State of the climate

In Tuesday's speech, President Bush showed how unserious he is about global warming. Here's how Congress can put the heat on him and stave off approaching disaster.

Topics: Environment, Global Warming, State of the Union

State of the climate

The Arctic ice shelf is snapping, the polar bear is threatened, and it was 70 degrees in New York in early January. The nation’s top climate scientist, NASA’s James Hansen, says: “I think we have a very brief window of opportunity to deal with climate change … no longer than a decade, at the most.” Otherwise, Hansen says, we risk an 80-foot rise in sea level and massive species extinction.

Sadly, President Bush offered no substantive, economy-wide proposals to address global warming in his State of the Union address. All the pre-speech hype about a White House U-turn on global warming turned out to be just over his use of the phrase “the serious challenge of global climate change.” But his vagueness and platitudes about energy reform showed that he remains unserious about the worsening problem.

The president who addressed Congress on Tuesday night is the same one who said in 2006: “We need to set aside whether or not greenhouse gases have been caused by mankind or because of natural effects.” Those remarks are in stark contrast to the forthcoming report from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which reportedly now concludes that climate change is “very likely” caused by humans.

Despite an uncooperative president who wields veto power, what should the Democratic-controlled Congress do — beginning right now — to address the increasingly urgent problem?

Congress should adopt a three-phase strategy for avoiding catastrophic climate change, one that would generate the jobs and technologies of the future, and move the United States toward energy independence. First, it must pass every piece of legislation it can in the next two years to accelerate the actual deployment of energy-efficient and renewable technology. Second, it should develop comprehensive legislation to cap carbon dioxide emissions at 1990 levels by 2020 — but don’t try to get Bush to sign it if that means compromising on the ultimate targets. Third, it must dramatically increase R&D funding so that after we spend the next two decades deploying existing technology, we can deploy the next generation of technology to take us more than 50 percent below those 1990 levels by 2050.

By far the top global-warming policy priority is creating a market that would establish a price for emitting carbon dioxide. This would be similar to the successful system used to trade emissions of sulfur dioxide under the Clean Air Act, though more complicated.

Expecting the president to support a national carbon cap and trading system seems unlikely: He campaigned in 2000 on establishing such a carbon trading system but then famously reneged on the pledge soon after taking office. Worse, in December 2004, the Financial Times reported that U.S. climate negotiators had actually worked to sabotage international efforts to cap emissions after 2012. And in September 2006, the Wall Street Journal reported, “the President damped speculation that his administration is exploring a major shift in global-warming policy and may soon embrace some kind of formal government-imposed limits.”

Congress should spend the next year developing comprehensive legislation to achieve national goals for reducing greenhouse-gas emissions. And as comprehensive legislation is being developed, Congress should pursue every other legislative strategy to reduce emissions, starting with an aggressive push to increase fuel-economy standards for cars and trucks. Requiring a 4 percent annual increase in fuel efficiency for all cars and light trucks would be a good start, and Bush endorsed this approach in his State of the Union address.

While we are making vehicles more efficient we should require them to use less-polluting fuel. The least likely alternative fuel is hydrogen. Hydrogen cars cannot help us reduce greenhouse-gas emissions before midcentury — and we simply can’t wait that long. The two likeliest fuels are ethanol and electricity. Funding for R&D into new technologies and tax credits for alternative-fuel vehicles have their value, but no country has ever successfully introduced an alternative fuel into the broad consumer market without government mandates. Market forces alone cannot overcome the built-in advantages of the petroleum industry, which has trillions of dollars already sunk into its infrastructure. Even Brazil succeeded with ethanol only after the government mandated a minimum blend of ethanol in gasoline and required that all gas stations have an ethanol pump.

If we are serious about reducing our large and growing addiction to oil — especially oil from unstable governments — we need to require the use of alternatives. Congress should set a requirement of 20 percent renewable fuels by 2020 and help fund a new fueling infrastructure. The likeliest candidate is cellulosic ethanol from biomass, such as agricultural waste or dedicated crops. Corn ethanol is a useful transition fuel but lacks both the necessary environmental benefits and the capacity to replace a significant fraction of oil.

