December 05, 2007

Climate change bill passes senate committee

A Senate committee approved a broad bill on Wednesday night to address climate change, a major step toward passage of a measure that would for the first time slow and then reverse emissions of the gases that scientists blame for the warming of the planet. I strongly support this legislation (and I would support stronger legislation.) I feel that it will address air pollution as well as reduce risks of possible climate change. The increased costs to carbon will mean more nuclear and renewable power. My previous articles have discussed the EIA forecast of the effect of a climate change bill. (Triple nuclear and renewables and possible reduction of coal to 11% by 2030.) I think this bill has a good chance of passing in 2008 or 2009 because many big businesses (car companies, dupont etc...) feel that after George Bush is gone the pressures (Al Gore and the Inconvenient truth lobby) will only increase for even stronger legislation.

The Environment and Public Works Committee split largely along party lines on the bill, which calls for a roughly 70 percent cut from 2005 levels by 2050 in the production of carbon dioxide and other climate-altering pollutants.

The committee, which approved the measure by an 11-to-8 vote, worked through dozens of amendments over nearly 10 hours of hearings on Wednesday.

The legislation, which is opposed by a powerful array of forces including utilities, oil companies and manufacturers, faces an arduous path through the full Senate and then in the House. Little action is expected before the first of next year.

Previously I had discussed the passage of the bill by a senate panel (a portion of this larger committee).


Al Fin said...

Greenhouse gases are not the same as pollution from coal and oil. A critical distinction. Confusing issues does not solve problems.

It would be incorrect to assume that the multi-billion dollar interests pushing this issue are all on the side of oil and coal. To the contrary, the carbon trading markets that Gore and others are promoting will be huge.

Yes, by February of 2009, George Bush will be gone. But by then, accumulating scientific evidence against the greenhouse gas theory of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming (CAGW) will be much stronger.

The IPCC has become a cross between a climate orthodoxy and a climate mafia.

bw said...

Yes, I know that Greenhouse gases are not the same as air pollution.
However, I believe that the legislation will eventually cause a shift away from coal power to nuclear. Of course how much of this depends upon the specifics of the legislation. Initially with high caps for the carbon trading most of the money will actually go towards coal companies. This is what has been happening in the UK. However, not all of the money goes to coal so cleaner sources and tech do get funded and it continues the shift that is already occurring towards nuclear. The 2005 legislation which provides loan guarantees and the laws in the south of the US which allow utilities to recapture cost overruns on plants with higher rates insure the 32 new nuclear plants get built. The climate change bill legislation also helps.