Donnie Fowler

http://www.ibabuzz.com/politics/2010/07/23/forum-weighs-pros-and-cons-of-ab-32-prop-23/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PoliticalBlotter+%28Political+Blotter%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

The Bay Area Council, a public policy advocacy organization representing the region’s largest employers, long has been a supporter of the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, and is already on record in opposition to Prop. 23, which would suspend AB 32’s implementation until the state’s unemployment rate has dropped to 5.5 percent or lower for four consecutive quarters. The Council invited not only opponents of the measure, but also a consultant to the Yes on 23 campaign.

v   Top Stories

• Dems Call Off Climate Bill Effort in Congress, NYTimes
• A Congressional Post-Election Lame Duck Session on Climate & Energy?, NYTimes
• Bipartisan Attack to Stop California’s Prop23, San Francisco Chronicle

v   The Two-Front War: California’s Prop23 & Congress

• Polling Shows Prop 23 Potentially Tied with Likely Voters / PPIC Poll
• Going Backward: Prop 23’s Threat to Calif Jobs & Investment Clean Economy Network
• Don't Let Texas Oil Companies Kill California Clean Tech, Arno Harris (CEO of Recurrent)
• Don’t Fall for the Myths About AB32, Barry Cinnamon (CEO of Akeena Solar)
• Meg Whitman’s Middle Position on Prop23 Could Appeal to Voters, Fox&Hounds

• Forum Weighs Pros & Cons of AB32 & Prop23 / Contra Costa Times

• November Calif. Ballot Initiatives Impact Clean Tech, San Jose Mercury News

v   Government & Politics

• “Brown Dog” Democrats Complicate Federal Climate Plan, Politico
• Who Cooked the Planet? (Paul Krugman), NYTimes
• Put a Price on Carbon (Marty Lagod & Jason Scott), Politico
• California Yanks Home Solar, Energy Retrofit Loans, NYTimes
• Boxer, Fiorina have Opposing Views on Green Jobs, KGO/ABC

• Fiorina’s HP Mishaps Prompt Technology Executives to Back Boxer, Businessweek,

• “Smart Grid Architecture and Standards,” US House Hearing Summary
• Silicon Valley: DC Doesn’t Get Tech, Politico

v   Science, Jobs, & Investment

• Going Backward: Prop 23’s Threat to Calif Jobs & Investment Clean Economy Network
• Five Million Green Jobs for California, East County Magazine
• Taking on the Tool Belt Recession: Energy Efficiency Retrofits, Ctr for Am. Progress
• The Climate Majority, NY Times

News Summary

Top Stories

• Calif Regulators Issue New Rules on Public Power, San Jose Mercury News
• Local Municipalities Enter Lawsuit Against Prop. 16, The Business Journal
• California’s Updated Economic Analysis Finds Climate Plan Offers Greener Days Ahead, FavStocks
• Boost for U.S.-China Clean Energy Research, New York Times

Government & Politics

•  News Analysis: Too Soon for Another Partisan Battle?  LA Times
• News Risk Is Clear in Offshore Drilling; Payoff Isn’t, NY Times
• Carbon Permits Said to Be in Excess in Europe, NY Times
• California’s Climate Law Under Attack in Ballot Initiative, Public Radio International
• Who’s Up for Building Bridges? New York Times

Science, Jobs, & Investment

• Clean Technology Investments Bounce Back, New York Times
• Green Gone Wrong: Can Capitalism Save the Planet? New York Times
• Remember the historical role of federal investment in Silicon Valley, San Jose Mercury News
• Building a Green Economy, NY Times Magazine

Articles

Top Stories

Calif Regulators Issue New Rules on Public Power / San Jose Mercury News, April 9

State energy regulators have issued new guidelines meant to curb tactics used by Pacific Gas & Electric Co. in its campaign against Marin County's new public power agency.  Among the new rules issued Thursday by the California Public Utilities Commission is one that says utility companies cannot simply refuse to supply electricity to community choice aggregators.

Local Municipalities Enter Lawsuit Against Prop. 16 / The Business Journal, March 24

The San Joaquin Valley Power Authority is one of several groups included in a lawsuit to disqualify from the June ballot a proposition backed by Pacific Gas and Electric Co. that would necessitate a two-thirds vote before municipalities could sell electricity to community members.

California’s Updated Economic Analysis Finds Climate Plan Offers Greener Days Ahead / FavStocks, April 7

On March 24, California’s Air Resources Board (ARB) released a new economic analysis that found that California can grow its economy while meeting air pollution reduction goals of its Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). This post is the second in a series. The first summarized ARB’s modeling methods and findings about gross state product. This one covers jobs.

Boost for U.S.-China Clean Energy Research / New York Times, April 2

The Department of Energy announced this week the availability of $37.5 million in financing to support a joint United States-China clean energy research initiative.

Government & Politics

News Analysis: Too Soon for Another Partisan Battle?  / LA Times, April 4

President Obama's victory on healthcare gave him some much-needed political momentum. But he seems disinclined to ride that into another all-in battle this year on his keystone domestic agenda items of climate change and immigration. Instead, the White House is planning to focus on narrower efforts to pump up the economy, rewrite financial regulation, amend campaign finance laws to limit corporate donations and impose new fees on banks to repay federal bailout funds. Nonetheless, the President "has implemented a lot of Republican ideas and goals into broad energy policy," said Joshua Freed, clean-energy policy director for the centrist Democratic think tank Third Way. "It's even bigger than saying, 'I want this in the bill.' It's acting."

News Risk Is Clear in Offshore Drilling; Payoff Isn’t  /  NY Times, April 4

In proposing a major expansion of offshore oil and gas development, President Obama set out to fashion a carefully balanced plan that would attract bipartisan support for climate and energy legislation while increasing production of domestic oil. It is not clear that the plan announced Wednesday will do either.

Carbon Permits Said to Be in Excess in Europe  /  NY Times, March 31

As the global economy faltered last year and factories idled, industries in the European Union benefited from one of the most lucrative outcomes of the recession: a huge excess of permits to emit carbon dioxide.

California’s Climate Law Under Attack in Ballot Initiative / Public Radio International, April 5

Arnold Schwarzenegger: “In California, we are proceeding on renewable energy requirements, and a cap and trade system for greenhouse gases, and limiting greenhouse gas emissions from cars. Nearly 60 percent of all venture capital in America flows through California, and this is creating the critical mass of money and intellect to develop new, green technologies." Governor Schwarzenegger has leaned heavily on businesses not to fund a measure that could tarnish his environmental legacy. So the effort has collected most of its money outside the state, about a million dollars so far, mostly from oil companies, including Valero, which owns two refineries here.

Who’s Up for Building Bridges? / New York Times, April 6

So, government matters. It needs to be incentivizing businesses to build their next factory in this country — at a time when every other nation is throwing incentives their way; it needs to be recruiting highly skilled immigrants; it needs to be setting the highest national education standards and funding basic research; it needs to be laying down the right energy regulations that will stimulate more clean-tech companies.

Business, Science, & Investment

Clean Technology Investments Bounce Back / New York Times, April 2

Global investments were up 29 percent from the fourth quarter of 2009 and 83 percent from the same quarter a year ago, according to a new report.

Green Gone Wrong: Can Capitalism Save the Planet? / New York Times, April 2

In a new book, Heather Rogers warns of the dangers of buying into green euphoria and says green capitalism is undermining ecological progress.

Remember the historical role of federal investment in Silicon Valley / San Jose Mercury News, February 20

Silicon Valley has the potential to be a leader in the emerging field of clean energy. We have a growing solar industry as well as opportunities to grow the tools for promoting energy generation and efficiency, including energy storage and smart-grid technologies. We also have the potential to become a leader in green transportation, including battery and hybrid technologies.

Building a Green Economy / NY Times Magazine, April 11

Like the debate over climate change itself, the debate over climate economics looks very different from the inside than it often does in popular media. The casual reader might have the impression that there are real doubts about whether emissions can be reduced without inflicting severe damage on the economy. In fact, once you filter out the noise generated by special-interest groups, you discover that there is widespread agreement among environmental economists that a market-based program to deal with the threat of climate change — one that limits carbon emissions by putting a price on them — can achieve large results at modest, though not trivial, cost. There is, however, much less agreement on how fast we should move, whether major conservation efforts should start almost immediately or be gradually increased over the course of many decades.

SUMMARY of CONGRESSIONAL CLIMATE & ENERGY LEGISLATION

Updated March 15, 2010

“The cap-and-trade bills in the House and Senate are dead.” Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) stated the reality that Congress now faces as it negotiates a comprehensive climate and energy package that might get voted on before this November’s congressional elections.  One alternative to cap-and-trade has been a cap-and-dividend bill sponsored by Senators Maria Cantwell (D-Washington) and Susan Collins (R-Maine). The leading solution, though, appears to be coming from a bipartisan group of senators led by John Kerry (D-Massachusetts), Joe Lieberman (I-Connecticut), and Graham that would put a price on carbon emissions that targets only the electric utility, transportation, and industrial sectors of the economy.

The Senate is where the current debate lies because the House of Representatives already passed its bill in June 2009 (the “ACES Act” or the “Markey-Waxman” bill). The Kerry-Graham-Lieberman climate bill will join an energy bill written by Sen. Jeff Bingaman last Fall as the main vehicle for a new national policy. The House of Representatives must then decide what to do about its own bill and the Senate’s before President Obama signs anything into law. "It will be a very different mix of a bill from where we were at the end of the House effort," Kerry said. "It will be simpler, and hopefully, capable of attracting support."

I.   HOUSE CLIMATE & ENERGY BILL (“ACES Act” / “Waxman-Markey bill”)

Key Date: Passed June 2009 by House (219 to 212)

Authors: Rep. Henry Waxman, Chairman of House Energy & Commerce Cmte; Rep. Ed Markey, Chairman of Cmte on Energy Independence & Global Warming

More Info: www.pewclimate.org/acesa

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17 % reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 83 % by 2050
• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 20% by 2020. Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, biogas and biofuels derived exclusively from eligible biomass, landfill gas, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, wastewater-treatment gas, coal-mine methane, and new hydro at post-1992 dams
• R&D of $190 billion to energy efficiency, renewables, carbon capture & storage, electric vehicles
• Transmission Grid Supports.
• Energy Efficiency for Buildings, Lights, Appliances.
• Green Bank Financing Office.
• Carbon Offsets Program.
• Coal Plant Pollution & CCS Standards.
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.

II.  SENATE CLIMATE BILL ( “Kerry-Graham-Lieberman”)

Key Dates: Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman are working on bipartisan compromise legislation for March 2010; March meeting occurred with Republican & Democratic senators with President Obama

Authors: Sen. John Kerry (Democrat), Senate Foreign Affairs Committee Chair, Sen. Lindsey Graham (Republican), & Sen. Joe Lieberman (Independent)

• Cap-and-Trade Replaced with Carbon Caps on Specific Parts of the Economy – Electric Utilities, Transportation, and Industry.
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17% reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 80% over “long term”
• Carbon Capture & Sequestration Standards & Research Funding
• Domestic Oil & Gas Production Expanded, Including New Offshore Drilling
• Nuclear Power: Incentives for nuclear power plants & low-emissions transportation

III.  SENATE ENERGY BILL (“American Clean Energy Leadership Act” / “Bingaman bill”)

Key Date: legislation passed by Energy Committee June 2009; additional amendments and new pieces of legislation are being debated in the Energy Committee in 2010

Author: Sen. Jeff Bingaman, Chairman of the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee

• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 15% by 2021.  Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, landfill gas, incremental hydro, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, and new hydro at existing dams.
• Transmission “Interstate Highway System” & Grid Security.  Creates new planning system based on local, state and regional input with states taking initial lead. New security powers to Dept or Energy & FERC.
• Green Bank Financing Office
• CCS R&D Funding. $6.6 billion for 10 “early mover” large-scale CCS projects
• Offshore Drilling in Eastern Gulf of Mexico. Opens 3.8 billion barrels of new oil resources & 21.5 trillion cubic feet of new natural gas resources.

News

Top Stories

• Democrats Already Looking Past Health Care to Climate Change, CBS News & The Daily Beast
• Interview: Energy Secretary Chu Policy & Funding , Wall Street Journal
• Legislation: Key Republican & Democratic Senators Meet with Obama, NY Times
• For U.S. Senators on the Fence on Climate, Everything's in Play , NY Times

Government & Politics

• Texas Oil Financing Ballot Initiative to Kill California’s AB32 Climate Law, ClimateWire
• Study: Health Costs of California Air Pollution, Rand Corporation & NY Times
• Senate & House Committees Study Home Efficiency, Appliance Standards, Etc., NY Times
• Senate Energy Cmte. Studies Smart Grid Technology Delay, NY Times

• Home Efficiency Programs Poised for Congressional Ramp Up, NYTimes

• Opinion: Getting Obama Right (David Brooks), NY Times

Science, Jobs, & Investment

• Made in the U.S.A.: Efficiency Materials, NY Times

• Solar Industry Learns Lessons in Spanish Sun, NYTimes

• “SolarHub” Website Aggregates Solar Installation Info, SolarTech & SolarPro
• The Arguments For & Against Global Warming , Wall Street Journal
• Study: Global Warming is Not Slowing , NY Times
• Study: US Economic Growth & Job Creation from Climate Bill , UC-Berkeley
• Study: Legislation’s Benefits Outweigh Costs , Wall Street Journal
• Green Jobs Paying $30 an Hour , Yahoo!

Top Stories

Democrats Already Looking Past Health Care to Climate Change / CBS News & The Daily Beast, March 16 … The fate of President Obama's health care reform package is still up in the air, but he appears to be already taking on an equally challenging and contentious agenda item -- climate change legislation. The White House remains surprisingly confident that they will be able to pick off enough support from the opposition party to move forward on these major issues, even in an election year. For Obama's aides, climate change offers a unique combination of the challenge of a global crisis with the economic opportunities for job growth, technological innovation, and boosting exports. The issue represents a sharp contrast with the inactivity of the Bush years, as well as a chance to transform several sectors of the U.S. and global economy.

Legislation: Key Republican & Democratic Senators Meet with Obama / NY Times, March 9

Fourteen senators from both parties -- including several who remain undecided on the climate bill -- met for more than an hour with Obama, four Cabinet members, and White House energy adviser Carol Browner. Sen. Kerry, a key co-author of legislation called the meeting ''terrific'' and said Obama ''made it very, very clear that he believes it is critical to have a price on carbon,'' a move that some Republicans and business groups oppose because it would raise the price of oil and coal. The Kerry-Lieberman-Graham flagship bill would abandon a broad ''cap-and-trade'' approach to reducing carbon pollution. Instead it would apply different carbon controls to electric utilities, transportation, and industrial sectors of the economy.

For U.S. Senators on the Fence on Climate, Everything's in Play / NY Times,  March 2

The fate of comprehensive energy and climate legislation that includes a first-ever price on domestic greenhouse gases rests in the hands of about 30 senators. The list includes coal and Rust Belt Democrats, Westerners, and moderate Republicans. They bring several high-profile issues to the forefront: coal, nuclear, oil & gas drilling, foreign trade, manufacturing, and increased costs to consumers.

Interview: Energy Secretary Chu on Policy & Funding / Wall Street Journal,  March 8

I think the price on carbon is the most important part of any comprehensive energy bill. You also have to give time for certain regions of the country that have been used to inexpensive energy to make adjustments. You have to give them a little stimulus to make them go in that direction, we have to do the research and development to help those industries.

Government & Politics

Texas Oil Mum About Financing a Halt to California’s AB32 Climate Law / ClimateWire, March 3

The money behind a November 2010 statewide ballot referendum to suspend California's landmark climate law is coming from a pair of oil refiners based in San Antonio, Texas, according to several well-placed sources in Sacramento. These sources said two refiners based in San Antonio -- Valero Energy Corp. and Tesoro Corp. -- are the largest funders so far behind a proposed ballot initiative that would bring a temporary halt to A.B. 32, the law that cuts greenhouse gases and reduces air pollution across California.

Study: Health Costs of California Air Pollution / Rand Corporation, March 2 & NY Times, March 12

California's dirty air caused more than $193 million in hospital-based medical care from 2005 to 2007 as people sought help for problems such as asthma and pneumonia that are triggered by elevated pollution levels, according to a new RAND Corporation study. It is the first to quantify the cost of hospital-based medical care to various payers caused by the failure to meet federal clean air standards across the state. More people in California live in areas that do not meet federal clean air standards than in any other state.

Senate & House Committees Study Home Efficiency, Appliance Standards, Etc. / NY Times, March 8

Democrats will turn the focus to energy efficiency standards and incentive programs this week with hearings in the Senate and House energy panels. Topics: home efficiency tax incentives, “home star” rebates, “building star” rebates for commercials buildings, manufactured home rebates, smart grid,  and appliance efficiency standards.

Senate Energy Cmte. Studies Smart Grid Technology Delay / NY Times, March 2

"Clearly, everyone agrees we should do more," Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) said in an interview. Bingaman said there is likely to be a smart grid component in upcoming energy legislation that he hopes to introduce and mark up in the next four to five weeks. A smart grid, in many ways is like an Internet for electricity, a network of devices that are monitored and managed with real-time communications and computer intelligence.

Home Efficiency Programs Poised for Congressional Ramp Up, NYTimes, March 11

A program to encourage homeowners to add solar panels and make their houses more energy efficient through higher property taxes aims to scale up.

Opinion: Getting Obama Right (David Brooks) / NY Times, March 14

Liberals are wrong to call Obama weak and indecisive. He’s just not always pursuing their aims. Conservatives are wrong to call him a big-government liberal. That’s just not a fair reading of his agenda ... In a sensible country, people would see Obama as a president trying to define a modern brand of moderate progressivism. In a sensible country, Obama would be able to clearly define this project without fear of offending the people he needs to get legislation passed. But we don’t live in that country. We live in a country in which many people live in information cocoons in which they only talk to members of their own party and read blogs of their own sect. They come away with perceptions fundamentally at odds with reality, fundamentally misunderstanding the man in the Oval Office.

Science, Business, & Investment

Made in the U.S.A.: Efficiency Materials, NY Times, March 12

While solar and wind manufacturers struggle to fend off Chinese competition, energy efficiency equipment seems to have no such problem. According to a recent study commissioned by efficiency advocates like San Francisco’s Efficiency First, equipment like caulking and insulation — basic tools for retrofitting the country’s homes and businesses — is almost entirely made in the United States.

Solar Industry Learns Lessons in Spanish Sun, NYTimes, March 11

A national commitment to solar power transformed one community but big subsidies led to unsustainable growth.

“SolarHub” Website Aggregates Solar Installation Info / SolarTech & SolarPro, Feb 24

SolarHub (www.solarhub.com) provides a one-stop shop, aggregating detailed product specifications and allowing users to search listed products by a variety of attributes specific to each product type.

SUMMARY of CONGRESSIONAL CLIMATE & ENERGY LEGISLATION

Updated March 15, 2010

“The cap-and-trade bills in the House and Senate are dead.” Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) stated the reality that Congress now faces as it negotiates a comprehensive climate and energy package that might get voted on before this November’s congressional elections. One alternative to cap-and-trade has been a cap-and-dividend bill sponsored by Senators Maria Cantwell (D-Washington) and Susan Collins (R-Maine). The leading solution, though, appears to be coming from a bipartisan group of senators led by John Kerry (D-Massachusetts), Joe Lieberman (I-Connecticut), and Graham that would put a price on carbon emissions that targets only the electric utility, transportation, and industrial sectors of the economy.

The Senate is where the current debate lies because the House of Representatives already passed its bill in June 2009 (the “ACES Act” or the “Markey-Waxman” bill). The Kerry-Graham-Lieberman climate bill will join an energy bill written by Sen. Jeff Bingaman last Fall as the main vehicle for a new national policy. The House of Representatives must then decide what to do about its own bill and the Senate’s before President Obama signs anything into law. "It will be a very different mix of a bill from where we were at the end of the House effort," Kerry said. "It will be simpler, and hopefully, capable of attracting support."

