Why the new energy climate bill is more important than ever

Of course, it is not news that investment in clean energy technology can create jobs. In the name of “green” jobs these new opportunities for people have been touted for years.

But Barack Obama’s science adviser John Holdren has recently made clear that the administration plans to address the two issues simultaneously by pushing for more energy reform and convincing the American people that the threat of climate change is imminent. By connecting the two issues, both will be pushed to the forefront. In an interview with New Scientist, Holdren said:

“The polls show that 70 to 75 per cent of the American public accepts that climate change is real, that humans are largely responsible, and that we need to do something about it. But it doesn’t rank particularly high on their concerns: the top concern tends to be the economy. So it’s recognised as a problem but needs to move up.”

This is not surprising. A recent poll showed that people are indeed concerned about global warming; the problem just isn’t tangible enough or threatening enough just yet to warrant any big changes in personal life styles or economics, but Americans overwhelmingly support policy changes in Washington.

The new energy climate bill that passed the House in June aims to reduce emission levels from 2005 by 17% by the year 2020. It also proposes to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050. The bill requires utilities to start getting 20% of their energy from renewable sources by 2020. According to Holdren, introducing cap and trade is additionally important because paying a price would force innovation in the area of emission reductions.

While he made clear that geoengineering is not being considered as an option under the current policy, he said it is important to understand the effects of it – both positive and negative. This follows his April assertion that geoengineering considerations might be on the table. This is not surprising, considering both DARPA and the American Meteorological Society are looking into research in the once outlandish idea of re-engineering the earth to combat global warming’s effects.

Holdren, however, unequivocally stated that the ill-effects might be too dangerous to control, but insists that the concept should not be overlooked. Both biofuels and nuclear energy must be considered for alternative sources according to him.

Most importantly, Holdren contends that the US should come up with a specific plan prior to the United Nations climate summit in Copenhagen later this year, so that industrialized nations can make a commitment toward reducing emissions, and developing countries can follow suit. This would happen if the Senate passes the bill; 60 votes are needed and with 60 Democrats and some convincing, Holdren believes that can happen.