Coming Up ACES

The Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) seemed to have hit a snag this week. One of the reasons was the opposition of House Agriculture Chairman Collin Peterson and agribusiness to the EPA -- instead of the USDA -- monitoring agricultural pollution. No agreement has been reached on that issue, but it looks like the bill will make it to the floor on Friday anyway -- even though, as CongressDaily reports, the 218 votes needed to pass it aren't a lock and negotiations continue.

Supporters and opponents of the bill are therefore kicking into high gear -- which means facts be damned in the case of the latter. The EPA and CBO have estimated the average household cost of the bill as somewhere between 22 cents and 48 cents per day ($80 to $175 per year) -- without taking into account the benefits of reduced global warming, energy efficiency promotion, or job creation. But that hasn't stopped Republicans from claiming the cap and trade program will "cost every American family $3000". They are also, of course, predicting massive job losses and a weak economy -- the same tired line they have used for decades in opposing clean air and clean water laws -- even though history has proven them wrong time and again and this bill would do the same.

Clean energy advocates like NRDC, Sierra Club, 1Sky, and Green For All are mobilizing activists to support and strengthen the legislation -- and fight any efforts to weaken it. Some of the issues include possible changes to clean energy incentives, emission reduction goals, the renewable energy standard, enforcement, green job investment in lower income communities, and auctioning pollution credits versus giving them away to polluters.

Clearly in the coming days the big bucks will go to corporate lobbyists and groups like Newt Gingrich's American Solutions for Winning the Future, which released an ad yesterday predicting, "We'll lose more jobs, pay more for gas and electricity -- pushing our economy to its breaking point." Fearmongering Republicans will continue to try to scare the hell out of the public. So now's a good time to get involved in this fight, help level the playing field, and talk sense with your Representative about the need to strengthen and pass this bill.

Comments (32)

1. Don't Waxman and Markey KNOW that the ONLY way to draft energy policy is...

   with secret meetings with unidentified participants and memos and transcripts sealed for 1000 years???

   What is WITH these guys?!??!?!

   Posted by Mask at 06/23/2009 @ 3:44pm

2. The only un-cynical thing one can declare is that there has been an uptick in awareness of the corporatocracy, fusion of Wall St and Congress, etc.

   This has gone from a Kuccinich/Nader fringe claim to close to a mainstream Dem concept. Considering the Dems are center-right (Daschle and Health Care $$, etc., for ex.) this is pretty cool. Still, true, won't translate into single payer or anything dramatic in Energy sector policy.

   Posted by winyahn at 06/23/2009 @ 5:03pm

3. This is nothing more that a giant tax bill forced on the American people with the sole purpose of control and crippling of industry. Far from creating jobs, this is a job destroyer. The extreme dishonesty on the left is revolting and this insanity will be fought to the end.

   Posted by pyeatte at 06/23/2009 @ 10:57pm

4. Posted by IlyaKuryakin at 06/23/2009 @ 10:39pm | ignore this person | warn this person

   Napoleon Solo agrees. Idiots are now firmly in control and are employing a steady hand on the til of the Titanic sailing straight for the Iceberg at 30 knots! The thin line between the leftist genius of the plan they're using to destroy America and sheer Idiocy has now been finally crossed!

   Posted by BigPasture at 06/23/2009 @ 11:04pm

5. Meanwhile down under and an ETS may bite the dust:

   Global warming isn't real, says Fielding

   AAP June 24, 2009, 2:09 pm

   Family First senator Steve Fielding believes that the global temperature isn't rising .

   Family First senator Steve Fielding has made up his mind on global warming - there's not enough evidence that it's real.

   After talks with the government and top scientists, Senator Fielding, who holds a crucial Senate vote, has released a document setting out his position.

   "Global temperature isn't rising," it says.

   On emissions trading, Senator Fielding said he wouldn't risk job losses on "unconvincing green science".

   The document was prepared with the help of some of the country's most prominent climate-sceptic scientists.

   It says it is a "fact" that the evidence does not support the notion that greenhouse gas emissions are causing dangerous global warming.

   The Senate is due to debate emissions trading legislation this week. The government is struggling to muster enough votes to pass the legislation.

   Senator Fielding's stance appears to torpedo the chance of the scheme passing as the government would need his support, as well as that of the Greens and independent Nick Xenophon.

   Otherwise, the government would need the support of the opposition to pass the scheme.

   Posted by lrjones4 at 06/24/2009 @ 02:50am

6. Far from creating jobs, this is a job destroyer. Posted by pyeatte at 06/23/2009 @ 10:57pm

   Pyeatte -- what do you base this assertion on?

