Think Tank: US Climate Bill Falls Short
WASHINGTON - A drastically weakened U.S. climate bill released Monday favors polluting industries over truly sustainable clean energy solutions, argues Daphne Wysham, director of a sustainable energy and economy think tank.
What's the Story?
"Right out of the starting gate, the [American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009] provides a ridiculous number of giveaways to industry," writes Wysham, Institute for Policy Studies fellow and director of the Sustainable Energy & Economy Network.
Specifically, 85 percent or more of pollution permits would be given free of cost to the electricity sector, leaving low- to moderate-income families vulnerable to inevitable energy price hikes.
The bill would also create the largest market for carbon emissions in the world. This will enable industries that pollute above permitted emissions levels to buy carbon credits from companies that pollute below these levels. However, "the Government Accountability Office (GAO) claims it's virtually impossible to verify whether carbon offsets represent real emissions reductions," notes Wysham.
Finally, continues Wysham, the bill "makes a mockery of our common understanding of 'renewable energy,' favoring dirty smokestacks over truly clean, renewable energy."
One example of this is the act's classification of municipal solid waste incinerators as "waste to energy" projects. According to the bill, the incinerators are renewable because energy can be produced by burning waste, which is constantly being produced. However, "burning garbage produces more [carbon dioxide] per unit of electricity generated than the dirtiest coal power plants," says Wysham.
Climate Bill May Increase Pollution
An element of the proposed U.S. climate change bill to reduce carbon emissions and invest in clean energy could actually spur a rise in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions until 2026, said a coalition of environmental organizations last month.
Criticizing the significant carbon offsets provisions in the draft bill, 26 environmental and clean energy organizations warned: "to craft a bill that allows for 2 billion tons of offsets per year -- roughly equivalent to 27 percent of 2007 U.S. greenhouse gas emissions -- is to allow for continued and dangerous delay in real action by our country at a time when the world is looking to the U.S. for leadership on climate change."
"Increasing evidence is revealing the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), the world's biggest carbon offset market, is failing to deliver real climate or sustainable development benefits," continued the coalition in their open letter to the bill's sponsors. "Most fundamentally, the CDM has actually facilitated an increase in overall greenhouse gas emissions -- undermining the most fundamental and critical goal of all -- stemming the growth of greenhouse gas emissions in the Earth's atmosphere."
From Climate Change to Catastrophe
"Developing countries, who face catastrophe if climate change is not held in check, are demanding rich nations cut their emissions by at least 40 percent on 1990 levels by 2020," reported the international development agency Oxfam International at the close of a climate conference in Bonn, Germany last month.
So far, rich countries have only pledged to slash emissions by between 4 and 14 percent on 1990 levels by 2020. "The 2.8 - 4 degree temperature rise which would result, could lead to an additional 3 million more deaths from hunger and malnutrition and water shortages affecting up to 4 billion additional people -- the vast majority in the developing world," notes Oxfam.
Adds the environmental advocacy group, Greenpeace International: "Developed nations must collectively achieve emissions cuts of at least 25-40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 and 80-95 percent by 2050." But the new U.S. climate legislation only sets U.S. emission targets at 4 per cent below 1990 levels, a much less ambitious target than previously anticipated. "Rapid emissions reductions in the short-term are critical to avoiding the worst effects of climate change," says Greenpeace.
Take Action
To help people around the world get involved in climate protection efforts, OneWorld has launched the OneClimate.net Web site, a new social networking space for sharing ideas and experiences on climate change.
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
11 Comments so far
Show AllEver notice how the Obama Clan ignores these threads?
This is a trojan horse bill designed to guarantee corporate profits and business as usual for as long as possible. When the people wake up and demand real action on climate change the corporatists who pay the deniers now will pay them to promote a "let the existing legislation work" meme.
The idea is to block the gates to further legislation with a do-nothing shell.
More toothless legislation from DC.
Carbon Tax is the best of the two choices US policy, but the compromising politicians go with cap-n-trade saying the citizens won't go for it, that industry will revolt... pols come to their decision without public debate. Worse, they squelch out any debate with political muscle.
Now we have a cap-n-trade with most credits going for free. This cuts the federal revenue that Obama promised us he'd create for public programs.. in other words the price of the credit could be used as a form of "tax"...generating money for federal programs ...not anymore! Now the people get absolutely nothing out of the deal while handing "get out of jail" credits for free.
And offsets? Super-company X can pay to open a shadow company in a foreign country with NO REGULATIONS and run freely without US oversight.
Now we are told by the supporters: better something than nothing! Not if that something worsens are ability to fight pollution and global warming....
Those powerful forces who put their profit before environmental health need to be exposed personally. It's time to take names.
I can't wait to see what happens after the 'take names' phase.
I'm pretty much 180 degrees different than the article: reasonable people often disagree.
Before we increase the cost of energy for Americans with cap-and-trade and also enrich a new class of financial traders, I believe it's imperative that the United States establishes a non-political, scientific commission to review all facts and evidence surrounding global warming. Currently, we are relying upon a political organization, the United Nations, for their assessment of global warming. This is not good for America. The stakes are huge.
I am a Democrat. For the past 20 years I believed global warming was caused by CO2. Now I'm not so sure, after taking an objective look at the wellspring of man-made global warming theory, the United Nations' Climate Change 2007 report. Whereas the report should have considered all possible global warming culprits then narrow the field, it instead removed from consideration the possibility that natural forces might drive global warming. It is little wonder that the report pinned the blame on CO2 when in their own words (p. 95), "The topics have been chosen for...assessing...risks of human-induced climate change." The fix was in. It was politics not science. The mission statement should have read, "Topics have been chosen for assessing risks of human-induced and NATURE-INDUCED climate change." Remember, the UN developed in Kyoto Protocol. They have a vested interest in demonizing CO2. For further discussion of the report see
http://energyplanusa.com/ipcc_reports_dont_pass_smell_test.htm
I would suggest that propaganda has claimed your soul.
Cap and trade is a shell game that does not reduce carbon emissions. What is required is a carbon tax as advocated by RFK, Bill McKibben, and Al Gore, to name some high profile people who understand the issues.
I recommend you read Big Coal: The Dirty Sercret Behind Coal, by Jeff Goddel offering an analysis of the problem with coal, and why it is never going to be clean. Since coal consumption is rising rather than decreasing, and coal remains the most used souce of energy on the planet and the most egregious; it is time to stop listening to those like Obama, who are owned by the coal industry.
As far as being a Democrat goes, that will be yours and our Earth Mothers undoing.
Too many people on the planet with no plan!
It's gotta be big and its got to be global.
We would be better off with no politicians. Direct democracy is the answer.
Get real; the average American doesn't have a clue what the Climate Change or Peak Oil threats really are thanks to corporate media and the crappy educational system. In California where we are more educated on average than the rest of the US the electorate is just now getting the idea that free lunch promises from politicians and advertisers always taste like ashes. There are states in the US where reality is optional depending upon your religion.
Direct democracy would be a disaster on this issue and many others.
The Third Party voters told you so. Still, the herd was falling over each other for a marketing schema called "change we can believe in." The corporate owned Democrats are putting lip stick on the pig. It is called Green Washing: i.e., a public marketing barrage disguising their latest corporate giveaway.