Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
US Congress Begins Drive for Climate Change Bill
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Congress on Tuesday began work on a bill that would fundamentally change the way American factories and power plants use and supply energy as part of the Obama administration's drive to cut harmful greenhouse gas emissions.
Activists call for action on climate change, energy and the economy on the West Lawn of the US Capitol in March in Washington, DC. Under pressure from the Obama administration to show the world that Washington is making advances against climate change, Congress is to open debate on a "clean energy" bill this week. (AFP/Getty Images/File/Alex Wong) "The time for delay, denial and inaction has come to an end," declared Democratic Representative Edward Markey in opening the House Energy and Commerce Committee's effort to produce a climate bill by the end of May.
President Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats who control both houses of Congress have made combating climate change a priority, worrying Republicans and some other opponents who fear skyrocketing energy and compliance costs.
Over the next five weeks the committee will debate and fine-tune a Democratic draft bill that would drastically reduce the amount of carbon dioxide and other industrial emissions that scientists say contribute to climate problems.
At the bill's core is a "cap and trade" plan to reduce carbon emissions -- lowering them by 20 percent by 2020, 42 percent by 2030 and 83 percent by 2050, with 2005 as a base year.
Manufacturing companies and utilities would get permits to emit less and less carbon and other pollutants, while also being allowed to trade those permits to other firms as they lower their reliance on fuels contributing to climate change.
The proposals also would set tough requirements on utilities, which would have to generate 25 percent of electricity from renewable sources by 2025. Some lawmakers on Tuesday said that timetable was too ambitious.
While the House could pass a bill by mid-year, the tougher fight will be in the Senate, where Republican opponents can use procedures to try to block controversial measures.
One congressional aide said the Obama administration has been reaching out to moderate Democrats and Republicans in the Senate to broaden support for a bill that might not be debated until next year.
Representative Ralph Hall, a Texas Republican, accused Democrats of engaging in a "mad dash" to pass a bill that still does not lay out important details, such as whether industries would have to buy all of the new permits to emit carbon dioxide or whether the government would give them some permits at no cost.
"American businesses and consumers are in the dark on how much this bill is going to cost," Hall said.
"CASH-FOR-CLUNKERS"
Special interest groups from across the United States will try to influence the legislation in coming weeks.
Representative John Dingell of Michigan, a Democrat and longtime defender of the domestic auto industry, said the bill should take more steps to help struggling carmakers. Dingell said he would push to include a "cash-for-clunkers" provision that would pay people to turn in their gas guzzlers and replace them with more fuel-efficient cars.
The House panel's work comes a few days after the Environmental Protection Agency formally announced that greenhouse gas emissions, which are being blamed for extreme weather, the drying up of major rivers, polar ice melting and endangering of more species, is also a danger to human health.
If Congress cannot agree on a climate control bill, Obama is expected to order the EPA to impose new regulations to address the problem.
The EPA released an analysis on the House bill's impact, which found it would raise electricity prices by 22 percent by the year 2030 -- although the total energy bill for the average U.S. household would rise by only 9 percent after various government rebates.
The attempt to pass one of the biggest energy and environmental initiatives in decades comes as the United States is in a deep economic recession -- the worst time to raise energy costs, according to opponents.
But Democrats on Tuesday worked hard to blunt that argument, saying the climate bill will unleash a torrent of investment in new technologies and start-up firms to create up to 5 million new jobs.
Representative Jay Inslee of Washington State called it the "single biggest job creation program since the launch of the Apollo (space) project under the leadership of President John F. Kennedy."
(Additional reporting by Ayesha Rascoe in Washington and Michael Conlon in Chicago, editing by Vicki Allen)
- Posted in
5 Comments so far
Show AllI'm a complete pessimist about Congress. The world wants energy-efficient devices and Americans want to invent them, but Congress will team up with Exxon/Mobil and the ghost of General Motors and find a way to kill American innovation dead by sitting on it and whistling Dixie. Then the country will go broke, the West will dry up and burn in huge fires, Florida and Manhattan will submerge in frequent hurricane storm surges, and China can buy our orphan kids.
