Climate Law Update: Climate Change & Sustainable Energy News : Thelen Reid Law Firm : Renewable Energy, Construction, Project Finance Lawyers & Attorneys

Wind power developers in the United States built new installations at a fast rate during the first quarter of 2008, according to an industry group. But the American Wind Energy Association, which issued the report, also warned that the boom could go bust if Congress doesn't move to renew tax credits.

The association documented installations of 1,400 megawatts of new capacity, or about $3 billion worth, in its quarterly market report (see press statement here; text of report here). In its statement, the group said the industry was working at a "breakneck pace." The new installations were enough to serve 400,000 homes, according to the group. However, executive director, Randall Swisher, issued some caveats:

"But if Congress does not act quickly, this momentum could be derailed at the worst possible time for the economy, placing 76,000 jobs and over $11.5 billion in investment at risk. While 2008 is shaping up to be another great year, we could see a very different story in 2009 as uncertainty looms over investment in wind power projects and manufacturing due to continuing delay in extending the production tax credit (PTC).”

The tax credit for the production of energy from renewable sources is the primary federal incentive program for wind power, the association said in its public statement. The credit expires at the end of the year, along with other federal incentives for alternative energy.  

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Coal may be a fossil but apparently it isn't dead.

The U.S. Department of Energy looks to be backing carbon sequestration projects and clean coal in a big way, despite some setbacks for the fuel in recent months (see Climate Law Update stories here and here). The Bush administration acted just as some environmentalists have raised new concerns about the technology.

The department announced this week it was supporting sequestration research efforts, which also could be used for capturing carbon from non-coal sources, in California and the Midwest to the tune of more than $126 million (see press statement here). An executive of the company where the California project will be located said the technology would be useful for many fuels. 

Then on Wednesday the department outlined the separate restructuring of its "FutureGen" program, which could help underwrite "clean coal" projects using carbon sequestration technology to the tune of  many more hundreds of millions of dollars (see press release here).

While neither of the two newest sequestration projects appeared to rely on coal as a primary fuel source, coal clearly wasn't far from the minds of Bush administration energy  officials. The energy department's announcement earlier this week said that "advancing carbon sequestration is a key component of the Bush administration's comprehensive efforts to commercially advance clean coal technology" to meet the nation's energy needs. 

In a statement, California Energy Commission Vice Chair James Boyd waxed enthusiastic about the $65.6 million headed toward the state (see press release here):

"By demonstrating how greenhouse gas emissions can be safely contained through carbon sequestration, we make strides to curb the effects of global warming. Using the newest carbon capture and storage technology, California can show how environmental and industrial concerns are working together for the same cause."

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A new lawsuit filed by environmentalists challenges Arctic oil and gas exploration efforts the groups contend threaten marine mammals such as whales.

Plaintiffs include organizations that have already sought to force new federal protections for polar bears and other animals because of alleged threats from climate change, a move that could also have implications for oil development in the region.

Filed in U.S. District Court in Alaska on Monday the lawsuit asks a judge to rule that federal authorizations allowing the explorations in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas by Shell  and BP were issued before proper environmental reviews were conducted and that the actions could seriously harm marine mammals. The plaintiffs also asked for a preliminary injunction blocking the activities, at least some of which were planned for this summer (see lawsuit text here; motion for preliminary injunction here).

Seismic surveys planned by the companies "will result in excessive noise pollution in Arctic waters that have not been subjected to such levels of concurrent seismic noise pollution for at least 15 years, if ever," claimed the documents filed by the groups. The plaintiffs, which also include a native village, focused primarily on concerns for the health of such animals as whales and seals. Polar bears are only briefly mentioned in the lawsuit, as inhabitants of both of the seas year-round. 

Officials of the federal Minerals Management Service, which issued the seismic survey permits, and the National Marine Fisheries Service, which was also named as a defendant, told Climate Law Update they would have no immediate comment on the case.  Both oil companies, neither of which was named in the lawsuit, also declined comment specifically on the case but they each defended the environmental soundness of their exploration practices.   

