While Washington waits for the Senate to complete its work on health care, the rest of the world is gearing up for the beginning of the U.N. Climate Conference in Copenhagen.  With the United States and China both announcing aspirational limits on their own carbon emissions, the Copenhagen talks might provide more concrete outcomes than seemed possible only a few weeks ago.  Congressional delegations will be attending the talks, and with a House bill and the outlines of a Senate companion being fashioned, there is a level of optimism for meaningful accomplishment both internationally and in Congress.

There are three hearings of note this week in Congress.  In the House, the Agriculture Committee will hold a hearing on the economic impacts of climate change.  Remember, Democrats on the Agriculture Committee forced major concessions from Chairman Waxman before a climate bill could be brought to the floor.  A second hearing in the Select Committee on Global Warming will discuss climate science.  This will be the first hearing since leaked e-mails from the University of East Anglia climate scientists became public knowledge.  Look for this hearing to turn on the issue of those e-mails.  Finally, the Senate Energy Committee will hold a hearing on policy options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  With the acrimony on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW) panel, the Senate Energy Committee will be taking a broader role than in previous years.  Key to their success may be comments from Ranking Member Murkowski, who has previously acknowledged the consensus scientific position and could support a cap-and-trade system.

Wednesday, December 2

At 10 a.m. in the House, the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming will hold a hearing on the “State of Climate Science” in Room 318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, and the House Committee on Agriculture will hold a hearing on the economic impacts of climate change in Room 1300 of the Longworth House Office Building.

Also at 10 a.m. in Room 366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee will conduct a hearing on policy options for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

For further information about this topic, please contact Akin Gump.

 After a week of talks-sometimes heated, sometimes not-of two key negotiation groups of the UNFCCC, there remains considerable work to be done to meet the goals of the Bali Action Plan. In fact, at the end of the week, it appeared a near certainty that there would be no binding legal agreement developed at the Copenhagen meetings upcoming in December, with only a political agreement being developed at that meeting. At the same time, however, there was considerable work on a number of other issues that would make up any new agreement, leaving some negotiators with the hope that an agreement could be reached in 2010.

The major sticking point for Parties seemed to be the level of ambition-or, more truly, the lack of ambition-on display from developed countries. The gap between developed country commitments and those called for by developing countries (with the general accompaniment that those larger commitments are “required by science”) proved a stumbling block throughout the week. Those debates also created the most dramatic moment of the conference when, on Monday afternoon, the Africa Group walked out of negotiations, demanding that the issue of “numbers” be resolved before negotiations continued. While the Africans were eventually brought back to the table, the stalemate over emissions cuts remained.

In other areas, however, more substantive progress occurred, particularly in the areas of developing country mitigation actions, cooperative sectoral approaches, technology transfer and forest carbon. On developing country mitigation-addressed under paragraph 1(b)ii of the Bali Action Plan-the Parties significantly consolidated their work on Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs), and released a new document outlining plans for long-term development strategies, a registry of NAMAs, and the scale and scope of these actions. Those negotiators working on cooperative sectoral approaches continue to have significant work to accomplish, but a newly released document includes language addressing “bunker fuels”-the fuel oils used in international marine and aviation transport. The contact group addressing forest carbon pushed forward on a concept known as REDD+, or “Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation,” discussing ways to finance, implement and monitor forest protection programs.  The “+” in REDD+ indicates the intent that this effort go beyond current voluntary programs and initiatives developed by the UN-REDD Programme.

With scant weeks before Copenhagen-which once loomed as the deadline for developing a binding successor to the Kyoto Protocol-the world is left in somewhat of a confounding situation: while significant progress has been made on a number of issues, the distance to a binding agreement seems as far as it did a year ago.

For further information about this topic, please contact Akin Gump.