I.   HOUSE CLIMATE & ENERGY BILL (“ACES Act” / “Waxman-Markey bill”)

Key Date: Passed June 2009 by House (219 to 212)

Authors: Rep. Henry Waxman, Chairman of House Energy & Commerce Cmte; Rep. Ed Markey, Chairman of Cmte on Energy Independence & Global Warming

More Info: www.pewclimate.org/acesa

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17 % reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 83 % by 2050
• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 20% by 2020. Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, biogas and biofuels derived exclusively from eligible biomass, landfill gas, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, wastewater-treatment gas, coal-mine methane, and new hydro at post-1992 dams
• R&D of $190 billion to energy efficiency, renewables, carbon capture & storage, electric vehicles
• Transmission Grid Supports.
• Energy Efficiency for Buildings, Lights, Appliances.
• Green Bank Financing Office.
• Carbon Offsets Program.
• Coal Plant Pollution & CCS Standards.
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.

II.  SENATE CLIMATE BILL ( “Kerry-Graham-Lieberman”)

Key Dates: Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman are working on bipartisan compromise legislation for March 2010; March meeting occurred with Republican & Democratic senators with President Obama

Authors: Sen. John Kerry (Democrat), Senate Foreign Affairs Committee Chair, Sen. Lindsey Graham (Republican), & Sen. Joe Lieberman (Independent)

• Cap-and-Trade Replaced with Carbon Caps on Specific Parts of the Economy – Electic Utilities, Transportation, and Industry.
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17% reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 80% over “long term”
• Carbon Capture & Sequestration Standards & Research Funding
• Domestic Oil & Gas Production Expanded, Including New Offshore Drilling
• Nuclear Power: Incentives for nuclear power plants & low-emissions transportation

III. SENATE ENERGY BILL (“American Clean Energy Leadership Act” / “Bingaman bill”)

Key Date: legislation passed by Energy Committee June 2009; additional amendments and new pieces of legislation are being debated in the Energy Committee in 2010

Author: Sen. Jeff Bingaman, Chairman of the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee

• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 15% by 2021.  Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, landfill gas, incremental hydro, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, and new hydro at existing dams.
• Transmission “Interstate Highway System” & Grid Security.  Creates new planning system based on local, state and regional input with states taking initial lead. New security powers to Dept or Energy & FERC.
• Green Bank Financing Office
• CCS R&D Funding. $6.6 billion for 10 “early mover” large-scale CCS projects
• Offshore Drilling in Eastern Gulf of Mexico. Opens 3.8 billion barrels of new oil resources & 21.5 trillion cubic feet of new natural gas resources.

CLEAN TECH POLICY NEWS

Top Stories

• Sen. Reid Demands Climate Bill ASAP (Washington Post)
• Ballot Intiative to Stop AB32, California’s Renewable Energy Law? (L.A. Times)
• Thomas Friedman: How the Republicans Go Green (NY Times)

Government & Politics

• Al Gore: We Can’t Wish Away Climate Change (NY Times)
• Energy Secretary Chu Vexed by Spending Backlog (Wall Street Journal)
• $130 Million Federal Building Energy Efficiency Effort (DoE Press Release)
• EPA Delays Start of New Rules on Emissions to 2011 (Wall Street Journal)

Science, Jobs, & Investment

• The Long Road to an Alternative Energy Future (Wall Street Journal)
• The Fuel Cell: Bloom Energy Raises the Curtain (San Jose Mercury News & NY Times)
• Wal-Mart Announces Green Mandate to Suppliers (NY Times)
• Battle Lines Harden Over New Transmission Policy for Renewables (NY Times)
• Energy Efficiency to Shine in 2010 (San Jose Mercury News)
• The Arguments For & Against Global Warming (Wall Street Journal)
• Study: Global Warming is Not Slowing (NY Times)
• Study: US Economic Growth & Job Creation from Climate Bill (UC-Berkeley)
• Study: Legislation’s Benefits Outweigh Costs (Wall Street Journal)
• Green Jobs Paying $30 an Hour (Yahoo!)

Top Stories

Sen. Reid Demands Climate Bill ASAP

Washington Post, Feb 24, 2010

Senate Majority Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has instructed Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) to produce a revamped climate bill as soon as possible, according to sources, a task Kerry intends to accomplish within two weeks. The marching orders could represent the best chance advocates will get to pass a climate and energy bill before the November elections. “The mechanism for pricing carbon is the real key here," said Sen. Kerry. The two most-talked about options are cap-and-trade and cap-and-dividend.

Thomas Friedman: How the Republicans Go Green

NY Times, Feb 28, 2010

Senator Lindsey Graham, the South Carolina Republican, along with John Kerry and Joe Lieberman, is trying to craft a new energy bill — one that could actually pass the Senate. What is interesting about Graham is that he has been willing to depart from the prevailing G.O.P. consensus that the only energy policy we need is “drill, baby, drill.” What brought him around? Graham’s short answer: politics, jobs and legacy … Avoid talking about “climate change,” which many on the right don’t believe. Instead, frame our energy challenge as a need to “clean up carbon pollution,” to “become energy independent” and to “create more good jobs and new industries.”

Ballot Intiative to Stop AB32, California’s Renewable Energy Law?

L.A. Times, Feb 6, 2010

Republican politicians and conservative activists are launching a ballot campaign to suspend California's landmark global-warming law, in what they hope will serve as a showcase for a national backlash against climate regulations. The initiative would delay the state’s renewable portfolio standard and concurrent curbs on greenhouse gas emissions until the state's unemployment rate drops to 5.5%, a level not seen since 2007. Supporters say they have "solid commitments" of nearly $600,000 to pay signature gatherers for a November 2010 initiative.

Government & Politics

Al Gore: We Can’t Wish Away Climate Change

NY Times, Feb 28, 2010

We would still need to deal with the national security risks of our growing dependence on a global oil market dominated by dwindling reserves in the most unstable region of the world, and the economic risks of sending hundreds of billions of dollars a year overseas in return for that oil. And we would still trail China in the race to develop smart grids, fast trains, solar power, wind, geothermal and other renewable sources of energy — the most important sources of new jobs in the 21st century.

Obama Speech to Business Roundtable of CEOs Offers Some Clues on Energy Bill

NY Times, Feb 25, 2010

Obama, his top aides and the bipartisan trio piecing together an energy and climate package, Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn), are in search of the right mix of "sweeteners" to help corners of the energy industry that matter to Republicans and fence-sitting Democrats reluctant to sign on to a high-priced climate bill that could land them in hot water in their home states. Among the White House policy goals are ones that would satisfy emissions-cutting goals, control costs and ensure that a lower-carbon mix of U.S. energy sources can meet future energy demand.

Energy Secretary Chu Vexed by Spending Backlog

Wall Street Journal, Feb 5, 2010

Chu expressed frustration before a Senate Committee that only $2.1 billion of the roughly $37 billion in stimulus money Congress gave his agency last year has been spent, but said the agency could manage a new round of funding for clean-energy projects as part of an expected jobs bill.

China Expanding Lead in Global Race to Make Clean Energy & Create Clean Jobs

NY Times, Jan 31, 2010, US Dept of Energy, Feb 17, 2010, and Gerson Lehman Group, Feb 9, 2010

China vaulted past competitors in Denmark, Germany, Spain and the United States last year to become the world’s largest maker of wind turbines. China has also leapfrogged the West in the last two years to emerge as the world’s largest manufacturer of solar panels. And the country is pushing equally hard to build nuclear reactors and the most efficient types of coal power plants. Bloomberg New Energy Finance notes that China spent $21.8 billion on new wind centers, a 27% increase over 2008, and nearly doubled its spending on solar projects, reaching $1.9 billion in 2009.  The Chinese government will invest more money in the development of smart grid technology than the United States in 2010. China will spend more than $7.3 billion in the form of stimulus loans, grants and tax incentives this year, compared to $7.1 million by the U.S. These efforts to dominate renewable energy technologies raise the prospect that the West may someday trade its dependence on oil from the Mideast for a reliance on solar panels, wind turbines and other gear manufactured in China … Renewable energy industries in the P.R.C. are adding jobs rapidly, reaching 1.12 million in 2008 and climbing by 100,000 a year.

Science, Business, & Investment

The Long Road to an Alternative Energy Future

Wall Street Journal, Feb 22, 2010

New energy technologies are coming that will shrink our use of fossil fuels and cut emissions of greenhouse gases. Just don't expect them anytime soon.

The Fuel Cell: Bloom Energy Raises the Curtain

San Jose Mercury News, Feb 22 / NY Times, Feb 24 / “60 Minutes” on Feb 21

Bloom spent nearly a decade developing its fuel-cell technology while saying nary a word. Over the past year and a half, it has quietly sold and installed 100-kilowatt Bloom boxes at Google, Bank of America, Wal-Mart and other big companies … Fuel cells have been something of a holy grail as they can operate at extremely high temperatures to maximize efficiency and can use a variety of fuels, like natural gas and biogas. Since the heat allows the fuel to be directly transformed into electricity through an electrochemical process, the expensive precious metals and rare-earth elements used in other fuel cells to act as catalysts could theoretically be eliminated.

Wal-Mart Announces Green Mandate to Suppliers

NY Times, Feb 25, 2010

Wal-Mart has announced an initiative that aims to achieve major reductions in greenhouse-gas emissions from its supply chain. It said it would lean on its suppliers to rethink the sources, manufacturing processes, packaging and transportation of their goods.

Battle Lines Harden Over New Transmission Policy for Renewables

NY Times, Feb 25, 2010

A group of Pacific Northwest and California power companies has joined utilities from the Southeast and other regions to oppose widespread cost-sharing for transmission expansion to carry wind and solar power to distant markets. They call for developers and customers of new renewable power to pay for transmission connecting their projects to customers.

Point / Counter-Point: The Arguments For & Against Global Warming

Wall Street Journal, December 6, 2009

That consensus, simply put, states that the planet is warming, and that most of the temperature rise is very likely due to an increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere caused by human activity. In a recent survey of more than 3,000 Earth scientists, 82% agreed that human activity is a "significant contributing factor" in changing global temperatures. Specialists were in greater agreement: 75 of the 77 climate scientists who actively publish in the field—about 97%—agreed. So, what do the skeptics say? In a nutshell, they argue that the warming in the past century has been modest and that human activities' contribution to the warming has been minimal; there is no crisis. The article addresses these points:

* The Earth isn’t warming at crisis levels.

* Surface temperature & satellite temperature readings are unreliable, inconsistent.

* The Earth’s temperatures constantly change over history.

* Global warming is not man-made and scientists disagree.

* Sea level rises not linked to carbon dioxide levels.

* Polar ice isn’t disappearing.

SUMMARY: CONGRESSIONAL CLIMATE & ENERGY LEGISLATION

Updated January 11, 2010

The energy and climate change fight is currently focused on the U.S. Senate because the House of Representatives already passed legislation in June 2009 (the “ACES Act” or the “Markey-Waxman” bill). Two primary pieces of legislation are being debated in the Senate: the Bingaman energy bill and the bipartisan Kerry-Graham-Lieberman climate bill.

There are several factors at play in 2010 that will affect what any new climate & energy laws look like (and might even determine whether Congress passes any laws at all).

• First, the 2010 congressional elections are making things difficult because many Democrats facing close re-election fights are worried about supporting controversial legislation, and President Obama has used a lot of political capital to try to pass health care legislation, thus leaving less for upcoming climate and financial regulation fights (as well as the higher priority economic & financial regulation agenda)
• Second, the intense partisanship that has developed in Congress over the last sixteen years means that most Republicans will fight to deny the Democrats and the President any victory. It will thus be very hard to find Republicans to replace wavering Democrats.
• Third, it is unclear yet that the business community that does support climate & energy legislation, especially the clean tech industry, can compete equally with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the coal & oil companies when making the economic, jobs, energy prices, and national security arguments. Environmentalists are unable to win this debate on their own.

The Senate climate bill is where the real difficulty lies; its cap-and-trade element being the most controversial with members of both political parties.  Nonetheless, there is an opportunity for earning some Republican support that will be needed to offset some wavering Democrats because of its sponsorship by Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. There is another bipartisan climate bill sponsored by Republican Susan Collins of Maine and Democrat Maria Cantwell of Washington. It offers a cap-and-dividend solution instead of cap-and-trade.

Advocates for Senate climate legislation, including the White House, are pushing back against calls to abandon a mandatory cap on U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in favor of a stand-alone energy bill. Division among Democrats on whether a new climate law is possible this year goes all the way to the top. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) recently told The Associated Press that passage of the legislation was unlikely.  Other Democrats who suggest that energy-only legislation has a better chance of passing in an election year include Agriculture Chairwoman Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Policy Chairman Byron Dorgan of North Dakota.

Congress needs to hear from clean tech business leaders frequently on the economic growth, job creation, and international competitiveness issues. Otherwise, say members of Congress, the debate will be lost or the final laws so weak that they do not spark the clean energy economy. Click here for congressional contact information and look further in this document for message points that support clean tech’s agenda.

I.   HOUSE CLIMATE & ENERGY BILL (“ACES Act” / “Waxman-Markey bill”)

Key Date: Passed June 2009 by House (219 to 212)

Authors: Rep. Henry Waxman, Chairman of House Energy & Commerce Cmte; Rep. Ed Markey, Chairman of Cmte on Energy Independence & Global Warming

More Info: www.pewclimate.org/acesa

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17 % reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 83 % by 2050
• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 20% by 2020. Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, biogas and biofuels derived exclusively from eligible biomass, landfill gas, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, wastewater-treatment gas, coal-mine methane, and new hydro at post-1992 dams
• R&D of $190 billion to energy efficiency, renewables, carbon capture & storage, electric vehicles
• Transmission Grid Supports.
• Energy Efficiency for Buildings, Lights, Appliances.
• Green Bank Financing Office.
• Carbon Offsets Program.
• Coal Plant Pollution & CCS Standards.
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.

II.  SENATE CLIMATE BILL (“Kerry-Boxer” replaced by “Kerry-Graham-Lieberman”)

Key Dates: Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman outlined legislation December 2009 that replaces Kerry-Boxer legislation of September 2009

Authors: Sen. John Kerry (Democrat), Senate Foreign Affairs Committee Chair, Sen. Lindsey Graham (Republican), & Sen. Joe Lieberman (Independent)

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17% reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 80% over “long term”
• Carbon Offsets Program
• CCS Standards
• Nuclear & Transportation. Incentives for nuclear power plants & low-emissions transportation
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.
• Key Unanswered Question: how the permits to emit carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases would be distributed to utilities, manufacturers, agribusiness and other interests

III. SENATE ENERGY BILL (“American Clean Energy Leadership Act” / “Bingaman bill”)

Key Date: legislation passed by Energy Committee June 2009

Author: Sen. Jeff Bingaman, Chairman of the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee

• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 15% by 2021.  Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, landfill gas, incremental hydro, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, and new hydro at existing dams.
• Transmission “Interstate Highway System” & Grid Security.  Creates new planning system based on local, state and regional input with states taking initial lead. New security powers to Dept or Energy & FERC.
• Green Bank Financing Office
• CCS R&D Funding. $6.6 billion for 10 “early mover” large-scale CCS projects
• Offshore Drilling in Eastern Gulf of Mexico. Opens 3.8 billion barrels of new oil resources & 21.5 trillion cubic feet of new natural gas resources.

CLEAN TECH POLICY NEWS

Top Stories

• Energy Secretary Chu Vexed by Spending Backlog (Wall Street Journal)
• Defense Dept: Climate Change a Threat to Global Security & Stability
• Environmentalists Cooling on Obama (NYTimes)
• China Expanding Lead to Make Clean Energy & Create Clean Jobs(NY Times)

Government & Politics

• Obama Announces Nuclear Loan Guarantees (NY Times)
• $130 Million Federal Building Energy Efficiency Effort (DoE Press Release
• Obama Announces Biofuels & CCS Advances (The White House)
• Federal Climate Service Created to Provide Data (NY Times)
• Sacramento Receives Huge Response to its Renewable Energy Feed-in-Tariff
• Josh Becker: A Potential Greentech Voice in the California Legislature (Green Tech Media)

Science, Business, & Investment

• Is Geoengineering Inevitable? (GreenBiz)
• Energy Efficiency to Shine in 2010 (San Jose Mercury News)
• Matt Golden: Recurve Home Efficiency Founder (San Jose Mercury News)
• The Arguments For & Against Global Warming (Wall Street Journal)
• A Plan B for Congressional Climate & Energy Legislation? (Houston Chronicle)
• Study: Global Warming is Not Slowing (NY Times)
• Study: US Economic Growth & Job Creation from Climate Bill (UC-Berkeley)
• Study: Legislation’s Benefits Outweigh Costs (Wall Street Journal)
• Green Jobs Paying $30 an Hour (Yahoo!)

Top Stories

Energy Secretary Chu Vexed by Spending Backlog

Wall Street Journal, Feb 5, 2010

Chu expressed frustration before a Senate Committee that only $2.1 billion of the roughly $37 billion in stimulus money Congress gave his agency last year has been spent, but said the agency could manage a new round of funding for clean-energy projects as part of an expected jobs bill.

Defense Department Concludes Climate Change a Threat to Global Security & Stability

2010 Quadrennial Defense Review, February 2010

In an unprecedented announcement, the Department of Defense highlighted broad geopolitical and security threats posed to the United States by climate change when it released the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review.  The Review says that the effects of climate change are already being felt in the United States and highlighted intelligence community determinations that "climate change will have significant geopolitical impacts around the world, contributing to poverty … and weakening fragile governments."

Environmentalists Cooling on Obama

NYTimes, Feb 18, 2010

Mr. Obama moved quickly in his first months in office, producing a landmark deal on automobile emissions, an Environmental Protection Agency finding that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare, a virtual moratorium on oil drilling on public lands and House passage of a cap-and-trade bill.

Since then, in part because of the intense focus on the health care debate last year, action on environmental issues has slowed ... [T]he grumbling of the greens has grown louder in recent weeks as Mr. Obama has embraced nuclear power, offshore oil drilling and “clean coal” as keystones of his energy policy.

China Expanding Lead in Global Race to Make Clean Energy & Create Clean Jobs

NY Times, Jan 31, 2010, US Dept of Energy, Feb 17, 2010, and Gerson Lehman Group, Feb 9, 2010

China vaulted past competitors in Denmark, Germany, Spain and the United States last year to become the world’s largest maker of wind turbines. China has also leapfrogged the West in the last two years to emerge as the world’s largest manufacturer of solar panels. And the country is pushing equally hard to build nuclear reactors and the most efficient types of coal power plants. Bloomberg New Energy Finance notes that China spent $21.8 billion on new wind centers, a 27% increase over 2008, and nearly doubled its spending on solar projects, reaching $1.9 billion in 2009.  The Chinese government will invest more money in the development of smart grid technology than the United States in 2010. China will spend more than $7.3 billion in the form of stimulus loans, grants and tax incentives this year, compared to $7.1 million by the U.S. These efforts to dominate renewable energy technologies raise the prospect that the West may someday trade its dependence on oil from the Mideast for a reliance on solar panels, wind turbines and other gear manufactured in China … Renewable energy industries in the P.R.C. are adding jobs rapidly, reaching 1.12 million in 2008 and climbing by 100,000 a year.

Government & Politics

President Obama Announces Nuclear Loan Guarantees

NY Times, Feb 16, 2010

President Obama underscored his embrace of nuclear power as a clean energy source, announcing that the Energy Department had approved $8.3 billion in loan guarantees for the construction of two nuclear reactors in Georgia. Says a White House official: ”By announcing plans today to break ground on the first new nuclear reactors in nearly three decades, the President is making good on his offer to meet Republicans halfway. Republicans who advocate for nuclear power have to recognize that we will not achieve a big boost in nuclear capacity unless we also create a system of incentives to make clean energy profitable. As long as producing carbon pollution carries no costs, plants that burn fossil fuel will be more cost effective than nuclear plants. The President will continue to work with Republicans and Democrats in Congress to pass comprehensive legislation that drives the transition to a clean energy economy and creates millions of American jobs.”

$130 Million Federal Building Energy Efficiency Effort

Dept of Energy Press Release, Feb 12, 2010

On February 12, seven Obama Administration agencies announced up to $129.7 million over five years to create new building efficiency technologies and work with local partners through an Energy Regional Innovation Cluster (E-RIC) based at a university, DOE national laboratory, nonprofit organization, or private firm. Nearly 40% percent of U.S. energy consumption and carbon emissions come from buildings.