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

• European and Japanese investors have bought slightly over half of London-based Climate Change Capital, which invests in projects to cut carbon emissions in the developing world among other enterprises, Reuters reports.
• Efforts to address the transportation industry's carbon footprint, particularly that from air travel, are examined in a recent article in the New York Times.
• Top climate modelers have gathered in the United Kingdom to plan a revolution in climate prediction but computer power may have to increase before many improvements are seen, according to a story from the BBC.
• Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain and nearly two-dozen other senators have asked the Bush administration to waive ethanol production requirements, stories in the Guardian and other media say.
• Venture capitalists put $2.2 billion into clean tech companies last year and prospects for the future look good, according to an upbeat new report from PricewaterhouseCoopers, documented by C/Net's news.com. 
    

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

• The Asian Development Bank's head announces a new fund to combat damage caused by climate change, writes The Economic Times of India. 
• Scientists suggest species living in the tropics may be in more serious danger than those living near the Arctic, reports the CBC.
• The world can reach a significant new climate change agreement by the end of next year, if current talks keep up their momentum, the head of the United Nations climate panel says, according to Reuters.
• A connection between rising shark attacks and global warming? Perhaps, the Guardian newspaper writes.
• A new book that offers "a profound academic, spiritual, theological, exegetical, politically grounded and energizing rendering of the global climate and sustainability crisis" is positively reviewed by The Christian Century. 
• Sempra Energy Chairman Donald E. Felsinger says there is enough scientific evidence in place that "we need to take action" to mitigate the effects of climate change, according to an interview with the New York Times appearing over the weekend
• The Bush administration literally chose to "add more fuel to the global warming fire" by moving ahead to open the Chukchi Sea to drilling, argues the Audubon Magazine.
• Ethanol mandates "are just an appetizer for a much larger big business feast should a liberal Congress be paired with a liberal White House," argues a posting on the Heritage Foundation's blog, The Foundry.   
  
  

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

This saving the planet stuff just isn't complicated enough, it seems.

Underscoring the importance of the finer points involved in establishing a market-based approach to controlling greenhouse gas emissions, a new report (accessible here) sponsored by a fascinating collection of interests shows how huge sums are at stake depending on how such a program is structured.

The most intriguing part of the document examines one of the most controversial parts of a cap-and-trade scenario: the distribution of emissions credits or "allowances" that will determine how many tons of heat-trapping gases that, say, a power plant can emit over a year. It looks at the differences in formulas contemplated by two bills now before Congress, the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act and the Bingaman-Specter Low Carbon Economy Act. The document also adds another twist, such as examining what would happen if credits were allocated based on each company's electricity output, versus its share of emissions.

The report generally seems to side with Lieberman-Warner. That bill would require selling more of the credits initially and it would also allocate some credits for sale to benefit the public.

The document also finds that some utilities, such as those with relatively cleaner technologies, would fare vastly better under a system in which credits were distributed on the basis of power output. However, both bills so far propose to allocate the allowances to electric providers based on their historic carbon dioxide emissions. 

The bills are named for their sponsors, Sens. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., John Warner, R-Va., Jeff Bingaman, D-New Mexico, and Arlen Specter, R-Pa.

 

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A new federal economic analysis of the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act shows that the measure wouldn't impede strong growth in the United States; whereas a new federal study of the bill forecasts a gloomy future of  higher energy prices and problems for industry.

It's the same document. Just depends on who's looking at it.

Produced by the Department of Energy's statistical arm, the Energy Information Administration, the new report seems to have done little to foster agreement between the warring sides in the battle over the greenhouse gas reduction bill. The Senate is poised to take up the bill, sponsored by Sens. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., and John Warner, R-Va., in June.

