06 Oct 2008: Report
Financial Crisis Dims Chances
for U.S. Climate Legislation
Environmentalists had been looking to a new president and a new Congress to pass legislation dealing with global warming next year. But with tough economic times looming, the passage of a sweeping climate change bill now appears far less likely.
In the coming months, as Washington struggles to contain the damage from Wall Street’s precipitous financial free fall, one of the first casualties may be the top piece of legislation on the environmental agenda: the adoption of a sweeping national program to control greenhouse gases.
Democratic leaders in the House and Senate continue to rank climate-change legislation as one of their major priorities for the next Congress. So, too, do both presidential candidates. But there’s growing acknowledgement that with the United States on the verge of a deep recession, passing a bill that mandates a reduction of greenhouse gases and places a price on emitting carbon will be extremely difficult.
“Clearly what’s happening with the economy, and the scale it’s happening, takes all the oxygen out of the room for virtually anything else for the moment,.” said Debbie Sease, legislative director for the Sierra Club.
The odds are long for two reasons. First, with the nation facing the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression and high energy prices, many legislators will be reluctant to pass a bill that — at least in the short term — will make all carbon-based fuels even more expensive. “Financial realities will make it much more difficult for the new administration or Congress to put forth a very aggressive, economy-wide climate bill,” argued Sen. James Inhofe, ranking Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and one of Congress’s harshest critics of any climate-change action. “I believe the current financial crisis will only reinforce the public’s concerns about any climate bill that attempts to increase the costs of energy and jeopardizes jobs in the near term.”
Second, with the nation’s voters furious at poorly regulated financial markets that helped create the current meltdown, Congress is going to be reluctant to create a cap-and-trade system in which a new commodity — carbon emissions — will be traded on a large scale. Said William Kovacs, vice president for environment, technology and regulatory affairs at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, “Anyone who thinks you can have a cap-and-trade system in which trillions of dollars of new securities will be traded is just not paying attention to what’s happening on Wall Street.”
All this, as well as the concern that a cap-and-trade system will mean the creation of a federal regulatory system that will further swell the budget deficit, has left environmentalists acutely aware of the daunting challenges ahead on federal climate legislation.
“If you frame climate change as a regulatory program that’s going to have a lot of costs,” said Eileen Claussen, president of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, “then it will take a while for it to get back toward the top of the legislative agenda.”
Inhofe and other opponents note that last year, despite broad support from the environmental community, Democratic leaders couldn’t muster the 60 votes they needed to prevent a filibuster of their global warming bill. That measure, sponsored by Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman and Republican Sen. John Warner, would have created a cap-and-trade program allowing businesses to eventually buy and sell greenhouse gas emission credits on the open market.
David Kreutzer, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, said that even before the financial crisis hit, climate-change legislation was losing votes because it has the potential to raise the cost of electricity from coal-fired power plants. “When you put this kind of tax in place, you make energy more expensive,” he said. “You lose lots of jobs. You really hit manufacturing.”
Half the battle will be defining what the climate change legislative debate is really about.
Environmental advocates are recasting their global warming proposals as economic recovery packages that will create green jobs.Environmental advocates are already adjusting to the new political realities, recasting their global warming proposals as economic recovery packages that will create green jobs. “When we address the threat of unchecked global warming by investing in clean energy technologies and reducing our dependence on foreign oil, we also have a recipe for economic recovery,” noted Sen. Barbara Boxer, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.
Those who favor controlling greenhouse gases contend that Inhofe and other critics are ignoring the enormous long-term price of coping with higher sea levels, droughts, and increased disease brought on by global warming. Claussen, of the Pew Center, noted that both presidential candidates are now looking at action on climate change as “a job creation program that deals with the lower cost of climate change now rather then the higher cost” of responding to it in the future.
Republican presidential nominee John McCain and Democratic nominee Barack Obama are continuing to support climate-change legislation, although their campaigns are now focused on economic issues.
As for creating another U.S. commodities market, environmentalists argue that climate-change legislation would contain strong government oversight that would prevent a Wall Street-style meltdown. “Cap-and-trade gives you a very effective government oversight role that is absolutely essential,” said Tony Kreindler, a spokesman for the Environmental Defense Fund.
Claussen argued that the proposed emissions trading programs would not “encourage speculation,” noting, “It’s not something where anybody can buy in. You actually have to be a regulated entity to take part. So there will be lots of strings attached.”
