Federalism to the Federalism to the Rescue:Rescue:

U.S. State and MunicipalU.S. State and MunicipalClimate Change PolicyClimate Change Policy

Stanley J. Kabala, PhDStanley J. Kabala, PhDCenter for Environmental Research and Center for Environmental Research and

EducationEducationDuquesne UniversityDuquesne University

412-396-4233412-396-4233kabala@duq.edukabala@duq.edu

Spring 2011 Jean Monnet SymposiumThe Nexus of Global Climate Change and

Energy:Transatlantic Perspectives

Where We Find OurselvesWhere We Find Ourselves

……On July 28, 2003, I called the threat of On July 28, 2003, I called the threat of catastrophic global warming the catastrophic global warming the "greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the "greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people…“American people…“

U.S. Sen. James M. U.S. Sen. James M. InhofeInhofe

(R-Okla), January 4, (R-Okla), January 4, 20052005

  

Where We Find Where We Find OurselvesOurselves

McConnell Amendment to S. 493McConnell Amendment to S. 493Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky)Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky)

Identical to:Identical to:– S. 492 S. 492 Energy Tax Prevention ActEnergy Tax Prevention Act– H.R. 910 H.R. 910 Energy Tax Prevention ActEnergy Tax Prevention Act

Possible vote on March 30, 2011Possible vote on March 30, 2011

Where We Find OurselvesWhere We Find Ourselves

Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011 (HR Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011 (HR 910)910)

Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich), Chair, Energy and Commerce Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich), Chair, Energy and Commerce CommitteeCommittee

Exempts CO2 and other heat-trapping gases fromExempts CO2 and other heat-trapping gases from

CAA definition of “air pollutant”CAA definition of “air pollutant”

Thus, in effect, overturns Thus, in effect, overturns Massachusetts v. EPA[Section 2, adding CAA Section 330(a), (b)(1)][Section 2, adding CAA Section 330(a), (b)(1)]

Repeals EPA’s ”endangerment” determination Repeals EPA’s ”endangerment” determination  [Section 2, adding CAA Section 330(b)(4)(A)] [Section 2, adding CAA Section 330(b)(4)(A)]

Blocks EPA carbon pollution performance standards for:Blocks EPA carbon pollution performance standards for:– Power plants: Power plants: 2.2.4 billion T C02/y (40% U.S. total)4 billion T C02/y (40% U.S. total)– Oil refineries: hundreds of millions of tonsOil refineries: hundreds of millions of tons– AnyAny industries industries

[Section 2, adding CAA Section 330(b)(1)(A), (b)(4)(K)][Section 2, adding CAA Section 330(b)(1)(A), (b)(4)(K)]

Massachusetts v. EPAMassachusetts v. EPA

BackgroundBackground

1999 petition to EPA1999 petition to EPA– regulate new vehicle GHGregulate new vehicle GHG– CAA “endangerment” of public health & CAA “endangerment” of public health &

welfarewelfare

2003 EPA denial of petition: No CAA authority 2003 EPA denial of petition: No CAA authority to do so to do so

D.C. Circuit Court of AppealsD.C. Circuit Court of Appeals– Plaintiff: 2 states, 3 cities, 2 terr., several NGOsPlaintiff: 2 states, 3 cities, 2 terr., several NGOs– Opposing: USEPA, auto and truck related Opposing: USEPA, auto and truck related

groupsgroups– Suit rejected because:Suit rejected because:

EPA Administrator has discretion re CAAEPA Administrator has discretion re CAAPlaintiffs lack standingPlaintiffs lack standing

Massachusetts v. EPAMassachusetts v. EPA     Supreme Court 5 - 4 decision April 2, 2007Supreme Court 5 - 4 decision April 2, 2007

Massachusetts had standing to sueMassachusetts had standing to sue

Ruling favor of petitioners on all 3 issuesRuling favor of petitioners on all 3 issues

– ““Injury”:Injury”: Massachusetts loss of Massachusetts loss of shorelineshoreline

