US Energy and climate legislation in 2010
by Ray Block
There are three energy and climate bill currently before the US Senate. These are:
• The American Power Act.
• The American Clean Energy Leadership Act.
• Lugar Practical Energy and Climate Plan.
The first of these- the American Power Act proposed by Senators Kerry and Lieberman, which is the Senate version of the House’s Waxman- Markey Bill passed last year would mandate a cap and trade system and require a 17 per cent reduction in greenhouse gases from 2005 levels by 2020.
The second bill emerged from the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources in June 2009, sponsored jointly by Democrat chairman Jeff Bingaman and Ranking Republican Lisa Markowski is a bipartisan measure designed to accelerate clean energy technologies in the US, including clean energy project financing, a renewable electricity standard, and a robust and secure national electricity transmission highway.
The bill which is yet to go to the floor of the Senate would also require increased energy efficiency in buildings.
The third measure, Lugar Practical Energy and Climate Plan S 3464 by Republicans Senators Richard Lugar and Lindsay Graham is a “possible bipartisan framework for making progress on energy driven national security, economic, and environmental concerns.”
The Plan would reduce by over 40 per cent the need for foreign oil; cut energy use by 11 per cent; cut greenhouse gas emissions by more than 20 per cent over “business as usual” by 2030. This climate savings trajectory meets nearly half of President Obama’s 2020 climate goal.
Barack Obama’s (June 15 2010) powerful speech from the Oval Office to the American people, at a time when the BP oil spill disaster in the Gulf is a blow to the American psyche deliberately made no mention of the Kerry-Lieberman bill.
The problem is that the Republicans won’t swallow the carbon cap and trade measure.. Democrats would like it,, but they can’t secure the support of 60 Senators for passing such a requirement. But in a design to secure wavering Republican support for some meaningful legislation, Obama mentioned the other two proposals before the Senate.
Obama said in part: “ Last year, the House of Representatives passed a strong and comprehensive energy and climate bill- a bill that finally makes clean energy the profitable kind of energy for America’s businesses. Now, there are costs associated with this transition. And there are some who believe that we can’t afford not to change how we produce and use energy- because the long term costs to our economy, our national security, and our environment are far greater.”
“ So, I’m happy to look at other ideas and approaches from either party – as long as they seriously tackle our addiction to fossil fuels. Some have suggested raising efficiency standards in our buildings like we did in our cars and trucks. Some believe we should set standards to ensure that more of our electricity comes from wind and solar power. Others wonder why the energy industry only spends a fraction of what the high tech industry does on research and development- and want to rapidly boost our investments in such research and development.”
“All of these approaches have merit, and deserve a fair hearing in the months ahead. But the one approach I will not accept is inaction.”
The excellent online newsletter on Congress, Politico.com (June 17 2010), said that the Senate Democrats held a special caucus meeting on the three bills. But there was no consensus, on which bill was likely to gather sufficient support for a bipartisan energy and climate bill could emerge on the floor of the Senate, before the August recess. The November elections is expected to hand ccntrol of both Huses back to the Republicans, so time is short. Another caucus meeting is tentatively scheduled for next week.
The Democrat Majority would like to get through the floor of the Senate a climate and energy bill that puts a price on carbon, but they lack the numbers to execute such a plan.
What is likely to happen in a consensus measure, is one which cobbles together pieces from all three bills. No cap and trade for the US economy as a whole,. But possibly some measure which includes a mandated reuirement for power plants to use less hydrocarbons and more renewables. This would be accompanied by large tax benefits for the energy utilities to dramatically increase their renewable energy facilities in wind and solar power.Also a ban on new coal fired power plants. That would be a big advance to the bits and pieces the US has now.
After all, seven of the largest electric utilities- AES, Duke Energy, Exelon, NextEra Energy, NRG, PG&E, PNM Resources are members of the US Climate Action Partnership, which says “we are committed to a pathway that will slow, stop and reverse the growth in US emissions, while expanding the US economy.”
Other large greenhouse gas polluting companies in the Climat Action group include DuPont, Dow Chemical, Alcoa, Shell Oil, Rio Tinto, General Motors, Ford and Chrysler, which share the same passion with some leading environmental organisations, who are also members of the partnership.
Posted under Climate Change, Global Warming, Low Carbon Economy, Renewable Energies, World Inflation

Climate changing nowadays at very rapid growth. Its the main concern for everyone around the world.
Very good article. It always come down to good content that people are interested in. Thank you for the guidelines.
I believe that the third bill presented by Mr. Lugar and Graham is good for USA. it will help achieve president’s goal and will help save energy. All around the world; research should be conducted for ways of saving energy and locating new ways of making energy.
Yes, it is really very big problem. I think that we need more discussions on this subject and dont forget about it. After all, we all live on the Earth and its future depends entirely on us and our future on it.
Add A Comment