WHAT THE PRESIDENT CAN DO, WHAT CONGRESS WILL DO & HANSEN’S RECOMMENDATIONS

In the face of overwhelming and still growing evidence of the reality of global climate change, an even more astonishing and dismaying natural phenomenon is Senator James Inhofe’s (R-Okla) ability to go on denying climate change and obstructing action to fight it.

Senator Inhofe, Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, continues to fill the website's minority page with obscurantist, denier irrelevancies from impressively credentialed non-experts and experts whose work is taken out of context. His response to the release by Senator Barbara Boxer’s (D-Calif), the Committee Chair, of the principles that will guide the formulation of the 2009 Senate climate change legislation was typically obstructionist.

Inhofe: "[The principles] will impose a long-term multi-trillion dollar energy tax on families and workers. As demonstrated last year, when it comes to drafting comprehensive climate legislation, the devil is in the details. These principles offer nothing more than a punt on all of the difficult issues that Americans expect to be honestly debated."

The steadfast Senator Boxer, however, appears undiscouraged and commited: "We know that we have to act, and we intend to act…"

The principles:

(1) Emissions reductions to avoid the worst consequences of climate change, based on "best" scientific guidance --
(2) Short and long term emissions reduction targets that are “certain and enforceable, with periodic review…” --
(3) Inclusion of state and local governments and groups --
(4) A "transparent and accountable" market-based system to drive emissions cuts --
(5) Return emissions market revenues to (a) create a just and effective result, (b)build New Energy and Energy Efficiency infrastructure, (c) connect with the world community and (d) increase national security and --
(6) Bring emissions controls and the market to all countries, developed and emerging.

click to enlarge

In a return of Senator Boxer’s signal, the Obama administration signaled back that it likes her attitude and intends to be part of the process.

Lisa P. Jackson, head, EPA: "We are very pleased to see Congress moving quickly on legislation to curb greenhouse gas emissions…We will be working closely with the Hill in the weeks and months ahead to address this tremendous challenge and opportunity."

The EPA’s Inspector General (IG) has just released a report noting the absence of “an overall plan to ensure developing consistent, compatible climate change strategies...[which] can result in duplication, inconsistent approaches, and wasted resources among EPA's regions and offices."

Confronting climate change issues with "consistent, compatible climate change strategies" is something the EPA, when run by the previous administration, avoided like a 4-year-old caught with his hand in the forbidden cookie jar avoids the truth.

It is clear the Obama administration intends to change that. While EPA spokeswoman Roxanne Smith was reacting noncommittally to the IG report, her boss Ms. Jackson was meeting with Mary Nichols, Chair of the California Air Resources Board, about California’s newly granted permission to set more rigid vehicle emissions standards.

Nichols: "You have to have [emissions] caps…If you start out with the conception you're doing the best you can, that's never going to be good enough."

click to enlarge

Senator Boxer's principles have no specifics yet and probably await further consultation with the administration as much as they await further scientific input. In response to questions about whether this year’s legislation has a better chance of acceptance from the recalcitrant Republican minority than the climate change bill defeated last year, Boxer was optimistic.

Senator Boxer: "A lot of those who voted against us are no longer here…"

Senator Inhofe is most definitely still there, though, and it will be painfully fascinating to watch the Republicans dispute and delay while the earth burns.

The Boxer Committee principles follow President Obama’s lead in their strong call for legislation based on the best scientific information. Dr. James Hansen, the foremost U.S. climate scientist, just released a public statement in defense of the group fighting FOR wind and AGAINST mountaintop removal coal mining at Coal River Mountain. (See also FIGHTING COAL WITH WIND and HOW TO GET TO THE NEW ENERGY ECONOMY…).

14 activists from the group Coal River Mountain Wind were arrested in West Virginia February 3 while demonstrating to urge the state’s Governor to reconsider his rejection of a wind installation for the mountain instead of an environmentally devastating mountaintop removal coal mining operation.

In his statement, Dr. Hansen commented on the necessary components for climate change legislation: “There are two major requirements for solving the global warming problem: (1) rapid phase-out of coal emissions, and (2) a substantial, rising price on carbon emissions.”

Hansen was very specific about how to price emissions: “In order to move to the world beyond fossil fuels, there must be a strong economic incentive to do so, and the business community must realize that we mean business. The tax does not have to start out large, though it should be substantial. It has to be a tax that covers all fossil fuels. It should not be a cap-and-trade that allows some carbon to escape, and makes Wall Street millionaires on the backs of the public.”

At first glance, this sounds like a condemnation of cap-and-trade, which would leave Dr. Hansen allied with the Senate’s foremost climate change denier and in opposition to Senator Boxer, President Obama and climate change prophet Al Gore.

