There are a number of “cap-and-trade” bills in the US Congress that would set a cap on carbon emissions and establish a market for carbon pollution credits. The Pew Center on Global Climate Change offers a handy comparison chart (pdf) of the various climate change bills. The bills are complex and vary in terms of the economic sectors that are covered, the level and timeframe for the cap, and how the carbon credits are allocated.

On October 18, 2007, US Senators Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and John Warner (R-VA) introduced a new bill - “America’s Climate Security Act” (ACSA) - and Senator Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) has signed on as a co-sponsor.  This bill establishes mandatory caps on global warming pollution from major emitters such as power plants and oil refineries, leading to reductions of about two percent each year from current levels.

ACSA commits an unprecedented level of financial resources to conserving wildlife and wildlife habitats threatened by global warming.  The bill’s sponsors have made this investment against the wishes of industry groups and others.  They will need a united wildlife conservation community to work closely with them to achieve its enactment.

Global warming is the most serious threat to wildlife and wildlife habitats in the U.S. and around the world.   Cutting global warming pollution is essential to stave off mass extinctions and major disruptions of ecosystems, but it is not sufficient.  Global warming has already begun and substantial additional warming is inevitable due to pollution already released into the atmosphere.  Scientists project that this warming will lead to increased sea level rise, intensified storms, floods and droughts, disappearing mountain snowpack and altered stream flows, evaporating lakes and wetlands, and numerous other disruptions. 

Global Warming and North Carolina Fact Sheet
Global Climate Change and Wildlife in North America Report

ACSA will enable the U.S. to make major strides in conserving wildlife in the face of this inevitable warming.   It devotes 20 percent of auction proceeds – double the amount provided for wildlife by earlier climate change bills – toward adaptation measures that help U.S. wildlife survive global warming.  An estimated $125 billion will be provided during the first 19 years of the cap and trade program (i.e., through 2030).  This represents an average investment of $6.6 billion each year – a major commitment to the conservation of our natural heritage for future generations. 

This funding will flow directly from the auction of emission allowances and thus will not be subject to the vagaries of the annual appropriations process.  

ACSA allocates the funding among a variety of state and federal agencies as follows:

• State and territorial fish and wildlife agencies: 40 percent
• Department of the Interior (wildlife programs and lands and waters under DOI’s jurisdiction): 20 percent
• Department of the Interior (cooperative grant programs): 5 percent
• Forest Service (forest and grasslands): 5 percent
• EPA (large-scale freshwater aquatic and estuarine ecosystems): 12.5 percent
• Corps of Engineers (large-scale freshwater aquatic and estuarine ecosystems): 12.5 percent
• NOAA (coastal, estuarine, coral and marine species and habitats): 5 percent

Protecting wildlife from global warming is a new field of endeavor for all of these agencies, and thus it would be easy to second-guess this allocation formula.  However, ASCA’s sponsors should be applauded for recognizing that a wide array of species and habitats is threatened by global warming and for distributing funding to the agencies and programs that have a track record in conserving those species and habitats.

The funding provided to the 56 states and territories will be distributed according to the allocation formula already established for the State Wildlife Grants program.  Unlike in the State Wildlife Grants program, which requires states and territories to produce a 50 percent match to be eligible for funding, the bill requires only a 10 percent match.  This is in apparent recognition that the large dollar amounts generated by the bill would be difficult if not impossible for most state fish and wildlife agencies to match on a 1 to 1 basis.

Funding to states and territories may be utilized only for adaptation activities that are carried out in accordance with comprehensive wildlife adaptation strategies, otherwise known as State Wildlife Action Plans.  The bill could be improved by requiring that these strategies be updated to address adaptation to global warming.  However, it should be noted that current law already requires updates in roughly 5 years.  By that time, significant advances in the rapidly-evolving science of adaptation will have been made.  The states will have an incentive to incorporate this science and add adaptation strategies; this would expand the array of conservation activities eligible for funding under the bill. 

The bill also calls for state adaptation activities to be carried out in accordance with other key natural resource management strategies, where appropriate.  This will encourage states to utilize adaptation strategies incorporated into respected conservation plans such as those prepared under the North American Wetlands Conservation Act and Endangered Species Act.  

For the 5 federal agencies that receive funding under the bill, ACSA requires that they jointly adopt a comprehensive adaptation strategy within 18 months of the bill’s enactment and that conservation activities subsequently funded by the bill be consistent with this strategy.  In developing the strategy, the agencies must consult with states and Indian tribes and must solicit input from the public and independent scientists.  Strategies must be updated every 5 years. 

ACSA broadly defines the adaptation activities that will be funded.  The focus of the bill is ensuring the survival of not just fish and wildlife, but also fish and wildlife habitats, plants, and associated ecological processes.  Scientific research and education are among the conservation activities that receive attention.

Finally, ACSA promotes projects to sequester carbon in forests and soils, which often provide on-site benefits for fish and wildlife.  The bill prevents the use of destructive invasive species to earn credits, and it excludes projects that otherwise harm the environment or public health.

