Advanced search Help
Searching for terms: ALL (Climate AND Change) in: title or summary
Clear all search criteria
Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).
-
Cars and Climate: What Can EPA Do to Control Greenhouse Gases from Mobile Sources? [December 9, 2009]
"In the 111th Congress, climate change legislation is among the leadership's highest priorities. With the inauguration of President Obama, there is a proponent of greenhouse gas (GHG) legislation in the White House, as well, markedly improving the prospects for enacting some sort of legislation to reduce GHG emissions. The President has said that a new energy, environment, and climate policy will be 'a leading priority of my presidency, and a defining test of our time.' Not all parties are in agreement that controls on GHGs are desirable. Some argue that the science behind climate change is too uncertain; they oppose controls unless, at some future time, more is known about trends in climate variables and the impact of specific pollutants. Others, who agree in principle that the science dictates GHG reductions be made, raise a number of arguments, including issues concerning international commitments (i.e., whether China, India, and other developing countries will be subject to binding agreements) and the timing of a control regime (e.g., whether a major regulatory initiative is appropriate during the worst economic climate since the Great Depression). Still others can be expected to raise objections about the form and substance of specific legislative proposals, many of which are among the broadest regulatory measures that Congress has ever considered. Proponents of legislation counter that the threat of climate change is too important for action to be delayed, and that energy-efficiency and lower GHG emissions can be the building blocks of a program to restore the economy as well as to protect the environment."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.
2009-12-09
-
Status of the Copenhagen Climate Change Negotiations [December 9, 2009]
From the Overview: "The United States and almost 200 other countries are negotiating under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to address climate change cooperatively beyond the year 2012. Parties agreed to complete those negotiations by the 15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP-15) scheduled for December 7-18, 2009, in Copenhagen. […] Negotiations had lagged through 2008. In December 2008, the then-incoming Obama Administration stated its policy to reduce U.S. emissions to 14% below 2005 levels by 2020. Optimism among many grew that the U.S. Congress would pass GHG [greenhouse gas] control legislation before the Copenhagen meeting, providing guidance to the executive branch negotiators regarding the elements of a treaty that the Senate would ultimately consent to ratify. The Obama position and passage by the U.S. House of Representatives of H.R. 2454 (the American Clean Energy and Security Act, ACES, or the 'Waxman-Markey' bill) have led to reinvigorated hopes of some people that consensus among countries could be found by December 2009 on a comprehensive Copenhagen agreement with quantified commitments. As the weeks remaining until December wane, with neither a U.S. GHG target nor U.S. financial offers, it becomes less likely that China and major non-Annex I country emitters would agree to GHG reduction commitments--which they have been strongly resisting. Smaller countries, concerned about the impacts of climate change on their welfare and economies, and looking to the United States and other large, wealthy countries for leadership on climate change, have become increasingly frustrated. Lack of strong political agreements has led to recent demonstrations in as many as 4,500 locations in 170 countries. More are planned during the Copenhagen meeting."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Lattanzio, Richard K.; Leggett, Jane A.
2009-12-09
-
Technical Support Document for Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act
"This document provides technical support for the endangerment and cause or contribute analyses concerning greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act. This document itself does not convey any judgment or conclusion regarding the question of whether GHGs may be reasonably anticipated to endanger public health or welfare, as this decision is ultimately left to the judgment of the Administrator. The conclusions here and the information throughout this document are primarily drawn from the assessment reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP), the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), and the National Research Council (NRC)."
United States. Environmental Protection Agency
2009-12-07
-
Safeguarding Canadian Arctic Sovereignty Against Conventional Threats
From the thesis Abstract: "The effects of climate change as well as national interests over control of vast amounts of natural resources in the Arctic seem to be destabilizing the geostrategic environment involving the circumpolar states. A traditional conflict scenario in the near future is not out of the question, particularly if the legal framework governing the region, the United Nations Law of the Sea Treaty, is proved inadequate to address the full range of issues in the region and fails to resolve territorial claims. Canada has ongoing disputes in the Arctic region with the United States, Russia, and Denmark, and has recently reaffirmed its commitment to its national sovereignty. Based on an analysis of military capabilities for Arctic operations as well as a qualitative comparison between each of these countries, this study establishes that Canada does not have the necessary military capabilities to deter and counter conventional threats to its sovereignty in the Arctic. Consequently, Canada should leverage the other means of national power, specifically its existing multilateral security and defense agreements, to ensure its sovereignty in the Arctic."
