Monthly Archives: February 2010

February 26, 2010 | 6:13 PM | By

More Water Likely for Farms and Cities–With a Catch

Craig Miller

What is now looking like a "normal" wet winter may mean bigger water allocations for crops. Photo: Craig Miller

We’d like to think that weather and water supply is a straightforward proposition. If rain falls in the lowlands and snow blankets the Sierra Nevada the way we expect it to, then we ought to have enough water to get us through the dry months ahead. But of course, California water is never that simple. The latest example: today’s state and federal announcements of projected  deliveries from two massive Central Valley water systems.

From the state: The Department of Water Resources said it’s increasing promised State Water Project deliveries from five percent–the amount projected last December 1–to 15%.

In a conference call with reporters, newly-appointed DWR Director Mark Cowin called the 15% figure “very conservative.” He said that if the wet season continues on its current “average” path, the department could deliver between 35-and-45% of the contracted amount.  Cowin said where final allocations would land in that range depends on pumping restrictions currently in place to protect endangered salmon and smelt.  “That spread between 35 and 45 percent is based on how the fisheries agencies ultimately apply the existing rules to protect fish–and how much resulting flexibility we have to pump water from the Delta,” Cowin said.

The bottom line from the DWR announcement: Three years of drought have taken a toll on water supplies that will take more than one good year of rain and snow to reverse. Cowin says runoff from the healthy Sierra snowpack will be lower than normal, as more water is absorbed by relatively dry soil.

At the same time, the State Water Project’s biggest reservoir, Lake Oroville, stands at 54% of its normal level for this time of year. The other linchpin for SWP supply, San Luis Reservoir, is at 80 percent of normal overall. But most of that water is already spoken for and is unavailable for meeting this year’s state water contract commitments.

As the state was adjusting its projections, officials also weighed in on 2010 deliveries from the federal Central Valley Project.

Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar announced that the initial allocation from the CVP to San Joaquin Valley farmers and other users is 5%. That’s better than nothing–which was the early allocation last year. But it was only part of the news.

Salazar disclosed that negotiations involving Senator Dianne Feinstein, other members of the California congressional delegation, water contractors, and environmental groups have hammered out a plan that could deliver nearly 40% of contracted supplies to CVP customers. But there’s a big “if” in the picture: Those expanded deliveries only happen if the wet season continues to be wet.

Weeks of controversy preceded Salazar’s announcement. Areas of the San Joaquin Valley that have gone thirsty during the three-year drought–notably the Westlands Water District–have been agitating for more federal water even if it means overriding Endangered Species Act protections for fish.

Feinstein went to bat for Westlands and other federal water customers, proposing an amendment to a jobs bill that would set aside Delta pumping limits in order to guarantee deliveries to Valley water users. That sparked outrage from those working to save the Delta fisheries and a sharply critical letter from a dozen House members. But it also apparently prompted the talks that led to Salazar’s announcement. In a statement, Feinstein said she was pleased with the projected allocations announced today and praised the “creative thinking” that went into it. But she added that she’s watching how water shipments play out. Although she has shelved her water amendment for now, she said, “I reserve the right to bring it back should it become necessary.”

Here’s our updated KQED California Reservoir Watch, which gives a pretty good picture of the state’s water storage:

<
View KQED: California Reservoir Watch in a larger map

FILED UNDER: Government & Business, Water, Agriculture, Alpine, Economics, Policy, Water
February 26, 2010 | 1:28 PM | By

Mapping California’s Shifting Climate

By Gretchen Weber & Molly Samuel

A companion radio piece to this post aired on The California Report.

Map from The Nature Conservancy showing projected drought conditions for 2070-2100

Projected drought conditions for 2070-2100 (Map: The Nature Conservancy)

Climate change is causing conservationists to rethink traditional methods of protecting lands and ecosystems. The conventional strategy of setting aside a specific parcel of land (and increasingly, ocean) to protect a particular community of organisms may no longer be sufficient in a rapidly changing climate. While greenhouse gas reduction and climate change mitigation remains a top priority for most conservationists, land managers have begun developing adaptation strategies that take the effects of a warming planet into account.

