Investing in Sustainable Energy Options in Ukraine via the Kyoto Protocol
This webcasted panel discussion will examine opportunities for U.S. businesses and others to invest in energy efficient and renewable energy projects in Ukraine using the mechanisms of the Kyoto Protocol. The panelists will review opportunities for reducing energy waste in Ukraine’s major end-use energy sectors as well as the status and near-term potential for developing Ukraine’s solar, wind, biomass/biofuels, small hydro, geothermal, and coal-mine methane resources.
Panelists- Brian Castelli – Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Alliance to Save Energy
- John Palmisano – Chairman, IE3
- Rich Rosenzweig – Chief Operating Officer, Natsource
- Ken Bossong – Co-Director, Ukrainian-American Environmental Association
(biographical information on each of the four panelists follows below)
This event, being co-sponsored by the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation and The Washington Group, will be broadcast live on-line in English.
Persons planning to attend in person should arrive by 11:50 am
- (Ukrainian Time: 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm)
U.S.-Ukraine Foundation 1701 “K” Street NW Suite #903 Washington, DC 20006
TO SUBMIT QUESTIONS ON-LINE: Questions for the panelists can be e-mailed either in advance or during the discussion to ulyana@usukraine.org. Please type “Kyoto/Energy Panel” in the “subject” line.
TO REGISTER AND FOR MORE INFORMATION: For On-Site Attendance, RSVPs Required. Lunch will be served. Space is Limited.
RSVP by email to: ulyana@usukraine.org.
The presentation will be broadcast live online. To register to watch online, please visit this link and follow the instructions.
Speakers:
JOHN PALMISANO Chairman, IE3
Since 1976, Mr. Palmisano has:
- Created 3 emissions brokerage and 1 emissions trading businesses, including the first emissions brokerage firm, AER*X
- Advised the Hong Kong Stock Exchange on developing a “green” exchange
- Consulted to trade associations, the US EPA, the United Nations, the World Bank, US Congress, the Russian government, the Ukrainian government, the Canadian government and many US and international companies on both emissions trading matters and developing “green” energy projects and policies
- Helped create three “green” NGOs that focus on promoting emissions trading—one in Russia, one in Ukraine, and one in the United States
- Established emission brokerage offices and representatives in Moscow, Kiev, Hong Kong, London, and Washington DC
- Brokered more than 70 emission trades
- Served as an expert witness in public utility commission and legal proceedings
- Managed the air pollution control program in California for an engineering company
- Developed several major environmental policies while working at US EPA
Mr. Palmisano’s immersion into emissions trading began when he was a manager at the United States Environmental Protection Agency where he developed regulatory reforms dealing with air and water pollution control. He received U.S. EPA’s Gold Medal for his work on emissions trading.
////////////////////////////////
BRIAN CASTELLI Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Alliance to Save Energy
Brian T. Castelli is the executive vice president and chief operating officer of the Alliance to Save Energy. He has 30 years of national and international experience in the energy field, including expertise in energy efficiency, renewables, emission reductions, and electricity demand reduction.
Prior to joining the Alliance in July 2005, Castelli ran his own energy consulting firm. There he was the federal energy liaison for the California Energy Commission; a principal with the Center for Energy and Climate Solutions, and a consultant to both the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and the National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO).
As a presidential appointee, Castelli served as chief of staff to the U.S. Department of Energy’s assistant secretary for energy efficiency and renewable energy from 1994 to 2001. He managed 550 staff and more than $1 billion in programs and research, development, and deployment initiatives and directed the development and implementation of energy policies and programs.
Castelli also led and participated in missions to Western Hemisphere, European, and former Soviet Union countries and was also deeply involved in developing energy-efficiency measures for the eventual closure of the nuclear reactors in Chornobyl, Ukraine.
Prior to DOE, Castelli was appointed in 1988 by Gov. Bob Casey to the Pennsylvania Energy Office (PEO), for three years as deputy director for administration and public affairs and then as executive director, through 1994. As executive director he ran the commonwealth’s energy policies and programs, managed the state energy office and the Pennsylvania Energy Development Authority, and took the lead on responding to energy emergencies.