U.S. Army Command and General Staff College
Abboud, Dave
2009-12-06
-
Statement from the Press Secretary on the United Nations Climate Change Conference [December 4, 2009]
"This week, the President discussed the status of the negotiations [at the climate conference in Copenhagen] with Prime Minister Rudd, Chancellor Merkel, President Sarkozy, and Prime Minister Brown and concluded that there appears to be an emerging consensus that a core element of the Copenhagen accord should be to mobilize $10 billion a year by 2012 to support adaptation and mitigation in developing countries, particularly the most vulnerable and least developed countries that could be destabilized by the impacts of climate change. The United States will pay its fair share of that amount and other countries will make substantial commitments as well. In Copenhagen, we also need to address the need for financing in the longer term to support adaptation and mitigation in developing countries. Providing this assistance is not only a humanitarian imperative-it's an investment in our common security, as no climate change accord can succeed if it does not help all countries reduce their emissions."
United States. Office of the White House Press Secretary
2009-12-04
-
Mexico, the Caribbean, and Central America: The Impact of Climate Change to 2030: A Commissioned Research Report
"This assessment identifies and summarizes the latest peer-reviewed research related to the impact of climate change on selected countries in Central America and the Caribbean. It draws on the literature summarized in the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment reports, National Communications to the United Nations Framework (UNFCCC) on Climate Change, statistical data from the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) and on other peer-reviewed research literature and relevant reporting. It includes such impacts as sea level rise, water availability, agricultural shifts, ecological disruptions and species extinctions, infrastructure at risk from extreme weather events (severity and frequency), and disease patterns. This paper addresses the extent to which the countries in the region are vulnerable to impact of climate change. The targeted time frame is to 2030, although various studies referenced in this report have diverse time frames. This assessment also identifies (Annex B) deficiencies in climate change data that would enhance the IC [Intelligence Community] understanding of potential impacts on Central America and the Caribbean and other countries/regions."
National Intelligence Council (U.S.)
Joint Global Change Research Institute; Battelle Memorial Institute. Pacific Northwest Division
2009-12
-
North Africa: The Impact of Climate Change to 2030: Geopolitical Implications
"The National Intelligence Council-sponsored workshop entitled, The Implications of Global Climate Change in North Africa, held on 20 August, 2009, brought together a panel of experts to consider the probable effects of climate change on North Africa from a social, political, and economic perspective. The workshop focused on Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, and Tunisia. The panelists concluded that systemic state failures attributable solely to climate change to 2030 are not likely. However, climatic stress coupled with socioeconomic crises and ineffective state responses could generate localized social or governmental collapses and humanitarian crises. The effects of climate change in North Africa will exacerbate the region's existing challenges of insufficient water and food resources, low economic growth, inadequate urban infrastructure, and weak sociopolitical systems."
National Intelligence Council (U.S.)
Scitor Corporation; CENTRA Technology, Inc.
2009-12
-
Public Security Perspectives: American Views on Nuclear Weapons, Terrorism, Energy and the Environment: 2009
"We report findings from a national Internet survey of the US general public conducted in mid-2009 that investigates concerns about the proliferation of nuclear weapons (with emphases on the cases of North Korea and Iran), evolving views on the efficacy of nuclear deterrence, and preferences for the future of US nuclear weapons. Our analysis of public views on terrorism include assessments of the evolving threat, public tolerance for intrusive domestic measures for preventing terrorism, and perceived effectiveness of domestic efforts to prevent terrorism in the US. We also report findings from a national public survey on US energy and environmental security administered by Internet in mid-2009. Key areas of investigation include how factual knowledge about global climate change is related to support for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and how public knowledge of energy issues relates to preferences for future energy policies. Additionally, we investigate how different sources of energy are perceived in terms of attributes, costs, risks, and preferences, and we analyze how public beliefs about nuclear energy are structured, to include risk/benefit tradeoffs and preferences for additional nuclear generation. Where possible, findings from each."
Sandia National Laboratories
Herron, Kerry G.; Jenkins-Smith, Hank C.
