..and then takes a U-Turn the very next day!

In a reported letter to the Prime Minister of India, Mr. Jairam Ramesh, the Indian Environment Minister proposed a radical shift in India’s stand on climate change–away from its national position on climate negotiations–which India has backed since 1990 and which was defended robustly even in UN talks in Bangkok earlier this month.

Minutes after the news spread, political parties sitting in the opposition were quick to respond. Within the next few hours, the Environment Minister issued a clarifying statement for national media and the entire Nation!

Read more of this story »

Nike just announced that it is leaving its position on the US Chamber of Commerce board of directors because of the business organization’s opposition to climate action.

Nike doesn’t beat around the bush on why it is leaving the board.

Read more of this story »

Just when you thought no more ink could be spilled about the merits or political viability of a carbon tax versus a cap-and-trade, it has. With the House passage of the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES), also known as Waxman-Markey, a version of the bill is now being considered by the Senate. And while there are certainly things to both love and hate about Waxman-Markey, it may be the only hope we currently have for meaningful climate change legislation. But are there other options?

Now, I’m not saying in all cases a carbon tax is superior to a cap-and-trade, in fact, I may just write a “7 Reasons a Cap-and-Trade is Better than a Carbon Tax” post after this one. But in some instances, the straight tax does have its advantages.

Read more of this story »

A top China central government think tank yesterday released a framework for quantifying countries’ historical emissions. Under this proposed framework, the State Council Development Research Center (DRC) would create a “historic account” of past emissions, used to benchmark developing countries with lower accumulated emissions - like China - against countries with higher accumulated emissions and assign emissions “deficits” to countries who have emitted less. Using this quantitative assessment, countries with emissions “deficits” would get the green light to emit, or trade emissions credits with countries that have already exceeded their allowance.

The release of this plan supports external analysis that China believes it should have the right to develop free from carbon reductions until their accumulated emissions are on par with industrialized countries. A recent Brookings Institute report: “Overcoming Obstacles to US-China Cooperation on Climate Change” articulated Beijing’s stance, which included the conviction that:

Countries should be held responsible not only for their current emissions but also for their cumulative historical emissions, given that greenhouse gases accumulate in the atmosphere over many decades.

This plan is Beijing’s most comprehensive effort to date to both highlight and quantify development inequalities as a justification for releasing China and other developing countries from emissions reduction expectations.

Read more of this story »

The report, published in Chinese, highlights case studies of exemplary leadership in low carbon development in 12 Chinese cities - including innovation and deployment of solar energy, LED lighting, and electric cars technology - in what appears to be a rally cry for support from China’s power base and attempt to broaden understanding of the issue. The tone of the report is set out in its first paragraph: all countries should be viewed as equals, and developing countries’ policy choices for tomorrow shall be given equal respect as the advances that industrialized countries have already made in this area.

Why cities? The report’s Executive Summary argues that cities, responsible for a higher proportion of global greenhouse gas emissions than the percentage of the world’s population they support, have a responsibility to lead the way in addressing climate change issues. It also refers to energy insecurity and a heightened threat of natural disasters as two results of climate change that particularly affect cities.

Read more of this story »

President-elect Obama met  with Al Gore and Vice President-elect Joseph Bidenenergy and climate policy — and how addressing those issues can drive the nation’s economic recovery, at the Transition’s Chicago headquarters earlier this wee to discuss

“The time for denial is over, ” President-elect Obama said. “This is a matter of urgency and national security…[but] it is not only a problem, it is also an opportunity. We have the opportunity now to create jobs all across this country in all 50 states to re-power America, to redesign how we use energy and think about how we are increasing efficiency to make our economy stronger, make us more safe, reduce our dependence on foreign oil and make us competitive for decades to come — even as we save the planet.”

Read more of this story »

As negotiations get under way in earnest at the two-week United Nations Climate Conference in Poland, recent surveys suggest a majority of people in both developing and industrialized nations seek substantive action on global warming and want their governments to agree on carbon emission targets.

The survey was commissioned by the HSBC Climate Partnership, a partnership of business and environmental groups. 12,000 people were surveyed in 12 countries and territories including Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Malaysia, Mexico, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Read more of this story »

This post contains additional media. Click here to view the full post.

The UN Climate Conference in Poznan, Poland, starting today is raising hopes and fears across the green spectrum. As reported in the Christian Science Monitor.