After the divisiveness that marked the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW)  mark up of climate legislation last week, the legislation moves to the two other committees with significant climate jurisdiction-Finance and Energy and Natural Resources.  Senator Max Baucus, who last week supplied the only “no” vote among Democrats on EPW, will lead his committee in an examination of the legislation and, in particular, look at the contentious issues surrounding offsets and allocations.  In the Senate Energy Committee, Chairman Bingaman and Ranking Member Murkowski are hoping to forge a moderate consensus on the renewable energy and production titles of the bill.  Many senators are looking at this week’s action as a chance to start fresh, away from the ideological schisms in the EPW Committee. 

Meanwhile, a group of Senators, led by Lindsay Graham, John Kerry and Joe Lieberman, are looking to create their tri-partisan compromise on expanded offshore and nuclear production in exchange for caps on carbon.  This group of three intends to  meet with Administration officials, including Carol Browner.

Tuesday, November 10

At 10 a.m. both the Senate Finance Committee and Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee will hold hearings in Room 215 and Room 366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, respectively, on climate legislation.

For further information about this topic, please contact Akin Gump.

 To view Part 1 in the series, please click here.

To view Part 2 in the series, please click here.

On October 29, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW) held its third and final day of hearings on S. 1733, the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act.  The committee took testimony from four panels of witnesses, with each panel providing a broad spectrum of perspectives on the issues.    

First Panel

Preston Chiaro, CEO of Energy Products Group and John Rowe, Chairman and CEO of Exelon Corporation, provided testimony from the industry perspective.  Mr. Chiaro explained that his group supports a strong, global climate agreement for the investment certainty it will bring.  Mr. Rowe highlighted his company’s recently-produced Exelon 2020, which he characterized as the only industry plan to offset carbon emissions by 2020.  Mr. Rowe focused on the need for cost containment mechanisms and advocated the inclusion of a definitive price collar on allowances to remove price uncertainty. 

Bon Winger, President of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers; Mike Carey, President of the Ohio Coal Association; and Bob Stallman, President of the American Farm Bureau Federation focused on employment impacts of the proposed legislation.  Mr. Winger testified that blue collar jobs are diminishing and expressed the hope that blue collar jobs can flourish under S. 1733.  Mr. Carey, by contrast, warned that S. 1733 will kill jobs in the coal industry and bankrupt the communities that depend upon coal and expressed the view that new jobs created under the legislation would not be as high paying.  Mr. Stallman claimed that, because a cap-and-trade program would put a hole in the energy supply without providing a substitute, the U.S. agriculture sector will shrink “under any scenario.”

Finally, Dr. Willett Kempton, Professor of Marine Policy at the University of Delaware, encouraged the panel to focus on “new technologies that are carbon-free, large and near commercial production today.” Fred Krupp, President of the Environmental Defense Fund, encouraged the U.S. to move beyond technology creation to technology manufacturing.  He claimed that the U.S. currently lags behind other countries and is missing a great economic opportunity. 

Second Panel

Testifying on behalf of the Bipartisan Policy Center, Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (R- NY, retired) endorsed climate change legislation.  He endorsed requirements to establish emissions targets from transportation would provide a framework for performance driven federal transportation policies, linked to a set of clearly articulated goals, and accountable for results.  He stated that while the allowance set asides for the transportation sector are critical, they are still far below what the sector should receive based on the impact that investment in transportation could have on climate change. 

Similarly, American Public Transportation Association (APTA) President William Millar and Mike McKeever, Executive Director, Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) supported the bill.  Mr. Miller praised the legislation for demonstrating a strong commitment to reducing emissions from the transportation sector and also suggested that the bill can be a major step forward in invigorating transportation infrastructure while drastically reducing its environmental impact.  In concluding his statement, Mr. Miller emphasized that the allowance revenue under the bill must supplement and not replace investments in transit under the surface transportation program and called for the committee to consider the reauthorization.  Mr. McKeever addressed the local planning requirements under the bill that would promote sustainable communities.  He asserted that creating more livable committees would result in a number of benefits, including energy saving, congestion relief, increased productivity, efficient land use, environment and health benefits.