2009-12
-
President to Attend Copenhagen Climate Talks [November 25, 2009]
"The White House announced today [November 25, 2009] that President Obama will travel to Copenhagen on Dec. 9 to participate in the United Nations Climate Change Conference, where he is eager to work with the international community to drive progress toward a comprehensive and operational Copenhagen accord. The President has worked steadily on behalf of a positive outcome in Copenhagen throughout the year. Based on the President's work on climate change over the past 10 months-in the Major Economies Forum, the G20, bilateral discussions and multilateral consultations-and based on progress made in recent, constructive discussions with China and India's Leaders, the President believes it is possible to reach a meaningful agreement in Copenhagen. The President's decision to go is a sign of his continuing commitment and leadership to find a global solution to the global threat of climate change, and to lay the foundation for a new, sustainable and prosperous clean energy future." This press release also includes information on domestic and international leadership initiatives.
United States. Office of the White House Press Secretary
2009-11-25
-
Fact Sheet: U.S.-India Green Partnership to Address Energy Security, Climate Change, and Food Security [November 24, 2009]
This factsheet holds information regarding President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh Green Partnership, and reaffirms "their countries' strong commitment to [...] combat climate change, ensur[es] their mutual energy security, [and their work] towards global food security, and building a clean energy economy that will drive investment, job creation, and economic growth throughout the 21st century." Prime Minister Singh and President Obama agreed to strengthen U.S.-India cooperation several issues during their meeting including: clean energy, climate change, and food security by launching" several initiatives discussed in this November 24, 2009 press release.
United States. Office of the White House Press Secretary
2009-11-24
-
Fact Sheet: Enhancing U.S.-India Cooperation on Education and Development [November 24, 2009]
"In meeting the demands of a changing world economy, President Obama and Prime Minister Singh joined this week to recommit to cooperation on education and development. President Obama and Prime Minister Singh have both put education at the top of their national agendas. Today [November 24, 2009], they reaffirm that it is through cooperation on education and development that global challenges are met-from food security to public health, from climate change to workforce development and women's empowerment. Toward that end, Prime Minister Singh and President Obama agreed to strengthen U.S.-India cooperation on education and development by launching" several initiatives discussed in this press release.
United States. Office of the White House Press Secretary
2009-11-24
-
U.S.-China Joint Statement [November 17, 2009]
"At the invitation of President Hu Jintao of the People's Republic of China, President Barack Obama of the United States of America is paying a state visit to China from November 15-18, 2009. The Presidents held in-depth, productive and candid discussions on U.S.-China relations and other issues of mutual interest. They highlighted the substantial progress in U.S.-China relations over the past 30 years since the establishment of diplomatic ties, and they reached agreement to advance U.S.-China relations in the new era. President Obama will have separate meetings with Wu Bangguo, Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress and Premier Wen Jiabao. President Obama also spoke with and answered questions from Chinese youth." The joint statement included the following issues: the U.S.-China relationship, building and deepening bilateral strategic trust, economic cooperation and global recovery, regional and global challenges, climate change, and energy and environment.
United States. Office of the White House Press Secretary
2009-11-17
-
Joint Press Statement by President Obama and President Hu of China [November 17, 2009]
On November 17, 2009, President Obama and President Hu of China released a joint press statement which included a summary of their discussions. Topics included Korea, Iran, the China-U.S. strategic and economic relationship, the international financial situation, the international nuclear nonproliferation regime, climate change, and the one-China policy.
United States. Office of the White House Press Secretary
2009-11-17
-
Fact Sheet: U.S.-China Energy Efficiency Action Plan [November 17, 2009]
"Today [November 17, 2009], President Barack Obama and President Hu Jintao announced the launch of a new U.S.-China Energy Efficiency Action Plan to strengthen the economy, improve energy security and combat climate change by reducing energy waste in both countries. The United States and China consume over 40 percent of global energy resources, costing businesses and households in the two countries roughly $1.5 trillion per year. Working together to improve energy efficiency in buildings, industry and consumer products, the United States and China can reduce spending on imported and highly polluting sources of energy and reinvest in new sources of economic growth and job creation. The U.S.-China Energy Efficiency Action Plan will help achieve this through the following:" green buildings and communities; industrial energy efficiency; consumer product standards; advanced energy efficiency technology; public-private engagement.