   Posted by gregokauf at 06/24/2009 @ 07:09am

7. Same folks that told us to beware Saddams wmd's, that Bill ayers was the most important issue in the last presidential election, that the war in Iraq has been won and that drilling four years from now woill save us money today....

   now say using less energy and creating jobs will cost money and lead to job loss.

   These same people quote the CBO on Obamas deficit spending, but ignore it on this issue?

   ---

   LR is quoting a Family First Senator? What is that?

   I thought senators represented states, not interest groups? Silly me.

   Family First-"Non-profit organization provides various articles and other information on marriage, parenting and fatherhood."

   What the heck do they know about global warming?

   Family First is associated with Focus on the Family, which is associated with domestic terrorist attacks on Americans.

   Posted by crabwalk at 06/24/2009 @ 07:48am

8. Posted by BigPasture at 06/23/2009 @ 11:04pm |

   Get out now while you can!!!

   I hear that the FLMN is accepting applications. It turns out that their ties to communism are weaker than ACORNS, somehow, according to Larrylogic.

   Posted by crabwalk at 06/24/2009 @ 07:52am

9. Family First is associated with Focus on the Family, which is associated with domestic terrorist attacks on Americans.

   Posted by crabwalk at 06/24/2009 @ 07:48am

   Good question Crabs but I somehow think the government which ran on saving the planet by getting an ETS up is now perversely hoping the good senator will not have a sudden change of heart.

   (As far as FF goes You can be pretty sure it has never heard of America or know where it is so you should be pretty safe).

   What has been bleedingly obvious, to those who know what makes the wheels of industry turn efficiently and cheaply, has dawned upon our government. So it is still making all the right noises but knows how deeply it will be in the shit with the electorate in terms of massive job losses and higher energy prices, particularly for the mums and dads and the working and non working poor.

   Australia used to run on the sheep's back but those little critters have dropped well behind the dirty black (and sometimes brown) stuff with which we pollute our part of the world, along with a bit of help from China.

   Posted by lrjones4 at 06/24/2009 @ 08:24am

10. It says it is a "fact" that the evidence does not support the notion that greenhouse gas emissions are causing dangerous global warming. Posted by lrjones4 at 06/24/2009 @ 02:50am |

    One should always be wary of 'scientists' who use the word "fact" in these situations...it's indicative of a failure in their basic training for the job, IMHO.

    Posted by snowball666 at 06/24/2009 @ 07:33am

    Well to cut a long story short I think the believing scientists told him don't worry if it hasn't been getting hotter recently even though AGHG are rising at an alarming rate. We are scientists and don't believe what the "thermometers" are telling us.

    Anyway you are just a religious crank and as far as we are concerned we are not going to waste any more time with you or with your sort. Our final word to you is get stuffed.

    He asked to see the believing government scientists to fill him in on the discrepancies but they chose to ridicule him in much the above vein through the media.

    So then he went back to the unbelieving scientists who first put him up to it and that's where he got his "facts" from.

    Can you blame him?

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/24/2009 @ 08:40am

11. Posted by gregokauf at 06/24/2009 @ 07:09am

    From "a detailed analysis" by something like the "Competitve Enterprise Institute"....

    which got $700,000 from Exxon-Mobil....or an equivalent.

    Posted by Mask at 06/24/2009 @ 09:27am

12. Posted by lrjones4 at 06/24/2009 @ 08:40am

    Not really important anyway, LRJONES....McCain didn't support the Deniers in this country...

    nor will any future Republican nominee for President. Game's over.

    Posted by Mask at 06/24/2009 @ 09:29am

13. "This is nothing more that a giant tax bill forced on the American people with the sole purpose of control and crippling of industry."

    the "sole purpose"?

    Posted by darladoon at 06/24/2009 @ 10:54am

14. "with the sole purpose of control and crippling of industry"

    many industries will benefit from adaptation to environmental circumstances.

    many already have.

    Posted by darladoon at 06/24/2009 @ 10:55am

15. add to this, perhaps some of the objectives relate to carbon emissions and ozone depletion...

    but for the neocons these are lies used as Trojan horses for their secret mission of soshlizin' Merka.

    Posted by winyahn at 06/24/2009 @ 12:38pm

16. Not really important anyway, LRJONES....McCain didn't support the Deniers in this country...

    nor will any future Republican nominee for President. Game's over.

    Posted by Mask at 06/24/2009 @ 09:29am

    Maybe then maybe not Mask.

