American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009
| A week ago the American Clean
Energy and Security Act of 2009 passed out of the Energy and Commerce
Committee of the United States House of Representatives. Life of the Land has read and analyzed the bill, and join a growing list of groups who oppose the bill, including Public Citizen, Friends of the Earth, Center for Biological Diversity, Rainforest Action Network, International Rivers, Energy Justice Network and Greenpeace. The version of the bill that passed out of the committee was written in the presence of oil and coal industries lobbyists outside of the public arena. The bill focuses on proposed long-term changes at the expensive of the immediate implementation of short-term changes. In the coming years, these long term changes can be modified, dropped or postponed. Within the climate change community, it is widely believed that a minimum requirement is that greenhouse gas emissions are reduced 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2020. The bill calls for a goal of 20 percent reduction by 2020, but using a base year of 2005, when U.S. emissions were 16 percent higher than in 1990. Thus the bill would reduce 1990 emission levels by about 7 percent, assuming that provisions are not watered down in the future. (Section 702.2) The bill allows new coal plants to be built, based on the implementation of unproven sequestration techniques. The bill defines clean energy technology to include: increasing the efficiency of oil pipelines; on site fossil fuel based combined heat and power systems; producing advanced materials with energy applications; and enhancing water security through improved water management (Section 171(b)(3)(B-F)) Pollution credits are given for free to the oil and coal industries for the proposed cap-and-trade market. Wall Street types including speculators are allowed to buy and sell greenhouse gas emission obligations. It is critical that the U.S. provides leadership on the climate issue. This proposed bill sends us down the wrong path. |
|
House Committee Approves Waxman-Markey ACES (H.R. 2454) 33 To 25 Friday, May 22, 2009 May 21: Following the marathon, 4-day markup session, the House Energy and Commerce Committee approved H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES), by a vote of 33 to 25, at about 8:30 PM. In the end, 32 Democrats and 1 Republican voted for the Committee amended bill. Three Democrats voted against the bill: Mike Ross, AR; Jim Matheson, UT; and G.K. Butterfield, NC. The one Republican voting for the bill was Representative Mary Bono Mack, CA. Despite the mostly party-line vote, the Republican leadership on the bill, Ranking Member Joe Barton (R-TX) and Fred Upton (R-MI), congratulated Committee Chairman Henry Waxman on his leadership, control and fairness in allowing the Republican minority to present and debate their amendments. The Republicans encouraged the Democrats to exercise the same leadership when the bill reaches the House Floor. Chairman Waxman called the legislation "a comprehensive approach to America's energy policy that charts a new course towards a clean energy economy." He said, "Today the Committee took decisive and historic action to promote America's energy security and to create millions of clean energy jobs that will drive our economic recovery and long-term growth. This bill, when enacted into law this year, will break our dependence on foreign oil, make our nation the world leader in clean energy jobs and technology, and cut global warming pollution. I am grateful to my colleagues who supported this legislation and to President Obama for his outstanding leadership on these critical issues." Energy and Environment Subcommittee Chairman Ed Markey (D-MA) said, "With this plan, we will shape a new energy destiny for our country, where we innovate more and pollute less. Today we have chosen bold action to preserve good paying jobs here in America and preserve our planet. In just eight weeks, Chairman Waxman and I, working with our entire committee, have moved us farther down the path toward energy independence than our country had moved in the past eight years." According to a release from the Committee, the 900+ page ACES, will create millions of new clean energy jobs, save consumers hundreds of billions of dollars in energy costs, enhance America's energy independence, and cut global warming pollution. The Committee indicated that the legislation has received wide support from electric utilities; energy companies; manufacturing, industry, and corporate companies; labor unions; and community and environmental organizations. In a release from USCAP, the industry-environmental coalition said, "While the current bill does not reflect every USCAP recommendation - and in some instances addresses issues not considered in the Blueprint or in more detail than the Blueprint - it is a good foundation for moving forward in the Congress. USCAP members include: Alcoa - Boston Scientific - BP America - Caterpillar - Chrysler - ConocoPhillips - Dow - Duke Energy - DuPont - Environmental Defense Fund - Exelon - Ford - FPL Group - GE - GM - John Deere - Johnson & Johnson - Natural Resources Defense Council - The Nature Conservancy - NRG Energy - PepsiCo - Pew Center on Global Climate Change - PG&E - PNM Resources - Rio Tinto - Shell - Siemens - World Resources Institute - Xerox. A broad coalition of environmental and other advocacy groups indicated, "While a week of debate failed to adequately strengthen protections for consumers, communities, and the climate in this bill, it erased all doubt of who will benefit most from it: Big Business. Despite the best efforts of Chairman Waxman, the decision-making process was co-opted by oil and coal lobbyists determined to sustain our addiction to dirty fossil fuels, even as the country stands ready to rebuild our economy and clean up the environment with real clean energy. The resulting bill reflects the triumph of politics over science, and the triumph of industry influence over the public interest. . ." The coalition (Greenpeace, et al) includes: Greenpeace USA * Friends of the Earth * Public Citizen * Citizen Power * Center for Biological Diversity * Citizens Action Coalition of Indiana * TURN—The Utility Reform Network * Sustainable Energy & Economy Network * Green Delaware * Massachusetts Environmental Energy Alliance * Massachusetts Forest Watch * Coal Moratorium Now! * Rainforest Action Network * International Rivers * Energy Justice Network. Friends of the Earth re American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 WASHINGTON, D.C. May 15, 2009 - Friends of the Earth President Brent Blackwelder had the following statement in response to the release of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009: "Chairman Waxman and the Energy and Commerce Committee should be commended for their effort to find a path forward on global warming. Unfortunately, the result of their effort has been corrupted by members of Congress backed by oil and coal interests. As currently written, the legislation fails to take the dramatic national and international actions necessary to avoid the worse impacts of climate change and spur the development of a truly clean energy economy. As a result, Friends of the Earth cannot support this bill." Greenpeace and Public Citizen re The American Clean Energy and Security Act Submitted by RConnors on Fri, 05/15/2009 On Wednesday, we released a joint statement with Greenpeace and Public Citizen to express our concern about disturbing changes to the new climate bill currently being discussed in Congress: We are extremely troubled by the reports coming out of the Energy and Commerce Committee last night on additional compromises to the already flawed American Clean Energy & Security Act. The world needs real leadership from Congress and the Administration to address global warming — action that will enable us to transform our economy with clean, renewable energy technology, new green jobs and show leadership internationally. If reports are true, the compromises being struck on the bill undermine these goals. While we don't have the bill in our hands yet, what we are hearing from the Hill is not promising. The whole point of climate and energy legislation is to stop the worst impacts of global warming by transitioning the United States to a clean energy economy and by laying the groundwork for an international response to this global problem. From what we've heard, the bill won't make us reduce our emissions fast enough to do our part to avoid the climate crisis. On top of the emissions reductions targets being weak, offsets in the bill would create pollution loopholes that allow companies to continue polluting at their current levels by financing dubious projects here in the U.S. and in other countries. And then the bill would give away too much to the big polluters and the industries that created this problem in the first place. Rather than investing enough in the solutions we need — renewable energy, energy efficiency, public transit, protections for low-income communities, and safeguards for those most vulnerable to climate impacts — Congress would give large portions of revenue away to polluting industries — to oil companies making record profits, to coal companies producing dirty coal, and to big auto companies manufacturing huge gas guzzlers. Whether it’s because the oil and coal lobby is too strong, or because there is no one making enough noise demanding something better, the Democrats in Congress are compromising on our future. Meanwhile, the administration is already calling the draft a success, which makes it even more imperative for us to be outspoken about the dramatic changes needed. Right now in Alaska, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Missouri and West Virginia, the livelihoods of Americans are being torn apart by weather caused by dangerous new climate patterns. Across the globe, small island states are literally drowning — and people who live there have nowhere to go. We can do better for our children and for our global community. We need the American public to tell Congress to stop giving away our money to the very people who put us here — to stop giving away our money to industry instead of to solving this crisis. As soon as the bill comes out officially, we'll get to work on our analysis. If it's as bad as we think, we'll need you to help us by calling your member of Congress and