Defending the Clean Air Act on the Web and in Congress

Sphere: Related Content

My last post was on the arguments for climate change and my admitting to having little interest in engaging in the all to often flaming rhetoric that makes up the blogosphere. It is a different matter when our elected representatives are doing it, that we have to live with. The Environmental Defense Fund had warned us that Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) had submitted a "resolution of disapproval" that demanded opposition because of its intention to eliminate the Clean Air Act's ability to protect Americans from global warming.This attack would put public health at risk and jeopardize long-overdue action to hold the biggest polluters accountable, reduce America's oil dependence and jump-start a vibrant clean energy economy.The Supreme Court ruled that global warming pollutants are covered by the Clean Air Act and the EPA has begun carrying out the law by taking steps to limit global warming pollution from vehicle and from large power plants and factories.

Fortunately, I have two Senators who support my views on the environment and work to make positive change. I am going to include the information that they provided me in its entirety even though the general rule of blogging is not to have overly lengthy posts.

From Senator Barbara Boxer

Dear Mr. Dowling: Thank you for writing to me in opposition to a proposal that could overturn the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) global warming endangerment finding. I share your opposition to this proposal.

As you may know, on December 7, 2009, the EPA issued a finding that greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare. However, there are efforts underway to curtail the EPA's authority by repealing the agency's finding. I believe that such efforts are misguided and would greatly undermine the Clean Air Act, a landmark environmental law that has safeguarded the air we breathe for decades.

Debating over what to do about unchecked global warming is fair, and the Senate will continue to evaluate the best tools for addressing greenhouse gas emissions, but repealing an endangerment finding based upon years of work by America's leading scientists and public health experts is not appropriate. On January 11, the Majority Members of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) united together in opposition to the effort to overturn EPA's endangerment finding and urged all of our Senate colleagues to do the same. I believe that my colleagues and I will be successful in blocking this ill-conceived proposal.

Throughout my tenure in Congress and now as Chairman of EPW, I have worked to uphold our important environmental laws and lead the way in our fight against global warming. In my continuing efforts, Senator John Kerry and I proudly introduced the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act (S.1733), which would establish strong greenhouse gas emission standards, promote clean energy, and create millions of new jobs. Our bill would also ensure that the Clean Air Act and other landmark environmental protections are not weakened as we work together to fight dangerous global warming.

S.1733 was passed by the EPW Committee on November 5, 2009, and provisions of our bill will now become part of a comprehensive clean energy and climate package for consideration by the full Senate. Be assured that I will work to defeat all attacks on our environmental protections and keep working to see a clean energy and climate change bill signed into law.

Again, thank you for writing to me. Please feel free to write to me in the future about this or any other issue of concern to you.

Barbara Boxer
United States Senator

From Senator Feinstein

Dear Mr. Dowling:

Thank you for writing to express your opposition to efforts by Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) to reverse the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) finding that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare, and block the EPA from regulating those emissions. I appreciate hearing your thoughts on this issue, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.

As you may know, last year, Senator Murkowski proposed an amendment to the fiscal year 2010 Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act (P.L. 111-88) that would have prohibited the EPA from using any funds to enforce the Clean Air Act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources. Although Senator Murkowski's amendment did not receive a vote, you may be interested to know that I spoke out against the amendment on the Senate floor and have included my remarks for your review.

Additionally, Senator Murkowski has introduced a resolution of disapproval (S.J. Res. 26) to prevent the EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act, even though such regulation is necessary in order to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark Massachusetts v. EPA decision in 2007. Under the Congressional Review Act, Congress has the authority to disapprove of a regulatory rule issued by an agency by enacting a joint disapproval resolution within 60 legislative days of receiving the rule. The resolution must be signed by the President in order to overturn a rule. Senator Murkowski has also indicated that she may offer a similar measure to limit federal action on climate change to legislation that would increase the national debt limit (H. J. Res. 45).

Please know that I share your support for taking strong action to address climate change, and I appreciate hearing your concern about efforts to weaken the EPA's regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act. In my view, the United States needs multiple tools to protect public health and the environment from the impacts of climate change. While I believe that regulating the largest greenhouse gas emitters under a new cap and trade system would be more effective and less expensive than regulating these sources under the existing Clean Air Act, I believe Congress must ensure that the EPA has tools to reduce emissions from large-scale emitters in the United States in a way that minimizes costs to consumers. Again, thank you for writing. If you have additional questions or comments, please contact my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3841. Best regards.

Senator Dianne Feinstein

Statement in Opposition to the Murkowski Amendment #2530 H.R. 2996, the Interior Appropriations Bill
September 24, 2009

Mrs. FEINSTEIN.

Mr. President, I know Senator Boxer, the chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, has an hour reserved to come and speak.

First, I will respond to the comments of the distinguished Senator from Alaska. I hope she will understand there are many of us who have viewed her amendment with substantial alarm, for reasons that I thought I might spend a few moments speaking about.

Essentially, as I understood the amendment, which was blocked from coming to the floor, it attempted to prohibit the EPA from using any funds to enforce the Clean Air Act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources.

The proponents have argued that their only goal was to protect small family-owned farms and businesses from overly burdensome regulations. Yet the amendment would have gone much further. In fact, it would actually exempt some of the Nation's largest commercial emitters from climate change regulation, including huge industrial facilities, such as power plants and refineries.

