Billion Gallon Challenge and Other Hot Pubs
Recent USCAN Member Reports
Explosive Tax Breaks. The nuclear industry could end up facing no risk under massive tax break subsidies in the Kerry-Lieberman climate bill, according to a new analysis (June17, 2010) conducted for Friends of the Earth by the research organization Earth Track. These tax breaks totaling $9.7 billion to $57.3 billion (depending on the type and number of reactors) would come on top of the Kerry-Lieberman measure’s lucrative $35.5 billion addition to the more than $22.5 billion in loan guarantees already slated for nuclear power. These tax cuts would greatly impede market access for competing energy sources and worsen the already substantial risks to taxpayers from a nuclear build-out.
Billion Gallon Challenge. Union of Concerned Scientists has developed a new report (June 2010) on getting biofuels back on track. The report recommends increasing U.S. cellulosic biofuels production to 1 billion gallons per year through a suite of financial incentives that would help build 10 to 20 commercial scale biorefineries nationwide. Such a “billion gallon challenge” would get advanced biofuels production to meet the requirements of the Renewable Fuel Standard.
Measuring Emissions. A report (June 2010) from the World Wildlife Fund, “Counting the Gigatonnes: Building trust in greenhouse gas inventories from the United States and China,” casts light on the measuring and reporting of emissions by the world’s largest emitters of greenhouse gases — the United States and China. WWF concludes that both countries have existing technology and procedures in place to accurately measure and report their GHG emissions, albeit in different ways.
Capitalizing Climate. A report (June 2010) by Friends of The Earth examines the various, and often contradictory roles played by the World Bank – a major climate polluter and driver of deforestation, an institution attempting to address climate change, a political tool used by developed countries in UN climate negotiations to maintain control over international climate finance, a supposed defender of developing country interests, and an institution asserting itself to capture as much short term (and, by extension, long term) climate finance as possible.
APA Analyses. Climate Works Analysis published a new report (June 2010) as part of its series of analyses that quantify the economic impact of policy options and providing a common analytic approach for assessing those options. The analysis evaluates the energy, climate, and macroeconomic implications of comprehensive energy and climate policy based on the American Power Act as introduced in draft form on May 12, 2010.
Power to Compete. A new policy brief (June 2010) by the Breakthrough Institute and Americans for Energy Leadership, “The Power to Compete?,” provides the first independent analysis of how the Kerry-Lieberman American Power Act would impact U.S. competitiveness in the global clean energy industry.
National Security. A new report called “Climate change and the U.S. armed forces” (April 2010) explores the dual pressures of climate change and energy on each U.S. military service and combatant command and offers a road ahead to improve the country’s ability to promote national security in the face of a changing climate.
Game Plan. A WWF report titled “Getting Back in the Game: U.S. Job Growth Potential from Expanding Clean Technology Markets in Developing Countries” (April 2010)shows how the U.S. has fallen behind top competitors, both in clean technology investments domestically and in exports of clean technologies abroad. WWF estimates that if the U.S. is able to capture a 14% market share of this new potential clean tech export market—on par with our current market share in environmental goods and services in developing countries—280,000-850,000 new, long-term American jobs could result.
Climate Commitments. A paper by the Brookings Institution, “Comparing Climate Commitments: A Model-Based Analysis of the Copenhagen Accord” (May 27, 2010) analyzes the Copenhagen targets using the GCubed model of the global economy. The paper shows how different formulations make the same targets appear quite different in stringency, and estimates and compares the likely economic and environmental performance of major emitters’ Copenhagen targets. The analysis also explores the spillover effects of emission reductions efforts on countries that did not adopt economy-wide emissions targets at Copenhagen.
Clean Energy Investment. A report (May, 2010)by Climate Solution details how to develop, implement, and finance a clean energy program and offers examples of existing innovative clean energy financing models and useful resources to consult when developing a clean energy strategy. Deployed together, efficiency measures that reduce consumption by 30% can be combined with clean energy that costs 30% per unit of production at no incremental cost to the end user.
