UMD for Clean Energy Letter to Ben Cardin

Cross-posted from: here

The University of Maryland student activist group I am currently campaign director of is called UMD for Clean Energy. In the past year we’ve worked on getting thousands of Powervote pledges, collaborated with state environmental groups to pass a state global warming bill with the strongest short term greenhouse emissions target in the country, and our most recent accomplishments were organizing(with other groups) a 300 person clean energy Town Hall meeting for House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer(whose floor debate remarks are incredible), and bringing together students statewide to help turn Maryland Congressman Frank Kratovil’s swing vote on ACES into a yes vote. Our close proximity to DC gives us plenty of opportunities to lobby and have a strong presence on Federal legislation.

This past Tuesday, we delivered a letter to our Senator Ben Cardin’s office in a visit a couple of our members made to DC to meet with Cardin’s office as well as Senator Barbara Mikulski’s. The letter outlined what our group feels should be prioritized regarding improvements in the drafting of Senate legislation over the House climate bill . Although we know we have Ben Cardin’s vote, he is playing a important role on the Environment and Public Works Committee in drafting the Senate bill, and in marking it up. We would like to see the part of the bill that comes out of the EPW committee be as strong as possible, and feel that there can be improvements since the make up of the committee is fairly progressive and full of East and West coast Democrats who states are not particularly coal dependent. Letter is below, and was signed by our elected officers. Continue reading

Navigating a Minefield Part 2

Cross-posted from: here

In my first post on the coming climate legislation battle in the Senate, I focused on a myriad of suggestions on how both the politicians pushing legislation as well as environmental activists and organizations could work to get a stronger bill. Despite the monumental challenge of getting to 60 votes in the Senate, as I said in the first post which I won’t repeat in depth here, there are advantages in terms of how to increase the pressure on Senators that we didn’t have in the House. However that isn’t the focus of this post. This post basically shows that absent a much stronger and smarter mobilization in the Senate, there will need to be wheeling and dealing done by President Obama, Barbara Boxer and Harry Reid, along with top Democrats.

As a disclaimer I will say that the “pick your poison” scenario I lay out at the end is not one that I would like to see. It is simply a look at what it’s going to take to get 60. Another disclaimer is this is a long post, so bring a snack. Continue reading

Flashmob in Capitol Hill cafeteria

Forty flashmobbers, including CCAN’s own Kat McEachern, froze for 2 minutes in frustration over the lack of progress on climate change legislation. The action took place in Longworth Congressional Office Building’s Cafeteria during lunch time.

This action was organized through Craigslist and Twitter and called for a stronger “American Clean Energy and Security Act.” The bill is expected to come to a vote on the House floor this Friday. The bill offers our country the most important opportunity in generations to create millions of new, well-paying jobs, boost renewable energy production and limit global warming pollution. However, many of the bill’s stronger initial provisions have been weakened. Stay tuned for more actions leading up to this historic vote.

What really happened in Bonn?

In our “Countdown to Copenhagen” weekly radio feature, Earthbeat Radio this week interviewed three leading U.S. policy advocates just back from the Bonn climate talks. What sort of leadership did the Obama team show in Bonn? How is the Waxman-Markey bill affecting the road to Copenhagen? Is the White House doing enough at home and aboard? Get answers from Angela Anderson of USCAN, Lou Leonard of WWF, and Karen Orenstein of Friends of the Earth.

Visit www.earthbeatradio.org and just click on “Listen Now.” You can also sign up for our weekly podcast to get the only weekly radio program in America dedicated exclusively to the climate crisis. This week we also look at “managed relocation” of plant and animal species due to climate change and we interview the world’s largest wind turbine company: Vestas of Denmark.

Ask Al Gore about ACES

If strengthened, the American Clean Energy and Security Act offers our country the most important opportunity in generations to create millions of new, well-paying jobs, boost renewable energy production and limit global warming pollution. En route to the House floor, many of the bill’s stronger initial provisions were weakened, however, leading some like CCAN, MoveOn, and the Sierra Club to call for the bill to be strengthened.

Al Gore’s Alliance for Climate Protection has not taken that path. The group has ardently supported the bill throughout the process and Al Gore will hold a conference call tomorrow night at 8pm to explain his support and “to build urgency around this bill and make sure it passes.”

