by Becca Brown | Jul 17, 2007 | Climate Justice
It turns out that the pursuit of energy efficiency isn’t just some newfangled political fad thought up by climate scientists and mechanical engineers… it’s in our genes! According to a team of researchers at the University of Arizona, humans learned to walk upright because doing so uses less energy than traveling on all fours. This is a fun fact, all by itself, but I can’t help thinking… maybe pursuing an energy efficiency revolution is the next phase of human evolution?
by Becca Brown | Jun 28, 2007 | Climate Justice, Global Justice
Faced with the horror of genocide, we struggle to learn its lessons – to discover how to make the unfulfilled promise of “never again” a reality. In Darfur, even as we strive to bring an end to the human tragedy, we must also look to the future, renewing our commitment to prevent more such atrocities. We now know that making this commitment requires making another — committing to prevent dangerous climate change, and committing to help the most vulnerable people and societies to cope with its effects.
The roots of the conflict in Darfur are complex, but climate change clearly played a role in triggering and exacerbating the violence. A new study by the UN Environmental Programme found that failing rains, drought and desertification increased pressure on already scarce resources, helping to push this fragile society past its breaking point. The same study warned that:
“Sudan is unlikely to see a lasting peace unless widespread and rapidly accelerating environmental degradation is urgently addressed.” (UNEP)
The desert in northern Sudan has spread by 60 miles over the past 40 years and rainfall has dropped by nearly a third. Unchecked climate change will result in additional temperature rises of between 0.5C and 1.5C by mid-century, which speeding up desertification, intensifying drought, and leading to a fall in crop yields of 70%.
Unless we take immediate, effective action to curb climate change, the environmental degradation will jeopardize hopes for peace in Darfur, and threaten to spark conflict across the region.
“Darfur is just an early warning,” Muawia Shaddad of the Sudan Environment Conservation Society told the Washington Post . If this tragedy is a warning, let it be heeded, and let us act now, in the spirit of our promise.
by Citizens for Global Solutions | Jun 19, 2007 | Climate Justice, Global Cooperation
The Senate is entering its second week of deliberations on a proposed energy bill (H.R. 6). Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has made it clear that he wants to wrap-up the energy bill by the end of the week, so he can take another stab at moving the immigration reform bill.
The energy bill ran into trouble at the end of last week over several major sticking points: automobile mileage standards, renewable energy, and gasoline price gouging. But the real problem is a fundamental philosophical difference among lawmakers about how to solve the energy challenges facing the U.S. today. Some Senators come from the “Drill more” school of energy policy, others recognize that, in the long run we can’t drill ourselves out of the dangers posed by global warming and the geopolitics of oil, and are focusing on cutting consumption and increasing the use of renewables. (Full disclosure: In case you can’t tell, I’m with the second group).
“Our legislation would increase production of renewables,” Reid said. “We do not believe in the president’s theory, the Republicans’ theory: drill, drill, drill, more of the same. It reminds me of Iraq.” – Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, quoted by NPR
Here’s a brief rundown on some of the bill’s trouble spots:
CAFE Standards:
The Senate energy bill currently calls for a 35 miles per gallon fuel efficiency (CAFE) standard for both cars and light trucks by 2020, with annual increases of 4% for both after that. Automakers (and their friends in Congress) are actively opposing this measure, and Sen. Levin (D-Mich) has introduced an alternative amendment that would set CAFE standards at 36 miles per gallon for passenger cars by 2022 and 30 mpg for light trucks by 2025. The auto industry claims that the bill’s efficiency standards are unreasonable and “unachievable.”
I would argue that what’s unreasonable is the fact that these standards haven’t been raised in nearly thirty years, and that as a result the United States is now ranked last in the industrialized world on energy efficiency. (My favorite little factoid on this issue is that U.S. automakers can’t sell the cars they sell here in China… because they don’t meet Chinese efficiency standards.)
Renewable Electricity (Renewable Portfolio Standard):
Republicans have blocked voting on an amendment introduced by Senate Energy Committee Chairman, Jeff Bingaman, which would require utilities to produce 15 % of their electricity from renewable sources by 2020. This renewable portfolio standard is an important first step if the U.S. is to lead a global transition away from fossil fuel sources of energy. However, Republicans have threatened to filibuster the energy bill if the Bingaman amendment is included. A coalition of major corporations and environmental groups have sent a letter to Congress urging them to support the Bingaman amendment. But it remains to be seen whether the Democratic leadership will risk defeat on the energy bill to save one of its most critical measures.
Fortunately, the Senate was able to defeat a “Clean” Portfolio Standard amendment, introduced by Senator Domenici (the ranking member on the Senate Energy Committee) which would have set a 20% standard for utilities, but would have counted nuclear and certain types of coal generation as “clean” energy.
Price Gouging:
Another measure of the bill that ran into trouble was a provision that would make oil industry “price gouging” a federal crime during times of “national energy emergency.” This provision has drawn a veto threat from President Bush, in addition to strong opposition from the oil industry.
