The American Clean Energy and Security Act (aka the Waxman-Markey bill) narrowly passed in the House late Friday thanks to eight bold Republicans who hopped the fence. And one of them is Washington state's very own Dave Reichert of the 8th District (which includes Mercer Island, Bellevue, and surrounding areas).

Some 44 House Democrats, mostly from coal-producing and industrial states, broke party lines by voting "no" on the bill that promises renewable electricity standards, emissions caps, investments in energy technology, and more. That means those eight Republicans who gave a "yay" rather than a "nay" produced the simple majority vote (plus one bonus vote!) that catapulted ACES to the Senate floor.

Why did Reichert decide to break from the Republican pack and support the bill? He remained tight-lipped about the decision until the votes were counted, and then released this statement:

How did your representative vote? Here's the breakdown for Washington state:

Yay

Nay

Related Links:

What to make of the new climate poll

Bill McKibben says time is running out on climate delays

Carol Browner strongly backs bipartisan cap-and-trade bill

Photo: Office of the MayorSometimes, fighting climate change is a numbers game. Numbers like 20 -- the percentage of Seattle's carbon footprint caused by energy use in homes and buildings. Also 600 -- the cost (in $) of a home energy audit to find out just how drafty those old windows are. But thanks to two more numbers (big ones, both preceded by dollar signs), some 5,000 homeowners will be looking at a new number: 95 -- as in a much-discounted rate for said energy audit.

It's part of Mayor Greg Nickels' (D) Green Building Capital Initiative, an effort to increase the efficiency of Seattle buildings by helping residents and business owners help themselves. To do this, Nickels is combining some $1.2 million of the city's federal stimulus money with some $1.5 million from local utility Seattle City Light. The funds will go toward the $95 home energy audits (5,000 of them are available) as well as a loan program that would help make the efficiency improvements affordable once the audits are completed.

The initiative also includes more stringent efficiency requirements for new buildings and requires current buildings to measure and report energy usage depending on size and occupancy (more numbers!).

What's the bottom-line goal of the initiative? Another number, of course: 20 percent improvement in the efficiency of existing buildings by 2020.

Related Links:

Learning how to count to 350

Making buildings more efficient: rationalizing retrofit markets

Making buildings more efficient: looking beyond price

Photo: Seattle Municipal Archives via Flickr

If you noticed this week that your bar tab was a bit higher than usual, it's probably because of that extra shot of tequila you're now regretting the sales tax hike. As of April 1, residents in King, Pierce, and Snohomish county started paying more for their purchases -- one half of one percent more, to be exact -- and that money is going toward Sound Transit light-rail expansion, improved express-bus service, and boosted capacity on commuter trains. Sound familiar? That's probably because you marked an "X" in a spot on your November ballot labeled "Proposition 1." (Or maybe you didn't -- but you're still paying, sucka!) Estimates suggest the average adult will pay about $69 a year in new sales taxes -- but considering your boozehound-y habits, that figure could be on the low end.

Read it: What other ballot measures are due to go into effect this year? Find out here.

Related Links:

Learning how to count to 350

U.N. chief will pressure senators on climate bill

Friday music blogging: Here We Go Magic

Related Links:

What Do Coal and Dirty Dorm Rooms Have in Common?

Is there a tradeoff between economics and the environment?

Clean energy opportunities

Related Links:

What Do Coal and Dirty Dorm Rooms Have in Common?

Clean energy opportunities

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Related Links:

What Do Coal and Dirty Dorm Rooms Have in Common?

Treat energy efficiency like a utility

Clean energy opportunities

Related Links:

Climate Denial Crock of the Week: The big mist take

Learning how to count to 350

More NYC farmers markets accept food stamps and sales soar

Related Links:

Learning how to count to 350

Home Economics of the JP Green House, Part 1

Slideshow: Reinventing the JP Green House

Related Links:

Climate Denial Crock of the Week: The big mist take

Learning how to count to 350

More NYC farmers markets accept food stamps and sales soar

Related Links:

Learning how to count to 350

More NYC farmers markets accept food stamps and sales soar

Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change

Related Links:

What Do Coal and Dirty Dorm Rooms Have in Common?

Treat energy efficiency like a utility

Clean energy opportunities

Related Links:

Chuck Norris on Copenhagen

The U.S.-India climate ‘partnership’

Obama headed to Copenhagen, sets the bar for success

Related Links:

Is there a tradeoff between economics and the environment?

A Penny Saved Is…

Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I) -- who's pushed an aggressive green agenda -- will be able to run for a third four-year term next year, thanks to a City Council vote last week that changed NYC's term-limits law.

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

Related Links:

Is there a tradeoff between economics and the environment?