Notably, he developed a revolving loan fund for energy-efficiency measures and a “Green Buildings” program for cutting energy use and costs in all commonwealth-owned or operated buildings, and he drafted legislation for and implemented an alternative fuel program.
Earlier in his career, Castelli was vice president of finance for The National Center for Appropriate Technology; senior vice president and cofounder of CEXEC; and financial analyst with the Federal Energy Administration. He has authored many articles, studies, and reports on energy-related issues, served on various boards of directors, and made presentations in many state, national, and international forums and conferences.
Castelli holds two degrees from the University of Pennsylvania, a bachelor of science in chemical engineering and an MBA in industrial/environmental management from the university’s Wharton School.
////////////////////////////////
RICH ROSENZWEIG Chief Operating Officer, Natsource
Richard Rosenzweig, Chief Operating Officer of Natsource (Washington, DC), is responsible for the company’s global Advisory Services and Research business unit. He provides services to private firms, investment funds, governments, and international financial institutions on all aspects of climate change and renewable energy, including risk assessment and management, market entry strategies, trading system design, domestic policy development and international negotiations. Mr. Rosenzweig has extensive experience in all aspects of emissions trading and risk management. He represented several companies in the design of the U.S. Acid Rain and NOx SIP Call Programs. Mr. Rosenzweig was involved in the first transaction of UK and Danish greenhouse gas allowances. He joined Natsource from the Washington law firm of Van Ness Feldman, where he was Principal.
Mr. Rosenzweig served as Chief of Staff to the Secretary of Energy at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) from 1993-1996. His national policy responsibilities included the development and coordination of DOE strategy related to global climate change. He played key roles in developing the Clinton Administration’s Climate Change Action Plan, which incorporated the first project-based mechanism to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and the Secretary of Energy’s international energy, environmental, and national security initiatives. He also helped to negotiate voluntary agreements between DOE and more than 600 electric utilities to achieve voluntary greenhouse gas reductions in the “Climate Challenge” program. Mr. Rosenzweig has written extensively on the greenhouse gas market, the impacts of trading system design, and the role of technology in addressing climate change. He has a BA degree from Northeastern University and an MS degree from American University in Political Science.
////////////////////////////////
KEN BOSSONG Co-Director, Ukrainian-American Environmental Association
A former volunteer in Ukraine with the U.S. Peace Corps (February 2000 – January 2003), Ken Bossong presently serves as the coordinator of the Sustainable Energy Coalition, a U.S. NGO comprised of 50+ U.S. business, environmental, consumer, and energy policy organizations promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies.
Over the past 35 years he has served as the director of several national U.S. environmental NGOs as well as worked as a member of several organizations working on Ukrainian issues. He has degrees in law, public administration, and environmental engineering.
Most recently he was a short-term scholar at the Kennan Institute of the Woodrow Wilson Center where he conducted research on sustainable energy policies and options for Ukraine.
////////////////////////////////
Major Financial Program Support provided by:
Chopivsky Family Foundation Dmytro & Jaroslava Jarosewycz Memorial Charitable Gift Fund Heritage Foundation of First Security Federal Savings Bank (Chicago, IL) The Maria Hulai Lion Foundaton Self Reliance (NY) Federal Credit Union (New York City) Selfreliance Ukrainian American Federal Credit Union (Chicago, IL) Sutaruk Foundation
Individuals: Leonard & Helena Mazur Marta Pereyma Murray Senkus Stefan & Wolodymyra Slywotzky
PEER: FWS Scientists in "Ethics Tug of War"; IG Launches Inquiry
This is crossposted from the newly launched Think Progress Wonk Room, which will be covering policy news from climate change to national security. The issues covered by Hill Heat writer Brad Johnson will enjoy deeper coverage at the Wonk Room, where he is now a full-time staffer.
The Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility today highlighted the ethical conundrum facing scientists currently serving under Fish & Wildlife Service Director H. Dale Hall.
In addition, this month the Interior Inspector General opened a preliminary inquiry into whether Hall violated the code of conduct for repeatedly missing Endangered Species Act deadlines to list the polar bear, despite clear scientific guidance.
PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch asks: “How can we expect scientists to obey a code of conduct that their director ignores?”
The latest delay has also triggered a lawsuit from environmental groups.
Allison Winter reports for E&E News:The Interior Department’s internal watchdog said today it has begun a preliminary probe of the delayed polar bear decision.Responding to requests from environmental groups, the Inspector General’s Office official said its preliminary review will determine if there is a need for a full investigation.
The Sierra Club, Alaska Wilderness League and four other organizations requested a review by Inspector General Early Devaney, claiming the delay violates the Fish and Wildlife Service’s scientific code of conduct and rules of the Endangered Species Act by allowing MMS to proceed with Chukchi lease sales.
UCS at Chamber of Commerce Presentation Against Climate Legislation in New Hampshire
The Alliance for Energy and Economic Growth (AEEG) (an industry coalition organized in 2001 to support the administration’s Energy Task Force efforts), the National Association of Manufacturers, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce are hosting a series of state climate change dialogues in 2008 in Ohio, New Hampshire, Montana, and North Dakota, with Margo Thorning of the American Council for Capital Formation, a conservative corporate think tank. The first such forum was held in Manchester, NH on Wednesday, March 12.
Jim Rubens, of the Union of Concerned Scientists attended the event. Below is his story of what transpired, a Hill Heat exclusive.The American Council for Capital Formation and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce – fronting for coal, oil and the fossil-heavy utilities – last Wednesday road tested their forum on what they claim are the dire economic consequences of the Lieberman-Warner climate bill. It was train wreck I am certain they will not want repeated.First, in response to a letter from 8 utility CEOs asking that exaggerations be removed from the Charles River Associates analysis forming the basis for the phony projections, lead ExxonMobil-funded economist Dr Margo Thorning announced that no specific impact numbers would be provided. We’d need to wait to see the new, even more slanted ACCF-sponsored study due to be released the next day.
Next, a couple of global warming denialists in the audience asked the Chamber rep why the nation’s business lobby was buying into the need for anything at all to be done, given that glaciers are growing worldwide, Mars is getting colder, etc. The response: the IPCC report is in, and attacking the science is no longer politically tenable. Subtext read in the facial expressions from the dais: we’d love to, but we’re stuck now fear mongering the economics of an American energy future of stable prices, domestic job growth, and intact Florida coastlines.
Next, Tufts economist Dr Julie Nelson asked Dr. Thorning whether the new ACCF-sponsored analysis would be any better than the CRA version, allowing peer review, disclosing assumptions, etc, like all the competing 25 climate-economy models which project only very modest impacts. Answer: an embarrassed no.
Next, yours truly asked Dr. Thorning whether the ACCF analysis – to correct the CRA’s failings – would model the costs of projected warming under the business as usual or baseline scenario at greater than zero, given that New Hampshire’s $650 million ski industry will be wiped out by 2100, or would assign a return greater than zero to stepped-up efficiency and conservation investments, or a value greater than zero for future energy technology innovation. Answer: another hang-dog faced no. Given the lack of data, there is no way to assign any number, she said.
I then asked Dr. Thorning whether it would therefore be fair to footnote the baseline scenario GDP and energy cost numbers, with a statement to the effect that the predicted cost of L-W is high because the baseline number is likely to be low, in that the cost of global warming under business as usual is greater than zero. She acknowledged some merit to that before quickly retreating from the room to work her cell phone.
Recommendations for the three future ACCF fora: be sure to have credible economists and clean energy and efficiency experts and developers in the room. Call them on every false, exaggerated and unsupported statement. Talk about what American entrepreneurs are doing right now in the states where the fora are held to make the American economy stronger while reducing the risks of future climate change. Make sure the media is present to witness it.
