Republican Senators on Lieberman-Warner

Posted by Brad Johnson on 31/10/2007 at 02:09PM

VOINOVICH Speaking at the National Press Club on Friday, Sen. George V. Voinovich (R-Ohio), a member of the Committee on Envrionment and Public Works, criticized the “overly aggressive first phase of emission reductions” in the draft Lieberman-Warner legislation, which calls for the Sanders-Boxer target of reduction to 1990 levels of emissions (15% reduction from 2005 levels) by 2015.

According to CQ (subscriber only):

Voinovich said that legislation should include financial incentives for technological development and deployment, such as loan guarantees, government procurement programs and international technology transfer promotion.

“Let’s do a Manhattan project,” Voinovich said. “Let’s do an Apollo project.”

Without new technologies, he warned, coal-fired power plants would simply switch over to using natural gas

ISAKSON Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) will introduce a “nuclear title” amendment at the subcommittee markup tomorrow for more nuclear power plant incentives. At last week’s hearing, Isakson said it was “just crazy” to not support nuclear power. Update: Isakson may miss the markup to attend a White House meeting on the Georgia drought. David Roberts notes the irony that means Isakson won’t be able to support subsidies for the most water-intensive source of electricity.

ALEXANDER Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) sits on the EPW committee. He believes the cap-and-trade system should not apply to the transportation sector through the “upstream” cap on refiners and fuel importers, instead only applying a Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) such as that in S. 1324 and HR 2215.

According to CQ, Alexander will amend Alexander-Lieberman (S 1168), a power-sector cap-and-trade bill, to include transportation and building efficiency standards.

INHOFE Inhofe, EPW’s ranking member, continues to challenge the science of climate change.

Climate Change Bills Comparison

Posted by Brad Johnson on 13/07/2007 at 12:51PM

Resources From the Future has posted a comparison of the climate change bills introduced in the 100th Congress, including

  • Bingaman-Specter’s Low Carbon Economy Act (S. 1766)
  • Udall-Petri discussion draft
  • Lieberman-McCain Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act (S. 280)
  • Kerry-Snow Global Warming Reduction Act (S. 485)
  • Waxman Safe Climate Act (HR 1590)
  • Sanders-Boxer Global Warming Pollution Reduction Act (S. 309)
  • Feinstein-Carper Electric Utility Cap and Trade Act (S. 317), electric utility cap-and-trade
  • Alexander-Lieberman Clean Air/Climate Change Act (S. 1168), electric utility cap-and-trade
  • Stark Save Our Climate Act (HR 2069), a carbon tax bill

This chart (pdf) compares the cap-and-trade mechanisms, and This graph (pdf) compares the emission reduction goals of the bills. View the graph below the fold.