NSAC Issues Climate Change Recommendations Under Farm Bill

Posted June 26, 2014

A year after the President’s Climate Action Plan, the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) announced the availability of  “Climate Change and Agriculture Recommendations for Farm Bill Conservation Program Implementation” document, according to an article on Agri-Pulse available here. KTIC also published the article here.

The document states principles and recommendations for the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NCRS) to consider as it implements conservation programs under the 2014 Farm Bill.

“Farmers and ranchers have unique climate change solutions to offer,” said Jeff Schahczenski of the National Center for Appropriate Technology, based in Montana. “Changes in agricultural practices can help farmers and ranchers not only adapt to the consequences of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, but also mitigate them.”

The NSAC document is based on a set of principles for addressing climate change adaptation and mitigation through NRCS conservation programs.

“NRCS programs help farmers prevent the degradation of critical natural resources, such as soil, water, air quality, and wildlife,” said Mark Schonbeck, Virginia Association for Biological Farming. “Surely, in this day and age, our climate rates as a most critical natural resource, one that merits NRCS assistance to those who produce our food and whose capacity to do so depends on a benign and stable future climate.”

NRCS is writing program rules that address the changes to conservation programs directed by the 2014 Farm Bill. The rules are expected to release this summer, according to the agency.

For more information on farm bills, please visit the National Agricultural Law Center’s website here.

EPA Seeking 30 Percent Reduction in Carbon Dioxide Emissions by 2030

Posted June 3, 2014

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a draft rule seeking 30 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2030, based on 2005 emission levels from existing power plants, according to an article on Hoosier Ag Today by Gary Truitt available here. USA Today also published an article with video available here, Forbes here, and The Energy Collective here.

The American Farm Bureau Federation said this proposal would harm the nation’s economy, rural communities, and America’s farm and ranch families while leading to higher energy prices. 

Roger Johnson, National Farmers Union President, urges EPA to recognize rural electric cooperatives serve the nation’s farmers and ranchers by providing power to 42 million Americans, accounting for 12 percent of the total U.S. electricity sales. Any regulatory action must consider the impact on rural electrics and the communities they serve.

The EPA Plan is President Obama’s largest climate effort thus far, according to USA Today.

“This is not just about disappearing polar bears or melting ice caps,” said EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy. “This is about protecting our health and our homes. This is about protecting local economies and jobs.” McCarthy said the proposal will spur innovation and create jobs.

The regulations will be announced June 3 and target existing power plants, which could put a heavy burden on utilities getting electricity from coal, and ratepayers who will suffer the cost of pollution controls and alternative sources of electricity, according to Forbes.

Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act also gives the EPA authority to modify the rules for existing power plants, such as grandfathering older plants under theory that they will reach the end of their useful lives to justify the cost of expensive pollution controls.

For more information on the Clean Air Act, please visit the National Agricultural Law Center’s website here.

Grassley Voices Concerns over EPA’s Methane Reduction Plan

Posted April 23, 2014

Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) voiced his concern about how the Obama administration’s methane-reduction efforts would affect dairy farms in a letter available here.  The Hill reported on the story here.

The administration recently released a plan to reduce methane emissions and the EPA released technical papers on methane emissions.

In his letter, Grassley asked several questions including: how many other countries incentivize or require methane reducing protocols for their dairy or livestock industries?; what percent of average size dairy farms would need to install anaerobic digesters to create a 25 percent reduction in methane emissions by 2020?; and what are the typical costs and payoff time for an anaerobic digester on an average size dairy or livestock farm?

Grassley does not agree with the administration’s biogas plan, according to an article by WHOtv available here.  While the plan uses voluntary strategies to reduce emissions from livestock, Grassley says regulating greenhouse gasses is difficult to do on farms. 

According to the Economic Research Service, “the agriculture sector produces about 10 percent of U.S. greenhouse gasses.  Despite being offset by forestry efforts, which removes 13 percent of U.S. emissions, livestock methane emissions make up around a fourth of total agriculture emissions.”

For more information on climate change, please visit the National Agricultural Law Center’s website here.

EPA Releases Technical Papers on Methane Emissions

Posted April 18, 2014

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently released a series of technical white papers about sources of methane emissions and asked the public to comment on the research to assist in EPA’s efforts to reduce emissions of methane, according to an article by The Hill available here.  The oil and gas journal also reported on the story here.