EPA Fully Embroiled in Scandal; Bush Changed Regulations
EPA administrator Stephen L. Johnson has taken significant heat from environmental groups, state officials, and Congress for his December denial of California’s Clean Air Act waiver request to enact AB 32 to regulate tailpipe greenhouse gas emissions (and the February release of his justification). Congressional investigations, though stonewalled repeatedly by Johnson, have revealed that unanimous staff recommendations to approve the waiver were overturned by the administrator.
The Supreme Court decision Mass. v. EPA, which compelled the agency to make a decision on the waiver, also required the agency to make an endangerment finding as to whether greenhouse gases pose a threat to human health and if so, to issue motor vehicle regulations. On Wednesday Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.)’s Oversight Committee investigation revealed that Johnson in fact attempted to issue an endangerment finding and motor vehicle regulations in December, but was evidently overruled by the White House and Department of Transportation. Johnson is still being unresponsive to Waxman’s investigation, as well as the one newly opened by Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) of the Global Warming Committee.
Late Wednesday night, the EPA issued new smog regulations, lowering the public health (primary) and public welfare (secondary) standards to 75 parts per billion from 84 ppb. The Washington Post’s Juliet Eilperin revealed that the EPA scientific panel was overruled in its recommendation to establish a much lower seasonal secondary standard to protect plantlife during the growing season:Nearly a year ago, EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee reiterated in writing that its members were “unanimous in recommending” that the agency set the standard no higher than 70 parts per billion (ppb) and to consider a limit as low as 60 ppb.
She goes on to note that on March 6, the Office of Management and Budget’s Susan E. Dudley sent a letter to the EPA asking them to consider the effect of a too strict regulation on “economic values and on personal comfort and well-being,”. EPA Deputy Administrator Marcus C. Peacock replied that “EPA cannot consider costs in setting a secondary standard,” with the cutting retort: “EPA is not aware of any information that ozone has beneficial effects on economic values or on personal comfort and well being.”
Today Eilperin further revealed that President Bush personally stepped in at the last minute to block the EPA’s intended secondary standard.The president’s order prompted a scramble by administration officials to rewrite the regulations to avoid a conflict with past EPA statements on the harm caused by ozone. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement warned administration officials late Tuesday night that the rules contradicted the EPA’s past submissions to the Supreme Court, according to sources familiar with the conversation. As a consequence, administration lawyers hustled to craft new legal justifications for the weakened standard.
Massachusetts v. U.S. EPA Part II: Implications of the Supreme Court Decision
Chairman Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and the Select Committee on Energy Independence & Global Warming will hold a hearing on Thursday March 13, 2008 with EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson and other experts to discuss EPA and the Bush administration’s response to the landmark Supreme Court decision Massachusetts v. EPA.
Witnesses
Panel I
- The Honorable Stephen L. Johnson, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Panel II
- The Honorable Roderick Bremby, Secretary, Kansas Department of Health and Environment
- The Honorable Josh Svaty, Kansas House Member
- Lisa Heinzerling, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center
- David Bookbinder, Chief Climate Counsel, Sierra Club
- Peter S. Glaser, Partner, Troutman Sanders
Summit on America's Energy Future
This event will feature presentations by leading thinkers on energy policy from the U.S. government (state and federal), universities, and the private sector, as well as international perspectives. It will take place in the main auditorium of the National Academy of Sciences building at 2100 C Street, NW, in Washington DC. This event will serve to develop information for the Academies’ ongoing study, America’s Energy Future: Technology Opportunities, Risks and Tradeoffs, and to stimulate discussion among leading thinkers with diverse points of view on energy issues as the 2008 U.S. elections approach.
