Friday, May 29, 2009
Hey I Know, How About If I Ride Across Iowa Just for Kicks?
The clock for RAGBRAI (Register's Annual Great Bicycle Ride Across Iowa) is counting down inexorably...less than 50 days to get ready for my first attempt at the largest, multi-day ride/rolling party in the country. http://ragbrai.com. And, no boys and girls, Iowa is not flat. Its rolling hills and the course this year reportedly is one of the hillier in the ride's 37-year history. While no one will ever describe my training grounds around the Puget Sound area as "flat," I still need some quality miles and strategic callouses to be ready do 442-miles over 7 days in July. This ain't no Seattle-to-Portland (STP) jaunt that I can knock off 200-miles in a day just so I don't have to get back on the bike a second day -- in fact She-Who-Must-Be-Obeyed even suggested I do STP in TWO days just for the experience! Well, that isn't going to happen, but I hope to get more mileage and seat time this weekend between Little League playoff games, the Seattle Country Day Crazy Carnival, and combat weeding. Keep on spinning!
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Climate Change Convergence
An interesting convergence of climate change issues on Thursday. May 21st started in Washington, D.C., with the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee entering its fourth day of markup on HR 2454, the American Clean Energy & Security Act, while in the other Washington (Seattle) the Environmental Protection Agency held the second of its two public hearings on the proposed CO2 endangerment ruling.
I had hoped to tweet from the EPA hearing (@USClimateLaw), unfortunately my Blackberry apparently didn't have T-Mobile coverage...at Pier 66 in downtown Seattle! Don't know whether it was operator-error (highly possible) or a lame network, but I did attend Gov. Gregoire's post-testimony press conference where she signed Executive Order 09-05, "Washington's Leadership on Climate Change" and then issued a Lane Powell Hot Sheet on the Executive Order, http://www.lanepowell.com/5267/washington-climate-change-executive-order-signed.
Given that the recession-driven budget constraints that doomed the Washington state cap-and-trade bill are continuing, its hard to see how much real impact the executive order can have, but it is an effort to move policy forward. The Governor characterized the Executive Order as the "next best thing" to the cap-and-trade bill that failed in the last legislative session and it does set up the state to implement whatever cap-and-trade ultimately gets adopted, whether by the feds or the Washington legislature in a later session.
Meanwhile back at the EPA public hearing in Seattle, 185 witnesses signed up to testify for three minutes each. While there was a ritualized feel to the process (which I have to confess may be due more to my perceptions from covering countless public hearings in my previous life as a t.v. reporter), the hearing was well-organized and people expressed their positions in well-articulated concise statements. Not surprising for an environmental hearing in Seattle, the vast majority of speakers favored action by EPA even as Congress considers legislation that could preempt the agency's action. Indeed, the consensus seemed to be that since nothing is guaranteed in the legislative process its important for the EPA to continue with the rulemaking, if for no other reason than to keep pressure on Congress.
Watching Day Four of the C-SPAN stream of the House Energy and Commerce markup of HR 2454 brought to mind Otto Von Bismark's adage: "Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made." Republican committee members had filed some 400 amendments, but only about 56 of them were considered and most rejected. Notwithstanding the 36 hours of debate on a 900+ page bill and the palpable desire of committee members to get out of town for the Memorial Day recess, as the waning moments of the markup went past 8 pm EDT, there seemed to be less partisanship and vituperation than might be expected and more of a sense of resignation by the minority. The bill passed by a 33-25 margin, mostly on a party line vote. The New York Times describes the future for the bill as "a tortuous path" through several more House committees before it can come to a floor vote and then an even more doubtful fate in the Senate. http://tinyurl.com/r9f7ty.
As the day wore down there was a sense that the history and convergence between the two Washingtons was not to be missed.
I had hoped to tweet from the EPA hearing (@USClimateLaw), unfortunately my Blackberry apparently didn't have T-Mobile coverage...at Pier 66 in downtown Seattle! Don't know whether it was operator-error (highly possible) or a lame network, but I did attend Gov. Gregoire's post-testimony press conference where she signed Executive Order 09-05, "Washington's Leadership on Climate Change" and then issued a Lane Powell Hot Sheet on the Executive Order, http://www.lanepowell.com/5267/washington-climate-change-executive-order-signed.
Given that the recession-driven budget constraints that doomed the Washington state cap-and-trade bill are continuing, its hard to see how much real impact the executive order can have, but it is an effort to move policy forward. The Governor characterized the Executive Order as the "next best thing" to the cap-and-trade bill that failed in the last legislative session and it does set up the state to implement whatever cap-and-trade ultimately gets adopted, whether by the feds or the Washington legislature in a later session.
