Tag: politicians

Interview: Bill McKibben

  • ill McKibben is an author and the founder of 350.org, a grassroots effort to increase awareness of the threats of climate change. (Photo by Nancie Battaglia, courtesy of Bill McKibben)

Bill McKibben has been writing about
climate change for 20 years. More
recently, he founded the grassroots
organization 350.org. It urges
governments to do something about
climate change. Lester Graham talked
to McKibben and asked him how his
group deals with the debate in Congress –
especially when it’s less about scientific
facts and more about your brand of politics:

Transcript

Bill McKibben has been writing about
climate change for 20 years. More
recently, he founded the grassroots
organization 350.org. It urges
governments to do something about
climate change. Lester Graham talked
to McKibben and asked him how his
group deals with the debate in Congress –
especially when it’s less about scientific
facts and more about your brand of politics:

Bill McKibben: Well, it’s hard to deal with it because, of course, we don’t a kind of separate physics and chemistry for Republicans and Democrats. You know, the laws of nature tend to operate the same way no matter whether you spend your life marinating in Rush Limbaugh or not, you know. So it’s difficult because we have to deal with those physical facts. The only good news is that the only place where this is a political issue in those ways is the United States. The rest of the world, everybody’s on-board, understanding that we need to go to work. We’ve still got serious problems in this country. It’s one of the reasons that we desperately need the President to finally make some serious noise about climate change, and say straightforwardly and out-front what the dangers are and do what he can to drive home the peril that we’re in.

Lester Graham: The Center for Public Integrity reports that there are more lobbyists in Washington than ever before, working on supporting or blocking or somehow reshaping climate change legislation. How does a grassroots effort, such as 350.org, compete with the big moneyed lobbyists at work?

McKibben: Well, we can’t compete with them in terms of money. There are, I think, 2800 lobbyists that industry has hired to go to – which gives you some idea of what a bad job being a Congressman is. Each Congressman has 7 people devoted to making sure that they toe the line on fossil fuel. We can’t compete! Exxon Mobile, last year, made more money than any company in the history of money, okay? So, in that currency, we’re sunk. The only currency we’ve got is bodies and commitment. And that’s why we’re finally trying to organize a real movement around climate change. It’s not enough to depend on the fact that the science is on your side, and that any rational system or person would be doing everything they can to try to deal with this biggest problem we’ve ever faced. Our system, in that sense, isn’t rational. It’s dependent on power and pressure. And we have to accept that, and we have to accept the challenge of building those kinds of movements.

Graham: What do you think of the legislation on greenhouse reductions, greenhouse gas reductions as it’s shaping up in Washington?

McKibben: It’s in grave danger, if it hasn’t already, of turning into a sort of piñata filled with goodies for each special interest. Each Senator now is saying, ‘yes, but in my state we need a lot of money or whatever to do this, or, ‘we have to exempt this industry,’ or whatever. These guys don’t get the degree of danger that we’re in. They’re still using it as just one more political game to play. It’s why Obama’s gotta step up to the plate. He can’t let happen what happened with healthcare – just Congress take all of this on its own, let it drift, come out with some mediocre thing, and call it a victory.

Graham: What would you like to hear President Obama say that would compel people to say, ‘oh my gosh, we’ve got to do something about this!’?

McKibben: I’d like him to do what leaders around the world now – partly at the behest of 350.org – have been doing over the last few weeks. Saying, ‘here, in my country, are the grave dangers that we face.’ That’s the kind of leadership that we’re not seeing out of Obama, unfortunately.

Related Links

Companies for the Climate Bill

  • A big shift away from fossil fuels isn’t scaring off everybody. Some businesses are actually lobbying for climate change legislation. (Photo courtesy of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory)

As Congress begins debate on climate
change legislation, American businesses
are watching very closely. Some are
worried that a new law could bankrupt
them with energy costs. But others
see a bright future under carbon limits.
Julie Grant reports:

Transcript

As Congress begins debate on climate
change legislation, American businesses
are watching very closely. Some are
worried that a new law could bankrupt
them with energy costs. But others
see a bright future under carbon limits.
Julie Grant reports:

Jeff Holmstead is an environmental attorney and has been working on clean air issues for two decades now. He led the Air Division of the Environmental Protection Agency under the Bush Administration and has worked on some of the most significant environmental regulations in the nation’s history. But he says the current climate change bill is the biggest thing he’s seen.

