Capitol Light/Climate Politics
Capitol Light/Climate Politics
Today's ten tidbits
Buying power: The General Services Administration announced that nearly $1 billion in funding from the Inflation Reduction Act will be used for climate-related upgrades for federal buildings. The GSA said in a press release that the upgrades are expected to prevent 2.3 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions over the duration of the equipment’s lifetime. (The Hill)
Not just death and taxes evidently: White House adviser John Podesta said the approval of the Mountain Valley Pipeline was “inevitable.” Podesta’s comments come as climate activists criticize President Joe Biden’s signing into law legislation that approved the controversial pipeline. (The Hill)
Comment: The White House is nervous about Senator Joe Manchin’s opposition to the Inflation Reduction Act he was partially responsible for and the possibility that he’ll run as third party candidate for the presidency. It’s unlikely that the approval of the Mountain Valley Pipeline will keep him from doing whatever it is he will be doing.
Take the money and run: The Agriculture bill for fiscal 2024 that passed the House Appropriations Committee on June 14 turned REAP from a low-profile, bipartisan effort that promotes energy efficiency projects in the countryside into a political hammer.
Last week, Republicans cut $500 million from the program to express disapproval over last year’s Inflation Reduction Act — and at one point considered doubling the reduction. Advocates were caught off guard. (E&E News)
Comment: This is a case hypocrisy at work. The chair of the House subcommittee on appropriations for agriculture and rural development, Representative Andy Harris, was pleased to announce a $270,000 rural energy grant for solar installations mainly on the Eastern Shore of Maryland in 2019. What changed? He says there’s too much wasteful spending. Democrats on the subcommittee say he’s just following the party line.
Held v Montana: Young plaintiffs’ attorney closes Montana climate change trial with call for action. The attorney for 16 young plaintiffs urged a judge Tuesday to strike down as unconstitutional a Montana law that prohibits state agencies from considering the environmental effects when it weighs permits allowing the release of greenhouse gases.
Montana Assistant Attorney General Michael Russell said in the state’s closing Tuesday that the climate change issue is much larger than Montana can address on its own.
He said calls by the plaintiffs for the state to take the lead in addressing climate change was a social statement, not a legal argument. The case put on by the young plaintiffs was a “week-long airing of political grievances that properly belong in the Legislature, not a court of law,” he said. (AP)
A ruling from state District Judge Kathy Seeley is expected sometime after the parties file their proposed findings in the case, which are due in early July.
Comment: See my article Juliana Redux for more on the case.
Maybe we shouldn’t give them credit after all: The idea behind renewable credits (RECs) is that if companies and individuals buy them, it will provide more money that can help wind and solar developers get off the ground. But critics say there is no evidence that the cash from such credits is actually helping deploy wind and solar.
“There is no research showing that it does,” Gillenwater said. (Washington Post)
Comment: There are clearly problems with the renewable energy credits, including double and triple counting. The use of RECs has also led to charges of greenwashing because there’s little evidence to suggest that credits play any significant role in the construction of solar and wind projects. Some experts say that the credits would have to cost between $20 and $40 per megawatt-hour as opposed to the $1 to $5 they are priced at today.
Business must be good: Microvast Holdings said on Tuesday it was progressing with the more than $300 million investment at its Clarksville, Tennessee facility, even though the U.S. Energy Department did not award the lithium battery maker a $200 million grant. (Reuters)
They can try: The Bureau of Land Management's proposal to change how the agency considers conservation programs on public lands has drawn the opposition of Republicans, including an effort to stop it with legislation. (Roll Call)
Comment: Expect Republicans in the House to use appropriations bills to try and undo the Inflation Reduction Act, along with other federal investments in climate-related programs and energy and environmental regulations drafted by the administration. The big question is how willing are congressional Republicans to force a government closure on October 1st over issues they categorize as “woke?” Expect this game of chicken to be played right up to the 11th hour.
Why should they believe the government is there to help them? This won’t be an easy conversation: Can tribal nations love mining? Or at least accept mining as a necessary step in the creation of a clean economy? And can governments and international mining companies figure out how to respect and work fairly with Indigenous communities?
The conversation is weighted by history. The mining industry, and governments, have to sell the idea that, this time it’s different. This time the industry will respect cultural and religious sites. This time the industry will clean up its own mess. This time it will reward tribal communities as owners instead of serving up resources as colonies. (ICT)
Another poll dance: A new poll shows two-thirds of Americans worry about global warming and support policies to reduce it -- and that they underestimate how many people share those views. (Yale Climate Connections)
Comment: The problem with polls is there’s little evidence to suggest those who are worried about Earth’s warming and support clean energy sources like solar and wind place these issues at the top of their list when it comes time to vote. Moreover, a supporter of solar and wind can quickly become an opponent when a utility-scale project wants to move in next door—Not In My Back Yard (NIMBY) they say.
Grid and bear it: The U.S. power grid isn’t ready for climate change, experts say, and major investments are needed to boost reliability and meet rising demand. (Axios)
Comment: The statement says it all.