Feinstein unveils Dem plan to cut greenhouse gas

[mom cat]

Feinstein unveils Dem plan to cut greenhouse gas
Carl T. Hall, Jane Kay, Chronicle Staff Writers

Friday, August 25, 2006


Sen. Dianne Feinstein offered a new Democratic outline Thursday night of a plan to attack global warming in the next session of Congress -- and put political opponents on the defensive headed into the fall campaign season.

In a speech to the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco, California's senior senator unveiled a legislative package she intends to introduce when Congress reconvenes in January. The bills would require carmakers to improve mileage and would coax power producers to meet emission standards, while extending California-style green-technology programs nationwide.

"There now is a scientific consensus that global warming is happening and we can't stop it," Feinstein said during an interview. "The effort we have to make is to restrict it."

Parts of her speech touched on legislation already introduced, such as a requirement that cars, sport utility vehicles and light trucks get another 10 miles per gallon within 10 years.
more at:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/08/25/MNGCJKP5U61.DTL

[nam78_two]

1. ..

:thumbsup:

[mom cat]

3. There are some parts of her proposal that I have trouble with,

especially the reccommendations to increase the use of biofules that have a dubious overall net carbon savings. However the bonuses for planting trees is very important.

From the link in the OP:

"But Feinstein also called for new provisions, in particular a proposal to bring agriculture and forest managers into a market system for greenhouse gas emissions known as "cap and trade." This would allow farmers and landowners who plant trees or convert crops into bio-fuels to earn emission credits that could be sold to companies that exceed emission limits.

That could help alter the politics of the climate change debate in farm states and perhaps in some corporate circles, although coal producers have made clear that they will fight any program along the lines that Feinstein is proposing.

Internationally, the program would put the United States in a position to lead, Feinstein said, and would help coax countries such as China and India to hold down their emissions, too, despite fast-growing economies.

The goal would be to keep global temperature increases to a manageable 1 or 2 degrees by the end of the century. To do so by 2050, she said, the United States would have to cut carbon dioxide emissions to levels 70 percent below those of 1990."

[nam78_two]

4. yeah I am a little skeptical about biofuels myself

But I don't enough about them yet :shrug:
I see conflicting reports on how much they cut :shrug:...

But hey if that stops them from drilling in the ANWR and invading countries randomly for il, I'll take it.

Its very important to get India and China on board too.

Primarily I am glad to see SOME leadership or proposals on this issue at all though.

I mean the Bushies are doing NOTHING...its suicidal I tell you.

Back in 2001 some of my co-volunteers at the Sierra Club came up with an idea for a banner "Earth to W:Cool it"...we knew even then that this guy would do nothing about GW. But, honestly, we never in a million years thought he would be around this long :(. The way we figured, congress would change in 2002 and Bush would be out in 2004.... never ever thought NOTHING would be done about GW even in 2006....

:(

[mom cat]

7. And we can't afford two mor years of foot draging, not if we only

have 10 years to turn things around. The Dems must take the lead on this or there will be no tomorrow for all of us.

[pinto]

5. I agree on that one point. These trade off arrangements never seem

to work as planned. They're being used now in wetlands management and, where I live, in urban/rural development planning. Well meaning, I believe, but the implementation is something else on the ground. :shrug:

[tinrobot]

15. Biofuels is a very broad category

Some are inefficient, some aren't. A lot of times the same type of fuel can have different efficiencies depending on how it's produced. Ethanol from corn is a lot less efficient than ethanol from sugar.

I think biofuels definitely have a place in the equation, but we need to be very aware of how they're produced.

[ihelpu2see]

25. BioDiesel Is cheap to produce and can be run 100% in the south and up to

50% - 100% in the North, depending on temp. Ofcourse you must have a diesel. Tough to buy American if your looking for a diesel sedan

[krispos42]

26. Wind-powered ethanol plants!

One of the big complains about ethanol is the amount of natural gas used to distill it. Seems to me that using electical heating elements powered by dedicated wind turbine generators would sold that problem nicely.

Making ethanol plants in the Midwest would take two things the Midwest has plenty of, corn and wind, and turn it locally into fuel.

The wind turbiens, being elevated, have a fairly small footprint and can be placed on farms without taking up much acrage at all. Pipe some 440 volt 3-phase right to the distillation tanks and boil off the ethanol.

