Break Down: Omnibus Bill's Green Spending

By now, most people know that the stimulus package was crammed with goodies for the environment. There were new tax incentives for renewable energy projects, increased spending for public transportation and funds for making the electric grid more energy efficient.

Now that the stimulus package has been passed and the money is making its way into the economy, it's time to turn our attention to the next source of environmental funding, the $410 billion Omnibus spending bill.

The Omnibus is a catch-all funding bill that provides funding necessary for 12 cabinet departments and lower federal agencies to operate. Congress was supposed to approve the Omnibus late last year, but punted the difficult vote to this year.

Here is a list of environmentally-related funding provisions in the Omnibus from the House Committee on Appropriations...

• Environmental Protection Agency: $7.6 billion - Includes $224 million in grants for states to implement the Clean Air Act, $60 million in grants to reduce emissions from diesel engines, $50 million for the Energy Star program, $10 million in grants for communities to tackle climate change.

• Department of Energy: $27 billion - $175 million for renewable energy pilot programs, $273 million for improved vehicle battery and clean fuel engine technology, $200 million in grants for weatherization, $18.5 billion for innovative technology grants and $4.8 billion for the DOE's Office of Science.

• Climate Change: $232 million - This funding goes to addressing climate change while $2 billion was set-aside to study it. For 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels generated by the U.S., $10 million. For carbon capture and sequestration projects, $3 million. For a greenhouse gas registry, $6.5 million. Finally, $14.7 million for the Global Climate Change Mitigation Fund to encourage businesses to make green changes to their operations.

• Hazardous Waste and Toxic Sites: $815 million - $605 million for 1,500 Superfund clean-up sites nation-wide. $112 million to investigate and clean-up underground toxic spills. $27 million to clean-up Brownfields' former industrial and commercial sites.
  

To see the full list of environmental spending in the omnibus, check out the list on the House Appropriations Committee's website.

Clinton's First Visit Focuses on Energy

During the contentious primary battle between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, one issue they completely agreed upon was the need to address the role energy plays in foreign relations.

Growing nations like China, Egypt, Brazil and India are demanding a larger portion of the world's energy supply, while leaders like Vladamir Putin and Hugo Chavez are becoming petro-dictators, wielding increasing power from their control over energy supplies.

Both Obama and Clinton agreed that unless we find ways to reduce global demand for energy and create open markets for oil, the world could become a series of energy coalitions, competing with one another for access to energy, perhaps through deadly confrontations.

Already, China and Russia have used their membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization to create economic agreements with one another for the transfer of energy supplies. Iran is an observing member of the SCO but may soon become a full member. There is a joint military element to the SCO, with coordinated military tests conducted as recently as 2007 by China and Russia in the Ural Mountains. The United States has applied for membership in the SCO and was rejected.

The importance of addressing energy challenges, specifically in the "Eurasian" region, has provoked Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to use her first overseas visit to go to China to discuss the issues of climate and energy. The meetings between Clinton and Chinese leaders have been placed under the umbrella of climate change, but discussions of energy cooperation will likely be included.

To see the full NYT store on Secretary of State Clinton's visit to China, click HERE.

NBC Poll: 89% Support Clean Energy Investment

A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released yesterday provided good news to both President Obama and environmentalists. Of those polled, 71% approve of Obama's presidential transition efforts. More importantly to environmentalists, 89% of those polled said they supported the idea of creating jobs by expanding renewable energy development and making buildings more energy efficient.

According to the AP, House Democrats and President Obama's economic team have released a draft version of the stimulus package. A review of the draft shows that policymakers have heard the American people and plan to invest heavily into new energy infrastructure and energy efficiency.

Some of the provisions in the draft include:

• $32 billion for installation of a "Smart Grid" that is more efficient and reliable than the outdated existing grid
• $20 billion for tax incentives for renewable energy development
• $6 billion to "weatherize" existing modest-income homes
• $10 billion in rail and mass transit projects
• $13 billion to repair and make more energy-efficient public housing projects
  

Read more about the draft stimulus package HERE.

