The year ahead

What will it take to make 2008 great?

Posted by Joseph Romm (Guest Contributor) at 12:00 PM on 04 Jan 2008

The following guest post is by Rep. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.), originally published on Climate Progress. He is the co-author of Apollo's Fire: Igniting America's Clean Energy Economy.

-----

jay inslee Now that our New Year's Eve party hats are put away, it's time to look to the next year in the battle against global warming. In the year 2007, some good things did indeed happen on this front. Measures significantly improving car mileage standards and promoting the growth of renewable fuels were signed into law. But if 2007 was a year that could be considered in some ways good, then 2008 needs to be a year that will be great.

Nothing else will do. The cataclysms of one million square miles of ice melting in the Arctic, a several-fold increase in the rate of melting tundra, and the acceleration of melting in Greenland, foretell possible feedback mechanisms that demand a faster and more aggressive clean energy revolution than we even envisioned a year ago. Whatever we thought necessary on New Year's Day 2007 needs to be doubled in 2008.

So what will it take to make '08 great? Three things will do the trick.

First, each of us can take some individual small step down the clean energy road. For my wife and myself, our small step was spending the last two days of 2007 stuffing insulation under our home's flooring. It was low-tech, and not particularly creative, but it promises to save several tons of CO2 over the lifetime of our leaky, creaky old house, while keeping our toes warm in the process.

Second, George W. Bush will have to have an epiphany.

His veto threats against everything, from a renewable portfolio standard to replacing tax breaks for oil companies with ones for clean energy companies, evinces a total failure to recognize his responsibility to lead a national effort against global warming. Much more, his refusal to assist these relatively modest efforts is an ominous indicator that he will continue to "stand in the school house door" against the passage of a cap-and-trade system, the granddaddy of global warming measures.

It is true that nobody has gotten rich betting that this president will embrace science when it comes into conflict with his old political cronies. But we do not have the luxury of indulging in the comfort of low expectations, even for a president who has so often not just ignored science, but has actively suppressed it. We are duty-bound to soldier on, pass the most aggressive cap-and-trade system possible, and again pass the Renewable Portfolio Standard and tax measures we previously passed in the House, all in the hope that a combination of pressure from major progressive corporations, the public, and a dose of divine intervention can bring the light of understanding into the White House.

This is "no regrets" strategy. In the best case scenario, the presidential epiphany arrives, In the worst case, we have plowed the ground in preparation for the next president to get the job done. Either way, we will have done what we should do -- everything we can.

Third, we need the spirit of Teddy Roosevelt to arise in the breasts of just a few more Republican senators, so that we can break a filibuster of these vital provisions. We fell just one vote short on the RPS last year, for example. With the ghost of the Old Rough Rider leading the charge, the Grand Old Party could again regain the legacy that gave us our national park system and the Environmental Protection Agency, two things that occurred under Republican presidents. If not, the American people in 2008 will have to put a few new leaders into the Senate, leaders who understand that eight years of inaction on global warming during the Bush administration were eight years too many.

One thing we know will happen in 2008 as a lead pipe cinch: while these policy battles are going on, the brilliant Americans who have been inventing the new revolutionary clean energy technologies will be busy. We can assuredly look forward to advances in solar thermal power at Ausra Energy, advances in wave power at Finavera, advances in lithium battery technology at A123 Battery, and advances in cellulosic ethanol at Range and Iogen Companies. The shifting of economic tectonic plates will continue at a rapid pace because of the genius of inventors and the courage of entrepreneurs. We just need to create the conditions where their work can blossom. After co-authoring the book Apollo's Fire: Igniting America's Clean Energy Economy, I can warrant that if the policies finally level the playing field so that fossil fuels do not enjoy such an outrageous advantage in subsidies -- both direct and indirect -- over renewable energy sources, we will see an explosion in clean technologies that could rival the growth in the internet.

This is why global warming is as much an economic opportunity for the nation as an environmental challenge. It is our destiny to provide the world with the clean energy technologies it will need to tame the beast of global warming. We should be selling to China the technology it will surely need to replace the coal-fired plants that threaten to doom the planet. In doing so, we will grow our economy as well as save the earth.

It's a great planet. It deserves a great year. Let's make it great in '08.