President Obama Announces Biofuels & Carbon Capture & Storage Advances

The White House, Feb 3, 2010

At a meeting with a bipartisan group of governors from around the country, the President announced actions to accelerate the development of biofuels and clean coal technologies.

Federal Climate Service Created to Provide Data

NY Times, Feb 9, 2010  /  http://www.climate.gov

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration will create a new climate change office to gather and provide data to governments, industry and academia as part of a broad federal effort to prepare for long-term changes to the planet, officials said Monday. The new unit, to be known as the NOAA Climate Service, will assemble the roughly 550 scientists and analysts already working on the issue at the agency into a cohesive group under a single leader.

Josh Becker: A Potential Greentech Voice in the California Legislature

Green Tech Media, Jan 29, 2010  /  www.joshbecker2010.org

It means putting his VC career on hold, but could also mean improved energy policy in California.

Sacramento Receives Huge Response to its Renewable Energy Feed-in-Tariff

A California utility's feed-in tariff (FIT) program for renewable or combined heat and power generating facilities met with an overwhelming response last month. The Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) reported on January 19 that applications for the new FIT, which were all for solar photovoltaic power, exceeded its 100-megawatt allotment.

Science, Business, & Investment

Is Geoengineering Inevitable?

GreenBiz, Feb 10, 2010

If it becomes evident that the earth can't avoid the catastrophic impacts of climate change, it is not merely possible that governments will turn to geoengineering. Some people believe that it is all but certain.

Geoengineering is the deliberate large-scale manipulation of the planet to counter global warming. It can take a number of forms. Long a taboo subject, it is being talked about openly these days by scientists, environmentalists and policy thinkers. A congressional subcommittee held its second hearing on geoengineering two weeks ago.

Energy Efficiency to Shine in 2010

San Jose Mercury News, Jan 24, 2010

Solar and wind power may get the headlines and attention, but green-tech experts say 2010 will be dominated by energy efficiency, the mundane but critical process of cutting the amount of gas and electricity that homes and offices use. Why? 43% of U.S. carbon emissions come from buildings while 32% comes from transportation and 25% from industrial sources. Kevin Surace, CEO of Serious Materials says, "When you really break it down, every dollar spent on energy efficiency pays back the investment four or five times. It saves people money and creates jobs. And it has bipartisan support."

Recurve Home Efficiency Founder Matt Golden (Profile)

San Jose Mercury News, Feb 5, 2010

With energy efficiency generating a big buzz these days, Matt Golden, founder of Recurve, is arguing that a 25% reduction in residential energy use through efficiency will create 1.25 million jobs in every state and is the same as taking ½ of passenger cars off the road. He’s one of the key players behind Home Star, a national plan that would give homeowners incentives to make energy-efficient improvements to their houses. Congress is expected to include Home Star as part of a broader jobs bill in the coming weeks.

Point / Counter-Point: The Arguments For & Against Global Warming

Wall Street Journal, December 6, 2009

That consensus, simply put, states that the planet is warming, and that most of the temperature rise is very likely due to an increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere caused by human activity. In a recent survey of more than 3,000 Earth scientists, 82% agreed that human activity is a "significant contributing factor" in changing global temperatures. Specialists were in greater agreement: 75 of the 77 climate scientists who actively publish in the field—about 97%—agreed. So, what do the skeptics say? In a nutshell, they argue that the warming in the past century has been modest and that human activities' contribution to the warming has been minimal; there is no crisis. The article addresses these points:

* The Earth isn’t warming at crisis levels.

* Surface temperature & satellite temperature readings are unreliable, inconsistent.

* The Earth’s temperatures constantly change over history.

* Global warming is not man-made and scientists disagree.

* Sea level rises not linked to carbon dioxide levels.

* Polar ice isn’t disappearing.

SUMMARY: CONGRESSIONAL CLIMATE & ENERGY LEGISLATION

Updated January 11, 2010

The energy and climate change fight is currently focused on the U.S. Senate because the House of Representatives already passed legislation in June 2009 (the “ACES Act” or the “Markey-Waxman” bill). Two primary pieces of legislation are being debated in the Senate: the Bingaman energy bill and the bipartisan Kerry-Graham-Lieberman climate bill.

There are several factors at play in 2010 that will affect what any new climate & energy laws look like (and might even determine whether Congress passes any laws at all).

• First, the 2010 congressional elections are making things difficult because many Democrats facing close re-election fights are worried about supporting controversial legislation, and President Obama has used a lot of political capital to try to pass health care legislation, thus leaving less for upcoming climate and financial regulation fights (as well as the higher priority economic & financial regulation agenda)
• Second, the intense partisanship that has developed in Congress over the last sixteen years means that most Republicans will fight to deny the Democrats and the President any victory. It will thus be very hard to find Republicans to replace wavering Democrats.
• Third, it is unclear yet that the business community that does support climate & energy legislation, especially the clean tech industry, can compete equally with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the coal & oil companies when making the economic, jobs, energy prices, and national security arguments. Environmentalists are unable to win this debate on their own.

The Senate climate bill is where the real difficulty lies; its cap-and-trade element being the most controversial with members of both political parties.  Nonetheless, there is an opportunity for earning some Republican support that will be needed to offset some wavering Democrats because of its sponsorship by Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. (There is another bipartisan climate bill sponsored by Republican Susan Collins of Maine and Democrat Maria Cantwell of Washington. It offers a cap-and-dividend solution instead of cap-and-trade.)

Advocates for Senate climate legislation, including the White House, are pushing back against calls to abandon a mandatory cap on U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in favor of a stand-alone energy bill. Division among Democrats on whether a new climate law is possible this year goes all the way to the top. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) recently told The Associated Press that passage of the legislation was unlikely.  Other Democrats who suggest that energy-only legislation has a better chance of passing in an election year include Agriculture Chairwoman Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Policy Chairman Byron Dorgan of North Dakota.

But Senate Foreign Relations Chairman John Kerry (D-MA) spoke to the undercurrent of pessimism in early January, “These are the dumb D.C. rumors that too often mark this city and are rendered meaningless on a daily basis. We can cross the finish line this year.” Sen. Graham said at the same time, “I am convinced that reason, logic and good business sense and good environmental policy will trump the status quo.”  And President Obama's top energy adviser, Carol Browner, insisted on January 11th that the Administration's goal remains a "comprehensive bill" that touches on all corners of the energy and climate debate, including the controversial cap-and-trade program.

Congress needs to hear from clean tech business leaders frequently on the economic growth, job creation, and international competitiveness issues. Otherwise, say members of Congress, the debate will be lost or the final laws so weak that they do not spark the clean energy economy. Click here for congressional contact information and look further in this document for message points that support clean tech’s agenda.

I.   HOUSE CLIMATE & ENERGY BILL (“ACES Act” / “Waxman-Markey bill”)

Key Date: Passed June 2009 by House (219 to 212)

Authors: Rep. Henry Waxman, Chairman of House Energy & Commerce Cmte; Rep. Ed Markey, Chairman of Cmte on Energy Independence & Global Warming

More Info: www.pewclimate.org/acesa

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17 % reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 83 % by 2050
• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 20% by 2020. Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, biogas and biofuels derived exclusively from eligible biomass, landfill gas, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, wastewater-treatment gas, coal-mine methane, and new hydro at post-1992 dams
• R&D of $190 billion to energy efficiency, renewables, carbon capture & storage, electric vehicles
• Transmission Grid Supports.
• Energy Efficiency for Buildings, Lights, Appliances.
• Green Bank Financing Office.
• Carbon Offsets Program.
• Coal Plant Pollution & CCS Standards.
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.

II.  SENATE CLIMATE BILL (“Kerry-Boxer” replaced by “Kerry-Graham-Lieberman”)

Key Dates: Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman outlined legislation December 2009 that replaces Kerry-Boxer legislation of September 2009

Authors: Sen. John Kerry (Democrat), Senate Foreign Affairs Committee Chair, Sen. Lindsey Graham (Republican), & Sen. Joe Lieberman (Independent)

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17% reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 80% over “long term”
• Carbon Offsets Program
• CCS Standards
• Nuclear & Transportation. Incentives for nuclear power plants & low-emissions transportation
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.
• Key Unanswered Question: how the permits to emit carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases would be distributed to utilities, manufacturers, agribusiness and other interests

III. SENATE ENERGY BILL (“American Clean Energy Leadership Act” / “Bingaman bill”)

Key Date: legislation passed by Energy Committee June 2009

Author: Sen. Jeff Bingaman, Chairman of the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee

• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 15% by 2021.  Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, landfill gas, incremental hydro, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, and new hydro at existing dams.
• Transmission “Interstate Highway System” & Grid Security.  Creates new planning system based on local, state and regional input with states taking initial lead. New security powers to Dept or Energy & FERC.
• Green Bank Financing Office
• CCS R&D Funding. $6.6 billion for 10 “early mover” large-scale CCS projects
• Offshore Drilling in Eastern Gulf of Mexico. Opens 3.8 billion barrels of new oil resources & 21.5 trillion cubic feet of new natural gas resources.

STATE BY STATE JOB GROWTH

Clean Energy & Climate Policies Lead to Economic Growth in the United States

New analysis shows that adopting comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation could create up to 1.9 million jobs

The State Fact Sheets were co-released by E2, Ceres, and The Clean Economy Network and also some state business groups. Feel free to distribute.

http://www.e2.org/jsp/controller?docName=jobs

New economic analysis shows that clean energy and climate policies would create jobs, increase consumers’ income, and strengthen the U.S. economy as a whole. Based on collaborate research by the University of Illinois, Yale University and the University of California, the new study clearly demonstrates that comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation, such as the American Clean Energy and Security Act and the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, would limit pollution and create incentives to drive large-scale investments in clean energy and energy efficiency.  

The analysis indicates that, on a national level, such legislation would up to 1.9 million new jobs, increase annual household income by up to $1,175 per year, and boost GDP by up to $111 billion – with all of those benefits measured relative to a scenario without such legislation. In addition, all the states would see economic gains are over and above the growth that they would see in the absence of such a bill.  

Environmental Entrepreneurs, along with the national investor coalition Ceres and the Clean Economy Network, have sponsored the publication of the following 50 state fact sheets that clearly illustrate the study’s findings about how each state will be impacted if we pass strong clean energy and climate policies to secure a safer and cleaner future for our country. Click on the links below to see those state fact sheets.  

See more information on the national results

Read the Executive Summary for the analysis

CLEAN TECH MESSAGING

Senators and Congressmen must hear from clean tech business leaders early and often or opponents will dominate and poison the public debate by arguing that the US economy will suffer, that jobs will be lost, that the technologies you are developing will not work, and even that global warming is still up for debate (if not a complete hoax). Your silence and the silence of other clean tech leaders will make passage of a truly effective law very difficult or even impossible. Call, write, email, and visit. Help Congress help you.

Click here for an easy way to contact Congress with this basic message:

Effect on American Consumers

* One Postage Stamp Per Day. The proposed legislation will cost Americans only $160 per year in increased energy prices -- one postage stamp per day -- while poor Americans actually save money.  source: non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO)

* Americans Actually Will Save Money When Adding Energy Efficiency. Energy efficiency savings could result in $250 per year for American consumers, making the energy and climate price tag for Americans effectively zero. 
* Inaction Means Reduced Global & US GDP.

20% global GDP reduction per year 
1-2% US GDP reduction per year

* New, American Jobs Will Be Created. An estimated 1.7 new American jobs will be created with this legislation. source: PERI/CAP (UMass. Political Economy & Research Institute / Center for American Progress)

State by State Economic Benefits

Research is available that outlines economic and job benefits for each state. Senators and Congressmen care how this will affect their constituents, so the data is a good resource.  Click here or go to

< www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/pdf/peri_report.pdf > and look in Appendix 2.

RECENT CLEAN ENERGY NEWS ARTICLES

• A Plan B for Congressional Climate & Energy Legislation? (Houston Chronicle)
• Obama Eases Nuclear Reactor Construction, Triples Loan Guarantees (Wall Street Journal)
• Study: Global Carbon Market Could Grow 33% in 2010 (NY Times)
• Study: Global Warming is Not Slowing (NY Times)
• Study: US Economic Growth & Job Creation from Climate Bill (UC-Berkeley)
• Study: Legislation’s Benefits Outweigh Costs (Wall Street Journal)
• Green Jobs Paying $30 an Hour (Yahoo!)
• The Top 10 U.S. States for Cleantech in 2009 (Clean Tech Group)
• The Top 10 Cleantech Countries of 2009 (Clean Tech Group)

China Leading Global Race to Make Clean Energy

NY Times, Jan 31, 2010

China vaulted past competitors in Denmark, Germany, Spain and the United States last year to become the world’s largest maker of wind turbines. China has also leapfrogged the West in the last two years to emerge as the world’s largest manufacturer of solar panels. And the country is pushing equally hard to build nuclear reactors and the most efficient types of coal power plants. These efforts to dominate renewable energy technologies raise the prospect that the West may someday trade its dependence on oil from the Mideast for a reliance on solar panels, wind turbines and other gear manufactured in China … Renewable energy industries in the P.R.C. are adding jobs rapidly, reaching 1.12 million in 2008 and climbing by 100,000 a year.

Congress & The Obama Administration

After the Massachusetts Senate Election & Obama’s State of the Union Speech: U.S. Senate Leader Reid Says Climate Change Still a Priority, But Plan B Getting Planned

Reid Press Release, Jan 20, 2010 / Houston Chronicle, Jan 25, 2010

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told his fellow lawmakers on January 20, after the Republicans won a special Senate election to replace Ted Kennedy, that comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation remains firmly on the Senate agenda: "We will continue to create new jobs, including good-paying clean- energy jobs that can never be outsourced. We will tackle our daunting energy and climate challenges, and by doing so will strengthen our national security, our environment and our economy." But there is a possible Plan B: tacking “clean energy” measures onto a job-creation package and following that up with an “energy-only” bill that doesn't contain a specific plan for combating climate change. That focused energy measure would expand drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico, modernize the nation's aging electrical transmission system and mandate that electric utilities generate more of their electricity from wind, solar and other renewable sources. Another option for the Senate is to take up the energy bill that won bipartisan approval from the Energy and Natural Resources Committee last June.

Obama’s State of the Union & 2011 Budget Proposal Keep Clean Tech a High Priority

Wall Street Journal, Jan 28, 2010  /  NY Times, Jan 31, 2010

In his January 26 State of the Union speech, President Obama called for a “comprehensive energy and climate bill,” repositioning it as a national competitiveness issue. And his $3.8 trillion budget for 2011 that will be presented to Congress on February 1 increase financing for civilian research programs by more than 6 percent. Many programs at the Energy Department are in line for increases.

Green Groups Pine for Bill, White House Does Not Want to Separate Energy & Climate Legislation, Election Year Politics Infecting the Policy Discussions

Politico, January 15, 2010 & NYTimes, January 12, 2009

Moderates don’t like cap and trade. Republicans question climate change. Even some supporters now publicly doubt that the bill will get done in 2010.  Environment groups and their business allies realize that they are now fighting for the very core of the bill: a cap on greenhouse gas pollution.  The strategy is to gain support from key groups of Democrats by cutting deals to address the concerns of agricultural and manufacturing states and perhaps some support from a few Republicans recruited by South Carolina’s Graham.

Obama Act to Ease Way to Construct Nuclear Reactors

NY Times, Jan 29, 2010  /  Wall Street Journal, Jan 29, 2010

The Obama administration moved vigorously on two fronts January 29 to promote nuclear power, proposing a tripling of federal loan guarantees for new projects (to as much as $54 billion) and appointing a high-level commission to study what to do with nuclear waste.  It’s a move aimed at winning Republican lawmakers' support for its log-jammed energy policy.

Investment

S.E.C. Adds Climate Risk to Public Company Disclosure List

NY Times, Jan 27, 2010  /  Wall Street Journal, Jan 27, 2010

The Securities and Exchange Commission said on Wednesday for the first time that public companies should warn investors of any serious risks that global warming might pose to their businesses; it has never specifically cited climate change as bringing potentially significant business risks or rewards … The commission said that companies could be helped or hurt by climate-related lawsuits, business opportunities or legislation and should promptly disclose such potential impacts. Mary L. Schapiro, the S.E.C. chairwoman said that the commission was not creating new legal requirements for companies, nor did it intend to endorse any particular scientific or policy view of global warming.

Private Equity is Bullish on Clean Energy

Wall Street Journal, Jan 28, 2010

The clean energy sector could become “the mother of all verticals” for private investors predicted said Hovey Kemp, a private equity lawyer at the law firm Goodwin Procter, said at the Dow Jones Private Equity Analyst Outlook 2010 meeting in New York. Private equity and venture capital firms, which collectively invested $6 billion into the clean energy sector in 2009 (with the federal government adding more than $13 billion).

Venture Capitol: The U.S. Dept of Energy is the New VC Force

Wall Street Journal, December 15, 2009

The DOE hopes to lend or give out more than $40 billion to businesses working on "clean technology." In the first nine months of 2009, the DOE doled out $13 billion in loans and grants to such firms. By contrast, venture-capital firms -- which have long been the chief funders of fledgling tech firms, taking equity stakes in the start-ups that will pay off if they go public -- poured just $2.68 billion into the sector in that time … Private investors [are] waiting to see which projects the government blesses. Success in winning federal funds can attract a flood of private capital, companies say, while conversely, bad luck in Washington can sour their chances with private investors. The result is an intertwining of public and private-sector interests in an arena where politics is never far from the surface.

• Other Stories

Business Groups Call for Action on Emissions

Wall Street Journal, Jan 27, 2010

More than 80 leading businesses, labor unions, faith, national security and environmental organizations launched a national print ad campaign last week calling for swift action by Congress to pass legislation that limits emissions.

Green Civil War: Projects vs. Preservation

NY Times, Jan 12, 2010

A NY Times blog discussion on the debate between land use and building of renewable energy projects.

Opinion: Clean Tech R&D, Not Mandated Carbon Cuts

Bjorn Lomborg, Wall Street Journal, Jan 28, 2010

“An expert panel including three Nobel Laureate economists concluded that devoting just 0.2% of global GDP—roughly $100 billion a year—to green-energy R&D could produce the kind of breakthroughs needed to fuel a carbon-free future. Not only would this be a much less expensive fix than trying to cut carbon emissions, it would also reduce global warming far more quickly.”

Point / Counter-Point: The Arguments For & Against Global Warming

Wall Street Journal, December 6, 2009

That consensus, simply put, states that the planet is warming, and that most of the temperature rise is very likely due to an increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere caused by human activity. In a recent survey of more than 3,000 Earth scientists, 82% agreed that human activity is a "significant contributing factor" in changing global temperatures. Specialists were in greater agreement: 75 of the 77 climate scientists who actively publish in the field—about 97%—agreed. So, what do the skeptics say? In a nutshell, they argue that the warming in the past century has been modest and that human activities' contribution to the warming has been minimal; there is no crisis. The article addresses these points:

* The Earth isn’t warming at crisis levels.

* Surface temperature & satellite temperature readings are unreliable, inconsistent.

* The Earth’s temperatures constantly change over history.

* Global warming is not man-made and scientists disagree.

* Sea level rises not linked to carbon dioxide levels.

* Polar ice isn’t disappearing.

Worldwide Subsidies for Clean Energy & Fossil Fuels

Wall Street Journal, January 15, 2010

Virtually all energy is subsidized. Fossil fuels, which provide about 80% of total global energy, have enjoyed favorable tax breaks and other incentives for decades. The International Energy Agency estimates that fossil-fuel subsidies in developing countries -- government money to reduce the price of energy -- totaled $310 billion in 2007, the most recent year for which the IEA has statistics. Last fall, the Group of 20 leading economies called for phasing out fossil-fuel subsidies world-wide.

Yet for every unit of energy renewable energy produces, it is often subsidized more heavily than fossil fuel. Government spending and price supports accounted for about one-third of the roughly $145 billion invested world-wide in clean energy in 2009, New Energy Finance estimates. Though renewable energy gets fewer subsidy dollars than the IEA says fossil fuels receive, the price supports are covering a larger portion of renewable energy firms' costs.