“It’s a big deal. Much bigger than really any other environmental legislation or regulation than people have had to deal with in the past.”

Holmstead says the stakes are just so high. He says the costs could reach into the hundreds of billions of dollars for American businesses.

“And there’s just also enormous amounts of uncertainty as to how we would fundamentally change our society, which has really grown up largely using fossil fuels. Whether we can truly switch away from that in the kind of time frame that people are talking about.”

But a big shift away from fossil fuels isn’t scaring off everybody. Some businesses are actually lobbying for climate change legislation.

Commercial: “Climate change is real. But solving it is a real opportunity. If we build clean energy technologies in America, we’ll generate the jobs that will power the 21st century and jumpstart our economy. We need a can-do plan that caps greenhouse gas pollution and creates jobs here at home.”

This commercial is not made by a bunch of tree-huggers, liberals, or Al Gore. It stars the South Carolina Chamber of Commerce, and corporate CEOs from Deere and Company and the Eaton Corporation. Eaton makes everything from circuit breakers to hoses to hybrid trucks.

“Yeah, Eaton is a power management company that sales about
15-billion dollars and 70,000 employees worldwide.”

That’s Joe Wolfsberger. He’s in charge of environmental programs at Eaton. The company wants Congress to approve climate change legislation and to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Wolfsberger says it could be a great kick-start for the economy and help create jobs.

“We also see a very big opportunity for Eaton and other companies, especially in this power management area. We’ll be able to provide solutions for people to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions going forward, to help reduce the amount of fuel they consume on the road as part of their operations.”

The company has already created new hybrid transmissions for delivery trucks. They’re used in lots of UPS, Fed-Ex, and Wal-Mart trucks. Wolfsberger says it improves gas mileage 50% to 70%.

Wolfsberger says a lot of companies are still questioning whether climate change is real. He says Eaton CEO Alexander Cutler gets asked about it a lot.

“And his response to them is, ‘it doesn’t really matter if the data is good or not. It doesn’t matter if it’s a normal climatic cycle. The question is, if you as a company can do better, you should do better.’”

But that may be easy to say when your company will benefit from climate change legislation. It’s a lot tougher when your business is producing natural gas or making steel and depends on heavy use of fossil fuels.

Environmental attorney Jeff Holmstead says the price of reducing greenhouse gases is going to be a lot higher for these types of companies if a bill passes. He says that’s what the debate is all about.

“Should we be spending a hundred billion dollars a year, should we be spending a trillion dollars a year? I think most people believe we could significantly reduce our CO2 emissions, it’s just a question of how much we’re willing to pay, and also what we get for that.”

And this what Congress will be debating in the coming months – whether the possibility of higher energy bills is worth the chance to have a more stable climate and more energy independence.

For The Environment Report, I’m Julie Grant.

Related Links

Lobbyists Swarm the Climate Bill

  • The Center for Public Integrity finds there are at least five lobbyists on climate change legislation for every member of Congress. (Photo courtesy of the Architect of the Capitol)

According to new investigative reports,
lobbying efforts on climate change
policy are growing dramatically. Lester
Graham reports:

Transcript

According to new investigative reports,
lobbying efforts on climate change
policy are growing dramatically. Lester
Graham reports:

Washington, more than ever before, is crawling with lobbyists.

A journalistic project finds there are at least five lobbyists on climate change legislation for every member of Congress.

Maryanne Lavelle with the Center for Public Integrity heads up the project.

“It’s just astounding. If you just compare to six years ago when Congress first considered a really comprehensive climate bill, there has been a 40o% increase in lobbyists.”

Some are there to ensure greenhouse gases are reduced, some are there to shape climate change legislation to benefit their business interests, others are there to block it.