Europe Banning Plasma TV's

Members of the European Union have finalized provisions of a minimum energy performance standard for televisions. On average, plasma televisions burn 50% more energy than their LCD counterparts. Because of their appetite for energy, the larger size plasma TV's will probably be banned under the new EU television standard.

In addition to banning large plasma TV's, the new EU rules will also phase-out inefficient TV models and will create a labeling system that tells consumers which TV's are the most energy efficient.

A similar television energy standard has been proposed in the United States but momentum for new rules fizzled out. The only progress made at the federal level is the inclusion of televisions in the Energy Star program beginning last November. Energy Star is a voluntary program for manufacturers whose products exceed minimum efficiency standards by some amount. Televisions with the Energy Star label have already reached store shelves.

In 2007, the federal Energy Bill required that televisions be included in the Energy Guide program. This program provides information to consumers about how much electricity the product use annually and how much operating costs will be over the lifetime of the product. Unfortunately, including televisions has been difficult because the Department of Energy hasn't provided the necessary testing methods.

As usual, states are picking up where the federal government has failed to act. California's Energy Commission is currently creating a new television energy standard that would require all new TV's use 50% less energy by 2013. The proposed standard would save the state 600 megawatts, the amount of energy generated by a large power plant.

To read more about new TV energy standards, click HERE.

Speculation: Obama's Green Team and their Bios

President-Elect Barack Obama has been moving swiftly to fill his cabinet so the transition into a new administration will be as smooth as possible, given the challenges currently facing the U.S. There has been rampant speculation about who Obama will appoint to each office and so far most rumors have proven accurate.

Today, NBC News is reporting the names of three possible appointees for Obama's environmental policy team.

1) Steven Chu - Energy Secretary: A 1997 Nobel Prize laureate for his work isolating and trapping an atom, Steven Chu has always lived at the threshold of progress. Chu is a St. Louis native who is currently a professor at the University of California at Berkley. He directs the Berkley National Laboratory and has held positions in physics and research departments at Stanford and Bell Laboratories.

2) Lisa Jackson - EPA Administrator: Lisa Jackson is a chemical engineer by trade. She worked for the EPA for 16 years previously and has recently served as Director of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. In the short time she served as Director at the DEP, Jackson put in place mandatory reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, reformed New Jersey's contaminated site clean-up process and established a scientific advisory board to review agency decisions. Lisa Jackson would be the first African-American EPA Administrator.

3) Carol Browner - Energy "Czar": A Floridian (like this blog's editor) Carol Browner has served as head of both the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation and EPA. An intereting side-note for environmentalists, Browner was the Legislative Director for former Vice-President Al Gore when he was in the Senate. Currently, Browner is the Principal of the Albright Group and an attorney.

EPA's Most Wanted

Eco-Criminals beware...the Environmental Protection Agency has created a most-wanted list for you. A new EPA website will feature pictures and bios of fugitive environmental lawbreakers.

The new list was posted online today, already featuring 23 offenders committing crimes that include smuggling of o-zone depleting substances, discharging pollutants into the air & water, laundering money and making criminally false statements.

The EPA believes this new list will assist in capturing fugitives on the run from the law for committing dangerous environmental crimes.

If you recognize an eco-criminal on the list, fill out the "Report a Fugitive" form online and send tips directly to the EPA so they can begin following the lead.

The EPA urges citizens to remember that many fugitives are likely armed with more than gas hogging SUV's and litter. These characters are involved in complex schemes that involve millions of dollars and dangerous associations.

Check out the EPA's new Most Wanted website by clicking HERE.

Obama Keeps Promise on Big Oil Tax

Yesterday, the environmental world was abuzz with rumors that President-Elect Obama was backing away from his pledge to tax windfall profits earned by the big oil companies.

Obama argued during the campaign that the oil industry had benefitted for decades from tax breaks and subsidies designed to help it expand energy infrastructure, but now that oil companies are earning record-breaking profits, it's time to reverse the tax breaks so funds could be invested in renewable energy development.

Yesterday, some news organizations were reporting that an aide to Obama claimed he was no longer interested in a windfall profits tax because the price of oil had dropped significantly since the campaign and profits would probably be too low to tax.

