The Peter G. Peterson Foundation funded six groups from across the political spectrum to put forward plans addressing our nation’s fiscal challenges.  All the plans are here.   The Center for American Progress plan, “Budgeting for Growth and Prosperity” brings the deficit below 2% of GDP within 6 years and fully balances by 2030.

The CAP budget does so while boosting clean energy research and deployment funding roughly $10 billion a year — and instituting a high and rising CO2 price.  The plan achieves the CO2 reduction targets from the 2009 House climate and clean energy jobs bill (Waxman-Markey):  A 42% cut (from 2005 levels) by 2030, and 83% cut by 2050.

The CAP plan does not specify whether the carbon price would be instituted as a tax or some sort of trading mechanism.  Lower income groups are protected from the impact of higher energy prices through rebates and tax reform.  The plan creates a single 15% tax bracket for 80% of Americans.  Some of the additional clean energy funding can also go towards efficiency measures that will help lower people’s bills.

The CAP strategy probably isn’t a big surprise to Climate Progress readers.  But what is remarkable is that the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) takes a strikingly similar approach on the revenue side — a high and rising CO2 price!  As AEI’s plan, “A Balanced Plan for Fiscal Stability and Economic Growth,” explains:

Read more

If you tuned in to the House Natural Resources Committee this morning expecting to learn about roadblocks to wind and solar development, you may have been surprised to hear yet again about how to grow the profits of Big Oil companies.

Chairman Doc Hastings’ (R-WA) Natural Resources Committee bumped today’s hearing entitled “Identifying Roadblocks to Wind and Solar Energy on Public Lands and Waters – The Wind and Solar Industry Perspective.” They replaced it with part three of their oil above all look at gas prices, including witnesses associated with the Koch brothers and Jack Abramoff.

James Martin testified on behalf of the 60 Plus Association, which openly admits that they are “viewed as the conservative alternative to the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP).” As a 501 (c)(4), the 60 Plus Association does not reveal from where their funding comes, but it has been reported that Republican sources described the organization in 2010 as receiving “an influx of funds from the billionaire brothers, David and Charles Koch.” ThinkProgress also obtained a 2007 PowerPoint presentation prepared by the BP-funded front group “Consumer Energy Alliance,” in which the 60 Plus Association is listed as an “affiliated group”.

Another witness on the panel, Deneen Borelli, testified on behalf of the National Center for Public Policy Research, which once had Jack Abramoff on its Board of Directors. This connection is particularly of interest given that in her testimony, when discussing the need for a pro-growth energy strategy, Ms. Borelli states:

“There is something terribly wrong when the corporate and social elite can use the power of government to advance their narrow interests while harming the standard of living of hardworking Americans, denying us our right to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

Yet, she failed to recognized a recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll that shows 74 percent of voters support eliminating tax breaks to oil companies or that according to a March 2011 survey by polling firm Greenberg Quinlan & Rosner Research (GQCR), 52 percent of voters blame oil companies for the recent increase in gas prices.

Big Oil may be the largest example of “corporate and social elite” in the world, and they continue to rely on their friends in the Grand Oil Party to protect their taxpayer subsidies and push for policies that pad their shareholder’s pockets. The votes don’t lie. The GOP controlled house has taken 13 votes that directly benefit Big Oil. Today’s postponed wind and solar hearing is just one more example of the GOP’s plan to protect oil above all, rather than get serious about reducing gas prices with a comprehensive energy plan.

Joplin, Missouri happens to be represented by a climate science denier.   Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) loves to mock those who want to restrict global warming pollution — with unintentionally self-mocking comments (see video below):

In Missouri when we go from winter to spring, that’s a good climate change. I don’t want to stop that climate change you know. Who in the world want to put politicians in charge of the weather anyways?

Seriously.  And now E&E News (subs. req’d) reports that he wants to become Senator:

An engineer by training, who is seeking the Republican Senate nomination to take on Sen. Claire McCaskill (D) next year, Akin said the science supporting man-made climate change had always appeared thin to him.

Interesting that E&E News mentions his engineering training — that would be a B.S. in “management engineering” — and not, say, his “Master of Divinity degree at Covenant Theological Seminary in St. Louis.”  Hey, I’m not saying either matters in terms of his climate science denial — there are deniers with Ph.D. in physics while the Vatican itself says the science is real and requires immediate action — just that it’s interesting E&E plays up the engineering side.  But I digress.

