review found that the risk of having a condition that is a precursor to deadly heart attacks for people living in soot-laden areas goes up by 24 percent rather than 12 percent, as particle concentrations increase.
A variety of sources produce fine particles, and they include diesel engines, automobile tires, coal-fired power plants and oil refineries.
When you see the source of these emissions, you can start to see why this public health study makes climate news as well.
Continue Reading...How to Win China and India
Reagan-era economist Martin Feldstein weighed in on the current cap-and-trade plan under consideration in Congress with an op-ed in today's Washington Post.
I'd like to celebrate his contribution, since I noted last week how little thoughtful criticism was coming from Republicans, but unfortunately I can't. Feldstein uses dubious logic and selective inputs to argue that the Waxman Markey bill is a bad idea.
Feldstein argues that the cost of the scheme to taxpayers -- $1600 per typical household, according to a Congressional Budget Office estimate -- is too high since the impact on global warming would be "virtually unnoticeable." Instead, Feldstein argues, the United States "should wait until there is a global agreement that includes China and India."
I agree with Feldstein that climate change cannot be solved without the cooperation of China and India. But unless and until the United States takes a leadership role in battling climate change, those two countries are not going to play ball.
Continue Reading...