Today, however, the Obama administration officially reaffirmed its support for rolling back tax subsidies for oil companies. They did point out that during the campaign, Obama was very specific in noting that the windfall profits tax would only be triggered when oil prices were at $80/barrel or more. As long as the prices are below that, no such tax comes into effect.

So, it seems, the policy of the Obama administration will be to roll back unneccesary subsidies to the oil industry and to put in place a windfall profits tax that applies when oil reaches $80/barrel or more.

Read the full story from Talking Points Memo HERE.

Sen. Boxer Will Push Global Warming Bill in 2009

This afternoon, Senator Barbara Boxer of California said that she would be pushing a new "streamlined" global warming bill in 2009 that would encapsulate President-Elect Obama's clean energy proposals.

Senator Boxer was vague in describing the new legislation. She said it would be simpler than a similar bill that failed in the Senate earlier this year. She promised that a cap & trade market would be included in the new bill.

In addition to the new global warming legislation Boxer plans to submit next year, she is pushing for a $15 billion clean energy program that would invest in wind, solar, geothermal and other renewable energy sources. There would also be money for carbon capture development on coal power plants. Boxer says the economic benefits of new jobs, increased manufacturing and exportable technology excuses the program's cost.

Read the full story on Senator Boxer's proposals HERE.

New Committee Chair and Global Warming

From Taegan Goddard's Political Wire...

The House Democratic Steering Committee chose Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) to be chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee next year -- "a stinging rebuke" of the sitting chairman, Rep. John Dingell (D-MI), CQ Politics reports. Waxman won a 25-22 vote over Dingell in a closed-door meeting. However, the full House Democratic Caucus must approve or reject the decision Thursday. The fight underscores the tensions within the Democratic caucus on high-profile issues such as climate change. Dingell favors a market-based approach toward reducing global warming; Waxman has pushed for a more-aggressive approach towards cutting greenhouse gases.

Check out the original post HERE.

Obama's Surprise Global Warming Speech

The Governors Global Climate Summit comes together today in Los Angeles. President-Elect Obama has recorded a surprise address to the participating Governors in which he renews his commitment to fighting global warming. In addition to casting the issue in a moral light, he says that it presents is as a challenge to our economic and national security interests.

The video is featured below. Obama says, "The United States cannot meet this challenge along. Solving this problem will require all of us working together...I look forward to working with all nations to meet this challenge in the coming years."

Obama's Cap & Trade Plan Coming in '09

Obama's energy & environment adviser Jason Grumet said today that the new administration will push its cap & trade proposal in 2009. Speaking to a carbon trading conference, Grumet said that 2009 will be a "very, very busy" period for government.

A cap & trade system places a limit on how much pollution certain industries can release. That limit is divided into credits that can be purchased and sold, like stocks, so some entities can pollute more by buying credits from those who are polluting less. As time passes, the limit is decreased and credits are pulled from the market as an incentive for the industry to invest in technology to decrease their pollution.

Both McCain and Obama had proposed cap & trade systems during the 2008 campaign. Passing the program will not be easy, however, as it failed in Congress just this past summer. Many states like West Virginia and Michigan are opposed to this type of program because it forces industry to spend money on cleaner burning technology.

Although the cap & trade program may be costly for many polluters, it will generate huge amounts of money for the development of cleaner energy and manufacturing technology. Already, similar programs in individual states and regions have raised tens of millions of dollars for renewable energy. Development of these new technologies will ultimately mean more jobs and a new economic sector for America.

Read the full New York Times article on Obama's cap & trade plans for '09 HERE.

A Must Read: Supreme Court Rules Against Whales in Navy Case

The Supreme Court has ruled against environmental organizations seeking to protect whales from sonar used by the Navy during training missions off the coast of California.

From the AP summary:

The court did not deal with the merits of the claims put forward by the environmental groups. It said, rather, that federal courts abused their discretion by ordering the Navy to limit sonar use in some cases and to turn it off altogether in others.

