{"id":60,"date":"2007-06-22T14:27:04","date_gmt":"2007-06-22T18:27:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/?p=60"},"modified":"2007-06-22T14:27:04","modified_gmt":"2007-06-22T18:27:04","slug":"policy-news-from-esas-public-affairs-office-2-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/2007\/06\/22\/policy-news-from-esas-public-affairs-office-2-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Policy News from ESA\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s Public Affairs Office"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>A Bi-Weekly Publication of the Ecological Society of America <\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>ENERGY POLICY: SENATE INCLUDES CLIMATE AMENDMENTS IN SWEEPING ENERGY BILL<\/li>\n<li>ENERGY POLICY: HOUSE SCIENCE PANEL CLEARS BIOFUEL, CARBON SEQUESTRATION RESEARCH BILLS<\/li>\n<li>AGRICULTURE: HOUSE CHAIRMAN WILL AVOID SUBSIDIES FOR BIOFUELS CROPS<\/li>\n<li>CLIMATE: STATE EMISSION REGULATIONS AT HEART OF GROWING HILL DEBATE<\/li>\n<li>PARKS: NPS LOBBIED CONGRESS TO KEEP SNOWMOBILES IN YELLOWSTONE<\/li>\n<li>SENATE: WYOMING STATE LAWMAKER APPOINTED TO FILL VACANCY<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<hr>\n<p><strong>ENERGY POLICY: SENATE INCLUDES CLIMATE AMENDMENTS IN SWEEPING ENERGY BILL <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The Senate adopted several climate-related amendments June 21 before  passing a major energy bill that would boost auto efficiency standards  and require a roughly five-fold increase in the use of biofuels.<\/p>\n<p>The final amendment package that cleared the Senate without  objection includes provisions that call for research into abrupt  climate change, curbing emissions from the power plant that serves  Capitol Hill and efforts to make federal buildings \u201cgreener\u201d and more  energy efficient.<\/p>\n<p>Senators voted 65-27 for the final bill, with 20 Republicans siding  with Democrats to pass the measure. Four Democrats opposed it. Beyond  the vehicle mileage and biofuels increases, the bill would also create  new laws against gasoline \u201cprice gouging,\u201d boost appliance and lighting  efficiency, further carbon sequestration testing, and seek to stimulate  production of advanced technology cars. An agreement on the fuel  economy plan earlier in the day helped clear the way, with the Senate  now on record in favor of increasing corporate average fuel economy  standards for cars and light trucks to 35 miles per gallon by 2020.<\/p>\n<p>The underlying bill would create an expanded ethanol mandate to  reach 36 billion gallons by 2022, 21 billion of which must be met with  \u201cadvanced\u201d biofuels such as cellulosic ethanol. The current renewable  fuels standard targets 7.5 billion gallons in 2012.<\/p>\n<p>Democrats were forced to drop two major proposals during the debate.  They could not muster enough support for requiring utilities to provide  15 percent of their electric power from renewable sources by 2020, and  the plan never came up for a vote. And senators did not agree to  cloture on an energy tax package that would have created $28.5 billion  in incentives for renewable power, biofuels, plug-in hybrids, clean  coal and other technologies.<\/p>\n<p><strong>ENERGY POLICY: HOUSE SCIENCE PANEL CLEARS BIOFUEL, CARBON SEQUESTRATION RESEARCH BILLS <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>A House Science and Technology subcommittee approved on June 21 a  trio of research bills addressing issues such as biofuels, carbon  sequestration and solar energy.<\/p>\n<p>The first bill, <strong>H.R. 2773 <\/strong>, the \u201cBiofuels Research  and Development Enhancement Act,\u201d would authorize a series of new  research programs and studies for the development of alternative fuels  and increase the overall authorized spending levels for the Energy  Department\u2019s biofuel research programs.<\/p>\n<p>The legislation would establish two new research efforts under the  existing Bioenergy Research Program one to study modifications of  existing infrastructure or development of new infrastructure for  biofuels and another to improve the energy efficiency of biorefineries.  The subcommittee agreed to an amendment to the bill requiring those  research programs to also examine the environmental impacts of biofuel  production.