The next president can provide more than just legislative leadership. If Congress drags its heels next year, Bush’s successor could nudge lawmakers along by calling on the Environmental Protection Agency to use the Clean Air Act to control greenhouse gases. A 2007 Supreme Court decision urged the agency to do just that. But the Chamber of Commerce’s Kovacs said that the business community fears that a Clean Air Act regulation on greenhouse emissions would apply to millions of small businesses, schools, and churches. If regulators take such a shotgun approach, there might be pressure on Congress to enact a more narrowly targeted law to address climate change.
Meanwhile, big business has been anxiously watching the states move forward with their own global warming programs.
With states moving forward on their own programs, a growing number of companies are backing federal climate-In late September, 10 Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states opened the first U.S. market for trading greenhouse-gas emission permits. California continues to adopt an ambitious mix of laws aimed at controlling global warming. Other states are forging their own paths. Corporate leaders complain that the disparate state and regional efforts are forcing them to comply with a hodgepodge of regulatory requirements. Little wonder, then, that a growing number of companies are now backing federal climate-change legislation.
change legislation.
But while the momentum is still on the side of controlling greenhouse gas emissions, environmentalists will have to settle for a less ambitious bill than they anticipated under next year’s Democratic Congress and a new White House. “The environmental community is going to have to adjust to reality,” Claussen said. “Any bill that’s going to pass the Senate and the House and be signed by the president, whoever it is, will have to come from the middle. The bill will have to address the needs of the manufacturing states and the agricultural states — not just the clean states,” she noted.
Before getting climate-change legislation back on the agenda, environmentalists will have to wait until the dust settles from the Wall Street fiasco. They’ll also have to devote some time to fighting new battles, like stopping efforts to allow oil and gas exploration off U.S. shores and on federal lands. And businesses will have to accept an emissions trading program with more strings attached and more safeguards than those imposed on the ill-fated Wall Street financial gurus.
Climate change legislation isn’t dead. It’s just taking a sobering detour.
POSTED ON 06 Oct 2008 IN Biodiversity Climate Oceans Policy & Politics Policy & Politics North America North America
ABOUT THE AUTHORMargaret Kriz covers energy and environmental issues for the National Journal, where she has been a writer since 1987. She also writes a column for the Environmental Law Institute's bimonthly magazine, Environmental Forum. From 2005 to 2006, Kriz was a fellow at the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University.
Recommend
Tweet
DIGG
Email
Print
Stumble Upon
ShareRELATED ARTICLES
How to Find Common Ground
In the Bitter Climate Debate
Even as the impacts of climate change intensify, many Americans remain confused by the issue. In an interview Yale Environment 360, climate scientist Katharine Hayhoe discusses what rising temperatures will mean for the U.S., how to talk with climate skeptics, and what she would say to Texas Gov. Rick Perry to prod him into action on global warming.
A Veteran of the Climate Wars
Reflects On U.S. Failure to Act
One of the many casualties of the recent U.S. elections was Congressman Rick Boucher, a Virginia Democrat who played a key role in passage of cap-and-trade legislation by the House of Representatives. In an interview with Yale Environment 360, Boucher discusses the bitter failure of the Senate to pass a climate bill and future prospects for tackling global warming.
Ambitious Actions by the States
Push U.S. Toward Climate Goals
Hampered by a slow-moving Congress, the Obama administration is offering only modest greenhouse gas reduction targets at the Copenhagen conference. But limited federal action does not mean the U.S. is standing still: More than half of the 50 states are already taking steps to reduce emissions on their own.
The Case Against the Skeptics
Stirring Up the Warming Debate
The recent controversy over hacked e-mails in the climate science community has emboldened global warming skeptics who dismiss the notion that humanity is dangerously heating up the planet. But James Hoggan, founder of the Desmogblog, is taking on the deniers, accusing them of cynically obfuscating an issue long ago settled by mainstream science.
The Copenhagen Diagnosis:
Sobering Update on the Science
On the eve of the Copenhagen conference, a group of scientists has issued an update on the 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Their conclusions? Ice at both poles is melting faster than predicted, the claims of recent global cooling are wrong, and world leaders must act fast if steep temperature rises are to be avoided.
