Mother Earth News - Mother Earth News 2004

Green Gazette

The Climate Stewardship Act didnt make it through Congress last fall, but the environment may still prove the winner. The first attempt by Congress to address the threat of global warming since 1998, the McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act, failed to pass the Senate by a narrow margin, but Sen. John McCain says he may reintroduce the legislation as early as this spring.

McCain and the bills co-sponsor, Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Connecticut, say they are encouraged by the support the failed bill received; the vote was a close 43-55. We lost a battle today, McCain said, but well win over time because climate change is real. And we will overcome the influence of special interests over time.

The Climate Stewardship Act would cap carbon dioxide (C0 2 ) emissions from power plants, oil companies and factories, and create an emissions trading system under which companies that achieve more pollution reductions than required can sell their excess reductions to other companies to help them meet their commitments.

The aim of the legislation is to begin solving the problem of global warming, which poses a wide range of threats to the environment, the economy and public health. Carbon dioxide, produced by the combustion of coal, oil and natural gas, is the most abundant of the green house gases, which are responsible for raising the Earths surface temperature. Scientists predict global warming will cause species extinctions, rising sea levels, an increase in deaths from extreme heat, and the migration of tropical diseases northward.

Kevin Curtis, National Environmental Trust vice president of government affairs and a supporter of the McCain-Lieberman legislation, says three weeks before the October vote, the bill reportedly only had 32 votes firmly supporting it and more than a dozen senators still on the fence. Our fear was that the bill might pull in fewer than 40 votes, he says, which would have doomed it for the foreseeable future. But the majority of the undecided senators broke in favor of the bill.

According to information from McCains office, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) study estimated the legislation would cost only about $20 per household. Analysts predicted the impact on the U.S. GNP at no more than 0.01 percent. A second study by the Boston-based Thellus Institute predicted that if the bill becomes law, it will reduce U.S. energy demands and save U.S. residents $48 billion by 2020.

[SOURCES: AMANDA GRISCOM AND GRIST MAGAZINE (SUBSCRIBE TO GRISTS FREE E-MAIL AT WWW.GRISTMAGAZINE.COM/SIGNUP ); SEN. JOHN MCCAIN AND SEN. JOE LIEBERMAN, AND THE NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION ( WWW.NWF.ORG )]

Northeast Crafts Plan to Cut Carbon Emissions

The northeastern United States isnt waiting for Congress to tackle the problem of global warming. The governors of 10 states, led by New York Gov. George Pataki, agreed last July to begin a regional initiative to curb carbon dioxide (C0 2 ) emissions. Their goal is to establish a flexible, market-based cap and trade program by April 2005.

Pataki and the governors of Connecticut, Vermont, New Hampshire, Delaware, Maine, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and Rhode Island agreed to develop a regional C0 2 cap and trade program in an effort to reduce C0 2 emissions from power plants. Maryland has indicated it may participate in the discussions at a later date.

The plan would center on an emissions trading system to require power generators to reduce emissions. The initiative grew out of recommendations made to Pataki by the Greenhouse Gas Task Force he appointed in June 2001 ( www.ccap.org ).

James Tripp, general counsel for Environmental Defense, a national environmental advocacy organization, and a member of the Greenhouse Gas Task Force, Says, This is not only a major regional initiative but a critical national precedent as to how to deal with global warming.

Ashok Gupta, director of the Air and Energy Program for the National Resources Defense Council, says, The debate in the Northeast is no longer about climate science but how best to use existing technologies to reduce emissions and minimize energy costs at the same time.

[SOURCE: ENVIRONMENT NEWS SERVICE (ENS), WWW.ENS-NEWSWIRE.COM ]

Cleaner Power to the People

If you hate writing checks to pay for energy that comes from a fossil-fuel-chugging power plant, you may have another option at your command. A new industry has emerged in recent years that allows customers to buy power generated by renewable energy sources, such as wind, solar, geothermal and biomass.

The electricity currently used in the United States comes primarily from coal (52 percent), nu clear (20 percent) and natural gas (16 percent). Ten percent comes from hydropower and oil combined, while only 2 percent originates from renewable sources. The environmental repercussions of this imbalance are considerable.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), electricity generation is responsible for two-thirds of the sulfur dioxide, one-third of the mercury and one-quarter of the nitrogen oxides emitted annually in the United States. In addition, use of fossil-fuel-based energy sources contributes significantly to emissions of fine particulate matter and carbon dioxide, a leading greenhouse gas.

About 50 percent of U.S. electricity customers today have the option of purchasing green power directly from their suppliers. More than 400,000 actually are doing it.

The number of suppliers who offer green pricing options or who are in the process of developing such programs has grown to more than 350 utilities in 33 states. Included are investor-owned utilities, rural electric cooperatives and other publicly owned utilities. Green pricing is a separate tariff designed specifically for the utility to sell green power. In states with restructured electricity markets, electricity customers often can choose from multiple suppliers, some of which may offer green power programs, too.

Even if your local utility does not offer green power options, you still can purchase cleaner power from regionally or nationally based companies that offer renewable energy certificates. These certificates represent electricity generated from renewable energy sources. The physical electricity is sold into the regional market where the power is generated, but the certificates can be sold anywhere in the country, or the world for that matter. (Here at MOTHER EARTH NEWS, for example, we offset our energy use with green power certificates purchased from Native Energy, a windpower supplier that focuses on developing American Indian renewable energy projects.)

Renewable energy sources still are a bit more expensive than conventional sources, but the price most of us pay for electricity does not account for the environmental damage and other external costs associated with the use of fossil and nuclear fuels. We eventually pay for these hidden costs in the form of tax dollars spent on regulations, pollution control and increased health-care costs linked to air pollution.

But how do you know that the premium you are paying is actually supporting renewable energy development? As a consumer, you have a right to ask what assurances your green power provider can provide. Some certification programs exist: Green-e and the Green Pricing Accreditation Program, both administered by the Center for Resource Solutions, are leading national certification programs for green power.

For More Information:

Utility Green Pricing Programs
www.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/summary.shtml