The papers, available here, address ways in which methane may be released into the atmosphere: natural gas compressors, hydraulic fracturing, leaks during natural gas production, removing liquids in gas wells, and pneumatic devised used in the gas industry.

“The white papers will help EPA solidify our understanding of certain sources of methane and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions in the oil and natural gas industry,” said the EPA in a statement.  “Methane is a potent greenhouse gas, and VOCs contribute to the formation of harmful ground-level ozone (smog).”

The papers follow the administration’s unveiling of its strategy to reduce methane emissions as part of President Obama’s efforts to reduce climate change.

EPA has not said it will write new regulations to curb methane emissions, but the papers indicate that the agency may be a step closer to considering new regulations.

For more information on climate change, please visit the National Agricultural Law Center’s website here.

White House Announces Proposal to Reduce Methane Emissions

Posted April 1, 2014

On Friday, the administration announced a proposal to reduce methane emissions, including a plan to lower U.S. dairy greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent by 2020, according to an Agri-Pulse article available here.

The USDA, EPA, and the Department of Energy, along with the dairy industry will release a “biogas roadmap” in June outlining voluntary strategies to accelerate adoption of methane digesters and other cost-effective technologies.

The plan would also cut methane emissions from landfills, coal mining, and oil and gas systems.  Methane emissions make up almost 9 percent of all greenhouse gas emitted as a result of human activity in the U.S.  Since 1990, methane pollution has decreased by 11 percent, but “methane pollution is projected to increase to a level equivalent to over 620 million tons of carbon dioxide pollution in 2030 absent action to reduce emissions.”

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) and the National Farmers Union (NFU) praised the administration’s announcement. 

“This announcement validates the path the dairy industry is on – one focused on proactive incentives that can increase farm income, not punitive regulations that would add more costs,” said NMPF president and CEO, Jim Mulhern.

“NFU is pleased that the administration’s strategy to reduce methane emissions recognizes that farmers and ranchers are important partners in the effort to solve our nation’s climate challenges,” said NFU Senior Vice President of Programs Chandler Goule in a statement available here. 

Oil and natural gas companies were less enthusiastic about the announcement according to an article by the Wall Street Journal available here.  America’s Natural Gas Alliance and the American Petroleum Institute did not criticize the announcement, but “pointed out how the industry was already and will continue cutting its methane emissions without new regulations.”

For more information on climate change, please visit the National Agricultural Law Center’s website here.  

USDA Announces Regional Hubs to Mitigate Climate Change

Posted February 10, 2014

Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack recently announced the creation of seven regional “climate hubs” for risk adaptation and mitigation of climate change, according to the USDA news release available here.

The “climate hubs” will address risks such as fire, invasive pests, floods, and droughts on a regional basis, “aiming to translate science and research into information to farmers, ranchers, and forest landowners on ways to adapt and adjust their resource management.”

“For generations, America’s farmers, ranchers and forest landowners have innovated and adapted to challenges.  Today, they face a new and more complex threat in the form of a changing and shifting climate, which impacts both our nation’s forests and our farmers’ bottom line,” said Vilsack.

The hubs will provide outreach information to producers “on ways to mitigate risks; public education about the risks climate change poses to agriculture, ranchlands and forests; regional climate risk and vulnerability assessments; and centers of climate forecast data and information.”  They will also link universities, nongovernmental organizations, federal agencies, Native Nations, state departments of environment and agriculture research centers, and farm groups working on climate change risk adaptation and mitigation.

CNN and USA Today also reported on the story here and here.

For more information on climate change, please visit the National Agricultural Law Center’s website here.

Court Finds BLM Failed to Meet Regulatory Requirements

Posted January 6, 2014

In Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance v. Burke, No. 2:12CV257DAK, 2013 WL 5916815, D. Utah (Nov. 4, 2013), the United States District Court for the District of Utah considered a case involving the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) decision in approving resource management and travel plans governing the management of 2.1 million acres of BLM land in south-central Utah.  The court held that the BLM failed to meet regulatory requirements to implement the minimization criteria by examining the relevant data and articulating a satisfactory explanation for its action.  For a copy of the decision, please contact the National Agricultural Law Center at nataglaw@uark.edu.  For more information on environmental law, please visit the Center’s Environmental Law Reading Room here. 

