August 22, 2007
Democrats Want $6.7 Billion To Fight Global Warming
Congress wants to spend as much as $6.7 billion next fiscal year to combat global warming, an increase of nearly one-third from the current year, The LA Times reports. President Bush’s proposed budget, on the other hand, provides for a three percent increase for climate-change activities.
Here are some of the environmental and energy spending contained in fiscal 2008 House appropriations bills as reported by the Times article:
Interior and environment: Boosts spending for climate-change research by more than half, to $264 million. Includes $50 million to create a climate change commission to study and recommend initiatives and $2 million for the Environmental Protection Agency to develop regulations to reduce greenhouse gases.
Energy and water: Provides $1.9 billion for the Energy Department’s energy efficiency and renewable energy programs. Includes $200 million for solar energy and $235 million for vehicle technologies. Also provides $150 million for climate change research.
Commerce, justice and science: Allocates nearly $1.9 billion to address climate change. Includes $10 million for a “global-warming reduction incentive program” and $10 million for climate-change education.
Transportation, housing and urban development: Directs Housing and Urban Development to incorporate “robust green building” standards in housing programs.
State and foreign operations: Encourages the U.S. Export-Import Bank to increase investment in renewable energy projects.
Legislative branch: Contains $3.9 million for the Green the Capitol initiative.
Stay Up-to-Date On Environmental Management, Energy & Sustainability News with EL's Free Daily Newsletter
Advertisers
Can you accelerate your sustainability efforts?
Complimentary 5 Step Best Practices Guide >>
Renewables Briefing: World’s Biggest Offshore Wind Farm, 1.3 MW Solar Installation at Navy's SPAWAR
Reader Comments
$6.7 billion??? Hogwash. I love it. Another commission. How many bloody useless commissions do we need in this country? And “incentive programs”, “education” …..will”raise awareness” too? I have no problem with legitimate research into ways to conserve water, energy and the like. I do have a problem with going at this from the angle that man is to blame for global warming. I do not dispute that global warming may be occurring; I do dispute the pseudo-science that proclaims man the villain in the piece. Of course it makes sense to do what we can to conserve, recycle and ensure that our resources are safe. We do NOT need $6.7 billion so that the loons in Congress can feel good.
Egad.
Glenda Rutherford | August 22nd, 2007
Clearly Glenda is not a scientist. Rather than spending time disputing things many of us don’t really need to understand, I would suggest we all spend time learning about what each of us, our government, and the companies we work for, and the companies that make the stuff we purchase can and need to do to address our fossil-fuel based climate problems.
Mac Dyer | August 23rd, 2007
I must say that I side with Glenda on this one…although the title of the article is a bit misleading. Quite a bit of money seems to be going to incentives for alternative energy. If you add up the numbers provided you still come up short over 2.5 billion. Where is “that” money going?! Of the totals – seems only 150 million is earmarked toward additional climate change research. I say tax the wealthy with a non-resident surcharge for 2nd and 3rd homes. I live in the northeast where a very large number of “week-enders” keep their vacations homes a toasty 65 degrees all winter even when they aren’t there!
johnnygizmo | August 26th, 2007