But Hansen elaborated further in his statement: “…With coal phase-out and a rising price on carbon emissions, the curve can be changed fundamentally, and move downward fast. But it will not happen as a consequence of “goals” and weak cap-and-trade measures -- and a temporary downturn of emissions due to economic slowdown should not be misinterpreted as fundamental change.”

In essence, then, this is Dr. Hansen once again demonstrating the courage with which he defied the Bush administration. He is not exactly opposed to cap-and-trade. He is opposed to “weak cap-and-trade.” It will be from thougtful, challenging “opponents” like Dr. Hansen - and not recalcitrants like Senator Inhofe - that the adminstration will get the push-back it needs to make its climate change legislation effective.

click to enlarge

The Presidential Climate Action Plan (PCAP), a special project of the School of Public Affairs at the University of Colorado/Denver, is a more comprehensive statement about what is needed to reverse climate change. Indeed, PCAP is one of the most comprehensive and ambitious plans yet released.

From the executive summary: “This is not an easy time but it is rich with promise. If we embark on the path of sustainability, help developing nations leapfrog from poverty to clean prosperity and build the new skills and industries that equip us for the post-carbon world, we will accomplish what author Thomas Berry calls the Great Work of our generation…At every key turning point in our history – the American Revolution, the Civil War, the World Wars of the 20th century – the living generation has put itself on the line for future generations. Now we are being tested…”

PCAP was launched in 2006 to define a course for the first 100 days of the 44th President. It was released in November 2008 for Barack Obama’s edification and enlightenment. It sets out steps that need to be taken in the broad areas of (1) climate action, (2) energy action, (3) stewardship, (4) investing in a 21st century economy, and (5) finding capital.

The report is lengthiest in its recommendations for financing the many projects for which it calls. It is most articulate in describing a new role for the U.S. in the world community: “Great nations rise to great challenges. Today, no challenge is more critical than global climate change. It reaches to the core of humanity’s relationship with the Earth. It tests our capacity to make intelligent changes in our economy, policies and behaviors in the interest of all people and all generations. So how should the United States respond to climate change?”

PCAP answers this question in a dozen categories: (1) urgency, (2) effective action, (3) consistency and continuity of purpose, (4) opportunity, (5) predictability, (6) flexibility (7) everyone plays, (8) multiple benefits, (9) accurate market signals, (10) prudent preparation, (11) international solutions and (12) fairness.

The same themes recur in section after section and topic after topic: (a) The U.S. must confront global climate change by reducing emissions through a just and disciplined market-based system, (b) it must play a role in the world community, (c) it must develop New Energy and a New Energy economy, (d) there is tremendous opportunity in undertaking these goals and (e) it is merely responsible stewardship of this earth to undertake them.

From the PCAP executive summary: “How quickly we make this transition will determine the future of our country and the quality of life of our children to a degree not true of any earlier generation. If we continue investing time and resources in life-support for the old economy, we will condemn the nation to a future of international resource conflicts and the catastrophic consequences of unmitigated global climate change. We will sentence future Americans to lives of coping rather than hoping, and surviving rather than flourishing…If we embrace and invest in the new economy – and do it with unprecedented speed – we will create an opportunity society, a renewed America that is not only more vibrant, with new industries and jobs, but also more secure…”

The National Teach-In is an activist movement advocating on behalf of the principles in PCAP. “Time is short, demand solutions, choose the future.” From theNationalTeachIn via YouTube.

Presidential Climate Action Plan
November, 2008 (Wirth Chair/School of Public Affairs, University of Colorado/Denver)
and
Democrats Pen Principles for Climate-Change Bills; Senate Panel Sets Goal of Creating Cap-and-Trade System
Juliet Eilperin, February 3, 2009 (Washington Post)
and
Tell President Obama About Coal River Mountain
James Hansen, February 3, 2009 (Columbia University website)

WHO
The 44th President of the United States; Ray Anderson, PCAP Chair/Founder and Chairman of the Board, Interface Inc.; Advisory Committee to the Wirth Chair/School of Public Affairs, University of Colorado/Denver; Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Calif), Chair, and Senator James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee; Lisa P. Jackson, head, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); Dr. James E. Hansen

WHAT
The Presidential Climate Action Plan (PCAP) offers a detailed path forward on climate change. Principles for Global Warming Legislation is the list of principles released by Senator Boxer’s Environment and Public Works Committee that will guide the writing of the Senate’s 2009 climate change legislation.

click to enlarge

WHEN
- Senator Boxer promised she will deliver legislation from her committee to the full Senate before the end of the year.
- It would be best if the U.S. position on climate change action is settled by the time of the Copenhagen world summit in early December.
PCAP was launched in 2006 to chart a course for the first 100 days of the 44th President.
- According to PCAP, Lyndon Johnson was the first U.S. President, in 1965, to be warned by his science team about climate change.
- Dr. Hansen first warned about climate change in 1988. In 2008, he told a House of Representatives committee that the next President must, in 2009, set the U.S. on course to deal with climate change.