A year-long push to devise a new global climate-change treaty – one that picks up where the Kyoto Protocol leaves off – gets under way Monday in Poland, with delegates from more than 190 nations set to resume grappling with the thorny issues of how much more to cut greenhouse-gas emissions and who will pay.

The talks, in their first round, are focused on reducing human influence on climate from occurring, according to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). More or less, this means keeping global warming to about 2 degrees Celsius above pre industrial levels by the end of the century. Expectations however are low for this meeting.

President-Elect Obama’s pledge to reduce greenhouse gases to pre 1990 levels in the next 12 years notwithstanding, this group has a lot of challenges ahead. This first round of talks is primarily to develop working groups to tackle the various issues surrounding climate change in both developed and developing countries. But, with the global economic crisis on everyone’s mind, it will be hard to keep the conversation on track and work toward lower carbon emissions.

And while they are working to devise ways to reduce carbon emissions, they’ll create quite a few. AFP reports:

Read more of this story »

An Obama presidency in the United States could pave the way for a common North American approach to environmental issues and any differences on trade could be worked out, Canadian Conservative Party officials said in a recent interview.

Canadian Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon said that the Canadian government has quite a bit in common with Obama and sees the two countries as strong partners in protecting the environment. “On the environment issue, I’m pleased to see a similar approach between Canada and the United States, and that probably augurs well for a common North American approach to the environment,” said Cannon.

But can the Canadian federal government, now run by the Conservative Party, shed its reputation as somewhat of a laggard in the realm of environmental policy and help forge a new way forward in North American environmental policy?

Read more of this story »

President-elect Barack Obama wants to  aggressively follow a new and sustainable energy and environment policy. Green jobs, renewable energy, clean water and air are just a few of what he wants to create as part of our clean energy future.

Here is a behind-the-scenes look at how President-elect Obama’s Transition Team is approaching climate issues.

Five leading companies joined Ceres today to announce a business coalition demanding stronger U.S. climate and energy legislation as early as 2009. The team includes Nike, Starbucks, Levi Strauss, Sun Microsystems, Timberland And Ceres and is going by the moniker BICEP - I am thinking Nike had something to do with that one.

Read more of this story »

U.S. stocks advanced today in the biggest presidential Election Day rally in 24 years. This has been led by energy and banking shares, on higher commodity prices and speculation the Treasury will bail out more financial companies. (Bloomberg)

According to Philip Orlando, who helps manage $330 billion as chief equity strategist at Federated Investors Inc. in New York, “The elimination of the uncertainty of the campaign typically results in an end-of-year rally and you’re starting to see that today.”

Read more of this story »

On Thursday, European heads of state meeting in Brussels decided to stick to previously set climate action targets despite pressure from several member states to loosen the December target, which aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent by 2020.

Last week, a Polish-led group of eight poorer EU member states threatened to block any resolution that kept the existing targets in place, siting the current economic downturn and market turmoil as the primary obstacle.

>>More on European energy and environmental policy at RG&B

Read more of this story »

Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), who has called for EPA chief Stephen Johnson to resign, made the statement at a hearing on regulation of greenhouse gases under the U.S. Clean Air Act.

Read more of this story »

“I think cap and trade is going to go the way of some other things. As you may remember, when he came into office, Bill Clinton had a proposal of tax carbons and stuff like that. I don’t think those things are going to get very far as people start to examine the details of them.”

This post contains additional media. Click here to view the full post.

Throughout the Republican primaries John McCain continually pointed to his support for a carbon cap and trading program and the legislation he co-sponsored with Joe Lieberman as one of the critical differences between himself and the other Republicans - as well as between himself and President Bush.

So, is McCain saying one thing on the stump and then planning something completely different with his economic advisors?  The McCain camp has issued no statement on the Forbes remarks - but I’m sure they’ve seen the video.

If Mr. Forbes was speaking out of turn then why doesn’t the McCain camp distance themselves from Forbes by reiterating their support of cap and trade?  Without any such action, one can only assume that Forbes’ remarks were not too wide of the mark in terms of Mcain’s priorities.