United States. Office of the White House Press Secretary
2009-11-17
-
Fact Sheet: APEC Leaders Meeting--Key Accomplishments [November 15, 2009]
"On November 15, President Obama participated in the 17th Annual Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Leaders' meeting in Singapore. APEC members account for 53% of global GDP, purchase 58% of U.S. goods exports, and represent a market of 2.7 billion consumers. In 2008, U.S. goods exports to the Asia-Pacific totaled $747 billion, an increase of 8.3% over 2007. During that same period, U.S. services exports to the region totaled $186.5 billion, up 7.7 percent." The following are some of the key accomplishments discussed in the press release: "U.S. Hosting of APEC in 2011; Balanced, Sustainable, and Inclusive Growth; Regional Economic Integration; Facilitating Trade; Supporting the Multilateral Trading System; Climate Change; Low Carbon and Green Growth; Food Security, Food Safety, and Secure Trade."
United States. Office of the White House Press Secretary
2009-11-15
-
Comparison of Climate Change Adaptation Provisions in S. 1733 and H.R. 2454 [November 12, 2009]
"This report summarizes and compares climate change adaptation-related provisions in the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (H.R. 2454) and the Clean Energy, Jobs, and Power Act (S. 1733). H.R. 2454 was introduced by Representatives Waxman and Markey and passed the House on June 26, 2009. S. 1733 was introduced to the Senate by Senators Boxer and Kerry and, after subsequent revisions made in the form of a manager's substitution amendment, was reported out of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on November 5, 2009. Adaptation measures aim to improve an individual's or institution's ability to cope with or avoid harmful impacts of climate change, and to take advantage of potential beneficial ones. Both H.R. 2454 and S. 1733 include adaptation provisions that (1) seek to better assess the impacts of climate change and variability that are occurring now and in the future; and (2) support adaptation activities related to climate change, both domestically and internationally. Overall, while the two bills would authorize similar adaptation programs, they differ somewhat in scope and emphasis, and they also differ in the distribution of emission allowance allocations over time. Both bills contain provisions that address international climate change adaptation; domestic climate change adaptation programs, including the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), the National Climate Service, and state and tribal programs; public health; and natural resources adaptation. S. 1733 includes five additional provisions not provided for in the House bill that deal with drinking water utilities; water system mitigation and adaptation partnerships; flood control, protection, prevention, and response; wildfire; and coastal Great Lakes states' adaptation."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Ho, Melissa
2009-11-12
-
Cars and Climate: What Can EPA Do to Control Greenhouse Gases from Mobile Sources? [November 12, 2009]
"As Congress considers legislation to reduce the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that contribute to climate change, attention has focused on 'cap-and-trade' legislation. Such legislation would set a national cap on GHG emissions, with allowances (permits) to emit limited amounts of the gases distributed or auctioned to affected parties. Recently, there has also been discussion of taxes on greenhouse-gas-emitting substances (generally referred to as a 'carbon tax'), which proponents argue would provide greater transparency and a clearer price signal. Enacting greenhouse gas controls is not simply a choice between cap-and-trade and carbon tax options, however. A third set of options, using the more traditional regulatory approaches of the Clean Air Act (CAA), is available. Unlike a cap-and-trade system or a carbon tax, regulation under the Clean Air Act does not require new Congressional action. The ability to limit GHG emissions already exists under various CAA authorities that Congress has enacted, a point underlined by the Supreme Court in an April 2007 decision (Massachusetts v. EPA). [...] Regulation of GHGs from mobile sources might also lead the agency to establish controls for stationary sources, such as electric power plants. That option, the authority for which would come from different parts of the Clean Air Act, is addressed in CRS Report R40585, Climate Change: Potential Regulation of Stationary Greenhouse Gas Sources Under the Clean Air Act."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James J.
2009-11-12
-
Fact Sheet: U.S.-Japan Cooperation on Clean Energy Technologies [November 11, 2009]
"President Obama and Prime Minister Hatoyama met on November 13, 2009 in Tokyo. The two leaders affirmed the intent of the United States and Japan, as the two leading global investors in energy research and development, to expand already strong cooperative activities in technology research and development to provide solutions to the challenges of global energy security and climate change." This press release includes the "initial areas for joint activities to strengthen their cooperation."