    Because of the size of your population and your tendency to be ideologues rather than independent thinkers you are always a little behind the rest of the world. It's like the inertia of a large ship in that it takes some time to change direction and so it probably is with the environment. The science is far from settled, in terms of experimental data, though the politics once was. The GFC has probably had some effect on the latter and it is starting to fray at the edges if not unravel.

    Granpa Mac hardly counts as an expert on anything so that leaves the politics and you are sure to catch up with the rest of the world sooner or later. Once you were a leader. Sad.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/24/2009 @ 7:29pm

17. Posted by lrjones4 at 06/24/2009 @ 7:29pm

    So you're an "independent thinker"...

    yet all your global warming denial information, comes from websites from "think tanks" funded by businesses that make their money off of carbon-producing products?

    Gotcha.

    Posted by Mask at 06/25/2009 @ 08:12am

18. So you're an "independent thinker"...

    yet all your global warming denial information, comes from websites from "think tanks" funded by businesses that make their money off of carbon-producing products?

    Gotcha.

    Posted by Mask at 06/25/2009 @ 08:12am

    I think you just bit yourself on the bum Mask.

    BHP- Have a look at their science awards Here is one or two that should warm the cockles of your green heart:

    Sally Barrett

    Year 12 (2007) Keebra Park State High School, Qld

    Project title: The effect of anthropogenic carbon dioxide on the shell development of ostracods Sally used the shell thickness of small marine creatures to measure the effects of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide and found that shells become thinner as carbon dioxide increases.

    Storm Holwill

    Year 9 (2007) Marist Regional College, Tas

    Project title: Just a Drop in the Ocean?

    Storm's project used marine algae to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and produce bio-fuel through photosynthesis, thus reducing the need for agricultural land to produce fuel and assisting to reduce global warming.

    Visy Board: For the fifth consecutive year, Visy has been ranked No. 1 Company in Australia for it's Environmental Performance (Source - Reputex - Social Responsibility Ratings)

    Telstra: Planted around 89,000 trees to offset greenhouse emissions of salary sacrifice vehicles through our partnership with GreenFleet

    Saved 2,111 tonnes of CO2 equivalent emissions through increasing the number of vehicles in our fleet powered by LPG. Telstra is also currently adopting GPS in its own service delivery fleet, the largest fleet of its kind in Australia, which has the ability to transform logistical transport planning for more effective route planning, which can reduce fuel use.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/25/2009 @ 09:30am

19. If you care to google up all the large Australian companies followed by " environmental policies" you will find that they are about as green as government subsidies will encourage them to be. Even dark green if the offer is right. If there is money in it for them, in say an ETS then as long as their customers are paying for policies based on the premise that AGW or ACC is occurring then they will buy it and most already have. So your guess about big Australian companies is wrong.

    However real science is also important to these companies as they need top scientists in their research operations so unlike messenger shooters like you, they know that a scientific hypothesis is only valid if it can be falsified. That is why those interested in good science allow for the scientific proposition that any hypothesis including ACC needs to be continually tested to see if it is valid and until it thus achieves the status of a theory.

    That is where the independent thinking part comes in. Why do you personally accept the position you do? Do you understand the science? Do you know what the difference between a hypothesis and a theory is? Is ACC a theory or an hypothesis? Do you know where the weaknesses in the present ACC science are?

    If you can give a rational and scientific answer to those and not a follow the leader spiel, then you may qualify for the independent thinker's club.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/25/2009 @ 10:00am

20. Posted by lrjones4 at 06/25/2009 @ 10:00am

    So, it's just a COINCIDENCE, that your information is from "think tanks" that get a huge chunk of change from businesses that profit from the production of carbon-producing material and that their profit would be cut into by any reduction in use?

    Western Mining and friends just interested in "good science"....right?

    Posted by Mask at 06/25/2009 @ 11:48am

21. So, it's just a COINCIDENCE, that your information is from "think tanks" that get a huge chunk of change from businesses that profit from the production of carbon-producing material and that their profit would be cut into by any reduction in use?

    Western Mining and friends just interested in "good science"....right?

    Posted by Mask at 06/25/2009 @ 11:48am

    Well Mask the only other option is an "unthinking tank" from which you no doubt draw the inspiration for your inane posts. What is the significance of "carbon producing material"? Particular carbon in the atmosphere would have a cooling effect. The argument is about the greenhouse gas, CO2. Get up to speed Mask.

    Your problem is not so much those wicked evil think tanks but your apparent inability to come to grips with the science.