"The House panel's work comes a few days after the Environmental Protection Agency formally announced that greenhouse gas emissions, which are being blamed for extreme weather, the drying up of major rivers, polar ice melting and endangering of more species, is also a danger to human health."
when I imagine my proposed Global Start Date, Sept. 22, 2012, the date I would love to see the entire world begin living a reduced, non-industrial, non-electrical, agrarian life, the primary issues are water, food and shelter...
water is currently available to many, and quantities would be more than sufficient for all, if industrial use is removed from the picture...
food is a big one...no imports, no stores, big problem...we're going to need locally-growing, edible, sustainable vegetation where the people are, and wherever else we can grow it...we need to begin ripping up existing pavement and building infrastructure and reclaim the land for living, growing things...why are we reluctant to do this? because of:
shelter...we need money, or we lose our homes, the place where we sleep, bathe have sex, have and raise children, dress, eat, relax in privacy with our muses and store our stuff...this is the big hurdle we must cross to get to the other side...how do we allow human animals to live in existing infrastructure without money? How do we begin to share what we have kept private? If I knew I would not lose my home, or would be able to have a minimal, tidy place to live in return for my efforts, I would be SO ready to begin devoting my daily life to securing water and growing food...
Homes and greenhouses that keep people and plants warm in winter have already been built. I recommend roaldgundersen.com/portfolio/SolarGreenhouses/index.php as one example of several.
Solving climate change is our generation's greatest challenge. A revenue-neutral carbon tax is the cheapest, simplest, most effective and most progressive way to do it.
Join GreenChange.org in calling on President Obama and our elected representatives to support a revenue-neutral carbon tax:
http://tinyurl.com/neutralCO2tax
Churchill once said the best argument against Democracy is a 5 minutes conversation with the average citizen. In the age of the internet, he probably would mention the comment section of the blogs. The only hope here is the lack of comments.
I know it's useless, but the way this con works is congress will give the polluters (if you call CO2 pollution) carbon credits and some will be purchased. They will issue more than they need and will set the price low to begin with. When the market price is up, they will sell the excess credits to the banksters who will control the trading, like stocks and commodoties. They will sell it to countries who emit more CO2 than agreed (this agreement will take place in Copenhagen this winter) or a growing business here at home.
The imports from these countries will go up in price to cover the cost of the carbon credits. For those countries who may not go along, like China, we will impose an import tax on importers. The importer will simply pass the costs on to the consumer. It will not affect China much, they have a monopoly on much of what we need.
As with all trading schemes, the banksters will create a bubble, which will cause higher prices and carbon taxes since the carbon credits will be more expensive, causing price inflation in energy and pretty much everything else. Wages won't keep pace, so people will just be poorer, and you might end up paying a carbon tax for breathing out CO2. At some point, there will be a shortage of carbon credits, as population growth from immigration will continue, and this means an energy shortage. Prepare for intermittent power outages and fuel shortages. Living standards will decline further.
And the beauty is, that the developed world will never be able to develop, keeping them poor forever and consuming the resources our monopoly capitalists want. When it is all said and done, the developing world and developed world will both have living standards on par with China and Russias middle class, and probably just as much freedom and rights as in China.
There is a direct correlation between living standards and energy consumption. Lower CO2 emissions means lower energy consupmtion because renewable fuels will simply not deliver affordable energy. Just imagine living on 25% less income than you do today.
As for whats left of our manufacturing base, they will simply move out to those countries like China which will not limit their CO2 emissions.
Now some of you see a future where you would like 300 million people to live in a non-industrial, non-electrical, agrarian life. Fine. What do I care, I am old. But you obviously know nothing of human history, you will simply live as serfs serving a ruling class and probably have a life expectancy of 50 or so like your ancestors. Enjoy it, and if by some chance we enter an ice age before you die, just keep telling yourself that Global Warming was responsible.
If this nonsense is being broadcast on intergalactic TV, the ET's must be getting enjoying the show, lots of laughs for them.