Like a previous government analysis of the bill, which would cap emissions and establish a trading program, the new report shows some economic impacts but it also predicts by mid-century the legislation would produce better than 50 percent cuts in the production of heat-trapping gases (see text of report here). 

According to the new study, the drag on the gross domestic product between 2009 to 2030 would be between 0.2 percent and 0.6 percent. The bill's impacts would fall more heavily on industry than on other parts of the economy, the report predicted. While comparing the two analyses is difficult because of differences between them, the overall economic effects forecast by the new document appear to be generally smaller than those found by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in its  analysis put forward earlier this year (see Climate Law Update story here).  

Perhaps not surprisingly, supporters and opponents of congressional action to address climate change saw the energy department report dramatically differently. Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe, a leading Republican global warming skeptic (pictured), said the analysis showed the bill "is wrong for America." Environmental groups and congressional supporters of the legislation saw it as confirming the bill as economically benign.

    

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

• Methane coming from a landfill near San Francisco could soon fuel the garbage trucks serving the site, under a plan to be announced by Waste Management, the San Francisco Chronicle reports.  
• European leaders on climate change say they do not expect much from President Bush on the issue but they have hopes a new administration will be different, writes Reuters. 
• Rising demand for food and biofuels that prompted farmers to plant more crops has helped produce a shortage of fertilizer, according to the New York Times. 
• Australian government officials and representatives of that country's agriculture community have been discussing the industry's role in climate change policy, Sky News reports.
• Global warming could take a break in the next decade, thanks to a natural shift in ocean circulations, but long-term the planet's temperature will rise as previously expected, according to an AFP report on a study in the British journal Nature.
• Miami-Dade County government should invest in a wide range of actions to prepare for climate change, including high-tech mapping and financing fuel-efficient taxis, an advisory task force recommends, reports Miami Today.
  

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A compromise farm bill that reportedly includes some sharp reductions in subsidies for some forms of ethanol underwent heavy criticism Tuesday from President Bush. At a news conference, he called the overall multi-billion-dollar measure a “massive, bloated” bill that would do little to solve the problem of rising food prices (see White House transcript here).

That cast uncertainty on the legislation, which emerged with some fanfare late last week from behind-the-scenes negotiations between key lawmakers. Among the notable features in the bill, according to news reports (see Reuters story here), was a 6-cent-per-gallon cut in federal tax credits for ethanol. That would take the incentive down from 51 cents to 45 cents. However, Reuters reported the bill would also create a $1.01-a-gallon subsidy for ethanol distilled from cellulose, found in grasses, woody plants and crop residue.

Last week, the bill, which also contains incentives for public nutrition programs, took life with a boost from Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin, D-Iowa. He said the compromise legislation, among other things, "invests heavily in renewable energy and will help bring the promise of cellulosic biofuels to reality by providing grants and loans to move from corn ethanol to other renewable feedstocks." Access the full text of Harkin's statement here.

 

  

  

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The U.S. Department of Interior had only a muted reaction to Monday's federal court ruling demanding a quick decision on whether to protect the polar bear under the Endangered Species Act because of global warming. But that didn't keep the department's critics from weighing in.

A spokesman for the department headed by Secretary Dirk Kempthorne (pictured), in an e-mail forwarded Tuesday to Climate Law Update, gave little clue as to the government's next step in aftermath of U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken's ruling:

"We have received the court's decision and we are reviewing it. We will evaluate the legal options and will decide the appropriate course of action." 

Wilken Monday ruled in favor of a number of environmental groups and ordered the department to decide by May 15 whether to shield the animals under the endangered species law. The judge, who sits in Oakland, Calif., also rejected calls by the government, which has previously proposed designating the bears as "threatened," to delay the effect of its decision (see Climate Law Update story below). 