“We have a fantastic conservation success story in having conserved a huge network of protected areas,” says Healy Hamilton, director of the Center for Applied Biodiversity Informatics at the California Academy of Sciences. “The issue with those protected areas is that they all have static boundaries around them and they work to protect what lies within them,  So the plants and animals that are there are well-protected, as long as they stay there.” Trouble is, the habitat isn’t staying put.

Climate has “Velocity”

The world’s ecosystems will need to move about a quarter of a mile each year to keep up with climate change, according to a recent study published in Nature (link is to the first paragraph of the paper; the full article is only available to subscribers, but you can read a press release about the about the study).

Researchers from the Carnegie Institution, Stanford, the California Academy of Sciences, and UC Berkeley collaborated on the paper, which describes climate belts sweeping north and south from the equator–and also moving uphill–as the world warms.

Hamilton, who co-authored the study, told a packed house at the Center for Biological Diversity in January, that “Climates are on the move. It’s not just a slow unfolding, it’s a radical, abnormal process. Everywhere we look, shifts are already occurring.”

And under these changing conditions, she said, plants and animals have three choices: “They can stay and adapt, they can shift with their climate, or they can go locally extinct if they can’t move fast enough.”

The study’s lead author, Scott Loarie, a fellow at the Carnegie Institution, explains that climate change forecasts are commonly measured in degrees per year, but the authors of this study wanted to know how those temperature changes would affect what can live where. So they used temperature “velocity” (in kilometers per year) to measure how fast regional climate conditions are moving as the planet heats up.

It turns out that the belts move at different rates, depending on the landscape. In the Amazon Basin, velocity is relatively high. It’s a large and homogeneous ecosystem, so as the temperature changes there, plants and animals will have to travel a long way to keep up with the climate in which they’ve evolved to thrive. In a place like California, with its microclimates and variable topography, the velocity is lower. Some species may need merely to migrate to a nearby north-facing–and therefore cooler–slope. Others will have to head north and toward the coast. Climate models forecast that eventually the Bay Area will look more like Southern California, and the Bay Area’s current climate will be located somewhere north of us.

Projected Heat Stress in California for 2070-2100 (Map: The Nature Conservancy)

Projected Heat Stress in California for 2070-2100 (Map: The Nature Conservancy)

Mapping a Moving Climate

The Nature Conservancy of California has attempted to map some of these trends (see above and below). Scientists averaged together several different climate models to create a picture of California’s future in terms of temperature and precipitation. They then applied that projection to habitats for specific species, to make predictions about how ranges may shift. The maps show both how much areas are likely to change, as well as how certain the predictions are.

“What we’re trying to understand is how does the way we protect species in the future need to change with a changing climate,” says Rebecca Shaw, Director of Conservation for the Nature Conservancy of California. “The kind of strategies you employ and how much you spend is really going to be dependent on how certain you are about change in the future.”

For example, she says some parts of the Sierra are not likely to change very much over the next century, but some places like the Mojave Desert are expected to change a great deal. That kind of information could be useful for land managers trying to plan for the future. For example, in areas that are expected to undergo great change, it might be more important to preserve corridors, or connecting stretches of protected lands, so that populations can move as the climate changes, if they are unable to adapt where they are.

Loarie says “assisted migration”–helping specific species move to new locations–is expensive, unpredictable, and unrealistic. Instead, he, too, corridors for plants and animals to safely follow their climate–if they can keep up. Species like the American pika, already living on mountaintops, can’t go any farther uphill. Their habitats could disappear completely, or, as Loarie says, “they’ll pop off the top.”

There are limitations to the predictions one can make with temperature velocity measurements. What temperature changes will do to fog, for instance, is still unknown, so it’s not clear yet where the redwoods will need to move in the next 100 or so years.

To enable the second option, Hamilton agrees with Loarie. she says the conservation community needs to rethink its traditional strategy of protecting lands. Instead of protecting specific parcels of land and expecting them the stay the same over time, conservationists need to expect change, and to create connectivity in the landscape so that species can move when and if they need to.