The overall public interest tips "strongly in favor of the Navy," Roberts wrote. He said the most serious possible injury would be harm to an unknown number of the marine mammals.

"In contrast, forcing the Navy to deploy an inadequately trained anti-submarine force jeopardizes the safety of the fleet," the chief justice wrote.

Read the full article by clicking HERE

Environmental Ballot Initiatives Round-Up

The dust is beginning to clear as attention on President-Elect Barack Obama's stunning victory turns to cabinet positions and glimpses of the new administration's direction.

Before we dissect some of the information already coming out of Obama's administration, let's look at some of the environmental wins and losses on election day.

Five particular environmental ballot initiatives attracted the most attention on November 4th.

1. Missouri: Missouri's Proposition C would require the state's investor-owned utilities to generate or purchase at least 2% of customer power from renewable sources by 2011. By 2021, 15% of their power must be generated from renewables. The initiative passed 66 - 34 percent.
2. Colorado: Amendment 58 would eliminate tax credits for oil and gas producers. Those funds would be redirected to social and environmental purposes including college scholarships, habitat protection, water clean-up and clean energy development. The amendment failed by a 3 to 2 ratio, largely due to an oil industry funded campaign that threatened higher energy bills for consumers as a result of the amendment.
3. Minnesota: The Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment would raise sales-and-use taxes by 3/8ths of 1% to protect wildlife habitat, preserve cultural heritage, create parks and more. The funding would greatly assist in cleaning up polluted lakes and protecting wildlife, which has become a lower priority in the state's spending. The amendment passed and will create $290 million of new funding per year for 25 years for conservation.
4. California: Proposition 7 would nearly double the amount of renewable energy electric utilities must generate for consumers. Currently, utilities must reach 33% of renewable energy sources by 2020, Proposition 7 would raise that standard to 50% by 2025. The Natural Resources Defense Council, a pro-environment organization, opposes Proposition 7 because they believe it is poorly designed and creates loopholes for utility companies. Proposition 7 failed to pass.
5. California: Proposition 10 was supported by oil tycoon T. Boone Pickens. The intitiatve would provide billions of dollars for the purchase and development of fuel efficient vehicles and research into renewable energy. The environmental community also opposed Proposition 10, largely because of its emphasis on development of natural gas, a resource Pickens' has financial ties to. Proposition 10 failed to pass.

EPA Increases Lead Pollution Restrictions

A federal court ordered the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set a new health standard for lead by Wednesday night. In accordance with the court's order, the agency released a new acceptable lead pollution standard yesterday.

The new standard mandates that lead levels in our air must be reduced by 90%. This is a significantly stricter standard than the one previously set over three decades ago when lead was first removed from gasoline. 

It has been established that lead pollution is extremely dangerous to children who inhale it. Exposure to even low levels of lead can negatively effect IQ levels and memory. 

Renewable Energy in Wall Street Bailout

With all the mixed emotions over the Wall Street Bailout, at least there was something in the $800 billion plan we can all feel good about.

Included in the bailout was an eight year extension of the solar energy tax credits. These credits will offer 30% credit to both commercial and residential solar panel purchases. This huge investment in the spread of solar technology will encourage the private market to develop and install millions of solar panels nationwide.

The United States was once the leader in solar panel development but the decision to stop funding government solar panel research during Reagan's administration allowed European nations to move ahead of us and build a huge solar industry. With this new extension of the solar panel tax credit, not only can be expand our renewable energy usage here, but we can begin exporting solar energy products to other countries and regain the competitive advantage in this growing industry.

Some of the specific provisions for solar energy in the bailout include lifting the cap of $2,000 for residential solar installations as an incentive for homeowners to install more panels on their property, a credit for utility companies so they can switch from coal power to renewable power for customers and support for the creation of 400,000 green jobs.

While the federal government was busy fixing past mistakes, they were ensuring a cleaner and mores stable future. Read more HERE.

Humane Society Breaks Tradition, Endorses Obama

The Humane Society Legislative Fund (the Fund) endorses candidates strictly based on their views on issues relating to animals. The group steers clear of differntiating candidates on political party lines. This has led to the endorsement of hundreds of congressional candidates from both the Democratic and Republican parties. Never before, however, have they ever endorsed a candidate in the presidential election. This year they felt it was necessary.