The End of Magical Climate Thinking

Foreign Policy, Ted Nordhaus & Michael Shellenberger, Jan. 13, 2010

The 2009 federal stimulus included billions for energy R&D, infrastructure, and efficiency, and overturned the conventional wisdom that the United States would never again make big federal investments in technology as it had during the Cold War. But no sooner had the president's stimulus program demonstrated that a new way forward on climate change and energy might be possible, then the new administration relinquished its climate change and energy policy to the partisans of the past …

Secretary of Energy Steven Chu said in February 2009 that Nobel-caliber breakthroughs are required in chemistry, physics, and biology to make more efficient batteries, solar panels, and biofuels that can compete with fossil fuels in price, and that nuclear power is needed to displace coal. Unfortunately, his view hasn't shaped the actions of the administration or Democrats in Congress … [W]ith greens and establishment Democrats fully lost in the magical idea that we can achieve massive emissions reductions through conservation, efficiency, and existing renewable technologies, there was scarcely any constituency inside the Beltway for the kind of big energy-technology program that Chu had hoped to launch.

Incumbent energy interests were happy to indulge the magical thinking … [The Waxman-Markey House bill passed in June 2009] would give R&D $1.1 billion a year, less than a third of current levels, and would give coal and utility companies $32 billion … [It] would not require emissions reductions below business-as-usual levels … [but resulted in a law] negotiated by the Environmental Defense Fund and Natural Resources Defense Council with energy companies that used a magic accounting trick that was visible in plain sight: counting [unreliable] carbon offsets as real reductions of U.S. emissions … Democrats and Republicans had, in the course of a few short months, effectively switched policy positions on energy, with Democrats voting to hand trillions in new subsidies to coal-burning utilities and power plants while gutting Clean Air Act restrictions on the construction of coal-fired power plants, and Republicans, long-standing coal boosters, voting against a pro-coal bill …

Incumbent energy interests had, in short, hijacked magical climate thinking for their own uses. They took cap-and-trade legislation and turned it into an opportunity for them to raise energy prices on consumers, invest a fraction of the higher revenues in clean energy, remove existing regulatory obstacles to the construction of coal plants, and lock in their competitive advantage while crowding out energy newcomers, including clean energy firms, for decades to come…

We simply do not have low-carbon technologies today that can at large scale replace fossil fuels at a cost that any political economy in the world is willing to impose upon itself. There will be no political solution to climate change, no binding international agreement to substantially reduce emissions, and no effective domestic carbon cap until low-carbon technologies are much cheaper than they are today. Unfortunately, pointing out this now fairly evident reality is viewed by most greens as an act of bad faith .. [T]he technologies we need will not materialize in response to carbon prices or emissions caps. Nor will they arrive, as many conservatives would have it, by getting the government out of the way and simply allowing a new generation of Steve Jobs and Bill Gates to tinker away in their garages.

Solving global warming's technology challenges will require not a single Apollo program or Manhattan Project, but many … The hard work of mobilizing the resources and institutions necessary to engineer our way to a low-carbon economy will look profoundly different from both the histrionics at Copenhagen and the slick sales pitch offered by carbon traders in Washington.

SUMMARY: CONGRESSIONAL CLIMATE & ENERGY LEGISLATION

Updated January 11, 2010

The energy and climate change fight is currently focused on the U.S. Senate because the House of Representatives already passed legislation in June 2009 (the “ACES Act” or the “Markey-Waxman” bill). Two primary pieces of legislation are being debated in the Senate: the Bingaman energy bill and the bipartisan Kerry-Graham-Lieberman climate bill.

There are several factors at play in 2010 that will affect what any new climate & energy laws look like (and might even determine whether Congress passes any laws at all).

• First, the 2010 congressional elections are making things difficult because many Democrats facing close re-election fights are worried about supporting controversial legislation, and President Obama has used a lot of political capital to try to pass health care legislation, thus leaving less for upcoming climate and financial regulation fights (as well as the higher priority economic & financial regulation agenda)
• Second, the intense partisanship that has developed in Congress over the last sixteen years means that most Republicans will fight to deny the Democrats and the President any victory. It will thus be very hard to find Republicans to replace wavering Democrats.
• Third, it is unclear yet that the business community that does support climate & energy legislation, especially the clean tech industry, can compete equally with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the coal & oil companies when making the economic, jobs, energy prices, and national security arguments. Environmentalists are unable to win this debate on their own.

The Senate climate bill is where the real difficulty lies; its cap-and-trade element being the most controversial with members of both political parties.  Nonetheless, there is an opportunity for earning some Republican support that will be needed to offset some wavering Democrats because of its sponsorship by Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. (There is another bipartisan climate bill sponsored by Republican Susan Collins of Maine and Democrat Maria Cantwell of Washington. It offers a cap-and-dividend solution instead of cap-and-trade.)

Advocates for Senate climate legislation, including the White House, are pushing back against calls to abandon a mandatory cap on U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in favor of a stand-alone energy bill. Division among Democrats on whether a new climate law is possible this year goes all the way to the top. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) recently told The Associated Press that passage of the legislation was unlikely.  Other Democrats who suggest that energy-only legislation has a better chance of passing in an election year include Agriculture Chairwoman Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Policy Chairman Byron Dorgan of North Dakota.

But Senate Foreign Relations Chairman John Kerry (D-MA) spoke to the undercurrent of pessimism in early January, “These are the dumb D.C. rumors that too often mark this city and are rendered meaningless on a daily basis. We can cross the finish line this year.” Sen. Graham said at the same time, “I am convinced that reason, logic and good business sense and good environmental policy will trump the status quo.”  And President Obama's top energy adviser, Carol Browner, insisted on January 11th that the Administration's goal remains a "comprehensive bill" that touches on all corners of the energy and climate debate, including the controversial cap-and-trade program.

Congress needs to hear from clean tech business leaders frequently on the economic growth, job creation, and international competitiveness issues. Otherwise, say members of Congress, the debate will be lost or the final laws so weak that they do not spark the clean energy economy. Click here for congressional contact information and look further in this document for message points that support clean tech’s agenda.

I.   HOUSE CLIMATE & ENERGY BILL (“ACES Act” / “Waxman-Markey bill”)

Key Date: Passed June 2009 by House (219 to 212)

Authors: Rep. Henry Waxman, Chairman of House Energy & Commerce Cmte; Rep. Ed Markey, Chairman of Cmte on Energy Independence & Global Warming

More Info: www.pewclimate.org/acesa

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17 % reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 83 % by 2050
• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 20% by 2020. Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, biogas and biofuels derived exclusively from eligible biomass, landfill gas, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, wastewater-treatment gas, coal-mine methane, and new hydro at post-1992 dams
• R&D of $190 billion to energy efficiency, renewables, carbon capture & storage, electric vehicles
• Transmission Grid Supports.
• Energy Efficiency for Buildings, Lights, Appliances.
• Green Bank Financing Office.
• Carbon Offsets Program.
• Coal Plant Pollution & CCS Standards.
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.

II.  SENATE CLIMATE BILL (“Kerry-Boxer” replaced by “Kerry-Graham-Lieberman”)

Key Dates: Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman outlined legislation December 2009 that replaces Kerry-Boxer legislation of September 2009

Authors: Sen. John Kerry (Democrat), Senate Foreign Affairs Committee Chair, Sen. Lindsey Graham (Republican), & Sen. Joe Lieberman (Independent)

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17% reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 80% over “long term”
• Carbon Offsets Program
• CCS Standards
• Nuclear & Transportation. Incentives for nuclear power plants & low-emissions transportation
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.
• Key Unanswered Question: how the permits to emit carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases would be distributed to utilities, manufacturers, agribusiness and other interests

III. SENATE ENERGY BILL (“American Clean Energy Leadership Act” / “Bingaman bill”)

Key Date: legislation passed by Energy Committee June 2009

Author: Sen. Jeff Bingaman, Chairman of the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee

• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 15% by 2021.  Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, landfill gas, incremental hydro, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, and new hydro at existing dams.
• Transmission “Interstate Highway System” & Grid Security.  Creates new planning system based on local, state and regional input with states taking initial lead. New security powers to Dept or Energy & FERC.
• Green Bank Financing Office
• CCS R&D Funding. $6.6 billion for 10 “early mover” large-scale CCS projects
• Offshore Drilling in Eastern Gulf of Mexico. Opens 3.8 billion barrels of new oil resources & 21.5 trillion cubic feet of new natural gas resources.

STATE BY STATE JOB GROWTH

Clean Energy & Climate Policies Lead to Economic Growth in the United States

New analysis shows that adopting comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation could create up to 1.9 million jobs

The State Fact Sheets were co-released by E2, Ceres, and The Clean Economy Network and also some state business groups. Feel free to distribute.

http://www.e2.org/jsp/controller?docName=jobs

New economic analysis shows that clean energy and climate policies would create jobs, increase consumers’ income, and strengthen the U.S. economy as a whole. Based on collaborate research by the University of Illinois, Yale University and the University of California, the new study clearly demonstrates that comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation, such as the American Clean Energy and Security Act and the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, would limit pollution and create incentives to drive large-scale investments in clean energy and energy efficiency.  

The analysis indicates that, on a national level, such legislation would up to 1.9 million new jobs, increase annual household income by up to $1,175 per year, and boost GDP by up to $111 billion – with all of those benefits measured relative to a scenario without such legislation. In addition, all the states would see economic gains are over and above the growth that they would see in the absence of such a bill.  

Environmental Entrepreneurs, along with the national investor coalition Ceres and the Clean Economy Network, have sponsored the publication of the following 50 state fact sheets that clearly illustrate the study’s findings about how each state will be impacted if we pass strong clean energy and climate policies to secure a safer and cleaner future for our country. Click on the links below to see those state fact sheets.  

See more information on the national results

Read the Executive Summary for the analysis

CLEAN TECH MESSAGING

Senators and Congressmen must hear from clean tech business leaders early and often or opponents will dominate and poison the public debate by arguing that the US economy will suffer, that jobs will be lost, that the technologies you are developing will not work, and even that global warming is still up for debate (if not a complete hoax). Your silence and the silence of other clean tech leaders will make passage of a truly effective law very difficult or even impossible. Call, write, email, and visit. Help Congress help you.

Click here for an easy way to contact Congress with this basic message:

Effect on American Consumers

* One Postage Stamp Per Day. The proposed legislation will cost Americans only $160 per year in increased energy prices -- one postage stamp per day -- while poor Americans actually save money.  source: non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO)

* Americans Actually Will Save Money When Adding Energy Efficiency. Energy efficiency savings could result in $250 per year for American consumers, making the energy and climate price tag for Americans effectively zero. 
* Inaction Means Reduced Global & US GDP.

20% global GDP reduction per year 
1-2% US GDP reduction per year

* New, American Jobs Will Be Created. An estimated 1.7 new American jobs will be created with this legislation. source: PERI/CAP (UMass. Political Economy & Research Institute / Center for American Progress)

State by State Economic Benefits

Research is available that outlines economic and job benefits for each state. Senators and Congressmen care how this will affect their constituents, so the data is a good resource.  Click here or go to

< www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/pdf/peri_report.pdf > and look in Appendix 2.

RECENT CLEAN ENERGY NEWS ARTICLES

• US Patent Office Fast Tracks Clean Tech Patents (Wall Street Journal)
• US Dept of Agriculture Marks $90million for Climate Research (NY Times)
• Study: Global Warming is Not Slowing (NY Times)
• Study: US Economic Growth & Job Creation from Climate Bill (UC-Berkeley)
• Study: Legislation’s Benefits Outweigh Costs (Wall Street Journal)
• Green Jobs Paying $30 an Hour (Yahoo!)

Copenhagen Developments

NY Times Summary: Representatives of 193 nations are about to conclude climate talks in Copenhagen. A new report has found that an overall warming trend is continuing. Another study suggests that the steps needed to slow that climb, or reverse it, will cost trillions of dollars. The U.S. has said it will cut emissions by 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020 and has promised to help raise $100 billion to help poor countries make the transition to fewer emissions. China has said it would cut its "carbon intensity," or the amount of emissions in relation to production, by 40 to 45 percent, but has made it clear that a greater percent is not negotiable. The European Union said December 17th that it will not raise its 20 percent cuts to 30 percent, as it has offered, unless it sees more ambitious actions from other countries, especially China. (AP)

Obama Heads to Copenhagen, Even Non-Binding Deal In Question

AP, Dec 18, 2009

Obama will be on hand for the final day of the two-week, 193-nation U.N. climate conference. But U.S.-China acrimony, a bitter divide between rich and poor nations and dissatisfaction with the U.S. emissions-reduction pledge clouded prospects for any agreement. Schedules for foreign trips and international leader gatherings are usually set in advance in excruciating detail. Agreements are almost always inked ahead of time, with all but the signatures filled in. Not so for this trip … Thursday's offer from the U.S. to help raise $100 billion a year starting in 2020 to get poorer nations started on converting to clean energy and recovering from climate damage offered some hope. China responded by going some way to meet a firm U.S. demand that Beijing and other developing economies make cuts in emissions growth that are open to international verification. There has been much hope in Copenhagen that Obama would arrive with a new proposal and salvage the talks. That's not likely … Any agreement is expected, at best, to envision emissions-cutting targets for rich nations and billions in help for poor countries, but to fall well short of the goal of a legally binding pact … "Coming back with an empty agreement would be far worse than coming back empty-handed," said Robert Gibbs, Mr. Obama's press secretary.

Obama Sets a Target, China Announces Its Own, and The US & India Sign an MOU

The White House announced on November 25 that President Obama is offering a U.S. target for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the range of 17% below 2005 levels by 2020. The proposed target agrees with the limit set by climate legislation that has passed the U.S. House of Representatives, but the U.S. Senate is currently considering a bill that cuts GHG emissions to 20% below 2005 levels by 2020. The White House noted that the final U.S. emissions target will ultimately fall in line with the climate legislation, once that legislation passes both houses of Congress and is approved by the President. The U.S. Department of State has also established the "COP-15" Web site and a Facebook page to mark the event. The U.N. climate change conference is officially known as the 15th annual session of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, or COP-15 for short. See the White House press release and the State Department's press release, COP-15 Web site, and COP-15 Facebook Page.

China Cuts Rate of Growth. The day after the White House announced the U.S. GHG targets, China announced that it will reduce the intensity of its carbon dioxide emissions by 40%-45% by 2020. Carbon dioxide emissions intensity is defined as the amount of carbon dioxide emissions per unit of gross domestic product (GDP). China expects its GDP to at least double by 2020, which could potentially result in a doubling of carbon dioxide emissions, but the new target should hold the increase in carbon dioxide emissions to 20% or less. The carbon intensity target will be a binding goal that China will incorporate into its medium- and long-term development plans. China also announced plans to invest in the research, development, and commercialization of energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies, as well as other low-carbon energy technologies. The country plans to draw on non-fossil-fuel energy sources for 15% of its energy needs by 2020 and will encourage low-carbon lifestyles and consumption. Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao will attend the U.N. climate change conference in Copenhagen. See the announcement on the Chinese Government's official Web portal.

United States and India to Cooperate on Clean Energy Technologies. President Barack Obama and India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh signed a comprehensive Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on November 24 for their nations to work together to speed up the development and deployment of clean energy technology. Under the new MOU, the two nations will launch a Clean Energy and Climate Change Initiative, with the goal of improving technologies to make clean energy more affordable and efficient. The initiative will include cooperation in wind and solar energy, second-generation biofuels, and energy efficiency, as well as unconventional sources of natural gas and clean coal technologies, including carbon capture and storage. See the White House press release and the Green Partnership Fact Sheet (PDF 81 KB).

Congress & The Obama Administration

Senators Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman Unveil New Climate Bill

Wall Street Journal & Letter to President Obama, Dec. 10, 2009

A new bipartisan climate bill combines caps on greenhouse-gas levels with new offshore oil-and-gas exploration and nuclear power plant incentives. Offered by Sens. John Kerry (D., Mass.), Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.), and Joe Lieberman (I., Conn.), President Obama called it a "positive development,” but it's still unclear whether the proposal will win over Democrats from heartland states and Republicans opposed to adopting caps on U.S. carbon emissions. Meanwhile, another bill offering a “cap and dividend” solution instead of cap and trade is being pushed by Senators Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Susan Collins (R-ME).

EPA Paves Way for Carbon Regulation.

NY Times, Dec 7, 2009

The EPA announced Monday that it has formally determined that greenhouse gases pose a danger to human health and the environment. The so-called endangerment finding permits the Obama Administration to regulate emissions through agency rule-making procedures if Congress fails to enact climate legislation.

Obama Promotes Home Energy Efficiency Program

AP, Dec 15, 2009

Hoping to jump-start his plans for job growth, President Barack Obama is pushing Congress to pass incentives for homeowners who retrofit their homes to make them more energy-efficient. Last week, he advanced a new spending plan that would provide tax breaks for energy-efficient retrofits in homes and, thereby, put some people back to work. This would be separate from the climate and energy bill expected to be debated next year.

How the Recover Act Supports a Clean Energy Economy

ABC News, Dec 15, 2009

The White House has released a memo that VP Biden presented to the president outlining ways that $80 billion in direct funding from the Administration’s $787 billion Recovery Act funding is making progress for toward a cleaner, more energy efficient economy. The report details ways that stimulus funds have been used toward advances in renewable energy, energy grid modernization, home energy efficiency projects and green automobiles:

• Renewable Energy: The U.S. is on-track to double renewable energy generation, including solar, wind and geothermal, and double renewable manufacturing capacity in just three years because of Recovery Act investments.

• Vehicles and Fuels of the Future: Over the next six years, three new electric vehicles plants—the first ever in the U.S.—and 30 new battery plants will be fully operational because of the Administration’s $16 billion investment in plug-in hybrids, all-electric vehicles and the infrastructure needed to power them, as well as new clean fuels. When President Obama took office there were just 2 advanced battery and electric drive component factories in the U.S.

• Grid Modernization: Twenty-six million smart meters will be installed in U.S. homes by 2013 – more than triple the number currently in service – as a result of the Administration’s $4 billion Recovery Act investment in a smart energy grid and the one-to-one match in private sector funding. This technology allows consumers to monitor and regulate their own energy usage and costs.

• Energy Efficiency: Because the Administration is making the largest single investment in home energy efficiency in U.S history through the Recovery Act and other initiatives, nearly one million home energy efficiency retrofits will have happened by 2012.

• Carbon Capture: Because of Recovery Act funding and existing loan guarantee authority, there will be 5 commercial scale power plants operating with large carbon capture sequestration facilities by 2015. When President Obama took office, there were zero.

• Science and Innovation: Through the Recovery Act, the Administration is investing $400 million in some of the most advanced research in wind, solar, and geothermal technologies through the ARPA-E program to make these clean sources of energy more affordable and easier to store and transport. A year ago, this critical program was unfunded.

Speaker Pelosi Story on Getting House Climate Legislation Passed Last June

Time Magazine, Dec 16, 2009 (Runner Up for “Person of the Year”)

Nancy Pelosi and her army of whips had counted the votes and counted them again. [I]n the middle of a recession, the Waxman-Markey climate & energy law that Republicans were calling a job killer seemed too much to ask of her stressed-out caucus last summer, especially after Democrats had already put their necks on the line to bail out Wall Street and the auto industry and to pass a $787 billion economic-stimulus package, and when they were looking ahead to a massive overhaul of the health care system. But Pelosi was undaunted.

To win Rust Belt lawmakers, Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Henry Waxman had whittled down the bill's targets for reducing global warming and switching to renewable fuels. But that was just the beginning of the dealmaking. He and Pelosi doled out billions of dollars in pollution allowances to utilities, industry and agriculture. One freshman Congressman from Florida demanded — and got — a promise of a $50 million hurricane-research center in his district. For others, there was money to train low-income workers for green jobs and to make public housing more energy-efficient. Though some in the White House had misgivings about the wisdom of pushing ahead, Obama worked the phones and even pulled wavering lawmakers aside during a June 25 luau-themed picnic on the South Lawn.