WHERE
PCAP points out 2 exemplary federal insurance programs where dramatically increased tax payer exposure – 26 times in the Federal Crop Insurance Program to $44 billion and 4 times in the National Flood Insurance program to $1 trillion – justify big expenditures to reverse climate simply in order to avoid much larger costs of paying for it.

click to enlarge

WHY
- The principles that will guide formulation of the 2009 Senate climate change legislation:
(1) Emissions reductions to avoid the worst consequences of climate change, based on best scientific guidance.
(2) Short and long term emissions reduction targets that are “certain and enforceable, with periodic review…”
(3) Bring in state and local entities and support ongoing efforts.
(4) “Establish a transparent and accountable market-based system that efficiently reduces carbon emissions.”
(5) Use emissions market revenues (a) to protect consumers from power price increases, (b) build New Energy and Energy Efficiency infrastructure. (c) support states, localities and tribes in implementation, (d) support workers, businesses, communities and manufacturing states in the transition to a New Energy economy, (e) protect and conserve wildlife and natural systems, and (f) connect with the world community, “including faith leaders,” to provide support and adaptation and minimize “threats to international stability and national security…”
(6) Use incentives and other measures to ensure that “…countries contribute their fair share to the international effort…”

click to enlarge

- Examples of climate action by the President set out by PCAP: (1) Set the goal to cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions 25-to-30% 1990 levels by 2020; (2) Put “cap-auction-invest” legislation in Congress to cut GhGs 80% by 2050 that auctions allowances to coal, oil and natural gas producers; (3) Have EPA expedite GhG rules and regulatations under its Clean Air Act authority, etc.
- Examples of energy action by the President set out by PCAP: (1) Have the EPA stop coal industry environmental degradations; (2) Have DOE plan for the transition of coal plants to natural gas; (3) Have DOE expose the concept of “clean” coal; (4) Establish a CAFÉ standard of 50 mpg, etc.
- Examples of stewardship by the President set out by PCAP: (1) Establish the atmosphere as public commons and make federal employees its trustees charged to protect it; (2) Have federal agencies inventory and map U.S. environmental resources and ecosystems and identify impacts and protections; (3) Create protective institutions such as an Earth Systems Sciences Agency and a Department of Oceans, etc.
- Examples of investing in a 21st century economy by the President set out by PCAP: (1) Establish an Energy Security and Stabilization Board to draw on expert opinion for economic stabilization; (2) Drive public and private investment in New Energy, Energy Efficiency, climate adaptation and infrastructure renewal as economic stimulus from the bully pulpit; (3) Stop taxpayer subsidies to Old Energy (coal, oil and gas) and subsidize New Energy and Energy Efficiency; (4) Strengthen U.S. Small Business Administration subsidies to small companies that make New Energy and Energy Efficiency, etc.
- Examples of finding capital by the President set out by PCAP: (1) Make Iraq pay for its reconstruction; (2) Replace U.S. spending on foreign oil with spending on domestic energy sources by switching personal transport to electric fuel; (3) Fund New Energy to fuel the economy; (4) Fund state and local government investments in the New Energy economy; (5) Establish a National Energy and Climate Council as potent as the National Security Council and the National Economic Council, etc.

More about the National Teach-In from Hunter Lovins. From theNationalTeachIn via YouTube.

QUOTES
- From PCAP: “To address energy and climate security, the 44th President and 111th Congress must work together more closely than they have for many years. In the final analysis, these are not partisan issues or issues that require power struggles between the executive and legislative branches. The PCAP has identified the specific powers the President already has to begin leading on energy and climate without further action by Congress – powers that are delegated to the administration in existing law. The PCAP recommends the President make full use of his current authorities to take bold and early action. But the President must also make clear that he respects the boundaries of his current powers and that much that needs to be done will require new legislation. From his first day in office, the President should establish a pattern of collaboration and consultation with the legislative branch.”
- From PCAP: “In the Manhattan Project, the U.S. government invested an average of $4 billion annually (in 2007 dollars). In the Apollo Project, taxpayers invested $7 billion per year, on average. After the oil shocks of the 1970s, the Department of Energy invested $7 billion annually. Today the DOE invests an average of only $3 billion each year in research for energy technologies (fossil and nuclear as well as renewables and efficiency).”
- From the National Security and the Threat of Climate Change of the Center for Naval Analysis (quoted in PCAP): “Climate change can act as a threat multiplier for instability in some of the most volatile regions of the world, and it presents significant national security challenges for the United States…The increasing risks from climate change should be addressed now because they will almost certainly get worse if we delay.”