July 2004

Second Senate vote on Kyoto-lite bill is delayed again

by William Yeatman on July 6, 2004

in Politics

The attempt by Senators Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) and John McCain (R-Az.) to get another floor vote on their proposal to cap greenhouse gas emissions has been delayed yet again. McCain said that they intended to offer part of their energy rationing proposal as an amendment to the class action liability reform legislation before the Senate this week. However, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) warned that he was determined to keep non-germane amendments from encumbering the bill and then on July 7 filed a cloture petition to end debate and bring the measure to a vote.

If cloture fails, then the Senate will drop consideration of the bill and move on to other bills that are less suitable vehicles for the Lieberman-McCain amendment. If cloture is invoked, then the rule will not allow the amendment. It is quite possible that no vote will occur before the August recess and the Senate may be too busy with appropriations bills in the fall to have time to consider it.

S. 139, the so-called Climate Stewardship Act, would cap greenhouse gas emissions at 2000 levels by 2010 and at 1990 levels by 2016. The amendment would likely include only the first phase of reductions. A similar amendment was defeated on October 30, 2003 by a 55 to 43 vote.

Greenwire reported on July 7 that, “In pursuing the vote, McCain is following the same strategy he used to ultimately secure passage of campaign finance legislation after a bruising struggle that lasted nearly a decade. The goal, he said, is to keep the issue alive and make sure we get everyone on record.” McCain added, “It’s an old strategy of mine: Force votes on the issues. Ultimately, we will win.”

However, currently it appears that the measure would be lucky to get 43 votes in a second vote. Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) missed the first vote, but has announced that he will vote no. Senator John Edwards (D-N.C.) missed the first vote and is likely to miss a second now that he is campaigning for vice president. The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.), voted yes last fall, but is likely to miss a second vote as well. That puts the status quo at 56 to 42.

Several environmental groups are conducting major grassroots lobbying efforts to pressure several Senators to change their votes. Environmental Defense has a special fundraising appeal on its web site to “keep the heat on” called the 51 Club, which has raised $752,644 as of July 7. Targeted Senators include Mike DeWine (R-Ohio), Mary Landrieu (D-La.), Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), David Pryor (D-Ark.), and Ben Nelson.

No realistic way to stabilize CO2

by William Yeatman on July 1, 2004

in Politics, Science

Sir,

“Energy rationing without tears”that should have been the title of Lord Browne’s column (“Small steps to limit climate change”, June 30). He imagines that the world’s nations, via a series of “small steps”, could stabilize atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) at 500 to 550 parts per million by 2050 “without doing serious damage to the world economy”.  This is pie in the sky.  A study in the November 1, 2002 issue of the journal Science, co-authored by 18 energy and climate experts, including several who worry about global warming as much as Lord Browne, examined possible technology options that might be used in coming decades to stabilise atmospheric CO2 concentrations, including wind and solar energy, nuclear fission and fusion, biomass fuels, efficiency improvements, carbon sequestration and hydrogen fuel cells.

The authors found that “all these approaches currently have severe deficiencies that limit their ability to stabilise global climate”.  They specifically took issue with the claim by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that “known technological options could achieve a broad range of atmospheric CO2 stabilisation levels, such as 550 ppm, 450 ppm or below over the next 100 years”.  As noted in the study, world energy demand could triple by 2050.  Yet “energy sources that can produce 100 to 300 per cent of present world power consumption without greenhouse emissions do not exist operationally or as pilot plants”. The bottom line: ” CO2 is a combustion product vital to how civilization is powered; it cannot be regulated away.”

Given current and foreseeable technological capabilities, any serious attempt to stabilise CO2 levels via regulation would be economically devastating and, thus, politically unsustainable.  Lord Browne’s policy agenda is a dead end.  A small step on a journey one cannot complete and should not take is not progress; it is misdirection and wasted effort.

Next Entries →