You see, transmitting the wind power electricity across the country to where most of the people are would result in having to built a massive electrical grid and would result in a lot of transmission losses. This way the wind energy is transformed into a easily-storable form that can be hauled over existing roads and rail lines, by, perhaps, biodiesel.

[AX10]

2. I also hope she works to oust Arnold too!

:kick:

[cascadiance]

19. Firing Arnie campaigner Angela Bradstreet would make a good start!

Bradstreet shouldn't be allowed to be co-chairs of both her campaign and Schwarzenegger's campaign and bad mouth Phil Angelides at the same time on DiFi's dime! Kick her off DiFi, and I just might vote for you instead of Mr. Chretien.

[Sanity Claws]

6. Does it include a ban on *'s farts in the white house?

[mom cat]

8. Actually, with a methane capture system, his farts might be worth

an eco-credit.

[Sanity Claws]

9. Now you have a mission in life.

Your job, if you decide to accept it, is to place a methane chamber around *'s ass. Good luck, my dear.

[mike_c]

10. as a member of the scientific community this pisses me off....

Scientists have been warning about global effects of greenhouse gases for DECADES, and there was a time when we could have prevented global warming, or at least significantly diminished the effects. Politicians displayed a singular lack of leadership when it might have made some difference-- future generations will likely regard their inaction as criminal. Given a choice between corporate profits and environmental protection on a planetary scale they chose short term and local business interests every time. NOW they want to do something when it becomes obvious that there might be some equally short term political benefit to at least appearing to give a rat's buttocks. Wait until the coastal cities have all been flooded, and our richest agricultural areas have dried up and blown away-- those same politicians will be looking for scapegoats then, but they'll still be dodging responsibility and effective solutions for all they're worth.

[Porcupine]

11. Do nothing for ten years, then do too little to make a diff.

Yeah, that's a great plan.

Here's a plan:

Tax every motor vehicle over 4000 lbs gross weight enough that it's cheaper to replace them in 5 years. Require Detroit to produce only hybrids on larger vehicles (actual fuel savings is WAY over replacing a Camry with a Prius) within 5 years.

Replace EVERY AC unit in the US over 5 years old with a geo-exchange heat pump. Replace the older units first. Financing would be via power bills; the consumer should see a slight reduction in costs after power plus finance costs are added.

Paint EVERY black roof in Southern and Western states with thermal reflective paint. The GHG emissions savings on this alone would be enormous.

Tax incandescent light bulbs and halogens so that they cost 1/3 more than comparable flourescents. Give the taxes back as credits to people on Social Security and in the bottom 1/3 of income brackets.

Start installing light rail systems in any city over 60K people. This would create a huge number of jobs as well as using the leftover steel from SUV's.

Build a high-speed passenger rail system. Hire the french to do the planning and management. This would get us trains as well as secure middle class jobs.

Create an "Organic Only" farm subsidy program. Factory farming is a huge producer of GHG's. Pesticide is oil and fertilizer is oil too. Every fenceline on every farm in america would be required to be planted with irrigated trees appropriate to the local climate. Where appropriate animal waste would be diverted to methane digesters at government expense. Methane could be used for farm power or converted to dimethyl-ether, a diesel compatiable fuel.

Create a new rural electrification program. This program would install windmills and solar panels on farmland across the US. The added technical workers in rural communities would revive fading rural towns.

That would be a emissions reduction program. Or at least the start of one.

[Doremus]

14. Some excellent ideas there.

Out of curiosity, I'm wondering the purpose of irrigated trees on fencelines. Does it have to do with soil erosion?

Reading your list, it's sadly obvious how very far we have to go ... :( Thanks for posting it.

[Porcupine]

17. Windbreak, tilth, wildlife, carbon sequestration, lumber and more...

West of the Missisippi you have to irrigate this kind of windbreak for a few years in order to get past seasonal droughts. East of there you just plant; further east you just prune.

Recently I read a short story about global climate change. The main character was proposing a radical change in agricultural techniques to fend off the coming ice age. It seems the acorn, chestnut and almond based agriculteral system had pulled so much carbon from the atmosphere that the globe was radically cooling.