Projected changes in California Salamander habitat (Map: The Nature Conservancy)

Projected changes in California Salamander habitat (Map: The Nature Conservancy)

Projected changes in California Blue Oak habitat (Map: The Nature Conservancy)

Projected changes in California Blue Oak habitat (Map: The Nature Conservancy)

FILED UNDER: Government & Business, The Science, adaptation, Conservation, Desert, Ecosystems, migration, Policy, Wildlife
February 25, 2010 | 5:41 PM | By

On the Road to a National GHG Auto Standard

Craig Miller

Photo: Craig Miller

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) announced Thursday that the state has fulfilled its part of the May 2009 agreement set between auto manufacturers and two federal agencies that will establish the nation’s first greenhouse gas emissions standard for cars.

The new regulation adopted Thursday contains what CARB spokesman Stanley Young called “largely technical fixes,” including a change that will allow cars that meet the federal standard in the years 2012 to 2016 to be counted as compliant with the stricter California standard.  (The federal standard goes into effect in 2012.  It differs from the California standard until the two reach the same levels in 2016.)

The California law mandating rules to cut greenhouse gas emissions from cars, AB 1493, was passed in 2002.  Between 2005 and 2009, the state fought for an EPA waiver that would allow it to implement a standard tougher than existing federal rules. Last May, President Obama announced a national standard for tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases  modeled on California’s rules.  In June, the U.S. EPA  granted the waiver the state had long sought.  See the CARB website for a history of the struggles over the regulations.

CARB says that national implementation of the standard will cut 941 million tons of CO2 by 2020, compared to 793 million tons had the standard been limited to California and the thirteen states that had adopted California’s rules.

AB 1493 would not be affected by a suspension of AB 32, an issue Californians may be voting on soon.

FILED UNDER: Government & Business, California Air Resources Board, Emissions, GHG, Pavley, Policy
February 24, 2010 | 8:01 PM | By

Belief in Global Warming Waning

cw-climate-badge-1

One of six possible profile "badges" from KQED's Matter of Degree Facebook survey

The percentage of Americans who believe that global warming is not happening has doubled since 2008, climbing from eight to 16 percent of the adult population, according to a new report from Yale and George Mason Universities.  (The full report is available as a PDF on the Yale Project on Climate Change website.)

More than 1,000 adults were surveyed in late December and early January, and their responses compared with results from a similar survey in the fall of 2008.  Called “Global Warming’s Six Americas,” the study identifies six “types” of attitudes about climate change ranging from “Alarmed” to “Dismissive” (see diagram, below).

The updated research  finds that while the percentage of “Dismissives” is growing, the proportion of  people at the opposite end of the spectrum, the Alarmed, is shrinking.  The percentage of Americans who believe that climate change is real, is caused by humans, and is an immediate threat, has dropped to 10 percent of the population, down from 18 percent in 2008. The survey group described as “Concerned” has, however grown slightly, and the “Disengaged” portion has halved, which would seem to indicate more people staking out positions on one side or the other.

Study author and director of the Yale Project on Climate Change, Anthony Leiserowitz, cited “gloomy unemployment numbers, public frustration with Washington, attacks on climate science, and mobilized opposition to national climate legislation” as contributing to diminished public concerns about global warming.

As we reported earlier this month, despite a drop in concern about climate change, majorities in all six groups say that developing sources of clean energy should be a priority for the US government.

To see which of the “Six Americas” resonates most with your viewpoint, take our climate survey, A Matter of Degree, which was developed in collaboration with the Yale Project on Climate Change and the Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason Univeristy.  It’s available on the Climate Watch website and on Facebook.

sixameric

Graph from Global Warming's Six Americas, January 2010

FILED UNDER: The Science, Media, Views
February 23, 2010 | 6:01 PM | By

Huge Federal Boost for Oakland Solar Company

BrightSource Energy

Doing it with mirrors. Image: BrightSource Energy

Oakland-based BrightSource Energy is reportedly the beneficiary of a $1.37 billion federal boost for its planned solar-thermal plant in Southern California.

