Climate Politics

Obama visits Ohio plant that manufactures parts for wind turbines

President-elect Barack Obama took his "American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan" on the road Friday, talking up his clean energy plans at an Ohio factory that manufactures nuts and bolts used to build wind turbines.

Obama toured the Cardinal Fastener & Specialty Company in Bedford Heights, Ohio, which he cited as evidence that "a renewable energy economy isn't some pie-in-the-sky, far-off future."

"It's happening all across America right now," he said. "It's providing alternatives to foreign oil now. It can create millions of additional jobs and entire new industries if we act right now."

The visit and his speech afterward were meant to highlight his stimulus plan, which calls for doubling the production of renewable energy in the next three years, doing energy-efficiency retrofits on 75 percent of federal buildings, and weatherizing 2 million homes.

Obama said his plan, if enacted, would "put nearly half a million people to work building wind turbines and solar panels; constructing fuel-efficient cars and buildings; and developing the new energy technologies that will lead to new jobs, more savings, and a cleaner, safer planet in the bargain." A stronger economy, he said, "starts with new, clean sources of energy."

He also warned that without significant investments, renewable industries like Cardinal could go under. "I'm told that if we don't act now, because of the economic downturn, half of the wind projects planned for 2009 could wind up being abandoned," said Obama. "Think about that. Think about all the businesses that wouldn't come to be, all the jobs that wouldn't be created, all the clean energy we wouldn't produce."

Incoming energy secretary discusses green issues

Secretary-designate of Energy Steven Chu responds to ideas submitted and voted on at change.gov, including fighting climate change, creating a smart grid, and energy independence. Again, thoughtful, intelligent stuff, but frustratingly short on concrete policy recommendations (much less promises).

Modernizing the auto fleet will benefit the earth and the economy

The auto industry and its customers are suffering from unprecedented market conditions. Within the past six months, the industry has been hit with three unforeseen market problems: $4 per gallon gasoline, frozen credit markets, and, now, a recession that is spurring job losses and dampening consumer confidence. These factors combined to drive down U.S. new vehicle sales by 18 percent in 2008 (compared to annual sales in 2007) -- this equals nearly 2.9 million fewer cars and trucks sold in our nation in 2008.

As Congress and the Obama administration consider solutions to our economic problems and long-term challenges of enhancing energy security and fighting global warming, modernizing our nation's automotive fleet would go a long way toward accomplishing those goals. Currently there are nearly 250 million cars and trucks on American roads and highways. Many of these are older vehicles, manufactured prior to enactment of emissions standards that help make the new vehicles sold today dramatically cleaner and better for our air quality.

In the industry, we often say that the best thing you can due to reduce emissions is to purchase a new car. Why? Because today's vehicles are 99 percent cleaner than vehicles of the 1970s, thanks to a dramatic reduction in smog-forming emissions. In fact, in recognition of the progress automakers have made in reducing smog-forming emissions, California has gone so far as to eliminate smog checks for new vehicles.

Are you now or have you ever been a member of the environmental party?

"So she is pretty extremist in my eyes in terms of her liberal leanings. Where do you draw the line between an extreme liberal and a Socialist? You know, everyone has a different view of that."

-- Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), commenting to FOX News on the crypto-socialism of Obama's new energy adviser Carol Browner

The green aspects of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

Enviros are heartened by much of what they see in the newly released summary of the House's American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, better known as the stimulus package. But they're also concerned about how the transportation funds will be spent.

The bill includes a section focused on "clean, efficient, American energy." The summary states, "To put people back to work today and reduce our dependence on foreign oil tomorrow, we will strengthen efforts directed at doubling renewable energy production and renovate public buildings to make them more energy efficient." Another section of the bill aims to "modernize roads, bridges, transit and waterways." Here's the broad breakdown of those portions:

• $32 billion to transform the nation's energy transmission, distribution, and production systems by allowing for a smarter and better grid and focusing investment in renewable technology
• $16 billion to repair public housing and make key energy-efficiency retrofits
• $6 billion to weatherize modest-income homes
• $30 billion for highway construction
• $31 billion to modernize federal and other public infrastructure with investments that lead to long-term energy cost savings
• $19 billion for clean water, flood control, and environmental restoration investments;
• $10 billion for transit and rail to reduce traffic congestion and gas consumption

There's also $4 billion for training and employment services through grants for worker-training programs in "high growth and emerging industry sectors." Priority for these funds would be placed on green jobs and jobs in healthcare. "Green jobs training will include preparing workers for activities supported by other economic recovery funds, such as retrofitting of buildings, green construction, and the production of renewable electric power," says the summary.

The Sierra Club praised the bill, saying it "makes an important down payment on solutions that will transform America's economy and lead to a clean energy future that will benefit generations to come."