But the investigative journalists found big industry lobbyists and all the others out-gun lobbyists for environmental and alternative energy groups by an eight-to-one margin.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Related Links

Climate Bill Moving Along

  • A lot of compromises and some arm-twisting are persuading moderate Democrats to support limiting global warming emissions. (Photo courtesy of the Architect of the Capitol)

Work on the climate change bill
in the Senate is progressing
despite the controversy surrounding
the bill. Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

Work on the climate change bill
in the Senate is progressing
despite the controversy surrounding
the bill. Lester Graham reports:

A Republican boycott and bitter wrangling between Democrats and Republicans over provisions in the climate bill in the Senate and, still, supporters say it’s going okay.

A lot of compromises and some arm-twisting are persuading moderate Democrats to support limiting global warming emissions.

Even the Chair of the Senate Finance Committee, Max Baucus, is now saying Congress will approve legislation this session.

Josh Dorner is with a group backing a climate bill, called Clean Energy Works. Dorner says getting moderate Democrats like Baucus on board moves a climate bill closer to reality.

“That coupled with the bi-partisan agreement amongst other senators, Senators Kerry, Graham and Lieberman to move forward, I think shows that we’re closer to a bi-partisan agreement on getting a bill done now than we ever have been before.”

“Bi-partisan” meaning only a couple of Republicans joining a lot more Democrats in support of the bill.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Related Links

Senate Takes Up Climate Bill

  • The Senate held their first hearing on the climate change bill. (Photo courtesy of the Architect of the Capitol)

The Senate has started debate on
the climate bill. The Senate Committee
on Environment and Public Works heard
from cabinet members and others,
but Lester Graham reports it’s not
clear their testimony will matter:

Transcript

The Senate has started debate on
the climate bill. The Senate Committee
on Environment and Public Works heard
from cabinet members and others,
but Lester Graham reports it’s not
clear their testimony will matter:

It was the Senate’s the first hearing on the bill, but most of the Senators have already made up their minds.

For Republican Senator James Inhofe, the climate bill is a jobs killer and costs too much.

“We’re talking about somewhere between three and four-hundred billion dollars a year. That’s something the American people can’t tolerate and I don’t believe they will.”

That 300 to 400 billion is revenue from a cap-and-trade plan that would invest in renewable energy such as wind and solar and go to taxpayers to help with higher costs of fossil fuel.

One of the authors of the Senate climate bill, Democrat John Kerry, took issue with Senator Inhofe’s characterization of the bill.

“We need to move forward to deal with climate change and in doing so, Senator Inhofe, we will actually improve every sector of our energy economy.”

And Senator Kerry says that will mean energy independence and millions of new jobs.

The Senate climate bill makes a lot of compromises to win votes. But, it’s not clear they’ll actually sway any of the senators.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Related Links

Coal Will Not Go Quietly

  • In the fall of 2007, the state of Kansas made the unprecedented decision to deny a power company permits for a coal plant because of greenhouse gas emissions. (Photo courtesy of the Energy Information Administration)

Reducing the greenhouse gases that
cause global warming will mean less
reliance on fossil fuels, such as coal.
Almost two years ago, Kansas became
the first state ever to deny permits
for a coal plant because of greenhouse
gas emissions. Since then, there have
been lawsuits on all sides. Even the
compromise the Governor in Kansas reached
with the coal company in May is now
stalled. Devin Browne reports that
coal just will not go quietly:

Transcript

Reducing the greenhouse gases that
cause global warming will mean less
reliance on fossil fuels, such as coal.
Almost two years ago, Kansas became
the first state ever to deny permits
for a coal plant because of greenhouse
gas emissions. Since then, there have
been lawsuits on all sides. Even the
compromise the Governor in Kansas reached
with the coal company in May is now
stalled. Devin Browne reports that
coal just will not go quietly:

The Sunflower Electric Power Corporation had actually applied and been
approved for a permit to build a new coal plant in 2002. But, for whatever
reason, they let the permit expire. Seemed like no big deal at the time
– they figured they’d get another one whenever they turned in another
application.

Except that they didn’t. In the fall of 2007, the state of Kansas made
the unprecedented decision to deny the power company. Cindy Hertel is with
Sunflower.

