IN THE
NEWS - DAILY
CLIPS
Friday November 21, 2008
State emissions plan debated at Sacramento hearing
Jim Downing – Sacramento Bee
Business and environmental groups argued Thursday over whether California's plan to fight global warming will be a boon or a burden for the economy and low-income communities.
More than 200 people from around the state signed up to testify at the final public hearing on the Air Resources Board's proposal for cutting climate-warming emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, as required under a 2006 state law.
The strategy, first released in June, would get most of those cuts by mandating large improvements in energy efficiency as well as rapid expansion of the state's renewable power capacity. It also calls for a market for buying and selling the right to produce greenhouse gases – a so-called cap and trade system.
The air board is scheduled to approve a final version of the framework at its meeting Dec. 11-12 in Sacramento. State regulators will spend the next two years filling in the details, with most policies taking effect in 2012 or later.
By cutting power and fuel bills and fostering a green-tech industry, the plan should ultimately deliver billions of dollars in net economic benefit, according to the state's analysis.
But the transition to a lower-carbon economy carries uncertain costs – a point several business leaders emphasized Thursday.
"They don't tell us how we get there," said Edwin Lombard, a board member of the California Black Chamber of Commerce, in an interview.
Environmental groups, along with some business and venture capital interests, argue that efficiency improvements have been shown to pay off quickly.
"This is not an experiment. This is pretty straightforward stuff," said James Fine, an economist with the Environmental Defense Fund, in an interview.
The cap-and-trade proposal also drew criticism Thursday. Groups representing low-income and minority groups have united to oppose it altogether, arguing that a market would tend to concentrate polluting industries in their communities. At noon Thursday, about 100 activists rallied outside the air board headquarters.
The crafting of the state's plan is being watched across the country and may serve as a model for federal greenhouse-gas strategies. Indeed, air board Chairwoman Mary Nichols is rumored to be a candidate to head the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under President-elect Barack Obama.
(Published November 21, 2008)
Emissions plan calls for tougher rules, fees
State's goal is return to 1990 levels by 2020
Michael Gardner – San Diego Union Tribune
SACRAMENTO – A draft blueprint to stem global warming counts on businesses and everyday Californians to accept a mix of tough regulations and new fees, perhaps as much as $1.5 billion a year collected on targeted products and water bills.
The state Air Resources Board spent yesterday drawing praise and protest for its groundbreaking initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions linked to global warming.
Regulators now will refine the plan before they gather next month for a final vote on the blueprint, which would require a gradual rollback in emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020, an approximately 25 percent cut.
Their vast proposals include allowing businesses to buy and sell emission credits, imposing fees on water use and requiring utilities to generate 33 percent of electricity from renewable sources. Vehicles are major targets: The plan lays out a framework for pursuing strict limits on tailpipe emissions.
Specifics, including detailed regulations, financial incentives and fees, will still need to be hammered out among regulators and lawmakers in time for a 2012 launch.
The air board hearing was just one in a string of developments over recent days that signal a willingness to confront the global warming threat even during a worldwide economic slump.
U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., yesterday introduced legislation calling for the federal government to invest $15 billion annually in clean energy, a move she said would reduce reliance on oil and coal while stimulating job growth.
Boxer also proposed a national “cap and trade” program that would limit industry emissions. To encourage compliance and investment in clean technology, companies that come in under the cap would be provided pollution credits that then could be sold to other businesses. Those companies could use the newly bought credits to comply with emissions standards. California already is pushing that idea as part of the air board plan.
“By investing in clean energy technologies and reducing our dependence on foreign oil, we also have a recipe for economic recovery,” Boxer said in a statement.
Boxer's package is similar to proposals advanced by President-elect Barack Obama, who addressed world leaders gathered in Beverly Hills this week for a two-day global warming summit organized by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
In remarks delivered by video Tuesday, Obama unequivocally committed to pursuing remedies. “Now is the time to confront this challenge once and for all,” the Democrat said.
Schwarzenegger, a Republican who has gained international recognition for aggressively attacking global warming, said he's eager to join forces.
“We in California are ready to go and do everything that it takes in order to help his administration to follow through with his environmental vision,” the governor said.
Tops on California's agenda: obtaining federal permission to regulate vehicle tailpipe exhaust to limit greenhouse gas emissions. The Bush administration and automakers have resisted regulations, but officials in Sacramento are convinced Obama will act swiftly to grant authority to the state.
Adding to California's optimism is the ouster of an automaker ally, Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., as chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Replacing him is Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, a staunch advocate of policies aimed at reducing global warming.
