The Center for Climate and Energy Solutions seeks to inform the design and implementation of federal policies that will significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Drawing from its extensive peer-reviewed published works, in-house policy analyses, and tracking of current legislative proposals, the Center provides research, analysis, and recommendations to policymakers in Congress and the Executive Branch. Read More
The Pew Center on Global Climate Change Response to:
"Design Elements of a Mandatory Market-Based Greenhouse Gas Regulatory System"
Issued by Sen. Pete V. Domenici and Sen. Jeff Bingaman
In February 2006, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R - New Mexico) and top Democrat Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D - New Mexico) issued a white paper on Design Elements of a Mandatory Market-Based Greenhouse Gas Regulatory System, which posed several detailed questions about the design of a GHG cap-and-trade system.
The committee invited all interested parties to respond to the questions by March 13. Read a summary of our response below and the full response using the navigation bar in the top right corner of this page. You may also download the entire response (pdf) or sections of the response below.
Selected respondents were invited to attend the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee's conference-style hearing, or "Climate Conference", on April 4. Read Pew Center President Eileen Claussen's opening statement given at the Climate Conference. Read also Eileen Claussen's statement on the event of the Climate Conference.
Summary of Response to "Design Elements of a Mandatory Market-Based Greenhouse Gas Regulatory System" from Eileen Claussen, President, Center for Climate and Energy Solutions
Pew Center applauds the Senate Energy Committee for its continued efforts to address the critical issue of climate change. The Center is responding to all four main questions, and submitting additional information on cost containment and recent climate science. Responses draw from an extensive body of analysis, conference and workshop proceedings undertaken by the Center with input from the Center’s Business Environmental Leadership Council, scholars, policymakers, and stakeholders; as well as opinions expressed to the Center in discussions with over 30 large corporations. Please note that the Center and most companies surveyed believe that, rather than focusing on any one design element in isolation, any bill must be evaluated as a whole, especially in minimizing the costs to covered entities and the economy.
1. Point of Regulation: Ultimately mandatory GHG mitigation measures should cover the economy as a whole, equitably spreading responsibility among large emitters, the transportation sector, and households. For large stationary sources, the submission of allowances would best be required “downstream” at the point of emission, rather than “upstream.” For the transportation sector, the Center recommends an approach that would cover vehicle manufacturers through use of tradable vehicle GHG emission standards.
2. Allowance Allocation: To assist with the transition to GHG regulation, a high percentage of allowances (e.g., 90% - 95%) should be allocated at no cost, rather than auctioned, at least in the initial years of a cap-and-trade system. A small initial auction can provide funds for transition assistance and technology deployment. Over time, the amount auctioned could increase. In providing federal funding for technology development, a competitive process, such as a “reverse auction,” allocating funding on the basis of emission reduction potential, can minimize costs. In the early years of the program, the highest priorities for allocation should be transition assistance and technology development; over time the priorities should shift toward rewarding low-emitting technologies and practices. Offsets are critical for minimizing program costs. Use of offsets to meet allowance submission requirements should not be restricted, as long as the offsets meet reasonable standards for real, verifiable emission reductions. Early action credit is important and could be provided by allowing emitters who document emission reductions earlier than the default baseline year to use an earlier baseline, resulting in a higher allowance allocation.
3. Linkage: A U.S. GHG program should be integrated with systems around the world. This is both environmentally and economically important. Linkage will minimize costs while expanding GHG mitigation and technology transfer opportunities. Use of a low safety valve will greatly complicate such linkage and minimize the incentive for technology transfer and innovation.
4. Encouraging Comparable Action: Different policies are needed to address two distinct but related objectives: (1) achieving adequate action by all major emitting countries, and (2) protecting U.S. firms in energy-intensive industries whose goods are traded internationally against competitiveness impacts. The first is best achieved through multilateral commitments; the second through overall cost containment and targeted support for the vulnerable sectors.
Cost Containment: A “safety valve” is just one cost containment method. Costs to regulated entities can also be minimized through offsets, allocation, linkage, etc.
Climate Science: The evidence of globally-distributed climate change impacts is mounting.
Download Sections of Our Response (all pdf)
Question 1: Point of Regulation
Question 2: Allowance Allocation
Question 3: Linkage
Question 4: Encouraging Comparable Action
Additional Topics: Cost Containment & Climate Science
Additional Topics: Cost Containment Chart
Agenda for Climate Action
Prepared by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change
Download report (pdf)
Eileen Claussen, President, Pew Center on Global Climate Change
Over the past seven years, the Pew Center has published more than 60 reports on the science, economics, solutions, and policy options related to global climate change. Over that time, the scientific consensus on this issue has only strengthened, but there is, as yet, no consensus on the appropriate portfolio of policies that are required to address global climate change successfully. This Agenda for Climate Action is C2ES’s attempt to fill that gap. It takes a comprehensive look at a suite of climate, energy, and technology policies that could provide meaningful reductions in greenhouse gas emissions throughout the economy.
This report finds six areas in which the U.S. must take action: (I) science and technology research, (II) market-based emissions management, (III) emissions reductions in key sectors, (IV) energy production and use, (V) adaptation, and (VI) international engagement. In the areas of science and technology research, we call for increased stable funding for both, along with innovative approaches to distribute funds efficiently. We propose a mandatory GHG reporting system, which can form the basis for tracking voluntary reductions, accompanied by a large-source, economy-wide cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gases. This combination of technology investment and market development will provide for the most cost-effective reductions in greenhouse gases, as well as create a market for GHG-reducing technologies.
While these broader efforts are critical, sector-specific actions are also needed. To address emissions from the transportation sector, we propose converting the struggling Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program into a more ambitious but tradable GHG standard, along with increased support for low-emission vehicles and fuels. For the industrial sector, we encourage greater outreach and incentives for improvements in process efficiency and the manufacture of low-GHG products. In the agriculture sector, biological sequestration programs in Farm Bill legislation must receive proper funding and prioritization. Because energy is at the heart of this issue, we tackle this sector separately, making recommendations for each major energy source. To enable continued use of coal in a climate-friendly manner, we promote aggressive research and development on carbon separation and capture technologies, development of a regulatory framework for geologic sequestration, and advanced generation coal plants. Natural gas is an important transition fuel, and we support the expansion of natural gas transportation infrastructure and production. We propose extending incentives for renewable fuels and electricity generation, an increased focus on biomass, and federal-level support for renewable credit-trading programs. We also support continued use of nuclear power generation, pending resolution of issues such as safety and waste storage. There are vast opportunities for improving efficiency on an economy-wide basis, so we promote improved efficiency in electricity production (through distributed generation, combined heat and power technologies), in electricity transmission (through test beds for an advanced grid), and during energy use (through building codes, product standards, and manufacturing process improvements).
Because none of these efforts will fully prevent all potential effects of climate change (indeed, many impacts are already being observed), we propose the development of a national adaptation strategy and the funding of early warning systems. Last but not least, while the Agenda focuses on domestic actions, it argues for greater participation by the U.S. in international negotiations to engage all major emitters in a global solution.
Despite the specificity of many of the steps included here, there is still much room for ongoing refinement and elaboration of these recommendations. While we have consulted with many stakeholders in the development of this report, we look forward to building upon the suggestions described here through further outreach and consultation.
This report follows the publication of International Climate Efforts Beyond 2012: Report of the Climate Dialogue at Pocantico, an examination of options for advancing the international climate effort post-2012. Taken together, these two documents offer a promising path forward for the U.S. and the world in tackling global climate change.
Climate change is one of the most complex issues that the world will face in this century. Concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere have already reached levels unprecedented for hundreds of thousands of years, causing changes not only in global temperature, but also in observable impacts throughout the world, and these changes are happening more quickly than expected. The broad consensus of established scientific experts both internationally and domestically is that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities. In addition, the rate and severity of these changes will increase without significant steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs). Stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations will require a fundamental shift in our energy system, but this transition will have other benefits as well, including improved competitiveness, security, air quality, public health, and job creation. This transition will not be easy, but it is crucial to begin now.
This Agenda is the Pew Center's attempt to develop and articulate a responsible course of action for addressing climate change. It identifies fifteen actions that should be started now, including U.S. domestic reductions and engagement in the international negotiation process. It includes both broad and specific policies, combining recommendations on technology development, scientific research, energy supply, economy-wide markets, and adaptation with critical steps that can be taken in key sectors. While reductions across sectors and sources of emissions are key, these steps are not likely to happen simultaneously, nor without costs. However, these recommendations have been designed to be both cost-effective and comprehensive.
Invest in science and technology research.
1. Ensure a robust research program though the Climate Change Science Program.
2. Offer long-term, stable funds—in the form of a reverse auction—to GHG-related technology research and development.
Establish mandatory limits on greenhouse gas emissions and harness market mechanisms for economy-wide reductions.
3. Create a mandatory GHG reporting system as a basis for an economy-wide emissions trading program.
4. Implement a large-source, economy-wide cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gases.
Stimulate innovation across key economic sectors.
5. Transportation: Convert the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program into strengthened, tradable corporate average emissions standards. Support biofuels, hydrogen, and other low-GHG fuel alternatives.
6. Manufacturing: Provide outreach and incentives to manufacturers for improvements in industrial efficiency and low-GHG technologies, and support the production of low-GHG products.
7. Agriculture: Raise the priority and funding levels for Farm Bill programs and other federal initiatives on carbon sequestration.
Drive the energy system toward greater efficiency, lower-carbon fuels and carbon capture technologies.
8. Coal and Carbon Sequestration: Provide funding for tests of geologic carbon sequestration and for research, development and demonstration (RD&D) projects on separation and capture technologies, in combination with advanced generation coal plants. Establish an appropriate regulatory framework for carbon storage.
9. Natural Gas: Expand natural gas transportation infrastructure and production.
10. Renewables: Significantly “ramp up” renewables for electricity and fuels, including an extension and expansion of the production tax credit, a uniform system for tracking renewable energy credits, and increased emphasis on biomass.
11. Nuclear Power: Provide opportunities for nuclear power to play a continuing role in a future low-carbon electricity sector.
12. Efficient Energy Production and Distribution: Support the development and use of combined heat and power installations, distributed generation technologies, and test beds for an upgraded electricity grid.
13. Efficient Energy Usage: Reduce energy consumption through policies that spur efficiency, including appliance and equipment standards, building R&D and codes, and consumer education.
Begin now to adapt to the inevitable consequences of climate change.
14. Develop a national adaptation strategy through the Climate Change Science Program and Climate Change Technology Program, and fund development of early-warning systems for related threats.
Engage in negotiations to strengthen the international climate effort.
15. Review options for a new or modified agreement to ensure fair and timely action by all major emitting countries, and participate in negotiations to establish binding climate commitments consistent with domestic interests.
These fifteen recommendations are not the only means of achieving a lower-carbon future, but taken together, they would chart a climate-friendly path for the U.S.. Putting the Agenda into practice will take political will and policy action. All recommendations require government leadership, private sector commitment and time. Nonetheless, the details of specific recommendations in this Agenda are less critical than the compelling need to get started. Further delay will only make the challenge before us more daunting and costly.
Agenda for Climate Action
February 8, 2006
National Press Club, Washington, DC
Remarks made by business representatives at the release:
Group Climate Change Adviser
Shell International Limited (pdf)
Director for Federal, Governmental and Regulatory Relations
PG&E Corporation (pdf)
Western Hemisphere Health, Safety, Security, and Environment Director
Vice President of Federal Affairs and Environmental Safety
Vice President, Environmental Health and Safety
Holcim (US) Inc. (pdf)
Vice President, Government Relations
Whirlpool Corporation (pdf)
Supporting statements: Agenda for Climate Action
The Pew Agenda is an example of the kind of big picture, integrated thinking that is needed to tackle the climate issue. We're pleased that the Agenda makes the point that climate solutions should be market based while covering all parts of the economy and resolving regulatory uncertainty. These are all vital as the utility industry prepares to build the next generation of power plants needed by our growing economy.
James E. Rogers, Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer
The changes needed in our energy infrastructure to meet future demand and respond to climate change will not happen by chance - a clear, long term framework will give business the necessary incentive and confidence to invest further.
John D. Hofmeister, President and US Country Chair
Shell Oil Company
Holcim is pleased with the leadership that the Pew Center has taken with regard to greenhouse gas reduction policies and the depth of research that comprises the foundation of this report. Importantly, the Pew Center recognizes the necessity of market-based solutions and that various sector needs must be taken into consideration if we are to have consensus in what must be done to contain and ultimately reduce the generation of greenhouse gases.
Patrick Dolberg, President & Chief Executive Officer
Holcim (US) Inc.
Through its association with the Pew Center, Alcan has identified another avenue through which to actively address climate change and its effects on the long-term sustainability of the Company. This report sends a clear message, calling on all stakeholders to broaden their investment in tackling the economic, social, and environmental issues that climate change presents.”
Daniel Gagnier, Senior Vice President, Corporate and External Affairs
Intel supports Pew's efforts to advance the national discussion on climate change by proposing options that merit careful consideration. Intel agrees that climate change is a serious issue, and has been actively working to mitigate its own climate impact through aggressive programs to reduce energy consumption and emissions of global warming compounds.
Dane Parker, General Manager of Environmental Health and Safety
February 8, 2006
Contact: Katie Mandes, (703) 516-0606
PEW CENTER ON GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE RELEASES FIRST COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO CLIMATE CHANGE
All Sectors Must Share in Solution
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Pew Center on Global Climate Change released the first comprehensive plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. The Agenda for Climate Action identifies both broad and specific policies, combining recommendations on economy-wide mandatory emissions cuts, technology development, scientific research, energy supply, and adaptation with critical steps that can be taken in key sectors. The report is the culmination of a two-year effort that articulates a pragmatic course of action across all areas of the economy.