The uses of hedges in a mixed coppice are too numerous to mention. Before industrializaton forced the people off the land in England they provided a significant portion of the food, building materials and food the peasantry lived off of.

[LongTomH]

27. You have some good suggestions, Porc

Could I add a few?

Painting roofs with heat-reflective paint is a pretty good idea; it would also reduce the A/C loads, further reducing energy consumption. Another excellent possibility is green roofs, planted with grass and/or roof gardens; green roofs would reduce heat absorption and produce oxygen. Community roof gardens could also provide fresh food, reducing the need to truck in vegetables, which would reduce fuel consumed in transport.

Light rail? Good idea! Here's another: monorails. These were a prominent feature of every "world of tomorrow" sunday supplement when I was growing up; they still look 'futuristic' to most people. There are operating, electric monorail systems in Europe and Japan. We should have them too, along with electric, bullet trains.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

31. Excellent suggestions, and I bet that implementing would not only

cost less than the invasion and occupation of Iraq but unlike said atrocity, would create thousands of well-paying jobs, which in turn would generate tax revenues and help meet pent-up demand for essentials that financially strapped people have been holding back on.

Unfortunately, most politicians think that "doing something" means nothing more than hydrogen-powered cars (hello? What's going to happen to all that water vapor?) and higher fuel economy standards.

I have some further suggestions:

1) Encourage research into the building of climate-friendly buildings for each region. In Minnesota, that would mean encouraging traditions such as screen porches for the summer and enclosed entryways and storm windows for the winter.

2) Do a Jimmy Carter and encourage people to dress more warmly in the winter and more casually in the summer in the workplace to avoid the extremes of winter overheating and summer overcooling. (Such a program is underway in Japan.)

3) Make it illegal to build a building with windows that don't open. In areas such as Hawaii and California, air conditioning is "needed" because there is no natural ventilation. Hawaii is "too hot" only in areas where the breezes don't reach, so the energy-smart solution is to allow only buildings that take advantage of prevailing winds.

4) Make it illegal to build housing tracts that have no pedestrian/cycling/transit means of reaching essential stores and services.

[Clarkie1]

12. Good for her. Better late than never. nt

[VegasWolf]

13. I want to know if she is pro-war. People are dying every day. C'mon

Feinstien, priorities. I guess she simply doesn't want to focus on antiwar issues.

[amandabeech]

16. It is a real start by a moderate Democrat. Biofuels have problems

not only in net carbons, but also in net energy. It takes lots of natural-gas based nitrogen fertilizer, petroleum-based pesticides and diesel powered farm implements and transport to get ethanol from corn, which cannot be efficiently shipped through our existing pipeline system.

Its not just organic farming that can help, but using composted fertilizer from food system wastes that can help sequester carbon in our soils that suffer a carbon deficit as a result of chemical fertilizers. We will also then decrease our need for newly mined phosphorus and potassium. We have only a 70-90 year supply of mineral phosphorus in the U.S., and phosphorus is as important to plant growth as is nitrogen.

In addition, soils with high organic carbon/decayed plant matter not only absorb and hold moisture at least 10% better than chemically fertilized soils, but they also contain important micro-plants and micro-bugs that make the soil more fertile. In the process of composting, food and food animal waste gives off methane, which can be captured and used to generate electricity or to heat buildings. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas resulting from natural decay of vegetable matter. When it is burned it turns to carbon dioxide, which although a greenhouse gas, is much less potent than methane.

In addition, lots of material going into our landfills is recyclable today or will be in the near future. Wood can be burned for heat. Thermodepolymerization may allow us to turn many plastic and synthetic materials into oil and carbon which can be buried. I know that I've filled landfill space with many empty yogurt cartons and ruptured pantyhose, just for starters. Much other material can either be composed for fertilizer or incinerated in a way that produces gas for syn fuel production. As a last resort, landfill gas, which is at least half methane, can be burned for electricity or heating.

Reuse. Recycle. Compost. Ride share in that old SUV. Landscape with lots of trees and bushes. Plant a few little tomatoes and green beans. Sequester.

There's a lot that can be done that will lower our greenhouse gas emissions and lower our requirement for newly pumped or mined transportation fuels.