The suspense went nearly down to the wire, but when the gavel fell at 7:17 p.m. on June 26, Pelosi had won by one vote. She recalled that moment in a recent interview, barely able to get out the words as she battled a sore throat and nursed a cup of hot water, lemon and honey through a straw. "I never thought for one minute that we wouldn't win," she said in a raspy whisper. "Never." It can be foolish — maybe even dangerous — to underestimate Nancy Pelosi.

Opinion Pieces

Will Big Business Save the Earth?

Jared Diamond (Author of Guns, Germs, & Steel), NY Times, Dec 5, 2009

There is a widespread view, particularly among environmentalists and liberals, that big businesses are environmentally destructive, greedy, evil and driven by short-term profits. I have more nuanced feelings. The embrace of environmental concerns by chief executives has accelerated recently for several reasons. Lower consumption of environmental resources saves money in the short run. Maintaining sustainable resource levels and not polluting saves money in the long run. So why do policy changes face resistance from some businesses and many politicians?

Going Cheney on Climate

Thomas Friedman, NY Times, Dec 8, 2009

I’m for doing the Cheney-thing on climate — preparing for 1 percent. In the face of concerns that a Pakistani scientist was offering nuclear-weapons expertise to Al Qaeda, reportedly declared: “If there’s a 1% chance that Pakistani scientists are helping Al Qaeda build or develop a nuclear weapon, we have to treat it as... a certainty in terms of our response.” Cheney contended that the U.S. had to confront a very new type of threat: a “low-probability, high-impact event.” Many of the same people who defend Mr. Cheney’s One Percent Doctrine on nukes tell us not to worry at all about catastrophic global warming, 
where the odds are, in fact, a lot higher than 1 percent.

SUMMARY: CONGRESSIONAL CLIMATE & ENERGY LEGISLATION

December 10, 2009

The energy and climate change fight is currently occurring in the U.S. Senate because the House of Representatives passed legislation in June 2009 (the “ACES Act” or the “Markey-Waxman” bill). Two primary pieces of legislation are currently being debated in the Senate: the Bingaman energy bill and the bipartisan Kerry-Graham-Lieberman climate bill that has effectively replaced an earlier Kerry-Boxer bill. The climate bill, sponsored by Democrat John Kerry, Republican Lindsey Graham, and Independent Joe Lieberman, has opened the real possibility of finding enough Republicans and moderate Democrats to move things along in the first half of 2010. Nonetheless, as many as five Senate committees will hold hearings before a final vote by the entire Senate.

As the Copenhagen conference concludes this week, the public debate in the U.S. has been increasingly loud because all sides want to define the issues long before the legislation moves to first place on the Washington agenda. Congress needs to hear from clean tech business leaders frequently on the economic growth, job creation, and international competitiveness issues. Otherwise, say members of Congress, the debate will be lost or the final laws so weak that they do not spark the clean energy economy. Click here for congressional contact information and look further in this document for message points that support clean tech’s agenda.

I.   HOUSE CLIMATE & ENERGY BILL (“ACES Act” / “Waxman-Markey bill”)

Key Date: Passed June 2009 by House (219 to 212)

Authors: Rep. Henry Waxman, Chairman of House Energy & Commerce Cmte; Rep. Ed Markey, Chairman of Cmte on Energy Independence & Global Warming

More Info: www.pewclimate.org/acesa

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17 % reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 83 % by 2050
• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 20% by 2020. Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, biogas and biofuels derived exclusively from eligible biomass, landfill gas, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, wastewater-treatment gas, coal-mine methane, and new hydro at post-1992 dams
• R&D of $190 billion to energy efficiency, renewables, carbon capture & storage, electric vehicles
• Transmission Grid Supports.
• Energy Efficiency for Buildings, Lights, Appliances.
• Green Bank Financing Office.
• Carbon Offsets Program.
• Coal Plant Pollution & CCS Standards.
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.

II.  SENATE CLIMATE BILL (“Kerry-Boxer” replaced by “Kerry-Graham-Lieberman”)

Key Dates: Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman outlined legislation December 2009 that replaces Kerry-Boxer legislation of September 2009

Authors: Sen. John Kerry (Democrat), Senate Foreign Affairs Committee Chair, Sen. Lindsey Graham (Republican), & Sen. Joe Lieberman (Independent)

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17% reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 80% over “long term”
• Carbon Offsets Program
• CCS Standards
• Nuclear & Transportation. Incentives for nuclear power plants & low-emissions transportation
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.
• Key Unanswered Question: how the permits to emit carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases would be distributed to utilities, manufacturers, agribusiness and other interests

III. SENATE ENERGY BILL (“American Clean Energy Leadership Act” / “Bingaman bill”)

Key Date: legislation passed by Energy Committee June 2009

Author: Sen. Jeff Bingaman, Chairman of the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee

• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 15% by 2021.  Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, landfill gas, incremental hydro, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, and new hydro at existing dams.
• Transmission “Interstate Highway System” & Grid Security.  Creates new planning system based on local, state and regional input with states taking initial lead. New security powers to Dept or Energy & FERC.
• Green Bank Financing Office
• CCS R&D Funding. $6.6 billion for 10 “early mover” large-scale CCS projects
• Offshore Drilling in Eastern Gulf of Mexico. Opens 3.8 billion barrels of new oil resources & 21.5 trillion cubic feet of new natural gas resources.

STATE BY STATE JOB GROWTH

Clean Energy & Climate Policies Lead to Economic Growth in the United States

New analysis shows that adopting comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation could create up to 1.9 million jobs

The State Fact Sheets were co-released by E2, Ceres, and The Clean Economy Network

and also some state business groups. Feel free to distribute.

http://www.e2.org/jsp/controller?docName=jobs

New economic analysis shows that clean energy and climate policies would create jobs, increase consumers’ income, and strengthen the U.S. economy as a whole. Based on collaborate research by the University of Illinois, Yale University and the University of California, the new study clearly demonstrates that comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation, such as the American Clean Energy and Security Act and the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, would limit pollution and create incentives to drive large-scale investments in clean energy and energy efficiency.  

The analysis indicates that, on a national level, such legislation would up to 1.9 million new jobs, increase annual household income by up to $1,175 per year, and boost GDP by up to $111 billion – with all of those benefits measured relative to a scenario without such legislation. In addition, all the states would see economic gains are over and above the growth that they would see in the absence of such a bill.  

Environmental Entrepreneurs, along with the national investor coalition Ceres and the Clean Economy Network, have sponsored the publication of the following 50 state fact sheets that clearly illustrate the study’s findings about how each state will be impacted if we pass strong clean energy and climate policies to secure a safer and cleaner future for our country. Click on the links below to see those state fact sheets.  

See more information on the national results

Read the Executive Summary for the analysis

CLEAN TECH MESSAGING

Senators and Congressmen must hear from clean tech business leaders early and often or opponents will dominate and poison the public debate by arguing that the US economy will suffer, that jobs will be lost, that the technologies you are developing will not work, and even that global warming is still up for debate (if not a complete hoax). Your silence and the silence of other clean tech leaders will make passage of a truly effective law very difficult or even impossible. Call, write, email, and visit. Help Congress help you.

Click here for an easy way to contact Congress with this basic message:

Effect on American Consumers

* One Postage Stamp Per Day. The proposed legislation will cost Americans only $160 per year in increased energy prices -- one postage stamp per day -- while poor Americans actually save money.  source: non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO)

* Americans Actually Will Save Money When Adding Energy Efficiency. Energy efficiency savings could result in $250 per year for American consumers, making the energy and climate price tag for Americans effectively zero. 
* Inaction Means Reduced Global & US GDP.

20% global GDP reduction per year 
1-2% US GDP reduction per year

* New, American Jobs Will Be Created. An estimated 1.7 new American jobs will be created with this legislation. source: PERI/CAP (UMass. Political Economy & Research Institute / Center for American Progress)

State by State Economic Benefits

Research is available that outlines economic and job benefits for each state. Senators and Congressmen care how this will affect their constituents, so the data is a good resource.  Click here or go to

< www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/pdf/peri_report.pdf > and look in Appendix 2.

(also posted online at The Huffington Post)

Two primary pieces of legislation are being debated in the Senate: the Bingaman energy bill and the bipartisan Kerry-Graham-Lieberman climate bill.

There are several factors at play in 2010 that will affect what any new climate & energy laws look like (and might even determine whether Congress passes any laws at all).

• First, the 2010 congressional elections are making things difficult because many Democrats facing close re-election fights are worried about supporting controversial (and even costly) legislation, and President Obama has used a lot of political capital to pass health care legislation, which leaves less for upcoming climate and financial regulation fights.
• Second, the intense partisanship that has developed in Congress over the last sixteen years means that most Republicans will fight to deny the Democrats and the President any victory. It will thus be very hard to find Republicans to replace wavering Democrats.
• Third, it is unclear yet that the business community that does support climate & energy legislation, especially the clean tech industry, can compete equally with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the coal & oil companies when making the economic, jobs, energy prices, and national security arguments. Environmentalists are unable to win this debate on their own.

The Senate climate bill is where the real difficulty lies; its cap-and-trade element being the most controversial with members of both political parties.  Nonetheless, there is an opportunity for earning some Republican support that will be needed to offset some wavering Democrats because of its sponsorship by Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. (There is another bipartisan climate bill sponsored by Republican Susan Collins of Maine and Democrat Maria Cantwell of Washington. It offers a cap-and-dividend solution instead of cap-and-trade; this does not currently appear to be the primary vehicle for a new national climate policy.)

Advocates for Senate climate legislation, including the White House, are pushing back against calls to abandon a mandatory cap on U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in favor of a stand-alone energy bill. Division among Democrats on whether a new climate law is possible this year goes all the way to the top. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) recently told The Associated Press that passage of the legislation was unlikely.  Other Democrats who suggest that energy-only legislation has a better chance of passing in an election year include Agriculture Chairwoman Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Policy Chairman Byron Dorgan of North Dakota.

But Senate Foreign Relations Chairman John Kerry (D-MA) spoke to the undercurrent of pessimism, “These are the dumb D.C. rumors that too often mark this city and are rendered meaningless on a daily basis. We can cross the finish line this year.” Sen. Graham said this week, “I am convinced that reason, logic and good business sense and good environmental policy will trump the status quo.”  And President Obama's top energy adviser, Carol Browner, insisted January 11th that the Administration's goal remains a "comprehensive bill" that touches on all corners of the energy and climate debate, including the controversial cap-and-trade program.

RECENT CLEAN ENERGY NEWS ARTICLES

• US Patent Office Fast Tracks Clean Tech Patents (Wall Street Journal)
• US Dept of Agriculture Marks $90million for Climate Research (NY Times)
• Study: Global Warming is Not Slowing (NY Times)
• Study: US Economic Growth & Job Creation from Climate Bill (UC-Berkeley)
• Study: Legislation’s Benefits Outweigh Costs (Wall Street Journal)
• Green Jobs Paying $30 an Hour (Yahoo!)

Copenhagen Developments

NY Times Summary: Representatives of 193 nations are about to conclude climate talks in Copenhagen. A new report has found that an overall warming trend is continuing. Another study suggests that the steps needed to slow that climb, or reverse it, will cost trillions of dollars. The U.S. has said it will cut emissions by 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020 and has promised to help raise $100 billion to help poor countries make the transition to fewer emissions. China has said it would cut its "carbon intensity," or the amount of emissions in relation to production, by 40 to 45 percent, but has made it clear that a greater percent is not negotiable. The European Union said December 17th that it will not raise its 20 percent cuts to 30 percent, as it has offered, unless it sees more ambitious actions from other countries, especially China. (AP)

Obama Heads to Copenhagen, Even Non-Binding Deal In Question

AP, Dec 18, 2009

Obama will be on hand for the final day of the two-week, 193-nation U.N. climate conference. But U.S.-China acrimony, a bitter divide between rich and poor nations and dissatisfaction with the U.S. emissions-reduction pledge clouded prospects for any agreement. Schedules for foreign trips and international leader gatherings are usually set in advance in excruciating detail. Agreements are almost always inked ahead of time, with all but the signatures filled in. Not so for this trip … Thursday's offer from the U.S. to help raise $100 billion a year starting in 2020 to get poorer nations started on converting to clean energy and recovering from climate damage offered some hope. China responded by going some way to meet a firm U.S. demand that Beijing and other developing economies make cuts in emissions growth that are open to international verification. There has been much hope in Copenhagen that Obama would arrive with a new proposal and salvage the talks. That's not likely … Any agreement is expected, at best, to envision emissions-cutting targets for rich nations and billions in help for poor countries, but to fall well short of the goal of a legally binding pact … "Coming back with an empty agreement would be far worse than coming back empty-handed," said Robert Gibbs, Mr. Obama's press secretary.

Obama Sets a Target, China Announces Its Own, and The US & India Sign an MOU

The White House announced on November 25 that President Obama is offering a U.S. target for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the range of 17% below 2005 levels by 2020. The proposed target agrees with the limit set by climate legislation that has passed the U.S. House of Representatives, but the U.S. Senate is currently considering a bill that cuts GHG emissions to 20% below 2005 levels by 2020. The White House noted that the final U.S. emissions target will ultimately fall in line with the climate legislation, once that legislation passes both houses of Congress and is approved by the President. The U.S. Department of State has also established the "COP-15" Web site and a Facebook page to mark the event. The U.N. climate change conference is officially known as the 15th annual session of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, or COP-15 for short. See the White House press release and the State Department's press release, COP-15 Web site, and COP-15 Facebook Page.

China Cuts Rate of Growth. The day after the White House announced the U.S. GHG targets, China announced that it will reduce the intensity of its carbon dioxide emissions by 40%-45% by 2020. Carbon dioxide emissions intensity is defined as the amount of carbon dioxide emissions per unit of gross domestic product (GDP). China expects its GDP to at least double by 2020, which could potentially result in a doubling of carbon dioxide emissions, but the new target should hold the increase in carbon dioxide emissions to 20% or less. The carbon intensity target will be a binding goal that China will incorporate into its medium- and long-term development plans. China also announced plans to invest in the research, development, and commercialization of energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies, as well as other low-carbon energy technologies. The country plans to draw on non-fossil-fuel energy sources for 15% of its energy needs by 2020 and will encourage low-carbon lifestyles and consumption. Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao will attend the U.N. climate change conference in Copenhagen. See the announcement on the Chinese Government's official Web portal.

United States and India to Cooperate on Clean Energy Technologies. President Barack Obama and India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh signed a comprehensive Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on November 24 for their nations to work together to speed up the development and deployment of clean energy technology. Under the new MOU, the two nations will launch a Clean Energy and Climate Change Initiative, with the goal of improving technologies to make clean energy more affordable and efficient. The initiative will include cooperation in wind and solar energy, second-generation biofuels, and energy efficiency, as well as unconventional sources of natural gas and clean coal technologies, including carbon capture and storage. See the White House press release and the Green Partnership Fact Sheet (PDF 81 KB).

Congress & The Obama Administration

Senators Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman Unveil New Climate Bill

Wall Street Journal & Letter to President Obama, Dec. 10, 2009

A new bipartisan climate bill combines caps on greenhouse-gas levels with new offshore oil-and-gas exploration and nuclear power plant incentives. Offered by Sens. John Kerry (D., Mass.), Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.), and Joe Lieberman (I., Conn.), President Obama called it a "positive development,” but it's still unclear whether the proposal will win over Democrats from heartland states and Republicans opposed to adopting caps on U.S. carbon emissions. Meanwhile, another bill offering a “cap and dividend” solution instead of cap and trade is being pushed by Senators Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Susan Collins (R-ME).

EPA Paves Way for Carbon Regulation.

NY Times, Dec 7, 2009

The EPA announced Monday that it has formally determined that greenhouse gases pose a danger to human health and the environment. The so-called endangerment finding permits the Obama Administration to regulate emissions through agency rule-making procedures if Congress fails to enact climate legislation.

Obama Promotes Home Energy Efficiency Program

AP, Dec 15, 2009

Hoping to jump-start his plans for job growth, President Barack Obama is pushing Congress to pass incentives for homeowners who retrofit their homes to make them more energy-efficient. Last week, he advanced a new spending plan that would provide tax breaks for energy-efficient retrofits in homes and, thereby, put some people back to work. This would be separate from the climate and energy bill expected to be debated next year.

How the Recover Act Supports a Clean Energy Economy

ABC News, Dec 15, 2009

The White House has released a memo that VP Biden presented to the president outlining ways that $80 billion in direct funding from the Administration’s $787 billion Recovery Act funding is making progress for toward a cleaner, more energy efficient economy. The report details ways that stimulus funds have been used toward advances in renewable energy, energy grid modernization, home energy efficiency projects and green automobiles:

• Renewable Energy: The U.S. is on-track to double renewable energy generation, including solar, wind and geothermal, and double renewable manufacturing capacity in just three years because of Recovery Act investments.

• Vehicles and Fuels of the Future: Over the next six years, three new electric vehicles plants—the first ever in the U.S.—and 30 new battery plants will be fully operational because of the Administration’s $16 billion investment in plug-in hybrids, all-electric vehicles and the infrastructure needed to power them, as well as new clean fuels. When President Obama took office there were just 2 advanced battery and electric drive component factories in the U.S.

• Grid Modernization: Twenty-six million smart meters will be installed in U.S. homes by 2013 – more than triple the number currently in service – as a result of the Administration’s $4 billion Recovery Act investment in a smart energy grid and the one-to-one match in private sector funding. This technology allows consumers to monitor and regulate their own energy usage and costs.

• Energy Efficiency: Because the Administration is making the largest single investment in home energy efficiency in U.S history through the Recovery Act and other initiatives, nearly one million home energy efficiency retrofits will have happened by 2012.

• Carbon Capture: Because of Recovery Act funding and existing loan guarantee authority, there will be 5 commercial scale power plants operating with large carbon capture sequestration facilities by 2015. When President Obama took office, there were zero.

• Science and Innovation: Through the Recovery Act, the Administration is investing $400 million in some of the most advanced research in wind, solar, and geothermal technologies through the ARPA-E program to make these clean sources of energy more affordable and easier to store and transport. A year ago, this critical program was unfunded.

Speaker Pelosi Story on Getting House Climate Legislation Passed Last June

Time Magazine, Dec 16, 2009 (Runner Up for “Person of the Year”)

Nancy Pelosi and her army of whips had counted the votes and counted them again. [I]n the middle of a recession, the Waxman-Markey climate & energy law that Republicans were calling a job killer seemed too much to ask of her stressed-out caucus last summer, especially after Democrats had already put their necks on the line to bail out Wall Street and the auto industry and to pass a $787 billion economic-stimulus package, and when they were looking ahead to a massive overhaul of the health care system. But Pelosi was undaunted.

To win Rust Belt lawmakers, Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Henry Waxman had whittled down the bill's targets for reducing global warming and switching to renewable fuels. But that was just the beginning of the dealmaking. He and Pelosi doled out billions of dollars in pollution allowances to utilities, industry and agriculture. One freshman Congressman from Florida demanded — and got — a promise of a $50 million hurricane-research center in his district. For others, there was money to train low-income workers for green jobs and to make public housing more energy-efficient. Though some in the White House had misgivings about the wisdom of pushing ahead, Obama worked the phones and even pulled wavering lawmakers aside during a June 25 luau-themed picnic on the South Lawn.

The suspense went nearly down to the wire, but when the gavel fell at 7:17 p.m. on June 26, Pelosi had won by one vote. She recalled that moment in a recent interview, barely able to get out the words as she battled a sore throat and nursed a cup of hot water, lemon and honey through a straw. "I never thought for one minute that we wouldn't win," she said in a raspy whisper. "Never." It can be foolish — maybe even dangerous — to underestimate Nancy Pelosi.

Opinion Pieces

Will Big Business Save the Earth?

Jared Diamond (Author of Guns, Germs, & Steel), NY Times, Dec 5, 2009

There is a widespread view, particularly among environmentalists and liberals, that big businesses are environmentally destructive, greedy, evil and driven by short-term profits. I have more nuanced feelings. The embrace of environmental concerns by chief executives has accelerated recently for several reasons. Lower consumption of environmental resources saves money in the short run. Maintaining sustainable resource levels and not polluting saves money in the long run. So why do policy changes face resistance from some businesses and many politicians?