Meanwhile back at the EPA public hearing in Seattle, 185 witnesses signed up to testify for three minutes each. While there was a ritualized feel to the process (which I have to confess may be due more to my perceptions from covering countless public hearings in my previous life as a t.v. reporter), the hearing was well-organized and people expressed their positions in well-articulated concise statements. Not surprising for an environmental hearing in Seattle, the vast majority of speakers favored action by EPA even as Congress considers legislation that could preempt the agency's action. Indeed, the consensus seemed to be that since nothing is guaranteed in the legislative process its important for the EPA to continue with the rulemaking, if for no other reason than to keep pressure on Congress.
Watching Day Four of the C-SPAN stream of the House Energy and Commerce markup of HR 2454 brought to mind Otto Von Bismark's adage: "Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made." Republican committee members had filed some 400 amendments, but only about 56 of them were considered and most rejected. Notwithstanding the 36 hours of debate on a 900+ page bill and the palpable desire of committee members to get out of town for the Memorial Day recess, as the waning moments of the markup went past 8 pm EDT, there seemed to be less partisanship and vituperation than might be expected and more of a sense of resignation by the minority. The bill passed by a 33-25 margin, mostly on a party line vote. The New York Times describes the future for the bill as "a tortuous path" through several more House committees before it can come to a floor vote and then an even more doubtful fate in the Senate. http://tinyurl.com/r9f7ty.
As the day wore down there was a sense that the history and convergence between the two Washingtons was not to be missed.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Ocean Acidification & CO2
The Center for Biological Diversity on May 14 filed a lawsuit against the federal Environmental Protection Agency in U.S. District Court in Seattle claiming the agency should have included ocean waters off the Washington coast on a list of impaired waters due to carbon-dioxide caused acidification. Here's the CBD press release on the lawsuit: http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2009/ocean-acidification-05-14-2009.html.
The lawsuit was brought under the federal Clean Water Act, which requires states to list bodies of water that fail to meet quality standards. The CBD lawsuit claims that carbon dioxide in Washington's ocean waters has caused the pH level of those waters to decline (become more acidic) than permissible under CWA standards and, therefore, should have been listed as impaired.
Washington was one of several states that the CBD in 2007 requested to make "impairment" listings. The CBD also requested listings for Oregon, Alaska, Hawaii, Florida, New York, and New Jersey. In addition, the CBD had filed petitions with various California Regional Water Quality Boards regarding ocean waters in California. http://www.californiagreensolutions.com/cgi-bin/gt/tpl.h,content=235.
Using the Clean Water Act to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from industrial sources such as power plants, refineries, cement kilns and factories is a novel approach since the bulk of climate change attention has been on air emissions. But as a parallel track to the EPA's proposed rulemaking under the Clean Air Act that CO2endangers human health and the environment, the CWA lawsuit and petitions could end up being a significant one-two punch.
The lawsuit was brought under the federal Clean Water Act, which requires states to list bodies of water that fail to meet quality standards. The CBD lawsuit claims that carbon dioxide in Washington's ocean waters has caused the pH level of those waters to decline (become more acidic) than permissible under CWA standards and, therefore, should have been listed as impaired.
Washington was one of several states that the CBD in 2007 requested to make "impairment" listings. The CBD also requested listings for Oregon, Alaska, Hawaii, Florida, New York, and New Jersey. In addition, the CBD had filed petitions with various California Regional Water Quality Boards regarding ocean waters in California. http://www.californiagreensolutions.com/cgi-bin/gt/tpl.h,content=235.
Using the Clean Water Act to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from industrial sources such as power plants, refineries, cement kilns and factories is a novel approach since the bulk of climate change attention has been on air emissions. But as a parallel track to the EPA's proposed rulemaking under the Clean Air Act that CO2endangers human health and the environment, the CWA lawsuit and petitions could end up being a significant one-two punch.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Good AP piece in the Daily Olympian about the recently adjourned Washington legislative session that failed to adopt the Governor's requested bill to implement the state's part of the Western Climate Initiative cap-and-trade program. http://www.theolympian.com/northwest/story/844204.html. The combination of a very tough economy (a $9 billion budget hole to fill) and the potential for federal cap and trade (although that looks like a tough sell too http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2009/05/06/key-dem-blasts-administration-on-fuels-climate-policy/) probably doomed Washington's cap-and-trade measure.
Oregon has a similar Governor-requested measure, SB 80, which also is undergoing a "slimming down" when committee action last week took out the cap and trade provisions.
So, where does that leave the Western Climate Initiative? Its probably not dead, but the momentum of a few months ago definitely has stalled. As the economy picks up and if the feds don't adopt cap-and-trade the "climate" may improve for state action. Even so, it means the ambitious deadlines of WCI probably will end up getting moved out at least a couple of years.
Oregon has a similar Governor-requested measure, SB 80, which also is undergoing a "slimming down" when committee action last week took out the cap and trade provisions.
So, where does that leave the Western Climate Initiative? Its probably not dead, but the momentum of a few months ago definitely has stalled. As the economy picks up and if the feds don't adopt cap-and-trade the "climate" may improve for state action. Even so, it means the ambitious deadlines of WCI probably will end up getting moved out at least a couple of years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