telling them you demand better from them — that you want them to stand up to Big Oil and Big Coal and do what's needed to solve this crisis. Greenpeace USA Executive Director Phil Radford issued the following statement: “Despite the best efforts of Chairman Waxman, this bill has been seriously undermined by the lobbying of industries more concerned with profits than the plight of our planet. While science clearly tells us that only dramatic action can prevent global warming and its catastrophic impacts, this bill has fallen prey to political infighting and industry pressure. We cannot support this bill in its current state. We call on President Obama and leaders in Congress to get back to work and produce a bill, based on science, which presents a clear road map for significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions, transforms our economy with clean, renewable energy technology, generates new green jobs and shows real leadership internationally.” Emissions targets miss the mark To avoid the worst impacts of global warming, science tells us that the United States and other developed nations must collectively achieve emissions cuts of at least 25-40% below 1990 levels by 2020 and 80-95% by 2050. But ACES, as it currently stands, only sets a domestic target of approximately 4 percent below 1990 levels by 2020. Even with additional measures elsewhere in the legislation, the U.S. effort would still fall far short of the emissions cuts that climate scientists say are necessary. Rapid emissions reductions in the short-term are critical to avoiding the worst effects of global warming because rising temperatures have already triggered a series of negative feedback loops – such as Arctic melting in the North and raging wildfires in the South – that are accelerating the crisis. With the weak start oulined in this bill, achieving the needed emissions reductions would be impossible. Polluters to get massive giveaways, federal renewable standards insufficient Even while it sets out drastically low emissions targets, ACES would give corporate polluters hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies in the form of “allowances” – or free pollution credits – rather than making them pay the true costs of their businesses. Worse, a vast array of carbon offsets will also be offered to polluters, allowing them to effectively sidestep the need to make real reductions in their emissions for perhaps as long as the next decade. Worst of all, ACES would support the creation of a new generation of dirty coal-fired power plants through $10 billion worth of ratepayer subsidies for carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), a technology that has not yet been proven or even tested at large scales. You can read more about why CCS is a dangerous distraction that will not mitigate global warming impacts in our report, “False Hope: Why carbon capture and storage won't save the climate.” The renewable electricity standard set forth in the bill is woefully insufficient. It calls for just 20% renewables by 2020, and gives states the option to lower that to 12% renewables in their energy but make up the other 8% with efficiency measures. This would actually achieve lower rates of renewable energy usage than states are likely to achieve on their own, however. A much bolder renewable electricity standard is needed in order to create a clean energy economy in America. Our report, "Energy [R]evolution: A Sustainable USA Energy Outlook," provides a blueprint for how this can be done without using new nuclear or coal-fired plants. New leadership needed domestically and internationally New information about the threat global warming poses to the world is reported on a near-daily basis. The World Bank, for example, just released a report that shows increased flooding due to global warming has put 52 million people in coastal areas throughout the developing world in danger and poses a $122 billion risk to the GDPs of these nations. Despite the clear and present danger posed by global warming, there is precious little leadership on the issue here in America and abroad. If America does not meet its responsibility to control greenhouse gas emissions, it could be an invitation to developing countries that they, too, can shirk their responsibilities — all but guaranteeing catastrophic climate change. America needs to have a strong climate bill in place heading into the UN climate talks in Copenhagen this December in order to lead the world in implementing true solutions to global warming. As it is currently written, the Waxman-Marky bill is not the legislation we need to lead the global response to global warming. Some enviro groups not happy with Waxman-Markey bill By Kate Sheppard 15 May 2009 Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and Public Citizen released a joint statement on Wednesday as reports on the deal trickled out, arguing that “the compromises being struck on the bill undermine these goals.” Most of the other mainstream environmental groups are generally praising the Waxman-Markey plan, including the Natural Resources Defense Council, the League of Conservation Voters, the Wilderness Society, the Nature Conservancy, and the Environmental Defense Fund. |