Thursday, July 23, 2009

HR. 2454 - American Clean Energy and Security Act.


There are many reasons to hate H. R. 2454 the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. For one, it contains ongoing funding for the dream of a clean coal future and totally fails the goal of setting realistic constraints on carbon emissions.

Architecture 2030, a leader in the effort to change our future, finds in one section of the bill enough benefit to call for it's adoption. In E-NEWS Bulletin 16 today, Architecture 2030 identifies the real value.
Buried deep within the 1,428-page Waxman-Markey climate bill (H.R. 2454: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009) passed by the House and now on the Senate floor, is Section 201, pages 320-348. It is this section that makes H.R. 2454 worth passing.

No matter what else is compromised or changed in the climate bill working its way through the Senate, Section 201 must not be changed or weakened.
This bulletin is not yet on-line, but should be shortly. However, the real analysis in contained in a fact sheet that is currently posted.

According to Architecture 2030 Chairman, Ed Mazria, the entire effort falls apart if this portion of the bill is weakened.
It is clear that the building energy code targets set in Section 201 are not only essential for achieving the energy consumption and GHG emissions reductions needed, but that they also are the most cost effective approach for doing so.





1 comment:

Works of Faith said...

Like everything that has happened so far during the Obama Administration, the only change Democrats are interested in is that which respects the work done by those who came before us (to paraphrase an often-repeated mantra by the POTUS).

Basically, this is just a fancy way to say that Obama is an "incremental reformer" (i.e. corporate yes man).

Congress just does not understand that 30 years of inaction has put us in a position that requires a wartime-level deployment of the labour force to combat our GHG emissions. If we cannot reduce our GHG emissions by 80% in the next decade, there will be no point in reducing emissions at all.