This post was created for ClimateProgress.org, a project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

For story: The year ahead
9 Comments | Post a Comment

Now there's a Congressman to be proud of

Go Jay, thanks for working hard to build a better future. It's a pleasure to be represented by Jay, not only on Capitol Hill, but also on the basketball court where he takes 90% of the shots for our team.

by Mark Powell at 1:22 PM on 04 Jan 2008

sustainability long overdue

In my opinion, the entire "green" movement needs to take a much harder look at a new paradigm, and MUST move to a "sustainability" model, not just some knee-jerk reaction to one problem (GHGs) at the expense of the rest of the system.

This means MASSIVE investment in:

recycling/reuse programs (including water, power, trash);
in DECENTRALIZED RENEWABLE POWER GENERATION (only in previously developed areas);
in CONSERVATION programs (resulting in NET reductions of consumption of goods, resources, energy, etc., not just "efficiency" which does not reduce net consumption);
in HEALTHY MANUFACTURING AND AGRICULTURE programs (phase out big agra/livestock, pesticides, long-distance, slave labor, in favor of local, organic fair trade);
in EDUCATION programs (including population control, sustainability practices, personal responsibility and vocational training);
and in SOCIAL JUSTICE (for starters, NO TRADE should be permitted with gross polluters, sweatshop manufacturers, war profiteers, etc. - use our massive market as a tool for good rather than exploitation).

What it does NOT mean is blasting and obliterating millions of acres of wilderness to make new remote "green" (snort!) power plants and transmission lines which suck up groundwater and kill off living things just to benefit Big Power at an unconscionable cost to the environment and ratepayers.

It does not mean selling MORE (house, car, power, personal goods, food) to consumers, but rather swapping out polluting, slavery-sourced, non-recyclable goods once they have reached the end of their useful lives.

The pyramid scheme of today's brand of capitalism relies FAR too much on depletion of natural and human resources for the benefit of a very, very few. Sustainability means living wages, a healthy, robust marketplace which does not try to substitute for love, joy, spirituality, self-esteem or stature in society; and a planet on which all species can co-exist in balance.

It's really very simple, but you'll have to convince the entrenched Corporatocracy to back off - perhaps you could start by legislating that, despite Scalia's Faustian bargains, Corporations are not Citizens under the constitution, and also that no more bribes can be offered or taken (lobbying, campaign contributions, fake charities, job offers, family member bribes, etc.) by our elected officials at any time for any purpose (publicly-financed elections). again, you'd have to get Scalia to give up on "bribery is free speech," so good luck to you!

Thanks for listening!

the greenest energy is that which you needn't ever produce.

by stopgreenpath at 10:32 AM on 05 Jan 2008

I never new it could be so easy!

SOUNDS good. I'll write a letter to Scalia TODAY.

by guade00 at 12:12 PM on 05 Jan 2008
[ Parent ]

he's a legislator...

...so i was addressing my comment to him in that capacity, quade00. although, frankly, scalia is not really all that open to being legislated around, so you do make a point!

the greenest energy is that which you needn't ever produce.

by stopgreenpath at 3:56 PM on 05 Jan 2008

Our Creaky Old Planet Can't Wait For Cap and Trade

Congressman, I know you are committed to this endeavor. Today I was briefing looking over the Washington State's Climate Change website and I couldn't help but notice an article on "Creating a Cap and Trade program to Reduce GHG Emissions."
There has been much talk by prominent politicians, corporations and mainstream environmental groups in regard to the cap and trade program to reduced greenhouse gases. As you know powerful lobbyist are behind this system to save the planet. And I know your loyalty and obligation to the market's special interest groups however its time to face facts;

Cap and trade policies will not lend to predictability in regard to energy prices and will do little to mitigate the price volatility in electrical generation.

Cap and trade can not be implemented soon due to the complexity of the system. We do not have the luxury of waiting while the system goes through lengthy negotiations.

Cap and trade is cloudy and difficult to understand, making it hard for public support.
With the complexity of the cap and trade system there is more opportunity for manipulation by special interests which can undermine public confidence.

The cost of implementing cap and trade will be paid through hidden taxes as money flows to market participants, lawyers and consultants.

Another serious drawback to cap and trade would be "banking" pollution now for future credits. Brokers would be able to buy and sell allowance credits on the market and profit substantially. As stated previous, with emissions allowances auctioned off the end-users will be saddled with a so-called hidden, covert tax.