Background

Plaintiffs, several conservation groups including Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, Natural Resources Defense Council, Wilderness Society, National Parks Conservation Association, Grand Canyon Trust, Sierra Club, National Trust for Historic Preservation, Center for Native Ecosystems, and the Utah Rivers Council filed an action against the Acting Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management at the U.S. Department of the Interior.  Id. at *1. The groups appealed the BLM’s 2008 Richfield RMP and Travel Plan.  Id.  

The Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) directs the BLM prepare land use plans to govern the management of public lands. Id. (citing 43 U.S.C. § 1712(a)).  The FLPMA requires the BLM to manage public lands “under principles of multiple use and sustained yield” and “in a manner that will protect the quality of scientific, scenic, historical, ecological, environmental, air and atmospheric, water resource, and archaeological values.” Id. (citing § 1732(a), § 1702(a)(8)).  Id.  The RMP balances factors and multiple uses of public lands.  Id. 

Analysis and Holding

In short, this case involved the environmental sensitivity of areas surrounding off-highway vehicle (OHV) routes, road and trail designations, air quality standards, designation of Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs), and designation of wild and scenic rivers.  Id. at *3. 

The plaintiffs argued that BLM violated its own OHV minimization criteria, 43 C.F.R. § 8342.1(a)-(c); the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. § 4332(2)(c); the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), 16 U.S.C. § 470f; federal and state air quality standards, 43 U.S.C. § 1712(c)(8); the FLPMA, 43 U.S.C. § 1712(a); and the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (WRSA), 16 U.S.C. §§ 1273(b), 1286(b).  Id. 

The court held that: (1) the BLM failed to apply the minimization criteria when it prepared the Travel Plan; (2) the BLM complied with NEPA’s “hard look” requirement with respect to the impacts of OHVs; (3) the BLM violated the NHPA by failing to take into account the impact of OHV routes on archeological sites; (4) the BLM sufficiently considered the impacts of OHVs in the context of climate change; (5) the BLM complied with FLPMA when considering air quality standards; (6) the BLM complied with prioritizing ACECs, with the exception of the proposed Henry Mountains ACEC; and (7) the BLM complied with the WRSA in its determinations of eligible and suitable rivers, except Happy Canyon, Buck, and Pasture Canyons spring areas.  Id. at *19.   

Northeastern States Urge EPA to Support National Carbon Market

Posted December 9, 2013

Nine Northeastern states making up the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative are urging the EPA to mirror its program for a national carbon market, according to an article by Forbes available here.

Final federal rules for emissions from existing coal plants are expected soon, and the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) recently sent a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, writing, “Our experience with the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative demonstrates that regional cooperation can achieve the most cost-effective emission reductions, enable a transition to a lower-emitting and more efficient power sector and create economic benefits and jobs across the United States.”

The RGGI says that “its participating members have reduced their heat-trapping emissions by 40 percent between 2005 and 2012.” 

The EPA revised its proposals to reduce carbon dioxide levels in September.  The EPA news release is available here.  Under the new proposal, all future coal plants would “need to be as clean as combined cycled natural gas units.”  As a practical matter, “those units would need to incorporate carbon capture and sequestration technologies” which are presently “distant and expensive.”

The RGGI has a “declining cap and a corresponding change in the cost of carbon allowances, all of which create market signals to support fuel switching on and on-site efficiency.”

RGGI has successfully resulted in declining carbon dioxide emissions and a regional economy that has grown by more than $1.6 billion in economic value.  Additionally, consumers have “saved $1.1 billion in electricity bills, and 16,000 new jobs have been created region-wide.”

States in the RGGI include Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maryland, and Delaware.  New Jersey dropped out of the program in 2011, according to an article by the Hartford Business Journal, available here.

For more information on climate change, please visit the National Agricultural Law Center’s website here.

NALC Resource: State Law Clearinghouse

Posted October 22, 2013

The State Law Clearinghouse, available here, is a free resource provided by the National Agricultural Law Center.  

The Clearinghouse is an ongoing project to compile all state statutes that exist in specific topics of agricultural law.  State laws may vary widely from one state to the next, even when the area of law is the same.  This resource allows a researcher to obtain targeted, state-specific information on the issue by providing a complete statutory text along with the date of possible expiration.

Statute compilations posted to date include: Agricultural liens, agritourism, alternative dispute resolution (ADR), animal cruelty, animal identification, biofuels, climate change, farm animal confinement, fence law, recreational use, and right-to-farm.