“It would be like going for your drivers license, taking the drivers
test, passing it, then being denied your drivers license because you
don’t drive a Prius. Can’t change the rules in the middle of the game.
And that’s what happened.”

Rod Bremby is the Secretary of Health and Environment in Kansas. He says
the state didn’t really change the rules on regulating CO2 because there
aren’t any rules on CO2. And since there’s no federal regulations,
Secretary Bremby instituted a state regulation. He said it would be
irresponsible not to regulate the gases causing climate change.

Stephanie Cole with the Sierra Club called it a watershed moment.

“We were excited, we were stunned – however, it wasn’t long after
that, legislators from Western Kansas started making comments that they
disapproved of Secretary Bremby’s decision and that they were going to
make legislative attempts to overturn the permit denial. So victory was
short-lived.”

Since then, the power company, Sunflower, has hired lobbyists. They’ve
helped legislators draft new bills to allow the coal-burning power plant.
The power company sued both the previous and current governor for civil
rights violations. For two years – nothing.

Then Kansas got a new governor – Mark Parkinson. Almost immediately
after he became governor last May, he cut a deal with Sunflower. Stop the
lawsuits. Build only one unit, not two or three. And, most importantly to
the Governor’s agenda, put in transmission lines to Colorado so that
Kansas can start exporting wind energy out of state.

Kansas is the third windiest state in the country. But it needs
infrastructure to get that wind-power to other states. And, in the
governor’s deal, power companies like Sunflower help build that
infrastructure.

Cole, with the Sierra Club, said the deal was very much a let-down.

“Because it is very troubling to many of us who have been involved in
this so long. It is such a disappointment.”

For a moment the battle seemed to be over. But, it wasn’t.

In July, Sunflower received a letter from the EPA asking them to submit a
new application for a permit. John Knodel is an environmental engineer
with the EPA.

“It’s not appropriate, in our mind, that they take an application that
was for three 700 MW units and simply say, ‘that was bigger, this project
is smaller.’ We say, ‘you have to go through a process and make it
very clear what this new project is all about.’”

Now that the EPA is stepping in, Sunflower & the Sierra Club are back to
square one.

The power company is expected to turn in its new application this fall.
The Sierra Club is expected to fight it. And Sunflower is expected to
fight back.

Cindy Hertel with Sunflower says the power company is just trying to keep
electricity bills low.

Hertel: “This is still in the best interest of our members.”

Browne: “This still makes sense economically?”

Hertel: “It still makes sense. What people need to know is that we are
cost biased, not fuel biased.”

Browne: “And, right now, for Sunflower, that means coal.”

But it might not be coal for very long.

The U.S. House passed a bill last winter that includes a hefty carbon tax
and incentives for renewable energy. A similar bill was recently
introduced in the Senate.

If it passes, Kansas might find its wind energy not only beats coal in
price, but wind-power could become the next big export for the state.

For The Environment Report, I’m Devin Browne.

Related Links

G20 Protests in Pittsburgh

  • The Group of 20 Summit is being held in Pittsburgh starting on September 24th (Photo source: HoboJones at Wikimedia Commons)

Leaders of the world’s richest
countries are in Pittsburgh for
the G-20 Summit. Thousands of
environmental and economic protesters
are there, too, and the dissenters
aren’t happy with how police are
treating them. Jennifer Szweda Jordan reports:

Transcript

Leaders of the world’s richest
countries are in Pittsburgh for
the G-20 Summit. Thousands of
environmental and economic protesters
are there, too, and the dissenters
aren’t happy with how police are
treating them. Jennifer Szweda Jordan reports:

Protesters claim Pittsburgh police are cracking down on them before the international economic gathering begins.

The 3 Rivers Climate Convergence says the police have illegally search and impounded a bus supplying food for protesters.

Lisa Stolarski of 3 Rivers Climate Convergence, says officers have sought out environmental groups to hassle.

“I feel like the police are cracking down on green voices. I feel that we are being especially mistreated in Pittsburgh.”

While police crackdowns are typical around international summits, protesters say they had hoped that the city’s signage stating “Pittsburgh Welcomes the World,” also applied to them.
For The Environment Report, I’m Jennifer Szweda Jordan.