Under the Radar: Energy Diplomacy and Security –
One of the measures tucked into the energy bill that you probably won’t hear much about this week is also one of the most critical in terms of longterm energy security. If you have been following our work on energy closely you may have noticed that we have been supporting S.193 – the Energy Diplomacy and Security Act of 2007. This bill recognizes the importance of working in partnership with other nations to enhance energy security and develop shared solutions to the energy challenges facing us today. It reforms policymaking and implementation structures, giving policymakers the tools they need to craft effective energy policy. It strengthens global energy crisis response mechanisms, and takes steps to increase developing countries’ access to renewable energy technologies. In today’s energy-independence dominated debate, it represents a refreshing (and important) effort to introduce meaningful multilateral cooperation into U.S. energy policy.
I’ll keep you posted when I hear more…
by Citizens for Global Solutions | Jun 19, 2007 | Climate Justice, Global Cooperation
It looks like round one goes to Nancy Pelosi in the battle over energy legislation that’s ongoing this week in the House.
In the House, the Speaker has been facing off with two of her fellow Democrats, House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman, John Dingell (D-Mich) and Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va), chairman of the energy and air quality subcommittee, over energy legislation. Dingell and Boucher sought to include several measures that would have nearly eliminated any global warming benefit from the bill. These nuggets of policy brilliance included watered down fuel-economy regulations for automobiles, support for turning coal to liquids, and a proposal that would have taken away states’ power to set their own tough emissions standards…
Here’s a brief rundown on why I’m breathing a brief sigh of relief:
1. Fuel economy standards (CAFE standards) have been virtually stagnant for the past thirty years. They are a vast untapped resource for reducing our dependence on oil (note that I didn’t say ‘foreign’ oil, but just plain old oil from anywhere, not to mention the fact that the auto industry’s refusal to pursue increased efficiency has contributed to the declining competitiveness of U.S. companies in the global auto manufacturing industry. With Congress finally ready to raise the bar, it would be tragic to start lowering it again before the bill even reaches the floor.
2. Coal to Liquids: This is a very very very bad idea. Let me explain. First of all, it takes a lot of energy to turn coal into liquid fuel, so instead of tapping into a new energy source, you’re actually wasting energy. Second, we’re scrambling to find ways to put the brakes on global warming. The only way to do that is to reduce greenhouse gas pollution… burning coal in our cars would do the opposite, significantly increasing that pollution. Finally, it’s just plain expensive. If the federal budget has a few hundred million dollars extra to waste on coal to liquids, it should take them and invest them in renewable energy technologies that make sense for our own health, the health of our environment, and the health of our pocketbooks.
3. Taking away states’ power to regulate vehicle emissions. First, let’s look at why this was thrown into the bill. On emissions, the federal government has been in policy gridlock for the past several decades. So states have stepped into the vacuum and created their own policies. California in particular has an exemption that has allowed it to make groundbreaking progress in this area. And lately other states have started to follow suit. Momentum is building towards federal action, which is why opponents are taking aim at states’ power. If they can stop the states from regulating emissions, they can bring us back to gridlock.
Which is why i’m proud of Nancy Pelosi today. Despite pressure to meet her own July 4th deadline – she held firm. But this is only round one. In the memo released by Dingell and Boucher this morning, the Congressmen reserved the right to re-introduce the measures later in the year. I’ll be watching, and I hope you will be too.
by Becca Brown | Jun 19, 2007 | Climate Justice, Global Cooperation
This just in – The Senate Finance Committee just approved a $29 billion package of tax incentives supporting renewables at the expense of the oil and gas industry.
“When the major oil companies are making record profits, consumers are paying record prices, the federal government should not provide record subsidies for the major companies,? said Ron Wyden, D-Ore.”
You said it, Ron… But if you really mean it, how about tackling the hundreds of billions of dollars still flowing to the oil and gas industry through foreign assistance funds?
May I suggest considering a Senate version of H.R. 1886, the End Oil Aid bill introduced by Rep. Hinchey (D-NY)? Can we put it on tomorrow’s agenda?
by Citizens for Global Solutions | Jun 12, 2007 | Climate Justice, Global Cooperation
I’m at the Hyatt Regency this morning with my colleagues Charlie and Julia at a conference jointly sponsored by the Center for American Progress and the Century Foundation. The topic? “America in the World.”
Madeleine Albright kicked things off this morning. A couple of takeaways:
– Secretary Albright has long proposed that the U.S. is the “indispensable nation.” That is to say, to solve the world’s big problems, the U.S. has to be constructively engaged. Today, she suggested that China, too, is needed to solve major global challenges (she noted Iran, North Korea, Darfur, and climate change).
– Albright’s view of things places Iraq as third in a list of problems the next President needs to address, after mainstreaming our values into our foreign policy and revitalizing international institutions. I’m not sure if she listed problems in order of priority, but I’m glad that Iraq isn’t taking right, left, and center stage in her mind.
The coneference’s first panel featured Tom Daschle (moderator), John Deutch, Gen. (ret.) Charles Wald, and Cathy Zoi speaking on energy and climate change as elements of our foreign policy. It is noteworthy that every member of the panel refuted the myth of energy independence, with Gen. Wald emphatically adding: “Energy independence is the worst thing that could happen.”
More reflections later.
