The following article is from The Boston Globe and describes the activity in Congress over what to do about "global warming". The key players are environmental groups and large corporate interests who stand to benefit from proposed legislation. Note where some businesses think their is money to be made in selling "carbon credits". That explains their motivation. It has nothing to do with a concern for the environment. This is a very high-stakes game.
Interestingly, left out of the loop are scientists, thanks I believe, to the public perception that "the debate is over". The assumption is that yes indeed, man is causing global warming because of carbon dioxide emissions. Of course we're saying here that man is not causing global warming, and that the debate on this subject is far from over. Someone needs to tell our politicians, or we're all going to be "sold down the river".
Peter
from: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/08/22/unlikely_allies_advance_global_warming_policy/
Unlikely allies advance global warming policy
Environmentalists join industry, and both see progress
By John Donnelly, Globe Staff August 22, 2007
WASHINGTON -- Pushed by an unlikely partnership of corporate leaders and environmentalists, the White House and Congress are now grappling with decisions on global warming unimaginable only a year ago, including whether to implement tough fuel-efficiency standards for motor vehicles, require utilities to buy power from renewable sources, or mandate cuts in greenhouse-gas emissions.
Several environmentalists credit their new bedfellows -- business leaders they once lambasted -- for accelerating the agenda toward action this fall, and a showdown between lawmakers and President Bush.
There's no guarantee that any of the issues will be resolved. Despite the flurry of activity, some believe serious action will not happen until the next president takes office in 2009.
Bush, a former Texas oilman, has long opposed controls on greenhouse gas emissions and has threatened to veto the Senate's auto fuel-efficiency standard and the House's requirement that utilities make greater use of renewable energy. Bush prefers to promote biofuels, with a goal of replacing 20 percent of fossil-fuel consumption with alternatives like ethanol by 2020. The president will soon host a summit of the world's largest greenhouse gas emitters in hopes of reaching an agreement on cutbacks by the time he leaves office.
But skeptical business leaders do not want to wait that long for a deal. The United States Climate Action Partnership -- a coalition of 25 corporations, including DuPont, General Electric, Detroit's Big Three automakers, three oil companies, and nongovernmental groups such as Environmental Defense and the Natural Resources Defense Council -- has its own proposal.
It recommends a mandatory carbon cap-and-trade system that would set a target of reducing emissions by 60 percent to 80 percent of today's levels by 2050. In Congress, at least nine pieces of legislation are expected to be debated this fall; almost all call for similar reduction targets.
"To me, this is the defining business issue of our generation," said David Crane, chief executive of coalition member NGR Energy. His company owns power-generating facilities that can bring electricity to some 20 million homes. "It's going to take 50 years to do something about global warming, but we need to start to do something right away."
David Hawkins, director of the Natural Resources Defense Council's climate center, said he and other environmentalists have been talking with corporate heads for five years "to get this on their radar screen because of our belief this will happen faster if they are engaged."
No one in the partnership would say the motivation of corporations is solely based on altruism; several have calculated that changes are forthcoming and they would like a hand in setting the policy. Business leaders say a mandatory cutback on greenhouse-gas emissions would help them plan longer-term and could become a moneymaker -- especially a cap-and-trade system in which companies buy and sell credits based on how much pollution they create or eliminate.
There is another underlying perception that any deal might be better now than later, said Vicki Arroyo, director of policy analysis at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. "Some members of the business community are coming to the notion that they would prefer to deal with this Congress and this president," she said.
Hawkins said the activity over global warming has been at a furious pace since the White House signaled its intention last year to put the polar bear on the endangered species list. Since then, he said, "political attention to global warming in 100 days was greater than probably any 10-year period."
Among the developments: A United Nations scientific panel found with near certainty that humans have contributed to global warming; Al Gore's documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth," won an Oscar; the House formed a committee on global warming, headed by Representative Edward J. Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat; Democrats held scores of hearings on climate change in Congress; and investor pressure against building coal-powered electricity plants led to TXU Corp., a Texas-based organization, canceling eight of its planned 11 plants.
In coming weeks, Congress will further define the political battles over global warming with the Bush administration as a House-Senate committee tries to resolve two very different energy bills.
Before the August recess, the House OK'd a bill rolling back nearly $16 billion in tax breaks for oil and gas companies. It also granted a $4,000 tax credit for hybrid car buyers, set new efficiency standards for household appliances, and mandated that utilities use renewable energies as part of their power supplies.
The Senate's bill calls for the auto industry to build a fleet of cars, light trucks, and sport utility vehicles that average 35 miles per gallon by 2020.