I invite all DUers to visit the Energy and Environment forum here at DU. Read the archives and follow the discussions. I encourage all to consider with an open mind nuclear power as as opposed to coal and in addition to renewables in our quest for a doable, low energy lifestyle in light of global warming and the end of easy liquid transportation fuels. NNadir, a frequent pro-nuke, anti-coal poster, has submitted posts that everyone should consider, IMHO, in light of global warming and limits on transportation fuels.

This summer has been a real wake-up call here in the U.S. not only for global warming, but also for limited carbon fuels. A few more summers like this, and everyone but hard core right-wing nuts will be screaming for change. We Democrats can be there to answer with a multi-faceted creative plan to begin to address both problems with relatively simple and easy to understand plans. We can also use the next few years to suggest lifestyle changes that many might find pleasant and that can also yield lower carbon and liquid fuel usage, such as a movement to upgrade the status of home vegetable gardening and lower energy entertainment. We need to remember that what we need is a good start, not an immediate revolution.

The repukes, after all, will offer nada.

[leesa]

18. DLC crap..."coax" power producers to meet emission standards

10 MPG within 10 years?!? DiFi is damned near worthless.

[cosmicdot]

30. I wondered who/what drafted this 'legislative package'

I think you hit the nail on the head

"another 10 miles per gallon within 10 years"

so, an SUV getting 16 MPG might reach 26 MPG in 2016?

is this what centrism delivers?
is this the 'moderate' approach to our amassing crises (I purposely didn't write 'problems')?

progress at a snail's pace, if that, with corporate america's special interests in tow? solving our crises with corporate american interests (legislator's investments) writing the legislation??

someone who loves research might want to analyze Feinstein's
last personal financial statement (it's so long it's in 5 PDF parts) to see if she or her husband is invested in any businesses which might profit (or be hurt by a more progressive approach)

http://www.opensecrets.org/pfds/candlook.asp?CID=N00007364

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.asp?CID=N00007364&cycle=2006

she lost my vote when she voted for the 2001 tax cut ... the ribbon-cutting kick-off bill of the Bu$h-Cheney agenda ...


Energy/Nat Resource PAC money
$55,000

Oil & Gas
$18,000

American Gas Assn
$1,000

Cargill Inc
$4,000

Chevron Corp
$10,000

Independent Oil Producers' Agency
$500

Occidental Petroleum
$2,500

Misc Energy
$8,500

Bechtel Group
$4,500

National Assn of Water Companies
$1,000

Shaw Group
$3,000

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/memberprofile.asp?cid=N00007364&cycle=2006&expand=E07

[OneBlueSky]

20. it's fluff . . . not even close to what needs to be done . . . n/t

.

[Harry Monroe]

21. We can cut a lot of greenhouse "gas" from the atmosphere in November...

...by voting the Republicans out of office!!!!

[gauguin57]

22. If we don't fix the planet, all the rest will mean nothing.

Not tax cuts, not the estate tax, not education, not social programs, not Medicare or Social Security ... NONE of it.

If we don't fix the planet, we'll all be living in third-world countries before we all choke on our excess and die, or outright DROWN, and none of the rest will matter.

[civildisoBDence]

23. Throwing popsicles at hell

These regulations are better than nothing, but only slightly better.

We Americans are so spoiled and selfish we'd endanger the whole planet before giving up a few luxuries.

Bush and his minions will go down in history as some of the most craven assholes ever--and the right wing hate machine, with their anti-science, anti-nature, anti-logic screeds that give big oil and big industry cover, should be the first to rot in hell.

Enjoy the popsicles, you evil bastards.

Satire as thick as a president's skull

[Uncle Joe]

24. I believe this to be way short of what needs to be done, however

I am still recommending because no one else to my knowledge in Washington is addressing this problem. One point I do differ with, if global temperatures rise by 9 degrees and the Greenland or Antarctic ice sheets melt, sea levels will rise far more than 2 feet.

[karynnj]

28. Actually several people are

In addition to Gore, who while not in DC is making this a voting issue, John Kerry has a proposal and I think Hillary may too.

Here is a link to Kerry's speech last month on it.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/speeches/spc_2006_06_26.html

[The2ndWheel]

29. More 10 year plans, outstanding

All improved mileage and emission standards will do is cause more people to use more energy.