I am very pleased that this amendment is not before us today. The underlying rationale, as I understand it from the amendment, is groundless. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has made it clear that the agency will not use the Clean Air Act to regulate either small businesses or family-owned farms. I was prepared, should the amendment have come up, to put down a side-by-side amendment that would have clearly exempted any farm, as well as any business, that emits under 25,000 tons of carbon dioxide per year.

Let me point this out. Stationary industrial sources account for over half of the U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, according to EPA. These are the leading cause of climate change, and they must be reduced if we have any hope of containing the worst impact of climate change.The amendment would have hampered the administration's effort to tackle one of the biggest pieces of the emissions puzzle: large industrial facilities. It would have been a major setback.

Thirdly, the amendment would effectively overturn the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Massachusetts v. EPA. In that decision, the Court found that the Clean Air Act requires the EPA to determine whether the emissions of greenhouse gases may be reasonably anticipated to endanger public health or welfare and then comply with the Clean Air Act requirements designed to protect public health from dangerous pollution. Upon completion of an endangerment finding, the Clean Air Act requires EPA to control greenhouse gases from both stationary and mobile sources.

Many argue -- and I happen to agree -- that regulating the largest greenhouse gas emitters through new legislation, establishing a cap-and-trade system, would be more efficient and less expensive than regulating these sources under the existing Clean Air Act.But until Congress enacts climate change legislation, EPA has a legal obligation to follow the Clean Air Act. So if one does not want EPA to take action under the Clean Air Act, then this body should want to pass a cap-and-trade bill.

The chairman of the EPW Committee, Senator Boxer, has been working very hard to put together a bill which has an opportunity to pass this Senate.

The point is, if we do not want the Clean Air Act to prevail, then the cap-and-trade bill is the only way to go. That is a clear incentive for the Senate and the House to pass a bill.

EPA has released a draft endangerment finding which it is going to soon finalize. Yet the amendment would have blocked EPA from completing the endangerment finding and from complying with its legal obligations to protect public health. The repercussions would have been major. It means EPA would not be able to complete a joint rulemaking with the Department of Transportation to increase corporate average fuel economy, which we call CAFE, and create a tailpipe emissions standard for automobiles.

That would have been a major problem. It would block implementation of the 2007 fuel economy law which I authored with Senator Snowe and which took us a long time to get passed and enacted.

By undermining the negotiated agreement between States and the Obama administration, the Murkowski amendment would also have likely resulted in States moving forward with their own tailpipe emissions standards which automakers have fought for years as too onerous. This would have stopped California and 14 other States and the District of Columbia from moving forward with implementing tailpipe emissions standards.

This amendment is vigorously opposed by the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which includes General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler, the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers, and the United Auto Workers. To that end, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks a letter from the Auto Alliance and the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, finally, the amendment would send the wrong signal to the rest of the world about the Senate's intentions on climate change. It would suggest that we want to ignore the clear imperative to act, despite the efforts of the administration to motivate the international community in advance of the Copenhagen summit.

There is some concern also about small emitters. EPA is not planning to regulate small emitters. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has clearly stated on several occasions that the agency will not regulate small emitters.

She said it in her confirmation hearings, she said it again at Senate budget hearings, and she reiterated that comment when she appeared before the Senate Interior Appropriations Subcommittee hearing on EPA's fiscal year 2010 budget just a few months ago.

In fact, Administrator Jackson has sent a draft deregulatory rule to the Office of Management and Budget for review which would establish clearly that all but the very largest sources of greenhouse gas will be preemptively exempted from the stationary source permitting requirements in the Clean Air Act.

She has no intention of regulating small sources that emit under 25,000 tons of carbon dioxide or any small farm. 25,000 metric tons is a very high threshold. According to EPA, it is equivalent to the emissions from burning 131 trainloads of coal per year -- these would be exempted -- or burning 2.8 million gallons of gasoline annually. The 25,000-ton threshold would exempt every small source, focusing only on 13,000 of the largest emitters in the United States.

Let me say that again. The 25,000-ton threshold which EPA intends to proceed with, and which my side-by-side amendment would have had as one of the two criteria, would exempt every small source, focusing only on the 13,000 largest emitters in the United States. EPA intends to only regulate the largest facilities, and these facilities are, almost without exception, already regulated under the Clean Air Act for emissions of other pollutants such as soot, smog-forming nitrous oxides, or acid-rain-inducing sulfur dioxide. Let me now explain why the Murkowski Amendment would impact the joint EPA-Department of Transportation rulemaking on automobile greenhouse gas emissions.

This rulemaking is of critical importance, and the regulation implementing this law was negotiated by the White House in cooperation with automakers, the States, and labor. But according to a letter I received from EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson last night, the impact of the Murkowski amendment "would be to make it impossible for the EPA to promulgate the light-duty vehicle greenhouse-gas emissions standards that the agency proposed on September 15, 2009."

She writes: Because of the way the Clean Air Act is written, promulgation of the proposed light-duty vehicle rule will automatically make carbon dioxide a pollutant subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act for stationary sources, as well as for light-duty vehicles. The only way that EPA could comply with the prohibition in Senator Murkowski's amendment would be to not promulgate the light-duty vehicle standards."

These standards are something Senator Snowe and I have worked for at least 7 years now, beginning with the SUV loophole and ending with the bill that became law, would be totally undermined. By undermining the negotiated agreement between States, the amendment would also likely result in States moving forward with their own tailpipe emissions standards.