It also calls for a sevenfold increase in the use of ethanol by 2022 and requires Detroit to build half of its cars manufactured by 2015 to be fueled by a blend of ethanol and gasoline.
John Donnelly can be reached at donnelly@globe.com.
Showing posts with label laws. Show all posts
Showing posts with label laws. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Monday, April 30, 2007
Future Dim For Air Quality Laws
Here are some excerpts from an article in today's "Dallas Morning News". With all the attention global warming and climate change have been getting in the media, one would think legislators would be passing every law limiting polluting emissions of every sort; especially carbon dioxide. You would think it would be a "slam dunk", to paraphrase a former director of the CIA. And you would be WRONG. At least in Texas. And you might not think what happens in Texas is important, and again you might be wrong, as goes Texas might mean so goes the rest of the U.S., maybe more.
I'm not sure of the implications of the activity in the Texas legislature, but it does not look good for environmentalists. It seems reason, caution, and logic are winning out over hype, hysteria, and showbusiness. I get the impression that people are not believing the global warming doomsayers. All the talk in the world about global warming and the impending climate crises is not going to amount to anything unless enforceable laws are passed. It doesn't look like that is going to happen in Texas, and my guess is these kinds of bills are going to get the same chilly reception in Washington, D.C. in Congress. I'm just posting some highlights from the article. Read the entire article and let's hear what you think.
Peter
Go here to read the complete article: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/043007dnpropollution.3d024ea.html
Future dim for air-quality bills
Legislature: Most proposals to make coal plant permits tougher aren't getting a hearing
01:20 AM CDT on Monday, April 30, 2007
By RANDY LEE LOFTIS / The Dallas Morning News rloftis@dallasnews.com
When TXU and other companies announced their huge expansion of coal power in Texas, gaping holes in the state's air pollution rules became apparent.
But a Dallas Morning News review shows that most bills before the Texas Legislature aimed at making the state's air permit system tougher are dying without getting a committee hearing. Others, including bills to halt new coal-plant permits until rules can be tightened, have gotten a hearing but seem destined to get no action.
Strong public reaction to those regulatory shortcomings led legislators to file bills to fix the permitting system and to raise related issues such as global warming. For a while, it seemed possible that the 2007 session might bring fundamental changes to Texas' oft-criticized approach to protecting the public from air pollution. But with a month left before the Legislature adjourns, the chance for comprehensive reform is fading fast.
Although Texas ranks first among the states and seventh worldwide in emissions of carbon dioxide, all the bills attempting to write a Texas policy on global warming are also apparently headed for early deaths. So are bills that would require the sale of cleaner California-standard cars in Texas.
Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas, is among the legislators who pushed most aggressively for coal reforms. He filed bills to tax coal, strengthen clean-air technology requirements for coal plants, cut summertime emissions from power plants, and offer incentives for cleaner plants near urban areas. All are stalled. "I'm increasingly bearish on whether we're going to get anything out," Mr. Anchia said.
That happened Friday when a Senate bill aimed at limiting TXU's market share passed the House with some environmental amendments. Environmental lobbyists hope for more such small victories, but they are reluctant to say too much about them for fear of rallying the opposition. "There are many good bills out there that deserve a chance," said Tom "Smitty" Smith, Texas director of Public Citizen.
Environmental advocates are working to salvage as many reforms as possible during this session since half of the originally proposed coal plants are either still in progress or already have their permits.
Even if environmentalists managed to kill or delay Oak Grove, however, this session they won't achieve the same type of sweeping and clear new direction to clean-air regulation that water-development advocates got with the 1997 passage of Senate Bill 1, the state's comprehensive water planning law.
The water law, a response to a 1996 drought, still dictates state water policies a decade later. The clean-air bills, a response to the proposed coal boom, have smashed into a wall of opposition that the water bill never encountered.
Mr. Bonnen said he wants to wait until the furor over the coal boom has calmed down before thinking about which way Texas should go on regulating power plant pollution.
"We need to do this in an unemotional way that's not influenced by how people feel about a particular company's CEO," he said, referring to TXU's John Wilder, who became a lightning rod for criticism of TXU's coal plans.
At least 65 bills in the Legislature deal in some way with clean air. Bills awaiting action by the full House or Senate have passed a committee vote. Bills left pending or with no action in committee have received a hearing but have not had a vote. They could be revived or could become amendments to other bills but most probably will expire with no action. Bills that have received no hearing are probably almost certainly destined to will expire with no action.
(This is just a list of bills directly addressing "global warming", Peter)
Global warming
Awaiting action by full House:
HB 3431. Would extend state tax breaks to future equipment used to capture carbon dioxide emissions.