The ruling gave those skeptical of the agency's motives plenty of ammunition, and also a chance to talk about the larger implications of a listing under the powerful federal statute. They also seemed to have little doubt that the government will extend law's protections to the bear.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (1)

• The X Prize Foundation, which has previously handed out millions of dollars to stimulate developments in such fields as space travel, has announced it will distribute $100 million in awards for innovations in alternatives to fossil fuels, Business Week reports.
• The world's poorest and most vulnerable children are being hit hardest by climate change, according to a report prepared by UNICEF UK, writes the Telegraph.
• Sweden, which introduced a carbon tax in 1991, has made great strides in cutting emissions, putting it at the top of a European environmental group's list, according to the Guardian.
• Hurricane expert and global warming skeptic William Gray is on the outs with the Colorado university at which he is a professor emeritus, reports the Houston Chronicle.
• Connecticut's House of Representatives has overwhelmingly approved a tough new mandate that requires the state to drastically cut the greenhouse gas emissions associated with global warming, according to the Hartford Courant. 
• Duke Energy Corp. chief executive Jim Rogers wants a national use tax on every kilowatt of electricity sold across the nation, writes the Charlotte Observer.
• Global warming may open enormous economic opportunities in the Arctic, writes author Barry Zellen, director of the Arctic security research project at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School's Center for Contemporary Conflict, in a lengthy commentary in the Globe and Mail.
       

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A federal judge in California late Monday gave the federal government barely two weeks to make a final decision on protecting the polar bear under the Endangered Species Act, a move that could have significant implications for regulatory efforts to combat climate change.

Environmentalists pushing for protections for the iconic animals have accused the Bush administration of dragging its feet on the matter in order to avoid interfering with plans to explore for oil in parts of the bears' far northern home. Federal officials had concluded that oil and gas development would not pose a threat to the bears throughout their range. 

U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken (access biography here), in a 10-page decision, told the Interior Department to issue a final ruling on the matter by no later than May 15 (see text of order here). The judge also required that whatever decision the government makes would take effect immediately at the time it is issued. Additionally, she wrote that she did not need to have the parties come to court to argue the matter because "timeliness is essential, the issues are not complex and the parties are generally in agreement" on the issue.

The ruling was a win for the environmental groups including the Center for Biological Diversity, which has been pushing since 2005 to list the polar bear as an endangered species because of the effects of global warming on the bears' icy habitat. The interior department's U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, as part of a prior court agreement, had proposed to list the bear as a threatened species last year (see text of proposal here) but then took no final action (see Climate Law Update stories here and here).

 

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (2)

Chinese government officials may have produced a startling new goal for wind power in the giant country -- 100,000 megawatts by 2020. That represents a big step beyond more near-term figures the country floated just earlier this year (see Climate Law Update story here).

According to a story in the Shanghai Daily (see article here), an official with the Chinese Wind Energy Association (Chinese language site) said that the country's top economic planning agency, the National Development and Reform Commission recently discussed increasing wind power capacity to the 100,000-megawatt level. Previously, the country's leaders had announced a goal of installing 10,000 megawatts by 2010, so the new objective represents a 10-fold increase over the succeeding decade.

The country had set an objective of supplying 10 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2010, which would include wind, hydropower, bio-energy and solar.  According to the Shanghai Daily story it now wants to achieve 15 percent of its power consumption from renewable sources by 2020.  

Environmental Capital, the Wall Street Journal's online site that monitors such developments, sees new business opportunities in the Chinese move (see full posting here):

"Despite the recent tax reform meant to limit wind-turbine imports, China’s more ambitious goals could also open the doors for more joint ventures and local business for wind turbine makers like Vestas of Denmark, Suzlon of India, and Gamesa of Spain—all of whom have made China a key part of their global growth plans. And of course, General Electric hopes to make its energy business one of the group’s driving forces."

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On Earth Day, attention naturally turns to all things green – as in money.

Pocketbook issues are at the center of a number of new reports that assess the impact of efforts to combat climate change and promote the development of renewable sources of energy. One report shows government subsidies taking a big jump in recent years with renewables such as solar and wind getting a proportionately large share of the money.

