On Monday, Energy and Environment Daily reported that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi believes that the votes are there to pass a bill to cap global warming emissions, but that she wasn't sure whether it would make it onto the calendar for 2009.

E&E is a subscription-only site, so I'll quote the article at length here:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said today that she has enough votes to pass cap-and-trade legislation aimed at curbing the effects of global warming but would not commit to holding a vote in 2009.

Speaking to reporters in the Capitol, Pelosi said she has sufficient backing in the Democratic-controlled House to move a cap-and-trade bill, but will not force the issue. "I'm not sure this year, because I don't know if we'll be ready," Pelosi said. "We won't go before we're ready."

Pelosi acknowledged the December deadline looming over U.N. negotiations toward a new international climate change agreement. "We're sensitive to Copenhagen and the rest of that," she said, referring to the Denmark capital that will host the next annual U.N. conference. "And it's a very high priority for me."

But Pelosi said she could not guarantee that President-elect Barack Obama would be able to sign a cap-and-trade law before Copenhagen.

"I would certainly hope so, but I can't tell you that that is the case right now," she said. "Of all the bills that we have done, you know I sort of know the policies, I know what the possibilities are, this is the most, should we say, controversial, not controversial, mysterious."

Pelosi added, "There's so many ways we can go. We're seeing, studying what the Europeans did. They had to have some trial and error in what they did. And I think we have to be very careful, because we have to do it right, with cap and trade. We have to do it right. I don't think we can take any chances. So this is going to take some very thorough scrutiny as to how we go forward."

Speaker Pelosi has been a very powerful and effective champion for the environment. I truly believe her commitment to the issue is sincere. In the last Congress she stood up to some very powerful interests to push through the first increase in fuel economy standards in 30 years, among other accomplishments. And it's often a mistake to read too much into a single quote to one reporter.

But I have to ask, on an issue as critical as global warming, given the truly existential threats to our health, economy, and national security, what could possibly be more urgent?

I can understand wanting to take time to think through the policy given the complexities of the issue. This is a global issue that touches every part of our lives.

But the studies have been done. The verdict is in. If Congress isn't "ready," they need to get ready, and if that means staying up late and burning the midnight oil, well, it's past time for that too.

Congress needs to act now. There's no excuse for further delay. If the votes are there, the bill should be on the floor now.

 

President-Elect Barack Obama has made it clear in no uncertain terms that global warming will be a top priority for his new administration. In a taped message to the Global Climate Summit hosted by California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on November 18, Obama said:

Few challenges facing America – and the world – are more urgent than combating climate change. The science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear... I know many of you are working to confront this challenge... But too often, Washington has failed to show the same kind of leadership. That will change when I take office.

Couldn't have said it much better myself. What a breath of fresh air. And not a moment too soon. 

In that address, he reiterated his campaign promises to "reduce emissions to their 1990 levels by 2020 and reduce them an additional 80% by 2050."

Here's the rub. While Obama’s commitment to cutting emissions by 80% from 1990 levels by 2050 is in the range of what the science says is needed, his 2020 goal of returning to 1990 levels is a bit behind the times.

According to the research completed in 2007 by the Nobel Prize-winning U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, to prevent the most catastrophic consequences of global warming, developed nations must reduce emissions by 25-40% below 1990 levels by 2020 and by 80-95% by 2050.

I know what you're thinking. Obama's 25-40% wrong? What's going on?!?!

Well, no, not quite. There's some apples to oranges going on here. Obama's commitment to cut emissions to 1990 levels, which is based on legislation he cosponsored as a senator and was introduced before IPCC's most recent findings became public, refers only to pollution here in the U.S. IPCC's 25-40% refers to that but also additional emissions cuts achieved in developing nations with U.S. financial support, like funding the adoption of clean energy technologies in India or stopping deforestation in Brazil.

Now, we can't solve global warming just by protecting trees. Would that it were so easy. We must break our dependence on fossil fuels and dramatically cut our pollution here at home as well, starting now. But we also must provide leadership and assistance so that we can get all the reductions that are needed worldwide.

It is critical that Obama bring his global warming plan fully in line with the science by committing to total reductions consistent with IPCC's recommendations for developed nations. To do that, he needs to do two things:

1. sharpen his commitment for domestic reductions to at least 8-12% from 1990 levels by 2020; and

2. commit to achieving the additional reductions needed to reach that critical 25-40% range through international climate assistance.

You can help persuade President-Elect Obama to sharpen his short-term pollution reduction goals by going to Change.gov and posting a comment on his "Open for Questions" page. Tell him that to prevent the worst effects of global warming, we need to listen to the best science. And that means 25-40% below 1990 levels by 2020, no less. 

To solve global warming that's the change we need.

Hi!

I wanted to share some stories from our official opening of our new office in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). This post is quite long but it has been the best few days and I have to share with you all.