<\/p>\n<p>Additionally, the subcommittee approved <strong>H.R. 1933 <\/strong>,  \u201cThe Department of Energy Carbon Capture and Storage Research,\u201d which  authorizes seven large-scale tests for sequestration of carbon dioxide.<\/p>\n<p>The panel also approved <strong>H.R. 2774 <\/strong>, \u201cThe Solar  Energy Research and Advancement Act,\u201d which seeks to address several  challenges to expanding the use of solar technology.<\/p>\n<p><strong>AGRICULTURE: HOUSE CHAIRMAN WILL AVOID SUBSIDIES FOR BIOFUELS CROPS <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Rep. Collin Peterson (D-MN) does not intend to include new  nationwide payments or crop insurance for biofuels crops in his version  of the farm bill, the Agriculture Committee Chairman said on June 21.<\/p>\n<p>Peterson said his farm bill attempt will include incentives and  pilot programs to help get cellulosic ethanol refineries off the ground  as part of the multibillion-dollar energy title his committee is  expected to advance this summer. But he is \u201cadamantly opposed\u201d to  setting up new nationwide crop insurance or subsidies for biofuels  crops.<\/p>\n<p>Biofuels advocates and some environmental groups have been pressing  for the House and Senate to include an array of new incentives and  payments in the next farm bill to help support biofuels. Among those,  they want to pay farmers to grow switchgrass and other crops that could  eventually be used for cellulosic ethanol, to help overcome the  \u201cchicken and the egg\u201d conundrum of how to supply a not-yet booming  market with not-yet abundant crops.<\/p>\n<p>Two proposals in the Senate would pay farmers to plant biofuels  crops. Another proposal from Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT) would speed up crop  insurance, which usually takes years for new crops, for feedstocks used  to make biodiesel.<\/p>\n<p>But Peterson said his biofuels pilot program, which he plans to add  to the farm bill at the full committee level next month, would focus on  demonstration projects centered around existing energy facilities.  Peterson wants to use the projects to help farmers and energy  developers learn how best to grow, harvest, store and move feedstocks  for biofuels.<\/p>\n<p><strong>CLIMATE: STATE EMISSION REGULATIONS AT HEART OF GROWING HILL DEBATE <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>While leaders of the House Energy and Commerce Committee backed away  June 18 from proposals that would retract California \u2019s authority to  regulate automobiles\u2019 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, lawmakers\u2019  concerns about state-specific climate laws will remain a point of  contention on Capitol Hill.<\/p>\n<p>Key industry groups and a major labor union are urging Congress to set a single national GHG standard.<\/p>\n<p>Congressional debates over federal pre-emption have closely tracked  the development of U.S. environmental law, starting in the 1960s when  California adopted the nation\u2019s first auto-emission standards.<\/p>\n<p>Recently, Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Norm Coleman (R-MN)  separately considered legislation to wipe out all state global warming  laws and regulations, including California \u2019s plan to cut emissions  about 25 percent by 2020 and the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative in  place for the northeastern United States. Both senators backed down  amid vocal outcries from local officials and environmental groups.<\/p>\n<p>Asked to describe his ideal legislative proposal, electric utility  industry lobbyist Scott Segal called for a law that blocks any state  program inconsistent with the federal program unless the state can make  a significant case why it needs to be different.<\/p>\n<p>Segal suggested Congress should set a bar high enough that no state  can meet it. \u201cThe issue is too important, too expensive and too in need  of a national response to let inconsistent state policies continue,\u201d he  said.<\/p>\n<p>Several sources said they think the federal pre-emption issue will  not show up until the very end of the debate, perhaps in the final  stages of House-Senate deliberations.