The Summit will include presentations addressing three major energy themes: Energy Security; Energy and the Economy; and Energy and the Environment. During the sessions, the analyses and results of key recent energy studies will be presented by principals from:
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Electric Power Research Institute
- InterAcademy Council
- International Energy Agency
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology
- McKinsey Global Institute
- National Commission on Energy Policy
- National Petroleum Council
- National Research Council
- Rocky Mountain Institute
- U.S. Climate Change Science and Technology Program
- U.S. Department of Energy
In each session, there will also be time provided for participants to ask questions to a roundtable of speakers. The preliminary agenda will be posted by mid-January. This event is expected to be very full – please register early (free) if you’d like to attend. If you have any questions, please contact us at energysummit at nas.edu.
Thursday, March 13, Auditorium, National Academy of Sciences Building
| 8:00-8:15 a.m. | Welcome and Introduction Ralph Cicerone, President, National Academy of Sciences (confirmed) |
| 8:15-9:45 a.m. | Current U.S. Energy Policy Context Sen. Jeff Bingaman, Chair, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate (invited) The Geopolitical Context of America’s Energy Future Raymond L. Orbach, Undersecretary for Science, U.S. Department of Energy (invited) The Geopolitics of Energy Fatih Birol, Chief Economist, International Energy Agency (confirmed) |
| 9:45-10:00 a.m. | Question and Answer Forum Moderator: Ralph Cicerone |
| 10:30-10:45 a.m. | Defining the Problems Robert W. Fri, Senior Fellow Emeritus, Resources for the Future (confirmed) |
| 10:45-11:15 a.m. | Reference Global Energy and Environment Projections Ged Davis, Managing Director, World Economic Forum Centre for Strategic Insight, and Co-Chair, Global Energy Assessment Council, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (confirmed) |
| 1:15-11:45 a.m. | Facing the Hard Truths about Energy Lee F. Raymond, Chair, National Petroleum Council (invited) |
| 11:45 a.m. – noon | Question and Answer Forum Moderator: Robert W. Fri |
|
Session 1 1:30-1:45 p.m. |
Introduction to Session 1 Harold T. Shapiro, President Emeritus, Princeton University and Chair, National Research Council Committee on America’s Energy Future (confirmed) |
| 1:45-2:30 p.m. |
The Future of Coal and Nuclear Power Ernest J. Moniz, Professor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Co-Chair, MIT Interdisciplinary Study on the Future of Nuclear Power (confirmed) |
| 2:30-3:00 |
Biofuels: How Much, How Fast, and How Difficult? Jose Goldemberg, Secretary for the Environment, State of São Paulo, Brazil and Co-chair, Global Energy Assessment Council, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (confirmed) |
| 3:30-4:00 p.m. |
Automotive Fuel Economy: How Far Should We Go? Paul R. Portney, Dean, Eller College of Management, University of Arizona and Chair, National Research Council Committee on Effectiveness and Impact of Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards (confirmed) |
| 4:00-4:30 p.m. |
Prospects of a Hydrogen Economy Michael P. Ramage, Executive VP, ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Co. (Retired), and Chair, National Research Council Committee on Alternatives and Strategies for Future Hydrogen Production and Use (confirmed) |
| 4:30-5:15 p.m. |
Closing Address Samuel W. Bodman, Secretary, U.S. Department of Energy (confirmed) Moderator: Harold Shapiro |
| 5:15-6:30 p.m. | Reception: Great Hall, National Academy of Sciences Building |
| Friday, March 14, Auditorium, National Academy of Sciences Building | |
|
Session 2 9:00-9:15 a.m. |
Introduction to Session 2 Charles M. Vest, President, National Academy of Engineering (confirmed) |
| 9:15-10:00 a.m. |
Ending the Energy Stalemate John P. Holdren, Professor, Harvard University and Co-Chair, National Commission on Energy Policy (confirmed) |
| 10:00-10:30 a.m. |
Google’s RechargeIT Program for Commercial Deployment of Plug-in Hybrid Vehicles Dan W. Reicher, Director, Climate Change and Energy Initiatives, Google.org (invited) |
| 11:00-11:30 a.m. |
Electricity Innovation Pathways Steven R. Specker, President, Electric Power Research Institute (confirmed) |
