India will not accept limits on its greenhouse gas emissions at climate talks later this year and instead will focus on economic growth and lifting its people out of poverty, according to Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh. He said that a legally binding emissions target would endanger India’s food security and transport, adding, “India cannot and will not take emission reduction targets because poverty eradication and social and economic development are first and overriding priorities.”
Three-quarters of Americans believe that the government should regulate greenhouse gas emissions, with a majority supporting restrictions on carbon even if they raise the price of goods and lead to higher utility bills, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll.
The poll, released on the eve of a vote in the U.S. House of Representatives on a carbon cap-and-trade bill, showed that a slim majority — 52 percent — supports that specific legislation. Sixty-two percent of those surveyed said they would support carbon regulation even if it means higher prices for goods, 56 percent expressed support if CO2 regulation leads to a $10 increase in monthly utility bills, and 44 percent said they would back a cap-and-trade program even if it means paying $25 more per month for electricity. Roughly 60 percent said the U.S. should reduce carbon emissions even if other countries do little to confront global warming.
Like many of you, I am counting down the days to Copenhagen, even making my own sort of clean energy geek’s version of an Advent calendar and putting up an LED-bedecked tree (sustainably-harvested, of course).
But, I’m beginning to worry that we won’t get there before a trade war erupts over the last-minute amendment inserted into Waxman-Markey before Friday’s 219-212 passage of the bill. According to several sources, President Obama is worried too.
EnergyWorks CR is going to spend the week taking a closer look at how the Senate is likely to mark-up the already near-unrecognizable Waxman-Markey bill that was passed 219-212 in the House late Friday. We will look with special attention at what is likely to happen to the transmission siting authority proposals on the Senate side, particularly in light of the recent action in the courts on FERC’s existing “backstop” authority over transmission.
If the headline doesn’t get you, the price tag might: $500 million.
U.S. Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis was in Memphis last week to announce five grant competitions, totaling $500 million, to fund projects that will prepare workers for green jobs in the energy efficiency and renewable energy industries.
Sharpen your pencils. Four of the contests are aimed at training workers through various national, state and community outlets, according to Solis:
The US EPA issued a report that outlines a strategy to deliver clean, low-cost, and reliable energy to state residents through the use of energy efficiency, renewable energy, and clean distributed generation. The intent is to provide states with the information they need to determine what energy options would be the most beneficial, practical, and cost-effective.
The potential energy savings achievable through state actions is significant. EPA estimates that if each state were to implement cost-effective clean energy-environment policies, the expected growth in demand for electricity could be cut in half by 2025, and more demand could be met through cleaner energy supply.
This would mean annual savings of more than 900 billion kilowatt-hours (kWh) and $70 billion in energy costs by 2025, while preventing the need for more than 300 power plants and reducing greenhouse gas emissions by an amount equivalent to emissions from 80 million of today’s vehicles.
The big day has arrived for the Waxman-Markey climate bill, expected to go to the floor for a vote in the House today. A quick perusal of the Op-Ed pages this morning adds little to the debate.
NYT and The Boston Globe both offer tepid – and somewhat mournful – endorsements of the legislation, citing its symbolic significance while noting the well-publicized giveaways and leaning heavily on CBO and EPA studies out this week that downplay consumer cost increases as a result of carbon charges. A lot of “the costs of inaction, of clinging to a broken energy policy, will dwarf the costs of acting now” kind of palaver in both. Quite frankly, they are so superficial as to be disappointing — kind of like the bill itself in the minds of many. (more…)
Supreme Court watchers are hitting the refresh button often as the term wraps up and decisions are released in bunches.
Monday saw a significant ruling for the clean-tech observer as the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to uphold an Army Corps of Engineers ruling that allowed an Alaskan mining company to dump slurry waste into a nearby lake as a permanent disposal method.
Van Jones, Special Advisor for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation at the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), yesterday answered questions from Facebook and the White House website about President Obama’s vision for a clean energy economy.
If you missed the live chat, here’s the video of the event.
When we talk about wind, solar and geothermal power, geographical conditions such as surface areas and sunny latitudes are very important. Turkey offers excellent conditions for all of these renewable energy sources. Its young population of 70 million – 61% are under the age of 35 – and its strategic location between Europe and the Middle East, add to Turkey’s potential for a leading green power nation.
As Turkey aims at taking its place among the top-ten biggest economies by 2050, an increase in its energy consumption is inevitable. Electricity demand has been growing with an annual rate of 6.5% since 2002, up to current levels of 198,000 GWh/y. Scenarios forecast a 6% growth rate until 2020, compared to growth rates of 1-3% in developed countries. However, Turkey’s growth of electricity supply barely matches its fast growth of demand. The country began experiencing shortages already, and power has become a more popular daily topic. (more…)