The Arctic Sunrise appeared just before 15:30 on Saturday afternoon moving along slowly up the Congo River toward Matadi, the DRC's principal port for timber exports. The ship was quite the site to behold! As it approached, the far side of the Congo river was moving rapidly upstream, but was moving rapidly downstream here next to the port. In the middle of the two currents there was an eddy unlike anything I have ever seen.  It was an amazing site to see the pirouettes the Arctic Sunrise did as it danced in between the powerful currents.

As the ship pulled into port, 10 local drummers played traditional music and several dancers performed to celebrate its arrival. We were at the sleepy end of the port where there is normally little activity other than a few containers moving in and out, but on Saturday afternoon it came alive with port officials, the governor of the province, and many other dignitaries who had come to welcome the ship. People waited in the baking heat of the Congo sun for over two hours for the Arctic Sunrise and its crew to clear customs. And finally, with all the formalities done, the dignitaries were able to welcome the captain and the crew and tell us all how excited they were for the ship and Greenpeace to be in their town.

The rest of the team arrived on Sunday. That includes Gregoire & Jerome (GP France), An (GP Belgium), Brad, Mary, Amadou, Anne, Prudence, Danny, Raoul and Rene (GP Africa), Lalita, Dietlind, Philippe, Maarten, Chris and myself from GP International, and civil society partners from all over the country.

Throughout the day we had many people from the port and the town dropping by to say hi to the crew and take a tour of the ship. We were the big event in town and everyone wanted to join in the excitement. The sheer excitement at the arrival of the Arctic Sunrise was amazing. The ship’s crew was warm and welcoming, offering tea, coffee, and dinner to the guards, customs staff, and random visitors that popped by. Everyone seemed quite taken by the kindness and generosity we brought to town.

The day of the launch, preparations began at 8am with briefings and getting the final logistics into place. We had a beautiful event planned, and amazingly enough by 11:00am we were running ahead of schedule!!!! We had the Congolese National Environment Minister, the mayor of Matadi, the governor and his advisors, provincial ministers, parliamentarians, and others representing environment and forests at the local and national level. As the dignitaries arrived the drummers took up their beat once again, and they were joined not only by the dancers but by a police band of at least 20 people who eagerly joined in the musical celebration.

The captain welcomed the VIPs on board for a special tour of the ship. We then ushered various groups of journalists and civil society partners through tours and brought everyone into the air conditioned hold where the ceremony took place. There were over 100 guests on board and the captain and crew did a fantastic job of ensuring that all our plans went according to schedule – even better still, ahead of schedule!

We opened with a speech by the provincial governor, then Lalita and Amadou spoke, and finally the National Environment Minister addressed us and welcomed Greenpeace but also challenged us to be real partners and turn our words into actions. He acknowledged that the road ahead may not be easy but he welcomed us warmly and officially declared the office open in Kinshasa (DRC's capital city and the location of our new office). Afterward we whisked our guests off to a hotel where everyone enjoyed a beautiful luncheon and we managed to have a good discussion with the high-level officials about Forests for Climate and what the climate talks in Poznan, Poland, which are happening this December, mean to the Congo Basin.

This day was truly an amazing day. As I sit here and type, it is so hard to find the words to fully explain what the atmosphere was like. The DRC is in the midst of a humanitarian crisis, and has been ravaged by years of conflict, part of which is driven by its natural resource wealth. This day we signaled our commitment to work here and address the environmental and social issues facing the 40 million people whose very lives are dependent on the forests and their amazing biodiversity. We saw hope and excitement that an organization with Greenpeace’s global reach and tools like the Arctic Sunrise was making such a strong commitment to work in partnership with these people who have suffered so much.

Opening an office in the Congo has been a long time in the making. We managed to do it in style. As the captain said, if we can run an event like this in the Congo, and ahead of schedule no less, we can do anything!

But now the hard work begins. This office needs all of our support and commitment as they are about to embark on the challenge of finding their way into the Greenpeace world, hurdling the planning meetings, learning how to leverage the national and international aspect of our campaign strategy, and finding the vision for the Congo that comes from the people of the Congo with the complete support of this organization.

Some of us returned to Kinshasa to ready ourselves for the trip to Poznan, where we will carry these stories forward in our fight to save the forests for the climate. Some of the team set sail today down the Congo River at 18 knots, and are now beginning preparations to do a solar generation workshop, led by Christian of GP China and the Kids for Forests team from Cameroun and Kinshasa. After the workshops they will do a solar installation and show movies on the solar cinema. We are not only showing our work defending forests and the people and ecosystems that depend on them, but also bringing in real solutions to the many needs and challenges of the Congo.

I want to say a final thanks to all of those that were there, the ship and its fantastic crew, the GP Africa staff and all the NROs and our civil society partners. It is most definitely a day I will not ever forget. Viva la Afrique!

Lots of love and warmth from our newest office in Africa!

