Climate Change Policy Memo

Discussion Section 9 TA Jose Emilio Lopez Word Count 800 Addressed to the sizable Senators John McCain and Joseph Lieberman. Objective To ensure the act of the Climate Stewardship act upon, S. 139, in the US Senate before the November 2004 presidential election. Strategy The recent passagewayizeover of the cypher bill has opened an hazard for the passage of the Climate Change Stewardship Act. Furthermore, the results of the suffrage of the amendment toasted by Senator Lieberman in October, 2003, tell that on that point is already considerable support.We need to hold off building momentum around this supply, and cast each(prenominal)(prenominal) of the fol belittleding fulfils. Knowing which states get to voted against the Act, it leave be authorised to mathematical function out the motivations behind these votes and address them accordingly. For ember intensive states, the loss of income and unemployment that the adoption of dry-cleaned technologies nifty po wer bring is a swelled concern. Creating gold to aid them in the vicissitude is non as important as shedding light in the opportunities that the modernization of the coal patience heap end product.Coal and parvenue(prenominal)(a) fogey give the axes allow not be displaced in the short term as renewables ar still beyond the demand reliability, but institutionaliseing in pristine coal is feasible and can subscribe a spirited return, helping encouragement a standing(prenominal) industry, creating knew melodic lines, and attracting investment for R&D of renewables, smart grids, and coulomb go and storage technologies. Further evidence or so the real costs and benefits that new technologies present should be available from MIT and similar sources.Additionally, slightly states that voted against the amendment could be considered as highly unguarded to humour interpolate related phenomena such(prenominal)(prenominal) as flooding, hurricanes, and severe droughts . Reliable data related to the increase incidence of such events in Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas and other mid westward states, allow help us convert their representatives on the need to act not still to take usefulness of cytosine storing crop opportunities, but also to defend their vulnerable agriculture industry and the nation. It is meaty to build a stronger case approximately the commercialise opportunities related to climate change.It was the join States task force who proposed the flexible mechanisms to be incorporated in the Kyoto protocol, and all the extension phone I countries but the US arouse been receiving the benefits of such tools. The US has failed to take advantage of global blow markets and related commercial-grade opportunities worldwide, and is also missing the fortune to progress to emission decline targets at a lower cost. The global markets in which US companies like to drive is setting high competitive standards and truly global companie s lead need to adapt to the standards whether nationally choose or not, so why throw out behind them.At this point, the governing body powerfulness identify in the private sector a partner to sh ar the cost and risks related to the investment in cleaner technologies. To entice Senators nigh this argument, it will be important to use advocates such as the hybridisation Motor Comp each and IBM. These flag companies are anticipating future rules and turning the situation into a competitive advantage. Other big market players in the electricity, transportation, industry and commercial sectors might find similar advantages in their aver business models.This can help lessen the perception that climate change regulation is a office to control the market, and show that it can actually help become new markets, increase opportunities for low carbon business and promote the creation of jobs. In terms of international relationships, the passage of the Act can be presented as means to create the right environment for investments that could eventually reduce the addiction of the US on imported dodo fuels, which is as a matter of national security. Given the live climate around the war in Iraq, the Act can be seen as a low risk and low cost alternative to a pricy war.Additionally, in that respect is big concern that any local emission reduction action is meaningless if developing countries dont bring emission reduction targets. It can be argued that the US needs to establish high internal emission reduction targets, even if it doesnt ratify the Kyoto Protocol or other international agreements, to ascertain moral leadership and global duologue power around this issue. The media is already verificatory of the cause so we need to livelihood clobbering with them to maintain the climate change in the minds of the population in familiar to keep putting pressure on the candidates.As with highly vulnerable states, more assistance should be brought to the minds of the average citizen of the vulnerability of US territories and not only faraway territories in third world countries. It is important to supervise the results of negotiations in the House of Representatives to feed into this outline and amend the arguments we will present to the antithetic account players accordingly. Scientific evidence regarding the potentially harmful events of greenhouse featurees (GHG) cannot be ignored.Yet, some might argue that the emissions are payable to causes other than humans and might be reluctant to change consumption patterns. duration data regarding the harmful effectuate of GHG upon climate, ecosystems and human life, other areas need to be support by evidence, such as job creation, growth derived from innovation, and other benefits related to change magnitude dependency in foreign fuel supply. Climate change will exact adverse impacts in several communities. The nearly vulnerable communities in the United States will be those c losear to the Gulf of Mexico.Traditionally poor and peripheral states, will face the harshest conditions as their economicalal activities depend largely on the be consume of crops. Hurricanes and changes in the rain patterns can energise severe impact in the already vulnerable economies of these states. When looking at the be of states that voted against this we should devide them into those which are vulnerable to climate effects and voted against to urge them on increasing economic pressures derived from inaction in their own states and inhabit states (peer pressure). Then, with those that depend primarily n fossil fuel exploitation (coal mines, crude fields) we should work on the benefits of increase question and victimisation of low carbon technologies within the fossil fuel industry, investment in query and development of cleaner fuels and more effectual processes can be accompanied by technology transfer tax breaks. violence should be made on the fact that this newer industry will create an increasing amount of green jobs the young population could benefit from. It means shifting victuals investment in the oil and gas industry to the development of a unanimous new industry that will yield high paying specialized jobs.The research and development community is a key ally in act to convince state governments in secure resources funds for R&D of low carbon technologies. Try to capture talent within states. A new green saving brings opportunity for all and a great chance for stagnating and polluting industries to recapture investment in research and development. Development of smart grids, renewable energy projects, carbon capture and storage, doesnt compete with the current energy industry but will allow for a long term shift into a more sustainable future part creating high paying and wealth creating jobs.Reducing the dependence on imported oil might also allow the US government to reinvest savings from cut in oil trade in the states wi th highest oil drudgery in the cleaning of their industries, aiming to increase susceptibility and capture GHG gases. While there are still doubts on whether climate change is due to human activity or not, the fact is that there are countries that have used the opportunities climate change presents to invest in overseas markets and claim great benefits from voluntary carbon markets.This would allow to break the US reputation around the populace and regain moral leadership. Adaptation palliation Evidence needs to be self-possessed One of the main obstacles in ult negotiations was the unfairness of the developing countries not having cover charge reduction targets, in part because any reductions of emissions in the US would benefit only third world countries in the some vulnerable regions. But some US governments have failed to recognize the vulnerability of some US states close to the coast, river basin and other deserted areas (i. e.Florida, Mississipi, Texas, Lousiana, Sout h Carolina, Georgia). Inaction against climate change will affect these traditionally relegated states. Evidence about the vulnerability of these regions will be key in trying to convince the congressmen representing them to vote in privilege of the bill. Even if a great portion out of emissions are not necessarily machine-accessible to human activities (although there is worldwide consensus about the fact that it does) the fact is that temperatures are rising, and there is a need to stabilize carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere.This in itself is an opportunity for innovation, and given worldwide attention to this issue the cost of action will be tractd by many countries. If the US fails to act now, the cost of action in years to come might be considerably higher because the country will not be able to share the risk of the investment with other developed economies. It means maintaining leadership in the energy industry, while opening new channel for investment and efficiency, and the creation of a new set of consumption patterns, beneficial for stagnant and even contracting businesses (coal industry).