Read more

The Earth Policy Institute reported on figures today showing that cancer is now the leading cause of death in China, accounting for a quarter of all deaths in the country. The most common type? Lung cancer – caused in large part by increasingly foul air due to a heavy reliance on coal:

Read more

Every major GOP presidential candidate is a flip-flopper on the most important issue of our time (see Tim Pawlenty: “Every one of us” running for president has flip-flopped on climate change).  But the presumptive front-runner is a professional flip-flopper, from his opposition to the Obama healthcare reform bill that his Massachusetts plan inspired to his embrace of the dirty energy he once tried to stop (see In 2003, Romney attacked coal jobs that “kill people”).

Now Think Progress documents one of Romney’s most bizarre flip-flops — his effort to wrap himself around the now successful auto bail out he once vilified.

Read more

The debate about the cleanliness of natural gas continues, as the National Energy Technology Laboratory weighs in with its own analysis comparing coal and gas.

Last month Climate Progress wrote about a new study from Cornell University ecology professor Robert Howarth, which found that shale gas was potentially as big a contributor to climate change than coal. By examining the impact of “fugitive emissions” of methane – a greenhouse gas that traps heat far better than CO2 – Howarth came to the conclusion that shale gas “may aggravate rather than mitigate global warming”:

Read more

U.S. sues big oil traders for 2008 market manipulation

Norway plans billion-dollar clean energy initiative for poor

Norway wants to channel billions of dollars to renewable energies in developing nations, building on a scheme to protect tropical forests to which Oslo has been the biggest donor, officials said.

Read more

Unrestricted emissions of greenhouse gases means more extreme weather events like deluges and droughts.  For the GOP, however, a vote to increase disaster relief money is just another opportunity to gut funding for clean energy — which would make it another positive or amplifying feedback, albeit much smaller than the really worrisome ones (see “The methane hydrate feedback revisited“).  Brad Johnson has the story.

In a stunningly heartless move, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) put strings on emergency relief for the victims of the killer Joplin tornado, saying that other government services would have to be cut to offset aid spending.

Read more

In a stunningly heartless move, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) put strings on emergency relief for the victims of the killer Joplin tornado, saying that other government services would have to be cut to offset aid spending. Yesterday afternoon, the House Appropriations committee passed an amendment by Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-AL) to add $1 billion in funding for the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) disaster relief fund, offset by funding reductions from the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program at the Department of Energy. Instead of cutting oil subsidies to pay for the costs of our nation’s increasing climate disasters, the GOP is actually working to increase our dependence on fossil fuels. On MSNBC’s Ed Show, Rep. Russ Carnahan (D-MO) called the decision “just plain wrong”:

When you talk about cutting clean energy programs versus cutting subsidies for big oil, let’s have that debate here in Washington. But not on the backs of the people of Joplin.

Watch it:

Furthermore, the disaster relief package only makes up for other draconian cuts Republicans made to disaster aid and firefighter assistance grants, which mean that “FEMA state and local programs would be reduced by 55 percent compared to levels for fiscal 2011, and by 70 percent compared to fiscal 2010.”

The deadliest twister in U.S. history since 1947 is the latest multi-billion-dollar climate disaster in this season of unprecedented death and destruction. Scientists have warned for decades that our climate system would grow deadlier as greenhouse pollution from coal and oil increases, with greater floods, heat waves, droughts, wildfires, and storms. Instead of responding to reality by mobilizing our nation to protect people from climate disasters and build a resilient, green economy, Republicans are keeping us tethered to big oil.

National Defense Authorization Act allows dirty fuel use

Sunlight from a solar collector on the roof of Utah State University’s Energy Laboratory in Logan, Utah, is sent through fiber optics to stimulate the growth of algae. USU was among several institutions to receive grant money in 2009 from the Department of Defense to research ways to convert algae into biofuels for military jets.

Daniel J. Weiss, in a CAP cross-post

The Department of Defense is the largest energy consumer in the nation. It’s made significant efforts to wean the military services from their sole dependence on fossil fuels””particularly jet and diesel fuel made from oil””to power their planes, ships, and vehicles. Pollution from burning these fuels contributes to global warming, which, according to military leaders, is a “threat multiplier” for national security. Instead, the services are developing more efficient aviation, naval, and terrestrial heavy equipment, and various cleaner domestic advanced biofuels.*

Unfortunately the House Armed Service Committee’s National Defense Authorization Act, H.R. 1540, would reverse this progress. Section 844 of the bill would actually allow the military to use alternative fossil fuels that produce more pollution than conventional fuels. The additional pollution would exacerbate global warming, which in turn would make our nation less secure. The House plans to debate H.R. 1540 over the next several days. Congress must remove this provision to enhance national security.

Read more