To use, simply click on a state and a drop down menu will appear with the names of the topics of the statutes that have been assembled for that state.  From there, click on the appropriate state, and a document will open with the applicable information.  If a topic is missing from a state’s drop down menu, laws on that topic have not yet been passed in that state.

Ninth Circuit Issues Opinion in CA Low Carbon Fuel Standard Case

Posted September 27, 2013

In Rocky Mountain Farmers Union v. Corey, et al., No. 12-15135 (9th Cir. Sept. 18, 2013), a three judge panel from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld California’s low carbon fuel standard (LCFS).  The Court reversed a District Court ruling which held that California’s LCFS violated the dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.  The opinion is available here. 

The Court stated: “For dormant Commerce Clause purposes, economic protectionism, or discrimination, “simply means different treatment of in-state and out-of-state economic interests that benefits the former and burdens the latter… Absent discrimination, we will uphold the law ‘unless the burden imposed on [interstate] commerce is clearly excessive in relation to the putative local benefits.’”  Pike v. Bruce Church, Inc. 397 U.S. at 137 (1970). 

The Court remanded the case for trial to consider whether the regulations “placed an undue burden on interstate commerce” applying the Pike balancing test.

In holding that California’s LCFS mandate did not violate the U.S. Constitution, the Ninth Circuit also removed an injunction that had stopped the implementation of the law, according to an ABC News article available here.  The LCFS is a “key piece” of California’s “landmark global warming law,” AB 32, and aims to cut the state’s dependence on petroleum by 20 percent by 2020. 

The LCFS “calculates the life cycle of fuels from their extraction – or cultivation, in the case of biofuels such as corn based ethanol – to their combustion,” according to an LA Times article available here.

This decision allows the California Air Resources Board to begin implementing the law.  Air Resources Board spokesman Dave Clergern said the decision was “a very good step for Californians and the fight against climate change.”

Tim O’Connor of the Environmental Defense Fund said, “The court clearly upheld a groundbreaking policy that will protect consumers and the environment by diversifying our fuel mix and providing more choices for a clean energy future.”

Charles T. Drevna, president of the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, said the law’s “broad reach and intended scope means that implementing the [fuel standards] will have adverse consequences throughout the nation’s fuel refining facilities and supply chain far beyond California’s boarders.”

For more information on Renewable Energy and Climate Change, please visit the National Agricultural Law Center’s website here and here.

USDA Releases Report on Methods for Quantifying GHG Emissions and Removals

Posted September 4, 2013

USDA has released a report containing methods for quantifying entity-scale greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and removals from the agricultural and forestry sectors.  The notice, available here, seeks comments from the public on the proposed methods. 

The report, available here, was mandated by the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008.  It was prepared by 38 technical experts and reviewed by 29 scientific reviewers.  USDA “anticipates that the methods will be used by landowners and USDA to improve management practices and identify actions to reduce GHG emissions and increase carbon sequestration.”  The guidelines and methods “could also be used by farmers, ranchers, and forest owners to facilitate their participation in voluntary state and regional GHG registries and programs.”

According to the Report Fact Sheet, project methods will include the estimation of carbon sequestration and GHG emissions reductions associated with farm, ranch, and forest management activities including: cropland soils, agro-forestry, enteric fermentation, field residue burning, fertilizer management, forest management, manure management, lime applications, afforestation, grazing land management, wetland soils, and rice production.

USDA highlighted transparency, consistency, comparability, completeness, accuracy, cost effectiveness, and ease of use as key considerations in the development of the methods and estimation tools in the report.

USDA will accept comments through October 11, 2013.  

First GHG and Efficiency Standards for Trucks and Buses Announced

The New York Times reports that the "federal government announced the first national emission and fuel economy standards for heavy vehicles on Monday."

The mileage proposal "will apply to tractor-trailers, buses, delivery vans, heavy pickup trucks, cement mixers and many other classes of vehicles.  It will cover new vehicles manufactured between 2014 and 2018."

Lisa Jackson, administrator of the EPA said that the "national standards were an extension of the mileage and emission rules that the administration had already adopted for passenger cars and light trucks.  She said that the lower fuel costs for the truckers would more than cover the costs of the technology used to meet the new standards and would create jobs in truck manufacturing and related industries."