Passed Senate; awaiting action in the House:
SB 1762. Would order a state study on global warming's impact on the Rio Grande.
Left pending or no action in committee:
HB 722. Would create a state global warming task force.
SB 945. Would require actions and emissions cuts to fight global warming.
No hearing:
HB 2073, HB 2143, HB 2362, HB 3897, 3939, SB 1687. Would require actions and emissions cuts to fight global warming.
I'm not sure of the implications of the activity in the Texas legislature, but it does not look good for environmentalists. It seems reason, caution, and logic are winning out over hype, hysteria, and showbusiness. I get the impression that people are not believing the global warming doomsayers. All the talk in the world about global warming and the impending climate crises is not going to amount to anything unless enforceable laws are passed. It doesn't look like that is going to happen in Texas, and my guess is these kinds of bills are going to get the same chilly reception in Washington, D.C. in Congress. I'm just posting some highlights from the article. Read the entire article and let's hear what you think.
Peter
Go here to read the complete article: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/043007dnpropollution.3d024ea.html
Future dim for air-quality bills
Legislature: Most proposals to make coal plant permits tougher aren't getting a hearing
01:20 AM CDT on Monday, April 30, 2007
By RANDY LEE LOFTIS / The Dallas Morning News rloftis@dallasnews.com
When TXU and other companies announced their huge expansion of coal power in Texas, gaping holes in the state's air pollution rules became apparent.
But a Dallas Morning News review shows that most bills before the Texas Legislature aimed at making the state's air permit system tougher are dying without getting a committee hearing. Others, including bills to halt new coal-plant permits until rules can be tightened, have gotten a hearing but seem destined to get no action.
Strong public reaction to those regulatory shortcomings led legislators to file bills to fix the permitting system and to raise related issues such as global warming. For a while, it seemed possible that the 2007 session might bring fundamental changes to Texas' oft-criticized approach to protecting the public from air pollution. But with a month left before the Legislature adjourns, the chance for comprehensive reform is fading fast.
Although Texas ranks first among the states and seventh worldwide in emissions of carbon dioxide, all the bills attempting to write a Texas policy on global warming are also apparently headed for early deaths. So are bills that would require the sale of cleaner California-standard cars in Texas.
Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas, is among the legislators who pushed most aggressively for coal reforms. He filed bills to tax coal, strengthen clean-air technology requirements for coal plants, cut summertime emissions from power plants, and offer incentives for cleaner plants near urban areas. All are stalled. "I'm increasingly bearish on whether we're going to get anything out," Mr. Anchia said.
That happened Friday when a Senate bill aimed at limiting TXU's market share passed the House with some environmental amendments. Environmental lobbyists hope for more such small victories, but they are reluctant to say too much about them for fear of rallying the opposition. "There are many good bills out there that deserve a chance," said Tom "Smitty" Smith, Texas director of Public Citizen.
Environmental advocates are working to salvage as many reforms as possible during this session since half of the originally proposed coal plants are either still in progress or already have their permits.
Even if environmentalists managed to kill or delay Oak Grove, however, this session they won't achieve the same type of sweeping and clear new direction to clean-air regulation that water-development advocates got with the 1997 passage of Senate Bill 1, the state's comprehensive water planning law.
The water law, a response to a 1996 drought, still dictates state water policies a decade later. The clean-air bills, a response to the proposed coal boom, have smashed into a wall of opposition that the water bill never encountered.
Mr. Bonnen said he wants to wait until the furor over the coal boom has calmed down before thinking about which way Texas should go on regulating power plant pollution.
"We need to do this in an unemotional way that's not influenced by how people feel about a particular company's CEO," he said, referring to TXU's John Wilder, who became a lightning rod for criticism of TXU's coal plans.
At least 65 bills in the Legislature deal in some way with clean air. Bills awaiting action by the full House or Senate have passed a committee vote. Bills left pending or with no action in committee have received a hearing but have not had a vote. They could be revived or could become amendments to other bills but most probably will expire with no action. Bills that have received no hearing are probably almost certainly destined to will expire with no action.
(This is just a list of bills directly addressing "global warming", Peter)
Global warming
Awaiting action by full House:
HB 3431. Would extend state tax breaks to future equipment used to capture carbon dioxide emissions.
Passed Senate; awaiting action in the House:
SB 1762. Would order a state study on global warming's impact on the Rio Grande.
Left pending or no action in committee:
HB 722. Would create a state global warming task force.
SB 945. Would require actions and emissions cuts to fight global warming.
No hearing:
HB 2073, HB 2143, HB 2362, HB 3897, 3939, SB 1687. Would require actions and emissions cuts to fight global warming.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)