The New York Times reports today that it’s the biggest loan guarantee so far for a single solar project and that the Ivanpah array would be the largest of its type, potentially generating 2,600 megawatts of power for PG&E and SoCal Edison. The loan guarantee does not mean that the project is fully funded but federal loan guarantees are considered a potent inducement for investors.

The California Energy Commission has a chart of all solar projects currently under consideration, on its website. The CEC lists 28 solar-thermal projects and another dozen or so utility-scale photovoltaic arrays either announced, approved, or currently under review.

FILED UNDER: Power, Desert, Technology
February 23, 2010 | 11:31 AM | By

Accounting for Corporate Carbon

92827871Five years ago, the notion of measuring your company’s carbon footprint might have seemed quaint, or foolish, or just plain impossible.  And not too many large companies were interested.  But a recent report from the consulting firm Groom Energy Solutions finds that corporate emissions reporting is fast becoming big business (Groom describes itself as a “provider of renewable and energy efficiency systems to commercial and industrial companies.”)

The Groom analysis focuses on “enterprise carbon accounting” software, or, in plain language, technology that helps companies track their emissions.  According to the report, venture capitalists invested $46 million in enterprise carbon accounting (ECA) software in 2009, and it predicts that purchases of the technology will increase 600% by next year.

According to Paul Baier, VP of consulting services for Groom, 60% of Fortune 500 companies currently report their carbon emissions, and that number is growing rapidly.

“By the end of 2010, if a company is not reporting, it will be seen as a laggard in the industry,” said Baier.  “It’s increasingly mainstream for corporations to be doing this now.

Ninety percent of reporting companies are using “spreadsheets and consultants” to determine their footprints, said Baier, and the rest are using ECA software.  Three years from now he expects that 80% will be using the software, which helps companies track hundreds of different data points related to operational emissions.

“They don’t keep track of their financial information with spreadsheets anymore, and they won’t be using them for carbon reporting much longer,” he said.

In general, corporate carbon accounting is limited to what the Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative (which sets the widely accepted standards) refers to as Scope 1 and Scope 2.  These include the direct emissions of company operations such as on-site fuel combustion and electricity use.  Significantly, Scopes 1 and 2 leave out the potentially enormous, yet elusive footprint of a company’s suppliers and the myriad of other associated carbon sources.  In the works are standards for measuring Scope 3, which Baier calls “everything else,” but for now, there is no generally agreed-upon template for measuring this wider footprint.

Which leaves room for debate, such as when The Wall Street Journal raised questions about the 2008 pronouncement by Dell Inc. that it had achieved carbon neutrality. The Journal article reported that Dell was measuring only a small fraction of total emissions associated with the company.  Dell had taken into account employee air travel and building electricity use, but not emissions produced from transporting products or the footprints of the factories around that world that supply it with computer parts.

Given the inconsistencies and uncertainties of corporate carbon accounting, not to mention the cost in employee time and technology investments, why are companies flocking to do it?

According to the Groom Energy report, the three main drivers, in order, are:

  1. Increased pressure from customers and investors for companies to create a “greener” public image
  2. Cost and energy savings
  3. Mandates from buyers, like the Walmart Supplier Sustainability Assessment Program, intended to measure the environmental impact of its 100,000 suppliers.

Reducing CO2 emissions to help mitigate the effects of climate change did not make the list.

FILED UNDER: Government & Business, carbon accounting, Economics, Emissions
February 21, 2010 | 10:52 AM | By

Hot Topics in San Diego

NASA's "Dynamic Planet" exhibit at the San Diego Convention Center. Photo: Craig Miller

NASA's "Dynamic Planet" exhibit at the San Diego Convention Center. Photo: Craig Miller

SAN DIEGO –The annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) draws “thousands” of scientists in virtually every endeavor, from astrophysics to zoology. In climate science circles there was no lack of topics to choose from this year. Among them:

Geo-Engineering

Several sessions were devoted to the notion of fending off climate change by tinkering with earth systems. In technical sessions and news briefings, there was a range of opinion on display, from “Let’s try it” to “Let’s look at it,” to “Don’t even think about it.” There seems to be general agreement that techniques like seeding the atmosphere with particulates could yield rapid results–but the idea is fraught with political controversy and legal pitfalls. Stanford’s Ken Caldeira likened the idea to a cancer patient who accepts the risks of chemotherapy, in order to avoid worse consequences. Philosophy professor (and Caldeira’s former teacher) Martin Bunzl, firmly rejected that analogy, saying that unlike cancer therapy, the risks are not well known and “You can’t just turn it off.” Bunzl directs the Climate and Social Policy Initiative at Rutgers University.