United States. Office of the White House Press Secretary
2009-11-11
-
Climate Change: Comparison of the Cap-and-Trade Provisions in H.R. 2454 and S. 1733 [November 5, 2009]
"On June 26, 2009, the House passed H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. In addition to establishing a cap-and-trade system to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, the bill addresses energy efficiency, renewable energy, and other energy topics. On September 30, 2009, Senator Kerry introduced S. 1733, the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, which was referred to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. The committee held hearings on the bill starting October 27, 2009, and markup of the bill began November 3. On November 5, the committee approved Senator Boxer's 'Manager's Amendment' as a substitute, and ordered S. 1733 reported. […] This report provides a comparison of the cap-and-trade provisions of these two bills. Most notably, there are six key differences between the bills: (1) the Senate bill has a more stringent emissions cap between 2017 and 2029; (2) the two bills allocate emissions allowances and auction revenue to different recipients at different levels; (3) the bills would treat offsets differently; (4) the House bill would establish extensive carbon market regulation (the Senate bill currently has a placeholder for this topic); (5) the House bill would establish a requirement that importers purchase special emission allowances for certain imports from countries without greenhouse gas controls (the Senate bill currently has a placeholder for this topic); and 6) both bills would limit the Environmental Protection Agency's authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, although in different ways. The Appendix contains a section-by-section comparison of the cap-and-trade provisions in the two bills."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Yacobucci, Brent D.; Ramseur, Jonathan L.; Parker, Larry, 1954-
2009-11-05
-
Status of the Copenhagen Climate Change Negotiations [November 5, 2009]
"The United States and almost 200 other countries are negotiating under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to address climate change cooperatively1 beyond the year 2012. Parties agreed to complete those negotiations by the 15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP-15) scheduled for December 7-18, 2009, in Copenhagen. […] Negotiations had lagged through 2008. In December 2008, the then-incoming Obama Administration stated its policy to reduce U.S. emissions to 14% below 2005 levels by 2020. Optimism among many grew that the U.S. Congress would pass GHG [greenhouse gas] control legislation before the Copenhagen meeting, providing guidance to the executive branch negotiators regarding the elements of a treaty that the Senate would ultimately consent to ratify. The Obama position and passage by the U.S. House of Representatives of H.R. 2454 (the American Clean Energy and Security Act, ACES, or the 'Waxman-Markey' bill) have led to reinvigorated hopes of some people that consensus among countries could be found by December 2009 on a comprehensive Copenhagen agreement with quantified commitments. As the weeks remaining until December wane, with neither a U.S. GHG target nor U.S. financial offers, it becomes less likely that China and major non-Annex I country emitters would agree to GHG reduction commitments--which they have been strongly resisting. Smaller countries, concerned about the impacts of climate change on their welfare and economies, and looking to the United States and other large, wealthy countries for leadership on climate change, have become increasingly frustrated. Lack of strong political agreements has led to recent demonstrations in as many as 4,500 locations in 170 countries. More are planned during the Copenhagen meeting."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Leggett, Jane A.; Lattanzio, Richard K.
2009-11-05
-
Effects of Climate Change on U.S. Ecosystems
"A recent U.S. scientific assessment project -- one of a series commissioned by the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) -- examined how these climate changes are affecting agriculture, land resources, water resources and biodiversity in the United States. While this document offers readers a summary version of the original report, a limited amount of new information drawn from support¬ing scientific materials has been added to provide additional detail on the original findings. The lead sponsor of this activity was the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA); the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) led and coordinated the project. The time horizon considered was 1900 to 2100, but the main focus was on the recent past and the next 25 to 50 years, which fall within the planning horizon of many natural resources managers."
U.S. Global Change Research Program
2009-11
-
National Energy Awareness Month, 2009: A Proclamation by the President of the United States of America
In this October 2, 2009 proclamation, President Obama announced the Month of October 2009 as National Energy Awareness Month. From the proclamation: "We face a turning point in our Nation's energy policy. We can either remain the world's leading importer of oil, or we can become the world's leading exporter of clean energy technology. We can allow climate change to wreak unnatural havoc, or we can create jobs deploying low-carbon technologies to prevent its worst effects. Throughout our history, Americans have successfully confronted challenges that have tested our determination and our capacity to change. If we are to advance energy and climate security, we must focus on energy efficiency, promote sustainable industries, accelerate job training and job creation in these areas, and set effective and achievable standards for the generation and use of clean energy. As a Nation, we will lead by innovating, adapting to the global marketplace, and investing in the kind of sustainable future we want for the generations to come."
