Climate Security Act comes up tomorrow.

[TayTay]

This is a big deal. This is the first time since 2003 that a bill has come to the floor of the Senate that deals with global warming. This bill, also known as Warner-Lieberman, is far from perfect and a lot of environmental groups dislike it because it gives incentives to coal and gas companies. BUT, it is still the first serious bill to come before the Senate in 5 years. The debate is important and could further the goals of the Bali Conference in getting the US to align with the rest of the world to set attainable goals of reducing carbon dioxide emissions and so many other things.

There is a vote in the Senate tomorrow at 5:30 on whether to allow this bill to come to the floor. (This is a Motion to Proceed which has been used a lot in this Congress to filibuster bills. We shall see if this bill is even allowed to come to the floor for debate.)

Grist.org has been keeping track of this bill and the National Resource Defense Council has set up a special web site to track just this bill and the industry-linked groups that a fighting it. You can see the website at www.co2mediaguide.org . Check that out, it has a lot of detail about the bill.

This was a press release from Sen. Kerry's office that came out last week. It details 3 bills from other Senators that Sen Kerry wants to add as amendments to the Climate Security Act:

When the Senate next week debates the Warner-Lieberman climate change bill, Sen. Kerry plans to offer amendments to support the coordinated implementation of a national response to climate change. The amendment will be a combination of three bills that the Commerce Committee reported favorably on December 4, 2007. The 3 bills would be S. 2307, the Global Change Research Improvement Act of 2007, introduced by Senators Kerry and Snowe; S. 2355, the Climate Change Adaptation Act, introduced by Senator Cantwell, and S. 1581, the Federal Ocean Acidification Research and Monitoring Act of 2007, introduced by Senators Lautenberg and Cantwell.


S. 2307, the Global Change Research Improvement Act of 2007, would:

• improve the basic research and products the Federal government develops to address climate change and its impacts;
  
• increase the relevance of the Global Change Research Program to State, local, and non-governmental decision makers;
  
• establish a new National Climate Service within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA);\
  
• reinstate a Science and Technology Assessment Service within the legislative branch;
  
• authorize the National Institute of Standards and Technology to provide improved technologies for measuring greenhouse gas emissions; and
  
• establish a scientific research program on abrupt climate change.
  

S. 2355, the Climate Change Adaptation Act, would:

• require the President to provide the Congress with a national strategic plan to address the impacts of climate change within the United States;
  
• require the Secretary of Commerce to conduct regional assessments to identify key vulnerabilities of coastal and ocean areas and resources from hazards associated with climate change and ocean acidification;
  
• require the Secretary of Commerce to prepare an agency-specific coastal and ocean adaptation plan for NOAA that would address coastal and ocean impacts of climate change; and
  
• establish a grant program through the existing Coastal Zone Management Act grant process to support coastal States in the development and implementation of State plans.
  

Finally, S. 1581, the Federal Ocean Acidification Research and Monitoring Act, would:

• establish or designate an interagency committee to develop and provide Congress with a strategic research and implementation plan on ocean acidification and to coordinate activities across Federal agencies; and
  
• establish an ocean acidification program within NOAA to implement activities consistent with the strategic plan, including research and long-term monitoring, education and outreach, and development of adaptation strategies and techniques for conserving marine ecosystems.
  

This is a historic week and a long time coming. There is a lot of opposition to this bill and to any movement to impose either fees or cap and trade on carbon emissions. Yet, the debate has to take place. The US needs to show other nations, particularly China and India, that we WILL be changing out policies and soon. This bill puts down a marker for what WILL happen and soon.

Sen. Kerry will be in helping out with the floor debate. Senate session starts at 2:00 pm on June 2nd and the Motion to Proceed on this bill is the business on the floor. Should be interesting.

[beachmom]

1. The one thing I see as missing (at least it is not specified) is that drought

is also an impact of global climate change. Drought is not as dramatic as a hurricane or sudden flood on the coast. But it is a big danger especially out west in places like Arizona and Nevada. We will need to adapt to drought; however, I can tell everyone from direct experience that too many people outside of the city Atlanta do not care much what happens to their environment, and still think global climate change is a hoax. I don't know how you change minds when that kind of apathy and ignorance is common, even among very educated people.

I am glad this bill is being debated. From what I understand, it is being debated to "soften the ground" from when the real work begins come 2009.

[TayTay]

2. I agree drought is a huge problem

Water is the new oil. This is a problem not just in the South but in the American Southwest where the recent drought conditions are thought to be the beginning of a new dry period. See this National Geographic article for more info: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/04/070405-us-drought.html

Sigh. Yes, this is also about building the debate for next year. Sometimes, just as a sanity check, I go back into the Congressional record to the earlier version I can find of the transcriptions of the Senate and check and see who was mentioning global warming. In the 101st Congress, legislation was introduced. Tell me what part of this, 20 years later, is not still relevant.