Testifying on behalf of the American Truckers Association, Barbara Windsor, President & Chief Executive Officer, Hahn Transportation, Inc., objected that the legislation would add costs to an already burdened industry.  She commented that while the industry supports the objectives of EPA regulations to control emissions, gains had come at substantial cost to trucking fleets.  She emphasized that the increased fuel prices under the bill, meant to reduce VMTs, would only raise costs for the industry because trucking is not discretionary driving.  She asserted finally that biodiesel and natural gas fuels are not currently viable to replace diesel. 

Third Panel

John Podesta, President and CEO for the Center for American Progress, argued that the U.S. should pass a bill and send a signal to the world that the “U.S. will seize the economic opportunity of the 21^st century.”  He suggested that S. 1733 include a clean energy deployment administration, a “green bank” and additional emphasis on efficiency retrofits.  Mr. Podesta maintained that more can be done to expand the use of natural gas, and suggested the committee look at language in the Nat Gas Act and borrow from that legislation.

Ned Helme, President of the Center for Clean Air Policy, argued that, in contrast to the Kyoto Protocol, developing nations are now committed to taking nationally appropriate mitigation actions funded by developed nations.  He supported the development of international standards to measure, report and verify emission reductions. 

Jonathan Lash, President of the World Resources Institute, maintained that committing to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and developing an international agreement to the same effect is in the economic, environmental and security self interest of the country.   

Iain Murray, Vice-President for Strategy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, cited the struggle of European countries to meet emission targets, despite reductions resulting from the economic downturn.  He argued that the E.U. emissions trading scheme has been very expensive and has failed to produce emission reductions.   

Fourth Panel

Linda Adams, Secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency, said that California has experienced an economic gain following the implementation of clean energy technologies, including the addition of 125,000 new jobs.  She argued that state authority to implement climate change measures should be preserved and matched by national policies. 

Dave Johnson, Organizing Director for the Laborer’s International Union of North America, argued for the inclusion of carbon capture and sequestration, natural gas and nuclear technologies as part of the solution to climate change.   

J. Stephan Dolezalek, Managing Director for Vantage Point Venture Partners, explained that Vantage Point has the largest position in the venture capital industry in the country, with stakes in solar, vehicle electrification and other sectors.  He warned that if the U.S. does not commit to strong policies, it will become as dependent in the future on foreign renewable energy as it is dependent now on imported oil.   

Additional witnesses on this panel included David Hawkins; Eugen Trisko, speaking on behalf of the United Mine Workers of America; Director of the Climate Center for the Natural Resources Defense Council Matt Smorch; Vice President of Strategic Planning for CountryMark; and Paul Cicio, Executive Director for the Industrial Energy Consumers of America.  Mr. Hawkins urged the committee to adopt “strong” legislation, while the remaining three witnesses warned of potential dislocations from a cap-and-trade system.

For further information about this topic, please contact Akin Gump.

This week the Senate will officially start legislating.  The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) will hold their mark-up of the Kerry-Boxer bill beginning on Tuesday.  As of now, Chairman Boxer’s legislation does not look like it will garner any Republican votes to send it to the floor and even some committee Democrats have expressed reservations about the draft.  Although the EPW’s mark up is a significant step in the legislative process, the real action will come from outside the committee where there are serious efforts to bring in a major revision of America’s nuclear energy policy and possibly increased offshore oil production.

Tuesday, November 3

The EPW Committee, starting at 9 a.m., will begin the markup of the S. 1733, the cap-and-trade bill, in Room 406 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Thursday, November 5

The House Natural Resources Committee will hold a 10 a.m. hearing in Room 1324 of the Longworth House Office Building on “Getting Past Gridlock: Models for Renewable Energy Siting and Transmission.”

For further information about this topic, please contact Akin Gump.