Major legislative compromises are unsatisfying by design. They invariably have good, bad, and ugly parts.

I have previously argued that the Democrats would be smart to compromise on offshore drilling (see “Since offshore oil is de minimis, why shouldn’t Obama and the Dems make a deal? Part 1“) The rest of this series will examine whether the so-called Gang-of-10 deal is in fact a smart compromise.

That question can be rephrased as, does the good beat out the bad and the ugly [as, of course, Clint did in the epic spaghetti western]?

I will focus here on the main good-and-bad pieces of the “New Energy Reform Act of 2008.” Part 3 will cover the smaller pieces, including the one I think is really, really ugly.

THE GOOD

The best part by far is:

Enhancing Conservation [sic]
To ease gas prices and protect our environment during the transition, the proposal includes a significant federal commitment to promoting conservation and efficiency [sic]. These include:
• Extending renewable energy, carbon mitigation and energy conservation and efficiency tax incentives, including the production tax credit, through 2012 to create greater certainty and spur greater investment.

[Note to Gang-of-10 Dems: Please stop buying into the GOP frame that renewables are the same as "conservation and efficiency." That's how they try to pigeonhole all progressive solutions -- Doing with less. New renewables, including solar baseload, are a serious supply option that are all but certain to deliver more new kilowatt hours through 2050 and beyond than new nuclear power plants and coal with carbon capture and storage combined.]

Assuming this includes the solar investment tax credit along with the PTC, then this is far and away the most important piece of the legislation. Renewables have had to contend with uncertain year-by-year renewal for a long time. Consider the effect on the wind power, as this chart from a Union of Concerned Scientists study shows:

Read more

In the second report of its “Wake Up Call” series on global warming’s worsening of extreme weather, the National Wildlife Federation describes how the western United States has entered a new era of catastrophic wildfires, brought on by global warming, past forest management, and poor land development.

The frequency of large wildfires and the total area burned have been steadily increasing in the Western United States. Warmer springs and longer summer dry periods since the mid-1980s are linked to a four-fold increase in the number of major wildfires each year and a six-fold increase in the area of forest burned compared with the period between 1970 and 1986. The fire season stretches about 78 days longer and individual fires last about 30 days longer.

In a video, the National Wildlife Federation’s climate scientist, Amanda Staudt, describes how “global warming will increase the risk of wildfires.” Watch it:

Global warming increases wildfire risk in several ways. From the report, Increased Risk of Catastrophic Wildfires: Global Warming’s Wake-Up Call for the Western United States:

– Longer fire seasons will result as spring runoff occurs earlier, summer heat builds up more quickly, and warm conditions extend further into fall. Western forests typically become combustible within a month of when snowmelt finishes. Snowpack is now melting 1 to 4 weeks earlier than it did 50 years ago.

– Drier conditions will increase the probability of fire occurrence. Summertime temperatures in western North America are projected to be 3.6 to 9 degrees Fahrenheit higher by mid-century, enhancing evaporation rates, while precipitation is expected to decrease by up to 15 percent.

– More fuel for forest fires will become available because warmer and drier conditions are conducive to widespread beetle and other insect infestations, resulting in broad ranges of dead and highly combustible trees. Higher temperatures enhance winter survival of mountain pine beetles and allow for a more rapid lifecycle. At the same time, moderate drought
conditions for a year or longer can weaken trees, allowing bark beetles to overcome the trees’ defense mechanisms more easily.

– Increased frequency of lightning is expected as thunderstorms become more severe. In the western United States a 1.8 degree Fahrenheit increase in temperature is expected to lead to a 6 percent increase in lightning. This means that lightning in the region could increase by 12 to 30 percent by mid-century.

Not only is global warming worsening wildfires (despite Joel Achenbach’s protestations), but catastrophic wildfires are hastening global warming, by rapidly releasing carbon it took the forests decades, even centuries, to store:

In recent years, fires in the western United States have released carbon dioxide into the atmosphere equivalent to about 11 percent of their annual fossil fuel emissions. In some Western states a fire spanning over just a couple months can emit nearly as much carbon dioxide as its total annual fossil fuel emissions.

This vicious cycle is one of many dangerous experiments humanity is running on its only planet through unmoderated pollution. Recent scientific reports have discussed how oceanic dead zones caused by fertilizer runoff and air pollution have reached catastrophic levels. Atmospheric oxygen is declining, reaching hazardous lows in urban centers. And rapidly declining arctic sea ice is leading to permafrost melt, which has kept frozen thirty percent of all soil-based carbon for hundreds of thousands of years.

What epic gaffe could unite Colorado’s Democratic Senator Ken Salazar — “over my dead body” — and Republican U.S. Senate candidate Bob Schaffer – “Over my cold, dead, political carcass“?

That would be Arizona Senator John McCain telling The Pueblo Chieftan on Thursady that he wants to renegotiate the famous 1922 Colorado River compact to take water from the so-called upper basin states, including CO and NM, where the river originates and give it to lower basin states like his home state of AZ:

“I don’t think there’s any doubt the major, major issue is water and can be as important as oil. So the compact that is in effect, obviously, needs to be renegotiated over time amongst the interested parties. I think that there’s a movement amongst the governors to try, if not, quote, renegotiate, certainly adjust to the new realities of high growth, of greater demands on a scarcer resource’.

In short, the fact that lots and lots of people keep moving into the desert means Colorado should give up more of its water.

[Note to McCain -- Given your recent history of misinformation and disinformation on the subject (see "Will McCain's cynical lies destroy the chance for serious energy and climate policy?"), I'd skip the analogy to oil.]

Them’s fighting words — literally! The word rival, after all, comes from “people who share the same river.” In the West they say, “Whiskey’s for drinking, water’s for fighting.” See also “Warming Will Worsen Water Wars.”

Needless to say, Coloradans do not see things the way that the senator from Arizona does. Democratic Governor Bill Ritter pointed out McCain seems utterly unaware that the compact was just renegotiated in December:

“Just last year, the seven states entered into a new implementing agreement, and that agreement is working as intended,” Ritter said. “It would be sheer folly to re-open the compact at a time like this when all of the states are working cooperatively on this issue.”

In a piece titled, “McCain suggests raiding Colorado’s water,” the deputy editorial page editor of The Denver Post wrote Friday on behalf of “Five million thirst-crazed Coloradans”:

Read more