    As far as Jennifer Marohasy is concerned she is a pretty good scientist in her own right and her blog as far as I understand it is her hobby.

    Dr Jennifer Marohasy (born 1963) is a senior fellow at the Australian Institute of Public Affairs, a conservative think tank, and is a director of the Australian Environment Foundation which she says was born out of frustration with the current direction of environment groups. She holds a PhD in biology from the University of Queensland.

    Marohasy has worked as a field biologist in Africa and Madasgascar, and has a number of published papers in science journals.

    While head of the Environment Unit at the Institute of Public Affairs, Dr Marohasy compiled a backgrounder titled Myth and the Murray - measuring the real state of the river environment which was published by the Institute in December 2003. The Institute received a $40,000 donation from Murray Irrigation Limited at that time.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/25/2009 @ 1:45pm

22. This paper is quoted in the Interim Report of the Inquiry into future water supplies for Australia's rural industries and communities of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, March 2004.

    Now I don 't know about your "think tanks" but we have pretty bright people on ours and the government makes use of the expertise of bona fide scientists like Marohasy as well as other professionals in fields like economics and manufacturing when they want a basis for legislation.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/25/2009 @ 1:47pm

23. Posted by gregokauf at 06/24/2009 @ 07:09am:

    Just check-out Spain's experience to date - it has been a total disaster. Calzada has written a report in Spain detailing the bad news about the so-called -green industries - an oxymoron if there ever was one.

    The real facts are this country has the cleanest environment it has ever had in the modern era because I remember how it was back in the late 50s, 60s and 70s. The more technology advances the better things get, without onerous and destructive regulations that do nothing more than take freedoms away. The free market is the best way of improving peoples lives by providing opportunity to the people who want to work and improve their lives. It is called "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" and I think a lot of people forget this.

    It is frustrating to see the utter stupidity of trying to rely on wind (bird whackers) and solar power for primary power sources - it just will not work for many reasons. (see Spain)

    Posted by pyeatte at 06/25/2009 @ 11:02pm

24. Man-made global warming is the biggest scam perpetrated on the American public (and the world) in history. I suggest you learn about Steve Fielding, Senator from Austraila and how they killed this hoax before it could be saddled on their people. There is a new book from the down-under called "In Heaven and Earth: Global Warming: the Missing Science" by Ian Plimer - is to be released here on July 1st and will no doubt be a best seller. The army of skeptics is growing rapidly.

    It is important the House stops this monstrosity in its tracks and derail the attempt to cripple our economy through oppressive regulation and sky high energy costs and taxes. Although this would save the democratic party from itself, the down side, I would rather see a healthy job-creating and dynamic American economy where energy production and use is based on sound market economics instead of left-wing political agenda and blantant dishonesty.

    The truth shall set you free.

    Posted by pyeatte at 06/25/2009 @ 11:48pm

25. "Marohasy has worked as a field biologist in Africa and Madasgascar...."---Posted by lrjones4 at 06/25/2009 @ 1:45pm

    I didn't realize "field biologists" were trained in climatology modeling?!??!?!?

    BTW, as stated before, you and pyette and all the "Institutes for Continueing Profit Margins for Exxon-Mobil" can bitch and complain all you want...

    basic facts are these-

    1. Most Western nations accept GW/CC as real and man-made.

    2. No US President from now on, Repub or Dem, is going to be a Denier. A Repub might take a more lackadaiscal approach...but not say""it's a hoax".

    3. Therefore, policy wise....you guys are irrelevant.

    Posted by Mask at 06/26/2009 @ 08:09am

26. ...policy wise....you guys are irrelevant.

    Posted by Mask at 06/26/2009 @ 08:09am

    Then, I'm confused......why is CapandDie not breezing through? If we're so "irrelevant", what makes the more conservative Dems FEAR following your crowd to the biggest job-killing, economy-strangling and Big Brother piece of junk legislation?

    Posted by Happy at 06/26/2009 @ 09:27am

27. Posted by Mask at 06/26/2009 @ 08:09am

    Mask you are digging yourself deeper into a pit of ignorance.

    All scientists, particularly those with post graduate degrees are very fluent in things like physics and mathematics and some with chemistry. Now those disciplines also provide the basic tools for climatologists and mathematical modelers. So it matters little what discipline scientists practice in they all have the tools to intelligently evaluate the science that undergirds ACC (GW is not referred to so much these days as it seems to have morphed into GC these last few years.