Report 2010. The Department of State has submitted its fifth National Communication on U.S. climate change actions (June 2010) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Submission of this document, also called the U.S. Climate Action Report 2010, is a requirement under the UNFCC. The U.S. submits a National Communication to the UN every 3-5 years. The United States released previous Climate Action Reports in 1994, 1997, 2002, and 2006.
Clean Business. American Businesses for Clean Energy (ABCE) has compiled a comprehensive list (2010) of more than 6,000 companies that support clean energy and climate legislation. They provide estimates of the state-by-state employment figures for the more than 6,000 companies included in this analysis.
Ocean Impacts. A joint effort by Gulf of the Farallones and Coredell Bank National Marine Sanctuaries issued a report (2010) examining how global warming could affect habitats, plants and animals in the region’s ocean and coastal zones. Among the report’s findings: sea level rise is occurring; there is an increase in ocean acidity; and more frequent extreme weather events – winds, waves, storms – have caused coastal erosion.
Cardiff University’s report showed 78 percent of the 1,822 people surveyed thought the world’s climate was changing compared to 91 percent in 2005, while 40 percent of people thought the seriousness of climate change was exaggerated. And less than a third believed climate change was purely a result of human activity.
Just a quarter of Americans back expanding offshore drilling in the wake of the BP oil spill, and most fault federal regulators for the environmental disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.
In a recent poll conducted by Yale project on Climate change Communication, 87 percent of respondents supported funding more research into renewable energy sources. 83 percent supported tax rebates for people who buy fuel-efficient vehicles and solar panels. 77 percent supported regulating carbon dioxide as a pollutant.
Public concern about global warming is once again on the rise, according to a national survey released today by researchers at Yale and George Mason Universities.
The Joint Center’s report, Opinion of African Americans on Climate Change and 2010 Midterm Elections: The Results of a Multi-State Poll, presents findings from random digit dialing telephone surveys of 500 African American adults in Arkansas, Indiana, Missouri, and South Carolina. In these states, African Americans represent a key electoral constituency for many public officials, and their rate of participation in the 2010 midterm elections will be an important factor in the outcome of many closely contested races.
A statewide survey in Washington shows voters support the overall bill 54/41. Support for the bill is overwhelming among Democrats, who break for it by an 81/14 margin.
A statewide survey conducted on May 19th and 20th in Oregon finds that Oregon constituents are strongly supportive of the American Power Act, introduced last month by Senators John Kerry and Joe Lieberman and that their votes for the bill would likely be a political benefit back home.
A new poll reflects how the battle to contain the massive oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico shapes opinions on offshore drilling. Most voters continue to favor offshore oil drilling, but that support is down. Voters also remain critical of how President Obama and the companies involved are responding to the disaster.
A new poll shows that 50% of surveyed registered voters in California opposed new drilling, while 43% supported it.
Small Business Majority, American Businesses for Clean Energy and We Can Lead commissioned a national survey of 800 small business owners across the country to learn their attitudes toward energy conservation practices and clean energy policies. The results of the poll show that among small businesses there is strong support for clean energy and climate legislation; small businesses believe that clean energy policies will help the U.S. economy; and support for clean energy policies is even higher among Latino- and black-owned businesses.
A new poll was conducted by Woods Institute Senior Fellow Jon Krosnick, a professor of communication and of political science at Stanford, with funding from the National Science Foundation. The results show the Attitudes of Americans on climate change. Seventy five percent of respondents said that human behavior was substantially responsible for any warming that has occurred.
The latest Pew Research/National Journal Congressional Connection Poll, sponsored by SHRM, which was conducted June 10-13 among 1,010 adults, finds that nearly two-thirds (66%) of Americans favor offshore drilling for oil and gas: 35% support continuing existing drilling but banning new drilling, while 31% favor expanding offshore drilling. Just 22% would ban offshore drilling entirely. As in previous Pew Research Center surveys, Americans do not view energy policy as a choice between expanded production and conservation, or between traditional and alternative energy sources.
The oil spill is intensifying the public’s desire for clean energy investments and increased regulation on corporate polluters. In the aftermath of the spill, people firmly believe Congress needs to do more than just make BP pay. They understand America needs more than a band-aid; we need real, comprehensive energy reform.