Register here

Column on Waxman-Markey Bill

Cross-posted from: HERE

I have an op-ed out today about how the Waxman-Markey bill is being misrepresented, and despite its flaws we should still support it, and push for strengthening. Sources at the end. By the way, this doesn’t mean I’m not at direct actions protesting what I find objectionable.

The environment: Don’t hate, legislate

MATT DERNOGA

Issue date: 6/18/09

There are multiple perspectives being offered on a federal climate change bill called the American Clean Energy and Security Act. The bill’s authors, Henry Waxman and Ed Markey, laud the bill as strong and tough on coal. The environmental camp is split into those who feel passing this bill is better than passing nothing, and those who think the bill is so weak it should fail. The bill’s opponents think it will bring about economic Armageddon.

For the record, I’d like to see a bill that slashes greenhouse gas emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, sells 100 percent of all its “permits to pollute” to industry for a steep price, has zero offsets, prevents construction of all new coal-fired power plants and invests $50 billion a year in clean energy. I’m feeling like Alex Rodriguez in the playoffs: 0 for 5. Continue reading

A Common Person's Guide to the Federal Climate Bill

A Common Person’s Guide to the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009

On May 21st, following months of work, the House Energy and Commerce Committee passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACESA), a 932-page piece of climate legislation. There have been mixed reactions from environmental and climate groups, but most groups are in agreement that it needs to be strengthened going forward. For some groups the problems they see with the bill have led to their public withdrawal of support. These groups include Greenpeace USA, Public Citizen and Friends of the Earth. The Chesapeake Climate Action Network also does not support the bill in current form.

Below is a summary analysis of the main features of the bill.

–Cap and Trade System: The bill would establish a “cap-and-trade” system that sets mandatory and declining limits on greenhouse gas emissions over the next 40 years. By 2050 it projects reductions of 83% from 2005 levels for the United States. It does this primarily through the establishment of 1) a “cap” on emissions and the annual issuance by the government of permits to emit greenhouse gases, both of which–the cap and the emissions permits–come down steadily year after year, and 2) a tradable market to buy and sell those permits to emit global warming pollution. That’s why it’s called a “cap-and-trade” system.

–Wide-Open Buying and Selling: Significantly, this market is open to anyone, not just those entities which emit greenhouse gases. For example, Wall Street firms whose primary purpose is to make money for their investors can buy and sell pollution permits. Anyone, whether Goldman Sachs or John Q. Public, can get into this newly-created market. From page 430 of the bill: “The privilege of purchasing, holding, selling, exchanging, transferring, and requesting retirement of emission allowances, compensatory allowances, or offset credits shall not be restricted to the owners and operators of covered entities, except as otherwise provided in this title.” Especially following the sub-prime mortgage/credit/banking crisis, there is concern among many people, including some on Capitol Hill, about the potential for this system to be abused by those out to make quick and big profits.

–Goals and Targets: The document states that one of its prime objectives is to help the world “avoid atmosphere greenhouse gas concentrations above 450 parts per million carbon dioxide equivalent; and global surface temperature 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius) above the pre-industrial average.” However, a growing number of scientists, journalists and climate activists believe that we need to reduce emissions more deeply if we are to have a good chance of avoiding climate catastrophe.

–2020 Targets: It projects a 17% reduction in greenhouse gases (ghg) from 2005 levels by 2020. This is about 3% below U.S. ghg levels in 1990; 1990 is the baseline year used by the nations of the world. There is an additional 10% reduction of ghgs projected via investments in the prevention of deforestation outside the United States, and there could be a few percent more reductions through other means. This could add up to about a 20% reduction by 2020 compared to 1990 levels. The world’s international climate negotiators have called for industrialized countries to reduce their emissions by 25-40% below 1990 levels by 2020.

Continue reading

ACES Update – Polluters want a free pass

I’m sure this doesn’t come as a shock, but the biggest climate bill out there, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, is under attack in a major way. Surprise! Polluters – utilities, coal companies, heavy industry, oil companies… – all want to get permits to continue to spew global warming pollution into the air for FREE! This is all in the name of “cost containment,” which is not at all the same thing as pocketbook protection.

Now, I know that this is a bad idea. If you read the CCAN blog, you probably know that this is a bad idea.