Articles by Brian Beutler

What will Sen. Pete Domenici’s retirement mean for the environment?

The last post I wrote evaluating the environmental impact of a supposedly done-for senator was about Larry Craig. So much for that. But while Sen. Wide Stance (R-Idaho) is sticking around for now, Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) will certainly be retiring at the end of the 110th Congress — so it behooves us to look […]

EPA not up to par on environmental justice, GAO finds

Charged with the minor task of informing minority and low-income populations about toxic facilities in their neighborhoods, do you think the U.S. EPA has:

a). Done a thorough, admirable job, or

b). Not

For the correct answer, read this new GAO report [PDF].

Dingell endorses a cap-and-trade climate plan

Just days after releasing his carbon-and-gas tax proposal for public comment, House Energy and Commerce Chair John Dingell (D-Auto) -- along with Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Coal) of Virginia -- has released a report [PDF] endorsing an economy-wide cap-and-trade program.

In an odd but welcome turn, the 22-page white paper reads:

The United States should reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by between 60 and 80 percent by 2050 to contribute to efforts to address climate change. To do so, the United States should adopt an economy-wide, mandatory greenhouse gas reduction program.

Further white papers will be forthcoming, meant to ...

... address a number of other cap-and-trade design elements and additional topics, including: cap levels and timetables, measures for containing costs in a cap-and-trade program, carbon sequestration, offsets and credits, developing countries, distribution of allowances, and additional measures.

The bad news? "Government will distribute allowances equal to the level of allowed greenhouse emissions."

Stay tuned for updates.

The U.N. summit and Clinton Global Initiative are over, and where did they get us?

This week's New York Climate Change Bonanza has come to an end. It's always a good thing when powerful people hold high-profile event after high-profile event dedicated to amplifying the profile of the climate change crisis and then solving it, as they did this week with the U.N.'s climate summit and the Clinton Global Initiative. But there's still the question of efficacy.

On Monday, for instance, I sat and watched as literally dozens of world leaders -- who had flown in from around the globe to spend five minutes on an international stage -- called for global action on climate change. They hailed mostly from countries that have contributed a pittance to the near-critical mass of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, and yet that will suffer the worst of the effects. Many hadn't had much of a voice until that moment -- and when they finally spoke, it fell for the most part upon deaf ears.

George W. Bush, of course, thumbed his nose at the summit, then held his own.