– ““Causation”:Causation”: Traceable to defendant Traceable to defendant– ““Redressability”: Regulation to reduce Redressability”: Regulation to reduce

warmingwarming

Discretion: EPA Administrator’s judgment to Discretion: EPA Administrator’s judgment to on policy issueson policy issues

   CAA Sec. 202 “sweeping definition”CAA Sec. 202 “sweeping definition”

– any any air pollutantair pollutant– anyany substance substance

U.S. EPA Mandatory U.S. EPA Mandatory ReportingReporting

of Greenhouse Gases Ruleof Greenhouse Gases Rule(CFR 40 Part 98)(CFR 40 Part 98)

12/17/1012/17/10 85 - 90% of U.S. GHG emissions85 - 90% of U.S. GHG emissions Emitters >25,000 MT/yearEmitters >25,000 MT/year 2010 reports due 9/30/11 (initially 2010 reports due 9/30/11 (initially

3/31/11)3/31/11) Data to be made public by end of 2011Data to be made public by end of 2011 “…“…Provide high-quality data” (to) help Provide high-quality data” (to) help

industries & businesses…be more industries & businesses…be more efficient and save money, and be useful efficient and save money, and be useful to Congress, state agencies, NGOs, & to Congress, state agencies, NGOs, & public.” (SJK, ed.)public.” (SJK, ed.)

  

U.S. responses to Kyoto ProtocolU.S. responses to Kyoto Protocol1998 – 20061998 – 2006

1998 Byrd-Hagel Senate Resolution (S. Res. 98)1998 Byrd-Hagel Senate Resolution (S. Res. 98) No harm to U.S. economyNo harm to U.S. economy Require action by LDCsRequire action by LDCs Adopted 95-0Adopted 95-0 ““Don’t bother to send treaty to Senate for ratification”Don’t bother to send treaty to Senate for ratification”

2002 Bush Administration: Reduce 2002 Bush Administration: Reduce GHGGHG intensity intensity 18% by 2012 18% by 2012  2003 McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act2003 McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act Cap GHG emissionsCap GHG emissions 2006 Senate Amendment 866 (Bingaman, D-NM) adopted 2006 Senate Amendment 866 (Bingaman, D-NM) adopted

53/4453/44 National, mandatory, market-based limits toNational, mandatory, market-based limits to slow, stop, andslow, stop, and reverse growth of GHG emissions reverse growth of GHG emissions without harming the U.S. economwithout harming the U.S. economyy

  

U.S. State ResponsesU.S. State ResponsesThe California LeadThe California Lead

2000: The Pavley Act2000: The Pavley Act

Premise:Premise: 40% California GHG emissions 40% California GHG emissions due due to passenger vehicles & to passenger vehicles & light truckslight trucks

Goal:Goal: 30% GHG reduction over 8 years30% GHG reduction over 8 yearsfor new autos and light trucksfor new autos and light trucks

Activation:Activation: Adopt by 1/1/2005Adopt by 1/1/2005Enforce by 1/1/2006Enforce by 1/1/2006

In effect:In effect: 2009 model year2009 model year

U.S. State ResponsesU.S. State ResponsesThe California LeadThe California Lead

June 2005: Executive Order of the June 2005: Executive Order of the GovernorGovernor

GHG Emissions Reduction TargetsGHG Emissions Reduction Targets– 2010:2010: 2000 Level2000 Level– 2020: 2020: 1990 Level (~25% below 1990 Level (~25% below

2005)2005)– 2050: 2050: 20% of 1990 Level20% of 1990 Level

U.S. State Responses:U.S. State Responses:The California Lead The California Lead

Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006   Cap on GHG from major industrial sourcesCap on GHG from major industrial sources GHG listed in Kyoto ProtocolGHG listed in Kyoto Protocol Penalties for non-compliancePenalties for non-compliance Emissions reduction to 1990 level by 2020Emissions reduction to 1990 level by 2020 CARB cap-and-trade program 2012 - 2020CARB cap-and-trade program 2012 - 2020

  

U.S. Regional GHG U.S. Regional GHG InitiativesInitiatives

New England Governors’ CCAP (2001)New England Governors’ CCAP (2001)

GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2010GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2010

and 10% < 1990 levels by 2020and 10% < 1990 levels by 2020 Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (2003)Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (2003)

Stabilize CO2 emissions at 121.3 short Stabilize CO2 emissions at 121.3 short tonstons

by 2015, reduce <105 short tons by 2020 by 2015, reduce <105 short tons by 2020 Western Climate Initiative (2007)Western Climate Initiative (2007)

GHG emissions 15% < 2005 levels by GHG emissions 15% < 2005 levels by 20202020

RegionalRegionalGreenhouse Gas Initiative Greenhouse Gas Initiative

(RGGI)(RGGI)

Cooperative effort:Cooperative effort:Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland,

Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey,Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey,

New York, Rhode Island, VermontNew York, Rhode Island, Vermont $860.9 million of CO2 permit sales $860.9 million of CO2 permit sales

proceeds going toward strategic proceeds going toward strategic energy programsenergy programs

http://www.rggi.org/rggihttp://www.rggi.org/rggi http://www.rggi.org/rggi_benefitshttp://www.rggi.org/rggi_benefits

RGGIRGGIProgram design and Program design and

approachapproach

* * Multi-state cap-and-trade programMulti-state cap-and-trade program** Initial focus: CO2 onlyInitial focus: CO2 only** Target: electricity generators >25 MWTarget: electricity generators >25 MW** Scheduled cap reduction: 2.5%/yearScheduled cap reduction: 2.5%/year** Reduction by 2018: 10% Reduction by 2018: 10% ** Energy affordability and reliability Energy affordability and reliability

consideredconsidered** Tool: interstate trading of carbon creditsTool: interstate trading of carbon credits** Expandable: more states, more Expandable: more states, more

allowancesallowances

Western Climate InitiativeWestern Climate Initiative

Regional cap-and-trade systemRegional cap-and-trade system

Reduce GHG 15% below 2005 levels by 2020Reduce GHG 15% below 2005 levels by 2020

State-specific goals and climate action plansState-specific goals and climate action plans

Signatories:Signatories:Arizona, British Columbia, California,Arizona, British Columbia, California,Manitoba, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, Manitoba, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, Ontario, Quebec, Utah, WashingtonOntario, Quebec, Utah, Washington

Implementation anticipated in January 2012Implementation anticipated in January 2012

Western Climate InitiativeWestern Climate Initiative

Western Climate Initiative Western Climate Initiative State GHG Emissions GoalsState GHG Emissions Goals

Short termShort term Medium termMedium term Long termLong term

2101 – 20122101 – 2012 by 2020by 2020 2040 – 20502040 – 2050

  

Arizona Arizona ---------- 2000 levels2000 levels 50% 2000 by 50% 2000 by 20402040

  

Br. Columbia Br. Columbia ---------- 33% below 200733% below 2007 ----------

  

CaliforniaCalifornia 2000 levels2000 levels 1990 levels 1990 levels 80% 1990 by 80% 1990 by 20502050

   by 2010by 2010

ManitobaManitoba 6% below 19906% below 1990 6% below 19906% below 1990 ----------

  

New MexicoNew Mexico 2000 levels2000 levels 10% below 200010% below 2000 75% 2000 by 2050 75% 2000 by 2050 by 2012by 2012

OregonOregon Arrest growthArrest growth 10% below 199010% below 1990 75% below 199075% below 1990

by 2050by 2050

  

UtahUtah ----- ----- Set goals by 6/08Set goals by 6/08 ----------

  

WashingtonWashington ---------- 1990 levels1990 levels 50% of 1990 50% of 1990

by 2050by 2050

Safe Climate Act of 2007Safe Climate Act of 2007HR 1590 (Henry Waxman, D-Ca.)HR 1590 (Henry Waxman, D-Ca.)