The report calls for a combination of technology and policy and urges action in six key areas: (1) science and technology, (2) market-based programs, (3) sectoral emissions, (4) energy production and use, (5) adaptation, and (6) international engagement. Within these six areas, the Agenda outlines fifteen specific recommendations that should be started now, including U.S. domestic reductions and engagement in the international negotiation process. All the recommendations are capable of implementation in the near-term.
The report concludes that there is no single technology fix, no single policy instrument, and no single sector that can solve this problem on its own. Rather, a combination of technology investment and market development will provide for the most cost-effective reductions in greenhouse gases, and will create a thriving market for GHG-reducing technologies. To address climate change without placing the burden on any one group, the report urges actions throughout the economy.
“Some believe the answer to addressing climate change lies in technology incentives. Others say limiting emissions is the only answer. We need both,” said Eileen Claussen, President of the Pew Center.
Emissions in the United States continue to rise at an alarming rate. U.S. carbon dioxide emissions have grown by more than 18% since 1990, and the Department of Energy now projects that they will increase by another 37% by 2030.
Joining the Pew Center at the announcement were representatives from the energy and manufacturing sectors. Speaking at the release were: David Hone, Group Climate Change Adviser, Shell International Limited; Melissa Lavinson, Director, Federal Environmental Affairs and Corporate Responsibility, PG&E Corporation; Bill Gerwing, Western Hemisphere Health, Safety, Security, and Environment Director, BP; John Stowell, Vice President, Environmental Strategy, Federal Affairs and Sustainability, Cinergy Corp., Ruksana Mirza, Vice President, Environmental Affairs, Holcim (US) Inc.; and Tom Catania, Vice President, Government Relations, Whirlpool Corporation.
While actions are needed across all sectors, some steps will have a more significant, far-reaching impact on emissions than others and must be undertaken as soon as possible.
- A program to cap emissions from large sources and allow for emissions trading will send a signal to curb releases of greenhouse gases while promoting a market for new technologies.
- Transportation is responsible for roughly one-third of our greenhouse gas emissions, and this report addresses this sector through tradable emissions standards for vehicles.
- Because energy is at the core of the climate change problem, the report makes several recommendations in this area: calling for increased efficiency in buildings and products, as well as in electricity generation and distribution. Incentives and a nationwide platform to track and trade renewable energy credits are recommended to support increased renewable power. In recognition of the key role that coal plays in U.S. energy supply, the report calls for the capture and sequestration of carbon that results from burning coal. Nuclear power currently provides a substantial amount of non-emitting electricity, and is therefore important to keep in the generation mix. The report recommends support for advanced generation of nuclear power, while noting that issues such as safety and waste disposal must also be addressed.
- While most of the recommendations focus on mitigation efforts, the report acknowledges that some impacts are inevitable and are already being seen. As a result, it proposes development of a national adaptation strategy to plan for a climate-changing world.
- Finally, despite the importance of efforts by individual countries on this issue, climate change cannot be addressed without engagement of the broader international community. The report recommends that the U.S. participate in international negotiations aimed at curbing global greenhouse gas emissions by all major emitting countries.
Other recommendations include: long-term stable research funding, incentives for low-carbon fuels and consumer products, funding for biological sequestration, expanding the natural gas supply and distribution network, and a mandatory greenhouse gas reporting program that can provide a stepping stone to economy-wide emissions trading.
The full text of this and other Pew Center reports is available at http://www.c2es.org.
The Pew Center was established in May 1998 by The Pew Charitable Trusts, one of the United States’ largest philanthropies and an influential voice in efforts to improve the quality of the environment. The Pew Center is an independent, nonprofit, and non-partisan organization dedicated to providing credible information, straight answers, and innovative solutions in the effort to address global climate change. The Pew Center is led by Eileen Claussen, the former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs.
In a major address before the UN Security Council on February 6, 2006, Senator Richard G. Lugar (R-Indiana), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, called for the United States to return to negotiations under the Framework Convention on Climate Change to achieve a comprehensive international approach to global warming. He said a "roadmap to this outcome" is contained in the recent report of the Climate Dialogue at Pocantico convened by the Center.
Excerpt from Senator Lugar's address:
"...[Fossil fuel] dependence also presents huge risks to the global environment. With this in mind, I have urged the Bush Administration and my colleagues in Congress to return to a leadership role on the issue of climate change. I have advocated that the United States must be open to multi-lateral forums that attempt to achieve global solutions to the problem of greenhouse gases. Climate change could bring drought, famine, disease, mass migration, and rising sea levels threatening coasts and economies worldwide, all of which could lead to political conflict and instability. This problem cannot be solved without international cooperation.
The time is ripe for bold action by the international community because much has changed since talks first began in 1992 on what became the Kyoto treaty. For one, China and India, who won exemptions from the treaty’s emission-cutting requirements, have enjoyed rapid growth. They are now much greater sources of greenhouse gases than anticipated, but also far stronger economies, more integrated into the global system.
Our scientific understanding of climate change has also advanced significantly. We have better computer models, more measurements and more evidence -- from the shrinking polar caps to expanding tropical disease zones for plants and humans -- that the problem is real and is caused by man-made emissions of greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide from fossil fuels.
Most importantly, thanks to new technology, we can control many greenhouse gases with proactive, pro-growth solutions, not just draconian limitations on economic activity. Industry and government alike recognize that progress on climate change can go hand in hand with progress on energy security, air pollution, and technology development.
A roadmap to this outcome is contained in a recent report from the Center, a non-partisan organization, which assembled representatives from China, India and other countries and from global industrial companies, as well as from the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee staff. This diverse group agreed on the need for fresh approaches beyond Kyoto. They said the U.S. must engage all the major economies at once, including India and China, because experience has shown that countries will not move unless they can be sure their counterparts are moving with them.
The United States, the world’s richest country and the largest emitter of greenhouse gases, should seize this moment to make a new beginning by returning to international negotiations in a leadership role under the Framework Convention on Climate Change. I believe that the United States is prepared to do that. Our friends and allies should embrace this opportunity to achieve a comprehensive international approach to global warming...."
Full text of Senator Lugar's address to the Security Council
More on the report of the Climate Dialogue at Pocantico
Additional resources on international climate policy, including text of the Sense of the Senate resolution, S. Res. 312 (pdf), proposed by Senator Lugar with Senator Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (D-Delaware), calling for U.S. participation in international negotiations under the Framework Convention on Climate Change
As of February 2014, 151 bills focusing specifically on climate change had been introduced in the 113th Congress (2013-2014). Many more bills touch on energy, environment, transportation, agriculture and other areas that could have an impact on or be affected by climate change. The list below, however, contains for the most part only those bills whose authors explicitly reference climate change or related terms, such as greenhouse gases (GHG) or carbon dioxide. (For brevity, all legislative proposals, including resolutions and amendments, are referred to here as "bills.") The list includes 91 bills that are intended to advance climate action, as well as the 60 bills that would hinder climate action. 31 bills would prohibit EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.
The only bills included here that do not specifically mention climate change are those dealing with the impact of Hurricane Sandy, which have been signed into law, and the Shaheen-Portman energy efficiency bill, which is considered the best prospect for enactment among energy bills in this Congress. Climate action advocates have supported both issues, though in a sign of the times, the authors have avoided mentioning climate change in the bills themselves.
The following bills have been introduced in the 113th Congress:
- S.J.Res.30: A joint resolution to disapprove a rule of the Environmental Protection Agency relating to greenhouse gas emissions from electric utility generating units.
See title for summary. This bill would allow for a congressional review of EPA's greenhouse gas standard for new power plants. Past congressional reviews have occurred after a regulation is finalized. Through the introduction of this bill, Sen. McConnell makes two arguments for congressional review of this proposed regulation. First, the Congressional Review Act doesn’t place limitation for Congress to review only finalized rules. Secondly, a quirk in the Clean Air Act has the proposed rule carrying the full effect of a finalized rule and thus should be treated as such. It remains to be seen whether a congressional review could be brought up for this proposed rule. If allowed, the Senate would have 60 days from the date of introduction to vote on this disapproval measure. The bill must be voted on as is and cannot be filibustered, and would need a simple-majority to pass. (Assuming Republicans voted along party lines, six Democrats would need to break ranks to form a simple majority.) If this bill passes the Senate, it’s likely to pass the Republican-controlled House. Since EPA greenhouse gas regulations are the main pillar of the president’s Climate Action Plan, the President will most likely veto this bill if it makes it to his desk. Congress can over-ride the president’s veto with a two-thirds majority in both chambers. Sponsor: Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) (introduced 1/16/2014).
- H.Amdt.2 to H.R.3547: Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014
This omnibus bill would fund federal agencies until the end of the fiscal year 2014. Of note, this bill would block DOE funding for the implementation or enforcement of the federal light bulb efficiency standard, would bar the administration prohibiting funding of new coal-fired power plants overseas until September 30, and would require the president to submit a report detailing federal agency funding for climate change programs, projects, and activities in fiscal year 2013 and 2014. Sponsor: Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) (introduced 11/20/2013). Action: Passed in the House 12/2/2013 and passed in the Senate 12/12/2013; 1/17/2014 signed by the President.
- H.R.41: To temporarily increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for carrying out the National Flood Insurance Program
This bill, also known as the Hurricane Sandy Relief bill, provides a portion of the disaster relief requested – a $9.7 billion increase in borrowing authority for the National Flood Insurance Program. Sponsor: Rep. Scott Garrett (R-NJ). Action: 1/4/2013: passed in the House 354-67. 1/4/2013: passed in the Senate 1/6/2013: Signed by President and became Public Law No: 113-001.
- H.R.70: Deficit Reduction, Job Creation, and Energy Security Act
This bill would establish various grants, including a National Grant Program for Coastal and Ocean Sustainability and Health. It would direct funds to be used for coastal management planning and implementation mitigation, restoration, protection, and relocation of coastal communities threatened by the impacts of climate change. Sponsor: Rep. Shelia Jackson Lee (D-TX) (introduced 1/3/2013).
- H.R.71: Coral Reef Conservation Act Reauthorization and Enhancement Amendments of 2013
This bill would reauthorize the Coral Reef Conservation Act of 2000 to extend the remaining coral reef conservation program grant funds. Of relevance, this bill would require the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to submit a report to Congress every five years detailing implementation of the National Coral Reef Action Strategy. This report would include an assessment of actions taken to address climate change related threats to coral reef ecosystems. Sponsor: Rep. Madeline Bordallo (D-GU) (introduced 1/3/2013).
- H.R.152: Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2013
Overall, the bill provides $5.4 billion for the Federal Emergency Management Agency's disaster relief fund and $5.4 billion to rebuild transportation systems. The Army Corps of Engineers will receive $1.4 billion, part of which will go towards conducting a comprehensive study to address flood risks of vulnerable coastal populations in areas impacted by Hurricane Sandy, part of which will also go towards flood control and construction related to the consequences of Hurricane Sandy. The Department of Housing and Urban Development's community development program will get $3.9 billion, part of which will go towards restoration and infrastructure resiliency. The Federal Highway Administration will get $2 billion, and U.S. EPA will receive $608 million. Sponsor: Rep. Harold Rogers (R-KY) (introduced 1/4/2013). Action: 1/28/2013 Passed in the Senate 62-36; 1/29/2013 signed by the President and became public law No 113-2.
- H.R.219: Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013
This bill would streamline environmental review with the effect of expediting hazard mitigation projects, it would allow FEMA to be more flexible when issuing grants, and it would provide grants to reduce debris removal costs, amongst other things. Of particular relevance, 180 days after enactment of this bill, the Administrator of FEMA would be required to submit to Congress recommendations for a national strategy on how to improve the resiliency of local communities and States for the purpose of lowering future costs of disaster response and recovery. Each provision in H.R. 219 was part of the 112th Congress H.R.2903, the FEMA Reauthorization Act of 2012, which passed by voice vote on September 19, 2012. Sponsor: Rep. Jeff Denham (R-CA) (introduced 1/14/2013). Action: 1/14/2013 Passed in the House 403-0. For further action, see H.R. 152.
- H.R.243: Bowles-Simpson Plan of Lowering America's Debt Act
This bill would adopt reforms recommended by the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (i.e., Bowles-Simpson Plan) to reduce spending and make the Federal Government more efficient. Of particular note, Sec. 45Q tax credit for carbon dioxide sequestration (including for enhanced oil recovery) would be repealed. Sponsor: Rep. Dennis Ross (R-FL) (introduced 1/14/2013).
- H.R.259: Energy Freedom and Economic Prosperity Act
This bill would repeal credits for many renewable energy initiatives, as well as any credit for carbon dioxide sequestration (CCS). Specifically related to CCS, it would apply to any carbon captured after December 21, 2014. Sponsor: Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS) (introduced 1/15/2013).
- H.R.367: Regulations From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2013
This bill would require congressional review of federal regulations. A joint resolution of approval would be required for a major rule that: has resulted in or is likely to result in an annual effect on the economy of $50 million or more (the current figure is $100 million), is determined by the EPA administrator to have significant adverse effects on global economic competitiveness, has a significant impact on agricultural entities, implements or provides the implementation of a carbon tax, or a rule under the Affordable Care Act) to take effect. (Currently, major rules take effect unless a joint resolution disapproving them is enacted.) The bill also establishes Congressional disapproval procedures for nonmajor rules. Sponsor: Rep. Todd Young (R-OH) (introduced 1/23/2013).
- H.R.400: Clean Energy Technology Manufacturing and Export Assistance Act of 2013
This bill would require the Secretary of Commerce to establish a Clean Energy Technology Manufacturing and Export Assistance Fund, to be administered through the International Trade Administration. It also would require the Secretary to administer the Fund to promote policies that would reduce production costs and encourage innovation, investment, and productivity in the clean energy technology sector, and implement a national clean energy technology export strategy. Clean energy technologies would be defined as those related to the production, use, transmission, storage, control, or conservation of energy that aim to stabilize atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations. Sponsor: Rep. Doris Matsui (D-CA) (introduced 1/23/2013).