At Climate Watch, we’re preparing an explanatory radio feature on geo-engineering, for broadcast in the coming weeks.

Oceans

The plight of the planet’s oceans was a focus of the conference, with numerous discussions of acidification, marine reserves and the newly implemented concept of “marine spatial planning,” an effort to map the oceans’ topography, biota and habitat, then translate that into a kind of zoning plan for human use (an approach specifically mandated by the Obama administration last year).

In October, researchers will formally conclude the Census of Marine Life, a 10-year collaboration among scientists in 80 countries, to “assess and explain the diversity, distribution and abundance of life in the ocean.” During a media briefing at AAAS, census Co-Chief Scientist Ron O’Dor estimated that the final tally would include 5,000 newly discovered species (“not counting the microbials”), from flying sea cucumbers to the “Rasta sponge,” which, according to O’Dor’s colleague, Shirley Pomponi, appears to sport dreadlocks and also “produces an anti-cancer compound.” O’Dor said one general conclusion from the census would be that while it is “large and resilient, we can’t keep insulting the ocean forever.”

Science & Policy

In keeping with the meeting’s theme of “Bridging Science and Society,” and reflecting the current angst over credibility in science, there were overflow sessions with titles such as “A Wobbly Three-Legged Stool: Science, Politics and the Public.” While people spilled out the door of that room, hard-science lectures in adjacent rooms drew just a smattering of people. In an interview with Climate Watch, Brad Allenby, a professor of engineering and ethics at Arizona State University, lamented that “the climate change discussion has become so polarized, even among scientists, that it’s difficult to present the public with factual information that is credible.”

European Union exhibit at AAAS. Some attendees commented that the exhibit hall seemed sparse this year. Photo: Craig Millerl

European Union exhibit at AAAS. Some attendees commented that the exhibit hall seemed sparse this year. Photo: Craig Miller

National Climate Service

NOAA chief Jane Lubchenko used the occasion of the conference to talk up her agency’s new National Climate Service, funded by legislation last year. The new branch will provide one-stop shopping for climate research and tools for policymakers, including those at the state and local level. Lubchenko says she hopes to have the new unit operational by October, when the federal fiscal year turns over.

FILED UNDER: Government & Business, Power, Ecosystems, Emissions, Fisheries, International, NOAA, Oceans, Policy, Technology
February 19, 2010 | 10:06 AM | By

Bridging the Science Gap

SAN DIEGO — Scientists from 50 nations are gathered here this week for the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). This year’s theme is “Bridging Science and Society”–not surprising as recent surveys reveal there’s a lot of bridge building to do.

Birch Aquarium's "Feeling the Heat" exhibit. Photo: Birch Aquarium, La Jolla

Birch Aquarium's "Feeling the Heat" exhibit. Photo: Birch Aquarium, La Jolla

During a two-day pre-conference for “informal educators” (science museums, aquariums, zoos, and the like) on “climate literacy,” speakers painted a mostly grim picture of Americans’ understanding of climate in particular and science in general. Jean Johnson of the nonpartisan research organization Public Agenda pointed to research in which, when asked to “name a fossil fuel,” only four in ten could. Similarly, 56% surveyed thought that nuclear power contributed to global warming. There is still considerable confusion between climate change and the much publicized ozone “hole.”