| 11:30 a.m.-noon |
Session 2 Question and Answer Forum Moderator: Charles M. Vest |
|
Session 3 1:15-1:30 p.m. |
Introduction to Session 3 Richard A. Meserve, President, Carnegie Institution for Science (confirmed) |
| 1:30-2:00 p.m. |
Lighting the Way: Toward a Sustainable Energy Future Steven Chu, Director, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, and Co-Chair, Interacademy Council Study Panel on a Sustainable Energy Future (confirmed) |
| 2:00-2:30 p.m. |
Global CO2 Reduction Supply Curve Matt Rogers, Director, McKinsey and Co. (invited) |
| 3:00-3:30 p.m. |
Winning the Oil End Game Amory Lovins, CEO, Rocky Mountain Institute, and Principal Investigator, Winning the Oil End Game (confirmed) |
| 3:30-4:00 p.m. |
Climate Change Technologies Robert Marlay, Deputy Director, Climate Change Technology Program, U.S. Department of Energy (confirmed) |
| 4:00-4:30 p.m. |
Session 3 Question and Answer Forum Moderator: Richard Meserve |
| 4:30 p.m. |
Closing Remarks and Adjourn Robert Fri |
Waxman, Markey Go After EPA's Supreme Court Avoidance
Tomorrow morning, the House Select Committee on Global Warming and Energy Independence will be holding a hearing on the implications of Massachusetts v. EPA nearly one year later. Chairman Edward Markey (D-MA) plans to question EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson on why he’s delayedaction on the EPA’s remand (which might result in another lawsuit). Committee members will also hear from a panel that includes Kansas Secretary of Health and the Environment Roderick Bremby, who made national headlines this fall by utilizing his legal authority under state law to deny permits for two new coal-fired power plants—citing the growing scientific consensus surrounding warming-related impacts and the Court’s ruling in Mass v. EPA to justify his landmark decision.
The hearing WILL NOT be broadcast online (though it is being videotaped), but Warming Law will be in attendance and might be able to liveblog the proceedings, and will report back later regardless. We’ll be particularly noting whether any members decide to take up the "common sense questions" proposed today as talking points by the Heritage Foundation, which hyperbolically warns that an endangerment finding for CO2 would require the EPA [to] completely de-industrialize the United States." Heritage and the Competitive Enterprise Institute—which has similarly argued that an EPA global warming program would amount to "policy terrorism"—have actively taken credit for Johnson’s recent decision to suddenly halt work on an endangerment finding.
Amidst such boasts of outside influence on EPA, Markey’s counterpart on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, the indomitable Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), has started investigating the White House’s apparent interference in short-circuiting an endangerment finding. In a letter sent to Johnson today, Waxman notes on-the-record conversations with senior EPA officials that—combined with Johnson’s public statements up through the last couple of weeks—depict a process that was suddenly halted as it neared completion:
Multiple senior EPA officials [cited directly in this letter] have told the Committee on the record that after the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, you assembled a team of 60 to 70 EPA officials to determine whether carbon diioxide emissions endanger healt hand welfare and, if so, to develop regulations reducing CO2 emissions from motor vehicles. According to these officials, you agreed with your staff’s proposal that CO2 emissions from motor vehicles should be reduced and in Decemer forwarded an endangerment finding to the White House and a proposed motor vehicle regulation to the Department of Transportation…
The senior EPA officials who spoke with the Committee did not know what transpired inside the White House of the Department of Transportation or what directions the White House may have given to you. They do know, however, that since you sent the endangerment finding to the White House, "the work on vehicle efforts has stopped." They reported to the committee that the career officials assigned ot the issue have ceased their efforts and have been "awaiting direction" since December.