Congress should also accelerate the introduction into the marketplace of plug-in hybrid vehicles — advanced hybrids with larger batteries that can be charged overnight. Even a hybrid with a 20-mile all-electric range (before reverting to gasoline power) would give most commuters the ability to cut their gasoline consumption in half. Congress could require that 10 percent of cars in 2020 be plug-ins with a 20-mile or greater all-electric range.

I believe these mandates would also save the U.S. auto industry, which is being crushed by foreign companies like Toyota, by forcing U.S. automakers to build the low-carbon cars of the future that everyone in the world will eventually be driving. Unfortunately, U.S. automakers, championed in Congress by House Energy and Commerce chairman John Dingell, D-Mich., do not look at the world this way. A deal may be needed whereby the federal government helps auto companies invest in the market of the future.

Congress must also clean up electricity. It should require 20 percent of electricity in 2020 to be from renewable, non-nuclear sources. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 has more than enough subsidies for the next generation of nuclear plants, so Congress needs to do nothing further to help the nuclear industry.

To accelerate requirements for energy efficiency, Congress needs to establish a multibillion-dollar public benefits fund coupled with aggressive building codes that reduce electricity consumption. California offers a model example: Over the past three decades, California kept per capita demand flat using such measures, while electricity per capita rose 60 percent in the rest of the country. And California’s efficiency investments cost 2.9 cents per kilowatt hour — far cheaper than the cost of building new power plants. By 2004, greater focus on deploying the most efficient technologies cut the average cost of California’s efficiency programs in half, to under 1.4 cents per kilowatt hour. That’s cheaper than any form of new power supply — and far cheaper than any carbon-free power.

Finally, Congress must also focus on coal. The top priorities are to stop building traditional coal plants and build only goal gasification plants with carbon capture and storage. But that won’t happen until there is a serious price to be paid for carbon dioxide emissions. Many utilities are trying to build the “last dirty” coal plant using traditional technology — hoping that they will escape regulation. To stop that gaming, the new Congress, within its first 100 days, should pass a law stating that no coal plant built after 2005 will be grandfathered out of any future carbon trading system. We must not reward companies for building dirty coal plants that last 50 years, while pretending that carbon will not be regulated in the near future.

Congress must move forward without any illusions on this critical issue. Passing a weak global-warming bill — one with lame goals acceptable to Bush — would be worse than no bill at all because it would allow members to say that they had acted on climate change, without any real results. And the last thing we need to do is pass a climate bill that the president guts with one of his notorious signing statements.

We can only hope the next president will be more open to serious legislation on climate change: The Republican front-runner is climate champion John McCain, and all the leading Democratic contenders have embraced strong action on climate change. But Congress must persevere at this critical juncture. If lawmakers are able to enact these measures, then we will be on course to avoid catastrophic warming in the coming decades. The alternative is likely to be real-life disasters already familiar to us from Hollywood movies: searing heat waves, mega-droughts, rapid rises in sea levels, and super-hurricanes that would create a “hell and high water” on Earth.

More Related Stories

Featured Slide Shows

  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook
  • 1 of 14
  • Close
  • Fullscreen
  • Thumbnails

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and Adam, "Pilot"

    One of our first exposures to uncomfortable “Girls” sex comes early, in the pilot episode, when Hannah and Adam “get feisty” (a phrase Hannah hates) on the couch. The pair is about to go at it doggy-style when Adam nearly inserts his penis in “the wrong hole,” and after Hannah corrects him, she awkwardly explains her lack of desire to have anal sex in too many words. “Hey, let’s play the quiet game,” Adam says, thrusting. And so the romance begins.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Marnie and Elijah, "It's About Time"