ACSA Strengths:

1) Starting within five years, the bill will reduce global warming pollution from major emitters such as power plants and oil refineries by about two percent each year from current levels.  Emissions from these sources will be reduced by 15% below current levels between 2012 and 2020.  Over the longer term, the bill will reduce global warming pollution from major emitters by one-third (33%) below current levels between 2012 and 2030, and by 70% below current levels between 2012 and 2050.  The bill provides National Academy of Sciences reviews to assess the scientific adequacy of progress under the bill and recommend adjustments in the long-term targets to Congress.  The bill regulates power plants, oil companies and big industrial emitters, accounting for about three-quarters of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. 

2) The bill is the first to provide detailed provisions to aid a just transition to a clean energy future for low- and middle-income families.  The bill returns an estimated $275 billion to low- and middle-income consumers thru the year 2030.  The funds will be used for programs such as the Low Income Weatherization Assistance Program.  This funding –and all the funding for other needs in this bill – will be generated by payments from large polluters for emission permits.   (Note:  All dollar estimates are based on NWF calculations and will depend on the actual market prices for emissions permits, which will fluctuate over time).

3) The bill will provide an estimated $125 billion thru the year 2030 to protect America’s fish and wildlife, great waters, and other natural resources from the climate changes that can no longer be avoided.  Funding will be distributed to well established and successful wildlife conservation and natural resource management programs at the federal and state level.  Federal actions will be guided by a new comprehensive strategy to assist fish and wildlife and their habitat in adapting to and surviving the impacts of climate change.

4) The bill invests an estimated $400 billion thru 2030 in zero- and low-carbon technologies to accelerate our transition to a new energy future.  This funding supplements the much larger market-based incentives that will be generated from the emission limits and trading provisions.  The funding includes resources to help retool automobile manufacturing to produce cleaner, more fuel efficient cars and trucks.  Advanced biofuel technologies and practices funded by the bill will need to improve or maintain habitat quality and protect scarce water supplies.  Coal plants funded under the program must capture and store at least 85% of carbon emissions, as well as meet new EPA safety regulations that will be promulgated under this legislation.

5) The bill provides an estimated $30 billion thru 2030 to provide access and training to a clean energy workforce that promises to create millions of new jobs in America, and to provide fair treatment for affected workers and their communities. 

6) The bill provides financial resources to tribes to mitigate price impacts on tribal families, to protect tribal wildlife resources, to promote public transportation and energy efficiency, to address local impacts of climate change, and for other purposes.

7) The bill completely phases out all free giveaways to polluters, providing bipartisan support for the principle that the public has a right to a safe climate and polluters should pay to emit greenhouse gases.  The bill provides the majority (approximately 60%) of revenues to public benefit purposes in the first years of the program before phasing to 100% over time. 

8) The bill protects the rights of states to develop more stringent programs, and it provides special resources (bonus allocations) to states with more aggressive state laws than the federal system.

9) The bill includes new building codes designed to cut the energy usage of new homes and buildings in half by the year 2020, as well as new appliance standards.

10) The bill promotes domestic U.S. projects to store carbon in forests and soils, which can enhance habitat for fish and wildlife.  Some of these projects will reduce the net U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases beyond the stated reduction targets (that is, help achieve even stronger net emission reductions than the targets in #1, above).  The bill favors the use of native species and prevents the use of destructive invasive species to earn credits, and the bill excludes projects that harm the environment or public health.

11) The bill promotes efforts to protect forests globally.

12) The bill provides some funding for international efforts to help vulnerable human populations and natural resources adapt to, endure, or avoid negative global climate change impacts.  However, these provisions should be strengthened (see “areas for improvement”).

13) In addition to the measures outlined above, the bill contains several important policy design elements that protect the integrity of the cap-and-trade system:

• The bill does not include the “safety valve” loophole that undermines the emissions reductions goals of some legislation.

• The bill is largely implemented and enforced by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

• The bill limits the quantity of domestic offsets and largely limits the scope to forestry, agricultural and land-use projects.  Projects must be real, verifiable, additional, permanent, and enforceable.

• The bill limits international trading of permits to nations with comparable emission limits in place.

Areas for Improvement

1) The bill should set aside a strong package of financial resources to aid least developed nations with reducing their greenhouse gas emissions and protecting themselves from the climate changes that can no longer be avoided.  This will also help foster international cooperation toward a global agreement to slash emissions.  The bill has some significant provisions in this area from the perspective of national security that should be expanded in scale and scope.

2) The bill is one piece – although the most important piece – of the comprehensive set of climate and energy policies needed to fight global warming.  Enacting the fuel economy (CAFE) and renewable electricity standards in the Senate and  House energy bills, for example, would provide an important and complementary down payment on emissions reductions.  These bills would also provide consumers with low-carbon technology options and speed technology deployment.

3) Current science suggests that an 80% reduction target by 2050 would be more appropriate for the U.S. to do its share of a science-based global action plan on climate.  While the bill provides opportunities in the coming decades to update the 70% reduction target and accelerate the timetable, the bill could be strengthened by including the stronger long-term target.

4) The phase out of free allocations to industry takes too long and is not complete until the year 2035.  This timetable should be shortened.