We can only look to Europe for an example. Europe has a two-and-a-half-year-old cap and trade system in which power companies have passed on the cost of upgrading their equipment and buying emissions allowances to the customers. Cap and trade have pushed wholesale power prices in Europe up 5%-10% in just two years. By this example, cap and trade is a program for financial gain and profit for the shareholders. Isn't that the sole goal of corporations?
As an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal states, "The mechanics of such regulation (cap and trade) are complex...one result is certain: It will exact a toll on our economy."
I found it interesting that even the article from the before mention Climate change website pointed out that,"(Cap and trade) may be easier to put in place but more challenging to implement."
Again, I want to thank you so much for all that you are doing to help save the planet for our children and future grandchildren.
I will be looking forward to more updates on this important issue.

by claw3 at 6:31 PM on 06 Jan 2008

The Future

Thank you Joseph Romm for your 2008 goals. In order to obtain these goals, we are going to buck big corporate lobbiers, well financed dirty tricks supporting the status quo, and fight to maintain a free internet.

Who are you going to support; vote for? Who has the fire in his belly, is unafraid and unbought? Dennis Kucinich has it all right.
He is amazingly on target for all these 2008 goals and lives them. That is why he is not supported by the corporate media. So why don't you help him out here?

Dennis Kucinich was blocked out of the New Hampshire debate for what? We are in trouble people. When corporate media decides for us, using their for profit only standards, the people are being lied to as their options; the free press is free no longer; it becomes mind control. When all this is connected to the election of the single most powerful and important person in our nation and the world, capable of doing much damage (Bush) or capable of doing much good (Kucinich), this is news. We need to raise the roof with our outrage.

Kucinich want to hold Bush and Cheney accountable. In order to put credibility back into our U S. Constitution they must be held accountable. It is fact, no law, environmental or constitutional, or other, is useful unless it is enforced.

Kucinich not only will make a green globe possible, but I believe he has the will to do it. Let's not just offer platitudes about making it a great year; let us stand up and shout, and work and fight for the person who has the power to help us get the important work done.

Kucinich must be our next great president.

Thank you.

by mac1 at 9:32 AM on 07 Jan 2008

Getting Bush out of the way

I couldn't agree more that Pres. Bush is in the way of climate progress, but there is something more that the Democratic Congress could do to remove this obstacle: impeach him. It's hard to know why this hasn't been done yet, given that it is presented as a duty of Congress to impeach a president (and of course also a vice-president) for improper use of their office. The various lies and obstructions of Congress in regards to use of torture, domestic spying, and maneuvering the country into war are obvious crimes and misdemeanors that citizens should be protected from. With impeachment accomplished, Congress could then do the real and very popular work of passing energy and climate legislation (not to mention expanding S-CHIP and other forms of health insurance).

It's sad to hear someone as progressive as Inslee say that "there's nothing we can do" in the face of Bush's veto. If Congress just had policy differences with the president, it would be wrong to impeach him just to pass a legislative program (even though of course that's what happened to Bill Clinton). But in the face of real, and very serious crimes, isn't impeachment reasonable?

Raphael Sperry

by raphsperry at 12:09 PM on 07 Jan 2008

It's a great planet?

This sentence doesn't resonate with me. It's like something inane I might say to a grocery store checker, have a great day. It doesn't really get at the mystery or grandeur of life for me. The Seahawks may have had a "great" game yesterday, but in the scheme of things it's pretty inconsequential.

The inhabitants of the future, if there are any, will surely bemoan the fact that the Americans were a nation of pedestrian, mundane, smug entrepreneurs who turned the gift of life into a competive race for material accululation, who worshipped the StartUp in place of the stars and starlings.

by Colin Wright at 12:59 PM on 07 Jan 2008

Jay and The Washingtonians

Jay,

I hear you're one for Green. Great. How about:

Having Democrat Mayor Greg Nickles reduce the usage of his chauffeur driving SUV limo.
Pull us out of "trains to nowhere"; otherwise known as capital and carbon rich lite rail systems that no one will ride.
Getting all the rich liberals in Montake to take their fair share of the traffic burden.
Having all the Birkenstock clad ecology professors in Wallingford stop using their wood burning fireplaces.

The list goes on and on...Jay, I'm so glad your going to do these things and help Washington get Green!

by jabailo at 2:26 PM on 07 Jan 2008

ADVERTISING POLICY

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.