Climate Change Forum Hosted by Fran Pavley, Henry Waxman

BY Coby Skye

On August 21, 2009, Congressman Henry Waxman, co-author the American Clean Energy and Security Act (HR 2454), and State Senator Fran Pavley, author of the California Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32), hosted a lively forum regarding climate change at UCLA.

The panel discussion included several other distinguished speakers and highlighted the nexus between strong climate change legislation, national security, and economic recovery. Well-developed climate change policies are not only good for the environment and the long-term survival of the human species, they also provide substantial incentives for economic development in clean tech, and enhance our national security in several ways.

In her opening remarks, Senator Pavley credited environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, for successfully engaging in the battles to address climate change- legislatively, judicially, and through public education. She noted that elections matter, and the Obama Administration has been a breath of fresh air regarding climate change. Congressman Waxman talked about the challenges of advancing his legislation in the House, noting that most people were surprised the bill was able to pass his Committee, and downright shocked it passed the House floor. He called addressing climate change a moral imperative and credited the passage of the bill to an unprecedented alliance of industry, environmental groups, state and local governments, faith-based organizations, and ordinary citizens.

The first panel speaker, Professor Stephen H. Schneider of Stanford University, spoke about the potentially devastating impact unchecked climate change would have on California, noting the substantial increases in wildfires and reduced snowmelt are the tip of the iceberg. Retired U.S. Navy Vice Admiral Dennis McGinn was exceptionally eloquent when making the case for the national security risks associated with climate change. In addition to our unsustainable dependence on foreign oil, which diminishes our financial capabilities and funnels billions of dollars to interests that are aligned against the United States, Vice Admiral McGinn noted that climate change significantly increases hot spots around the globe due to conflict over scarce resources, leading to mounting pressure for U.S. military intervention. He and a team of retired military leaders recently concluded that it was imperative for the U.S. to shift away from our current fossil fuel based economy as quickly as possible.

Bob Epstein, Vice Chair of the AB 32 Economic and Technology Advancement Advisory Committee, showed that although California has higher costs for energy than Texas, we're so much more efficient that we have retained billions of dollars in the pockets of our residents, who then pumped them back into California's economy. Epstein noted that strong climate legislation was preferred by industry, because it would send clear and reliable market signals that are critical for significant investment to occur. Congressman Waxman reinforced this comment later in the program, noting that if H.R. 2454 were to pass, it is projected to act as a second Stimulus Bill.

Professor Ann E. Carlson of the Emmett Center on Climate Change and the Environment at UCLA quickly summarized the key provisions of AB 32 and H.R. 2454, noting that both bills utilized three primary strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions: (1) reducing demand, such as through energy efficiency; (2) shifting to a cleaner energy supply, such as through the Renewable Portfolio Standard; and (3) reducing or sequestering the emissions, through cap & trade or carbon capture & sequestration.

Anthony Eggert, Senior Science and Technology Policy Advisor at the California Air Resources Board, filled in for Mary Nichols (CARB's Chair). He noted that California's AB 32 was looked to as a model across the country and even at the Federal level. He also mentioned that the clean tech sector was the fastest growing sector in the economy, growing over 10 percent while other sectors were flat or declining. Given our current economic situation, any growth is exceptional.

Congressman Waxman closed by talking about the process going for ward then opened the floor to questions. During the Q&A, Waxman was asked whether it is wise for us to proceed if China and India don't also commit. His answer was two-fold: first, the vicious cycle of waiting for other countries and them waiting for us was irresponsible grammar school behavior. Second, we are passing this legislation because it benefits the U.S., growing our economy and mitigating our environmental impact. Being a global leader and regaining our international standing is a side benefit. The last question was whether astroturf (fake grassroots) protestors were having an impact on the debate. The issue was especially pertinent since a large group of pro and anti health care reform activists were demonstrating outside the event, either confused regarding the topic or simply eager to dog the Congressman wherever he went.

Waxman noted that most congress members and elected officials have ways of determining what their constituents really felt regarding the issues, as opposed to the loud yelling of demonstrators who are bussed into an event just to derail any discussion, although he acknowledged that the tactics may be more successful in swing districts.