Speakers from Yale, George Mason University* and the Pew Research Center all highlighted the recent trend toward rejection of contemporary climate science, despite several decades of accumulated evidence that affirms human impacts on climate. Several speakers, including former IPCC climatologist Richard Somerville (Coordinating Lead Author in Working Group I, for the 2007 Fourth Assessment Report) laid the blame for this chiefly on what was characterized as a well-coordinated, well-financed campaign of disinformation, organized by industries opposed to regulation of carbon emissions.

Some noted other factors, such as topic “fatigue” (people tired of hearing about it) and the current dismal state of the economy, which has shuffled personal priorities. Layered on all of that, “We live in an age of skepticism,” said Johnson of Public Agenda, in which trust in traditional institutions like government (and the media) is flagging. She pointed to the need for “credible neutral explainers” to act as translators between working scientists and the public. Anthony Leiserowitz of Yale, co-creator of the Six Americas project, noted that despite growing skepticism, there is still strong public support for climate and environmental education.

Birch_Heat2_blog

Frank Niepold, education coordinator for NOAA’s Climate Program Office, pointed to what he calls the “solutions barrier.” He noted that while the likely effects of climate change are often discussed in K-12 classrooms, there’s a lack of attention to potential solutions. Other speakers said climate impacts and solutions should be more closely linked to issues that are consistently rated as high priorities among households, such as energy independence and public health.

*Climate Watch partnered with Yale and George Mason researchers to create our climate survey, “A Matter of Degree,” which is featured on Facebook and on the Climate Watch website.

FILED UNDER: Government & Business, A Matter of Degree, education, Policy, Science
February 16, 2010 | 9:08 PM | By

The New Streamliners: Big Rigs Save Fuel, CO2

A big rig in the wind tunnel at NASA Ames Research Center. Photo: Gretchen Weber

Not exactly the Space Shuttle: A big rig in the wind tunnel at NASA Ames Research Center. Photo: Gretchen Weber

A companion radio piece to this post aired on The California Report.

The wind tunnel at NASA’s Ames Research Center in Mountain View is the largest in the world. According to Ames deputy director Lou Braxton, at various times it has housed a Boeing 747 and an America’s Cup racing yacht. But parked inside this week was a relatively diminutive semi-truck with a 53-foot trailer. The truck is called the ProStar, and according to its manufacturer, Navistar, it’s the most aerodynamic truck on the road.

The wind tunnel was open to the media because Ames, Lawrence Livermore National Lab (LLNL), Navistar, and the Air Force (which manages the tunnel) were showcasing their ongoing project designed to identify, develop, and test devices that reduce the aerodynamic drag of “big rigs.” The wind tunnel wasn’t activated for the press event but the media gathered inside the cavernous space could envision how the tests might work.

At highway speeds, more than 50 percent of the energy produced by a truck’s engine is used to overcome aerodynamic drag. Therefore, reducing that drag can produce significant fuel savings. In fact, testing thus far has determined that existing aerodynamic design adjustments and attachments can increase fuel efficiency by 12 percent, which, when applied to the US trucking fleet, could save more than three billion gallons of diesel fuel per year, a cost savings of more than $10 billion at current prices. This savings in diesel translates to a reduction of 36 million metric tons of CO2 per year.

Inside the wind tunnel, the truck’s trailer was outfitted with various attachments designed to reduce drag at critical points such as the trailer base, the under body, and the gap between the tractor and trailer. Some, such as the TrailerTail, are already commercially available, while others are still in development. For the next three weeks, scientists will test various devices and combinations. The best ones will be track tested and then road tested over the next year.

Currently, semi-trucks make up about 12 percent of US petroleum consumption; about 21 million barrels a day, according to LLNL.

The TrailerTail (Photo: Gretchen Weber)

The TrailerTail (Photo: Gretchen Weber)

Outside the National Full-Scale Aerodynamics Complex (NFAC) at Ames, where the wind tunnel is located (Photo: Gretchen Weber)

Outside the National Full-Scale Aerodynamics Complex (NFAC) at Ames, where the wind tunnel is located (Photo: Gretchen Weber)

FILED UNDER: Government & Business, Economics, Emissions, fuel efficiency, Technology, Transportation, trucking
February 12, 2010 | 6:29 PM | By

States at Crossroads for Climate Action

Tom Banse is a Seattle-based public media reporter and a regular contributor to Climate Watch.

