Visit to a blind student's school🧑🦯🧑🦯(community medicine)
Microsoft Power Point M Roy Arlington Cafe Scientifique Jan5
1. Climate Change Policy
At Home and Abroad
Café Scientifique
Arlington, Virginia
January 5, 2010
Manik Roy, Ph.D.
Vice President, Federal Government Outreach
Pew Center on Global Climate Change
www.pewclimate.org
2. Overview of today’s presentation:
•Introduction to the Pew Center
•Climate Policy 101
•US climate policy state-of-play
•Copenhagen Accord
3. Pew Center on Global Climate Change
Founded in May 1998
Independent, non-profit, non-partisan
Divided into five major program areas:
Scientific Studies/Analyses
Domestic and International
Strategies
Outreach Activities
• Business
• States
Solutions
Communications
6. Climate policy is mostly energy policy
80% of US greenhouse gas emissions are carbon
dioxide from combustion of fossil fuels.
Therefore climate policy and energy policy are
inextricably linked.
7. Three energy policy challenges
US energy policy must meet three interrelated
challenges:
•To power continued economic growth
•To reduce US vulnerability to energy-related
security threats
•To reduce risk of climate change and other
environmental threats
8. Energy sources
Must pursue all energy options:
•Coal with carbon capture and storage
•Nuclear power
•Natural gas
•Renewable energy
•Energy efficiency and conservation
9. Climate policy measures
Options for reducing greenhouse gas emissions:
• Voluntary reduction programs
• Subsidies and tax cuts for R&D and deployment
• Command-and-control
• Tax
• Cap-and-trade
10. Key element
Cap-and-trade is a key element of an All-of-the-
Above energy policy that meets our economic,
security and environmental challenges.
Under cap-and-trade, industry and the private
market – not the government – pick the winning
energy sources and technologies.
11. US Climate Action Partnership
U.S. Climate Action Partnership (USCAP)
• Companies: AES, Alcoa, Alstom, Boston
Scientific, BP America, Caterpillar, Chrysler,
Conoco-Phillips, Deere, Dow, Duke, DuPont,
Exelon, Ford, FPL, GE, GM, J&J, NRG, PepsiCo,
PG&E, PNM, Rio Tinto, Shell, Siemens,
• NGOs: Pew Center, Environmental Defense
Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council, Nature
Conservancy, World Resources Institute
• Calls for GHG cap-and-trade and other measures
12. US Climate Action Partnership
Why would businesses want urgent enactment of climate
legislation?
• Regulatory uncertainty inhibits investment
• Supreme Court has ordered EPA to regulate GHGs
• Avoid nuisance law suits
• State action
• Operating with cap-and-trade in Europe since 2005
• Want US to influence post-2012 international climate
negotiations
• Convinced by climate science, concerned by increasing
risk from climate impacts
15. Federal policy progress to date
Inconceivable in December 2007, not obvious even a
year ago:
•Climate change a top priority of President Obama
and Congressional leadership
•House passage of bill with GHG cap-and-trade
•Major GHG regulatory actions
•Major businesses (e.g., USCAP) advocating for GHG
cap-and-trade
•“Cap-and-trade” a household phrase
•“Copenhagen climate negotiations” household
words
16. Energy-Climate Legislation
Congressional action:
•House of Representatives passed the Waxman-Markey
climate-energy bill in June 2009
•2 of 6 Senate committees have passed energy-climate bills
•Full Senate consideration of climate & energy bill most likely
by May 2010
•Reconciliation of House and Senate bills would likely take
several months
•Reconciled bill must be passed by House and Senate and
signed by President to become law
18. Copenhagen Climate Summit
15th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on
Climate Change (December 7-18, 2009):
•Two weeks of harsh rhetoric and pitched procedural battles
•Basic terms of Copenhagen Accord were brokered directly by President
Obama and key developing country leaders on final day
•Nearly another full day of tense negotiations to allow leaders’ deal to be
formalized over the bitter objections of a few governments
•Parties adopted parallel decisions that “take note” of the political accord
and open the way for governments to individually sign on
•In separate decisions, parties agreed to continue negotiating toward a
fuller agreement in late 2010 in Mexico City
•Uncertainty about formal standing of Copenhagen Accord under the
U.N. climate process and about the nature of any future agreement.
•Aim of a “legally binding instrument,” which appeared part of the deal
when President Obama first announced it, later stripped out
19. Copenhagen Accord
Key elements of Copenhagen Accord:
•Aspirational goal of limiting global temperature increase to
2 degrees Celsius;
•Process for countries to their mitigation pledges by January
31, 2010;
•Terms for reporting and verification of countries’ actions;
•Commitment by developed countries for $30 billion in “new
and additional” resources in 2010-2012 to help developing
countries reduce emissions, preserve forests, and adapt to
climate change;
•Goal of mobilizing $100 billion a year in public and private
finance by 2020 to address developing county needs.
Separate agreement to continue negotiating toward fuller
agreement in late 2010 in Mexico City
21. Manik Roy, Ph.D.
Vice President, Federal Government Outreach
Pew Center on Global Climate Change
Manik Roy is the Vice President for Federal Government Outreach for
the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, where he manages
communication between the Center and the U.S. Congress. Dr. Roy has
twenty-five years of experience in environmental policy, having worked,
before coming to the Pew Center, for Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg, Rep.
Henry A. Waxman, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and the
Environmental Defense Fund.
Dr. Roy holds a Ph.D. in public policy from Harvard University. He also
holds a Master of Science degree in environmental engineering and a
Bachelor of Science degree in civil engineering, both from Stanford
University.
Contact: royn@pewclimate.org