Wonk Room

Lieberman-Warner was not opposed by a majority of environmental groups, and it was recognized as an important step. Dave Hamilton, director of global warming and energy programs for the Sierra Club, explained the flaws in the legislation, “We’d like to see the targets and timetables stronger,” although the Sierra Club supported Lieberman-Warner. Hamilton was not alone in concern over the bill. 1Sky, an organization that did oppose the bill, felt we should not back it because it only offers a band-aid solution. Betsy Taylor, President of the 1Sky campaign’s Board of Directors stated:

This bill failed on two fundamental measures and that is why 1Sky and many others did not support it. It would not have reduced carbon emissions as deeply or as quickly as the world scientific community says is necessary to address global warming. And, it would have given more money to the bloated fossil fuel industry, and left ordinary Americans paying too much for rising energy bills.

Read more of this story »

]]> http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/06/11/good-news-lieberman-warner-climate-security-act-fails-in-senate/feed/ http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/06/02/liveblogging-energys-future-is-in-technology-part-ii-politics-policy/ http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/06/02/liveblogging-energys-future-is-in-technology-part-ii-politics-policy/#comments Mon, 02 Jun 2008 10:14:26 +0000 Timothy B. Hurst http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/06/02/liveblogging-energys-future-is-in-technology-part-ii-politics-policy/ Unfortunately, my live updates from the Newsweek/American Petroleum Institute panel at Stanford last Thursday were limited to one - mostly because it took me a while to digest all of it, but also because I found that when I was writing, I stopped listening. Fortunately, Maria Surma Manka has been doing yeoman’s work covering the event thus far at Maria Energia and I highly recommend you pay her a visit. With that in mind, I’ll try to add to what she has written, rather than duplicating it.

As I see it, there were several themes threaded throughout the program. And over the next couple of days, I will be addressing each of them in turn. I will first address the politics and policies of our energy future, as raised by the panelists.

Politics & Policy

Although the panel discussion was not exactly intended to center on politics and policy, the discussion was continually being pulled in that direction. It seemed that nearly everyone had something to say about the role of government. And while there may have been clear political and ideological divisions amongst the panelists, they all generally agreed that the federal government has, up to this point, pretty much dropped the ball when it comes to leading the way with effective  energy policy programs.

Read more of this story »

]]> http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/06/02/liveblogging-energys-future-is-in-technology-part-ii-politics-policy/feed/ http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/04/18/odd-couples-for-climate-change/ http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/04/18/odd-couples-for-climate-change/#comments Fri, 18 Apr 2008 21:19:58 +0000 Heidi Suydam http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/04/18/odd-couples-for-climate-change/ I came across some interesting bipartisan ads today. One featuring Newt Gingrich with Nancy Pelosi and the other featuring Al Sharpton with Pat Robertson. In the ads each of these “odd couples” sat together on a couch and presented a united front urging the public to embrace efforts for climate change. I loved it!

Then I discovered the ads were produced by the We Campaign which was started by The Alliance for Climate Protection. My heart almost stopped beating when I realized I absolutely loved something that has its roots in the efforts of Al Gore. Yes, I am a conservative, and I admittedly have a strong aversion to Al Gore. Nonetheless, I repeatedly returned to We and to the ads. I overcame my stubborn ideals (my first instinct was, I cannot promote this because it belongs to Al Gore) and decided to embrace the cause (my heart said, you are passionate about bi-partisan efforts in environmentalism and you must promote this).

Read more of this story »

]]> http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/04/18/odd-couples-for-climate-change/feed/ http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/04/16/the-war-on-global-warming/ http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/04/16/the-war-on-global-warming/#comments Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:24:59 +0000 Jennifer Lance http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/04/16/the-war-on-global-warming/ The US government likes to declare war on issues in which there are no clear enemies, while physically fighting undeclared wars against foreign people. President Lyndon Johnson declared war on poverty. President Richard Nixon declared war on cancer and recreational drugs. Will George W. Bush declare war on climate change?

Tim Hurst wrote, “I would argue that the only opportunity the current president has to leave a positive and lasting legacy is to take ownership of the climate change and global warming issue” in response to rumors that Bush supports a new climate proposal. Could this be Bush’s declaration of war on climate change? I hope not, as the United States has failed to previously win a war on cancer, poverty, or drugs, and these wars have gone on for decades. We don’t have decades to solve the problem of climate change; we must do it now. Of course, when Bush is involved, I have to be skeptical of his true intentions, especially when the Associate Press reports the Bush administration is motivated to avoid a “train wreck” of climate change regulations. I suspect the Bush climate policy would be a watered down version of these other regulations, besides the White House may already be retreating on the issue.

Read more of this story »

]]> http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/04/16/the-war-on-global-warming/feed/