As I indicated before, in 2002 California enacted a landmark law to reduce tailpipe emissions standards by 30 percent for all new sedans, trucks, and SUVs by 2016.
I also stated that 14 other States -- namely, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia -- have adopted or announced their intention to adopt California's greenhouse gas emissions controls.

The amendment would have been a major roadblock in efforts to improve fuel economy standards for vehicles. I don't think we can bury our head in the sand when it comes to climate change.

I would like to conclude by reminding my colleagues that it makes no sense at this particular point in time to put on the floor a major amendment which well could have devastated both the EPA and any effort to get to cap-and-trade legislation when, in fact, the EPW Committee is struggling to write a comprehensive bill which has an opportunity to pass this body.

Again I say, if people do not want the Clean Air Act prevailing, then the only way you can do that is with a cap-and-trade bill. That is the way the committee of this body is proceeding. I believe it is the correct way.

I believe our Nation is in serious jeopardy, as is the rest of planet Earth, with global warming. I believe it is real. Just this week, the Journal Nature published a new paper that found rapid deterioration of the ice sheets on Greenland and Antarctica. Yesterday on this floor, I showed the deterioration in the Arctic. I showed the deterioration in Greenland. I showed the deterioration in the Chukchi Sea. I showed the deterioration off Barrow, AK. It is happening all over the world.

The Flat Earth Society cannot prevail. I think there is a real danger signal out there for planet Earth. We know we cannot reverse it. We know that greenhouse gases do not dissipate and go away after a period of time in the atmosphere. We now know these gases that began during the Industrial Revolution are still present in the atmosphere, and we know that the Earth is not immutable, that it can change. We look at other planets and we see that they have changed over the millennia. What we do here to protect our planet Earth for the next generations is so key and critical.

This discussion has to be joined in an appropriate way, and an appropriate way is when a cap-and-trade bill is produced by the Environment and Public Works Committee and the chairman of that committee is on this floor and the bill is open for amendments and there is a free flow of debate and discussion.

I believe the science is real. I pointed out yesterday we have a project in intelligence whereby the satellites are tracking deterioration in the ice shelves of the world. I hope to present more of that information when there is a bill on the Senate floor.

Sincerely yours,
Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

Further information about my position on issues of concern to California and the Nation are available at my website http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/. You can also receive electronic e-mail updates by subscribing to my e-mail list at http://feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ENewsletterSignup.Signup.

Related articles by Zemanta

• U.S. Chamber of Commerce Asks Court to Review EPA Carbon Ruling (businessweek.com)

17+ Arguments for Climate Change and for Action

Sphere: Related Content

This is one of my standard reblog posts made up of rehashed and mashed up info enhanced with additional links. My self serving intention is to combine information from a variety of sources and come up with a better understanding of a particular issue.

Millennium Development Goal 7. Environmental Sustainability has been of focus of this blog before and it is easily the most controversial. This blog does not bother to get involved in the arguments in the believe that it does not actually move anything forward. Instead it takes the view that the more information that gets out there, the more likely that more people will understand and understanding does lead to change. Still, one can't completely ignore the climate change deniers, and in specific circumstances there are viable arguments to be consider against particular aspects of climate change. One good example of such a discussion is here at MITWorld's The Great Climategate Debate. These are venues for finding solutions rather that engaging in vehement political rhetoric.

I have notice one aspect of many of the anti-climate change crowd and that is the tendency to treat the threat of climate change as a singular argument consisting of a few untested assumptions being put forward a small minority whose intentions are suspect and fraught with deception. A few well placed logical insights, usually based on political premises that are beyond questioning, and the whole facade folds. One biting comment from a blog of no greater reputation than this one sends the scientific climate change cronies scurrying for cover.

Leaving the climate change debate for a second, as an municipal economic development professional I do see the 21st century being a clean energy century and America falling behind in this business opportunity without any need to even bring up the topic of climate change. I also stand with the side that says climate change is a self-inflicted experiment that we cannot take a chance on being wrong about.

The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) provided 10 arguments from respected sources concerning the case for acute climate change. The EDF has provided consultation to the private-equity firm Kohlberg, Kravis Roberts & Co on its environmental initiatives since 2007 and a former project manager from the nonprofit is overseeing an expansion of its Green Portfolio Program.

10 startling facts underscoring the threat of acute climate change:

1. Current level of CO2 in the atmosphere – about 390 parts per million – is higher today than at any time in measurable history -- at least the last 2.1 million years. Science
2. 2000-2009 was the hottest decade. 8 of the hottest 10 years having occurred since 2000. World Meterological Organization
3. 2009 will end up as one of the 5 hottest years since 1850, 2010 will likely break the record. U.K.'s Met Office
4. Arctic ice cover remains perilously thin, it is vulnerable to further melting, posing an ever increasing threat to Arctic wildlife including polar bears. National Snow and Ice Data Center
5. The Arctic summer could be ice-free by mid-century, not at the end of the century. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
6. East Antarctica ice sheet has been shrinking. They expected the West Antarctic ice sheet would shrink. Nature Geosciences
7. Climate changes are already observed in the United States and… are projected to grow. "increases in heavy downpours, rising temperature and sea level, rapidly retreating glaciers, thawing permafrost, lengthening ice-free seasons in the ocean and on lakes and rivers, earlier snowmelt, and alterations in river flows." U.S. Global Change Research Program
8. Slight changes in the climate may trigger abrupt threats to ecosystems that are not easily reversible or adaptable, such as insect outbreaks, wildfire, and forest dieback. "More vulnerable ecosystems, such as those that already face stressors other than climate change, will almost certainly reach their threshold for abrupt change sooner." US Geological Survey
9. Most mid-Atlantic coastal wetlands from New York to North Carolina will be lost with a sea level rise of 1 meter or more. EPA, USGS and NOAA
10. California fruit and nut tree crops may no longer be economically viable, in the U.S. production of corn, soybeans and cotton could decrease as much as 82%. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Wired.com/Wired Science blog provides another 7 ecological tipping points