California estimates that about 30 percent of greenhouse gas emissions can be traced to the automobile. Vehicle regulations over time would account for 18 percent of the reduction in emissions, according to one state analysis of the air board plan.
The air board's draft plan also refers to “feebate” strategies that could be implemented to further cut vehicle emissions. The proposal calls for rewarding buyers of fuel-efficient cars with rebates. To discourage taking home gas-guzzlers, fees would be added to the purchase of large vehicles.
Just how far and fast California goes remains a work in progress as the state board grapples with its broader plan while trying to answer complaints that it costs too much.
Without a comprehensive strategy, regulators say, even slight increases in temperatures could trigger catastrophic climatic disruptions that threaten crops, water supplies and the environment.
Critics this week were supplied some ammunition by the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office. Its analysis found that some of the air board's economic impact figures “are inconsistent and incomplete,” and it criticizes the air board for selecting strategies first and then doing the financial study “after the fact.”
Moreover, the air board has failed to lay out specifically how much compliance could cost and when businesses could expect to recoup those investments – an important consideration for companies struggling to adjust, the analysis pointed out.
Ron Roberts, an air board member and San Diego County supervisor, said gyrations over cost are premature, given that the board plans to work on cushioning the impact between now and 2012.
“We have a long way to go,” he said. “This really is a first step.”
Roberts said regulators must act even with the country in a slump.
“The economic meltdown is temporary,” he said. “What we're really confronted with is an environmental meltdown that cannot be ignored.”
But an array of business representatives fear higher costs passed on to them for electricity, gas and goods.
“It's going to really hurt us. This is the wrong time,” said Marco Polo Cortes, president of the San Diego County Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.
The air board is studying a water fee to raise between $100 million and $500 million annually. The thinking is that it takes a lot of energy, thus high greenhouse gas emissions, to move water to farms, businesses and homes. Such a fee is not unprecedented. For example, the state collects 19 cents a month from San Diego Gas & Electric Co. customers, some of which is plowed back into programs to encourage conservation. The new water fee could be used to accomplish similar goals, regulators say.
An additional $300 million to $1 billion could be raised by taxing certain products associated with high emissions, such as refrigerants and insulation. A share of the money could go to a rebate plan to encourage consumers to buy energy-efficient appliances. Removing one old refrigerator could save the same amount of emissions generated by a car in a year, air board officials say.
(Published November 21, 2008)
California, still the climate leader
Robert Collier – San Francisco Chronicle
Despite new signals from President-elect Barack Obama and Congress that they may defy predictions of delay by pressing forward with legislation on global warming, California's role as the key battleground for climate policy is greater than ever - and local communities will be on the front line.
Environmentalists had reason to be encouraged by Obama's message to the two-day Global Climate Summit in Los Angeles earlier this week, in which he promised "a new chapter in America's leadership on climate change." Thursday there was more good news when Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, who has championed the fight against global warming, unseated Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., a staunch defender of the auto industry, to become chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
But it is still an uphill fight. Congress is not expected to pass comprehensive legislation until late 2010 or 2011, and international negotiations for a follow-up treaty to the Kyoto Protocol are stymied by disputes with China and other developing nations.
What's needed now more than ever is leadership from California. The state has long played a unique role in cajoling and dragging federal policymakers to take action on energy conservation and climate change. With climate-change deniers and delayers at long last out of power in Washington, California needs to push aggressively to toward its ambitious climate goals.
California's influence was amply demonstrated this week at the Los Angeles summit, where officials from around the world came to hobnob with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and study the state's progress on energy and climate. California, in fact, has been making slow progress in complying with its showpiece 2006 climate-change law, AB32. The double-whammy of fiscal and financial implosions are making further compliance even more difficult.
So far, results have been few on the most tangible element of AB32 - the requirement that private utilities produce 20 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2010. None of those companies are on track to meet that goal. Yet on Monday, Schwarzenegger doubled down on his bet, announcing that the goal would be raised to 33 percent from renewables by 2020. It was a laudable and necessary step, but such results will not come cheaply. The state Public Utilities Commission warned in a report last month that achieving this stepped-up goal would require about $60 billion to build wind and solar generation facilities and "smart grid" transmission lines. It would be "an infrastructure build-out on a scale and time line perhaps unparalleled anywhere in the world," the report said.
State lawmakers, who will need to pass legislation to facilitate this switch to more renewable power, say the economy's collapse makes it much harder to go green.