United States. Executive Office of the President
2009-10-02
-
Our Changing Planet: The U.S. Global Change Research Program for Fiscal Year 2010
"We herewith transmit a copy of 'Our Changing Planet: The U.S. Climate Change Science Program for Fiscal Year 2010'. The report describes the activities and plans of the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) established under the Global Change Research Act of 1990. The USGCRP coordinates and integrates scientific research on climate and global change supported by 13 participating departments and agencies of the U.S. government. This Fiscal year 2010 edition of 'Our Changing Planet' highlights recent advances and progress supported by participating agencies in each of the program's research and observational elements, as called for in the 'Strategic Plan for the U.S. Climate Change Science Program' released in July 2003. A new strategic plan reflecting President Obama's priorities is in preparation. The document describes a range of activities including examples of the USGCRP's contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, as well as progress in understanding Earth system components of the global climate system, how these components interact, and the processes and forces bringing about changes to the Earth system."
U.S. Global Change Research Program
2009-10
-
Recovery Through Retrofit
"Making American homes and buildings more energy efficient presents an unprecedented opportunity for communities throughout the country. The Recovery Through Retrofit Report builds on investments made in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) to expand the home energy efficiency and retrofit market. Home retrofits can potentially help people earn money, as home retrofit workers, while also helping them save money, by lowering their utility bills. By encouraging nationwide weatherization of homes, workers of all skill levels will be trained, engaged, and will participate in ramping up a national home retrofit market. There are almost 130 million homes in this country. Combined, they generate more than 20 percent of our nation's carbon dioxide emissions, making them a significant contributor to global climate change. Existing techniques and technologies in energy efficiency retrofitting can reduce home energy use by up to 40 percent per home and lower associated greenhouse gas emissions by up to 160 million metric tons annually by the year 2020. Furthermore, home energy efficiency retrofits have the potential to reduce home energy bills by $21 billion annually, paying for themselves over time. By implementing Recovery Through Retrofit's recommendations, the Federal Government will lay the groundwork for a self-sustaining home energy efficiency retrofit industry. This Report provides a roadmap of how the Federal Government can use existing authorities and funds to unlock private capital and mobilize our communities."
United States. Executive Office of the President; United States. Office of the Vice President
2009-10
-
Climate Change Adaption: Strategic Federal Planning Could Help Officials Make More Informed Decisions, Report to the Chairman, Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, House of Representatives
"Changes in the climate attributable to increased concentrations of greenhouse gases may have significant impacts in the United States and the world. For example, climate change could threaten coastal areas with rising sea levels. Greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere will continue altering the climate system into the future, regardless of emissions control efforts. Therefore, adaptation -defined as adjustments to natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climate change -is an important part of the response to climate change. GAO was asked to examine (1) what actions federal, state, local, and international authorities are taking to adapt to a changing climate; (2) the challenges that federal, state, and local officials face in their efforts to adapt; and (3) actions that Congress and federal agencies could take to help address these challenges. We also discuss our prior work on similarly complex, interdisciplinary issues. This report is based on analysis of studies, site visits to areas pursuing adaptation efforts, and responses to a Web-based questionnaire sent to federal, state, and local officials."
United States. Government Accountability Office
2009-10
-
Interagency Ocean Science and Technology Priorities for FY 2011
"This memorandum summarizes the priorities for FY2011, developed by the JSOST [Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology], including near-term priorities and infrastructure priorities. These are designed to advance work in support of the six societal themes of Charting the Course for Ocean Science: 1) Stewardship of Natural and Cultural Ocean Resources, 2) Increasing Resilience to Natural Hazards, 3) Enabling Marine Operations, 4) The Ocean's Role in Climate, 5) Improving Ecosystem Health, and 6) Enhancing Human Health. Appendix A describes these six societal themes and accounts for changes within them since Charting the Course for Ocean Science was published in January 2007. It is the intent of the JSOST to regularly revisit the priorities and update them as necessary as measured against metrics for success and completion."
United States. Office of Science and Technology Policy
Holdren, John P.
