Originally published on the CGS blog on April 23, 2010.
-A guest blog written by former intern Komal Hiranandani-
Senators John Kerry (D-Mass.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) have plans to unveil a comprehensive climate change bill in the Senate next weak, tentatively called the “American Power Act.” Running on the heels of Earth Day celebrations, this Senate Bill follows the passage of the House’s H.R. 2454 Waxman-Markey Bill in June last year.
A lot has happened between then and now. President Obama attended the Copenhagen climate summit in December, which acknowledged the scientific need to prevent climate change, acknowledged the assistance needed for developing countries to transition to clean energy economies, and saw the U.S. agreeing to pledge aid to developing countries for this purpose. However, the summit failed to produce the binding agreement across nations to take specific measures to fight this threat. The U.S. Senate debated the Kerry-Boxer climate bill that tried to follow H.R. 2454, but this moved fizzled out as Senators refused to come together and other issues clogged the agenda.
Once again, Senator Kerry has attempted to pick up the reins, and lead efforts to complete this process in the Senate. Conjecture has already begun about what this might and might not include. Reports indicate that it will pursue a 17% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 2005 levels by 2020, which was H.R. 2454’s target. The new bill is expected to move away from the House version’s economy-wide cap-and-trade system for carbon emissions, limiting itself to the utilities and industrial sectors. Support for the nuclear industry is also expected. Manufactures can expect to see tax breaks for employing energy-efficiency measures.
However, the bill still needs to iron out several points of contention. These include opposing views on whether the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority should be retained, oil and gas revenue- sharing systems from federal waters with coastal states , and the issue of new federal legislation superseding stronger state and regional measures already taken in states like California.
As Senators work out such technicalities, the need for finding common ground must be kept in mind. NASA confirmed that the earth has experienced the warmest decade on record. The U.S. draft report on climate change said that “Global warming is unequivocal and primarily human-induced,” and the International Energy Agency calculated that the cost of greenhouse gas emissions abatement increases by half a trillion dollars for every year that the world fails to take comprehensive steps to address climate change.
Meanwhile, Senator Kerry has emphasized the tremendous opportunity that a clean-energy economy represents. He noted that the energy market is a 6 trillion dollar market with about 4.5 billion eligible users. This explains why China is currently investing aggressively in alternative energy development.
Don Kraus, CEO of Citizens for Global Solutions pointed out that, “the Senate must pass a climate bill for three reasons: morality, security, and diplomacy. First, reducing U.S greenhouse gas emissions is the right thing to do. We continue to have a lopsided impact on the global climate that affects the lives of people throughout the world. Second, our oil habit still supports tyrannical regimes and makes our nation less secure. Finally, the U.S. will not be seen as credible partner at global climate change negotiations without it. The history of our presidents making agreements that are not back by the Senate is long, sad, and too well known.” Kraus went on to add that the EPA’s authority should be retained saying that “whatever is passed will only be a first step. This and future administrations will need an ‘EPA stick’ along with carrots to keep Congress engaged.”
The new Senate Bill must provide incentives for such a transition to take place in the U.S. Speedy legislation is necessary to mitigate uncertainties currently faced by companies here because they are unsure about what new laws might penalize or reward. Easing cap-and-trade to only apply to utilities and industries may be an acceptable short-term compromise, but this should be pushed as a concession that is accepted in exchange for broader cap-and-trade coverage in the future. The use and development of clean energy, like solar and wind, should be amply rewarded, and the EPA’s regulatory authority should be retained as far as possible. Strong incentives should be provided for companies to invest in clean energy and energy efficiency. If this is accomplished, the Senate might successfully win this battle in the long chain of steps we need to take to fight climate change.
This Earth Day urge your Senator to pass strong climate change legislation.