West Coast governors meet in Vancouver. Photo: Office of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger

West Coast governors meet in Vancouver. Photo: Office of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger

By Tom Banse

When two West Coast governors sat down with the head of British Columbia’s provincial government for a pre-Olympic confab today, the occasion brought to mind some things I’d picked up during a short fellowship in Denmark and Germany last week.

Two months after the chaotic United Nations climate summit ended, edgy “Hopenhagen” posters are one of the few visible reminders of the high-stakes gathering of world leaders, recently concluded in Copenhagen.  Ironically, the summit dashed the hopes of many climate activists for a legally binding treaty to reduce global warming emissions.

They’re not giving up, but in the aftermath acting locally may gain more prominence than acting globally.

“The Copenhagen hangover is over.  Now countries including the United States have to act,” said Denmark’s energetic Minister of Energy and Climate Lykke Friss.

The Danes are engaging other countries to try to revive momentum for international climate negotiations. “We should fight all the way for a deal in Cancun,” where the next United Nations climate summit will convene at the end of this year.  “But that depends on the will of the moment,” she said.  “There is no doubt this is a difficult process,” Friss acknowledged.

In European capitals, policymakers are eager for any clues or cues regarding the willingness of American lawmakers to regulate greenhouse gases. Cap-and-trade legislation has been stalled in the U.S. Senate for the past five months.

“If it’s not realistic that the U.S. would sign a binding international [climate] treaty, what is below this?” asked a German parliament member in Berlin.  The answer may not lie in Washington, DC.

“We do think the pendulum is starting to swing back to states,” said the former co-chair of the Western Climate Initiative Janice Adair.  In 2008, seven Western U.S. states and four Canadian provinces developed a framework to regulate greenhouse gas emissions independent of their national governments.  The plan has not taken effect.

“More and more, the UN and the national governments recognize that the ‘sub-national’ governments are really the ones that, in the end, can put the pressure on and create the action that is needed,” said Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, on Friday.  Schwarzenegger spoke in Vancouver, Canada after a mini-summit of Pacific Coast leaders timed to coincide with the opening of the 2010 Winter Olympics. British Columbia Premier Gordon Campbell hosted the meeting to discuss common environmental topics. Washington Governor Christine Gregoire and Oregon Secretary of State Kate Brown also attended.

Gregoire said when it comes to cap-and-trade, she still maintains that a national program is better than a regional one.  Yet state and local governments can do other things to control emissions, namely what policymakers such as Adair call “complementary” measures. Schwarzenegger specifically mentioned California’s Million Solar Roofs Initiative, which seeks to attain that number of rooftop solar arrays by 2016.  Some other examples include creating incentives for consumers to buy electric cars, increasing recycling or improving rail service.  Oregon and Washington have recently toughened their building codes to increase energy efficiency in new construction.

Gerry Pollet, the director of the Seattle-based environmental watchdog group Heart of America Northwest, recently urged his members to write Oregon and Washington’s governors and legislators, “saying you want Northwest states’ climate change legislation put back on the front burner – which is a good investment for our economy as well as for the health of our planet and children.”

As in Congress, there is hesitancy in state legislatures. “Our concerns are very much is this going to put us at a distinct competitive disadvantage,” said Shelly Short, a conservative legislator from Northeast Washington. [Ed. Note: Arizona Governor Jan Brewer cited the same concern in her executive order ending that state's participation in the WCI cap-and-trade plan]. Short says she is given pause by current controversies involving climate scientists, notably the one involving hacked e-mails that has been dubbed “Climategate” by global warming skeptics. “I’ll be honest and say some of the issues that have come forward really leave it up to whether this is something we need to be doing,” said Short.

Meaningful climate change legislation has not come up for debate this winter during the short 2010 sessions of the Washington and Oregon Legislatures.  But all the players on this issue expect global warming to return to the forefront in Salem and Olympia in 2011.

FILED UNDER: Government & Business, International, Policy, WCI