"We're in terrible budget crisis, and this will be a big challenge for climate-related programs," said Nancy Skinner, a longtime activist on global warming who was elected this month to the state Assembly in the East Bay.
"Some of these programs (at risk) are very basic. For example, on the table will be very significant cuts to funding for public transit. This will affect greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution. We need to expand transit, not cut it," she said.
State legislators are hoping that in the next few months, Congress will pass an economic stimulus bill that includes plenty of funds for rescuing local governments as well as creating "green jobs" - everything from weatherizing homes to building solar and wind energy installations.
"A lot of local governments have set aggressive targets for carbon (pollution) reduction that exceed state targets, and certainly the federal government's," said Michelle Wyman, executive director of ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability, an Oakland nonprofit. "But without more resources, more actual dollars for local governments to work with, whether on transportation or development, it will be hard to make as much progress as needed."
Skinner and other state legislators still hope to move forward in ways that don't cost much money. "We have to be innovative," she said, pointing to a plan to encourage Californians to replace their dark-colored roofs with light-colored roofs. This would save energy and help reflect the sun's heat back into space, thus counteracting the effect of global warming.
The steps that are perhaps most important - and that would affect people most directly - are the innumerable land-use decisions by local cities that determine whether to keep growth sprawling or begin to kick the addiction to the automobile. State legislation passed earlier this year steers government funds away from developments that encourage sprawl.
So will California lead Washington in the next few years, creating political momentum for Congress and the Obama administration to save the planet from global warming? The state's decisions are a much more diffuse and less glamorous set of moves than anything you're likely to see come out of Washington. But they're the leadership that counts.
What's next
Here are the big decisions ahead on climate change:
International
Kyoto Protocol - New treaty to be signed December 2009 in Copenhagen - but delays are likely. Disputes over emissions by China and other major nations.
Federal
California's EPA waiver - President -elect Obama is expected to reverse the Bush administration stance by allowing California to enforce its 23 percent cut in heat-trapping emissions from new cars by 2012 and a 30 percent cut by 2016.
Economic stimulus - Congress likely to pass bill in January or February. About $15 billion annually for clean energy, advanced biofuels and "green jobs.
Energy bill - Congress may pass it in mid 2009. Funds for advanced vehicles, biofuels and electric grid?
Climate change - Late 2010 or 2011? Federal cap-and-trade system to limit emissions for businesses and create tradable emissions credits, and a wide variety of energy-saving measures.
Local
Emissions - San Francisco, Berkeley and Santa Monica have committed to sharply reducing emissions by 2050. Compliance plans still being worked out.
Solar power - Berkeley is pioneering a program that finances residential solar installations with municipal bonds that are later repaid by homeowners. Test phase started October, full roll-out next year, with possible later expansion to include insulation and energy-efficient heaters and furnaces.
Source: Robert Collier research
California
Cap and trade - Regulations unveiled in December (2008) for emissions limits and tradeable credits.
Offsets - State plans to allow up to one-half of future emissions reductions to be fulfilled by purchases of credits for emissions-reducing projects in developing nations such as China. Business supports the plan, some environmentalists call it a sham.
Low-carbon fuel standard - New rule orders a reduction in carbon intensity of passenger vehicle fuels by at least 10 percent by 2020. Depends on multibillion-dollar investments by oil firms.
Cool roofs - Requirement for reflective, "cool colored" surfaces for new residential sloped roofs takes effect in July 2009. Possible strengthening by Legislature.
Robert Collier is a visiting scholar at the Center for Environmental Public Policy at UC Berkeley's Goldman School of Public Policy.
(Published November 21, 2008)
Waxman win boosts state's clout in Congress
Zachary Coile – San Francisco Chronicle
Los Angeles Rep. Henry Waxman's stunning overthrow Thursday of legendary Michigan Rep. John Dingell to take over one of the House's most powerful committees may be bad news for Detroit and its struggling auto industry, but it's a clear sign of California's growing clout in Washington.
After years battling the Bush administration and Dingell over the state's efforts to set the nation's toughest limits on greenhouse gases, Californians now control both House and Senate committees that will be writing climate-change legislation. They will have key allies in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, and President-elect Barack Obama, who just this week pledged rapid action on global warming.
"It just signals the sea change we're facing," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., chairwoman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, who plans to start moving climate-related bills in January. "It's a good sea change, it's momentous."
Waxman's victory as the new chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee rocked Capitol Hill, upending the House's traditional seniority system by ousting the 82-year-old Dingell, the dean of the House, who was just months away from becoming the chamber's longest-serving chairman.