South Asian monsoons, the Amazon rain forest and polar sea ice -- all significant environmental systems that control and regulate the climate of the entire planet -- could each serve as the site of an environmental tipping point as global temperatures rise, according to this article. Scientists are unable to predict the consequences of tipping-element changes to the Bodélé Depression in Chad or the Gulf Stream in the Atlantic Ocean, though changes to these systems have already been recorded.

This is only the tip of the proverbial iceberg but it is enough to keep me firmly in the camp that says climate change cannot be ignored.

Yet merely agreeing or acquiescing to the position that climate change is a reality is not enough. The EDF tells us that we have an historic opportunity to cap America's global warming pollution and put people back to work building America's clean energy future. We need your help to make sure the Senate gets the message: The time for climate action is now! Take action to deliver this message to your Senators.

President Obama says that our environmental and economic renewal "starts with a cap and trade" system to deal with global warming. But he needs the support of Congress to achieve this historic goal this year. Please take action now

Maybe Senator Boxer should go to Copenhagen

Sphere: Related Content

I have said before that Senator Boxer is a leader in the Senate when it comes to environmental legislation. Some of her most significant work as been on the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act (S.1733). Below is a some history on the bill from its latest passage out of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee to her original remarks introducing the bill.

Senate Environment and Public Works Committee passed a climate and energy bill sponsored by Senators Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and John Kerry (D-MA).

Th Environmental Defense Fund reminds us that Chairman Boxer and her colleagues deserve great credit for their commitment to move forward on solving our climate and energy challenges.

• the urgent need
  
• end our addiction to imported oil,
  
• create jobs
  
• cap the pollution that causes global warming

encouraged by the announcement yesterday that Senators Kerry, Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) will work together to craft a bipartisan bill to bring America greater energy independence and cap pollution.

Dear Friend:

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which I chair, has opened an intensive three-day schedule of legislative hearings on the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, S.1733, a bill aimed at creating new, clean energy jobs, reducing our dependence on foreign oil, and curbing the production of greenhouse gases. I am pleased to share with you my opening statement, available at this link. If you would like to see all of the testimony from the hearings, and see video or a live feed, please use this link.

Sincerely,

Barbara Boxer
United States Senator

Dear Mr. Dowling:

Thank you for writing to me in support of clean energy legislation to fight climate change. I appreciate hearing from you.

I want to share with you the statement I made when Senator John Kerry and I introduced the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act (S.1733).

Sincerely,

Barbara Boxer

United States Senator

Senator Boxer's statement on the introduction of "The Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act" on September 30, 2009:

I am very pleased to stand with my colleagues, national security leaders, veterans, business leaders, workers, environmental organizations, religious leaders, wildlife protectors, energy companies, state and local officials and so many others as we introduce the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act.

This bill addresses major challenges of our generation:

.protecting our children and the earth from dangerous pollution;

.putting America back in control of our energy future;

.creating the policies that will lead to millions of new jobs; and

.through our example, inspiring similar actions around the world to avoid an unstable and dangerous future.

As Chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, I want to thank so many of my colleagues and their staffs, on and off the committee.

Senator Kerry's staff and my office have been a team, working together for weeks and weeks, and often late into the night. Colleagues and staff on the EPW Committee have been very important in this effort and their work is reflected.

We built on the successful House effort. Our bill has stronger targets in the short term and we have expanded our coalition in the business community.

In our bill, the basic promise to consumers has been kept. The promise to regions that rely heavily on fossil fuels has been kept as well.

The first major part of the bill includes authorizations, all of which would be eligible for appropriations and some which are eligible for both appropriations and allowances.

Some of these are enhanced from the Waxman bill; some are new. Here are some examples of these authorizations:

Investments in clean natural gas, new transmission infrastructure, nuclear R&D and worker training, and green economic development;

Agricultural and forestry offset opportunities;

Provisions to speed the transition to cleaner transportation, including investments in our transit systems, and incentives for efficient hybrid and electric cars;

Adaptation authorizations that include wildfire prevention, flood control, water infrastructure, and investments in coastal communities and wildlife protection.

Our bill gives a much stronger role to mayors and local governments.

The second major part of our bill sets up the Pollution Reduction and Investment incentives.

In this section we have strong principles laid out for market transparency and oversight and we set up an Office of Offsets Integrity.

Allowances in this section will be detailed in the chairman's mark.

We have put into this section a soft collar to address cost containment and limit speculation while maintaining the environmental integrity of the pollution cap.

And our bill does not add one penny to the deficit.

In closing, let me say that my state of California is going through hard times right now and it weighs on me every day.

But there is one bright spot. And that is clean energy jobs and businesses.

The Pew Charitable Trusts reports that 10,000 new clean energy businesses were launched in California from 1998 to 2007. During that period, clean energy investments created more than 125,000 jobs and generated jobs 15 percent faster than the California economy as a whole.

The latest economic study predicts up to 1.9 million new jobs in America if we pass our bill.