- H.R.505: Balancing Act
This bill would repeal certain sequestration requirements implemented by the Budget Control Act of 2011 (Pub.L. 112-25). Of relevance, this bill would end the Sec.45Q tax credit for carbon dioxide sequestration (including for enhanced oil recovery). Sponsor: Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) (introduced 4/23/2013).
- H.R.518: To amend the Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 for the purposes of extending the Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 through 2018, and for other purposes.
The bill would extend authority and authorizes appropriations for the drought program through FY2018. It also would require cooperative drought contingency plans to provide for periodic review to address projected long-term climate variability and change. Sponsor: Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA) (introduced 2/5/2013).
- H.R.547: Border Security and Responsibility Act of 2013
This bill would require federal agencies to submit a border protection strategy to Congress. Of relevance, agencies would be required to develop and implement a monitoring and mitigation plan, which would include measures to protect habitat to ensure animal species are able to adapt to the impacts of climate change. Sponsor: Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) (introduced 2/6/2013).
- H.R.609: End Big Oil Tax Subsidies Act of 2013
This bill would repeal fossil fuel subsidies for large oil companies. Of particular note, Sec. 45Q tax credit for carbon dioxide sequestration (including for enhanced oil recovery) would be repealed for taxpayers that are not a small independent oil and gas company. Sponsor: Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) (introduced 2/12/2013).
- H.R. 621: To prohibit funding for the Environmental Protection Agency to be used to implement or enforce a cap-and-trade program for greenhouse gases, and for other purposes.
Refer to title for summary. Sponsor: Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX) (introduced 2/13/2013).
- H.R.662: To prohibit United States contributions to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Refer to title for summary. Sponsor: Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO) (introduced 2/13/2013).
- H.R.764: Coastal State Climate Change Planning Act
This bill would amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to direct the Secretary of Commerce to establish a coastal climate change adaptation planning and response program. This program would provide assistance to coastal states to voluntarily develop coastal climate change adaptation plans. It also would provide financial and technical assistance and training for such plans and authorizes the Secretary to make grants to develop and support projects that implement strategies contained in such plans. Sponsor: Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA) (introduced 2/15/2013).
- H.R.765: Water Infrastructure Resiliency and Sustainability Act of 2013
This bill would require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to: (1) establish the Water Infrastructure Resiliency and Sustainability Program. The Program would provide grants to owners or operators of water systems to increase the resiliency or adaptability of the systems to any ongoing or forecasted changes to the hydrologic conditions of a U.S. region, and (2) give priority to owners or operators of water systems that are at the greatest and most immediate risk of facing significant negative impacts due to changing hydrologic conditions. Grant funds used to improve existing water systems would have to be used in a manner that would not further increase net greenhouse gas emissions. Sponsor: Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA) (introduced 3/1/2013).
- H.R.974: MOVE Freight Act of 2013
This bill would establish a national freight network, composed of highways, railways, navigable waterways, seaports, airports, freight intermodal connectors, and aerotropolis transportation systems most critical to the multimodal movement of freight with the goal of improving the efficiency of the system. This would include providing competitive grants and planning assistance. Of particular relevance, in determining whether to award a grant, the Secretary of Transportation must consider the extent to which the project reduces greenhouse gas emissions. Sponsor: Rep. Albio Sires (D-NJ) (introduced 3/5/2013).
- H.R.1025: Berryessa Snow Mountain National Conservation Area Act
This bill would establish the Berryessa Snow Mountain National Conservation Area within Napa, Lake, Mendocino, Solano, and Yolo Counties in California. States that the purpose of the Conservation Area is the conservation, protection, and enhancement of the ecological, scenic, wildlife, recreational, cultural, historical, natural, educational, and scientific resources of the lands included in the Area for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations. Of relevance, the bill would require the production of plans to manage to manage and conserve the land. Each plan would be required to assess the impacts of climate change on the conservation area. Sponsor: Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA) (introduced 3/7/2013).
- H.R.1027: Advanced Vehicle Technology Act of 2013
This bill would authorize DOE to conduct a program of basic and applied research, development, engineering, demonstration, and commercial application in vehicle technologies to reduce oil consumption. The bill articulates a congressional finding that the transportation sector accounts for 28 percent of U.S. primary energy demand and greenhouse gas emissions. Sponsor: Rep. Gary Peters (D-MI) (introduced 3/7/2013).
- H.R.1138: Small Business Clean Energy Financing Act of 2013
This bill would direct the Administrator of the Small Business Administration to establish a program to guarantee loans of small technology manufacturing businesses that would contribute to a stabilization of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations in the United States. Sponsor: Rep. Doris Matsui (D-CA) (introduced 3/13/2013).
- H.R.1187: Northern Rockies Ecosystem Protection Act
This bill would designate specified National Forest System lands, National Park System lands, and public lands in Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, and Wyoming as wilderness and as components or additions to existing components of the National Wilderness Preservation System. Of particular note, this bill would establish a federal program to protect, restore, and conserve natural resources in response to the impacts of climate change. Sponsor: Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) (introduced 3/14/13).
- H.R.1189: American Natural Gas Security and Consumer Protection Act
This bill would amend the Natural Gas Act to prohibit any person from exporting any natural gas from the United States to a foreign country without first having secured authorization from the Secretary of Energy (DOE). Of particular relevance, the bill would direct the Secretary to issue final regulations for determining whether an export of natural gas from the United States to a foreign country is in the public interest. A measure of public interest would include the ability of the United States to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Sponsor: Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) (introduced 3/14/2013).
- H.R.1220: Asthma Inhalers Relief Act of 2013
This bill would direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to permit the distribution, sale, and consumption in the United States of CFC epinephrine inhalers. It would prohibit EPA from enforcing upon or restricting the distribution, sale, or consumption of CFC epinephrine inhalers on the basis of any federal law implementing the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. Sponsor: Rep. Michael Burgess (R-TX) (introduced 3/15/2013).
- H.R.1304: Flexibility to Farm Act
This bill would allow the chief executive of a state to exempt farmers from a requirement of a covered federal environmental law by determining that such a requirement is unduly burdensome. Covered environmental law includes regulations under the Clean Air Act. This bill articulates a congressional finding that EPA regulation of greenhouse gases as an air pollutant under the Clean Air Act could impose an undue burden on agriculture producers. Sponsor: Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI) (introduced 3/2013).
- H.R. 1351: Public Lands Service Corps Act of 2013
This bill would make amendments to the Public Lands Service Corps Act of 1993. In particular, it would describe the types of projects that would be carried out by the Public Lands Service Corps under the Act, which include carbon sequestration, and adaptability and resiliency efforts to protect against climate change. Sponsor: Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) (introduced 3/21/2013). Related Bills: S.360.
- H.R. 1364: New Alternative Transportation to Give American Solutions Act of 2013
This bill would amend the Internal Revenue Code to provide tax credits for medium- and heavy-duty natural gas vehicles and natural gas vehicle refueling infrastructure. This bill articulates a sense of Congress that EPA’s new fuel-economy and greenhouse gas emission regulations for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles should provide incentives to encourage and reward manufacturers who produce natural gas powered vehicles. Sponsor: Rep. John Larson (D-CT) (introduced 3/21/2013).
- H.R.1382: Digital Coast Act of 2013
This bill would direct NOAA to establish and implement a constitute-driven platform integrating geospatial data, decision support tools, training, and best practices to address coastal and emergency management issues. This bill articulates a congressional finding that highly accurate, high-resolution remote sensing and geospatial data play an important role in management of the coastal zone and economy, including community resilience to longer range climate change impacts. Sponsor: Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD)
- H.R.1469: LEVEL Act
This bill would revise certain aspects of the renewable fuels program under the Clean Air Act by: redefining “renewable fuel”; revoking the requirements that renewable fuel achieve a 20 percent reduction in lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions; reducing the volume of renewable fuel required to be in gasoline sold or introduced in the United States; requiring EIA to estimate the volumes of gasoline (current of transportation fuel, biomass-based diesel, and cellulosic biofuel) projected to be sold or introduced in the following year; making one gallon of cellulosic biomass or waste-derived ethanol equivalent to 2.5 gallons of renewable fuel; repealing provisions concerning cellulosic biofuel and biomass-based diesel; and repealing requirements that EPA promulgate fuel regulations to implement measures to mitigate adverse impacts on air quality as the result of renewable fuel requirements. Sponsor: Rep. Michael Burgess (R-TX) (introduced 4/10/2013).
- H.R.1482: Renewable Fuel Standard Amendments Act
This bill would amend the Clean Air Act to eliminate certain requirements under the renewable fuel program, including the modification of greenhouse gas reduction percentages. Sponsor: Rep. Steve Womack (R-AR) (introduced 4/12/2013).
- H.R.1486: No Carbon Tax Act of 2013
This bill would prohibit the Secretary of the Treasury and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency from devising or implementing a carbon tax. Sponsor: Rep. Nick Rahall, II (R-WV) (introduced 4/11/2013).
- H.R.1569: New Fair Deal Busting America's Rigid Outdated & Needless Subsidies Act of 2013.
This bill would amend the Internal Revenue Code to repeal tax credits for alternative fuel mixtures, plug-in electric drive motor vehicles, enhanced oil recovery tax credit and the tax credit for producing oil and gas from marginal wells, producing electricity from certain renewable resources, and for carbon dioxide sequestration. Sponsor: Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS) (introduced 4/15/2013).
- H.R.1579: Inclusive Prosperity Act of 2013
This bill would amend the Internal Revenue Code to impose certain taxes and to provide tax credits for certain secured transactions. Of relevance, it would declare Congressional recognition that extreme weather events rooted in climate change, including flood, drought, fire, super storms like Sandy, as well as `slow-onset' events like sea level rise, are wreaking havoc in the United States and across the globe resulting in climate change impacts that jeopardize the lives and livelihoods of Americans, causing large-scale food and energy insecurity in developing countries, and extolling untold economic costs. Sponsor: Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) (introduced 4/16/2013).
- H.R. 1582: Energy Consumers Relief Act of 2013
Of relevance, the bill would prohibit the use of the social cost of carbon (i.e., any estimate that montezies the damages associated with an incremental increase in carbon dioxide emissions in an given year) in the cost-benefit analysis of energy-related regulations with an estimated cost greater than $1 billion until a law is enacted authorizing such use. Sponsor: Rep. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) (introduced 4/16/2013) Action: passed in the House 232-181.
- H.R. 1616: Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act of 2013
This bill is intended to increase the use of energy efficient technologies in the residential, commercial and industrial sectors. The legislation would strengthen national model building codes, require the Secretary of Energy to encourage States, Indian Tribes and local governments to meet or exceed target building efficiency standards, and require the Secretary of Energy to provide grants for the establishment of training and assessment centers, for the purpose of building a workforce skilled in developing and applying energy efficient technological and design concepts to commercial and institutional buildings. Through finance initiatives, it would facilitate private investment in the research and development of energy efficient technologies and efficiency upgrades. In addition, a number of incentives would be put in place for manufacturers to use more efficient electric motors and transformers in industrial processes. The federal government, the single largest U.S. energy user, would be required to institute energy saving techniques for computers. In addition, the legislation would clarify that Energy Service Companies and Utility Service Contracts could be used by federal agencies to install natural gas and electric vehicle charging infrastructure, which would facilitate the use of these vehicles. Sponsor: Rep. David McKinley (R-WV) (introduced 4/18/2013). Related bill: S.761, S.1392.
- H.R.1696: Master Limited Partnerships Parity Act
This bill extends the publicly traded partnership ownership structure (i.e., master limited partnerships) to energy power generation projects, transportation fuels, and related energy activities. These include renewable energy, electricity storage devices, combined heat and power, renewable thermal energy, waste heat to power, renewable fuel infrastructure, renewable fuels, energy efficient buildings, gasification with sequestration, and carbon capture and storage. Sponsors: Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX) (introduced 4/24/2013). Related bill: S.795.
- H.R.1793: Global Partnerships Act of 2013
This bill would establish a new framework for U.S. foreign assistance. Of particular relevance, this bill would provide foreign assistance to mitigate and adapt to climate change and establish debt-for-nature exchanges for a range of activities including projects that address the effects of climate change. Sponsor: Rep. Gerald Connolly (D-VA) (introduced 4/26/2013).
- H.R.1807: The Residential Energy and Economic Savings (TREES) Act
This bill would establish a grant program to assist retail power providers to support targeted residential three-planting programs for a number of reasons including utilizing trees to lower ambient temperature and absorb carbon dioxide. Sponsor: Rep. Doris Matsui (D-CA) (introduced 5/3/2013).
- H.R. 1834: 21st Century Great Outdoors Commission Act
This bill would establish the 21st Century Great Outdoors Commission, which would assess the use, value, job creation, and economic opportunities associated with the outdoor resources of public lands and other U.S. lands and water areas. The bill articulates a congressional finding that changing demographics, impacts of climate change, lack of public access, and funding shortfalls create challenges for land and recreation managers. The bill would create the opportunity to provide policy recommendations, including recommendations on how to address key challenges such as climate change. Sponsor: Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) (introduced 5/6/2013).
- H.R.1881: Energy Production and Project Delivery Act of 2013
This bill would promote oil and gas production by repealing the prohibition against leasing or other development leading to production of oil and gas from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), by deeming the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to have approved the Draft Proposed Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program 2010-2015. Of relevance, the bill prohibits the Administrator or the head of any other Federal agency or department from regulating or continuing to implement or enforce any regulations, proposals, or actions establishing any carbon dioxide or greenhouse gas emissions reductions until the Administrator, the Administrator of the Energy Information Agency, and the Secretary of Commerce certify in writing that the People’s Republic of China, India, and the Russian Federation have proposed, implemented, and enforced carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas measures. The bill also prohibits the consideration of the impact of any greenhouse gas or climate change on any species of fish or wildlife or plant in the implementation of this Act.” Sponsor: Rep. Bob Bishop (R-UT) (introduced 5/8/2013).