MORE IN Reports
Africa’s Ambitious Experiment
To Preserve Threatened Wildlife
Five nations in southern Africa are joining together to create a huge conservation area that will extend across their borders and expand critical territory for elephants. But can these new protections reverse decades of decline for area wildlife while also benefiting the people who live there?
Melting Sea Ice Could Lead
To Pressure on Arctic Fishery
With melting sea ice opening up previously inaccessible parts of the Arctic Ocean, the fishing industry sees a potential bonanza. But some scientists and government officials have begun calling for a moratorium on fishing in the region until the true state of the Arctic fishery is assessed.
Solar Windows: Transforming
Buildings Into Energy Producers
The vast amount of glass in skyscrapers and office buildings represents enormous potential for an emerging technology that turns windows into solar panels. But major questions remain as to whether solar windows can be sufficiently inexpensive and efficient to be widely adopted.
Fighting A Last-Ditch Battle
To Save the Rare Javan Rhino
Rhinoceroses worldwide are under siege as their habitat shrinks and poachers slaughter hundreds annually for their valuable horns. Now, in Indonesia, conservation groups are engaged in a desperate struggle to save the last 40 Javan rhinos on earth.
Insurance Companies Face
Increased Risks from Warming
If the damages related to climate change mount in the coming decades, insurance companies may face the prospect of paying larger disaster claims and being dragged into global warming lawsuits. But many firms, especially in the U.S., have barely begun to confront the risks.
Hopes Fade for Cleanup
In Nigeria’s Oil-Rich Delta
The Ogoniland region of Nigeria has long been badly polluted by decades of oil production that has fouled the delta and contaminated drinking water. A United Nations report has recommended a massive recovery initiative, but so far the Nigerian government has shown few signs it will agree to the cleanup project.
Betting on Technology to
Help Turn Consumers Green
U.S. consumers tell researchers they want to buy environmentally friendly products, but so far they haven’t been doing that on a large scale. Now a host of companies and nonprofits are trying to use new technology — from smartphones to social networking — to make it easier for buyers to make the green choice.
U.S. Fossil Fuel Boom
Dims Glow of Clean Energy
A surge in gas and oil drilling in the U.S. is helping drive the economic recovery and is enhancing energy security. But as the situation in Ohio shows, cheaper energy prices and the focus on fossil fuels has been bad news for the renewable energy industry.
Can Reforming the Farm Bill
Help Change U.S. Agriculture?
For decades, farm bills in the U.S. Congress have supported large-scale agriculture. But with the 2012 Farm Bill now up for debate, advocates say seismic shifts in the way the nation views food production may lead to new policies that tilt more toward local, sustainable agriculture.
Scientists Warn of Low-Dose
Risks of Chemical Exposure
A new study finds that even low doses of hormone-disrupting chemicals — used in everything from plastics to pesticides – can have serious effects on human health. These findings, the researchers say, point to the need for basic changes in how chemical safety testing is conducted.
RELATED e360 DIGEST ITEMS
18 May 2012: EU Fisheries Observers
Are Intimidated, Bribed by Crews
17 May 2012: Human-made Pollutants May Be
Expanding Tropical Zone, Study Says
17 May 2012: Retreat of Columbia Glacier
Vividly Captured in NASA Satellite Images
16 May 2012: Wildlife in Tropical Regions
Has Declined 60 Percent Since 1970
14 May 2012: Various Uses of Wood
Determine Emissions from Deforestation
11 May 2012: Eel Breeding Innovation
Sought to Conserve Wild Populations
11 May 2012: Study Calls Selective Logging
Most Realistic Conservation Strategy
10 May 2012: New Interactive Website
Maps Distribution of Global Species
09 May 2012: Warming Waters Attract
New Fish Species to British Waters
08 May 2012: Highly Endangered Gorillas
Are Captured in Rare Video Footage
Yale Environment 360 is
a publication of the
Yale School of Forestry
& Environmental Studies.
SEARCH e360
CONNECT
Twitter: YaleE360e360 on Facebook
Donate to e360
View mobile site
Bookmark
Share e360
Email newsletter
Subscribe to our feed:
ABOUT
About e360Contact
Submission Guidelines
Reprints
e360 VIDEO
The Warriors of Qiugang, a Yale Environment 360 video that chronicles the story of a Chinese village’s fight against a polluting chemical plant, was nominated for a 2011 Academy Award for Best Documentary (Short Subject). Watch the video.