<\/p>\n<p><strong>PARKS: NPS LOBBIED CONGRESS TO KEEP SNOWMOBILES IN YELLOWSTONE <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The National Park Service asked Congress to allow snowmobiles in  Yellowstone National Park, despite pledging to the public and  stakeholders it would keep an open mind as it writes a new winter use  plan.<\/p>\n<p>A rider ensuring that snowmobiles can roam Yellowstone this winter  free from litigation threats was included in the fiscal 2008 Interior  spending bill the Senate Appropriations Committee approved June 21. The  $27.2 billion measure would boost spending for the Interior Department,  U.S. EPA and Forest Service.<\/p>\n<p>Because the winter use planning process is so controversial and  expensive NPS has spent $10 million since 2000 the agency made a  concerted effort to reach out to stakeholders, including environmental  groups and motorized recreation advocates who challenged previous rules  in court, noted Tim Stevens, Yellowstone program manager at the  National Parks Conservation Association, an advocacy group.<\/p>\n<p>The draft plan would also allow a maximum of 720 snowmobiles in the  park, using best available technology and requiring commercial guides.  Up to 140 snowmobiles would be allowed in neighboring Grand Teton  National Park, without commercial guides. The preferred alternative  would also cap the number of multipassenger snowcoaches at 78 and close  the Sylvan Pass area to all motorized oversnow travel, a provision  opposed by local officials.<\/p>\n<p>But environmentalists and several former NPS directors oppose the  plan, saying the agency should eliminate snowmobiles entirely in favor  of snowcoaches. EPA said the draft plan does not go far enough to  protect the park\u2019s human health, wildlife, air or quiet spaces, and  would cause a five-fold increase in carbon monoxide emissions and a  17-fold increase in hydrocarbon emissions in the park<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI\u2019m frankly perplexed why the Park Service would do this,\u201d Stevens  added. \u201cIt is sad to see the agency lobbying against its own science  and the law and public opinion.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><strong>SENATE: WYOMING STATE LAWMAKER APPOINTED TO FILL VACANCY <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Wyoming state Sen. John Barrasso (R) will fill the vacant U.S.  Senate seat caused by the death earlier in June of Sen. Craig Thomas  (R), Gov. Dave Freudenthal (D) announced June 22.<\/p>\n<p>State law required Freudenthal to choose from three nominees chosen  by the Wyoming Republican Party. The other two candidates were Tom  Sansonetti, a former U.S. assistant attorney general for environment  and natural resources, and former state Treasurer Cynthia Lummis.\n<\/p>\n<hr>\n<p><em><strong>Sources:<\/strong><\/em> Energy and Environment Daily and Greenwire<\/p>\n<p>Send questions or comments to Nadine Lymn, ESA Director of Public Affairs, <a href=\"mailto:Nadine@esa.org\">Nadine@esa.org<\/a> or Colleen Fahey, Policy Analyst, <a href=\"mailto:Colleen@esa.org\">Colleen@esa.org<\/a><\/p>\n<p>If you received Policy News from a friend and would like to receive  it directly, please send an e-mail to listserv@listserv.umd.edu with  the following in the body of the message: sub ESANEWS {your first and  last name}<\/p>\n<p>If you wish to unsubscribe to ESANEWS and your biweekly Policy News, send the command \u201csignoff ESANEWS\u201d to <a href=\"mailto:listserv@listserv.umd.edu\">listserv@listserv.umd.edu<\/a><\/p>\n<p>Visit ESA \u2019s website at <a href=\"https:\/\/esa.org\">www.esa.org<\/a><\/p>\n<p>See past editions of ESA \u2019s Policy News at <a href=\"https:\/\/esa.org\/pao\/policyNews\/\">https:\/\/esa.org\/pao\/policyNews\/<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Read the latest biweekly Policy News from ESA&#8217;s Public Affairs Office.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":50,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10,91],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-60","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ecology-in-policy","category-policy-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/50"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=60"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=60"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=60"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=60"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}