We know clean energy is the ticket to strong, stable economic growth ...it's right here in front of us...in the ingenuity of our workers and the vision of our entrepreneurs. And in studies and models.

The global clean energy market is estimated to reach two and a half times the size of the global personal computer market by the year 2020.

We know from venture capitalists that billions of dollars from the private sector will flow into this market.

Others will move ahead if we don't seize this opportunity.

If we do, we will be a leader in the world as we protect the earth and all who dwell here from a future that the world's most respected scientists agree is threatened if we do not act.

No one knows what challenges will face them in their time.

No one chooses their time. But you know what? This is our time.

Global warming is our challenge.

Economic recovery is our challenge.

American leadership is our challenge.

Let's step up right now.

Let's not quit until we have fulfilled our responsibility to our children and our grandchildren.

Thank you.

Tell Obama and the Senate to Take Bold Climate Action!

Sphere: Related Content

I have done a few blogs discussing the upcoming Copenhagen meeting on Climate Change this December. So far things don't look optimistic, but as they say it is always darkest before the dawn. I am getting involved with another BloggersUnite event, this time 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference, more on that in another post. There are numerous avenues to take action whether full activist and going to Copenhagen to protest or slacktivist and simply clicking a petition button. I am trying for something in between.

The good folks at Care2 remind us that Barack Obama promised to take bold action on climate change. President Obama needs to stay strong -- we need a real climate bill calling for real change >> As world leaders prepare for the U.N. Climate Change Conference in December, it is critical that Obama steps up his efforts to pass strong and comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation here at home. Tell Obama to stay true to his word and transition us away from dirty energy >> I did, even though this video apparently says that he already knows. My words follow.

Failure at Copenhagen puts our planet on an unsustainable path. The questions of not now, when, if not us, who? cannot be ignored because it will not be the bottom billion of the world's economy that history will look to as they have no voice in this effort. It will be the leaders of the developed world and the leading economies who must answer. You have promised to work for the Millennium Development Goals, but none of the others matter if No. 7 Environmental Sustainability is not fulfilled.

Here are more reasons why from the Environmental Defense Funds (EDF).

With a climate bill pending in the Senate, the EDF tells us that they are doing everything we can to keep the pressure on for strong climate action.

You, like I did, can help by emailing your Senators and urging them to support a climate bill. I changed the default wording recognizing the fact that my Senators have been leaders in this effort, especially Senator Boxer.

Now is the time for the Senate to act. I strongly urge you to continue your ongoing leadership and support for strong climate bills and show our President that America is not only ready to support environmental legislation that helps our country, but that we are also ready to work with other countries to help heal our planet and create development that helps the bottom billion of the world's economy. The House has passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act, HR 2454. This historic bill will place a cap on carbon, invest in America's green energy future, create needed jobs, curb our global warming pollution, and help free us from foreign oil. We have an historic opportunity to cap global warming pollution and put people back to work unleashing America's green energy economy.

Here are some sobering facts about climate and water to inspire you to take action:

7: Number of great rivers in Asia fed by meltwater from Himalayan glaciers (Ganga, Indus, Brahmaputra, Salween, Mekong, Yangtze and Huang He).

2 billion: Number of people, mostly in India and China, who rely on meltwater from Himalayan glaciers for their fresh water.

2035: Date by which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and India's Energy and Resources Institute predict that much of the Himalayas could be glacier free.

66%: Amount by which the July-September flows would be reduced in the Ganga River if we lose the Himalayan glaciers.

37%: Amount of India's irrigated land is located in the Ganga region.

1 and 2: Respective rank of China and India as the world's producers of wheat and rice, food staples for all of humanity.

Sources for our climate and water facts:

• http://assets.panda.org/downloads/glacierspaper.pdf
• http://www.tribuneindia.com/2008/20081111/main5.htm
• http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/10/05/himalayas.glacier.conflict/index.htmlhttp://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/03/global-warming-melting-glaciers-shrinking-harvests.php
  

After Copenhagen, Even More Reason to Worry

Sphere: Related Content

What Would Failure at Copenhagen Mean for the Poor and Developing Nations?

The Care2 Petitionsite reminds us that we need to protect the poor and vulnerable around the world from the effects of climate change. They are asking that we help the poor with the effects of climate change. ». Currently, they are at 6,744 with a goal of 10,000. I am 6,747. My two cents are below:

We are destroying our planet for us all, which is bad enough, we are also putting the greatest cost on the poor. Our governments need to be reminded that these funds are only a small down payment on what was promised in term of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals and especially 7. Environmental Sustainability. It is not money that is so desperately needed now, it is political will and global collaboration.

The fact that they are the ones least responsible for the changes in our environment and yet they are likely to suffer its worst consequences has been established previously in this blog under the post the Ugly of the Good, the Bad and The Ugly of Climate Change

There is funding set aside in the House's climate change bill to help poor people adapt to the effects of global warming, but at 1 percent of available resources, it falls short. What's needed is another $3.5 billion for international adaptation programs.

Poor people should not bear an undue burden of the impacts of climate change or the global adjustments needed to address it. Urge the Senate to help poor people adapt to climate change. »

The consequences of failing at Copenhagen don't look much better for the rest of us.

What Would Failure at Copenhagen Mean for Climate Change for the Planet?

From Scientific American: This is the consequence of failure at Copenhagen: A marked shift in scientific effort from solving global warming to adapting to its consequences, a hodge-podge of uncoordinated local efforts to trim emissions - none of which deliver the necessary cuts - and an altered climate.