EmissionsEmissions 20092009 FrozenFrozen 2010 – 20202010 – 2020 Cut 2% per year, to 1990 levelsCut 2% per year, to 1990 levels 2020 – 20502020 – 2050 Cut 5% per year, to 80% < 1990 levelsCut 5% per year, to 80% < 1990 levels

ActionsActions Cap-and-trade program for largest pollutersCap-and-trade program for largest polluters Allowance sales proceeds to Allowance sales proceeds to Climate Reinvestment Climate Reinvestment

FundFund EPA standards for vehicle GHG =/> California’s, EPA standards for vehicle GHG =/> California’s,

tightened in 2014 and periodically thereaftertightened in 2014 and periodically thereafter DOE national standards for electricity requiring:DOE national standards for electricity requiring:

– share from renewable sources to reach 20% by share from renewable sources to reach 20% by 20202020

– utilities to obtain each year 1% of energy supply utilities to obtain each year 1% of energy supply via efficiency improvements via efficiency improvements to customer facilitiesto customer facilities

Renewable/Alternative Renewable/Alternative Energy Portfolio StandardsEnergy Portfolio Standards

33 states and D.C33 states and D.C

Colorado (2004)Colorado (2004) 30% by 202030% by 2020

CaliforniaCalifornia 20% by 201020% by 2010

33% by 2020 (3/28/11)33% by 2020 (3/28/11)

MaineMaine 40% by 201740% by 2017

New JerseyNew Jersey 22.5% by 202122.5% by 2021

New YorkNew York 29% by 201529% by 2015

Penna. (2004)Penna. (2004)18% by 202018% by 2020 8% from tier 1 sources8% from tier 1 sources 10 % from tier 2 sources10 % from tier 2 sources

PennsylvaniaPennsylvaniaClimate Change Climate Change

ResponseResponseAct 35 (2007)Act 35 (2007)

850MW of solar power generated in Pa. by 2020850MW of solar power generated in Pa. by 2020 Utilities plan to meet alternative energy targetUtilities plan to meet alternative energy target Alternative energy credits remain the property of Alternative energy credits remain the property of

alternative energy system generating themalternative energy system generating them

PaPa.. Climate Change Act, Act 70 (2008) Climate Change Act, Act 70 (2008) PADEP periodic reportsPADEP periodic reports GHG emissions inventoryGHG emissions inventory Climate change Advisory CommitteeClimate change Advisory Committee Voluntary GHG registryVoluntary GHG registry Climate change action planClimate change action plan

Pa. Climate ChangePa. Climate ChangeAdvisory CommitteeAdvisory Committee

Non-binding 2020 goal: GHG 30% < 2000Non-binding 2020 goal: GHG 30% < 2000 ““Robust” 2020 policies: GHG =/< 38% Robust” 2020 policies: GHG =/< 38%

20002000 Improved building energy efficiencyImproved building energy efficiency Expanded energy effic./conserv. programsExpanded energy effic./conserv. programs Improved/expanded public transportationImproved/expanded public transportation Enhanced land conservation, urban Enhanced land conservation, urban

forestryforestry

U.S. MayorsU.S. MayorsClimate Protection Climate Protection

AgreementAgreement Launched 2/16/2005 (the day the Launched 2/16/2005 (the day the

Kyoto Protocol came in to effect) Kyoto Protocol came in to effect) 500 Mayors signed by 2007500 Mayors signed by 2007

Cities whose Cities whose mayors mayors signedsigned

the the agreementagreement

U.S. MayorsU.S. MayorsClimate Protection Climate Protection

AgreementAgreement Participating cities commit to:Participating cities commit to:

– MMeet/beat Kyoto Protocol targets via anti-sprawl eet/beat Kyoto Protocol targets via anti-sprawl land-use policies, urban forest restoration, land-use policies, urban forest restoration, information campaignsinformation campaigns

– Urge state and federal action to meet/beat Kyoto Urge state and federal action to meet/beat Kyoto Protocol GHG emissions reduction for U.S.: 7% < Protocol GHG emissions reduction for U.S.: 7% < 1990 by 20121990 by 2012

– Urge Congress to establish a national GHG Urge Congress to establish a national GHG emissions trading systememissions trading system

http://www.usmayors.org/climateprotection/http://www.usmayors.org/climateprotection/agreement.htmagreement.htm