Over 28 years as the panel's top Democrat, Dingell racked up a long list of accomplishments, passing the Endangered Species Act and expanding health care for children. But critics saw him as too industry-friendly, accusing him of shielding automakers from stronger fuel-economy standards and opposing tougher air pollution limits on power plants.
Clashed with Dingell
Waxman, 69, an avid environmentalist who has clashed with Dingell for three decades over issues from the Clean Air Act to climate change, saw an opening after Obama's victory this month. The committee has jurisdiction over three top elements of Obama's agenda - health care, energy and global warming - and Waxman made the case to his colleagues that Dingell would be a roadblock to enacting the new president's policies.
Lawmakers inside the Cannon caucus room, where Thursday's vote of the party caucus took place, said Dingell urged Democrats to remember his legislative accomplishments, while his allies urged members to respect seniority. Waxman responded by laying out his policy disagreements with Dingell over the years, casting himself as a change agent more in line with Obama.
"You could almost feel the votes move in the room" during Waxman's speech, said Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez, who helped run his fellow Californian's bid for the job.
At the end of voting, Waxman had prevailed, 137-122.
Outside the hearing room, Waxman told a crowd of reporters, "The prevailing view in the caucus, and the argument we made, was that we needed a change for the committee. ... We have an opportunity that maybe only comes once in a generation."
Dingell was gracious in defeat, issuing a statement pledging to work closely with Waxman on the committee. "Well, this was clearly a change year, and I congratulate my colleague Henry Waxman on his success today," he said.
A major factor in Dingell's defeat was the sense among many Democrats, particularly the party's liberal wing, that he had been slow to address climate change. Dingell released a 461-page draft climate change bill last month, but many members believed Waxman would be more aggressive.
Dingell antagonized California lawmakers by floating a draft bill last year to prevent states from enforcing tough limits on greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles - limits that were later blocked by President Bush's Environmental Protection Agency anyway. He also clashed with Pelosi over the creation of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming last year and over her push to raise fuel-economy standards, although Dingell ultimately backed the increase.
Pelosi was officially neutral in the race between Dingell and Waxman, but many of her top allies worked behind the scenes for Waxman, and lawmakers on both sides of the fight noted that she did nothing to discourage him from the challenge.
After the vote, Pelosi issued a statement calling Dingell a "giant of the Congress" while also predicting that Waxman would make progress on issues like energy independence, health care and global warming. She said the caucus "will move forward from this vote with unity."
Bitter race
But the race was bitter, and there are certain to be hard feelings, especially among Dingell supporters. Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Va., a senior member of the committee, called Waxman's challenge "highly inappropriate."
Capitol Hill watchers said Waxman's election may represent a new high-water mark for California's power in the Congress, rivaling the power Texas enjoyed starting in the mid-1990s, when former Republican Reps. Dick Armey and Tom DeLay were top House leaders and the state held several key chairmanships.
Besides Pelosi's position as speaker - arguably the second-most powerful job in Washington - Californians chair four House committees: Education and Labor (Miller); Foreign Affairs (Rep. Howard Berman, D-Los Angeles); Veterans Affairs (Rep. Bob Filner, D-San Diego) and now Energy and Commerce (Waxman). In addition to Boxer's committee post, Sen. Dianne Feinstein chairs the Senate Rules Committee and is a top Senate appropriator - and she is in line to possibly chair the Intelligence Committee.
Tim Ransdell, executive director of the California Institute for Federal Policy Research, said the state's clout is probably higher now than earlier this decade, when California had six Republican committee chairs in the House: Appropriations (Jerry Lewis of Redlands in San Bernardino County), Rules (David Dreier of San Dimas in Los Angeles County), Ways and Means (Bill Thomas of Bakersfield), Armed Services (Duncan Hunter of Alpine in San Diego County), Education and Workforce (Howard "Buck" McKeon of Santa Clarita in Los Angeles County) and Resources (Richard Pombo of Tracy).
Waxman had to give up his chairmanship of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, the House's top investigative panel, where he'd led high-profile probes into steroids use in sports and contractor abuses in Iraq. But Ransdell said Waxman had picked the right time to shift committees.
"Oversight is a committee whose job is largely to be a thorn in the side of the administration," he said. "He spent several years trying to uncover bad things that happened in a Republican administration. Now he doesn't have the task of doing that in a friendly administration."
(Published November 21, 2008)
11.19.08