- H.R.1890: Balancing Food, Farm, and the Environment Act of 2013
This bill would amend the Food Security Act of 1985 and would allow farmers to be rewarded for their carbon sequestration efforts through USDA’s Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). Regional funding would also be available for farmer-led efforts to increase resilience to rising temperatures and extreme weather. Sponsor: Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) (introduced 5/8/2013). Related bills: S.923
- H.R. 1943: SUPER Act of 2013
This bill would create a task force to review existing policies and develop best practices aimed at combating significant drivers of global climate change. This task force would find gaps and overlaps among the already existing efforts of multiple levels of government and coalesce them in order to achieve super pollutant reductions. Super pollutants include black carbon, methane, and hydrofluorocarbons. Sponsor: Rep. Scott Peters (D-CA) (introduced 5/9/2013).
- H.R.2023: Climate Change Health Protection and Promotion Act
This bill would direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to develop a national strategic action plan to assist health professionals in preparing for and responding to the public health effects of climate change. Sponsor: Rep. Lois Capps ( D-CA) (introduced 5/16/2013).
- H.R.2075: Electric Transportation Advancement Act of 2013
This bill would amend the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 by adding a provision that would establish or maintain a competitive grant and revolving loan program. In selecting grant and loan recipients, the Secretary of Energy would be required to consider the overall cost- effectiveness of a proposed, qualified electric transportation project in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Sponsor: Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) (introduced 5/21/2013).
- H.R.2081: No More Excuses Energy Act of 2013
This bill would prescribe a number of actions with the goal of increasing domestic energy production. Such actions would include requiring the President to designate at least 10 sites for oil or natural gas refineries on federal lands and make the sites available to the private sector for construction of refineries, prohibiting the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) from denying an application for nuclear waste disposal on the grounds of present or future insufficient capacity, repealing the prohibition against producing oil and gas from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. In addition, the EPA Administrator would be unable to promulgate any regulation regarding the emission of a greenhouse gas to address climate change under the Act. In addition, the Act would exclude "greenhouse gas" from the definition of "air pollutant" under the Clean Air Act except in connection with concerns other than climate change. Sponsor: Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX) (introduced 5/21/2013).
- H.R.2126: Better Buildings Act of 2013
This bill would facilitate better alignment, cooperation, and best practices between commercial real estate landlords and tenants regarding energy efficiency in buildings. Of relevance, the impact on climate change would not be a factor in determining the energy efficiency of commercial building tenants. Sponsor: Rep. David McKinley (R-WV) (introduced 5/23/2013). Related bills: S.1191
- H.R.2127: To prohibit the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency from finalizing any rule imposing any standard of performance for carbon dioxide emissions from any existing or new source that is a fossil fuel-fired electric utility generating unit unless and until carbon capture and storage is found to be technologically and economically feasible.
See title for summary. Sponsor: Rep. David McKinley (R-WV) (introduced 5/23/2013).
- H.R.2182: Half in Ten Act of 2013
This bill would establish a Federal Interagency Working Group on Reducing Poverty within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The working group would develop a National Strategy to reduce the number of persons living in poverty in America in half within 10 years after release of the 2012 Census report on Income, Poverty and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2011. The bill acknowledges that individuals and families in poverty are more socially vulnerable to natural disasters, extreme weather and impacts of climate change and have greater difficulty preparing for, responding to and recovering from such events. Sponsor: Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) (introduced 5/23/2013).
- H.R.2242: State and Local Fleet Efficiency Act
By imposing purchasing requirements, this bill would promote the use of natural gas, flexible fuel, and high-efficiency motor vehicle fleets. Of relevance, the bill explicitly states that it would not limit the authority of any State or local government to establish purchase requirements applicable to fleets if such requirements are intended to further any policy regarding climate change and the control of air pollution, amongst other things. Sponsor: Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) (introduced 6/4/2013).
- H.R. 2322: Strengthening the Resiliency of Our Nation on the Ground Act
This bill is intended minimize the future costs and prepare for extreme weather events. It would provide state and local governments with information aimed to improve the resilience of local infrastructure. The “STRONG Act” would create an interagency working group chaired by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that would assess existing resiliency efforts and find any gaps, then implement a plan to support public and private resiliency efforts. Rep. Scott Peters (D-CA) (introduced June 11, 2013).
- H.R.2368: GREEN Act
This bill would direct the Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Department of Labor, to award grants to eligible partnerships to develop programs of study that are focused on emerging careers and jobs in the fields of, amongst others, climate change mitigation, and climate change adaptation. Sponsor: Rep. Jerry McNerney (introduced 6/13/2013).
- H.R.2478: Section 526 Repeal Act
This bill would amend the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 to repeal the requirement that federal agencies procure alternative fuels that have lower lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions than conventional petroleum sources. Sponsor: Rep. Michael Conaway (R-TX) (introduced 6/25/2013). Related bills: S.1100
- H.R.2553: National Infrastructure Development Bank Act of 2013
This bill would establish a National Infrastructure Development Bank. Of particular note, reduction in greenhouse gases would be one factor considered for transportation, environmental, and energy infrastructure projects. Sponsor: Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) (introduced 6/27/2013).
- H.R.2593: Cost-Benefit and Regulatory Transparency Enhancement Act of 2013
This bill would require federal agencies, after completing any cost-benefit analysis or regulatory impact analysis used to promulgate rules, guidelines, or administrative actions to: submit a report to Congress on the results and methods (including methods in determining the social cost of carbon) used in the analysis; and to publish the report in the Federal Register. Sponsor: Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) (introduced 6/28/2013).
- H.R.2601: Beach Act of 2013
This bill would amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act relating to beach monitoring. Of relevance, the Administrator would be directed to conduct a study on the long-term impact of climate change on pathogenic contamination of coastal recreation waters. The results of the study would highlight necessary Federal actions to help advance the availability of information and tools to assess and mitigate these effects in order to protect public and ecosystem health. Sponsor: Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ) (introduced 6/28/2013).
- H.R.2610: Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2014
This bill would provide annual funding for various programs under the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and other federal agencies. Of particular note, funds from this bill could not be used to implement the European Union’s Emission Trading Scheme for aviation. Sponsor: Rep. Tom Latham (R-IA) (introduced 7/2/2013).
- H.R.2674: Job Creation Act of 2013
Of relevance, this bill articulates a congressional finding that the Department of State found that incremental life-cycle greenhouse gs emissions associated with the Keystone XL project are estimated in the range of 0.07 to 0.83 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent with the upper end of this range representing twelve one-thousandths of one percent of the 6,702 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emitted in the United States in 2011. This bill would not require a presidential permit for the Keystone pipeline. Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-FL) (introduced 7/11/2013).
- H.R.2863: GREEN Jobs Act of 2013
This bill would amend the Community Development Banking and Financial Institutions Act of 1994 to allow financial and technical assistance to small businesses that provide green jobs (e.g., jobs that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants) to low-income individuals. Sponsor: Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ) (introduced 7/30/13).
- H.R.2685: Smart Grid Advancement Act of 2013
This bill would require DOE and EPA to assess the potential of smart grid integration and capabilities in all products reviewed under Energy Star. The bill would also establish smart grid peak demand reduction goals. The bill would also require an analysis of the potential energy savings, greenhouse gas emission reductions, and electricity cost savings from smart grid products. Sponsor: Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-CA) (introduced 7/12/2013).
- H.R.2875: Waterfront of Tomorrow Act of 2013
This bill would authorize programs and activities for the improvement and protection of ports and harbors. Of particular note, this bill would require the Army Corp. to conduct a study on measures to improve flood protection and climate resilience in New York City. Sponsor: Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-NY) (introduced 7/31/2013).
- H.R.2886: Social Cost of Transparency Enhancement Act of 2013
This bill would require federal agency notice and receipt of public comment before using any estimate of the social of carbon for rulemaking. Sponsor: Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) (introduced 7/31/2013).
- H.R.2948: Transparency in Regulatory Analysis of Impacts on the Nation Act of 2013
This bill would require the President to establish the Committee for the Cumulative Analysis of Regulations that Impact Energy and Manufacturing in the United States. The committee would analyze and report on the cumulative and incremental impacts of covered rules and actions of the EPA concerning air, waste, water, and climate change for each of calendar years 2018, 2023, and 2030. Sponsor: Rep. Jim Matheson (D-UT) (introduced 8/1/2013).
- H.R.3033: Energy Security and Employment Act
This bill would expand domestic energy production in the United States. Of relevance, this bill would repeal EPA greenhouse gas regulations. Sponsor: Rep. Robert Latta (R-OH) (introduced 9/13/2013).
- H.R.3042: Taking Hold of Regulations to Increase Vital Employment In Energy Act
This bill would prohibit federal agencies from using the social cost of carbon in any regulatory impact analysis until a federal law is enacted authorizing its use. Sponsor: Rep. Tim Murphy (R-PA) (introduced 9/13/2013).
- H.R.3140: Ensure Reliable and Affordable American Energy Act of 2013
This bill would amend the Clean Air Act to prohibit regulation of carbon dioxide from power plants until the EPA administrator certifies a sufficient number of countries (accounting for not less than 80 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions) have implemented regulations under this Act that are just as stringent. Sponsor: Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) (introduced 9/19/2013).
- H.R.3163: CIR ASAP Act of 2013
This bill would provide for comprehensive immigration reform. This bill would require federal agencies to submit a border protection strategy to Congress. Of relevance, agencies would be required to develop and implement a monitoring and mitigation plan, which would include measures to protect habitat to ensure animal species are able to adapt to the impacts of climate change. Sponsor: Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-NM) (introduced 9/20/2013).
- H.R.3355: Reducing Employer Burdens, Unleashing Innovation, and Labor Development Act of 2013
Of relevance, this bill would require a cost-benefit report to Congress before finalizing any energy-related regulations. EPA would be prohibited from finalizing the rule if the Secretary of Energy determines the rule would cause significant adverse effects on the economy. The bill would also prohibit EPA from using the social cost of carbon in any energy-related regulations established to cost more than $1 billion until Congress authorizes such use. Sponsor: Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-KY) (introduced 10/28/2013).
- H.R.3424: Converting Methane Into Petroleum Act of 2013
This bill would provide a tax credit for facilities using a qualified methane conversion technology (e.g., technology that has a lower lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions associated with the production and combustion than conventional petroleum fuel sources) to provide transportation fuels and chemicals. Sponsor: Rep. John Larson (D-CT) (introduced 10/30/2013).
- H.R.3563: Federal Employees Responsible Investment Act
This bill would establish a corporate responsibility investment fund option under the Thrift Savings Account. One criterion for selection under this fund is environmental practices (including greenhouse gas emissions and contribution to climate change). This bill articulates a congressional finding that the United States National Research Council has established that human activity is largely responsible for recent climate change and threatens significant harm to our Nation’s public health and welfare, security, agriculture and forestry, natural resources, infrastructure, and economy. Sponsor: Rep. James Langevin (D-RI) (introduced 11/20/2013). Related Bills: S.1746.
- H.R.3570: To prohibit the United States from following guidance issued by the Secretary of the Treasury regarding how multilateral development banks should engage with developing countries on coal-fired power generation, and for other purposes
Refer to title for summary. Sponsor: Rep. David McKinley (R-WV) (introduced 11/21/2013).
- H.R.3574: End Polluter Welfare Act of 2013
This bill would repeal fossil fuel tax breaks and eliminate fossil fuel research and development programs and projects. Of particular note, Sec. 45Q tax credit for carbon dioxide sequestration (including for enhanced oil recovery) would be repealed. Sponsor: Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) (introduced 11/21/2013). Related Bills: S.1762.
- H.R.3638: Road Usage Fee Pilot Program Act of 2013
This bill would require the Secretary of Treasury to establish competitive grants under a Road Use Fee Pilot Program to states and localities. Of relevance, this bill would establish three working groups, one of which will evaluate the program potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Sponsor: Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) (introduced 12/6/2013).
- H.R.3684: Listen to Americans First Act of 2013
This bill would prohibit federal funds from being used for foreign travel by the Administrator of the EPA until the EPA has held public listening sessions on rulemaking for GHG regulations for existing power plants in 15 state with the highest percentage of electricity generated by coal, and the Administrator certifies the listening sessions have taken place. Sponsor: Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) (introduced 12/10/2013).
- H.R.3702: Federal Employees Responsible Investment Act
This bill would require EPA to submit a report to Congress on regulations (after enactment of this bill) that would reduce the sulfur content of gasoline, or new air pollutant standards for refineries, including greenhouse gas emissions. Congress would have to enact a law setting the effective date for the rule. Sponsor: Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) (introduced 12/11/2013).
- H.R.3727: Keep the EPA Honest Act of 2013
This bill would prohibit the EPA from proposing EPA greenhouse gas standards for existing power plants before finalizing such standards for new power plants. Sponsor: Rep. David McKinley (R-WV) (introduced 12/12/2013).
- H.R.3826: Electricity Security and Affordability Act
This bill would prohibit EPA from requiring new coal plants to use carbon capture and storage technologies to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions until the technology has been commercially deployed across the United States. Sponsor: Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-KY) (introduced 1/9/2014). Related Bills: S.1905.
- H.R.3895: EXPAND Act
Of relevance, this bill would amend the Clean Air Act to exclude greenhouse gases from the definition of an “air pollutant” and would allow owners and operators of gas and oil facilities to report greenhouse gas emissions from sub-basins. Sponsor: Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) (introduced 1/16/2014).
- H.RES.41: Expressing support for designation of February 12, 2013, as Darwin Day and recognizing the importance of science in the betterment of humanity.
Of relevance, this bill would recognize that the advancement of science must be protected from those unconcerned with the adverse impacts of global warming and climate change. Sponsor: Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) (introduced 1/22/2013).
- H.Res.68: Expressing support for the goals and ideals of National Marine Awareness Day.
Of relevance, this bill would expressly recognizes that the ocean has absorbed a significant portion of all carbon dioxide emissions, which causes ocean acidification, affecting marine organisms that use carbonate to build shells or skeletons. Sponsor: Rep. Donna Christensen (D-VI) (introduced 2/13/2013).