Michelle Medeiros
Africa Campaign Coordinator
Greenpeace International

The Wall St. bailout plan has consumed a lot of our nation’s attention recently, as well it should. But in the meantime, H.R. 6049, the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008, which was passed by the Senate last week, is on the verge of dying a quiet death.

H.R. 6049 would extend existing tax credits for investment in renewable energy past the end of this year, when they’re currently set to expire. It is vital that Congress pass a bill renewing these credits to ensure that we keep moving towards a renewable energy future and away from the dirty fossil fuels of the past. Equally vital at this point in time is the economic stimulus these tax credits would provide – foreign investment and thousands of new jobs are just what our ailing economy desperately needs rigtht now.

As Van Jones put it this past weekend:

"We can't drill and burn our way out of this economic crisis. We can -- and must -- invest and invent our way out. 600,000 jobs have been lost this year alone. We need to free ourselves from our dependence on foreign oil, and instead invest in jobs in sustainable industries -- wind and solar, among others. Only then will we be able to fight poverty and pollution at the same time."

Unfortunately, the odds of the two houses of the current Congress getting it together and passing this bill are looking slimmer by the day. The House has passed several versions of H.R. 6049, and while it was encouraging to see the Senate vote in its favor last week, it was returned to the House bearing several unwelcome, regressive additions. Specifically, the Senate added provisions that would allow tax credits to promote high-carbon liquid fuels from oil shale, tar sands, and liquid coal. Greenpeace is calling on both the House and the Senate to reach agreement on a bill that does not include these provisions – we don’t need more investment in fuels that would contribute to global warming. We need real solutions, and we need them now!

(There are various sticking points between the House of Representatiaves and the Senate that are preventing passage of a final bill, but I'll spare you the wonky minutiae.)

The economic crisis we’re facing is a dire one, so the 110th Congress will likely stay in the Capitol until they get a bailout package passed. If only they felt such urgency about addressing the global warming crisis. It’s not likely the House will take up H.R. 6049 before adjourning for the Fall, which means the only hope of its passage before the renewable energy tax credits expire on Dec. 31st is a lame duck session after the November elections. It’s not impossible, but neither is it terribly likely. If there is no lame duck session, the credits will definitely expire, as our federal legislators won’t be back at work until the 111th Congress is sworn in next year.

We’ll keep following this story, and we’ll keep you updated.

This weekend, Green for All, Greenpeace and hundreds of others organizations are sponsoring a national mobilization to say, "I'm ready for the green economy." The goal is to bring attention to a solution for the two biggest problems we now face--a faltering economy and climate change. The solution? We should build a green economy strong enough to lift people out of poverty and to save our weakening economy.

What would a green economy look like? Imagine millions of workers working on thousands of old buildings that need to be weatherized, installing shimmering solar panels, and building towering wind turbines. There are public transit systems to be set up and smart electricity grids in need of engineers and electricians to design them.

Like most big problems facing the country, this is really a question of priorities. While Congress is debating this week about golden parachutes for failed CEOs and a $700 billion dollar bailout for Wall Street, others are looking at a cleaner, greener future as a way out of this economic mess.

From a Greenpeace op-ed in the Nation:

A recent report report by the Center for American Progress estimates that investing just $100 billion in the green economy (one-seventh the amount contemplated in the administration's proposed Wall Street bailout) would create 2 million new jobs, with a significant percentage of those coming in the struggling manufacturing and construction sectors. In contrast, investing that much money in the financial services sector would generate just 1.1 million jobs, according to an analysis conducted by the study's authors, Robert Pollin and Heidi Garrett-Peltier of the University of Massachusetts. In other words, Wall Street's offering about half the jobs for the same money: hardly a smart bet for the taxpayer.

A green investment on the level of the Wall Street bailout could create growth on a much larger scale, almost entirely eliminating unemployment and significantly raising middle-class incomes. Instead of golden parachutes for CEOs, the government could finance America's transition from an oil- and fossil-fuel-dependent economy into one run completely on clean energy. Instead of buying up bad McMansion mortgages, we could pay people to retrofit their houses with high-efficiency appliances and green roofs.

The green stimulus could reach far beyond the energy sector to provide income and employment for rural America as well. It could finance the conservation of tens or hundreds of millions of acres of wildlands, providing income to farmers and other landowners--and make possible a whole new generation of national parks. (Many of those lands are now under threat exactly because of too-easy credit: without limits on lending, it's been all too easy for real estate developers to find the cash to pave over back-country wilderness for sprawl and ranchettes).

 

The time has come to take a hard look at where we are in this nation and where we want to go. This weekend will be a chance to reflect on the possibilities before us and the consequences of our choices. The question is this: Do we want to leave the next generation in debt and in crisis from a dangerous climate or do we want to take the initiative and start the inevitable conversion to a green economy? To me the answer is obvious. What's less clear is what Congress will do. Make your voice heard at www.projecthotseat.org.