    In an act of “betrayal” that messes up each of their relationships with Hannah, Marnie and Elijah open Season 2 with some more couch sex, which is almost unbearable to watch. Elijah, who is trying to explore the “hetero side” of his bisexuality, can’t maintain his erection, and the entire affair ends in very uncomfortable silence.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Marnie and Charlie, "Vagina Panic"

    Poor Charlie. While he and Marnie have their fair share of uncomfortable sex over the course of their relationship, one of the saddest moments (aside from Marnie breaking up with him during intercourse) is when Marnie encourages him to penetrate her from behind so she doesn’t have to look at him. “This feels so good,” Charlie says. “We have to go slow.” Poor sucker.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Shoshanna and camp friend Matt, "Hannah's Diary"

    We’d be remiss not to mention Shoshanna’s effort to lose her virginity to an old camp friend, who tells her how “weird” it is that he “loves to eat pussy” moments before she admits she’s never “done it” before. At least it paves the way for the uncomfortable sex we later get to watch her have with Ray?

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and Adam, "Hard Being Easy"

    On the heels of trying (unsuccessfully) to determine the status of her early relationship with Adam, Hannah walks by her future boyfriend’s bedroom to find him masturbating alone, in one of the strangest scenes of the first season. As Adam jerks off and refuses to let Hannah participate beyond telling him how much she likes watching, we see some serious (and odd) character development ... which ends with Hannah taking a hundred-dollar bill from Adam’s wallet, for cab fare and pizza (as well as her services).

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Marnie and Booth Jonathan, "Bad Friend"

    Oh, Booth Jonathan -- the little man who “knows how to do things.” After he turns Marnie on enough to make her masturbate in the bathroom at the gallery where she works, Booth finally seals the deal in a mortifying and nearly painful to watch sex scene that tells us pretty much everything we need to know about how much Marnie is willing to fake it.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Tad and Loreen, "The Return"

    The only sex scene in the series not to feature one of the main characters, Hannah’s parents’ showertime anniversary celebration is easily one of the most cringe-worthy moments of the show’s first season. Even Hannah’s mother, Loreen, observes how embarrassing the situation is, which ends with her husband, Tad, slipping out of the shower and falling naked and unconscious on the bathroom floor.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and the pharmacist, "The Return"

    Tad and Loreen aren’t the only ones to get some during Hannah’s first season trip home to Michigan. The show’s protagonist finds herself in bed with a former high school classmate, who doesn’t exactly enjoy it when Hannah puts one of her fingers near his anus. “I’m tight like a baby, right?” Hannah asks at one point. Time to press pause.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and Adam, "Role-Play"

    While it’s not quite a full-on, all-out sex scene, Hannah and Adam’s attempt at role play in Season 3 is certainly an intimate encounter to behold (or not). Hannah dons a blond wig and gets a little too into her role, giving a melodramatic performance that ends with a passerby punching Adam in the face. So there’s that.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Shoshanna and Ray, "Together"

    As Shoshanna and Ray near the end of their relationship, we can see their sexual chemistry getting worse and worse. It’s no more evident than when Ray is penetrating a clothed and visibly horrified Shoshanna from behind, who ends the encounter by asking if her partner will just “get out of me.”

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and Frank, "Video Games"

    Hannah, Jessa’s 19-year-old stepbrother, a graveyard and too much chatting. Need we say more about how uncomfortable this sex is to watch?

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Marnie and Desi, "Iowa"

    Who gets her butt motorboated? Is this a real thing? Aside from the questionable logistics and reality of Marnie and Desi’s analingus scene, there’s also the awkward moment when Marnie confuses her partner’s declaration of love for licking her butthole with love for her. Oh, Marnie.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and Adam, "Vagina Panic"

    There is too much in this scene to dissect: fantasies of an 11-year-old girl with a Cabbage Patch lunchbox, excessive references to that little girl as a “slut” and Adam ripping off a condom to ejaculate on Hannah’s chest. No wonder it ends with Hannah saying she almost came.

  • Recent Slide Shows



Comment Preview

Your name will appear as username ( settings | log out )

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href=""> <b> <em> <strong> <i> <blockquote>