The Environmental Defense Fund has come out with a document that studies the studies out there on the economic cost of a cap-and-trade system to cut emissions of greenhouse gases. Perhaps coming as no shock, the organization concludes that “a clear consensus” among the models demonstrates such a market system “is consistent with long-term economic growth.” The overall cost of capping the gases would amount to less than 1 percent of household budgets over the coming two decades, according to the EDF, which supports market approaches to the problem (see press statement here; text of study here).

Release of the analysis comes as the U.S. Senate is readying to take up the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act, which would establish a cap-and-trade system in the country. It also comes against a background of other reports issued by the government and business organizations showing potentially significant  economic impacts from such a system (see Climate Law Update story here).

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (1)

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has partially approved Pacific Gas and Electric Company's request that allows the company to recover from customers at least some of the costs related to a 1,000-mile transmission project intended to deliver power from renewable sources.

In the words of a statement from the federal agency, it gave partial approval to the Northern California utility's "petition for a declaratory order for recovery of prudently incurred pre-commercial and abandonment costs" related to the effort (see text of statement here; see full text of decision here). The $3.2 billion project would deliver up to 3,000 megawatts of new renewable power to California from Canada's British Columbia and from states in the Pacific Northwest.

The project will also be designed to take advantage of the fact that demands in the region peak at different times of the year, according to a statement from one of the commissioners. 

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 gave the commission authority to encourage greater investment in the power grid, including granting incentives allowing the recovery through rates of the costs associated with the projects. Barbara Connors, a spokeswoman for the commission, declined to put a dollar figure on the items so far approved by the panel.

     

 

 

 

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Attorneys for the Interior Department have asked a federal judge to give officials until June 30 to make a final decision on whether to protect the polar bear under the Endangered Species Act because of climate change.

Environmentalists immediately accused government bureaucrats of dragging their feet to avoid any interference with oil explorations planned for the bears’ habitat. 

The lawyers representing Interior and its Fish and Wildlife Service asked U.S. District Court Judge Claudia Wilken of Oakland, Calif., to give the service about 10 additional weeks to make up its mind whether to list the bear under the law (see text here). Officials have already taken preliminary steps to list the animal as “threatened” but no final action has occurred.

Any decision to protect the bear under the endangered species statute could have widespread ramifications, by bringing the law into play in a variety of government decisions potentially affecting global warming, and more locally on such issues as oil and gas development in the Arctic. The lawsuit noted that earlier this year, the federal government held a lease sale offering about 30 million acres “of prime polar bear habitat” in the Chukchi Sea for oil and gas development. 

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (2)

President Bush Wednesday set a goal of halting the increase in the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions by 2025, a significantly less ambitious objective than that established by some of the states, including California.

But in a speech in the White House Rose Garden, Bush also opened the door to a binding international agreement on cutting emissions.

In his speech, the president warned against raising taxes or imposing mandates or demands for “sudden and drastic emissions cuts that have no chance of being realized and every chance of hurting our economy.” He also argued in favor of promoting “emission-free nuclear power” and encouraging investments needed to produce electricity from coal without releasing carbon (see full text of statement here; see White House fact sheet here).

Bush called the new goal to stop the growth of U.S. greenhouse emissions by 2025 “a major step forward in America’s efforts to address climate change.” Yet he outlined few specific steps, beyond some already taken such as requiring better automobile fuel efficiency, to achieve the target. Among his goals, he said, was to create a new incentive to make the development, commercialization and use of new lower-emission technologies more competitive.

By contrast, California’s anti-global warming law, AB 32, requires the state to roll back its emissions of heat-trapping gases to 1990 levels by 2020, an estimated 25 percent reduction. Even further cuts would be required later under an order issued by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (see text here). Additionally, all three major presidential candidates have endorsed emissions limits and trading programs.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (2)

Greenhouse gas emissions in the United States dropped by a somewhat lower fraction than earlier reported, according to final estimates released this week by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

However, the annual Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks still showed a 1.1 percent drop between 2005 and 2006, compared to a draft report’s estimate earlier this year of a 1.5 percent decline (latest report can be accessed here; EPA press statement here). It also indicated that previous years’ emissions were a bit lower than had been previously estimated.