Going Cheney on Climate

Thomas Friedman, NY Times, Dec 8, 2009

I’m for doing the Cheney-thing on climate — preparing for 1 percent. In the face of concerns that a Pakistani scientist was offering nuclear-weapons expertise to Al Qaeda, reportedly declared: “If there’s 
a 1% chance that Pakistani scientists are helping Al Qaeda build or develop a nuclear weapon, we have to treat it as... a certainty in terms of our response.” Cheney contended that the U.S. had to confront a very 
new type of threat: a “low-probability, high-impact event.” Many of the same people who defend Mr. Cheney’s One Percent Doctrine on nukes tell us not to worry at all about catastrophic global warming, 
where the odds are, in fact, a lot higher than 1 percent.

SUMMARY: CONGRESSIONAL CLIMATE & ENERGY LEGISLATION

December 10, 2009

The energy and climate change fight is currently occurring in the U.S. Senate because the House of Representatives passed legislation in June 2009 (the “ACES Act” or the “Markey-Waxman” bill). Two primary pieces of legislation are currently being debated in the Senate: the Bingaman energy bill and the bipartisan Kerry-Graham-Lieberman climate bill that has effectively replaced an earlier Kerry-Boxer bill. The climate bill, sponsored by Democrat John Kerry, Republican Lindsey Graham, and Independent Joe Lieberman, has opened the real possibility of finding enough Republicans and moderate Democrats to move things along in the first half of 2010. Nonetheless, as many as five Senate committees will hold hearings before a final vote by the entire Senate.

As the Copenhagen conference concludes this week, the public debate in the U.S. has been increasingly loud because all sides want to define the issues long before the legislation moves to first place on the Washington agenda. Congress needs to hear from clean tech business leaders frequently on the economic growth, job creation, and international competitiveness issues. Otherwise, say members of Congress, the debate will be lost or the final laws so weak that they do not spark the clean energy economy. Click here for congressional contact information and look further in this document for message points that support clean tech’s agenda.

I.   HOUSE CLIMATE & ENERGY BILL (“ACES Act” / “Waxman-Markey bill”)

Key Date: Passed June 2009 by House (219 to 212)

Authors: Rep. Henry Waxman, Chairman of House Energy & Commerce Cmte; Rep. Ed Markey, Chairman of Cmte on Energy Independence & Global Warming

More Info: www.pewclimate.org/acesa

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17 % reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 83 % by 2050
• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 20% by 2020. Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, biogas and biofuels derived exclusively from eligible biomass, landfill gas, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, wastewater-treatment gas, coal-mine methane, and new hydro at post-1992 dams
• R&D of $190 billion to energy efficiency, renewables, carbon capture & storage, electric vehicles
• Transmission Grid Supports.
• Energy Efficiency for Buildings, Lights, Appliances.
• Green Bank Financing Office.
• Carbon Offsets Program.
• Coal Plant Pollution & CCS Standards.
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.

II.  SENATE CLIMATE BILL (“Kerry-Boxer” replaced by “Kerry-Graham-Lieberman”)

Key Dates: Kerry, Graham, and Lieberman outlined legislation December 2009 that replaces Kerry-Boxer legislation of September 2009

Authors: Sen. John Kerry (Democrat), Senate Foreign Affairs Committee Chair, Sen. Lindsey Graham (Republican), & Sen. Joe Lieberman (Independent)

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17% reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 80% over “long term”
• Carbon Offsets Program
• CCS Standards
• Nuclear & Transportation. Incentives for nuclear power plants & low-emissions transportation
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.
• Key Unanswered Question: how the permits to emit carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases would be distributed to utilities, manufacturers, agribusiness and other interests

III. SENATE ENERGY BILL (“American Clean Energy Leadership Act” / “Bingaman bill”)

Key Date: legislation passed by Energy Committee June 2009

Author: Sen. Jeff Bingaman, Chairman of the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee

• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 15% by 2021.  Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, landfill gas, incremental hydro, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, and new hydro at existing dams.
• Transmission “Interstate Highway System” & Grid Security.  Creates new planning system based on local, state and regional input with states taking initial lead. New security powers to Dept or Energy & FERC.
• Green Bank Financing Office
• CCS R&D Funding. $6.6 billion for 10 “early mover” large-scale CCS projects
• Offshore Drilling in Eastern Gulf of Mexico. Opens 3.8 billion barrels of new oil resources & 21.5 trillion cubic feet of new natural gas resources.

STATE BY STATE JOB GROWTH

Clean Energy & Climate Policies Lead to Economic Growth in the United States

New analysis shows that adopting comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation could create up to 1.9 million jobs

The State Fact Sheets were co-released by E2, Ceres, and The Clean Economy Network and also some state business groups. Feel free to distribute.

http://www.e2.org/jsp/controller?docName=jobs

New economic analysis shows that clean energy and climate policies would create jobs, increase consumers’ income, and strengthen the U.S. economy as a whole. Based on collaborate research by the University of Illinois, Yale University and the University of California, the new study clearly demonstrates that comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation, such as the American Clean Energy and Security Act and the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, would limit pollution and create incentives to drive large-scale investments in clean energy and energy efficiency.  

The analysis indicates that, on a national level, such legislation would up to 1.9 million new jobs, increase annual household income by up to $1,175 per year, and boost GDP by up to $111 billion – with all of those benefits measured relative to a scenario without such legislation. In addition, all the states would see economic gains are over and above the growth that they would see in the absence of such a bill.  

Environmental Entrepreneurs, along with the national investor coalition Ceres and the Clean Economy Network, have sponsored the publication of the following 50 state fact sheets that clearly illustrate the study’s findings about how each state will be impacted if we pass strong clean energy and climate policies to secure a safer and cleaner future for our country. Click on the links below to see those state fact sheets.  

See more information on the national results

Read the Executive Summary for the analysis

CLEAN TECH MESSAGING

Senators and Congressmen must hear from clean tech business leaders early and often or opponents will dominate and poison the public debate by arguing that the US economy will suffer, that jobs will be lost, that the technologies you are developing will not work, and even that global warming is still up for debate (if not a complete hoax). Your silence and the silence of other clean tech leaders will make passage of a truly effective law very difficult or even impossible. Call, write, email, and visit. Help Congress help you.

Click here for an easy way to contact Congress with this basic message:

Effect on American Consumers

* One Postage Stamp Per Day. The proposed legislation will cost Americans only $160 per year in increased energy prices -- one postage stamp per day -- while poor Americans actually save money.  source: non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO)

* Americans Actually Will Save Money When Adding Energy Efficiency. Energy efficiency savings could result in $250 per year for American consumers, making the energy and climate price tag for Americans effectively zero. 
* Inaction Means Reduced Global & US GDP.

20% global GDP reduction per year 
1-2% US GDP reduction per year

* New, American Jobs Will Be Created. An estimated 1.7 new American jobs will be created with this legislation. source: PERI/CAP (UMass. Political Economy & Research Institute / Center for American Progress)

State by State Economic Benefits

Research is available that outlines economic and job benefits for each state. Senators and Congressmen care how this will affect their constituents, so the data is a good resource.  Click here or go to

< www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/pdf/peri_report.pdf > and look in Appendix 2.

RECENT CLEAN ENERGY NEWS ARTICLES

• Senate Enviro Cmte Passes Law, Finance Cmte Debates Costs, Houston Chronicle & The Hill
• Green Jobs Paying $30 an Hour, Yahoo!
• 84% of Top Economists Concur on Threat of Warming, NY Times
• Pew Research Center Poll: Americans’ Views on Global Warming
• Book Review: Gore’s Our Choice, Adam Stern of TerraPass

California Moves Ahead (Again): Passes Carbon Cap
San Jose Mercury News, Nov 24, 2009

On Novmber 24, the California Air Resources Board unveiled a conceptual outline of what will become a first-in-the-nation, mandatory, multi-sector cap-and-trade program.  The program will set an absolute limit on sources of 85 percent of the state’s pollution, dialing back pollution levels by 15 percent between now and 2020. Under the new system, which would begin in 2012, California would distribute annual permits, or allowances, to industrial entities like power plants, oil refineries and cement factories that emit large volumes of greenhouse gases. Smaller industrial facilities and petroleum fuel and natural gas sellers would also be subject to the program; agriculture is not included. California leaders project that a final cap-and-trade program will be adopted by the state’s environmental agency in October 2010. The stage was set in 2006, when Governor Schwarzenegger signed the landmark Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32), a mandatory cap on greenhouse gas emissions in the state.

Obama Hobbled in Fight Against Global Warming, Congressional Action Not Until 2010
NY Times, Nov 15, 2009

President Obama has had to acknowledge that a comprehensive climate deal was beyond reach this year, limited in his ambitions by a Congress that is unwilling to move as far or as fast as he would like. The House passed a relatively stringent bill in June, but the Senate is not expected to begin serious debate on the measure until next year. Mr. Obama has mentioned a two-step process for Copenhagen -- formulate a nonbinding political agreement calling for reductions in global warming emissions and aid for developing nations to adapt to a changing climate while working to put together a binding global pact in 2010, complete with firm emissions targets, enforcement mechanisms and specific dollar amounts to aid poorer nations.

Obama To Set Emissions Targets Before Dec. 7th Copenhagen Meeting Begins, He Might Attend
NY Times, Nov 24, 2009

The announcement of a target will take the current legislative stalemate over a climate bill into account, and thus might present a range of possible reductions rather than a single figure. The lack of consensus in Congress puts Mr. Obama in a tricky domestic and diplomatic bind. He cannot promise more than Congress may eventually deliver when it takes up climate change legislation next year. But if he does not offer some concrete pledge, the United States will bear the brunt of the blame for the lack of an international agreement. Also, Obama has said he would consider attending the conference if his presence could be a useful impetus to a deal.

Analysis of Copenhagen’s Missed Opportunity (Environmental Defense Fund)
EDF Newsletter, Nov 17, 2009

On the down side, it’s predictable that those Members of Congress who just wish this bill would disappear are all too likely to let this decision reinforce their view that climate is just too big a lift. On the upside, “this will light a fire under the Administration.” It will also keep the pressure on Majority Leader Reid who is working with Senate leaders Kerry, Graham and Lieberman to mold a set of principles that meaningfully reflect common ground and a realistic path to Senate passage. Completing this process before the gathering in Copenhagen on December 7 will strengthen the hands of our US negotiators.

Flying Tigers: More Reasons to Worry About Asia’s Clean Tech Push
Wall Street Journal, Nov 18, 2009

The U.S. hasn’t actually fallen too far behind yet. It’s the future that a new report is worried about. Specifically, the next five years, when China, Japan, and South Korea are expected to spend about $500 billion to directly promote clean-technology development and depolyment, compared with about $170 billion in the U.S. ... China is the dragon in the room. The country’s top-down policies to promote not just clean energy but a clean-energy industry threaten to become a steamroller.

Energy Push Spurs Shift in U.S. Science
Wall Street Journal, Nov 25, 2009

The Obama administration's push to solve the nation's energy problems, a massive federal program that rivals the Manhattan Project, is spurring a once-in-a-generation shift in U.S. science … labs are ramping up to develop new electricity sources, trying to build more-efficient cars and addressing climate change … creating nearly 1,400 research jobs at federal labs … and another 1,400 science jobs at universities … Some of those involved in the energy push acknowledge its challenges. While a federal plan proved successful for building the atom bomb and putting a man on the moon -- both clear-cut tasks -- the energy problem is more diffuse, with hard-to-measure outcomes.

Top Republican Senator Seeks Probe of Climate Science; Scientists Respond
NY Times, Nov 24, 2009 & Wall Street Journal, Nov 25, 2009

After hackers obtained and disclosed the e-mail correspondence of numerous prominent climate scientists last week, Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma, the most outspoken global warming skeptic in Congress and senior Republican on the Senate Environment Committee, said Tuesday that he’d begun an investigation into what he alleges to be the manipulation of global warming research. Meanwhile, scientists (including some whose emails were released in the hacking job) issued a report arguing that the effects of man-made global warming have intensified in recent years. They addressed an issue that has become a political hot button: the fact that global average temperatures have fallen since 2005, though the years 2006-08 remain among the hottest on record. The report says that the decade from 1999 to 2008 showed overall warming. The new report also says that effects of global warming, including melting ice sheets in the Arctic and Antarctica, now approximate the worst-case scenarios foreseen in the 2007 report.

Happily, As Playing Field Widens More Moderate U.S. Senators Speaking Out
Environmental Defense Fund, Nov 10, 2009

Charting the way to 60 votes in the U.S. Senate won’t be easy, but a sense of optimism is not unjustified. Consider the developments among some skeptical senators from both parties:

a)      Republican Senators Lindsey Graham (SC) & Lisa Murkowski (AK) as well as Indpendent Democrat Joe Lieberman (CT) have opened critical bipartisan doors;

b)      Moderate and Rust Belt Senators Stabenow (MI), Baucus (MT), Begich (AK), Brown (OH), Harkin (IA), and Klobuchar (MN) co-sponsored legislation that would establish a domestic “offsets” program to address the interests of the agricultural community;

c)      Senator Baucus (MT) – in spite of all the current demands of the health care bill – has scheduled a Senate Finance Committee hearing on job implications of global warming legislation;

e)      Even Senator Conrad (ND) was heard to say after the EPW vote: “It’s not the end of the process. It’s just the beginning. So there’s lots of time & lots of opportunity for everybody to engage.”

After a Rough Spell, John Kerry Returns to Form
NY Times, Nov 24, 2009

Kerry finds himself at the center of some of the hottest items on the national docket. As chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, he has been a diplomatic point man in Central Asia, recently persuading President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan to agree to a runoff election. He will lead the Senate delegation to Copenhagen next month for the United Nations conference on climate change.

Current Energy Plans Unsustainable, IEA Says in New Report
Wall Street Journal, Nov 10, 2009

Primary energy demand—that means power for electricity, transport, and everything else—is projected to rise about 40% by 2030 compared to 2007 levels, mostly in developing countries …global oil demand increase 24% … electricity demand by 76% … coal will become more important, growing by 53% … The problem, contends the IEA, is that such an energy path portends “catastrophic consequences” from global warming … requires a cocktail of “cap-and-trade systems, sectoral agreements and national measures” … and an additional $10.5 trillion in energy-related investments that will be “more than offset” by cheaper fuel bills … Energy efficiency is by far the most important, accounting for more than half the emissions reductions. Renewable energy will chip in another 20%. Clean coal and nuclear power will each shave 10% off emissions. Biofuels won’t do much—just a 3% savings through 2030.

GE Pursues Pot of Stimulus Gold
Wall Street Journal, Nov 17, 2009

Jeffrey Immelt now has his eye on a huge new pool of potential revenue: Uncle Sam's stimulus dollars. Mr. Immelt, a registered Republican, quips about the shift in thinking in the nation's corner offices: "We're all Democrats now." GE has high hopes for the strategy. It says that over the next three years or so it could bring in as much as $192 billion from projects funded by governments around the globe, such as electric-grid modernization, renewable-energy generation and health-care technology upgrades.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce Changing Tune?
CNN, Nov 3, 2009

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is making tentative gestures of support in the general direction of a climate bill. The Chamber, which has been slammed by the media and abandoned by some of its own members since saying we need a “Scopes monkey trial” on climate science, said that it “supports most of the principles outlined” in that Kerry-Graham-Lieberman proposal. “This really is a game-changer," said Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Chair of the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee.

"Legislation's Benefits Far Outweigh Costs, New Study Finds"
Wall Street Journal Sept 8, 2009

As flawed as it may be, the US House climate bill passed in June makes economic sense, offering benefits worth at least twice as much as it costs, if not more. The NYU Law School’s Institute for Policy Integrity, states that the bill provides $2.27 in benefits for every dollar spent.  

"Firms Start to See Climate Change as Barrier to Profit"
Washington Post Sept 2, 2009

"If we don't move now, it just becomes more expensive, more complicated and a bigger risk," said Brad Figel, director of government affairs at Nike ... [Many S&P500 companies] see global warming as a threat to their bottom lines ... citing concerns including a potential shortage of raw materials and supply-chain disruptions because of severe weather.

STATE BY STATE JOB GROWTH

Clean Energy & Climate Policies Lead to Economic Growth in the United States

New analysis shows that adopting comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation could create up to 1.9 million jobs

The State Fact Sheets were co-released by E2, Ceres, and The Clean Economy Network and also some state business groups. Feel free to distribute.

http://www.e2.org/jsp/controller?docName=jobs

New economic analysis shows that clean energy and climate policies would create jobs, increase consumers’ income, and strengthen the U.S. economy as a whole. Based on collaborate research by the University of Illinois, Yale University and the University of California, the new study clearly demonstrates that comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation, such as the American Clean Energy and Security Act and the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, would limit pollution and create incentives to drive large-scale investments in clean energy and energy efficiency.  

The analysis indicates that, on a national level, such legislation would up to 1.9 million new jobs, increase annual household income by up to $1,175 per year, and boost GDP by up to $111 billion – with all of those benefits measured relative to a scenario without such legislation. In addition, all the states would see economic gains are over and above the growth that they would see in the absence of such a bill.  

Environmental Entrepreneurs, along with the national investor coalition Ceres and the Clean Economy Network, have sponsored the publication of the following 50 state fact sheets that clearly illustrate the study’s findings about how each state will be impacted if we pass strong clean energy and climate policies to secure a safer and cleaner future for our country. Click on the links below to see those state fact sheets.  

See more information on the national results

Read the Executive Summary for the analysis

SUMMARY: CONGRESSIONAL CLIMATE & ENERGY LEGISLATION

November 2009

Three primary pieces of legislation are part of the debate in Congress, one in the House of Representatives that passed in June and two primary bills currently under consideration in the Senate. When the Senate passes its climate & energy legislation, a few members from both chambers will reconcile the differences “in conference” followed by a final vote on a law that President Obama will need to sign. Passage of the legislation in 2009 is very unlikely, but 2010 will see the issues front and center. All proponents of new policy in Washington strongly agree that Congress needs to hear from clean tech business leaders frequently with requests to pass legislation. Click here for congressional contact information.

I.   HOUSE CLIMATE & ENERGY BILL (“ACES Act” / “Waxman-Markey bill”)

Key Date: Passed June 2009 by House (219 to 212)

Authors: Rep. Henry Waxman, Chairman of House Energy & Commerce Cmte; Rep. Ed Markey, Chairman of Cmte on Energy Independence & Global Warming

More Info: www.pewclimate.org/acesa

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17 % reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 83 % by 2050
• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 20% by 2020. Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, biogas and biofuels derived exclusively from eligible biomass, landfill gas, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, wastewater-treatment gas, coal-mine methane, and new hydro at post-1992 dams
• R&D of $190 billion to energy efficiency, renewables, carbon capture & storage, electric vehicles
• Transmission Grid Supports.
• Energy Efficiency for Buildings, Lights, Appliances.
• Green Bank Financing Office.
• Carbon Offsets Program.
• Coal Plant Pollution & CCS Standards.
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.

II.  SENATE CLIMATE BILL (“Boxer-Kerry bill”)

Key Dates: introduced September 2009, passed by Environment Committee in November 2009; at least four other committees will debate this legislation

Authors: Sen. John Kerry, Senate Foreign Affairs Committee Chair & Sen. Barbara Boxer, Environment & Public Works Committee Chair

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 20 % reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 83 % by 2050
• Carbon Offsets Program.
• CCS Standards.
• Nuclear & Transportation. Incentives for nuclear power plants & low-emissions transportation
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.
• Key Unanswered Question: how the permits to emit carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases would be distributed to utilities, manufacturers, agribusiness and other interests

III. SENATE ENERGY BILL (“American Clean Energy Leadership Act” / “Bingaman bill”)

Key Date: legislation passed by Energy Committee June 2009

Author: Sen. Jeff Bingaman, Chairman of the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee

• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 15% by 2021.  Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, landfill gas, incremental hydro, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, and new hydro at existing dams.
• Transmission “Interstate Highway System” & Grid Security.  Creates new planning system based on local, state and regional input with states taking initial lead. New security powers to Dept or Energy & FERC.
• Green Bank Financing Office.
• CCS R&D Funding. $6.6 billion for 10 “early mover” large-scale CCS projects
• Offshore Drilling in Eastern Gulf of Mexico. Opens 3.8 billion barrels of new oil resources & 21.5 trillion cubic feet of new natural gas resources.

