To tell you that I haven’t been skeptical about the value of a weak Senate climate and energy bill would be lying to you. For one thing, I’m pretty happy with how the EPA has been approaching the regulation of greenhouse gases. I’d hate to see strong programs like this and the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) and Western Climate Initiative (WCI) get swept aside by something less effective. The House vehicle, the American Clean Energy and Security Act – aka Waxman-Markey, is a strong piece of legislation, covering all the bases. I’d also hate to see a nuclear power revival in this country, or even just more billions upon billions go down the toilet while we are in easy reach of a 100% renewable energy economy.
In any event, the Senate, after months of negotiation with the White House, internally among Senators, with the House leadership, and certainly with industry and environmentalists, has rolled out its package. John Kerry has been spearheading the bill and had this to say today: “We have a never-before-seen coalition from across America, including key stakeholders embracing energy and climate legislation for the first time ever.” Some key players from core constituencies had comment. Frances Beinecke, President, Natural Resources Defense Council: “The core carbon pollution limits in the bill, covering all major pollution sources, are a solid foundation for Senate legislation.” Jim Rogers, CEO, Duke Energy: “The legislation can help the U.S. get its economic ‘mojo’ back. Operation Free: “America’s military leadership … have all identified climate change and oil dependence as security threats.” Roger Johnson, President, National Farmers Union: “We strongly support economic incentives from the climate change bill to enable agriculture to play a positive role.”
A short summary of the bill reveals that there are “…separate, targeted mechanisms for the three major emitting sectors: power plants, heavy industry and transportation.” I will leave deeper analysis off for the time being and defer to keen minds like Joe Romm at Climate Progress who asks here if the bill meets critically important criteria, like dropping the US substantially below its business-as-usual path on greenhouse gases. He says yes.
On eventual passage of this legislation, David Roberts at Grist, says “Chances for passage are quite slim, but not as slim as generally perceived, and ironically, the path to passage now involves the bill getting stronger, not weaker.”
Remember too, that the rest of the world is looking to the US to come back to the table with strong further proposals for an international regime. Lest we forget, the European Union’s climate chief, Connie Hedegaard, had a lot to say on this recently.
I keep trying to have an open mind. Maybe a strong bill, not unlike Waxman-Markey, can come out of all this and become law. We’ll just have to see.
In the meantime, you can watch John Kerry on the bill. Even better, though, you can read his eminently convincing post at Grist.
