“Former Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne said in May 2008 that the bears were on the way to extinction because of the rapid disappearance of the Arctic Sea ice upon which they depend. But he stopped short of declaring them endangered, which had it been declared would have increased protections for the bear and make oil and gas exploration more difficult… Along with the listing, Kempthorne created a ‘special rule’ stating that the Endangered Species Act would not be used to set climate policy or limit greenhouse gas emissions, which contribute to global warming and melting ice in the Arctic Ocean. The Obama administration upheld the Bush-era policy, declaring that the endangered species law cannot be used to regulate greenhouse gases emitted by sources outside of the polar bears' habitat. If the bears are found to be endangered, however, that could open the door to using the Endangered Species Act to regulate greenhouse gases. Sullivan said he would issue a written order shortly, but said Wednesday that the government is likely to have about 30 days to explain how it arrived at its decision.”
Fuel-Economy Stickers Unveiled. ClimateWire, September 7, 2010. "U.S. EPA and the Department of Transportation issued two new designs for the fuel-economy stickers affixed to the windows of new cars. The designs aren't final -- they won't appear until the auto class of 2012, and the agencies have requested public input during the next two months. But the labels are distinct. One design would feature a large letter grade for a car's fuel economy and emissions levels. The other design would feature numbers: the car's miles-per-gallon score and the estimated annual cost of filling its gas tank or battery."
“Coastal dredging and filling can cause significant damage to marine organisms and local ecosystems as massive amounts of sand are dug up in one location and then deposited on the sea floor in another spot. In addition, building a 45-mile sand berm could alter tidal currents and lead to the erosion of natural barrier islands that protect the Louisiana coast from hurricanes... Thad Allen, the U.S. Coast Guard admiral in charge of the spill cleanup, said on June 2 that BP has agreed to pay for construction of the 45-mile line of sand berms, which he estimated would cost $360 million... have yet to speak to a scientist who thinks that the project will be effective.”
Indonesia Probes Massive Forest Corruption. AFP, May 20, 2010. "Indonesia's anti-graft commission is investigating rampant corruption in the forestry sector that has cost the state more than 100 billion dollars, an official said on May 20... Deforestation and rampant illegal logging is the main reason Indonesia is the world's third-biggest emitter of greenhouse gas emissions report [Illegal Logging in Indonesia, PDF, 20 pages] by a coalition including the BlueGreen Alliance and the Rainforest Action Network released in the United States this month found that 40 to 55% of Indonesia's timber is illegally harvested. It warned that 98% of the archipelago's lowland forests could be gone by 2022."
Obama's Second Chance on the Predominant Moral Issue of This Century. Commentary by James Hansen, HuffPost, April 5, 2010. "President Obama, finally, took a get-involved get-tough approach to negotiations on health care legislation and the arms control treaty with Russia -- with success. Could this be the turn-around for what might still be a great presidency? The predominant moral issue of the 21st century, almost surely, will be climate change... Our fossil fuel addiction, if unabated, threatens our children and grandchildren, and most species on the planet...
The fundamental requirement for solving our fossil fuel addiction and moving to a clean energy future is a rising price on carbon emissions. Otherwise, if we refuse to make fossil fuels pay for their damage to human health, the environment, and our children's future, fossil fuels will remain the cheapest energy and we will squeeze every drop from tar sands, oil shale, pristine lands, and offshore areas. An essential corollary to the rising carbon price is 100% redistribution of collected fees to the public -- otherwise the public will never allow the fee to be high enough to affect lifestyles and energy choices. The fee must be collected from fossil fuel companies across-the-board at the mine, wellhead, or port of entry. Revenues should be divided equally among all legal adult residents, with half-shares for children up to two per family, distributed monthly as a 'green check'. Part of the revenue could be used to reduce taxes, provided the tax reduction is transparent and verifiable. The rising carbon price will affect almost everything. Congressman John Larson defined an appropriate rising fee. $15 per ton of carbon dioxide the first year and $10 more per ton each year. Economic modeling shows that carbon emissions would decline 30% by 2020. The annual dividend then would be $2000-3000 per legal adult resident, $6000-9000 per family with two or more children. About 60% of the public would receive more in the green check than they pay in added energy costs. People will set their net cost or gain via their energy and other consumer choices...
"The National Religious Coalition on Creation Care (NRCCC) is working with the Citizens Climate Lobby (CCL), the Price Carbon Campaign (PCC), and economists at the Carbon Tax Center (CTC) to help promote this honest and effective energy and climate policy. The public, if well-informed, can be expected to support this policy. But so far Congress has been steamrolled by special interests... Can the cacophony of special interests be overcome? There is one way: the president must get involved. He must explain the situation to the public and use his bully pulpit to persuade Congress to do what is right for the nation and future generations. He must explain that a rising carbon price is needed to phase out our fossil fuel addiction. The dividend will provide the public the means to move to a clean energy future, stimulating the economy... Perhaps posterity may remember that Obama reduced the number of nuclear-tipped missiles, or that he added 10% of Americans to the health care rolls. But if he dreams of being a great president, he needs to take on the great moral challenge of our century." Dr. James Hansen is director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, but he writes on this policy-related topic as a private citizen.