Yesterday, the Fund's Board of Directors, which is made up of Democrats and Republicans, voted unanimously to endorse Senator Barack Obama. 

In their endorsement, the Fund's Board explained their reasons for endorsing Obama..."Senator Barack Obama has been a solid supporter of animal protection at both the state and federal levels. As an Illinois state senator, he backed at least a dozen animal protection laws, including those to strengthen the penalties for animal cruelty, to help animal shelters, to promote spaying and neutering, and to ban the slaughter of horses for human consumption.  In the U.S. Senate, he has consistently co-sponsored multiple bills to combat animal fighting and horse slaughter, and has supported efforts to increase funding for adequate enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act, Humane Methods of Slaughter Act, and federal laws to combat animal fighting and puppy mills."

The Fund listed some of the animal protection bills that Senator John McCain has also co-sponsored but said that he has been largely absent on many important animal issues in the Senate. Far and away, the biggest reason the Fund failed to endorse Senator McCain was his selection of Gov. Sarah Palin for his running mate, whom they say has done more harm to animals than any other current governor in the United States. 

The Fund explained their discomfort with Palin this way, "Palin engineered a campaign of shooting predators from airplanes and helicopters, in order to artificially boost the populations of moose and caribou for trophy hunters. She offered a $150 bounty for the left foreleg of each dead wolf as an economic incentive for pilots and aerial gunners to kill more of the animals, even though Alaska voters had twice approved a ban on the practice. This year, the issue was up again for a vote of the people, and Palin led the fight against it—in fact, she helped to spend $400,000 of public funds to defeat the initiative."

To read the Humane Society Legislative Fund's full endorsement statement, click HERE. 

 Here is a video from the Defenders of Wildlife explaining Gov. Palin's support for aerial hunting...

Senate Considers Renewing Clean Energy Tax Credit

The government has at its disposal a number of tools to encourage development of clean energy sources. Congress could release additional funds to research institutions, attach requirements to state funding, change federal permitting standards, etc. Unfortunately, we're still waiting on a comprehensive energy policy that would utilize all of these tools, so in the meantiem we must make do with tax credits.

You may have heard of the Renewable Energy Tax Credit that is set to expire at the end of this year. The credit provides several benefits to those interested in creating sources of clean, renewable energy. For solar energy, the government pays 30% of the cost to businesses to invest in solar power to meet their energy needs. The government will pay 30% to residential energy users for installing solar panels, geothermal heat pumps or small wind equipment. For production of renewable energy, the government will pay 1.9-cent per kilwatt-hour to help make renewable energy most cost competitive with coal and natural gas energy. 

Already these tax credits have been effective at encouraging the growth of renewable energy. Big box stores have begun installing solar panels on the roofs of their buildings to offset their energy needs. Nationwide, there are 22 major solar power plants in the planning phase.

The progress made as a result of the renewable energy tax credit could be dramatically threatened if Congress doesn't renew the credit. In an area 70 miles southwest of Phoenix, a Spanish engineering company is planning the largest concentrated solar power plant in the country. They have said the plant cannot be completed if the tax credits are not renewed. Back in 2004 when Congress failed to renew the credit, investments in wind energy dropped by 77%. 

Yesterday the Associated Press reported that the Senate has broken a months-long impasse on a tax break package that would include the renewable energy tax credit. Legislation including this tax break package should hit the Senate floor this week. The Senate has set aside $17 billion in clean energy tax incentives, the funds for which would come from freezing tax breaks for oil and gas companies. 

Call your Senator and urge them to vote "yes" on this energy package. Its the right step in making America the leader in renewable energy manufacturing. 

Palin Fought Polar Bear Protections for Oil Companies

Last Friday I posted about John McCain's running mate, Alaskan Gov. Sarah Palin, and her record on the environment. I knew at the time that she opposed protecting polar bears and I eventually learned she believes global warming is a myth. Now we're getting a clearer picture of just how far she is willing to go to protect oil companies and stop protections for threatened species. 