- H.RES.214: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that extensive scientific and technical studies and analyses by the Department of State and other Federal agencies have affirmed that the proposed Keystone XL pipeline is an environmentally sound project.
Refer to the title for summary. Of relevance, this bill notes the State Department assessment that found the incremental life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions associated with Keystone XL are less than 1 percent of 2011 U.S. carbon dioxide emissions. Sponsor: Rep. Randy Weber (R-TX) (introduced 1/15/2013).
- H.RES.220: Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the contributions of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.
Of relevance, this bill would expressly recognize the increasing importance of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora in addressing effects of trade on species, while taking into account multiple and compounding threats on species and ecosystems such as over-exploitation, habitat loss, invasive species, disease, and the effects of climate change. Sponsor: Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) (introduced 5/17/2013).
- H.RES.467: Expressing support for designation of February 12, 2014, as "Darwin Day" and recognizing the importance of science in the betterment of humanity.
Of relevance, this bill would expressly recognize the advancement of science must be protected from those unconcerned with the adverse impacts of global warming and climate change. Sponsor: Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) (introduced 1/29/2014).
- H.CON.RES.7: Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States should provide, on an annual basis, an amount equal to at least one percent of United States gross domestic product (GDP) for nonmilitary foreign assistance programs.
The bill acknowledges the importance of contributing to global efforts that combat climate change. Sponsor: Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) (introduced 1/4/2013).
- H.CON.RES.8: Expressing the opposition of Congress to Federal efforts to establish a carbon tax on fuels for electricity and transportation.
Refer to title for summary. Sponsor: Rep. David McKinley (R-WV) (introduced 1/15/2013).
- H.CON.RES.13: Expressing the sense of the Congress that the United States Fish and Wildlife Service should incorporate consideration of global warming and sea-level rise into the comprehensive conservation plans for coastal national wildlife refuges, and for other purposes.
Refer to title for summary. Sponsor: Rep. Donna Christensen (D-VI). (introduced 2/13/2013).
- H.CON.RES.24: Expressing the sense of Congress that a carbon tax would be detrimental to the United States economy.
Refer to title for summary. Sponsor: Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA) (introduced 3/14/2013).
- H.CON.RES.25: Establishing the budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2014 and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2015 through 2023.
Of relevance, this bill would allow the Senate Budget Committee Chairman to reallocate funds, in a deficit-neutral manner, to ensure greenhouse gas emission standards must be cost effective, based on the best available science, and benefit low- and middle-income families. Sponsor: Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) (introduced 3/15/2013). Action: 3/21/2013, Passed House 221-207.
- H.CON.RES.36: Recognizing the disparate impact of climate change on women and the efforts of women globally to address climate change.
Refer to title for summary. Sponsor: Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) (introduced 4/26/2013).
- H.CON.RES.57: Expressing the opposition of the Congress to the Environmental Protection Agency's proposed rule establishing new source performance standards to limit greenhouse gas emissions from new power plants.
Refer to the title for summary. Sponsor: Rep. Nick Rahall (D-WV) (introduced 9/20/2013).
- H.CON.RES.59: Expressing the sense of Congress that the Environmental Protection Agency should hold public listening sessions on regulations targeting carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants in those States most directly impacted by the potential regulations.
Refer to the title for summary. Sponsor: Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) (introduced 10/8/2013).
- H.J.Res.64: Disapproving a rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to "Standards of Performance for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from New Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units"
Refer to title for summary. Sponsor: Rep. David McKinley (R-WV) (introduced 9/25/2013).
- H.AMDT.67: Would amend H.R.3. This amendment would delay effect of the bill unless the president found that tar sands producers could fully offset the additional greenhouse gas emissions produced annually. Sponsor: Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA). Action: Failed in the House 146-269.
- H.AMDT.132: Would amend H.R.2217. This amendment would prohibit use of funds to enforce the section of the Energy Independence and Security Act which prohibits federal agencies from purchasing alternative fuels unless its lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions are less than or equal to conventional oil. Sponsor: Rep. Bill Flores (R-TX). Action: Agreed by voice vote.
- H.AMDT.316: Would amend H.R.2609. This amendment would prohibit use of funds to enforce the section of the Energy Independence and Security Act which prohibits federal agencies from purchasing alternative fuels unless its lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions are less than or equal to conventional oil. Sponsor: Rep. Bill Flores (R-TX). Action: Agreed by voice vote.
- H.AMDT.380: Would amend H.R.2397. This amendment would prohibit use of funds to enforce the section of the Energy Independence and Security Act which prohibits federal agencies from purchasing alternative fuels unless its lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions are less than or equal to conventional oil. Sponsor: Rep. Bill Flores (R-TX). Action: Agreed by recorded vote 237-189.
- H.AMDT.447: Would amend H.R.1582. This amendment would prohibit EPA from using the social cost of carbon in any energy-related regulations established to cost more than $1 billion until Congress authorizes such use. Sponsor: Rep. Tim Murphy (R-PA). Action: Agreed by recorded vote 234-178.
- H.AMDT.448: Would amend H.R.367. This amendment would require the Administration to receive approval from Congress before implementing a carbon tax (i.e., a carbon price). Sponsor: Rep. Steve Scalise (R-LA). Action: Agreed by recorded vote 237-176.
- S.7: Extreme Weather Prevention and Resilience Act
This bill would express the sense of the Senate that Congress should: (1) promote investment to ensure resilience to extreme weather and disasters; (2) promote investment in clean energy infrastructure; (3) promote the development of clean energy technologies; and (4) ensure that the federal government is a leader in reducing pollution, promoting the use of clean energy sources, and improving energy efficiency. Regarding the first expression, it would promote investment to protect communities from extreme weather, sea-level rise, drought, flooding, wildfire, and other changing conditions exacerbated by carbon pollution. Sponsor: Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV). (introduced 1/22/2013).
- S.17: Energy Production and Project Delivery Act of 2013
This bill would prohibit the head of any federal agency from implementing or enforcing any regulations, proposals, or actions establishing any carbon dioxide or greenhouse gas emissions reductions until the Administrator, the Administrator of the Energy Information Administration, and the Secretary of Commerce certify in writing that the People's Republic of China, India, and the Russian Federation have proposed, implemented, and enforced measures requiring substantially similar reductions. It also would amend the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to prohibit consideration of the impact of greenhouse gas on any species of fish or wildlife or plant for any purpose in the implementation of the ESA. Sponsor: Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) (introduced 2/27/2013).
- S.106: Public Access to Historical Records Act
This bill would direct the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to establish an official dataset on the historical temperature record. Sponsor: Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) (introduced 1/23/2013).
- S.107: A bill to prohibit the regulation of carbon dioxide emissions in the United States until China, India, and Russia implement similar reductions.
Refer to title for summary. Sponsor: Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) (introduced 1/23/2013).
- S. 163: A bill to prohibit any regulation regarding carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gas emissions reduction in the United States until China, India, and Russia implement similar reductions.
Refer to title for summary. Sponsor: Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) (introduced 1/28/2013).
- S.271: Better Health in the Arctic Act
This bill articulates a congressional finding that the impacts of climate change include health problems. Sponsor: Sen. Mark Begich (R-AK) (introduced 2/11/2013).
- S.272: Arctic Research, Monitoring, and Observing Act of 2013
This bill would amend the Arctic Research and Policy Act of 1984 to direct the Arctic Research Commission to award merit-based grants to federal, state, local, or tribal governments and academic and private organizations to conduct research on or related to the Arctic. Of relevance, the Congress would declare as follows: a lack of research integration and synthesis of findings of Arctic research has impeded the progress of the United States and international community in understanding climate change impacts and feedback mechanisms in the Arctic Ocean, and an improved scientific understanding of the changing Arctic is critical to the development of appropriate and effective regional, national, and global climate change adaptation strategies. Sponsor: Sen. Mark Begich (R-AK) (introduced 2/11/2013).
- S. 329: The Sustainable Energy Act
This bill would eliminate certain fossil fuel subsidies and remove limited liability grants to certain oil and gas projects. Of particular relevance, section 45Q (relating to credit for carbon dioxide sequestration) would not apply to carbon dioxide captured after the date of the enactment of the Sustainable Energy Act. Sponsor: Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) (introduced 2/14/2013).
- S. 332: The Climate Protection Act
This bill would establish a fee on the emissions of carbon dioxide and methane from major emitters. It would also place a tax on oil and natural gas imports from countries that do not already charge a carbon tax. It is estimated that the carbon tax would generate $1.2 trillion in revenue over 10 years. Revenue from the bill would be used to, among other things: rebate all U.S. residents; support activities intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (including those promoting energy efficiency and low-emitting energy technologies); fund programs to provide training for workers moving to clean energy jobs; reduce the deficit; and fund climate change-resilient infrastructure. The bill would also require full disclosure of chemicals used during the hydrofracturing process. Sponsors: Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) (introduced 2/14/2013).
- S.360: Public Lands Service Corps Act of 2013
This bill would make amendments to the Public Lands Service Corps Act of 1993. In particular, it would describe the types of projects that would be carried out by the Public Lands Service Corps under the Act, which include carbon sequestration, and adaptability and resiliency efforts to protect against climate change. Sponsor: Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM) (introduced 2/14/2013). Action: 6/18/2013: reported out of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee by a voice vote.
- S.387: American Infrastructure Investment Fund Act
In general, this bill would attempt to stimulate investment for infrastructure and related projects. Of particular relevance, the bill would establish a fund to support environmental sustainability efforts of national or regional transportation systems. This would include ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, the bill would establish a competitive grant program for projects that improve further the transportation system. In determining whether to award a grant, the Secretary of Transportation would consider the extent to which the project improves energy efficiency or reduces greenhouse gas emissions. Sponsor: Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) (introduced 2/26/2013).
- S.570: A bill to establish a competitive grant program in the Department of Energy to provide grants to States and units of local government to carry out clean energy and carbon reduction measures, to close big oil company tax loopholes to pay for the competitive grant program and reduce the deficit, and for other purposes
See title for summary. Sponsor: Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO) (introduced 3/14/2013).
- S.761: Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act
This bill is intended to increase the use of energy efficient technologies in the residential, commercial and industrial sectors. The legislation would strengthen national model building codes, require the Secretary of Energy to encourage States, Indian Tribes and local governments to meet or exceed target building efficiency standards, and require the Secretary of Energy to provide grants for the establishment of training and assessment centers, for the purpose of building a workforce skilled in developing and applying energy efficient technological and design concepts to commercial and institutional buildings. Through finance initiatives, it would facilitate private investment in the research and development of energy efficient technologies and efficiency upgrades. In addition, a number of incentives would be put in place for manufacturers to use more efficient electric motors and transformers in industrial processes. The federal government, the single largest U.S. energy user, would be required to institute energy saving techniques for computers. In addition, the legislation would clarify that Energy Service Companies and Utility Service Contracts could be used by federal agencies to install natural gas and electric vehicle charging infrastructure, which would facilitate the use of these vehicles. Sponsor: Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH). (introduced 4/18/2013; Reported by Committee 5/8/2013). Related bill: H.R. 1616, S.1392.
- S.795: Master Limited Partnerships Parity Act
This bill extends the publicly traded partnership ownership structure (i.e., master limited partnerships) to energy power generation projects, transportation fuels, and related energy activities. These include renewable energy, electricity storage devices, combined heat and power, renewable thermal energy, waste heat to power, renewable fuel infrastructure, renewable fuels, energy efficient buildings, gasification with sequestration, and carbon capture and storage. Sponsor: Sen. Christopher Coons (D-DE). (introduced 4/24/2013). Related bill: H.R.1696.
- S.839: Coral Reef Conservation Amendments Act of 2013
This bill would amend the Coral Reef Conservation Act of 2000 to transfer certain authority from the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to the Secretary of Commerce. It would direct the Secretary to submit to Congress a national coral reef ecosystem action strategy, which would include discussions of various dangers to reef ecosystems including climate change. Sponsor: Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) (introduced 4/25/2013).
- S.923: Balancing Food, Farm, and the Environment Act of 2013 (introduced in conjunction with H.R. 1890)
This bill would amend the Food Security Act of 1985 and allow farmers to be rewarded for their carbon sequestration efforts through USDA’s Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). Regional funding would also be available for farmer-led efforts to increase resilience to rising temperatures and extreme weather. Sponsor: Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM) (introduced 5/9/2013).
- S.1100: North American Alternative Fuels Act
This bill would amend the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 to repeal the requirement that federal agencies procure alternative fuels that have lower lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions than conventional petroleum sources. Sponsor: Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) (introduced 6/6/2013). Related Bills: H.R.2478.
- S.1191: Better Buildings Act of 2013
This bill would facilitate better alignment, cooperation, and best practices between commercial real estate landlords and tenants regarding energy efficiency in buildings. Of relevance, the impact on climate change would not be a factor in determining the energy efficiency of commercial building tenants. Sponsor: Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO) (introduced 6/19/2013). Related Bills: H.R.2126
- S.1202: SAFE Act
This bill would establish a Federal program designed to respond to ongoing and expected impacts of extreme weather and climate change. It would establish a Natural Resources Climate Change Adaptation Panel composed of the heads of U.S. Federal agencies or departments with jurisdiction over natural resources and tribal representatives. The panel would focus on protecting, restoring, and conserving natural resources so that natural resources become more resilient, adapt to, and withstand the ongoing and expected impacts of extreme weather and climate change. In addition, the Secretary of the Interior, in collaboration with the States, Indian tribes, and other partner organizations, would establish a National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center within the United States Geological Survey. Sponsor: Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) (introduced 6/20/2013).
- S.1205: Local Energy Supply and Resiliency Act of 2013
The bill would require the Secretary of Energy to establish a program to provide assistance in identifying, evaluating, planning, and designing local energy infrastructure. In evaluating projects, the Secretary would be required to give priority to projects that have the greatest potential for strengthening the reliability of local energy supplies and boosting the resiliency of energy infrastructure to the impact of extreme weather events, power grid failures, and interruptions in supply of fossil fuels; minimizing environmental impact, including regulated air pollutants, greenhouse gas emissions, and use of ozone-depleting refrigerants. Sponsor: Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) (introduced 6/20/2013).
