Getting serious about global warming
by Fresh EnergyBy Carin Skoog, global warming solutions coordinator, Fresh Energy
Despite attempts by opposition to stall meaningful discussion of America’s Climate Security Act (S. 3036) sponsored by Senators Warner (R-VA), Lieberman (I-CT), and Boxer (D-CA), the U.S. Senate is making history this week with the first bipartisan climate bill to receive serious attention by Congress. Senators and citizens from across the country are sounding a clarion call for an aggressive federal program to limit and lower global warming pollution. (For live coverage of the debate, tune into C-SPAN).
What is the Climate Security Act?
The 400+ page revised bill calls for a cap on global warming pollution starting in 2012—requiring electric utilities, refineries, and the industrial and transportation sectors to cut their emissions 19 percent below 2005 levels by 2020—and a 71 percent reduction in global warming emissions by 2050. Other provisions are expected to reduce global warming pollution from additional emitters 66 percent by 2050. Some new provisions of the bill are intended to help consumers deal with any potential increase in energy prices. There’s an $800 billion consumer tax relief package included and $911 billion in allowances to local electric and gas utilities to help them cushion consumers from price swings, invest in renewables, and promote efficiency. This would all be paid for by the revenue generated from auctioning emissions allowances to polluters, expected to total $3.3 trillion over the life of the bill. Funds from the auction would also go to worker transition programs, block grants to local governments for energy efficiency programs, international adaptation programs, and deficit reduction.
Reality check
Unfortunately, opponents continue to claim that the bill would be too costly to the American economy, despite a recent analysis by the Bush Administration’s own EPA showing it’s more than affordable. The analysis found that under the national cap and trade program proposed in the Climate Security Act, America’s gross domestic product would grow 80 percent from 2010 to 2030, just one percentage point less than its growth in the absence of the policy. And let’s not forget that the EPA analysis didn’t include the costs of inaction, which most agree would be devastating to both our environment and economy.
Many supporters see the Climate Security Act as a strong framework for reducing global warming emissions, but with room for improvement. The most critical provisions that need strengthening include requiring economy-wide science-based emissions reductions of at least 80 percent by 2050, ensuring emissions reductions targets can be strengthened as scientific understanding increases and eliminating any free global warming emissions allowances for polluters.
Where do Minnesota’s senators stand?
Minnesota’s Senators Amy Klobuchar (D) and Norm Coleman (R) were original cosponsors of this important piece of legislation—please call them TODAY and thank them for their support. Urge them both to support strengthening amendments and oppose any attempts to further weaken the bill. Be a part of this historic discussion—make your voice heard for global warming solutions!