‘Heretic’ battles straw man

A Penny Saved Is…

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is seeking to change term-limit rules and win reelection to a third term; if he succeeds, it will be to the benefit of his ambitious plans to address climate change. Bloomberg's PlaNYC aims to reduce municipal greenhouse-gas emissions 30 percent by 2030 through planting 1 million trees, converting taxis to hybrids, and making buildings more energy efficient. In other mayor news, a study commissioned by the U.S. Conference of Mayors suggests that 4.2 million green jobs could be created over the next 30 years, up from 750,000 or so now. "It could be the fastest growing segment of the United States economy over the next several decades," says the report by Global Insight, Inc. Of course, the report assumes that by 2038, alternative energy will be widespread, buildings will be much more efficient, vehicles will run on alternative fuel, and Michael Bloomberg will be NYC's mayor. Oh wait, not that last one.

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

Dear Umbra,

I have a friend who is a fellow environmental studies major, and he says he's not going to vote because he "doesn't agree with the system." I've had numerous discussions with him about how important it is to vote, especially when it comes to environmental issues, but he doesn't seem to want to listen. My question to you is this: Why, as an environmentalist, should I vote?

Nick
Wyoming, Minn.

Dear Nick,

I grant you, our particular system of democracy is flawed. But pouting on the sidelines is not effective. Politics contains no über-moms who will take your hand, listen to your complaints, and report your troubles to the president so he/she can take action on your behalf.

Adulthood brings with it the responsibility to be a good citizen, and citizenship requires voting. So does environmentalism. Environmentalists should vote in every election, and particularly in local and state contests for town and county officers, council members, state insurance commissioners, and state congresspersons. These are the people who decide on funding for schools, highways, and public transit, or who make laws forbidding people from marrying, or who allow developers to destroy wetlands.

Photos: Hilary McHone

Local politicians and their constituents strongly influence area land use and planning. I took a look at the website for Chisago County, where you live, and found quite a few examples within five minutes of rapid clicking. This summer alone, your county planning commission discussed a demolition landfill, a composting operation, and a green corridor for land preservation. The summer of 2007 was the 14th year of a water quality improvement program for the Chisago Chain of Lakes, northeast of Wyoming. The county Environmental Services staff has found septic systems that were imminent threats to public health and has interceded. Just a few examples of environmentally significant local politics.

Day-to-day work in towns and counties is carried out by hired staffers, but the agenda for their work is heavily (and sometimes completely) influenced by elected officials and political appointees. You can see this dynamic at work on the federal level as well -- in the Environmental Protection Agency, for example. With President Clinton at the helm, the EPA had one agenda; with George W. in the White House it's had quite another. Imagine a vote for or against a candidate who supports unfettered land development, or one who believes industry should police itself!

In Seattle, for another example, we are often called upon to vote for or against major transportation projects. The last time this happened, many of us voted against a proposition that would have authorized a giant highway expansion and some (but not enough) mass transit. The measure failed, thus sending legislators a message that citizens placed a high value on mass transit options. The non-voters (like your friend) might have had a message too, but no one could possibly get it. What are non-voters saying? "Whatever," basically.

State-level voting also makes an impact. As I'm sure you've seen, candidates often have major differences on environmental issues related to agriculture, watersheds, energy, transportation, and business vs. the environment. A state government not only makes policy within its boundaries, but can also choose (or refuse) to join with other states in environmental actions. You've read in Grist about states adopting California's auto standards, or about multi-state carbon cap-and-trade projects, or about Midwestern governors signing a greenhouse-gas reduction accord. City leaders can join hands, too, as we're seeing with the U.S. Conference of Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement, signed by 884 mayors to date. This happens because environmentally conscious elected officials have the say-so. The local and state actions push the federal government to respond (no matter how much it wishes to ignore things). The trickle-up-and-push effect of our vote has been our main influence on national environmental policy for many years.

All of which is to say: Vote. It matters. Register today.

Simply,
Umbra

Related Links:

Ask Umbra’s video advice on composting

Turn your turkey carcass into a spectacular gumbo

This Friday, don’t just Buy Nothing—use nothing!

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg touted clean energy Tuesday at, aptly, the National Clean Energy Summit. He said his city has issued a formal request to companies for ideas on how to source electricity from the wind, sun, and waves. "Perhaps companies will want to put wind farms atop our bridges and skyscrapers, or use the enormous potential of powerful offshore winds miles out in the Atlantic Ocean," Bloomberg said, adding, "I think it would be a thing of beauty if, when Lady Liberty looks out on the horizon, she not only welcomes new immigrants but lights their way with a torch powered by an ocean wind farm." He also touted less-sexy smart power grids, increased transmission capacity, and carbon taxation. Bloomberg can't, of course, snap his fingers and create a Green Apple; plenty of obstacles remain, including potential expense, resident resistance, permitting, and the fact that less than 18 months remain in his mayoral term. Unfazed, Bloomberg declared, "When it comes to producing clean power, we're determined to make New York the No. 1 city in the nation."

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

Related Links:

This Friday, don’t just Buy Nothing—use nothing!

You never get a second chance to make No Impact—oh wait, yes you do

A surprising sneak peek at the clothesline revolution

Related Links:

Obama administration may (finally) offer greenhouse-gas targets

George Voinovich (R-Ohio) [UPDATED]

Al Franken (D-Minn.)