- S.1213: Weatherization Enhancement, and Local Energy Efficiency Investment and Accountability Act
This bill would reauthorize Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) for low-income persons for FY2014-2018. The bill articulates a congressional finding that WAP reduces residential and power plant emissions of carbon dioxide by 2.65 metric tons each year per home. Sponsor: Sen. Christopher Coons (D-DE) (introduced 6/25/2013).
- S.1324: National Energy Tax Repeal Act
This bill would prohibit EPA greenhouse gas regulations resulting from the Presidential Memorandum on Power Sector Carbon Pollutions Standards. Sponsor: Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) (introduced 7/18/2013).
- S.1372: Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, Fiscal Year 2014
This bill would provide annual funding for various programs under the State Department and other federal agencies. Of particular relevance, this bill includes $216 million for the Clean Technology Fund, $68 million for the Strategic Climate Fund, and $144 million for the Global Environmental Facility. Sponsor: Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) (introduced 7/25/2013).
- S.1392: Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act of 2013
This bill is intended to increase the use of energy efficient technologies in the residential, commercial and industrial sectors. The legislation would strengthen national model building codes, require the Secretary of Energy to encourage States, Indian Tribes and local governments to meet or exceed target building efficiency standards, and require the Secretary of Energy to provide grants for the establishment of training and assessment centers, for the purpose of building a workforce skilled in developing and applying energy efficient technological and design concepts to commercial and institutional buildings. Through finance initiatives, it would facilitate private investment in the research and development of energy efficient technologies and efficiency upgrades. In addition, a number of incentives would be put in place for manufacturers to use more efficient electric motors and transformers in industrial processes. The federal government, the single largest U.S. energy user, would be required to institute energy saving techniques for computers. Sponsor: Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) (introduced 7/30/2013). Related Bills: H.R.1616, S.761.
- S.1401: Domestic Energy and Jobs Act
This bill would require the development of a plan to increase oil and gas explorations, development, and production on federal land. Of particular relevance, the president would be required to establish a Transportation Fuels Regulatory Committee to produce a report that analyzes the cumulative impacts of EPA greenhouse gas regulations and other related regulations. EPA would be prohibited from finalizing any greenhouse gas regulations until at least 180 days after the report is submitted to Congress. Sponsor: Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND) (introduced 7/31/2013).
- S.1508: Water Infrastructure Resiliency and Sustainability Act of 2013
This bill would require the EPA to establish a program of awarding grants to owners or operators of water systems to increase their resilience. Of particular relevance, water systems for communities and agriculture production to improve water supply reliability, storage, should not result in a net increase of greenhouse gas emissions. Sponsor: Sen. Benjamin Cardin (D-MD) (introduced 9/17/2013).
- S.1514: Saving Coal Jobs Act of 2013
This bill would prohibit greenhouse gas regulations of the power sector unless explicitly authorized by Congress. Sponsor: Sen. Mitch McConnell (D-KY) (introduced 9/17/2013).
- S.1536: Agency PAYGO Act of 2013
This bill would require EPA, when proposing a rule to limit greenhouse gas emissions, to include an offset from available funds for projected increased costs to other federal agencies resulting from the proposed rule. EPA would Sponsor: Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) (introduced 9/23/2013).
- S.1627: American Renewable Energy and Efficiency Act
This bill would establish a federal renewable electricity standard of 25% by 2025. Of particular relevance, qualified biomass would be defined as renewable biomass that results in a 50-percent reduction in lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions per unit of useful energy, as compared to the operation of a combined cycle natural gas power plant using the most efficient commercial available technology. Sponsor: Sen. Edward Markey (D-MA) (introduced 10/31/2013).
- S.1746: Federal Employees Responsible Investment Act
This bill would establish a corporate responsibility investment fund option under the Thrift Savings Account. One criterion for selection under this fund would be environmental practices (including greenhouse gas emissions and contribution to climate change). This bill articulates a congressional finding that the United States National Research Council has established that human activity is largely responsible for recent climate change and threatens significant harm to our Nation’s public health and welfare, security, agriculture and forestry, natural resources, infrastructure, and economy. Sponsor: Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) (introduced 11/20/2013). Related Bills: H.R.3563.
- S.1762: End Polluter Welfare Act of 2013
This bill would repeal fossil fuel tax breaks and eliminate fossil fuel research and development programs and projects. Of particular note, Sec. 45Q tax credit for carbon dioxide sequestration (including for enhanced oil recovery) would be repealed. Sponsor: Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) (introduced 11/21/2013). Related Bills: H.R.3574.
- S.1767: Pipeline Modernization and Consumer Protection Act
This bill would require gas pipeline operators to accelerate the repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of gas piping or equipment that is leaking, may pose a high-risk of leaking, or may no longer be fit for service. This bill also articulates a congressional finding that methane (i.e., natural gas) is a greenhouse gas that is at least 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide. Sponsor: Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) (introduced 11/21/2013).
- S.1768: Pipeline Revolving Fund and Job Creation Act
This bill would require the Administrator of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration to establish revolving loan funds to repair or replace natural gas distribution pipelines. Each state receiving a grant will be required to publish a list of eligible projects, its priority on the list and expected funding schedule, and include an estimate of expected reductions in greenhouse gas emissions for that project. Sponsor: Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) (introduced 11/21/2013).
- S.1905: Electricity Security and Affordability Act
This bill would prohibit EPA from requiring new coal plants to use carbon capture and storage technologies to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions until the technology has been commercially deployed across the United States. Sponsor: Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) (introduced 1/9/2014). Related Bills: H.R.3826.
- S.1952: Green Act
This bill would authorize the Secretary of Education to award competitive grants to develop programs of study focused on clean energy, renewable energy, energy efficiency, climate change mitigation, and climate adaptation. Sponsor: Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) (introduced 1/16/2014).
- S. CON.RES.4: A concurrent resolution expressing the sense of Congress that a Carbon tax is not in the economic interest of the United States.
Refer to title for summary. Sponsor: Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) (introduced 1/28/2013).
- S.CON.RES.8: An original concurrent resolution setting forth the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2014, revising the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal year 2013, and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2015 through 2023.
This bill would establish a broad framework for the federal budget. During debate on the bill, the following amendments were added that pertain to climate change: S.Amdt.184, S.Amdt.482, S.Amdt.494, S.Amdt.499, S.Amdt.619, Please see below for the summaries of these amendments. . Sponsor: Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) (introduced 3/15/2013). Action: Agreed to in the Senate by a vote of 50 – 49.
- S.AMDT.184: This amendment would not subject United States’ exports that produce greenhouse gases outside of the United States to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act. Sponsor: Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) (introduced 3/22/2013). Action: Agreed to in the Senate on 3/23/2013 by voice vote.
- S.AMDT.261: This amendment would provide a point of order against legislation that would create a federal tax or a fee on carbon emissions. Sponsor: Sen. Roy Blunt (R-MO) (introduced 3/22/2013). Action: Failed in the Senate by a vote of 53-46.
- S.AMDT. 359: This amendment would prohibit funding for and essentially block the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gases for the purpose of addressing climate change. Sponsor: Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) (introduced 3/21/2013). Action: Failed in the Senate 47-52
- S.AMDT.440: This amendment would create a deficit-neutral reserve fund relating to global warming. Sponsor: Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) (introduced 3/21/2013).
- S.AMDT.454: This amendment would create international programs to export clean energy technologies and aid climate adaptation efforts, including those designed to reduce short-lived climate pollutants in the near term. Sponsor: Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) (introduced 3/21/2013).
- S.AMDT.457: This amendment would create a point of order against legislation relating to the regulation of greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide emissions, until the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Energy Information Administration, and Secretary of Commerce certify in writing that each of China, India, and Russia have proposed, implemented, and enforced measures requiring greenhouse gas, including carbon dioxide, emission reductions that are substantially similar to carbon dioxide emissions reductions proposed for the United States. Sponsor: Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) (introduced 3/21/2013).
- S.AMDT.458: This amendment would create a point of order against legislation that would establish an unrealistic or unattainable standard for carbon dioxide emissions from new coal-fired electricity-generating units. Sponsor: Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) (introduced 3/21/2013).
- S.AMDT.499: Amends S.CON.RES.8 (FY2014 Senate budget resolution). This amendment would establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund to ensure that abundant domestic energy sources and technologies could meet present and future greenhouse gas emissions rules. Sponsor: Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) (introduced 3/21/2013). Action: Agreed to in Senate by unanimous consent.
- S.AMDT.501: Would amend S.CON.RES.8 (FY2014 Senate budget resolution). This amendment would establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund relating to the commercialization of carbon technologies such as carbon capture, carbon storage, and other carbon utilization technologies required for coal and natural gas electric generating units (EGUs) to meet proposed and future greenhouse gas regulations. Sponsor: Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) (introduced 3/21/2013).
- S.AMDT.646: This amendment would establish a tax on carbon pollution and would require that any revenue raised be returned to the American people in the form of deficit reduction, reduced federal tax rates, and other cost savings. Sponsor: Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) (introduced 3/22/2013). Action: Failed in the Senate by a vote of 41-58.
- S.AMDT.706: This amendment would ensure that carbon emission standards be cost effective, based on the best available science and benefit low-income and middle-class families. Sponsor: Sen. Benjamin Cardin (D-MD) (introduced 3/22/2013).
- S.____: Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act of 2014
This bill builds on the previously introduced S.1392, the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act of 2013. Of note, this proposal would establish a Tenant Star program to promote energy efficiency in leased commercial buildings, requires benchmarking of energy use in federally-leased buildings, establishes a Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) demonstration project using energy savings contracts to perform retrofits on low-income housing, remove the third-party testing of electronic product requirement for the Energy Star program partners that are in compliance, exclude thermal storage water heaters under energy efficiency standards, and requires federal mortgage underwriting to include a home’s expected energy cost savings when determining the value of home mortgage. Sponsor: Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) (introduced 2/27/2014). Related Bills: H.R.1616, S.761, S.1392.
- H.R.___: Tax Reform Act of 2014
This draft bill would overhaul the federal tax code. Of particular note, Sec. 45Q tax credit for carbon dioxide sequestration (including for enhanced oil recovery) would be repealed. Sponsor: Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI) (introduced 2/26/2014).
- Energy Tax Reform Discussion Draft
This bill would overhaul federal energy tax credits and establish a technology-neutral tax credit based on greenhouse gas emissions; the cleaner the facility, the larger the tax credit. Of particular note, Sec. 45Q tax credit for carbon dioxide sequestration (including for enhanced oil recovery) would be repealed. Sponsor: Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) (introduced 12/18/2014).
- Carbon Pollution Fee Discussion Draft
This bill would establish a fee on the emissions of greenhouse gases from major emitters. Seeking comments on the use of revenues, such as: mitigating energy costs for low-income households, reducing the federal deficit, reducing the tax liability for individuals and businesses, protecting jobs of energy-intensive trade exposed industries, and investing in other activities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Sponsors: Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) (introduced 3/12/2013).
Two proposals for mandatory programs on greenhouse gases have recently been discussed in the Senate. Their targets and likely effects are discussed here along with projections for the Kyoto Protocol and the existing Bush Administration Climate Change Plan, two commonly discussed alternative approaches. Senator Bingaman has offered a proposal based on recommendations made by the National Commission on Energy Policy. (See Summary of Bingaman Climate and Economy Insurance Act of 2005.) Senators McCain and Lieberman reintroduced a modified version of their Climate Stewardship Act. (See Summary of McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act of 2005.) A cornerstone of both proposals is an economy-wide tradeable permits system, which imposes mandatory targets for large emitters and a market based system for meeting those targets. Such a system was used by the Clean Air Act to deal with acid rain, and is central to the Kyoto Protocol. It is, however, not part of President Bush’s Climate Initiative, which relies on voluntary action and nonbinding targets.
Senator Bingaman’s proposal differs from previous proposals that sought to impose mandatory targets in two distinct areas. First, absolute emission reduction targets are set based on emissions intensity – emissions per million dollars of GDP. Initially the goal is to reduce emissions intensity by 2.4% per year until 2019, after which the target becomes more stringent and increases to 2.8%. Despite this reduction in intensity, absolute emissions would actually grow. The Climate Initiative proposed by President Bush also set an intensity target but did not translate this target into an absolute level of mandatory reductions. (See Analysis of President Bush's Climate Change Plan.) The McCain-Lieberman proposal, in contrast, has sought to stabilize emissions at a specific level – as such it requires a greater scale of reduction as our economy continues to grow. The second significantly different element in the Bingaman proposal is a “safety value”, or price cap on the cost of greenhouse gas permits. A cost (or price) cap ensures that large emitters with targets will not have to pay more than some specified price for permits. Bingaman’s proposal sets the price cap at $7/TCO2 initially but increases this cap by 5% nominally each year (assuming a 2% rate of inflation, this implies that the price would only rise by 3% in real terms). As a point of reference, permits in the European greenhouse gas market have been trading during the summer of 2005 for over $25 USD/TCO2. A price cap gives emitters with targets some assurance about the cost of compliance but like a tax, does not ensure any specific level of reduction will occur. The EIA projects that allowance prices would reach the safety valve by 2016, causing emissions to exceed the cap after this time.
Balancing the cost of a new policy while ensuring that sufficient reductions occur to address the issue is crucial for the selection of the appropriate climate policy approach for the U.S.. The various climate policy proposals that have come forward to date have a wide range in cost, but also considerable differences in the resulting emissions reductions. The following table compares and contrasts the significant elements of current proposals that include targets - the Climate and Economy Insurance Act (proposed by Bingaman), the Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act (proposed by McCain and Lieberman), the Bush Climate Initiative, and the Kyoto Protocol. More detailed descriptions of these proposals as well as economic modeling cost projections are available on our website.