Climate experts, scientists and negotiators say that, absent international agreement, the children and grandchildren of those living today will negotiate a world where planetary geo-engineering is a part of daily life, sea-walls defend coastal cities, the world's poor are hammered by drought, floods and famine and our planet is heading toward conditions unseen for the last 100 million years. MORE

Getting to Copenhagen, a Reason to Worry

Sphere: Related Content GinaMarie Cheeseman recently posted from Care2 Global Warming about Why the U.S. Must Take Action to Save Copenhagen.

One of the reasons the Barcelona talks were not a rousing success is because the U.S. refused to offer targets for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions. Jonathan Pershing, chief U.S. negotiator, said little when questioned by reporters about U.S. targets. “I have no information to share with you on that… We are studying this question. It's a decision that is yet to be made.”

Unfortunately, the next day she is wondering Is Copenhagen a Lost Cause?

She, like I am, not very optimistic about the chances of a legally binding treaty coming out of Copenhagen in December.

The Earth Negotiations Bulletin reported that some delegates at climate change talks last week in Barcelona were “contemplating the increasingly clear high-level messages that a legally binding agreement at COP 15 will not be possible." The Chair at B Barcelona, John Ashe, from Antigua and Barbuda, said that progress was “less than desirable.”

This story from Change.Org supports that view.

Obama Disses Copenhagen

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has laid out his benchmarks for success at the upcoming international climate change talks in Copenhagen, calling on developed and developing countries to do all they can do to cut emissions. But as Stop Global Warming guest blogger Mike Smith notes, it may be too early for Ban Ki-Moon to count on the Obama administration to dance to the same climate change rhythm. (Read more)

Why this is so discouraging is that the stakes are so great. GinaMarie Cheeseman in another post wrote that Kilimanjaro's Ice Cover May Be Another Climate Change Casualty. I added photos, video and links to additional resources. The preponderance of evidence is substantial.

In 13 to 24 years Ernest Hemingway’s short story, The Snows of Kilimanjaro may serve as a reminder of what the world has lost due to climate change. The snow-capped volcano in Tanzania might be ice-free within the next two decades, according to a study(pdf) recently published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) journal.

More graphic evidence is available from NASA. Click on the photos for more information

November 1990

December 2000

Finally, from TED Video, Yann Arthus-Bertrand has captured the fragile beauty of the Earth. Through video and film, his latest projects bind together ecology and humanism.

Meet me at the Wall

Sphere: Related Content

From

Climate Change or for this blog Millennium Development Goal 7. Environmental Sustainability is the issue with the most significant impacts both nationally and globally. It is not enough for us to get our own environmental house in order, we must also work to Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes; reverse loss of environmental resources, across the planet. We cannot lead, however, if we don't start first with ourselves.

The idea of creating a clean energy economy is starting to become more of a reality in America. Far more so than it was in 2007 when I first started dealing with this issue, though far more sceptically than now. This blog and Web 2.0 have been an important factors in the journey from that point to this.

One particular aspect of interest has been the ability of organizations to use the power of Web 2.0 to enhance collaboration. The challenge has been how to move from the virtual world to the everyday real world, while still maintaining the connections. Often these efforts are somewhat parallel with feedback. People sign up and coordinate collectively, act individually as groups geographically separated, and report in collectively. The Stand Up Take Action End Poverty, and 350.org global wide efforts are examples. These efforts are time-specific to create maximum affect on a specific issue at a specific time to create maximum exposure for press coverage.

The Wall is a place where literally thousands and thousands of people committed to a revolutionary new energy future for our nation and the world are coming together -- to express our hopes, share our resolve, and step up to a leadership role in building a grassroots movement for change like nothing America has ever seen. It's an opportunity for you to be part of the climate movement in a new way, in a way that takes us beyond ourselves.

Share your voice on The Repower America Wall right now.

I am still uncertain how effective this progressive "shock and amaze" or "shock and annoy" is really. It can be great for inspiring the true believers, but how effective it is moving the mainstream majority is still an open question. A better approach may be the The Repower America Wall. The Wall is collaborative and primarily online. They are reaching out to the real world through main stream media outlets such as TV.

Watch our first national TV ad featuring the faces and voices of supporters like you.

In the coming weeks and months, the messages you add will be part of a groundbreaking new campaign that speaks directly to our elected leaders on the television stations they watch, the radio they listen to, and the newspapers they read. The more photos and videos and thoughts that you add, the more powerful The Wall will be.

Today's national ad begins an aggressive new phase of our campaign. With your passion and the power of your voice, we will break through on clean energy and overwhelm the powerful special interests who profit the most by blocking progress.

The language is inspiring, but this effort was made for slacktivists, of whom I am one. Individuals can decide their own level of activism and then create a combined story. The effort does not have an apparent end point, so it can continue to grow, perhaps even more organically than the 350.org, which appealed more to true activists.

Three days ago they reached over 15,000 supporters of a clean energy future who have posted a message on The Wall. The question is whether they will be able to reach a tipping point in regards to collective activism. If all those who support this effort join and convince those slightly less convinced then this take a cascading viral path, but people need to be aware of it and take at least the action of going online. Fortunately, those most likely to support this effort are also more likely to have the knowledge and initiative.

Join thousands of fellow supporters at the Repower America Wall now.

A growing demand for clean energy from all of us together sends a powerful message to our leaders: American support for clean energy is broad and deep.