Friends of the Earth President Brent Blackwelder pointed out both the good and the bad. "This proposal demonstrates a serious commitment to clean energy with a number of smart and much-needed investments that can create green jobs and be instrumental in our transition to a clean energy economy," he said. "Unfortunately, the transportation spending doesn't take the same forward-thinking approach. The stimulus as it currently stands doesn't do enough to create green jobs through clean transportation investments, and it doesn't prevent spending from going to unnecessary new roads that increase pollution and oil consumption."

Salazar promises to ‘clean up mess’ at Interior, looks like a shoo-in for confirmation

Ken Salazar. At his Senate confirmation hearing on Thursday, Interior Secretary nominee Ken Salazar said he would promote sound environmental and energy policies through his role in the new administration. His former colleagues on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee seemed to think he'd do a fine job.</p> <p>Salazar pledged to "clean up the mess" […]

Trying to restructure the House Agriculture Committee might not be worth it

Michael Pollan suggested at a recent Grist potluck -- note to editors: for future reference, I make a mean lemon-cilantro chicken -- that we could improve "the situation for food policy" in Congress if we could:

Make the House agriculture committee exclusive. The most important committees in the House -- Energy, Finance, etc. -- are "exclusive," which means their membership has to be drawn from diverse geographical and ideological sources. Ag isn't exclusive, which means it can be (and is) packed with representatives of Big Ag. It's where decent ag legislation goes to die.

Pollan has been advocating this kind of committee reform for a while. In fact, he mentioned the idea in a Q&A follow up to his "Farmer in Chief" manifesto in the New York Times. But I think it's worth pointing out what it does and does not mean to make a House committee exclusive, and why it might not accomplish much. Warning: This post gets fairly deep into the weeds on House committee structure.

Exclusivity does not, according to the Congressional Research Service, require geographical or ideological diversity. What exclusivity does is distribute plum assignments and ensure that individual members don't serve on too many powerful committees -- a member who sits on an exclusive committee can sit on no other committee. Only a few committees are considered powerful enough to warrant such limits (keeping in mind that each party can declare its own set of exclusive committees).

Out of 18 committees, five are exclusive for Democrats: Rules, Appropriations, Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce, and Financial Services. The last two have only recently been promoted, and thus only members who joined since the committees were made exclusive are limited to a single assignment. To put that in context, nonexclusive committees include the still very powerful Armed Services, Budget, International Relations, and Judiciary Committees. And no one is arguing those are packed by region or controlled by a particular interest group.

Waxman calls for climate bill by May, despite grumbling from Energy Committee members

In his first hearing as chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) on Thursday pledged to act "quickly and decisively" on climate change, and said he wants a bill ready to go by Memorial Day recess in May.

"Our environment and our economy depend on congressional action to confront the threat of climate change and secure our energy independence," Waxman said. "U.S. industries want to invest in a clean energy future, but uncertainties about whether, when, and how greenhouse-gas emissions will be reduced is deterring these vital investments."

But not everyone is on board. Rep. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said there are "many different views on this committee" as to whether climate change is caused by humans.

The committee heard from representatives of the U.S. Climate Action Partnership about its new blueprint for a cap-and-trade climate bill. President-elect Barack Obama and Waxman have both called for cap-and-trade programs, though considerably stronger ones than USCAP proposed.

But some committee member suggested that cap-and-trade is not the way to go. Rep. Gene Green (D-Texas) said he prefers a carbon tax, though it may not be as politically palatable. "It's probably the cleanest and most transparent thing Congress can do is to put a tax on something we shouldn't be putting in our atmosphere," said Green. His fellow Texan, Republican ranking member Joe Barton, also indicated that a carbon tax might be preferable to cap-and-trade.

Today's hearing illustrated that despite the leadership change in the committee -- climate advocate Waxman replacing automaker-friendly John Dingell -- it's going to be a tussle to move climate legislation this year. "Be prepared for a battle," warned Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.).

New CEQ head Nancy Sutley on transit and green jobs

I am loving the level of transparency and interactivity from the Obamites so far, but I must say, this is directionally heartening but somewhat short on specifics. Sutley likes transit, green jobs, and efficiency. But what's the administration going to do about them?

A knuckle-dragging senator teaches Vilsack that size matters

In yesterday's post about the Vilsack hearing, I missed one small but remarkable bit of drama (notable at an event marked by lack thereof).

Turns out that Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) delivered a sarcastic and, well, imbecilic little monologue comparing "small" organic farmers to the real men who run 10,000-acre wheat plantations in the plains of his state. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) had dared suggest that the USDA should think about supporting the work of family-scale organic farmers. That led Roberts to offer up a definition of "small farmer" for Vilsack's edification:

That small family farmer is about 5'2", and I'm looking to see if Mr. Leahy is sitting here, from Vermont, and he's a retired airline pilot and sits on his porch on a glider reading Gentleman's Quarterly -- he used to read the Wall Street Journal but that got pretty drab -- and his wife works as a stock broker downtown. And he has 40 acres, and he has a pond and he has an orchard and he grows organic apples. Sometimes there is a little more protein in those apples than people bargain for, and he's very happy to have that.