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…)

A partisan divide, climate change doubters ridiculed by by environmental advocates, concerns about the global competitive impact of being a carbon control leader, and uncertainties surrounding market function, pricing and cost to consumers… Sound familiar?

Now imagine it all in Paul Hogan’s accent instead of in the halls of the Capitol, and you have the Australian debate over cap-and-trade legislation.

NYT runs a story that gives evidence of one of the major obstacles to getting real global energy reform, the “you first” problem.

The story notes, “Conservatives say [the country] should not commit itself to any target before the world’s biggest emitters — China and the United States — lay their cards on the table, and a successor to the Kyoto agreement, which expires in 2012, is reached.”

(more…)

The debate over a national cap and trade system for carbon is moving along in Congress, though probably not as quick as the Obama administration would prefer. The Waxman-Markey Bill (HR 2454) certainly has as its cornerstone a national cap and trade system as has been previously blogged. The Bill sailed through the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

The real battle may lay in the House Ways and Means Committee where Republican members are pushing for a mark-up of the Bill, meaning Members would have a chance to offer amendments to address the concerns they have heard from their respective constituents.

(more…)

A key U.S. congressional committee has approved historic legislation that for the first time would put a cap and a price on carbon dioxide emissions. After weeks of debate and an intensive, multi-million dollar lobbying campaign by industry and environmental groups, the House Energy and Commerce Committee passed a bill calling for a 17 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions below 2005 levels by 2020 and an 83 percent reduction by 2050.

(more…)