Climate Policy Proposal Comparison
Program Element/Result [i]
Bingaman Proposal [ii]
Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act
Climate Initiative Bush Administration[v]
Mandatory / Voluntary
Absolute based on 2.4% intensity improvement 2010-2018, after 2019 target increases stringency to 2.8%
Absolute emissions 2000 emissions level after 2010
7% below 1990 levels by 2012
Intensity target goal 18% reduction by 2012
Offsetting Emissions Allowed for Compliance
Not to exceed 3%
not to exceed 15% of allowance allocation
no limits specified through Kyoto, though implementing countries have discretion
Yes - $7
(12% above 2010 levels in 2020)
(12% above 2000 levels by 2012)
EIA Estimated Emissions Reductions 2025
EIA Estimated Permit Price 2025 ($/TCO2)[x]
EIA Estimated Impact on real GDP
($135 billion in 2020)
[i] This table compares EIA’s analysis of only the greenhouse gas-trading program contained in each policy options. It does not include other policy elements, like technology incentives, that may be contained in each proposal
[ii] As modeled by EIA in Impacts of Modeled Recommendations of the National Commission on Energy Policy, April 2005, for the Cap and Trade component of the NCEP proposal.
[iii] Because the bill does not change the significant provisions related to carbon limits, this review summarizes the analysis of the previous McCain-Lieberman proposal as voted on in the U.S. Senate on October 30, 2003, Amendment 2028: The Climate Stewardship Act of 2000. A summary of the bill is available at http://wwww.c2es.org/federal/analysis/congress/108/summary-lieberman-mccain-climate-stewardship-act-2003. Results are from EIA’s (2004), assessment of http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/analysispaper/sacsa/pdf/s139amend_analysis.
[iv] Described and analyzed by EIA (1998), Impacts of the Kyoto Protocol on U.S. Energy Markets and Economic Activity, Report SR/OIAF/98-03, available at http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/kyoto/pdf/sroiaf9803.pdf. Reduction and price estimates are taken from the “1990-3%” scenario and are based on an auction approach for GHG permits with revenue recycling through tax policy.
[v] As announced on February 14, 2004, available at www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/02/climatechange.html
[vi] The Bingaman (NCEP) proposal calculates the target level of reductions in terms of emissions intensity based on expected future GDP growth; this target, however, is translated into an absolute emission target but because it is based on a growing economy the target grows over time. Should GDP differ from the forecasted level, the target is not affected. Utilization of the safety valve, in addition, will result in emissions above the target level of emissions reductions.
[vii] Assuming that the U.S. could meet some of its target through the use of biological sinks, the numbers represented here are those associated with EIA’s modeling of 3% below 1990 emission levels.
[viii] Estimated emission reductions have been adjusted to reflect a consistent baseline using EIA’s AEO2005 baseline assumptions. Adjustments are based on predicted percentage change applied to AEO2005 baseline levels. For example, EIA analysis suggested that McCain Lieberman reductions in 2025 would be 7,997 (-22%) million metric tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e) below their AEO2003 base case level of emissions. Utilizing the lower AEO2005 emissions baseline and assuming that a reduction of 22% implies emissions are reduced by approximately 2,180 MMTCO2e.
[ix] To convert from MTCO2 to MTC divide by 3.67.
[x] All dollars converted to $2004 constant dollars utilizing CPI.
[xi]The safety-valve permit price rises from $6.26 per metric ton in 2010 to 8.73 in 2025 (in 2004 dollars).
[xiii] Table 29 Impacts of the Kyoto Protocol on U.S. Energy Markets and Economic Activity, Report SR/OIAF/98-03. Assuming revenue recycled through an income tax rebate.
H.R.6 E.N.R.: The Energy Policy Act of 2005, as enacted (also referred to as Public Law 109-190) is intended primarily to increase the supply of energy, largely by providing subsidies, but also by setting standards that would increase the use of certain types of energy and energy-saving technologies. The energy sources and technologies promoted by the law include some that are climate-friendly and some whose use will result in large emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2). Among the provisions of the law specifically mentioning greenhouse gases (GHGs) are those that promote the deployment of GHG-intensity-reducing technologies, both domestically and in developing countries; authorize programs to promote the development and deployment of technologies that would capture and sequester CO2 emissions; and commission a National Academy of Sciences study of fuel cell technologies. Among the provisions that do not specifically mention GHGs, but would nevertheless promote climate-friendly technologies and activities are provisions that:
- Establish a national biofuel standard mostly in the form of ethanol for gasoline. This will increase the biofuels from 4 billion gallons per year in 2006 to 7.5 billion gallons per year in 2012.
- Increase the requirement for the purchase of renewable power by the federal government to 3% in 2007 and 7.5% in 2013.
- Establish new efficiency standards for 15 new commercial and residential products.
- Extend, through the end of 2007, the renewable electricity production credit of 1.9¢ per kWh during the first ten years of operation.
- Create a new tax credit for residential investments in solar power and fuel cell systems of 30% at an estimated $31 million.
- Increase the credit for commercial solar installations from 10% to 30% for two years at an estimated $222 million.
- Provide for investment tax credits for improving residential energy efficiency at an estimated $556 million.
- Allow for deductions for commercial buildings that cut their energy consumption by 50% for an estimated $243 million.
- Provide credits to manufacturers of energy efficient appliances ($180 million) and for building contractors that meet certain efficiency standards ($28 million).
- Offer tax incentives for the purchase of alternative fuel vehicles beginning in 2006 for an estimated cost of $874 million.
- Provide a 30% credit to alternative refueling installations at both residential and commercial properties.
- Authorize a $200 million annual clean coal initiative to go primarily towards coal gasification projects.
- Create three new investment tax credits for clean coal facilities with an expenditure cap of $1.612 billion. (20% for industrial gasification projects, 20% for IGCC, 15% for other electricity producing projects)
- Authorize a $1.25 billion fund for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant at Idaho National Laboratory to produce both electricity and/or hydrogen.
- Provide a tax credit of 1.8¢ per kWh for new nuclear power facilities during their first eight years of operation.
- Provide financial support for to up to six new nuclear power reactors in case of unforeseen construction delays.
Action: 8/8/05: Signed into law as Public Law 109-190.
The Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act of 2005 (S.1151) introduced by Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Joseph I. Lieberman (D-CT), would limit, from 2010 on, the total greenhouse gases (GHG) emitted by the U.S. electricity generation, transportation, industrial, and commercial sectors to the amount emitted in 2000. The affected sectors represented approximately 85% of the overall U.S. emissions in the year 2000. The bill also would provide for the trading of GHG emission allowances and reductions.
Target: The bill would cap the 2010 aggregate emissions level for the covered sectors at the 2000 level. The bill's emissions limits would not apply to the direct emissions of the agricultural and the residential sectors. Certain subsectors would be exempt if U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) determined that it was not feasible to measure their GHG emissions. The U.S. Department of Commerce would biennially re-evaluate the level of allowances to determine whether it was consistent with the objective of the United Nation’s Framework Convention on Climate Change of stabilizing GHG emissions at a level that will prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.
Allowances: An entity that was in a covered sector, or that produced or imported synthetic GHGs, would be subject to the requirements of this bill if it (a) owned at least one facility that annually emitted more than 10,000 metric tons of GHGs (measured in units of carbon dioxide equivalents – MTCO2E); (b) produced or imported petroleum products used for transportation that, when combusted, would emit more than 10,000 MTCO2E; or (c) produced or imported HFC, PFC and SF6 that, when used, would emit more than 10,000 MTCO2E. Each covered entity would be required to submit to the EPA one tradeable allowance for each MTCO2E directly emitted. Each petroleum refiner or importer would be required to submit an allowance for each unit of petroleum product sold that, when combusted, would emit one MTCO2E. Each producer or importer of HFC, PFC, and SF6 would be required to submit an allowance for each unit sold that, when used, would emit one MTCO2E. The EPA would determine the method of calculating the amount of GHG emissions associated with combustion of petroleum products and use of HFC, PFC, and SF6.
Allocation of Allowances: The Commerce Department would determine the amount of allowances to be given away or "grandfathered" to covered entities and the amount to be given to the Climate Change Credit Corporation established by the bill. The Commerce Department's determination would be subject to a number of allocation factors identified in the bill. The Corporation would use proceeds from the sale of allowances to reduce energy costs of consumers, assist disproportionately affected workers, help low income communities and individuals, disseminate technological solutions to climate change, and aid fish and wildlife in adapting and mitigating the impacts of climate change.
Flexibility Mechanisms: Covered entities would have flexibility in acquiring their allowances. In addition to the allowances grandfathered to them, covered entities could trade with other covered entities to acquire additional allowances, if necessary. Also, any entity would be allowed to satisfy up to 15% of its total allowance requirements by submitting (a) tradeable allowances from another nation's market in GHGs; (b) a net increase in sequestration registered with the National Greenhouse Gas Database established by the bill; (c) a GHG emission reduction by a non-covered entity registered with the Database; and (d) allowances borrowed against future reductions (as described below). A covered entity that agreed to emit no more than its 1990 levels by 2010 would be allowed meet up to 20% of its requirement through (a) international credits, (b) sequestration, and (c) registered reductions, but not (d) borrowed credits. An entity planning to make capital investments or deploy technologies within the next 5 years would be allowed to borrow against the expected GHG emission reductions to meet current year requirements. The loan would include a 10 percent interest rate.
National Greenhouse Gas Database: The EPA Administrator would be required to implement a comprehensive system for GHG reporting, inventorying, and reductions registrations. Covered entities would be required to report their GHG emissions and non-covered entities would be allowed to register GHG emission reductions and sequestration. The National Greenhouse Gas Database would be, to the maximum extent possible, complete, transparent, accurate, and designed to minimize costs incurred by entities in measuring and reporting emissions. The Commerce Department, within one year of enactment, would be required to establish, by rule, measurement and verification standards and standards to ensure a consistent and accurate record of GHG emissions, emissions reductions, sequestration, and atmospheric concentrations for use in the registry.
Penalty: Any covered entity not meeting its emissions limits would be fined for each ton of GHGs over the limit at the rate of three times the market value of a ton of GHG.
Research: The bill would establish a scholarship program at the National Science Foundation for students studying climate change. The bill would also require the Commerce Department to report on technology transfer and on the impact of the Kyoto Protocol on the U.S. industrial competitiveness and international scientific cooperation.
The bill also would make changes to the U.S. Global Change Research Program, establish an abrupt climate change research program at the Commerce Department, and establish a program at the National Institute of Standards and Technology in the areas of standards and measurement technologies.
Innovation: The bill would rename the Technology Administration, within the Commerce Department, the Innovation Administration. The responsibilities of the Commerce Department would be expanded to include the development of climate change innovation policies. The bill would establish a variety of programs and studies focused on fostering climate change innovation ranging from grade school education and university programs to technology transfer and patents.
The bill would establish additional research and demonstration programs for cleaner transportation, retooling of vehicle manufactures for advanced low-GHG-emitting vehicles, energy efficiency, and managing and monitoring agricultural and geological sequestration, among other concerns.
Technology: Revenues generated from the sale of allowances granted to the Climate Change Credit Corporation (see above) would be used to promote three different aspects of technology innovation and deployment: (1) first-of-a-kind engineering, (2) construction of the first generation of facilities that use substantially new technology, and (3) the marketing and procurement of low/no-GHG-emitting power or low-GHG-producing products. Projects for first-of-a-kind engineering and construction support would be selected according to the extent to which they reduce greenhouse gas emissions, are a substantially new technology, and attain cost effectiveness and economic competitiveness, among other criteria. The construction loan program for new facilities that meet the criteria would include at most three advanced coal power-generating facilities that combine Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) and carbon capture technologies with geological storage of greenhouse gases; three nuclear reactors (one of each new certified design); three large-scale biofuels facilities that maximize cellulosic biomass use; and three large-scale solar power facilities, and would be open to other unspecified technologies meeting the environmental and economic criteria.
Funding provided for first-of-a-kind engineering would be reimbursed to the Climate Change Credit Corporation by facilities that made subsequent use of the engineering and design supported by this program. Financial support for construction would be in the form of secured loans or loan guarantees that would be paid back to the Corporation. The reimbursed funds could be placed in a revolving fund to continue these programs as long as the Corporation deemed appropriate. Support for the marketing and procurement of low/no-emitting end products would be funded directly from the proceeds earned by auctioning 50% of the Corporation’s allowances. This program would be designed to evolve as innovation and technology moved forward.
For more information, see our Comparison of Climate Policy Proposals.
Statement of Eileen Claussen, President
Pew Center on Global Climate Change
November 15, 2005
The Pew Center enthusiastically welcomes the climate change resolution introduced by Senator Lugar and Senator Biden calling for the United States to participate in negotiations under the Framework Convention on Climate Change to establish mitigation commitments by all major greenhouse gas-emitting countries.
The timing of such a clear message from the leadership of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is especially important coming on the eve of the Montreal climate negotiations, where governments will decide on launching a process to consider next steps in the international effort. Parties to the Kyoto Protocol are obligated to begin considering post-2012 commitments for those developed countries with commitments under the Protocol. It is critical that a parallel process be launched under the Framework Convention, which includes the United States, to consider a broader range of possibilities that can engage all major economies. We urge the Administration to support such a process as a step toward a more inclusive and effective international climate effort.
The current U.S. policy on climate change, both domestically and internationally, is wholly inadequate. The Lugar-Biden resolution is an important complement to the Bingaman resolution passed earlier this year by the Senate calling for mandatory market-based limits on U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. It is critical that as we move forward to establish a meaningful domestic effort, we also work with other nations to strengthen the international framework and ensure that all other major emitting countries also contribute their fair share to this global effort.
