Senate Kills Climate Bill

June 6, 2008

Email this story Print this post Add your comments

The Carbon bill died in the Senate on Friday after a vote that resulted in 48 senators favoring the bill with 36 opposed, Reuters reports. Sixty votes were needed to take the bill to the next stage.

Six more senators, including Obama McCain, said they would have voted for the bill if they’d been in town to do so.

The bill seemed doomed before debate began. Earlier this week, the White House said that if the bill managed to pass Congress in its current form, President Bush would veto it.

The bill aimed to cut total U.S. global warming emissions by 66 percent by 2050. Opponents said it would cost jobs and raise fuel prices in an already pinched American economy.

Fred Krupp, president of Environmental Defense Fund, focused on the positive aspects of the vote: “The din of Washington politics can’t drown out the drumbeat of progress. Old adversaries came aboard and new supporters stood up for action. In the end, we got a stronger vote on a stronger bill than we had three years ago.”

Similar legislation in previous years did not even come close to getting 50 votes in the Senate, CBS reports.

Senate leaders used a variety of tactics during the week long debate – at one point, Republicans forced clerks to spend 10 hours reading an updated version of the 491-page bill aloud.

Eleven major corporations, including Allianz of America; Catalyst Paper Corporation; FPL Group, Inc.; JohnsonDiversey, Inc.; Johnson & Johnson; Levi Strauss & Co.; National Grid; Nike, Inc.; Novo Nordisk; Tetra Pak; and Xanterra Parks & Resorts, sent a letter to Congress urging the Senate to pass the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act (S. 3036).

The news on the vote came as The International Energy Agency said the world needs $45 trillion in additional investment to develop clean technologies in order to reach the goal of cutting global warming emissions 50% by 2050, Bloomberg reports.

The investment equals 1.1 percent of projected global gross domestic product in the period.

The world needs to build 32 new nuclear power plants and 17,500 wind-power turbines each year to halve emissions by 2050, according to the Paris-based energy adviser.

Email this story Print this post Add your comments

Advertisers

Stay competitive through sustainability.

Find out how at the SAP Sustainability Resource Center. >>

Unclear about the EPA's new GHG Rule?

Learn how it could affect your business. >>

EPA mandatory emissions reporting starts Jan 1st

CSA Standards can help your organization get ready for compliance. Find out how. >>

Best Practices: Product Environmental Compliance

How to achieve compliance at a significantly lower cost. Download the full report. >>

Join the Discussion

Recent Daily News [ see all ]

11/20/2009
11/19/2009
11/18/2009

Charts [ see all ]

European Paper Industry Cuts CO2 Emissions by 42% since 1990

S. America Takes Most Urgent View of Copenhagen Talks

Nike Tops Annual Climate Action Scores

Oceans May Trap more Carbon than Forests

Jobs

View All Jobs >> Post a Job >>

Comments and Discussions

Trade Association on Trade Group on EPA Chemical Regs: ‘If Everything is a Priority, Then Nothing is a Priority’
"Seriously… that..."

Gary Markowitz on Supermarkets Tackle Emissions Reductions, Fuel Efficiency
"Supermarkets waste over 10 percent of their energy through improper..."

peter in ireland on Ontario May Follow California’s Lead on TV Energy Efficiency
"Governor Schwarzenegger is shooting himself in the foot! 1...."

Environmental Leader on S. America Takes Most Urgent View of Copenhagen Talks
"The survey respondents (the PDF report mentions 4,000 respondents in 38..."

Jake on UPS Trying New Hydraulic Hybrid Trucks
"A point of clarification: the Reuters press release referenced herein reports that 20 UPS will purchase..."

Custom Organic Shirts on S. America Takes Most Urgent View of Copenhagen Talks
"90% of North Americans believe it is urgent to get a global climate..."

peter dublin on California City’s Green Building Ordinance Applies to Commercial Buildings
"Why energy efficiebnt regulation on buildings –..."

Environmental Leader