The standards are based on a study "issued this year by the National Academy of Sciences which found that existing technology -- including low-rolling-resistance tires, improved aerodynamics, more efficient engines, hybrid electric drive systems and idling controls could cut fuel use in trucks by a third to a half."

To read the New York Times story, click here.
To read the EPA News Release, click here.

Posted: 10/26/2010

Health Organizations Express Support for EPA Regulation of GHGs

Several health organizations urged the President and Congress to allow the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, according to The Hill's Energy and Environment Blog.

The American Medical Association, the American Lung Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American College of Preventative Medicine are among the groups who sent the letter.

The letter states, "In order to prepare for changes already under way, it is essential to strengthen our public health system so it is able to protect our communities from the health effects of heat waves, wildfires, floods, droughts, infectious diseases, and other events."  The letter continues, saying that "we must also address the root problem, which means reducing the emissions that contribute to climate change."

For the full-text of the letter, click here.
To read the The Hill Blog's story, click here.

Posted: 09/29/2010

ERS Releases Report on the Role of Agriculture in Reducing GHG Emissions

USDA's Economic Research Service (ERS) released a report titled "The Role of Agriculture in Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions."

The report addresses how agriculture could "play a prominent role in U.S. efforts to address climate change if farms and ranches undertake activities that reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions or take greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere."  Some of these activities could include "shifting to conservation tillage, reducing the amount of nitrogen fertilizer applied to the crops, changing livestock and manure management practices, and planting trees and grass."

The "Federal Government is considering offering carbon offsets and incentive payments to encourage rural landowners to pursue these climate-friendly activities as part of a broader effort to combat climate change."

To read the full-text of the ERS Report, click here.

Posted: 09/10/2010

Study Shows Vegetarianism More Effective in Reducing GHG Emissions

A recent study titled "Food-Miles and the Relative Climate Impacts of Food Choices in the United States" concludes that dietary changes to consume less meat and dairy products or shifting to a vegetarian diet "achieves more [greenhouse gas] GHG reduction than buying all locally sourced food."

The study, available here, found that "although food is transported long distances in general (1640 km delivery and 6760 km life-cycle supply chain on average) the GHG emissions associated with food are dominated by the production phase, contributing 83% of the average U.S. household's 8.1 t CO2e/yr footprint for food consumption."  Different food groups "exhibit a large range in GHG-intensity; on average red meat is around 150% more GHG-intensive than chicken or fish."

The study was conducted by Christopher L. Weber and H. Scott Matthews of the Department of Civil Engineering and Department of Engineering and Public Policy at Carnegie Mellon University.  Funding for the study was provided by an EPA Science to Achieve Results Fellowship and a National Science Foundation MUSES grant.

To read the full-text of the study click here.

Posted: 09/01/2010

EPA Rules to Regulate Greenhouse Gases Will Be "Modest"

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will begin regulating greenhouse gases from power plants and other large emission sources in 2011, but "vows to phase in the requirements slowly and shield small businesses" according to The Hill's Energy & Environment Blog.

Lisa Jackson, EPA Administrator, said that the rules would be "modest" because "business needs time to understand the regulations that are coming at them.  There won't be any huge shocks to the system."

Some lawmakers "hope to derail EPA's ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions; regulations also face court challenges.  Critics of the regulations allege they will harm the economy, while defenders call the fears overblown and say the rules are needed to help slow global warming."

Congress has failed, thus far, to pass climate change legislation this year.  The "House approved a sweeping  plan in mid-2009.  But a climate bill is widely considered dead in the Senate this year after Democratic leaders -- facing opposition from Republican and centrist Democrats -- abandoned the measure before the August break."  For more information on this issue, click here to read a past US Ag&Food Law and Policy Blog post on the subject.

To read The Hill's Energy and Environment Blog post, click here.

Posted: 08/31/2010

Climate Change Legislation Appears "Dead" in Congress

Keith Good at FarmPolicy.com reports that as "food safety concerns gain additional attention, climate change legislative issues appear to be fading during the August recess.

House Agriculture Chairman Collin Peterson told feed industry executives on Monday that carbon cap and trade legislation was effectively "dead" in Congress, according to the MinnPost.  The Senate is short of votes for "any significant climate change measure at all" and "environmental lobbyists are scaling back their efforts on a large-scale climate bill because they too have come to privately accept that it won't happen this year."