Both versions of the report also concluded that a variety of factors, including increased use of natural gas and renewable power sources, warmer winter weather and rising fuel prices contributed to the decline (see previous Climate Law Update story here).

The agency recalculated some of the base figures used in the report, which produced estimates lower than those previously reported. Those changes also helped narrow some of the gaps between the years. For instance, the earlier draft report showed total emissions in 2005 were equivalent to 7.3 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide, dropping to just more than 7.2 billion in 2006, a difference of about 112 million tons. In the revised report, those figures were about 7.1 billion and 7 billion, respectively, a difference of approximately 75 million tons.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks (2)

The U.S. Senate Thursday moved forward with its version of an extension of tax credits for renewable energy. But it did so without identifying how to pay for the estimated $6 billion in incentives for wind, solar and other projects.

Introduced by Sens. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington, and John Ensign, R-Nevada (pictured), only a week ago (see Climate Law Update story), the Clean Energy Tax Stimulus Act (see text here) was grafted as an amendment onto a housing bill before the Senate. Lawmakers adopted the energy amendment on an 88-8 voted and passed the entire bill 84-12.

In many ways, the Senate bill is roughly similar to a measure the House passed earlier in the year extending incentives known as the investment tax credit and the production tax credit. The renewable industry has been pushing hard for Congress to adopt some kind of legislation extending credits which expire at the end of the year.

Both bills provide short-term extensions of credits for producing electricity from renewable sources and for a longer period, until 2016, for business investment tax credits for solar and fuel cell projects. Residential solar and energy efficiency projects would also benefit under the Senate bill.

But the major difference in the Senate legislation lies in the fact that bill avoided the House approach of funding the incentives through reducing tax breaks for the oil industry. Instead, the Senate bill contains no identified funding mechanism. That could give the bill a difficult road in the House.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (2)

A key member of the international body that has done much to warn the world of the dangers of climate change says that a needed part of the solution – government support for research into new technologies – is falling ominously short.

In a recent presentation in San Francisco sponsored by the California Public Utilities Commission, Bert Metz, co-chairman of a key group of researchers within the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, added his voice to what appears to be a growing chorus calling for major new public investments into energy technology research and development. While other measures, such as market systems to promote energy efficiency and greenhouse gas reductions can help, they may not be enough, according to these experts.

In his presentation to an auditorium filled with energy experts and members of the public, Metz (pictured) foresaw the need for society "to rely on technologies that are not yet on the marketplace today. So that brings us to the area of how can we get them into the marketplace later. That means sufficient [research and development] investment." But there is a problem, he noted: 

“One sobering fact from the IPCC assessment was that energy R&D has gone down significantly since 1980. It’s now about half the level that we saw in the 80s. I’m talking about government, public R&D. That has not been taken over by the private sector. So we are worse off than we were 25 years ago. That is, of course, completely counter to the messages in this report.” 

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (1)

By any measure, it’s been a tough few weeks in the spotlight for biofuels such as corn-based ethanol and other alternative sources for transportation energy, including hydrogen.

A Time Magazine cover story not-so-subtly titled: “The Clean Energy Scam,” set the tone for the criticism. But it was met by a spirited rejoinder from the biofuels industry, which sees itself as helping to lead the way toward sustainability.  

The scrutiny focused on biofuels didn't stop with the magazine. 

Recently, reports have emerged that American biofuel subsidies have, in the characterization of the Wall Street Journal’s Environmental Capital, been “boomeranging” across the Atlantic (see story here). Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Times reported a California biofuels manufacturer was “short on cash and suffering from higher corn and plant construction costs” which threaten the company. The paper also noted a number of other plants that have been put on hold across the country, citing narrowing margins between the cost of production and the selling price of ethanol (see story at newspaper's Web site here).