ABC News is reporting that Gov. Palin sued the Bush Administration this year to stop the listing of polar bears as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. She believed the government was too accepting of climate change science and its impact on the bears. She also feared that increasing protection for polar bears would negatively affect the oil and gas industries in Alaska.

The exact language from the Palin Administration lawsuit against the federal government stated..."Listing the polar bear as a threatened species [under the Endangered Species Act] will have a significant adverse impact on Alaska because. . . [it] will deter activities such as commercial fisheries, oil and gas exploration and development, transportation, and tourism"

The decision by the government to protect polar bears was largely based on the findings of the U.S. Geological Survey. In the Alaska lawsuit, these studies were questioned, despite the fact that Alaska's own state scientists stated that the Geological Survey's research was reliable. 

The science provided by the U.S. Geological Survey, an independent government agency, may not have been sufficient enough for Gov. Palin, but research paid for by Exxon-Mobile was. According to the ABC News article, Palin supported the conclusions of research funded by the American Petroleum Industry and Exxon, which of course did not advocate protecting polar bears from the effects of global warming. 

To read the full ABC News piece, click HERE. 

Obama's VP, Joe Biden, On the Environment

Last night Senator Joe Biden of Delaware was officially nominated to serve as Vice President to Barack Obama. Biden gave a great speech, preceded by a passionate introduction by his son, Beau Biden. Joe Biden is a well liked Senator known for his straight talk and foreign affairs experience. What do we know about his support for environmental issues?

• Biden has an 83% lifetime score from the League of Conservation Voters.
  
• Supports capping carbon emissions 80% below 1990 levels by 2050.
• Supports requiring 20% of America's energy coming from renewable energy sources.
  
• Supports a federal government vehicle fleet with fuel efficiency requirements of 40 miles per gallon.
  
• Supports using federal construction projects to spur investment in the green building industry.
• Supports research and investment into clean coal and carbon sequestration technologies for export to other nations. China builds a new coal power plant every week.
• Does not support lifting the ban on offshore oil drilling.
• Co-sponsored a Senate resolution calling on the U.S. to participate in U.N. climate negotiations.
  
• Co-sponsored the Boxer-Sanders Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act which establishes a cap-and-trade system for greenhouse-gas emissions.
  

To see Grist.org's full scorecard on Biden, click HERE

Court Rejects Bush Admin's Pollution Rule

Since President Bush took office, he has worked to move environmental decision making away from the states to the federal government. Back in 2007, EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson summed up the Bush Administration's philosophy perfectly when he said, "A national solution is better than a confusing patchwork of state rule."

For the sake of consistency, this might sound like a smart approach to environmental regulation, but what happens when the federal government fails to adequately monitor and enforce pollution rules? Without some state authority, no one can plug the holes in the federal government's weak efforts.

Congress emphasized the need for a state-federal partnership in environmental monitoring and regulation when it amended the Clean Air Act in 1990. The amendment granted permitting authority to state and local governments with federal supervision over the process. This change brought efficiency and transparency to a process that had become bogged-down in federal bureaucracy.

In 2006, the EPA approved a rule that prohibited states from supplementing federal pollution monitoring. In other words, the Bush Administration didn't want the holes in their poor monitoring program to be plugged.

Earthjustice, the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council filed a lawsuit claiming that the EPA's new rule would result in a failure to satisfy the monitoring requirements set out in the Clean Air Act. The groups believed that by taking states out of the process, federal monitoring would be inadequate.

Yesterday, a panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia agreed with the environmental groups and struck down the EPA's monitoring rule. Judge Thomas Griffith wrote the decision in the case and stated that the Clean Air Act, "is a complex statute with a clear objective: it enlists EPA and state and local environmental authorities in a common effort to create a permit program for most stationary sources of air pollution."

The basic message the court sent to the EPA is that if they are going to run insufficient monitoring programs, they cannot prohibit other permitting authorities (i.e. state and local governments) from attempting to supplement those monitoring programs.

To read the full Washington Post article on the decision, click HERE.