We're beginning to break through. But to get our leaders to listen and make clean energy a reality, we must rise up in numbers to make our voices heard -- to overwhelm the voices clamoring for the status quo.

We're competing with powerful interests who are spending hundreds of millions of dollars to protect their profits and block clean energy reforms at the expense of our families, our jobs, and our planet.

With every new message you add to The Wall you demonstrate that the most powerful interest in this fight isn't the oil or the coal lobby -- it's the American people joining together, speaking as one, for a clean energy future.

Add your voice to the Repower America Wall now

Sustainable Environment and Sustainable Development - The World has a chance to keep a millennium promise this December

Sphere: Related Content

Another big event I missed because of real life/day job was 350.org and the more than 3000 extraordinary climate actions across nearly every country, from the bottom of the Great Barrier Reef to the summit of Mount Everest. Click to see the events map:

The 350 day of action is named for 350 parts per million, the amount of carbon in the atmosphere that scientists say would be the safe for the climate. (At the moment, we're at 387 parts per million and climbing fast.) Most immediately, 350 is the number world leaders need to lead with as they prepare to meet in Copenhagen this December to draft a new global climate treaty.

Quick links to more info about 350.org:

Of course, all this is leading up to the Copenhagen summit in December when 192 nations of the world gather again as they did back in 2000 and made the millennium promises which still remain unfulfilled. One particular fulfilled promise is now endangering us all unless positive and real action is taken and that is Millennium Development Goal 7 Environmental Sustainability.

What is becoming ever more apparent is the connection between global climate and poverty. CARE is thought of as an organization helping the poor in the far flung regions of the world, but it too is taking a stand against climate change.

CARE is working toward a world where people living in poverty can create opportunities despite the obstacles they face. But the reality about climate change is that it makes poor people even more vulnerable. Agricultural production is declining in the poorest developing countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa. Less reliable rainfall is effecting planting seasons, crop growth and livestock health, and leading to increased malnutrition.

In Zimbabwe, women make up 75 percent of the labor force in agriculture, and their livelihoods depend almost exclusively on natural resources. Droughts and the occasional cyclone, combined with limited resources for irrigation, left many women either waiting for the rainy season or suffering through floods that destroyed their crops and devastated their landscape. CARE worked with them to better manage their scarce water resources and modify their farming techniques in order to adapt to new climate conditions.

As President Obama told the United Nations recently, "Developing nations are already living with the unfolding effects of a warming planet: famine and drought, disappearing coastal villages and the conflict that arises from scarce resources. Their future is no longer a choice between a growing economy and a cleaner planet, because their survival depends on both."

The international community is negotiating a new agreement to guide global efforts to address climate change. These negotiations will conclude in Copenhagen, Denmark, in fewer than 50 days! The United States must help lead those efforts and forge strong agreements that cap emissions to prevent catastrophic warming and respond effectively to climate change affects already in motion.

Please contact your senators today and urge them to take the necessary steps to make the United States a global leader in the fight against climate change!

P.S. CARE has launched a new Web site just about climate change. Click here to view all the resources we have made available.

Take a Stand Against Climate Change

Sphere: Related Content

Two days ago I was blogging about Climate Change for Blog Action Day. Yesterday and today I have blogged about the Stand Up End Poverty Day and other related events. The United Nations Foundation sent an article that combines both.

	This weekend, October 16 to 18, millions of people around the world will join forces through a variety of events to draw attention to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and call upon world leaders to implement solutions now. Established by the UN in 2000, the MDGs outline eight critical global goals -- including environmental sustainability -- and provide a roadmap for worldwide progress by 2015. But the climate crisis threatens to undo much of the progress made so far, especially with regard to poverty reduction. Agricultural production in the developing world will face even greater challenges, and that could spell disaster for the poorest and most vulnerable among us. When you submit your climate change story on October 16, 17, or 18, it will count as an action for Stand Up. Add your climate change story to the board now, and have your action count! Even better: Help us spread the word! Test your MDG knowledge with our quiz and then share it with friends and family. The UN Foundation Climate and Energy Team (Reid, Ryan, Jana, Kurt, and John) http://www.UNFoundation.org/

The Better of the Good, the Bad and the Ugly of Climate Change

Sphere: Related Content

What is really better is that bloggers whether large institutional or small voice can help by doing what they are already doing, getting the word out and back again. In some cases, they can partner.

Jacklyn G. Rodney of the Fratelli Group recently sent me a hello, on behalf of the World Wildlife Fund and its "Act For Our Future" an integrated online and broadcast TV campaign to encourage the U.S. Senate to act on climate legislation.

Like Milestones for a New Millennium, we are also participating in Blog Action Day and we would like to join forces with you to spur Senate action on a climate bill this year. Your blog could help us reach more people and have a greater impact. In return WWF would like to draw our vast network of 1.5 million U.S. members to your site by cross-posting some of your content and links on our ActForOurFuture.org campaign site, as well as posting material on our campaign Facebook and Twitter pages.

I, of course, think that this great. The whole point of this blog is, beyond learning for myself, is trying to pass what I learn to whomever is interested. Apparently thousands are interested.

The “Act For Our Future” campaign strongly emphasizes the importance of reaching out to local Senators and asking them to vote “yes” on climate legislation. I strongly suggest that you take advantage and Act For Our Future. I was Supporting the Boxer-Kerry Climate Bill through Care2 before I knew about this opportunity.

For my efforts through Care2, I received the following reply from Senator Boxer's Office.