Then, late last week, reports began emerging that corn had hit a record $6 a bushel, prompting the food industry to pin the blame rising prices squarely on government encouragement of ethanol production. The Grocery Manufacturers Association said the "ripple effects" are being "felt throughout the economy" (see statement here).  

On the hydrogen front, the San Jose Mercury News tweaked California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who four years ago proclaimed the creation of a “hydrogen highway” that would allow motorists to fill up fuel cell cars. So far, however, the newspaper reported (see story here), “not a single hydrogen fueling station has been built under the program.” The article cited a number of possible reasons, from economics to politics, for the failure. The paper also reported that Mary Nichols, the chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board, believes up to 100 stations will be built by 2015, five years later than expected.

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (2)

At least U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Stephen L. Johnson, presumably, still has friends in the executive branch. Because he’s facing some opposition in the other two arenas of government.

The EPA, which this week landed in court action because of Johnson’s decision to take his time to study whether to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, could find itself getting new marching orders from Congress.

Two senators, one a Democrat and the other a Republican, have announced they're backing legislation to set a 60-day deadline for the agency to complete a critical step on the road to restricting climate-changing gases (see press release and text of bill). The measure sponsored by Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-California (pictured), and Olympia Snow, R-Maine, would also require the EPA to reconsider its denial of California’s attempt to regulate tailpipe emissions believed to contribute to global warming (see previous Climate Law Update story).

The EPA had only a bare-bones response to the announcement.

"We will review any legislation that is passed by Congress," wrote Jonathan Shrader, the agency's press secretary, in an e-mail to Climate Law Update.   

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Legislation extending tax credits for renewable energy including wind, geothermal and solar for at least a year was introduced Thursday in the U.S. Senate by a bipartisan group of lawmakers. The move drew immediate praise from the solar industry.

Senate authors of the measure, who left out a controversial hit on the oil industry that was contained in a recent House bill, hoped to break a logjam that has blocked progress on keeping incentives for renewable energy in place. Backers stressed the need to act quickly, with billions of dollars in projects possibly on the line. The bill also includes financial encouragements for energy efficient buildings, homes and appliances.

Introduction of the Clean Energy Tax Stimulus Act of 2008 in the Senate (see bill summary and text), comes more than a month after the House passed its own multi-year extension measure. The Senate legislation is sponsored by Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Washington (pictured), and Sen. John Ensign, R-Nevada. It has 21 other co-sponsors. Cantwell urged swift action (see full statement):

“Critical tax incentives are set to expire this year. If both houses of Congress don’t pass a bill, and the president doesn't ’t sign it into law within the next one to two months, we will start to see as much as $20 billion of anticipated investments in 2008 delayed or canceled. This could result in more than 100,000 U.S. jobs lost at a time when the country is skidding into a recession, and energy prices keep getting higher.”

Continue Reading...

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (2)

A legal action led by Massachusetts and supported by 17 other states and nearly a dozen environmental organizations was launched Wednesday to force the Environmental Protection Agency to issue a critical document that would trigger nationwide regulation of greenhouse gases.

The new move, in the form of a petition for a writ of mandamus, was filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. It sought to require the EPA to put forward its formal determination of whether emissions of the climate-changing gases endanger the public’s health or welfare. Such an “endangerment” finding, the filing  charged, has already been made but it is being withheld (see text).

“It is a necessary and critical step, which is why the administration is making its stand there,” said David Bookbinder, chief climate attorney for the Sierra Club, one of the groups filing the action, during a nationwide conference call with reporters. “They know once the endangerment finding is made they’re obligated to begin controlling greenhouse gases.”

He acknowledged that no final regulation was likely to be in place until after a new administration comes into office. However, he and others said that it was important to move forward now to get the process started.

“Time is not on our side,” said James Milkey, chief of the environmental protection division under