Exchange Between Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Eileen Claussen Regarding: U.S.-International Climate Change Approach: A Clean Technology Solution
Hearing of the Subcommittee on International Economic Policy, Export and Trade Promotion of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Panel II
November 14, 2005
Adopted from transcript by the Federal News Service
SEN. HAGEL: Secretary Claussen, welcome. We are glad you're here. When I say Secretary Claussen, those who are observing this hearing should note that you are not a secretary in the current government, but in a past government you were assistant secretary of State. And we're once again very grateful for your willingness to come before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and offer some important thoughts. Your present capacity is president of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. You have been a leader on this issue for many years. You know exactly what you're talking about and have very definite opinions and perspectives. We are always grateful to receive those.
And I'm pleased again that you'd take time to come before the committee. So please provide your testimony, and if you'd care to abbreviate it or read it all, either way. And then, we'll have an opportunity to exchange some thoughts.
President Claussen, thank you.
MS. CLAUSSEN: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. If I may, I would just like to summarize a few key points from my written statement.
The Hagel climate provisions of the energy bill go to a very important issue: how best to develop and deploy climate-friendly technologies urgently and on a global scale. Standards of living and energy demand are expected to rise dramatically in the developing world over the next few decades. China expects to build 544 gigawatts of new coal capacity over the next 25 years, and the city of Shanghai -- and these are just examples -- predicts a quadrupling of cars and trucks by 2020.
If we are going to address the climate change problem, the huge growth in energy demand in developing countries must be as climate- friendly as possible. We believe the Hagel provisions, if implemented properly, can help achieve that outcome. First, we would urge that assistance provided to developing countries be tailored to their specific needs. Rather than seeing climate-friendly technology deployment as an exercise in funding demonstration projects or increasing technology exports, our goal should be to integrate climate-friendly activities into national strategies for economic growth, poverty reduction and sustainable development.
This is the only way that it will make a lasting difference – that is, by becoming a part of the recipient country's own economic plans and programs.
Second, the Hagel provisions, like the many technology initiatives launched before it, can only be effective to the extent that they are adequately funded and managed. Time and again in the past, we have launched initiatives to much fanfare, but then provided inadequate funding and failed to manage them as a coherent whole. It would be a shame if the same happened to the Hagel program.
More important than any of this, though, is the need to establish a fair and effective international framework to engage all major emitting countries in the effort against climate change. We do not believe that technology initiatives in and of themselves will make a significant difference, and we do not believe that an international framework necessarily means putting countries on an energy diet -- a greenhouse gas emissions diet, yes; an energy diet, no.
But in order for countries to undertake and sustain ambitious efforts to limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions, they need to be confident that other countries, and in particular their major trading partners, are also contributing their fair share to the overall effort. We need, therefore, some form of mutual assurance and some certainty. This is best accomplished in a common framework within which countries can take on commitments commensurate with their responsibilities and capabilities and appropriate to their national circumstances. Technology cooperation should be a part, but only one part, of such a global framework.
Through an initiative called the Climate Dialogue at Pocantico, the Pew Center has engaged with policymakers and stakeholders from around the world to look at options for creating such a framework. Dialogue members who participated in their personal capacities included policymakers from Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Germany, Japan, Mexico, the United Kingdom and the U.S. Senate; senior executives from Alcoa, BP, DuPont, Eskom of South Africa, Exelon, Rio Tinto and Toyota; and experts from the Pew Center, India's Energy and Resources Institute, and the World Economic Forum. The final report of the dialogue will be released tomorrow, actually, in this room with Senators Lugar and Biden, and will be presented to government ministers at the upcoming climate change negotiations in Montreal.
We believe we've come up with some ideas for a path forward. Now what we need is for the United States to be constructively engaged in negotiating a framework, based perhaps on some of the ideas we will be suggesting. The climate negotiations taking place next month in Montreal would be an excellent place to start that engagement, and we know that nearly every country there would welcome U.S. leadership.
Unfortunately, we understand that the Administration is opposing efforts by other countries to initiate a process to begin considering next steps under the Framework Convention. We believe it is essential that such a process go forward.
So my final recommendation would be for the Senate to revisit and update the 1997 Byrd-Hagel resolution, advise the executive branch to work with other nations, both under the Framework Convention and in other international fora, with the aim of securing U.S. participation in agreements consistent with the following four objectives:
- First, to advance and protect the economic and national security interests of the United States.
- Second, to establish mitigation commitments by all countries that are major emitters of greenhouse gases.
- Third, to establish flexible international mechanisms to minimize the cost of efforts by participating countries.
- And fourth, to achieve a significant long-term reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions.
Doing that, if it leads to constructive U.S. engagement in the development of an international climate policy framework, is far and away the most important thing the Senate could do to create a positive context for implementation of the Hagel provisions.
Thank you very much.
SEN. HAGEL: President Claussen, thank you, as always, for your comments. And your entire statement will be included in the record.
I'm going to bounce around a little bit on some questions based on your testimony and some things that you did not specifically mention, but are in your statement, and then also based on some of the things that the previous witnesses mentioned.
First, Kyoto's cap and trade system – in your opinion, is it working for the European countries?
MS. CLAUSSEN: Let me put it this way. I think it is much harder than most of them thought it would be to actually implement the targets they negotiated. But I do think it has spurred a lot of activity, a lot of which is really positive in terms of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
So, has it been helpful in educating people and getting them on the right path? I think the answer is yes. Is it going to fulfill the dreams of many of those that signed? Probably not.
SEN. HAGEL: Meaning that many will not meet their targets?
MS. CLAUSSEN: I think many will not meet their targets -- not all, but many.
SEN. HAGEL: Do you believe a cap and trade system is necessary to force new technologies onto the market?
MS. CLAUSSEN: No. I think a cap and trade system is one approach that can work quite effectively, but it is not the only approach.
It is certainly my vision that we need some different paths forward, of which that could be one. It could be chosen by some countries, but I think we need others as well.
SEN. HAGEL: You sat and carefully listened, as I noted, to the testimony of the first panel, and they referenced some of these areas, in particular Secretary Garman. How do you respond to what you heard? Do you think that's too far out? Is it too much on the periphery? Were you encouraged by what you heard? Give me your thoughts on that.
MS. CLAUSSEN: This is something that Jim Connaughton said at the end: I think we are at a point where many in the private sector are starting to think very seriously about long-term strategies that move us toward climate-friendly greenhouse gas technology. I think that's right. I think, though, that what he thinks spurred that development was maybe helpful, but not what actually did it.
If I look at what has changed in the world that would result in that kind of activity, it is much more likely to be implementation of Kyoto, warts and all; the efforts in California and along the West Coast of the United States; the efforts in the Northeast and the Mid-Atlantic, where they are developing and will soon announce a cap-and-trade system; lots of other activities at the state level – 21 states with renewable requirements. That activity is really what is spurring the change in the private sector, more investment in climate-friendly technologies.
But I do think it's happening. I do agree with that. I just see different reasons for it.
SEN. HAGEL: Would you generally say you agree with what you heard as the objectives of this administration from the three representatives of the administration?
MS. CLAUSSEN: On the assumption that what we're all after is a world where emissions are reduced pretty substantially in the next 50 or so years, I think the answer is yes. I just don't think you can get there only by a “push.” I think you need a “pull” to get the technologies into the market as well, and some kind of certainty and some kind of policy that's more than the current administration seems to be interested in.
SEN. HAGEL: If we are seeing significant increase in the potential and the technologies coming on line, then what additionally would mandates, caps or government regulation do?
MS. CLAUSSEN: What would they do? I think they would move the technologies much faster in the development stage, and much, much faster in the deployment and diffusion stage, which is what we need to do. We need to get moving faster than just a little bit of push.
Again, I think your provisions will be very helpful. They just need to be complemented with something that helps get those technologies into the marketplace.
SEN. HAGEL: You mentioned international dialogue and how you think maybe something can come out of that. Would you expand on that a little bit?
MS. CLAUSSEN: Well, I don't want to expand too much, because I don't want to talk about what we're going to announce tomorrow. But I'll give you a little flavor.
The fact that we had such a diverse group of people around the table and that they actually reached a consensus was pretty good. We agreed on a set of elements we think are really important. We talked about adaptation, and we talked about long-term targets.
But when we started to focus on mitigation, we thought that there were four elements that were really important. One of them was technology, one of them was targets-and-trading, one of them was sectoral approaches, and one of them was what we called policy-based approaches.
We looked at that range of elements because we thought some may be more appealing to some countries than others, and what we were really interested in, in the long term, was getting everybody on the right path.
So we are looking at something that provides maximum flexibility with real results. When you asked me about targets and trading, yes, it's important, and I think it's a path that many will want to go down. But there are other ones as well.
SEN. HAGEL: Let me ask you a question I asked Secretary Dobriansky about. What are some of the regions in the world where you think we have the most significant opportunity for cost- effective development of these technologies?
MS. CLAUSSEN: Let me put it a slightly different way. Twenty- five countries are responsible for 83 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. These countries are also among the most populous, and they're also the countries with the largest GDPs.
But on the other hand, per capita emissions range by a factor of 14 and per capita incomes within that group by a factor of 18. So while they are the countries that absolutely have to be at the table -- and we feel very strongly that all of that group needs to be at the table -- we do need to have some kind of a flexible approach that allows each of those countries to do what is in their national interest, but that is also moving us on the right path on greenhouse gas emissions.
So I would look at it in terms of sort of major emitters, major economies, the people who have to be at the table.
SEN. HAGEL: You mentioned your idea about revisiting the Byrd- Hagel amendment, if I understood your point, to essentially update it.
MS. CLAUSSEN: Yes.
SEN. HAGEL: And you mentioned, I think, four specific areas. Would you care to expand on that point?
MS. CLAUSSEN: Our interest is in doing some of the things that you have in the Byrd-Hagel resolution, but instead of putting them in a negative context – what you shouldn't do – we think they should be put in a positive context of what the U.S. government should do. It is really important for the U.S. government to be engaged in this, and it's important for our private sector, too, to see the U.S. at the table shaping the solutions. Many in the private sector would feel that our views, our analysis, the way we look at these things is really important and should be a part of the process if we're going to have an outcome with which we can live.
So it's really important to urge engagement. I understand the context for the Byrd-Hagel resolution, but I think the context is different now, and it is really important for the U.S. to be at the table – at the table with ideas and at the table with solutions.
SEN. HAGEL: You do not think what you heard in the last hour and a half from three senior administration officials, talking about at the technologies, engagement, not only some of the legislation I sponsored that's now law, but even beyond that R11; you do not feel that's enough?
MS. CLAUSSEN: I don't, because I think most other countries, while they will participate in all of these initiatives that the last three witnesses talked about – and many of them have the potential to be effective, so I'm not trying to denigrate what contribution they can make – most countries are interested in a policy framework, not just a technology framework. As far as I understand it -- I may be wrong here, but I don't think so -- the U.S. has essentially said they don't want to participate in discussions about the future in a policy sense. And I think that's a mistake because the world needs both mutual assurance and certainty, you have to do that in some kind of a policy framework, and I think the U.S. should participate.
SEN. HAGEL: Thank you. Staying with your three colleagues here for a moment, let me give you an opportunity to respond to anything that you care to respond to that you heard while they were at the table.
MS. CLAUSSEN: Well, I talk to them all all the time, and we agree on a fair number of things. I just think the vision doesn't go where it needs to go if we're really going to address this. We have to start with a much greater sense of urgency, but not to do things that are bad for economic growth. I think that we can do things that are good for economic growth, that result much sooner in reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
It's interesting when you look at the companies that have taken on targets, and there are probably 35 or 38 of them. Many of them have targets that are much more stringent than, say, the U.S.-Kyoto target. Thirteen of them have already met their targets, and not one of them on net has spent money doing it because they've found efficiency opportunities that would result in reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. I don't want not to take those while we can take them, while we're developing the technologies that would be good in a decade or two decades. We need some long-term technologies, but why wouldn't we take opportunities that exist right now to put us on the right path? And I just don't see the Administration moving in that direction. I seem them focused on the long-term. I don't want to see us miss opportunities in the short-term.
SEN. HAGEL: You were here for the question that Senator Alexander asked the panel about why we shall invest in the Australian project with the timeline as it is, versus the timeline here. Do you know anything about that?
MS. CLAUSSEN: I don't know any of the specifics about that, but I do know that the private sector is really interested in advancing the technology, and I see them marketing a lot of technologies abroad because they feel that the policy climate is more certain abroad, whether it's in a Kyoto country or a country that's more committed to long-term emission reductions.
If you talk to the CEO of General Electric, for example, who's just started to really focus in a major way on greenhouse gas reducing technology, he views a lot of his markets abroad rather than here, because he doesn't think we're at the same stage in our policy development and implementation. He's very much focused on abroad, and of course he wants to sell his technology, but it's interesting that he sees the markets there, not here. Well, I think he should be seeing them here as well.
SEN. HAGEL: But you don't know anything about why they would make that decision.
MS. CLAUSSEN: No, I don't. But I'm happy to try to find out and answer it for you.
SEN. HAGEL: Well, I'll tell Senator Alexander that you will take that assignment on. He'll be very pleased about that. As you know, he is very engaged in this overall issue and very knowledgeable.
MS. CLAUSSEN: Yes. Well, coal and transportation are the two things we really need to focus on, because we're going to burn a lot of coal, and China and India and Australia are going to burn a lot of coal, and we have to find a way to do it with capture and sequestration.
SEN. HAGEL: Yes, for a long time to come.
MS. CLAUSSEN: For a long time to come.
SEN. HAGEL: Well, we are going to vote shortly, so I will adjourn our committee hearing. But let me also say, as I did to the first panel, that we may have additional questions if that is acceptable to you.
MS. CLAUSSEN: Absolutely.
SEN. HAGEL: We'll get those to you in the next two days if we have some members that would require that. Your full testimony, of course, will be included in the record.
Again, I personally appreciate all of the time that we've had over the years to exchange views on this issue, and your continued leadership. Thank you very, very much.
MS. CLAUSSEN: Thank you very much.
SEN. HAGEL: The committee's adjourned.