Some of global warming's worst consequences could be averted over the next century if climate legislation by Sens. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) becomes law, so long as other international players include similar strategies, U.S. EPA said in a study released today.
The EPA analysis -- the agency's most comprehensive in a decade on global warming legislation -- delves into the environmental and economic effects of the Lieberman-McCain "Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act," S. 280.
Among the findings: The bill would bring global greenhouse gas concentrations by 2095 to levels that many scientists say is necessary to avoid increasing the risks of forest fires, water scarcity and more intense heat waves. Those benefits would only come, EPA added, if other countries that are already limiting greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol continue on a similar path to a new U.S. policy that limits emissions 50 percent below 1990 levels by mid-century.
EPA's modeling also assumed China, India and other emerging economies would bring their emissions down to 2000 levels from 2035 to 2050 -- a long-shot scenario Lieberman and McCain requested.
By contrast, EPA found that continuing current U.S. and world climate policies would allow emission concentrations to reach levels that scientists say would heighten risks of the most severe climate impacts by century's end.
The U.S. economy would continue to grow with or without the climate policies becoming law, EPA says. But the Lieberman-McCain bill by 2030 would lower U.S. gross domestic product by about 1 percent compared with a business as usual scenario. And average annual per-household consumption would fall 2 percent ($550) from projected levels in 2030 if the measure became law.
EPA also found electricity prices would increase 22 percent in 2030 and 25 percent in 2050. And gasoline prices would rise by 26 cents a gallon in 2030 and 68 cents a gallon in 2050. Costs would also increase "significantly" if some of the most promising energy technologies -- including carbon capture and sequestration and nuclear power -- do not pan out as promised, EPA said.
Lieberman, who chairs a key Senate Environment and Public Works subcommittee with oversight of global warming legislation, said today he would release a new compromise draft bill before the start of the August recess that incorporates many elements from his original bill and some from eight other bills introduced so far.
In a press release, the senator said, "While no economic model predicts the future perfectly, EPA's projections are informative and useful."
Lieberman's office also played up the environmental benefits of the legislation, especially as they compare to current policies implemented during the Bush administration. McCain, a Republican candidate for president, added that the bill "provides a valuable roadmap for finding a sound solution to the most difficult environmental change of our time."
Under the Lieberman-McCain bill, pollution cuts would be required for power plants and large manufacturing and commercial facilities, as well as transportation fuels at the refinery or the import terminal. The legislation would require U.S. emissions to fall in 2050 by 67 percent below 2004 levels.
An EPA letter from the agency's top air pollution official, Robert Meyers, takes a neutral tone in describing the effects of the legislation. But a White House spokeswoman today cautioned against the economic effects if the Lieberman-McCain bill became law.
Kritsen Hellmer of the Council on Environmental Quality cited EPA estimates that show the projected growth of gross domestic product if Lieberman-McCain became law could slow by up to $419 billion by 2030 and up to $1.3 trillion by 2050.
Asked if the EPA study would change President Bush's position in opposition to mandatory cuts, Hellmer replied, "The president has been clear about what principles he supports to address climate change. Any climate change plan must sustain economic growth, not shift jobs overseas, create real reductions in emissions in the U.S. through the advancement of technologies, and China and India must be included."
Hellmer added, "Like all other legislation, we will review this bill and weigh it against the principles outlined by the president on climate change."
The Senate on two previous occasions voted against the Lieberman-McCain bill: 43-55 in 2003 and 38-60 in 2005.
EPA also is in the early stages of preparing a study on climate change legislation from Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine).
Click here for the EPA analysis.
Click here for EPA's letter to the senators.
Advertisement