Dear Mr. Dowling:

Thank you for writing to me in support of clean energy legislation to fight climate change. I appreciate hearing from you.

I want to share with you the statement I made when Senator John Kerry and I introduced the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act (S.1733).

Sincerely,

Barbara Boxer

United States Senator

Senator Boxer's statement on the introduction of "The Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act" on September 30, 2009:

I am very pleased to stand with my colleagues, national security leaders, veterans, business leaders, workers, environmental organizations, religious leaders, wildlife protectors, energy companies, state and local officials and so many others as we introduce the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act. This bill addresses major challenges of our generation:

protecting our children and the earth from dangerous pollution;putting America back in control of our energy future;

creating the policies that will lead to millions of new jobs; and through our example, inspiring similar actions around the world to avoid an unstable and dangerous future. As Chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, I want to thank so many of my colleagues and their staffs, on and off the committee.

Senator Kerry's staff and my office have been a team, working together for weeks and weeks, and often late into the night. Colleagues and staff on the EPW Committee have been very important in this effort and their work is reflected. We built on the successful House effort. Our bill has stronger targets in the short term and we have expanded our coalition in the business community.

In our bill, the basic promise to consumers has been kept. The promise to regions that rely heavily on fossil fuels has been kept as well. The first major part of the bill includes authorizations, all of which would be eligible for appropriations and some which are eligible for both appropriations and allowances. Some of these are enhanced from the Waxman bill; some are new. Here are some examples of these authorizations: Investments in clean natural gas, new transmission infrastructure, nuclear R&D and worker training, and green economic development;Agricultural and forestry offset opportunities; Provisions to speed the transition to cleaner transportation, including investments in our transit systems, and incentives for efficient hybrid and electric cars;Adaptation authorizations that include wildfire prevention, flood control, water infrastructure, and investments in coastal communities and wildlife protection.

Our bill gives a much stronger role to mayors and local governments. The second major part of our bill sets up the Pollution Reduction and Investment incentives.

In this section we have strong principles laid out for market transparency and oversight and we set up an Office of Offsets Integrity.Allowances in this section will be detailed in the chairman's mark. We have put into this section a soft collar to address cost containment and limit speculation while maintaining the environmental integrity of the pollution cap.

And our bill does not add one penny to the deficit. In closing, let me say that my state of California is going through hard times right now and it weighs on me every day. But there is one bright spot. And that is clean energy jobs and businesses. The Pew Charitable Trusts reports that 10,000 new clean energy businesses were launched in California from 1998 to 2007. During that period, clean energy investments created more than 125,000 jobs and generated jobs 15 percent faster than the California economy as a whole.

The latest economic study predicts up to 1.9 million new jobs in America if we pass our bill.

We know clean energy is the ticket to strong, stable economic growth ...it's right here in front of us...in the ingenuity of our workers and the vision of our entrepreneurs. And in studies and models.

The global clean energy market is estimated to reach two and a half times the size of the global personal computer market by the year 2020.

We know from venture capitalists that billions of dollars from the private sector will flow into this market.

Others will move ahead if we don't seize this opportunity.

If we do, we will be a leader in the world as we protect the earth and all who dwell here from a future that the world's most respected scientists agree is threatened if we do not act.

No one knows what challenges will face them in their time.

No one chooses their time. But you know what? This is our time.

Global warming is our challenge.

Economic recovery is our challenge.

American leadership is our challenge.

Let's step up right now.

Let's not quit until we have fulfilled our responsibility to our children and our grandchildren.

Barbara Boxer

United States Senator

Related Posts:

• The Good of the Good, the Bad and the Ugly of Climate Change
• The Bad of the Good, the Bad and the Ugly of Climate Change
• The Ugly of the Good, the Bad and The Ugly of Climate Change

The Ugly of the Good, the Bad and The Ugly of Climate Change

Sphere: Related Content

The Ugly of the Good, the Bad and the Ugly of Climate Change is the impact that a lack of action is having on those least able to deal with the negative affects of global warming. This has been discussed before at No Leadership or Consensus Regarding Climate Change as Nations Meet, more from different perspectives along the economic and political continuum.

Christian Science Monitor, The/Bright Green Blog (9/30) cited a Study: Climate change will lead to increase in number of malnourished.

Climate change is likely to affect crop yields negatively by 2050, an International Food Policy Research Institute study found. And, as the price of wheat, rice and maize increases, the study predicts, 25 million more children will be malnourished.
“Agriculture is extremely vulnerable to climate changes,” notes a new study from the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) that looks at how climate change will affect food production around the world by 2050.

“Developing countries are likely to be hardest hit by climate change and will suffer bigger declines in crop yields,” said Gerald Nelson, lead author of the study and an IFPRI research fellow, in a conference call with journalists on Tuesday.

The Economist also wrote that the Developing world bears brunt of climate change's effects

Developing countries account for more than half of carbon emissions, but climate change still hurts those countries in an outsized manner. The housing, health and health care problems that the poor face leave them more vulnerable to natural disasters, and poor countries are more prone to flooding.

There is not yet a real sense of urgency. One Hundred Months, a blog about the effects of climate change, has a clock ticking away and says that we are running out of time.

We have 100 months to save our climate. When the clock stops ticking, we could be beyond our climate's tipping point, the point of no return.

Related Posts:

• The Good of the Good, the Bad and the Ugly of Climate Change
• The Bad of the Good, the Bad and the Ugly of Climate Change
• The Better of the Good, the Bad and the Ugly of Climate Change