    The largest and most relevant GHG emitter is China and it is signaling that it will not stop using cheap and readily available fossil fuels for its power generation as it charges full steam ahead with it industrialisation program. It is the US that will quickly become irrelevant as an industrial power if it imagines that boutique energy sources like wind and solar will keep it even second behind China.

    That is the sort of irrelevance our Federal government is wrestling with now. It is drifting from being first cab off the rank back to the Bush position of doing something about GHG when China, Brazil, India etc start to reduce their GHG emissions. You wouldn't know what relevance, in this context is, even if you tripped over it.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/26/2009 @ 09:55am

28. Posted by Mask at 06/26/2009 @ 08:09am

    Mask you are digging yourself deeper into a pit of ignorance.

    All scientists, particularly those with post graduate degrees are very fluent in things like physics and mathematics and some with chemistry. Now those disciplines also provide the basic tools for climatologists and mathematical modelers. So it matters little what discipline scientists practice in they all have the tools to intelligently evaluate the science that undergirds ACC (GW is not referred to so much these days as it seems to have morphed into GC these last few years.

    The largest and most relevant GHG emitter is China and it is signaling that it will not stop using cheap and readily available fossil fuels for its power generation as it charges full steam ahead with it industrialisation program. It is the US that will quickly become irrelevant as an industrial power if it imagines that boutique energy sources like wind and solar will keep it even second behind China.

    That is the sort of irrelevance our Federal government is wrestling with now. It is drifting from being first cab off the rank back to the Bush position of doing something about GHG when China, Brazil, India etc start to reduce their GHG emissions. You wouldn't know what relevance, in this context is, even if you tripped over it.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/26/2009 @ 09:56am

29. Mask, you are dead wrong. This scam is rapidly being realized by the people and that climate change is a natural occurance. Notice how China, India and Russia are licking their chops at the prospect of America shooting itself in the foot. One thing for sure, they will not go over this cliff. Look at the insanity in England where peoples power bills have shot through the ceiling due to this stupid movement (bowel movement would be more descriptive).

    It is one thing to gradually improve our natural environment as needed and totally another to wreck our economy for nothing. And understand, if we have a wrecked economy and considerable pain, environmental concerns will be swept away instantly. Look at what happened last summer when gas hit $4 a gallon plus - attitudes quickly started to change. When you are hungry, nothing else matters.

    You want a clean enviroment? Have a healthy economy first and happy people with lots of spare money.

    Posted by pyeatte at 06/26/2009 @ 09:58am

30. Posted by Happy at 06/26/2009 @ 09:27am

    From the general to the specific, HAPP.

    Again, you Deniers claim that "we are winning, more and more coming to OUR side" (note Posted by pyeatte at 06/26/2009 @ 09:58am)....

    yet only DarinTT has stepped up to take my bet that the 2012 nominee will NOT say that global warming is a "hoax" nor even that it's "not man-made".

    Now...why is that? Surely a smart GOP Presidential nominee would want to get ahead of the "wave of roll-back" and get "proven right" and CRUSH the "tree-hugging socialist enviro-nuts" once and for all on their "scam of the century"...

    but none are? Caribou Barbie? Sure, when she was a VEEP candidate...but wonder what she'll say when she's vying for the Top Slot?

    Gotta $1000 waiting for all takers.

    Posted by Mask at 06/26/2009 @ 11:36am

31. "So it matters little what discipline scientists practice in they all have the tools to intelligently evaluate the science that ...."---Posted by lrjones4 at 06/26/2009 @ 09:55am

    So we could go to a cetaceanologist (studier of whales, if you don't know)...

    to disprove the idea that water existed on Mars?

    Posted by Mask at 06/26/2009 @ 11:40am

32. So we could go to a cetaceanologist (studier of whales, if you don't know)...

    to disprove the idea that water existed on Mars?

    Posted by Mask at 06/26/2009 @ 11:40am

    Now you're cooking on (environmentally clean) gas Mask. Spot on.

    Lawyers, for example, should be able to check out if the argument for "never water on Mars" is logical.

    However if it comes to evaluating the maths, physics or chemistry, assuming they are used in the claim and if they are not it is then in the realm of pseudo science or other nonsense, then that is where even a university educated whale expert could fill in acceptably.

    So the slightly less lovely than Sarah, Jennifer, with a doctorate in biology and as one widely read in the Natural CC v ACC controversy is perfectly equipped to give an opinion on the validity of the science. viz its theoretical basis, its mathematical modeling and its observations. That may sometimes mean she knows which specialists she needs to consult with.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 06/26/2009 @ 8:57pm