As per OMB Watch, the letter also pre-emptively rebuts the suggestion that the fuel economy standards passed by Congress in December have any legal impact on EPA’s legal obligations in wake of Mass. v. EPA. Waxman is demanding that EPA provide "copies of the documents relating to the endangerment finding and GHG vehicle rule, including copies of any communications with the White house and other federal agencies about these proposals." Copies of an EPA techinical support document, the proposed endangerment finding, and the proposed vehicle GHG rule are due by this Friday, March 14; all other documents are to be provided by March 28.
It should also be noted that Waxman previously uncovered an improper lobbying effort by the same parties in question here, DOT and the White House, against California’s since-denied application for a waiver to enact its own vehicle GHG standards. Waxman’s oversight into White House influence on that decision also continues, with a letter sent to Johnson on Monday threatening to subpoena missing documents unless they were provided by close-of-business today.
New Study Highlighting the National and 50-State Economic Impacts of the Lieberman-Warner Climate Change Bill
A media conference call to discuss the findings of a study jointly commissioned by the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and the American Council for Capital Formation (ACCF) that quantifies the potential national and state economic impacts of the Lieberman-Warner climate change bill, S. 2191, the America’s Climate Security Act of 2007.
Conducted by Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), the independent study examines the implications of the legislation with respect to future energy costs, economic growth, employment, production, household income and the impact on low income earners. The study includes a comprehensive national economic assessment, as well as separate and specific overviews of the impact the legislation would have on all 50 U.S. states.
The results of the study will be outlined during a brief presentation which will be followed by a question and answer session. The full SAIC national and 50 state-specific studies will be posted online at 9:30 am ET, Thursday, March 13, in advance and can be found at either www.accf.org or www.nam.org/climatechangereport.
The call is for credentialed media only.
- The Honorable John Engler, President, National Association of Manufacturers
- Dr. Margo Thorning, Senior Vice President and Chief Economist, American Council for Capital Formation
Dial-In Number: 1-800-857-9772
Passcode: 4174983
Contact: For additional information or to request an interview, please contact Erica Fitzsimmons
202-347-7445 – efitzsimmons@theheraldgroup.com
About NAM
The National Association of Manufacturers is the nation’s largest industrial trade association, representing small and large manufacturers in every industrial sector and in all 50 states. Headquartered in Washington, D.C., the NAM has 11 additional offices across the country.
About ACCF
The American Council for Capital Formation (www.accf.org) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to the advocacy of tax and environmental policies that encourage saving and investment. The ACCF was founded in 1973 and is supported by the voluntary contributions of corporations, associations, foundations, and individuals.
Nuclear Power in a Warming World: Solution or Illusion?
This hearing will explore the degree to which nuclear power could provide a solution for addressing climate change.
The contemplated future role of nuclear power in reducing global greenhouse gas emissions will clearly require a monumental capital investment, many years if not decades of planning and construction, extensive international coordination, and substantial assumption of risk by the general public and by investors. This hearing will examine the feasibility of achieving such a nuclear expansion, the costs and benefits of this nuclear path, and whether nuclear power can play a leading role in solving the climate challenge.
Wtinesses- Amory Lovins, Cofounder, Chairman, and Chief Scientist of the Rocky Mountain Institute
- Sharon Squassoni, Senior Associate in the Nonproliferation Program of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- David Lochbaum, Director of the Nuclear Safety Project for the Union of Concerned Scientists
Boxer and Environmental Leaders United on Urgent Need to Address Global Warming
U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, will be joined by the heads of America’s leading environmental organizations to discuss the need for action to address the challenge of global warming.
Participants- Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Chairman, Environment and Public Works Committee
- Frances Beinecke, President, Natural Resources Defense Council
- Carl Pope, Executive Director, Sierra Club
- Gene Karpinski, President, League of Conservation Voters
- Kevin Knobloch, President, Union of Concerned Scientists
Also participating will be representatives of Environment America, Environmental Defense, Center for International Law, Clean Water Action, National Wildlife Federation, Ocean Conservancy, Pew Environment Group, Physicians for Social Responsibility, and The Wilderness Society.