The EPA, however, will now try to regulate emissions under the Clean Air Act.  The EPA ruled in 2009 that greenhouse gases endangered human health, which "paves the way for regulating emissions under the Clean Air Act."

Peterson and MO Rep. Ike Skelton proposed a measure that would forbid the EPA from regulating carbon under the Clean Air Act, but this legislation did not make it to the floor.

To read the FarmPolicy.com post, click here.
To read the MinnPost story, click here.

Posted: 08/25/2010

Energy Bill Delays Raise Regulation Questions

The latest delay in energy legislation occurred last week when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) announced that a vote on oil spill legislation will not happen until September.  The Congressional delays have raised questions on who will regulate greenhouse gas emissions.

According to the Washington Post, the "Obama administration told Congress to find a way to regulate greenhouse gases -- or else."  The "next few months could bring a climax in the long-running debate over how to combat climate change, with the EPA trying to implement its rules and industry groups and opponents in Congress seeking to block it with lawsuits or legislation."

Energy legislation has been a highly debated topic in Congress recently.  To read past Ag&Food Law and Policy blog posts on this issue, click here and here.

In January, EPA will begin regulation with new permits requiring "the largest factories and power plants to show they have installed the 'best available' technology to curb emissions.  Smaller sources of greenhouse gases like shops, apartment buildings and bakeries are exempt."

Joshua Freed, director of the clean energy program at Third Way, stated that the EPA measures were "pretty modest steps" and "not much compared to what [the] legislation was set out to accomplish."  Industry groups, however, say that if the EPA requires "aggressive cuts, the result could be crushing costs for businesses."

Any regulation by EPA will likely see resistance in Congress, with a bill introduced by Senator John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W. VA) that "would suspend the effort for two years" awaiting a vote.

To read the Washington Post story, click here.

Posted: 08/09/2010

Climate Change Legislation A Possibility

While Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has said the climate change legislation expected to be considered before the Senate's August recess will not meet the deadline, some are optimistic about the legislation in the future.

Senator John Kerry (D-MA), stated that Senate Democrats "may take up a comprehensive climate-change plan after the November elections," according to an interview with Bloomberg.  Senator Kerry and Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) have worked on this legislation which has been termed "ambitious."  Kerry said that Reid will bring the bill forward when they have found the 60 votes needed for passage.  Collecting the votes necessary, however, has been a daunting task so far.  No Republicans have voiced their support and several Democrats still remain opposed to the plan.

Audie Cornish of NPR's All Things Considered reports that the "only Republican even close to being on board was Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, but he backed off."  David Welna opined that "it's a problem of having run out of juice or out of political capital with the Republicans in particular on lots of issues" but "some Democrats are very wary."  Midterm elections approaching in November may be the cause of the Democrats restraint on this issue.  Some Democratic senators who are vulnerable simply do not want "to cast a vote at this point that could be used against them."

If climate change legislation does make it to the floor of the Senate, "it would probably happen in the lame duck Congress."

To read the Bloomberg interview with Senator Kerry, click here.
To read the transcript of or listen to NPR's All Things Considered, click here.

Posted: 07/26/2010

Energy Bill Will Not Pass Before August Recess

CongressDaily's Amy Harder and Dan Friedman report that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will no longer push to pass comprehensive energy legislation before Congress takes a month-long August recess, according to the Atlantic.

Reid had set a personal deadline to pass the energy legislation before the August recess, but expressed to other lawmakers at a luncheon recently that the bill was not finished, according to Bloomberg.  Reid's bill "is a stripped-down version of legislation that passed the House last year and stalled in the Senate."  President Obama "continues to press Congress to pass an energy bill that, among other provisions, addresses issues raised by the BP [] oil spill."

Senator Joe Lieberman stated that Democrats should delay voting on the legislation to negotiate details including a plan to cap carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.  Executives with the Edison Electric Institute, which "has spent almost two years advocating for a cap-and-trade system" said that the bill was unlikely to include an emission cap because "time was running out for Congress to deal with that issue."

The details that remain unsettled seem revolve around whether the energy legislation will include a cap-and-trade system and if so, what type of system this would entail.  Senators Lieberman and Kerry are advocating for a cap-and-trade plan that "would apply to power plants that produce roughly one-third of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions."  Some Democrats, however, do not believe a cap-and-trade provision can pass.

To read the Atlantic story, click here.
To read the Bloomberg story, click here.

Posted: 07/22/2010