At today’s Clean Energy Economy Forum, Carol Browner, Director of White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy, said that it would be a “big mistake” if Congress passed a clean energy bill without a cap on emissions.

Browner made clear that the country needs a comprehensive bill that creates a carbon market to incentivize clean energy over the long-term.  This is the first public statement I’ve heard from the White House pushing back on the statements by some Senators (not Majority Leader Reid) that have suggested they would prefer to do an energy-only bill.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu was even more blunt.

Chu said a shrinking cap and rising carbon price was “very, very important.”  He said it is the part of the bill “that really means something,” and “the rest is just carrots.”  Chu is a big supporter of carrots but was clear that the long-term signal and steady emissions reductions were critical to avoid catastrophe.

He specifically refenced the recent definitive NOAA-led report on U.S. climate impacts that warns of scorching 9 to 11°F warming over most of inland U.S. by 2090 with Kansas above 90°F some 120 days a year (which that isn’t the worst case, it’s business as usual).

Chu pointed out that on our current emissions path, St. Louis, Missouri would spend one third the year.

Finally, Commerce Secretary Locke said it is “absolutely important we pass this” bill, that it is incredibly important for economic competitiveness, pointing out that China spends $12 million an hour on clean energy!

Related Links:

George Voinovich (R-Ohio) [UPDATED]

Al Franken (D-Minn.)

Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)

Related Links:

Obama administration officials grateful for early spring

Hot planet to Obama: What’s your Plan B?

U.S. and China announce plan for collaboration on clean energy and climate change

Related Links:

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Global boiling declares war on Thanksgiving

Climate Citizen: Michael Pollan on agriculture and health care

Related Links:

Biochemist Oliver Peoples explains how his polymer-producing microbes could transform the plastics i

Black (fly) magic

James Bond calls for more marine protected areas

Companies participating in the U.S. Climate Action Partnership have pledged to lobby for a mandatory cap on U.S. carbon emissions, but -- and there's always a but -- many of those same corporations are working behind the scenes to undermine greenhouse-gas regulation. Just a few examples: USCAP members General Electric and Caterpillar sit on the board of a group called the Center for Energy & Economic Development, which opposes greenhouse-gas regulations. USCAP member Duke Energy has joined notorious coal lobbying group Americans for Balanced Energy Choices. Eight USCAP members sit on the board of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which is critical of attempts to reduce carbon; the chamber vice president of environment says no board members have pressured the chamber to change its position. Which is kind of what USCAP is about: Says David Hawkins of green group and USCAP member NRDC, "We do expect them to exert pressure on other organizations."

Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

Agencies investigate claims of muzzling by Bush administration

Has the Bush administration tried to suppress climate-change research? We'd tell you, but there's a guy in a trench coat watching us type. Maybe inspectors general at NASA and the Commerce Department will have better luck as they investigate claims that climate scientists were muzzled by political appointees at NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The inquiry, prompted by a request from 14 Democratic senators, is "going to shake up the administration, because it will uncover internal documents and agency correspondence that may expose widespread misconduct," said Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.). "Taxpayers do not fund scientific research so that the Bush White House can alter it." A spokesflack for the White House Council on Environmental Quality called the claims of interference "false," saying with a straight face, "We have in place the most transparent system of science reporting." The results of the probe should be available early next year.

Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

Nature charges that Commerce Department blocked climate-change report

The Commerce Department blocked a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration report indicating that climate change contributes to stronger hurricanes, the journal Nature reported yesterday. In February, a seven-member NOAA panel was directed to prepare a report on agency views regarding climate change and hurricanes, and a draft indicated that -- gasp! -- warming might indeed affect storms. In May, when the statement was to be released, a Commerce official informed the panel that the report was too technical to be made public. A NOAA spokesflack disputed the Nature article, saying the document was simply not ready in May -- and besides, it was not a report but a fact sheet. NOAA Administrator Conrad Lautenbacher had a different view, calling it an internal document that was not released because the agency could take no official position on the matter -- even though the report contained no policy statements. So many conflicting reports! Guess the only thing we can be sure of is that climate change affects hurricanes.

Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

Emails show that Bush administration micromanaged scientist interviews

Emails obtained through the Freedom of Information Act show that the Bush administration micromanaged media requests for interviews with climate scientists after Hurricane Katrina, aiming to downplay the influence of global warming. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration press officers were required to get clearance from the Dept. of Commerce to discuss global warming and hurricanes with the media. Commerce Deputy Director of Communications Chuck Fuqua happily OK'd interview requests with NOAA hurricane researcher Chris Landsea, who has stated publicly that global warming has little to no effect on hurricanes. In email correspondence, Fuqua writes, "Please make sure Chris is on message" and "I'm a little nervous on this, but trust he'll hold the course." But Fuqua declined a request that NOAA researcher Thomas Knutson, who published research indicating that global warming strengthens hurricanes, be on CNBC -- when told that Knutson disagreed with Landsea, Fuqua wrote, "Why can't we have one of the other guys on then?"

Related Links:

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Obama going to Copenhagen

‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science

In a lawsuit made public late last week, Earth Island Institute and other environmental organizations have sued the U.S. government for relaxing labeling standards for "dolphin-safe" tuna. The suit stems from a decision by the U.S. Commerce Department to classify as dolphin-safe a previously prohibited method of fishing -- in which dolphins are encircled with nets to trap tuna swimming below -- so long as an onboard observer certified that no dolphins were killed or injured in the process. The change in classification would primarily affect Mexico, which has been excluded from the U.S. market for more than a decade because its tuna fleet relies almost entirely on this netting practice. The lawsuit claims the government is ignoring its own evidence that the netting method is harming dolphins. David Phillips of Earth Island Institute called the reclassification "no more than a political gift to Mexico at the expense of dolphin lives."

Related Links:

Chuck Norris on Copenhagen

Obama administration may (finally) offer greenhouse-gas targets

The Climate Post: You heard it here first—Copenhagen a success

In other marine news, a new report released by the federal government has found that dolphin populations in the Pacific Ocean are failing to recover from years of tuna fishing, and that some 3,000 dolphins are still killed by tuna boats every year. The report, by the U.S. Commerce Department's Southwest Fisheries Science Center, contradicts earlier claims by the government, Mexican officials, and foreign fishing fleets that dolphin populations have benefited dramatically from changes in tuna fishing. In the past, tuna boats gained infamy for chasing down dolphins to locate the tuna that swim with them, a practice that led to the death of about 6 million dolphins from the 1950s forward. The new finding that dolphin populations have not yet recovered from those fishing practices could have implications for a battle between environmentalists, who fought hard for the "dolphin safe" tuna label, and the Commerce Department, which wants to weaken the meaning of that label in order to increase trade with Mexico, Venezuela, Colombia, and other countries.

Related Links:

Obama administration may (finally) offer greenhouse-gas targets

The Climate Post: You heard it here first—Copenhagen a success

Copenhagen panic is premature

A federal appeals court yesterday rejected the U.S. government's bid to loosen the standard for "dolphin-safe" tuna. The U.S. wanted to open its dolphin-safe market to Mexican and Latin American fishers who catch tuna in large purse-seines and promise to set free dolphins trapped in the nets. But the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling, preventing the U.S. Commerce Department from moving forward with the new standard until it conducts more studies on whether dolphin populations would be hurt by the change. The issue has split the environmental community. The Earth Island Institute, which filed the suit, said the new standard would lead to more dolphin deaths. But World Wildlife Fund and others argued that the standard would create economic incentives for foreign governments to make sure tuna fishing doesn't harm dolphins.

Related Links:

Chuck Norris on Copenhagen

Obama administration may (finally) offer greenhouse-gas targets

The Climate Post: You heard it here first—Copenhagen a success