Shares of Solar Firms Plummet as Germany Plans Further Cuts in Feed-In Tariffs. Reuters, January 15, 2010. "A potential deep cut in feed-in tariffs in Germany will hit solar companies around the world and increases pressure on large players to reduce exposure to the world's largest photovoltaic market. Analysts say that lower prices could result in a shakeout in the industry that drives higher cost players out of business and dissuades new entrants. Shares in solar firms plummeted after a Reuters report that the German government plans to chop feed-in tariffs -- prices utilities pay generators of renewable energy -- as early as April, much more deeply and sooner than the market expected. Analysts agree that the plans, which envisage a one-off cut of 16-17% on top of the 10% already set out in the German Renewable Act, will deal a major blow to the sector, which the German government thinks is overly subsidized now... Large utilities must pay producers of solar power the feed-in tariffs, which have gradually fallen from 57 euro cents per kw in 2004 to 39 cents this year. The utilities then pass the higher costs to consumers."
Australia's Conservative Opposition Gears Up to Challenge Rudd on Climate. By Rob Taylor, Reuters, January 14, 2010. "Australia's conservative opposition has opened its campaign for this year's elections, targeting the environment as a key battleground in its attempt to stop Prime Minister Kevin Rudd gaining a second term. But while new conservative opposition leader Tony Abbott released a series of green initiatives, he stopped short of announcing a key climate change policy -- prompting one environment group on Friday to accuse him of 'cheap political opportunism.' Abbott is seen by many voters as a climate change skeptic after becoming opposition leader last December on the back of opposing the government's climate change policy of a carbon emissions trading scheme... Rudd will most likely call an election in the second half of 2010, and is strongly tipped to govern for another three years on the back of a growing economy that has emerged largely unscathed from the global financial crisis. Opinion polls showing Rudd's Labor maintaining an election-winning lead and surprisingly strong job figures on Thursday will reinforce his government's popularity."
Senators Maria Cantwell and Susan Collins Introduce 'Cap and Dividend' Bill. By H. Josef Hebert, AP, December 11, 2009. "Two senators on Friday offered yet another approach to tackling climate change [The Carbon Limits and Energy for America's Renewal Act -- CLEAR], proposing the government sell pollution allowances to industry to cut greenhouse gas emissions and then use most of the money to send tax-free monthly checks to every American. The 'dividend' checks, estimated to average about $100 a month over nearly two decades, would be aimed at offsetting the higher cost of energy. The proposal by Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., and Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, was being offered as an alternative to a more complex cap-and-trade climate bill already before the Senate and approved by the House. Cantwell said her approach is a simpler way to reduce carbon pollution and boost clean energy alternatives. Like the rival Senate bill, it would impose limits on greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels and is designed to cut emissions by 20% by 2020 and about 80% by mid-century... The bill introduced by Cantwell and Collins adds yet another alternative, raising more uncertainty as to what kind of climate legislation is likely to emerge when the Senate focuses on the issue early next year... Cantwell and Collins largely abandon the broad cap and trade approach that has been the focus in the Senate up until now, and which has been widely attacked by Republicans and some centrist Democrats as too complex, subject to manipulation and tantamount to imposing a huge energy tax and threatening jobs."
White House Recommends Creating National Oceans Council, But Shuns NOAA. By Les Blumenthal, McClatchy, November 8, 2009. "Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the oceans have absorbed 525 billion tons of carbon dioxide. They're now absorbing about 22 million tons of carbon dioxide a day... More than 60% of the nation's coastal rivers and bays are moderately to severely degraded by nutrient runoff from products such as fertilizer, creating algae blooms that affect the kelp beds and grasses that are nurseries for many species of fish... The danger signals are everywhere, some related to climate change and greenhouse gases and others not... As the grim news mounts, a storm is brewing in Washington, D.C., over who should oversee oceans policies. A White House task force has recommended creating a National Ocean Council that would develop and implement national ocean policy and include the secretaries of state, defense, agriculture, interior, health and human services, labor, commerce, transportation and homeland security. It also would include the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, the administrators of NASA and the Environmental Protection Agency , the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the director of national intelligence and the chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Plus the president's advisers on national security. homeland security, domestic policy and economic policy. The chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality and the director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy would head the council.
"However, NOAA, the nation's primary ocean agency, which includes the National Ocean Service, the nation's premier science agency for oceans and coasts; the National Marine Fisheries Service, which manages living marine resources; the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, which studies climate, weather and air quality; and the National Weather Service -- is missing from the task force's list. 'I am mystified why NOAA has been exempted,' said Maine Sen. Olympia Snowe, the top Republican on the subcommittee. 'It was a surprise,' Sen. Maria Cantwell, D- Wash., said in an interview. 'I didn't know it would be this sensitive.' Cantwell chairs the oceans subcommittee of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee. Her panel held a hearing on the issue in early November."

