| |
|
|
|
Search
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact
Jim: jdipeso@rep.org
(253) 740-2066 / 2010
Archive / 2009
Archive / 2008
Archive / 2007
Archive / 2006
Archive / 2005
Archive
Lessons from the Climate Pratfall
July 23, 2010
We
all know what happened. On the very day that China announced a plan to
institute carbon emissions trading beginning in 2011, Harry Reid stood
in a hallway and delivered a whole lotta nothin' on climate legislation.
Now you know why Tom Friedman wished plaintively in his book Hot, Flat and Crowded
that we could be China for just one day.
Who is to blame?
Start with obtuse Republicans who successfully branded climate policy
as "cap and tax." Thanks, guys and gals, you brought smiles to the
petroleum ministries of Iran, Venezuela, and Saudi Arabia. Mahmoud,
Hugo, and King Abdullah ought to bake Mitch McConnell a cake.
Republicans, however, are not in charge of Congress and the executive
branch. Democrats are in charge. Mealy-mouthed Democrats let
irresponsible Republicans get away with demagoguery and didn’t play
ball with other Republicans willing to deal.
The finger points right at the top. In his Dot Earth blog,
the New York Times'
Andrew Revkin pointed
out that President Obama failed to exert
leadership and failed to challenge James Inhofe and the other OPEC
enablers who see nothing wrong with perpetuating America's
overdependence on coal and oil.
After Reid laid the egg, the White House actually blamed
environmentalists for failing to line up enough votes. Enough votes for
what? The president never spelled out to Congress exactly what he
wanted, didn't knock heads together on Capitol Hill, and didn't
brandish consequences if lawmakers went all wobbly on him.
Waiting for lobbyists to gift-wrap 60 votes and hand them to the
president and the feckless Reid on a silver platter is not leadership.
Somewhere, the ghosts of Ronald Reagan, Harry Truman, and Theodore
Roosevelt are shaking their heads.
There are others who deserve blame - bloviating narcissists on
talk-radio and on the blogs, mendacious ideologues who manufactured the
so-called "climategate" controversy, even citizens who let clever
merchants of deceit push their emotional buttons and jam their critical
thinking circuits.
What must be done?
Republican Congressman Bob Inglis of South Carolina has a suggestion.
On the day of Reid's pallid announcement, Inglis told utility
executives that climate policy needs a messaging makeover - stop
dwelling in the weeds of cap-and-trade, offsets, and other wonkery that
is chiefly of interest to economics PhD's. That doesn't sell. Instead,
sell carbon pricing as a market-based solution for stimulating
innovation and entrepreneurship.
Inglis' idea has been heard before, but rebranding could enable
sensible conservatives to lead the way towards a centrist climate bill
that responds to Americans’ worries about the economy, pollution, and
national security.
Next, vigilance will be required against assaults on EPA’s Clean Air
Act authority to set limits on greenhouse gas emissions. One such
attempt was beaten back earlier this summer. There will be more. Until
the Senate is ready to legislate climate policy seriously, EPA is an
imperfect but potent arrow that must remain in the quiver.
This is where Obama can show that he means business. Mr. President,
pull out that veto
pen and wave it around every time talk of curtailing EPA’s authority
springs up in Congress.
Next, Big Coal friends like Byron Dorgan should repeatedly administer
the cold shower that he and the late Robert Byrd gave Big Coal until
Big Coal gets their message that continuing to pretend that energy
markets won't change is a fast ticket to palookaville.
By 2016, half the nation's coal-fired power plants will be more than 50
years old. Utilities can rely on those don't-laugh-it's-paid-for coal
beaters for only so long before they must be replaced. Impending EPA
regs - NOx, SOX, mercury, coal ash - threaten to speed those plants'
trip to the boneyards. Utility bosses have said as much.
By coming to the table, the coal industry could help negotiate a
climate bill with R&D aimed at finding economical ways
of burying carbon. That would give some cover to senators in coal
states.
Without a reasonable prospect that sequestration can work, utilities
will be wooed by the fetching message of the strutting gas industry.
The gas guys are telling the utilities that switching to gas will allow
them to dump their dirty old coal plants, avoid a lot of EPA red tape,
and get ahead of the curve if and when carbon is priced. If Big Coal
doesn’t care for that sort of talk, then Big Coal should come to the
table and negotiate.
Next, it's important to work the flanks of the issue by pushing for a
national renewable
energy and efficiency standard, broadening the clean cars deal that the
administration worked out with Detroit, and extending tax incentives
for renewables. Find more money for basic energy R&D so that
innovators can develop cheaper solar technology, test the promise of
modular nuclear reactors, and tap the enormous potential of ocean wave
and tidal energy.
Too much is at stake for the Senate setback to be final. Climate
stewards must arise from the mat and return to the arena.
|
|