RECENT CLEAN ENERGY NEWS ARTICLES

• New Books: Gore’s Our Choice & NRDC Pres. Frances Beineke’s Clean Energy Common Sense
• 84% of Top Economists Concur on Threat of Warming, NY Times
• Pew Research Center Poll: Sharp Drop Among Americans Who Worry About Global Warming
• Steven Chu: The Nerd in the Cabinet, GreenBiz.com
• VC to Lead DoE Loan Program (Jonathan Silver of Core Capital Partners), Wall Street Journal
• Some Utilities Push Congress to Act on Carbon Emissions, Wall Street Journal

Senate Environment Committee Passes Climate Legislation
Houston Chronicle, Nov 5, 2009

The Senate Environment Committee's Democrats on November 5 approved 11-1 a plan to impose the nation's first-ever caps on greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming, marking the high-water mark for the legislation this year. At least five other committees are expected to weigh in on the issue before there is a single bill for floor debate. Bill backers also have to find a way to navigate any measure around a host of regional concerns — including senators worried about the vitality of manufacturing, members from coal-reliant regions and others concerned that legislation will encourage U.S. refiners to move operations overseas. Montana Democrat Max Baucus voted “no” while all committee Republicans skipped the vote in protest.

Senate Finance Committee Battles Over Climate Legislation Costs
The Hill Newspaper, Nov 10, 2009

Democratic supporters of climate legislation on Nov. 10th battled critics who argue cutting carbon emissions will hurt the economy and cost jobs. Backers say the legislation will create new jobs and give the United States a leg up in a new green, global economy. Opponents argue it will raise energy prices by forcing greater reliance on renewable energy and other climate-friendly sources of power that cost more than coal and will be an overall drag on the economy. Both sides cited recent outside studies for support.

Happily, As Playing Field Widens More Moderate U.S. Senators Speaking Out
Environmental Defense Fund, Nov 10, 2009

Charting the way to 60 votes in the U.S. Senate won’t be easy, but a sense of optimism is not unjustified. Consider the developments among some skeptical senators from both parties:

a)      Republican Senators Lindsey Graham (SC) & Lisa Murkowski (AK) as well as Indpendent Democrat Joe Lieberman (CT) have opened critical bipartisan doors;

b)      Moderate and Rust Belt Senators Stabenow (MI), Baucus (MT), Begich (AK), Brown (OH), Harkin (IA), and Klobuchar (MN) co-sponsored legislation that would establish a domestic “offsets” program to address the interests of the agricultural community;

c)      Senator Baucus (MT) – in spite of all the current demands of the health care bill – has scheduled a Senate Finance Committee hearing on job implications of global warming legislation;

e)      Even Senator Conrad (ND) was heard to say after the EPW vote: “It’s not the end of the process. It’s just the beginning. So there’s lots of time & lots of opportunity for everybody to engage.”

What “Plan B” Looks Like for Copenhagen
Reuters, Oct 16, 2009
[see also, “Forty Days to Get a Climate Deal” in The Guardian (U.K.), Nov 1, 2009]

Negotiators are already talking about "plan B" for the Copenhagen climate talks. Some analysts say that none of the major players is talking about "no deal," just a deal that will take a little longer to agree on … The U.S. Senate might pass the climate bill in the first part of 2010, allowing Obama's administration to bring a 2020 target and financing pledges to the table during a major U.N. climate meeting in Bonn in June. At worst, nations would have to wait until annual U.N. climate talks in Dec 2010 … Copenhagen itself might instead yield an agreement deciding on the political essentials and add conditional offers by China, India and other big developing nations based on what the United States was prepared to do once the legislation passed.

Senate Working on ‘Framework’ for Copenhagen Talks, Say Lieberman
Blomberg, Nov 11, 2009

A bipartisan “framework” to combat climate change may be reached in the U.S. Senate before global meetings in Copenhagen next month to craft a new treaty on global warming, Senator Joe Lieberman said.

Lieberman, a Connecticut independent, said he’s working with Senator John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, and Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, to “move the Senate as far as we can before Copenhagen.”

International Energy Agency Warns of Falling Investment, Risk to Economic Recovery
AP, Nov 10, 2009

Investment in renewable energy sources fell by about one-fifth from 2008 to 2009 according to a new International Energy Agency report. Government stimulus plans kept it from falling 30 percent. The IEA estimates that $1.1 trillion needs to be invested annually through 2030, for a total of $26 trillion, just to meet energy demand on current growth trends. Should governments adopt plans to limit greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere to 450 parts per million of CO2 equivalent, an additional $10.5 trillion needs to be invested.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce Changing Tune?
CNN, Nov 3, 2009

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is making tentative gestures of support in the general direction of a climate bill. The Chamber, which has been slammed by the media and abandoned by some of its own members since saying we need a “Scopes monkey trial” on climate science, said that it “supports most of the principles outlined” in that Kerry-Graham-Lieberman proposal. “This really is a game-changer," said Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Chair of the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee.

Statisticians Reject Global Cooling
Associated Press & Time Magazine, Oct 26, 2009

Have you heard that the world is now cooling instead of warming? In a blind test, the AP gave temperature data to four independent statisticians and asked them to look for trends. The experts found no true temperature declines over time. Yet the idea that things are cooling has been repeated in opinion columns, a BBC news story posted on the Drudge Report and in a new book by the authors of the best-seller "Freakonomics." Last week, a poll by the Pew Research Center found that only 57 percent of Americans now believe there is strong scientific evidence for global warming, down from 77 percent in 2006.

Senate Global Warming Bill Seeks to Cushion the Impact on Industry & Households
NY Times, Oct 24, 2009

The Senate climate bill will initially grant billions of dollars of free emissions permits to utilities and industry but will require the bulk of the money be returned to consumers and taxpayers … will also provide a cushion to energy-intensive manufacturing companies to ease the transition to a lower-carbon economy and to help them compete internationally ... sets a floor and ceiling on the price of permits to emit carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases … The EPA estimates that overall cost of the bill at roughly $100 a year per household … Neither bill would add to the federal deficit and both measures could actually produce some revenue.

"Legislation's Benefits Far Outweigh Costs, New Study Finds"
Wall Street Journal Sept 8, 2009

As flawed as it may be, the US House climate bill passed in June makes economic sense, offering benefits worth at least twice as much as it costs, if not more. The NYU Law School’s Institute for Policy Integrity, states that the bill provides $2.27 in benefits for every dollar spent.  

"Firms Start to See Climate Change as Barrier to Profit"
Washington Post Sept 2, 2009

"If we don't move now, it just becomes more expensive, more complicated and a bigger risk," said Brad Figel, director of government affairs at Nike ... [Many S&P500 companies] see global warming as a threat to their bottom lines ... citing concerns including a potential shortage of raw materials and supply-chain disruptions because of severe weather.  

"Falling Behind on Green Tech"
Jeff Immelt & John Doerr
Washington Post August 3, 2009

America confronts three interrelated crises: an economic crisis, a climate crisis and an energy security crisis. We believe there's a fourth: a competitiveness crisis. This crisis is particularly evident in America's worldwide standing in the next great global industry, green technology.

SUMMARY: CONGRESSIONAL CLIMATE & ENERGY LEGISLATION

November 2009

Three primary pieces of legislation are part of the debate in Congress, one in the House of Representatives that passed in June and two primary bills currently under consideration in the Senate. When the Senate passes its climate & energy legislation, a few members from both chambers will reconcile the differences “in conference” followed by a final vote on a law that President Obama will need to sign. Passage of the legislation in 2009 is very unlikely, but 2010 will see the issues front and center. All proponents of new policy in Washington strongly agree that Congress needs to hear from clean tech business leaders frequently with requests to pass legislation. Click here for congressional contact information.

I.   HOUSE CLIMATE & ENERGY BILL (“ACES Act” / “Waxman-Markey bill”)

Key Date: Passed June 2009 by House (219 to 212)

Authors: Rep. Henry Waxman, Chairman of House Energy & Commerce Cmte; Rep. Ed Markey, Chairman of Cmte on Energy Independence & Global Warming

More Info: www.pewclimate.org/acesa

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17 % reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 83 % by 2050
• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 20% by 2020. Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, biogas and biofuels derived exclusively from eligible biomass, landfill gas, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, wastewater-treatment gas, coal-mine methane, and new hydro at post-1992 dams
• R&D of $190 billion to energy efficiency, renewables, carbon capture & storage, electric vehicles
• Transmission Grid Supports.
• Energy Efficiency for Buildings, Lights, Appliances.
• Green Bank Financing Office.
• Carbon Offsets Program.
• Coal Plant Pollution & CCS Standards.
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.

II.  SENATE CLIMATE BILL (“Boxer-Kerry bill”)

Key Dates: introduced September 2009, passed by Environment Committee in November 2009; at least four other committees will debate this legislation

Authors: Sen. John Kerry, Senate Foreign Affairs Committee Chair & Sen. Barbara Boxer, Environment & Public Works Committee Chair

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 20 % reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 83 % by 2050
• Carbon Offsets Program.
• CCS Standards.
• Nuclear & Transportation. Incentives for nuclear power plants & low-emissions transportation
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.
• Key Unanswered Question: how the permits to emit carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases would be distributed to utilities, manufacturers, agribusiness and other interests

III. SENATE ENERGY BILL (“American Clean Energy Leadership Act” / “Bingaman bill”)

Key Date: legislation passed by Energy Committee June 2009

Author: Sen. Jeff Bingaman, Chairman of the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee

• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 15% by 2021.  Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, landfill gas, incremental hydro, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, and new hydro at existing dams.
• Transmission “Interstate Highway System” & Grid Security.  Creates new planning system based on local, state and regional input with states taking initial lead. New security powers to Dept or Energy & FERC.
• Green Bank Financing Office.
• CCS R&D Funding. $6.6 billion for 10 “early mover” large-scale CCS projects
• Offshore Drilling in Eastern Gulf of Mexico. Opens 3.8 billion barrels of new oil resources & 21.5 trillion cubic feet of new natural gas resources.

Two Events This Week

contact dfowler@gmail.com for more information

U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH)

Silicon Valley & San Francisco Friday, Nov. 6th
CEO-Level Clean Tech Lunch in Santa Clara
Afternoon Clean Tech Meet & Greet in San Francisco
Apollo Alliance Dinner in San Francisco

U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer (Co-Sponsor of Climate Legislation)

Silicon Valley Fundraiser Saturday, Nov. 7th
Hosts: Safra Katz, John Chambers, John Doerr, Mike Holston, John Thompson

RECENT CLEAN ENERGY NEWS ARTICLES

What “Plan B” Looks Like for Copenhagen
Reuters, Oct 16, 2009

[see also, “Forty Days to Get a Climate Deal” in The Guardian (U.K.), Nov 1, 2009]

Negotiators are already talking about "plan B" for the Copenhagen climate talks in December, with uncertainty growing that nations will be able to agree in time on a tougher and broader U.N. climate pact. Some analysts say that none of the major players is talking about "no deal," just a deal that will take a little longer to agree on … The U.S. Senate might pass the climate bill in the first part of 2010, allowing Obama's administration to bring a 2020 target and financing pledges to the table during a major U.N. climate meeting in Bonn in June. At worst, nations would have to wait until annual U.N. climate talks in Dec 2010 … Copenhagen itself might instead yield an agreement deciding on the political essentials and add conditional offers by China, India and other big developing nations based on what the United States was prepared to do once the legislation passed. Global conservation group WWF says the essentials would include: a clear indication of the sources and methods of funding and to ensure the money comes from predictable revenue streams; clarity on the bodies managing the money and the level of developing country representation; and immediate funding.

US Chamber of Commerce Chief Battles Obama Agenda
Wall Street Journal, Nov 2, 2009

On climate change, the US Chamber of Commerce says warmer temperatures could help by reducing deaths related to cold weather … Though Mr. Donohue [the Chamber’s president] has strong supporters, a vocal minority of companies, including Apple Inc. and Nike Inc., have recently quit the Chamber or its board. "They've put Main Street businesses in a precarious place by taking a position that's not credible and doesn't allow them to shape legislation to their members' benefit," said James Rogers, chief executive of Duke Energy Corp.

Statisticians Reject Global Cooling
Associated Press & Time Magazine, Oct 26, 2009

Have you heard that the world is now cooling instead of warming? The case that the Earth might be cooling partly stems from recent weather. Last year was cooler than previous years. In a blind test, the AP gave temperature data to four independent statisticians and asked them to look for trends, without telling them what the numbers represented. The experts found no true temperature declines over time. Yet the idea that things are cooling has been repeated in opinion columns, a BBC news story posted on the Drudge Report and in a new book by the authors of the best-seller "Freakonomics." Last week, a poll by the Pew Research Center found that only 57 percent of Americans now believe there is strong scientific evidence for global warming, down from 77 percent in 2006.

White House Steps Up Climate Efforts
NY Times, Oct 27, 2009

The Obama Administration promoted measures to cap greenhouse gas emissions and support new means of fueling homes and vehicles with far less carbon dioxide intensity. Mr. Obama appeared at a solar energy installation in Florida and Mr. Biden at an auto plant in Delaware that will produce electric vehicles, talking about the potential of alternative energy to create jobs. On Capitol Hill, five senior administration officials appeared before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee to speak in support of a bill to address global warming and encourage development of nonpolluting energy sources. They said such measures were important not only to the environment but to the nation’s economic competitiveness. Republicans on the committee dismissed the bill as an overly complex one that will harm the economy, kill jobs and favor some parts of the country over others.

OPINION: Review of Senate Environment & Public Works Hearing
Grist, Oct 27, 2009

The seven committee Republicans, generally all opponents, requested a five-week EPA anaylsis before proceeding on the bill. Sen. Baucus (D-Montana) put himself squarely on the fence and limits to the EPA’s regulatory authority seem a negotiating point. Meanwhile, the Obama Administration has stepped up its work, announcing of $3.4 billion in funding for smart grid initiatives; Biden announced the reopening of a shuttered GM plant to make hybrids; and Obama spoke at a new solar plant in Florida.

Senate Global Warming Bill Seeks to Cushion the Impact on Industry & Households
NY Times, Oct 24, 2009

The Senate climate bill will initially grant billions of dollars of free emissions permits to utilities and industry but will require the bulk of the money be returned to consumers and taxpayers … will also provide a cushion to energy-intensive manufacturing companies to ease the transition to a lower-carbon economy and to help them compete internationally, although the subsidies will disappear over time. The measure also sets a floor and ceiling on the price of permits to emit carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases … The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that overall cost of the bill at roughly $100 a year per household … Neither bill would add to the federal deficit and both measures could actually produce some revenue from the sale of emissions permits, the agency found.

Yes We Can (Pass Climate Change Legislation)
NY Times, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) & Sen. John Kerry (D-MA)   Oct 10, 2009

We refuse to accept the argument that the United States cannot lead the world in addressing global climate change. We are also convinced that we have found both a framework for climate legislation to pass Congress and the blueprint for a clean-energy future that will revitalize our economy, protect current jobs and create new ones, safeguard our national security and reduce pollution.

Business Alliances Shift in Fight Over Climate Bill
Wall Street Journal, Washington Times, San Francisco Chronicle, & San Jose Mercury News Oct 7, 2009

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the nation's largest business trade association, has suffered the defection of five of its members, including Apple Inc. and Nike Inc., over its hard-line opposition to pending climate change legislation. The resignations, submitted in just the past two weeks, have shined a spotlight on the deep divisions in industry over how to deal with the issue of climate change.

"Legislation's Benefits Far Outweigh Costs, New Study Finds"
Wall Street Journal Sept 8, 2009

As flawed as it may be, the US House climate bill passed in June makes economic sense, offering benefits worth at least twice as much as it costs, if not more. The NYU Law School’s Institute for Policy Integrity, an outfit basically created to bring cost-benefit analysis back to the environmental arena, states: "From almost any perspective and under almost any assumption, H.R. 2454 is a good investment for the United States to make in our own economic future and in the future of the planet.” It’s a pretty simple job to tally up the potential benefits: the bill provides $2.27 in benefits for every dollar spent.  

"Firms Start to See Climate Change as Barrier to Profit"
Washington Post Sept 2, 2009

"If we don't move now, it just becomes more expensive, more complicated and a bigger risk," said Brad Figel, director of government affairs at Nike ... [Many S&P500 companies] see global warming as a threat to their bottom lines ... citing concerns including a potential shortage of raw materials and supply-chain disruptions because of severe weather.  

"China Racing Ahead of U.S. in the Drive to Go Solar"
NYTimes Aug 24, 2009

China has stepped on the gas in an effort to become the dominant player in green energy - especially in solar power, and even in the United States. 

"Zogby Poll Shows 71% Support for House's Climate Legislation" 
Wall Street Journal Aug 11, 2009

The Obama administration’s argument that the energy and climate bill is actually an engine of job creation is gaining some traction with the public. Some 51% of respondents figure it will create jobs ... Only 29% of respondents said they would have an “unfavorable” view of their representative for having voted for the bill; 47% took a “favorable” view. 

"Falling Behind on Green Tech"
Jeff Immelt & John Doerr
Washington Post August 3, 2009

America confronts three interrelated crises: an economic crisis, a climate crisis and an energy security crisis. We believe there's a fourth: a competitiveness crisis. This crisis is particularly evident in America's worldwide standing in the next great global industry, green technology.

SUMMARY: CONGRESSIONAL CLIMATE & ENERGY LEGISLATION

October 2009

Three primary pieces of legislation are now part of the debate in Congress, one in the House of Representatives that passed in June and two under consideration in the Senate. When the Senate passes its climate & energy bill, a few members from both chambers will reconcile the differences followed by a final vote on a law that President Obama will need to sign. Senior DC officials said this week that passage of the legislation in 2009 might be unlikely, but the door is not completely shut. All proponents of new policy in Washington strongly agree that Congress needs to hear from you with a request to pass legislation now. Click here to contact Congress now.

I.   HOUSE CLIMATE & ENERGY BILL

(“ACES Act” / “Waxman-Markey bill”)

Key Date: Passed June 2009 by House (219 to 212)

Authors: Rep. Henry Waxman, Chairman of House Energy & Commerce Cmte; Rep. Ed Markey, Chairman of Cmte on Energy Independence & Global Warming

More Info: www.pewclimate.org/acesa

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17 % reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 83 % by 2050
• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 20% by 2020. Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, biogas and biofuels derived exclusively from eligible biomass, landfill gas, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, wastewater-treatment gas, coal-mine methane, and new hydro at post-1992 dams
• R&D of $190 billion to energy efficiency, renewables, carbon capture & storage, electric vehicles
• Transmission Grid Supports.
• Energy Efficiency for Buildings, Lights, Appliances.
• Green Bank Financing Office.
• Carbon Offsets Program.
• Coal Plant Pollution & CCS Standards.
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.

II.  SENATE CLIMATE BILL (“Boxer-Kerry bill”)

Key Date: proposed legislation introduced September 2009

Authors: Sen. John Kerry, Senate Foreign Affairs Committee Chair & Sen. Barbara Boxer, Environment & Public Works Committee Chair

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 20 % reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 83 % by 2050
• Carbon Offsets Program.
• CCS Standards.
• Nuclear & Transportation. Incentives for nuclear power plants & low-emissions transportation
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.
• Key Unanswered Question: how the permits to emit carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases would be distributed to utilities, manufacturers, agribusiness and other interests

III. SENATE ENERGY BILL (“American Clean Energy Leadership Act” / “Bingaman bill”)

Key Date: legislation passed by Energy Committee June 2009

Author: Sen. Jeff Bingaman, Chairman of the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee

• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 15% by 2021.  Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, landfill gas, incremental hydro, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, and new hydro at existing dams.
• Transmission “Interstate Highway System” & Grid Security.  Creates new planning system based on local, state and regional input with states taking initial lead. New security powers to Dept or Energy & FERC.
• Green Bank Financing Office.
• CCS R&D Funding. $6.6 billion for 10 “early mover” large-scale CCS projects
• Offshore Drilling in Eastern Gulf of Mexico. Opens 3.8 billion barrels of new oil resources & 21.5 trillion cubic feet of new natural gas resources.