Related Links

United Nations Summit on Climate Change

  • UN Headquarters from northwest on 1st Avenue - taken on April 20, 1956. (Photo courtesy of the Library of Congress)

In December, in Copenhagen, nations around
the world are all supposed to sign a treaty to
reduce the greenhouse gases causing global
warming. But negotiations are going slowly.
Lester Graham reports the Secretary General
of the United Nations is stepping in:

Transcript

In December, in Copenhagen, nations around
the world are all supposed to sign a treaty to
reduce the greenhouse gases causing global
warming. But negotiations are going slowly.
Lester Graham reports the Secretary General
of the United Nations is stepping in:

Tomorrow, the UN Secretary General is holding a summit of the heads of state.

Janos Pasztor is the Director of the Secretary General’s Climate Change Support Team. He says, although the world’s leaders won’t be directly involved in the negotiations, its’ good for them to spend a day talking about the broader political implications of global warming.

“What we expect is, at the summit, heads of states will consider those broad political issues and give—not just impetus that they need to be fixed, but even give some direction, some vision on how they can be fixed without actually getting into the negotiation itself.”

Pasztor adds it might even be a good thing if the U.S. does not pass a climate change bill before Copengagen. That gives the U.S. some room to negotiate instead of showing up and saying ‘There it is. Take it or leave it.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Related Links

The EPA and CO2 Regulations

  • This graph, based on the comparison of atmospheric samples contained in ice cores and more recent direct measurements, provides evidence that atmospheric CO2 has increased since the Industrial Revolution. (Graph courtesy of NASA and NOAA)

The Environmental Protection Agency
is trying to figure out how it might
regulate greenhouse gases. Lester
Graham reports language in the
Clean Air Act is not helping:

Transcript

The Environmental Protection Agency
is trying to figure out how it might
regulate greenhouse gases. Lester
Graham reports language in the
Clean Air Act is not helping:

The U.S. Supreme Court ordered the EPA to decide whether greenhouse gases are pollutants. The EPA is making the case that they are.

But setting rules to reduce those emissions is problematic.

The Clean Air Act says it you emit 250-tons a year of a pollutant, you need a pollution permit. 250-tons of CO2 a year is not a lot.

Jeff Holmstead worked in the EPA on air pollution issues during the last Bush Administration. Now, he’s a lawyer with the Washington DC firm Bracewell and Giuliani.

“You know, 250-tons of CO2 according to EPA would include most schools, most apartment buildings, any kind of commercial building. It just isn’t possible to develop permits for all of these sources.”

So the EPA plans to raise the amount to 25,000-tons. But, that’s not what the Clean Air Act says.

That’s one reason why the Obama Administration prefers a climate change law passed by Congress.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Related Links

Who’s Monitoring Pollution?

  • The famous photo of the Cuyahoga River fire that appeared in Time Magazine. The photo is not of the 1969 blaze, but rather of another fire on the river in 1952. (Photo courtesy of NOAA)

Federal and state governments have cut
back on monitoring some big sources of
pollution, and small sources are rarely
monitored. Lester Graham reports it’s a
problem that’s even tougher when state
budgets are cut:

Transcript

Federal and state governments have cut
back on monitoring some big sources of
pollution, and small sources are rarely
monitored. Lester Graham reports it’s a
problem that’s even tougher when state
budgets are cut:

Industry does not pollute like it did in the 1960s or 70s. Today, regulators monitor most of those big factories.

Tom Lyon is the Director of the Erb Institute for Global Sustainable Enterprise at the University of Michigan.

“Big smokestack industries we have a fairly good eye on, but there are a lot of areas that we still don’t have a good handle on.”

Like small businesses which collectively can release a lot of toxins, and farms that use pesticides and fertilizers on millions acres.

Jennifer Sass is a Scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council. She says, under the Bush Administration, pollution monitoring of big industry was cut back. Sass says that monitoring needs to be restored and expanded to smaller sources.

“If we quit our monitoring programs, then we don’t really know. It’s a lot like putting our head in the sand.”

But many state agencies say they don’t have the resources to keep track of all those sources of pollution.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Related Links