DEPARTMENTS
OpinionReports
Analysis
Interviews
e360 Digest
Video Reports
TOPICS
BiodiversityBusiness & Innovation
Climate
Energy
Forests
Oceans
Policy & Politics
Pollution & Health
Science & Technology
Sustainability
Urbanization
Water
REGIONS
Antarctica and the ArcticAfrica
Asia
Australia
Central & South America
Europe
Middle East
North America
e360 VIDEO REPORT
As temperatures rise and water supplies dry up, tribes in East Africa increasingly are coming into conflict. A Yale Environment 360 video reports on a phenomenon that could become more common: how worsening drought will pit groups — and nations — against one another. Watch the video.
e360 MOBILE
from Yale
Environment 360 is now available for mobile devices at e360.yale.edu/mobile.
Top Image: aerial view of Iceland. © Google & TerraMetrics.
e360 VIDEO REPORT
Leveling Appalachia: The Legacy of Mountaintop Removal Mining, an e360 video examining the environmental and human impacts of this mining practice, won the award for best video in the 2010 National Magazine Awards for Digital Media. Watch the video.
OF INTEREST
COMMENTS
Nothing like a real problem to make you forget all about a fake one invented to separate people from their money and freedom.
I'm not sure how much of a delay this will cause. As I recall, they managed to insert a pretty strong carbon clause into the bailout package, right along with $6million for wooden arrows.
Jim
Concern for the environment is a luxury afforded rich nations. If the economy tanks bad enough, long enough, people will be hunting endangered species for food and chopping down old growth forests for fuel.
At least this crisis will slow down the nonsense legislation on the non-crisis og AGW. Too bad it takes a real meldown to curtail foolishness.
The economic meltdown cuts two ways. It's working to slow progress toward green stimulus, but it's also the guarantee that more progress will be made toward greening the economy than without the crisis. Ms. Kriz gets the balance right.
Congressional opposition to greening can only go so far. Although many in Congress don't believe that climate is the problem it is, they believe in stimulating the economy by providing jobs. So let's stick with jobs that do greening without gouging too many emissions-creating sacred cows.
I recommend two massive job/stimulus projects that won't necessarily alarm the fossil fuel apologists. They weigh down on the low-tech, commonsense side of combating warming: a) absorb the maximum amount of CO2 that is humanly or politically possible, and b) reorient the construction industry away from sprawl development to creating denser, walkable cities:
1) Plant 10 billion trees in the next two years.
2) Stop sprawl development by only incentivising urban retrofit densification like the following:
3) Build basements under all buildings that lack them and where basement construction is feasible. This could be especially helpful to harried homeowners who could thereby rent or sell the additional units.
These are two very limited but very strategic projects, which, if done with passion and resolve, will lead to a groundswell of support that will soon enough (even though we're already almost too late) create the bigger changes we need.
The economic meltdown cuts two ways. It's working to slow progress toward green stimulus, but it's also the guarantee that more progress will be made toward greening the economy than without the crisis. Ms. Kriz gets the balance right.
Congressional opposition to greening can only go so far. Although many in Congress don't believe that climate is the problem it is, they believe in stimulating the economy by providing jobs. So let's stick with jobs that do greening without gouging too many emissions-creating sacred cows.
I recommend two massive job/stimulus projects that won't necessarily alarm the fossil fuel apologists. They weigh down on the low-tech, commonsense side of combating warming: a) absorb the maximum amount of CO2 that is humanly or politically possible, and b) reorient the construction industry away from sprawl development to creating denser, walkable cities:
1) Plant 10 billion trees in the next two years.
2) Stop sprawl development by only incentivising urban retrofit densification like the following:
3) Build basements under all buildings that lack them and where basement construction is feasible. This could be especially helpful to harried homeowners who could thereby rent or sell the additional units.
These are two very limited but very strategic projects, which, if done with passion and resolve, will lead to a groundswell of support that will soon enough (even though we're already almost too late) create the bigger changes we need.
Legislators becoming reluctant to pass the environmental bill and the government bent to increase taxes to curb the excessive use of carbon producing energy are both negative approach. Wouldn't it be better to encourage solar and carbon-less bio energy to bring the climate change threat in track?
Comments have been closed on this feature.