CLEAN TECH MESSAGING

Senators and Congressmen must hear from clean tech business leaders early and often or opponents will dominate and poison the public debate, arguing that the US economy will suffer, that jobs will be lost, that the technologies you are developing will not work, and even that global warming is still up for debate (if not a complete hoax). Your silence and the silence of other clean tech leaders will make passage of a truly effective law very difficult or even impossible. Call, write, email, and visit.

Click here for an easy way to contact Congress with this basic message:

Effect on American Consumers

* One Postage Stamp Per Day. The proposed legislation will cost Americans only $160 per year in increased energy prices -- one postage stamp per day -- while poor Americans actually save money.  source: non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO)

* Americans Actually Will Save Money When Adding Energy Efficiency. Energy efficiency savings could result in $250 per year for American consumers, making the energy and climate price tag for Americans effectively zero. 
* Inaction Means Reduced Global & US GDP.

20% global GDP reduction per year 
1-2% US GDP reduction per year

* New, American Jobs Will Be Created. An estimated 1.7 new American jobs will be created with this legislation. source: PERI/CAP (UMass. Political Economy & Research Institute / Center for American Progress)

State by State Economic Benefits

Research is available that outlines economic and job benefits for each state. Senators and Congressmen care how this will affect their constituents, so the data is a good resource.  Click here or go to

< www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/pdf/peri_report.pdf > and look in Appendix 2.

CLEAN TECH BUSINESS LEADERS DELIVER LETTER TO CONGRESS

U.S. Clean Tech Business Leaders Call for an American Clean Energy and Security Act

Washington, DC, September 23, 2009 — On the heels of President Obama’s September 22 speech before the United Nations Climate Change Summit and with Congress debating legislation, sixty-four private sector executives, investors, and business leaders from the clean technology sector have delivered a letter to the United States Senate calling for swift congressional action on an American Clean Energy & Security Act.

New federal polices will create over a million jobs here at home, help the United States catch up in an increasingly competitive clean tech global market, and wean our nation off its dependence on foreign oil.

“We have a rare opportunity to accelerate the growth of a new economic engine that supports long-term national growth and offers a sustainable path for the future,” said lead organizer Donnie Fowler. “Clean technology offers the same economic promise to this country that the transcontinental railroad, the interstate highway system, and the broadband revolution did when they were young industries.”

The signers comprise a wide range of leaders within the clean tech community, from established veterans such as venture capitalist Vinod Khosla and Rhone Resch, CEO of Solar Energy Industry Association, to newer entrepreneurs like Matt Golden of home remodeler Sustainable Spaces and Christian Okonsky of electric motor developer KLD Energy.

SUMMARY: CONGRESSIONAL CLIMATE & ENERGY LEGISLATION

Three primary pieces of legislation are now part of the debate in Congress, one in the House of Representatives that passed in June and two under consideration in the Senate. When the Senate passes its climate & energy bill, a few members from both chambers will reconcile the differences followed by a final vote on a law that President Obama will need to sign. Senior DC officials said this week that passage of the legislation in 2009 might be unlikely, but the door is not completely shut. All proponents of new policy in Washington strongly agree that Congress needs to hear from you with a request to pass legislation now. Click here to contact Congress now.

I.   HOUSE CLIMATE & ENERGY BILL (“ACES Act” / “Waxman-Markey bill”)

Key Date: Passed June 2009 by House (219 to 212)

Authors: Rep. Henry Waxman, Chairman of House Energy & Commerce Cmte; Rep. Ed Markey, Chairman of Cmte on Energy Independence & Global Warming

More Info: www.pewclimate.org/acesa

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 17 % reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 83 % by 2050
• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 20% by 2020. Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, biogas and biofuels derived exclusively from eligible biomass, landfill gas, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, wastewater-treatment gas, coal-mine methane, and new hydro at post-1992 dams
• R&D of $190 billion to energy efficiency, renewables, carbon capture & storage, electric vehicles
• Transmission Grid Supports.
• Energy Efficiency for Buildings, Lights, Appliances.
• Green Bank Financing Office.
• Carbon Offsets Program.
• Coal Plant Pollution & CCS Standards.
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.

II.  SENATE CLIMATE BILL (“Boxer-Kerry bill”)

Key Date: proposed legislation introduced September 2009

Authors: Sen. John Kerry, Senate Foreign Affairs Committee Chair & Sen. Barbara Boxer, Environment & Public Works Committee Chair

• Cap-and-Trade
• Greenhouse Gas Reductions. 20 % reduction from 2005 levels by 2020 & 83 % by 2050
• Carbon Offsets Program.
• CCS Standards.
• Nuclear & Transportation. Incentives for nuclear power plants & low-emissions transportation
• Protections & Cost Supports for New Technology Development, Consumers, & Some Industries.
• Key Unanswered Question: how the permits to emit carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases would be distributed to utilities, manufacturers, agribusiness and other interests

III. SENATE ENERGY BILL (“American Clean Energy Leadership Act” / “Bingaman bill”)

Key Date: legislation passed by Energy Committee June 2009

Author: Sen. Jeff Bingaman, Chairman of the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee

• US Renewable Energy Electricity Standard (RES) of 15% by 2021.  Qualifying sources: energy efficiency, wind, solar, ocean, geothermal, biomass, landfill gas, incremental hydro, hydrokinetic, waste-to-energy, and new hydro at existing dams.
• Transmission “Interstate Highway System” & Grid Security.  Creates new planning system based on local, state and regional input with states taking initial lead. New security powers to Dept or Energy & FERC.
• Green Bank Financing Office.
• CCS R&D Funding. $6.6 billion for 10 “early mover” large-scale CCS projects
• Offshore Drilling in Eastern Gulf of Mexico. Opens 3.8 billion barrels of new oil resources & 21.5 trillion cubic feet of new natural gas resources.

CLEAN TECH MESSAGING

Senators and Congressmen must hear from clean tech business leaders early and often or opponents will dominate and poison the public debate, arguing that the US economy will suffer, that jobs will be lost, that the technologies you are developing will not work, and even that global warming is still up for debate (if not a complete hoax). Your silence and the silence of other clean tech leaders will make passage of a truly effective law very difficult or even impossible. Call, write, email, and visit.

Click here for an easy way to contact Congress with this basic message:

Effect on American Consumers

* One Postage Stamp Per Day. The proposed legislation will cost Americans only $160 per year in increased energy prices -- one postage stamp per day -- while poor Americans actually save money.  source: non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO)

* Americans Actually Will Save Money When Adding Energy Efficiency. Energy efficiency savings could result in $250 per year for American consumers, making the energy and climate price tag for Americans effectively zero.

* Inaction Means Reduced Global & US GDP.

20% global GDP reduction per year 
1-2% US GDP reduction per year

* New, American Jobs Will Be Created. An estimated 1.7 new American jobs will be created with this legislation. source: PERI/CAP (UMass. Political Economy & Research Institute / Center for American Progress)

State by State Economic Benefits

Research is available that outlines economic and job benefits for each state. Senators and Congressmen care how this will affect their constituents, so the data is a good resource.  Click here or go to

< www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/pdf/peri_report.pdf > and look in Appendix 2.

RECENT CLEAN ENERGY NEWS ARTICLES

Yes We Can (Pass Climate Change Legislation)
NY Times, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) & Sen. John Kerry (D-MA)   Oct 10, 2009

We refuse to accept the argument that the United States cannot lead the world in addressing global climate change. We are also convinced that we have found both a framework for climate legislation to pass Congress and the blueprint for a clean-energy future that will revitalize our economy, protect current jobs and create new ones, safeguard our national security and reduce pollution.

Business Alliances Shift in Fight Over Climate Bill
Wall Street Journal, Washington Times, San Francisco Chronicle, & San Jose Mercury News Oct 7, 2009

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the nation's largest business trade association, has suffered the defection of five of its members, including Apple Inc. and Nike Inc., over its hard-line opposition to pending climate change legislation. The resignations, submitted in just the past two weeks, have shined a spotlight on the deep divisions in industry over how to deal with the issue of climate change.

Big Business & Clean Tech Execs Pushes for Climate Action
San Jose Mercury News & Politico Oct 7, 2009

Two coalitions of top U.S. corporations are using Washington visits and more than $1 million in advertising to prod the Senate and White House to accelerate work on an energy and climate bill.

General Political Environment: Obama Dealing with Many Issues, DC Looking at 2010 Elections 
Boston Globe Oct 5, 2009

Thirteen months before the mid-term elections: Obama is trying to prod Congress into passing legislation on health care overhaul, climate change, and financial services regulation by early next year, before election-year political pressures make it harder to persuade wary lawmakers to vote for the dramatic change Obama promised in his campaign. He must also make difficult decisions on whether to increase troop strength and commit America to a larger, longer mission in Afghanistan. And the economy, while apparently on the road to recovery, is still not producing new jobs and continues to generate anxiety around the country.

The New Sputnik
Thomas Friedman, NY Times Sept 27, 2009

Most people would assume that 20 years from now when historians look back at 2008-09, they will conclude that the most important thing to happen in this period was the Great Recession. I’d hold off on that. If we can continue stumbling out of this economic crisis, I believe future historians may well conclude that the most important thing to happen in the last 18 months was that Red China decided to become Green China … China will continue to grow with cheap, dirty coal, to arrest over-eager environmentalists and to strip African forests for wood and minerals. Have no doubt about that. But have no doubt either that, without declaring it, China is embarking on a new, parallel path of clean power deployment and innovation. It is the Sputnik of our day. We ignore it at our peril.

"Legislation's Benefits Far Outweigh Costs, New Study Finds"
Wall Street Journal Sept 8, 2009

As flawed as it may be, the US House climate bill passed in June makes economic sense, offering benefits worth at least twice as much as it costs, if not more. The NYU Law School’s Institute for Policy Integrity, an outfit basically created to bring cost-benefit analysis back to the environmental arena, states: "From almost any perspective and under almost any assumption, H.R. 2454 is a good investment for the United States to make in our own economic future and in the future of the planet.” It’s a pretty simple job to tally up the potential benefits: the bill provides $2.27 in benefits for every dollar spent.  

"Firms Start to See Climate Change as Barrier to Profit"
Washington Post Sept 2, 2009

"If we don't move now, it just becomes more expensive, more complicated and a bigger risk," said Brad Figel, director of government affairs at Nike ... [Many S&P500 companies] see global warming as a threat to their bottom lines ... citing concerns including a potential shortage of raw materials and supply-chain disruptions because of severe weather.  

"China Racing Ahead of U.S. in the Drive to Go Solar"
NYTimes Aug 24, 2009

China has stepped on the gas in an effort to become the dominant player in green energy - especially in solar power, and even in the United States. 

"Zogby Poll Shows 71% Support for House's Climate Legislation" 
Wall Street Journal Aug 11, 2009

The Obama administration’s argument that the energy and climate bill is actually an engine of job creation is gaining some traction with the public. Some 51% of respondents figure it will create jobs ... Only 29% of respondents said they would have an “unfavorable” view of their representative for having voted for the bill; 47% took a “favorable” view. 

"Falling Behind on Green Tech"
Jeff Immelt & John Doerr
Washington Post August 3, 2009

America confronts three interrelated crises: an economic crisis, a climate crisis and an energy security crisis. We believe there's a fourth: a competitiveness crisis. This crisis is particularly evident in America's worldwide standing in the next great global industry, green technology.

CLEAN TECH BUSINESS LEADERS in D.C.

Green Tech Execs Press for Climate Change Bill
San Jose Mercury News, October 8, 2009

WASHINGTON — Hundreds of green-energy company executives, including many from Silicon Valley, descended on Washington this week to urge members of Congress to pass a sweeping climate change bill, which they predicted would spur billions of dollars in clean-energy investments and ease the nation's dependence on foreign oil.

The entrepreneurs got a boost of encouragement from the White House on Wednesday at a forum featuring some of the Obama administration's top environmental officials, whose message was short and direct: We need your help.

The House in June passed far-reaching legislation designed to combat global warming, and focus has now shifted to the Senate. But similar legislation faces an uphill fight there thanks to regional concerns among senators from oil- and coal-dependent states.

During a question-and-answer session, Energy Secretary Steven Chu cited a Congressional Budget Office estimate that the House bill would boost energy costs for the average household by roughly the equivalent of a postage stamp each day.

"Is 44 cents a day worth it?" asked Chu, the former head of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. "You should convince some of your senators who are on the fence that it is worth it."

Among the executives on hand was one of Silicon Valley's best-known venture capitalists, John Doerr, who has emerged as a leading business voice for the climate change bill. After meeting with members of Congress this week, the partner at Kleiner, Perkins, Caufield & Byers said he was partly encouraged and partly concerned about what's on the horizon. "Like many conversations in the country, it's getting quickly polarized and political," Doerr said in an interview with the Mercury News.

The climate legislation would place a cap on carbon emissions for the first time, effectively putting a price on energy consumption that contributes to global warming. Doerr and other supporters predict that would trigger a dramatic shift away from oil and toward solar and wind and batteries, spurring billions in new investments and creating new jobs. Opponents call a so-called cap-and-trade system tantamount to a huge tax increase on energy.

CLEAN TECH BUSINESS LEADERS DELIVER LETTER TO CONGRESS

U.S. Clean Tech Business Leaders Call for an American Clean Energy and Security Act

Washington, DC, September 23, 2009 — On the heels of President Obama’s September 22 speech before the United Nations Climate Change Summit and with Congress debating legislation, sixty-four private sector executives, investors, and business leaders from the clean technology sector have delivered a letter to the United States Senate calling for swift congressional action on an American Clean Energy & Security Act.

New federal polices will create over a million jobs here at home, help the United States catch up in an increasingly competitive clean tech global market, and wean our nation off its dependence on foreign oil.

“We have a rare opportunity to accelerate the growth of a new economic engine that supports long-term national growth and offers a sustainable path for the future,” said lead organizer Donnie Fowler. “Clean technology offers the same economic promise to this country that the transcontinental railroad, the interstate highway system, and the broadband revolution did when they were young industries.”

The signers comprise a wide range of leaders within the clean tech community, from established veterans such as venture capitalist Vinod Khosla and Rhone Resch, CEO of Solar Energy Industry Association, to newer entrepreneurs like Matt Golden of home remodeler Sustainable Spaces and Christian Okonsky of electric motor developer KLD Energy.

BOXER/KERRY CLIMATE & ENERGY LEGISLATION RELEASED TODAY

A climate bill that Senate Democrats was formally introduced today by Senators Barbara Boxer and John Kerry

• sets a cap-and-trade system
• calls for a 20 percent reduction carbon dioxide emissions from 2005 levels by 2020 an 83 percent reduction by 2050
• compared to the June House bill:
• a different approach on offsets
• a 20% reduction rather than the House’s 17% reduction
• greater incentives for construction of nuclear power plants & for low-emissions transportation systems
• key unanswered question: how the permits to emit carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases would be distributed to utilities, manufacturers, agribusiness and other interests
• the legislative process:
• Boxer promised to begin hearings October 20
• other Senate panels, including the Finance Committee, led by Senator Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana, will also play a major role
• final legislation sent to the White House will first need to resolve the differences between the House and Senate bills
• opponents to legislation like Oklahoma’s Senator James Inhofe telegraphed the message that they will deliver, "farmers, families and workers have no way of gauging how acutely they will be affected from job losses, higher electricity, food, and gasoline prices."

CLICK HERE TO CONTACT CONGRESS & TELL THEM YOUR VIEWS

LATimes article: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-climate30-2009sep30,0,128921.story

NYTimes article: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/30/us/politics/30climate.html

Click Here for More News on The Boxer-Kerry Legislation

JOIN CLEAN TECH BUSINESS LEADERS in D.C. NEXT WEEK

WCL: Business Advocacy Day for Jobs & Competitiveness - October 6 & 7

Nearly 100 business leaders from around the country will travel to Washington, D.C. for an advocacy day on Capitol Hill in support of comprehensive energy legislation. Attendees will receive media training, policy briefings, meet with key policy makers and attend networking events both evenings. For more, email dfowler@gmail.com or click here.

CLEAN TECH BUSINESS LEADERS DELIVER LETTER TO CONGRESS

U.S. Clean Tech Business Leaders Call for an American Clean Energy and Security Act

Washington, DC, September 23, 2009 — On the heels of President Obama’s September 22 speech before the United Nations Climate Change Summit and with Congress debating legislation, sixty-four private sector executives, investors, and business leaders from the clean technology sector have delivered a letter to the United States Senate calling for swift congressional action on an American Clean Energy & Security Act.

New federal polices will create over a million jobs here at home, help the United States catch up in an increasingly competitive clean tech global market, and wean our nation off its dependence on foreign oil.

“We have a rare opportunity to accelerate the growth of a new economic engine that supports long-term national growth and offers a sustainable path for the future,” said lead organizer Donnie Fowler. “Clean technology offers the same economic promise to this country that the transcontinental railroad, the interstate highway system, and the broadband revolution did when they were young industries.”

The signers comprise a wide range of leaders within the clean tech community, from established veterans such as venture capitalist Vinod Khosla and Rhone Resch, CEO of Solar Energy Industry Association, to newer entrepreneurs like Matt Golden of home remodeler Sustainable Spaces and Christian Okonsky of electric motor developer KLD Energy.

- - -

The ACES Act Coalition exists solely to add many business voices to the public debate on energy & climate debate many times. We coordinate closely with allies all over the United States.

RECENT CLEAN ENERGY NEWS ARTICLES

http://www.acesbusinesscoalition.com/Links.html

US Chamber Faces Revolt Over Opposition to Global Warming
San Jose Mercury News Sept 30, 2009 
PG&E took the extraordinary step of quitting the chamber because of its "extreme rhetoric and obstructionist tactics" as the debate over global warming legislation heats up in Congress. Two other utility companies, New Mexico's PNM and Chicago's Exelon, followed PG&E's lead, and other companies [like Nike] are under pressure to join the exodus. 

Stimulus Funds Speed Transformation Toward Smart Grid
Wall Street Journal Sept 28, 2009 
North American utilities are expected to spend $10.75 billion on computer hardware, software and services related to the smart grid this year, up from $7.56 billion in 2008 ...The smart-grid market "may be bigger than the whole Internet," said John Chambers, CEO of networking giant Cisco.

"Legislation's Benefits Far Outweigh Costs, New Study Finds"
Wall Street Journal Sept 8, 2009 
As flawed as it may be, the US House climate bill passed in June makes economic sense, offering benefits worth at least twice as much as it costs, if not more. The NYU Law School’s Institute for Policy Integrity, an outfit basically created to bring cost-benefit analysis back to the environmental arena, states: "From almost any perspective and under almost any assumption, H.R. 2454 is a good investment for the United States to make in our own economic future and in the future of the planet.” It’s a pretty simple job to tally up the potential benefits: the bill provides $2.27 in benefits for every dollar spent.  

"Firms Start to See Climate Change as Barrier to Profit"
Washington Post Sept 2, 2009 
"If we don't move now, it just becomes more expensive, more complicated and a bigger risk," said Brad Figel, director of government affairs at Nike ... [Many S&P500 companies] see global warming as a threat to their bottom lines ... citing concerns including a potential shortage of raw materials and supply-chain disruptions because of severe weather.  

"China Racing Ahead of U.S. in the Drive to Go Solar"
NYTimes Aug 24, 2009 
China has stepped on the gas in an effort to become the dominant player in green energy - especially in solar power, and even in the United States. 

"Zogby Poll Shows 71% Support for House's Climate Legislation" 
Wall Street Journal Aug 11, 2009
The Obama administration’s argument that the energy and climate bill is actually an engine of job creation is gaining some traction with the public. Some 51% of respondents figure it will create jobs ... Only 29% of respondents said they would have an “unfavorable” view of their representative for having voted for the bill; 47% took a “favorable” view. 

"Falling Behind on Green Tech"
Jeff Immelt & John Doerr
Washington Post August 3, 2009 
America confronts three interrelated crises: an economic crisis, a climate crisis and an energy security crisis. We believe there's a fourth: a competitiveness crisis. This crisis is particularly evident in America's worldwide standing in the next great global industry, green technology.

---