U.S. Climate Action U.S. Climate Action PartnershipPartnership

http://www.us-cap.org/http://www.us-cap.org/

Members:Members:– CorporationsCorporations– Environmental Environmental

organizationsorganizations

Goal:Goal:– Strong federal Strong federal

legislation requiring legislation requiring significant reductions significant reductions of GHG of GHG

Tool:Tool:– Principles and Principles and

recommendations on recommendations on on climate change on climate change policypolicy

U.S. Climate Action U.S. Climate Action Partnership MembersPartnership Members

NGOsNGOs– Environmental Environmental

Defense FundDefense Fund– Natural Resources Natural Resources

Defense CouncilDefense Council– Pew Center on Pew Center on

Global Climate Global Climate Change Change

– The Nature The Nature Conservancy Conservancy

– World Resources World Resources Institute Institute

CorporationsCorporations– AES AES – Alcoa Alcoa – Alstom Alstom – Boston Scientific Corporation Boston Scientific Corporation

Chrysler Chrysler – The Dow Chemical Company The Dow Chemical Company – Duke Energy Duke Energy – DuPont DuPont – Exelon Corporation Exelon Corporation – Ford Motor Company Ford Motor Company – General Electric General Electric – Honeywell Honeywell – Johnson & JohnsonJohnson & Johnson– NextEra Energy NextEra Energy – NRG Energy NRG Energy – PepsiCoPepsiCo– PG&E Corporation PG&E Corporation – PNM Resources PNM Resources – Rio Tinto Rio Tinto – ShellShell– Siemens CorporationSiemens Corporation– WeyerhaeuserWeyerhaeuser

Pittsburgh Climate InitiativePittsburgh Climate Initiative

Adopted by City Council in August 2008Adopted by City Council in August 2008 2003: Pgh. emitted 6.6 million tons CO22003: Pgh. emitted 6.6 million tons CO2 Goal: Cut GHG emissions 20% by 2023Goal: Cut GHG emissions 20% by 2023 Collaborative, multi-sectoralCollaborative, multi-sectoral

– MunicipalMunicipal– CommunityCommunity– BusinessBusiness– Higher EducationHigher Education

http://pittsburghclimate.org/http://pittsburghclimate.org/

Local ResponseLocal Response

ICLEI 5 milestone ICLEI 5 milestone approach:approach:

1.1. Baseline emissions Baseline emissions inventory and forecast.inventory and forecast.

2.2. Emissions reduction Emissions reduction target.target.

3.3. Climate Action Plan.Climate Action Plan.

4.4. Policies/measures.Policies/measures.

5.5. Monitoring and Monitoring and verificationverification

PADEP ResponsePADEP Response

Local Government Greenhouse Gas Pilot Grant Local Government Greenhouse Gas Pilot Grant ProgramProgram– ALLEGHENY COUNTYALLEGHENY COUNTY

Wilkins Township (with Forest Hills and Penn Wilkins Township (with Forest Hills and Penn Hills)Hills)

Mt. Lebanon Mt. Lebanon – BUCKS COUNTY BUCKS COUNTY

Bucks County Multi-Municipal ProgramBucks County Multi-Municipal Program– BUTLER COUNTY BUTLER COUNTY

Cranberry TownshipCranberry Township– CENTRE COUNTY CENTRE COUNTY

Centre Region Greenhouse Gas Pilot Grant Centre Region Greenhouse Gas Pilot Grant – CRAWFORD COUNTY CRAWFORD COUNTY

MeadvilleMeadville– DELAWARE COUNTY DELAWARE COUNTY

Swarthmore RegionSwarthmore Region

Wilkins Township et alWilkins Township et al

Municipal clientsMunicipal clientsWilkins Twp., Pa.Wilkins Twp., Pa.

Penn Hills, Pa.Penn Hills, Pa.

Forest Hills, PaForest Hills, Pa. . Technical supportTechnical support

Duquesne University CEREDuquesne University CERE

Products:Products:GHG inventoriesGHG inventoriesClimate Action PlansClimate Action Plans

Local ResponseLocal ResponseWilkins TownshipWilkins Township