legislation

Chemical-safety bill moving oh-so-slowly through Congress

An attack on one of the many toxic chemical plants in the U.S. could endanger more than a million people. Environmentalists, security experts, and even the Army surgeon general have been raising the alarm about this threat since Sept. 11, 2001, but Congress has yet to do anything about it. Its latest efforts are being […]

Rep. Henry Waxman’s Safe Climate Act

For weeks now, I've had an open tab in Firefox with Rep. Henry Waxman's Safe Climate Act languishing in it, waiting for my loving bloggy ministrations.

Today, I finally had a look, and Ana's right -- this is a more powerful and more sensible plan that the one Kerry described yesterday. The main reason, in my view, is not so much the stronger ultimate target (80% vs. 65% below 2000 emissions by the year 2050) but the incrementalism -- precisely the problem ffletcher identified. Here's the capsule version of the plan:

• Science tells us that we face a grave risk of irreversible and devastating global warming if global temperatures increase by more than 3.6°F.
• The bill sets greenhouse gas emissions targets that aim to keep temperatures below the danger point.  The level of emissions is frozen in 2010 and then gradually reduced each year through 2050.
• The bill achieves these targets through a flexible economy-wide cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gas emissions, along with measures to advance technology and reduce emissions through renewable energy, energy efficiency, and cleaner cars.

Here's how the targets will work:

Democrats jockey for attention with their latest energy plans

As GOP leaders bluster about gay marriage, flag burning, and the “death tax,” Democrats are struggling to get a word in edgewise about the bevy of proposals they’ve been drafting to address more substantive national concerns — namely, soaring gas prices, dependence on oil from an increasingly volatile Middle East, and global warming. These are […]

Point, shoot, go to jail

Say you live in a neighborhood where there is a power or waste-treatment plant nearby. You notice some toxic nastiness spewing out, so you decide to document said spewage by recording it with photos or video. If lawmakers in New Jersey get their way, you've just committed a crime that could put you in jail for 18 months:

The state Senate Law and Public Safety Committee is expected to discuss a bill today which would make it a crime -- punishable by up to 18 months in jail -- to photograph, videotape or otherwise record for an extended period of time a power generation, waste treatment, public sewage, water treatment, public water, nuclear or flammable liquid storage facility, as well as any airport in the state.

At the very least, it will allow law enforcement officials across the state to detain the individual or confiscate any recorded materials to further their investigation, according to state Sen. Fred Madden, D-4 of Turnersville, who is the bill's sponsor.

Opponents of the bill said it "makes no sense" and is "awful."

Indeed.

(Via BB)

Push to raise fuel-economy standards gaining new support

Cringe as we might over record-high gasoline prices, they could be the best thing to happen to automobile fuel economy since the Arab oil embargo. Nowhere to go but up. The soaring cost of oil in recent weeks has sent Washington lawmakers into an election-year frenzy. Some of their proposals — like one from Senate […]

Spring brings a new crop of climate bills in Congress

A small crop of new climate bills is sprouting up in Congress, and none too soon. Grow, little seedling, grow. Photo: iStockphoto. Earlier this month, a number of influential energy execs called on Congress to regulate industrial greenhouse-gas emissions. And earlier this week, the EPA quietly released dismal new figures showing that U.S. emissions are […]

On the art and brutal economics of small-scale farming

Since moving to the North Carolina mountains in 2004 to launch a farm project, I've learned some sobering lessons about idyllic rural life.

To wit, small-scale organic farming is an art form -- and as with most artistic endeavors, the hours are long and the pay is crap. How did I wind up penniless and exhausted, sporting a beat-up pair of Carhartts? You'd think I had set up shop as an abstract painter in some squalid, ruinously priced Williamsburg, Brooklyn, garret.

(There's much to love about the farming life, too: for example, the volunteer broccoli raab that's sprouting up everywhere in one part of the garden, a triumph of unintentional permaculture. Saute it with a little olive oil, garlic, crushed chile, and vinegar, and you remember why you came to the farm in the first place.)

The USDA's Economic Research Service recently released two reports on the state of farm economics. The information contained therein can help greens as they formulate an agenda for the 2007 Farm Bill (which may be even more important than defending biofuel and hybrids from critics.)

Bush admin unveils meek new fuel-economy standards for light trucks

The Bush administration yesterday raised fuel-economy standards for SUVs, minivans, and many pickup trucks — the most significant boost to efficiency requirements for the big vehicles in three decades. Exempt no more. Photo: iStockphoto. Of course, as enviros have been quick to point out, that’s not saying much. These final CAFE (corporate average fuel economy) […]

Obama and Inslee propose to save the American auto industry by paying it to do the smart thing

Don't miss "Salvaging the Auto Industry," a Boston Globe op-ed from Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and Rep. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.), two of the Dems' brightest lights on energy issues. (Inslee wrote a piece in Grist on his New Apollo Energy Act.)

Obama and Inslee propose a piece of legislation called the "Health Care for Hybrids" Act. The idea is that the feds would help American auto companies pay some of their enormous healthcare costs; in return, the companies would commit to using the money to develop fuel-efficient vehicles.

I'm a little dubious about the bill on the merits.