WIRTH (AND OTHERS) AMENDMENT NO. 93 (Senate - May 04, 1989)



Mr. SASSER (for Mr. Wirth, for himself, Mr. Chafee, Mr. Heinz, Mr. Johnston, Mr. Gore, Mr. Cranston, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Durenberger, Mr. Kerry , and Mr. Gore) proposed an amendment to the concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 30), supra; as follows:

At the appropriate place insert the following:

REDUCING THE GENERATION OF CARBON DIOXIDE

Sec. . (a) The Senate finds that--

(1) the concentration of the so-called `greenhouse' gases--including carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, chlorofluorocarbons, tropospheric ozone is rising;

(2) since the advent of the industrial revolution 150 years ago, a number of scientific experts estimate that the atmospheric concentration of--

(A) carbon dioxide, the most prevalent of these gases, has increased by 25 percent;

(B) methane has increased by 100 percent;

(C) nitrous oxide has increased by 10 percent;

(D) CFC's have increased from zero 60 years ago at an average rate of 5 percent per year; and

(E) tropospheric ozone continues to increase by 1 percent per year;

(3) a large number of the world's leading scientists, including members of National Science Foundation, have warned policy makers that--

(A) increased concentrations of these gases will alter climate; and

(B) such climatic alterations could have devastating effects on weather patterns, agricultural productivity, coastal population centers due to rising sea levels, and biological health;

(4) the majority of these gases are generated in the production of energy;

(5) in 1988, the Department found, based on data collected for the 1985 National Energy Policy Plan, that the United States' generation of carbon dioxide would increase from 1985 levels by 38 percent in the year 2010;

(6) leading scientific experts of the world, including members of the
National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine have urged the President to take action to reduce the generation of these gases by the United States;

(7) international negotiations are underway to develop strategies to reduce the generation of these gases;

(8) the United States is chair of the Response Strategies Working Group of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which was established by the United Nations Environment Programme and the World Meterological Organization;

(9) at the first meetings of the IPCC's Response Strategies Working Group, the Secretary of State urged that global solutions to global climate change be as specific and cost-effective as they can possibly be;

(10) it is imperative that the United States and all nations take immediate steps to protect the global environment; and

(11) without action by the United States to protect the global environment, our ability to convince other nations to act on concerns such as global climate change will be constrained.

(b) It is the sense of the Senate that United States policy on global warming should be--

(1) to reduce the generation of greenhouse gases;

(2) to hold, in 1989, a global conference on the environment, hosted by the President;

(3) to encourage other nations to undertake measures to reduce the generation of greenhouse gases;

(4) to develop binding multilateral agreements with other nations by the end of calendar year 1992, or as early as is practicable, to reduce the global generation of greenhouse gases;

(5) to encourage the worldwide protection of tropical rainforests;

(6) to require each Federal agency to examine its programs to determine the impacts of global warming on its missions and activities and to evaluate and propose policies under its authority that could reduce the generation of greenhouse gases; and

(7) to develop new technologies and better utilize existing technologies that will provide reliable supplies of energy and service for the citizens of the United States while reducing the generation of greenhouse gases.

(c) It is also the sense of the Senate that the United States Government should adopt a position with respect to a `Framework Global Climate Convention', and through its representative to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, should begin discussions on such a convention when it chairs the next meeting of the `Response Strategies Working Group'.

(d) To the maximum extent practical, the priorities set forth in this section should be reflected in the Federal budget.

Sigh! 20 years. Sigh!

[beachmom]

3. Anyone from Virginia, call Sen. Webb who has not weighed in on whether he'll vote for the bill

More here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6225335

I have no regrets volunteering for, donating to, and voting for Webb. But I am not as enthusiastic as others at talk of him being VP. The fact that he needs to be called on a moderate bill on global climate change is one of those reasons.

[beachmom]

4. Must read article about how Sen. Warner changed on global climate change

http://hamptonroads.com/2008/06/sen-warner-joins-fight-limit-greenhouse-gas-emissions

In 1943, as war raged across Europe and the Pacific, Warner's father, a Washington physician, told him that soon it would be his turn to serve his country and that he needed to get ready.

"I'll pay your way one-way to go somewhere and work for 90 days," his father told him, "and you better make enough money to get home or you're going to stay there."

Warner ended up in northern Idaho, fighting fires and clearing trails for the U.S. Forest Service.

"It was a breathtaking experience.... Those forests were pristine," he said. "We used to fish in the streams and drink water out of the streams. I can see the trees. Just magnificent.

"I'm carrying those memories always."

Two years ago, on a political trip to Idaho, Warner recruited a Forest Service ranger to lead him back to the panhandle.

"I was absolutely devastated when I saw those forests," he said.

For mile after mile, the lush green countryside had been turned brown. The ranger told him the forests are being destroyed by beetles that once were kept in check by cold winters but now flourish year-round, Warner said.

His escort was a 25-year Forest Service veteran. He told Warner, "I do remember what you saw, but you can't find that in these forests today."

Warner returned to Washington resolved to delve deeper into climate change.

...

Then, in the spring of 2007, Warner began to hear warnings about global warning from retired generals and admirals. A group including former Army Chief of Staff Gordon Sullivan and Adm. Joe Prueher, a Virginia Beach resident who once commanded American forces in the Pacific, issued a study that cast climate change as a serious threat for the U.S. military.

The report warned of future wars over energy and water in areas where global warming has triggered droughts. It predicted that millions of people in coastal communities could be left homeless as melting polar ice raises sea levels. The military, particularly the Navy, would be hit hard by such disasters, with piers submerged and training areas reduced to marshland.

Sherri Goodman, a Pentagon official in the Clinton administration, directed the study and was among those briefing Warner on it.

"I think he was moved," she said. Warner came to see that "this is an issue too important just to be left to environmentalists."

As word of Warner's interest spread, he also began to hear more from a chorus of environmental groups that has been pressing for global warming legislation for years. And he got more encouragement from his two daughters, he acknowledged.

Fascinating story.