Environmental/Business
Coalition Warns That White House is Out-Of-Touch and Irresponsible for its
Continued "Do-Nothing" Climate Change Policy and Rejection Of Limits
on Greenhouse Gas Emissions
November 11, 2004 — By The Sustainable Energy Coalition
WASHINGTON DC - The Sustainable Energy Coalition today sharply criticized recent
comments by senior White House officials rejecting any limits on greenhouse gas
emissions. The criticism was in response to statements made following President
Bush's re-election, by James Connaughton, chairman of the White House Council on
Environmental Quality, White House science adviser John Marburger, and Mike
Leavitt, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
In light of the recent release of two major new studies* that conclude global
warming is dramatically impacting the United States faster than many scientists
had anticipated, the Administration's position is shortsighted and
irresponsible. Moreover, given the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol by the
Russian Federation and more than 120 other nations, the U.S. is now out of touch
with virtually every other industrialized country on the planet other than
Australia.
The Administration continues to rely on questionable economic analyses as
justification for its lack of effective policy and argues that the Kyoto
Protocol would cost the U.S. economy nearly 5 million jobs. Accordingly, the
Sustainable Energy Coalition calls upon the Administration to identify the
analysis upon which this 5 million job loss figure is based, and to explain why
the findings of multiple other analyses that smart strategies to reduce U.S.
carbon emissions can produce a net increase in domestic employment were
rejected.
According to analyses by SEC member group, the Union of Concerned Scientists,
the Administration's own computer model and assumptions show that increasing the
use of renewable electricity sources to just 20 percent by 2020 would cut the
growth of power plant carbon emissions by more than half, while saving consumers
billions of dollars and creating hundreds of thousands of new jobs.** Adopting
other renewable energy incentives such as a Renewable Fuels Standard and
incorporating cost-effective energy efficiency savings could further reduce U.S.
carbon emissions substantially compared to the Administration's
business-as-usual projections.
Ironically, while the White House has based its rejection of both the Kyoto
Protocol and other form of mandatory limits on greenhouse gas emissions on
economic grounds, its position actually threatens to undermine the nation's
economic health - as well as its environmental health.
In a letter sent to President Bush on October 14, the Sustainable Energy
Coalition warned that the U.S.'s "continued rejection of meaningful
international involvement in the effort to address climate change is not only
undermining the global environment but also risks great damage to the American
economy. By not being a signatory, the United States now faces the very real
possibility of putting itself at a serious competitive disadvantage in the world
marketplace.
"Russia's approval of the Kyoto Protocol means that U.S. business may be
cut out of the new carbon trading markets which have already been set up in
London. Furthermore, carbon trading and incentives to install renewables and
other clean technologies in the treaty will give companies in Europe and
elsewhere a financial advantage in joint trading agreements with former Eastern
bloc and developing countries.
"In addition, by giving industry, local authorities and consumers
incentives to take action on climate change, Russia, Japan, the European Union
and the other industrialized countries that have joined the protocol will set
themselves on a path to greater economic efficiency. This will ultimately
translate into foreign enterprises being significantly more competitive in the
global marketplace."
Moreover, post-election analyses*** reveal that whatever policy support
President Bush may have received from the voters did not include inaction on the
issue of global warming. In fact, the Administration's climate change policies
may be handicapping the economies of many of the very states that assured his
election. For example, America's agricultural sector is already profitably
reducing greenhouse gases by turning to no-till or minimum-till farming
practices, producing ethanol, biodiesel, biogas (reducing methane emissions) and
other biofuels, hosting a rapidly increasing number of wind farms and seeking
efficiencies throughout their operations.
The Sustainable Energy Coalition consequently reiterates its call to President
Bush to commit the United States to binding goals for the reduction of
greenhouse gases. Addressing climate change with policies and investments that
favor increased energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies will not
only help the environment but also create millions of new, high-quality domestic
jobs and businesses. It will be a net win for the U.S. economy.
---------------------------------
* A report by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change found "abundant
evidence" that global warming has begun to affect plants and animals in
every region of the United States, from the earlier nesting of birds in the
desert Southwest to the earlier flowering of trees in forests around the Great
Lakes. Another report, commissioned by the United States and other nations with
Arctic territory, found that northern Alaska and the rest of the Arctic are
warming rapidly, with the loss of polar ice projected to accelerate global
warming as well as contributing to sea-level rise and flooding. **documented at http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/renewable_energy/page.cfm?pageID=1370
and http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/renewable_energy/page.cfm?pageID=1505
*** A November 8 report prepared by the polling firm of Greenberg, Quinlan,
Rosner Research Inc. for SEC member group, the Natural Resources Defense
Council's Climate Center, concluded: "In a campaign season that divided
Americans like few others, voters find broad consensus on the reality of global
warming and the need to do something about it. In a national debate dominated by
war and terrorism, voters still invest a fair degree of urgency and priority in
global warming, particularly when framed around broader concerns of the nation's
energy policy. And in a period of economic stagnation, voters reject arguments
about delaying or curtailing changes in global warming policy due to alleged
deleterious economic outcomes."
# #
The Sustainable Energy Coalition is a coalition of nearly 90 national and state
energy policy, business, environmental, and consumer organizations that
collectively represent several thousand companies and community-based groups.
Founded in 1992, the Sustainable Energy Coalition supports expanded use of
energy efficient and renewable energy technologies.
========================
SUSTAINABLE ENERGY COALITION
1612 "K" Street, N.W.; #202-A
Wasington, D.C. 20006
202-293-2898, ext.201; fax: 202-293-5857
Contact: Ken Bossong 202-293-2898, ext.201