Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday vowed to push for major changes to a climate change bill that could move through a key committee next week, including a proposal to count nuclear power as a clean energy alternative.
The House Energy and Commerce Committee will try by the end of next week to put its finishing touches on one of the most significant environmental initiatives in decades.
If the Democratic-controlled committee can meet that self-imposed deadline, the full House could vote and probably pass it by early August. The bill’s future in the Senate is less certain.
Representative Joe Barton, the senior Republican on the House panel, predicted he would prevail with an amendment to include nuclear power and “clean coal” as alternative sources of energy that will have to be used more by electric utilities under the bill.
So-called clean coal would use as-yet-undeveloped technology to capture pollutants.
Democrats aim their alternative energy requirements at renewable sources such as solar and wind, but Barton thinks he might attract enough support from Democrats to pass that amendment.
The core of the bill would impose a 17 percent cut in emissions of carbon dioxide and other industrial pollutants by 2020, from 2005 levels. That “cap” on emissions would then continue to fall.
Also under the “cap and trade” program, industries that pollute less than their permits allow could trade some of their permits to industries that pollute more.
SCALED BACK GOALS
Representatives Henry Waxman and Edward Markey, the top two Democrats pushing the climate bill, have scaled back provisions in order to gain support of fellow Democrats who worry their hometown industries and consumers would otherwise be hurt.
Democrats on the committee have “on the most part dealt with the major issues,” Waxman told reporters. Those include giving 35 percent of the pollution permits to some utilities, 15 percent to trade-vulnerable industries like steel and cement companies and 3 percent to firms making electric vehicles.
Representative Mike Doyle said there will be an approximately “50-50 split” between pollution permits that are sold to industry versus given away.
But Democrats were still working out some details, even as Republicans prepared to unveil their own alternatives.
“We are not prepared to accept unilateral economic disarmament of the U.S. economy, and cap and trade does that,” Barton told reporters.
He said he and fellow Republicans will offer amendments to kill cap and trade when the panel meets next week. Waxman has predicted he has enough Democratic support to fend him off.
Republicans will then focus on other changes to the bill, including the one on nuclear power and renewing attempts they made last year to vastly expand offshore oil drilling and other moves that emphasize domestic energy production rather than controlling greenhouse gas emissions.
“We’ll give swing Democrats lots of opportunities to improve the bill,” said Representative Fred Upton, referring to Democrats who are nervous about the climate change bill.
Before doing battle with Republicans, Waxman and Markey still have some work to do to nail down Democratic support.
Among the difficult provisions still being negotiated are:
– Waxman said he is still talking to oil-state lawmakers about permits that could be given to oil refiners. There had been discussions they could get 5 percent of the permits.
– Representative Jay Inslee wants a $17 billion fund for research and development of alternative fuels.
– Inslee said there also could be fine-tuning of trade protections for U.S. companies that could end up competing against foreign firms that do not have strict carbon-emission rules in place. But final details could be up to the House Ways and Means Committee, which oversees trade policy.
Republicans have been arguing that the cap and trade bill would result in higher consumer energy bills. Waxman countered that the free permits, which eventually would be phased out, “will substantially offset electricity price increases.”
__________
Full article: http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/05/13/us/politics/politics-us-climate-usa-congress.html?ref=global-home