2009-09-25
-
Methane Capture: Options for Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction [September 17, 2009]
From the Summary: "Research on climate change has identified a wide array of sources that emit greenhouse gases (GHGs). Among the six gases that have generally been the primary focus of concern, methane is the second-most abundant, accounting for approximately 8% of total U.S. GHG emissions in 2007. Methane is emitted from a number of sources. The most significant are agriculture (both animal digestive systems and manure management); landfills; oil and gas production, refining, and distribution; and coal mining. As Congress considers legislation to address climate change by capping or reducing GHG emissions, methane capture projects offer an array of possible reduction opportunities, many of which utilize proven technologies. Methane capture projects (e.g., landfill gas projects, anaerobic digestion systems) restrict the release of methane into the atmosphere. The methane captured can be used for energy or flared. Methane capture challenges differ depending on the source. Most methane capture technologies face obstacles to implementation, including marginal economics in many cases, restricted pipeline access, and various legal issues.[...]This report discusses legislative alternatives for addressing methane capture, sources of methane, opportunities and challenges for methane capture, and current federal programs that support methane recovery."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
McCarthy, James E.; Ramseur, Jonathan L.; Folger, Peter (Peter Franklin) . . .
2009-09-17
-
Wildfire Fuels and Fuel Reduction [September 16, 2009]
From the Summary: "Severe wildfires have been burning more area and more houses in recent years. Some assert that climate change is at least partly to blame; others claim that the increasing number of homes in and near the forest (the wildland-urban interface) is a major cause. However, most observers agree that wildfire suppression and historic land management practices have led to unnaturally high accumulations of biomass in many forests, primarily in the intermountain West. While high-intensity conflagrations (wildfires that burn the forest canopy) occur naturally in some ecosystems (called crown-fire or stand-replacement fire ecosystems), abnormally high biomass levels can lead to conflagrations in ecosystems when such crown fires were rare (called frequent-surface-fire ecosystems). Thus, many propose activities to reduce forest biomass fuels. [...] The issues for Congress include the appropriate level of funding for prescribed burning and thinning for fuel reduction and the appropriate reporting of accomplishments. Current reporting does not identify ecosystems being treated and the effectiveness of the treatments. Similarly, current appropriations and reporting do not distinguish thinning for fuel reduction from thinning for other purposes, such as enhancing timber productivity. More complete reporting could allow Congress to better target its appropriations for fuel reduction to enhance wildfire protection."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Gorte, Ross W.
2009-09-16
-
Climate Change: Costs and Benefits of the Cap-and-Trade Provisions of H.R. 2454 [September 14, 2009]
"This report examines seven studies that project the costs of H.R. 2454 to 2030 or beyond. It is difficult (and some would consider it unwise) to project costs up to the year 2030, much less beyond. The already tenuous assumption that current regulatory standards will remain constant becomes more unrealistic as time goes forward, and other unforeseen events (such as technological breakthroughs) loom as critical issues which cannot be modeled. Hence, 'long-term cost projections are at best speculative, and should be viewed with attentive skepticism.' The finer and more detailed the estimate presented, the greater the skepticism should be. In the words of the late Dr. Lincoln Moses, the first Administrator of the Energy Information Administration: 'There are no facts about the future.'"
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Parker, Larry, 1954-; Yacobucci, Brent D.
2009-09-14
-
Role of Federal Gasoline Excise Taxes in Public Policy [September 11, 2009]
"American drivers, compared to those in other industrialized nations in Europe, pay relatively low federal, state, and local gasoline and diesel excise taxes. The Federal taxes are used specifically to fund annual highway construction, maintenance, and mass transit. Over the years, proposals have come forth to raise the federal tax as a way to address long-standing national policy concerns, including U.S. dependence on imported oil and various environmental problems related to large volumes of gasoline consumption. Policy attention on the role of the gasoline tax has also increased recently due to three major developments. First, the 2008 oil and gasoline price run-up and subsequent economic downturn have led to a decline in gasoline tax revenues available for needed highway construction and maintenance. Second, the possibility of enacting some form of binding climate change legislation in the next several years will eventually mean an increase in the relative price of fossil fuels, including oil and gasoline. Third, the volatility of gasoline prices has affected investment planning (e.g. for alternative fuels) and arguably contributed to the troubles facing domestic automobile manufacturers. In the above context, this report outlines some of the macroeconomic and microeconomic pros and cons of using the federal gasoline excise tax for policy purposes in addition to the funding of highway infrastructure."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Pirog, Robert L.
2009-09-11
