Longview Weather
79°F
Severe
Full Forecaste

Past Month's Most Commented Stories

Home > Breaking News

Washington Legislature passes climate change measure

Thursday, March 6, 2008 9:38 AM PST

By RACHEL LA CORTE
Associated Press Writer

Font Size:
 
 

OLYMPIA — Washington state will come up with a plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions and build a “green collar” work force under a measure passed by the Legislature on Wednesday.

The measure cleared the Senate 29-19 on a mostly party-line vote after more than 90 minutes of debate. Only two Democrats voted against it — Sens. Jim Kastama of Puyallup and Tim Sheldon of Potlatch.

“No one likes change,” said Sen. Rosa Franklin, D-Tacoma. “Change is going to take place and we need to prepare for it.”

The bill now goes to Gov. Chris Gregoire, who requested it and will sign it within the next week.

“Global climate change is the greatest challenge our generation and future generations face, we must take bold steps to address it now,” Gregoire said in a statement. “This bill will help guide Washington state in working toward a cleaner environmental future and sustainable economic development by laying the groundwork for creating green collar jobs.”

The measure builds on a law that passed last year. That underlying measure set targets to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020; to 25 percent below 1990 levels by 2035; and to 50 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 — or 70 percent below what is currently predicted for 2050.

The bill that passed Wednesday makes those goals firm requirements.

“It’s a very significant step forward, absolutely fundamental to doing what we need to do in this state to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in a way that doesn’t damage the economy,” said Jay Manning, director of the state Department of Ecology. “This bill is a great combination of doing the right thing by the environment and doing the right thing by the economy.”

It has five major points, led by orders for the state Ecology Department to make dramatic cuts in Washington’s greenhouse gas emissions. The agency’s eventual blueprint must find a way to curb emissions by 70 percent of expected levels in 2050.

Ecology regulators also would set up an emissions reporting system, for industries that annually produce 10,000 metric tons of greenhouse gases and vehicle fleets that emit at least 2,500 metric tons per year. The first reports would be due in 2010, with deferrals possible for interstate transport businesses.

At the same time, the state Transportation Department would set up recommendations for cutting in half the annual per capita vehicle miles traveled by 2050.

Opponents argued that the bill would lead to an unfair mandate on how people live and commute to work.

“They’re gonna tell you what size car you’re gonna drive, when you’re gonna drive it, what size house you’ll live in, how big that house is gonna be, and how much electricity you’re going to use,” said Sen. Jerome Delvin, R-Richland.

Lawmakers rejected more than a dozen proposed amendments, including one that would recognize nuclear power as a renewable source of energy.

The measure also directs the state to add 25,000 “green collar” jobs by 2020. The green jobs initiative would set up a special state account that gives grants for training and other programs to encourage clean-energy businesses.

“The green economy will be the new economy,” Franklin said. “If we do not prepare for it, we will be left behind.”

Washington officials are also authorized to work with the Western Climate Initiative, a partnership of six states and two Canadian provinces, in developing a regional cap-and-trade system aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions across the West.

The bill’s definition of greenhouse gases includes carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. Such gases essentially trap energy from the sun, which warms the Earth’s surface and lower atmosphere. Many scientists believe human activity that increases those gases is contributing to global warming.

But some question the measures the state is taking.

“There is sort of a chicken little aspect to this bill that seems to imply the sky is going to fall in large chunks,” said Sen. Mike Carrell, R-Lakewood. “It is not.”

———

The climate change bill is House Bill 2815.

Previous Next

Just the facts wrote on Mar 6, 2008 9:53 AM:

" Washingtons "progressive" legislature must have missed the The 2008 International Conference on Climate Change going on right now in New York, as it actually has honest debate on whether or not people are having any effect on the climate. Oh there is no money in that point of view.
"

The real fact is wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:01 AM:

" I think that staying home in Washington and actually GETTING SOMETHING DONE is much much more important than going to a CONFERENCE in New York. What good do CONFERENCES do? Talk about problems get nothing done. At least our state representatives are staying home and doing their jobs. "

grams wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:09 AM:

" "Just the facts,"-- "honest debate" and hindsight are two different things. Can you name one good reason why this legislation will hurt or harm? Or perhaps you are in the oil business. There is all kinds of money in not paying attention if that is the case. How much is a barrel of oil selling for today? "

gimpy wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:26 AM:

" Alright, Gov. Gregoire, now it is time to do more than pay lip-service to climate change. We DEMAND that you state your position on allowing a LNG facility in the lower Columbia, directly across from Puget Island and Cathlamet. Now is not the time to start importing more foreign fossil fuel which will only continue to add to our greenhouse gas problem. "

somedude wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:43 AM:

" Get your walltes out and bend over this isn't going to be pretty! "

OK wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:47 AM:

" Has the legislature been watching Al Gore's movie over and over again? Did they have scientists present all the evidence before this bill was created? Not just global warming people either! If no one has noticed or read we have had some global cooling going on. Maybe we need a bill for that too! "

Cowlitz County wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:50 AM:

" Well if the state is going to get involved why not start here in Cowlitz County and start lowering the emmisions generated from the mills and factories. After all acording to earlier articles in the TDN we have the most poluted air in the state. What I really think is this is nothing more than a move by the politicos to have more tools to raise taxes and fees. Plus how many new state employees will need to add to staff the departments which will be the watchdogs over the whole thing? "

Marianne wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:50 AM:

" To: Just the facts - if every person in this country takes steps to reduce their carbon foot print to zero - what would be the effect.
Before you comment on something that is apparent few people actually have all the facts.
82% of carbon emissions are human made from petroleum and natural gas.
Thr primary source of carbon emmisions in the US is from CARS. Tell me, what do you drive?
Combine emissions from cars and residential emissions, and that is over 50% off all the carbon emissions. Information is from the feds - who by the way - don't believe the climate is changing due to people.
One person can't make a difference? Allow me to introduce you to Rosa Parks.
Oh, and Yes, I have a zero carbon footprint. "

What a scam wrote on Mar 6, 2008 10:53 AM:

" Are you people blind or just plain dumb. It is no warmer or cooler then it was 100 years ago. The state will make tons and tons of money off this junk by extra fake taxes and permits. Say goodbye to the mills in town, they will go over seas and there will be massive unemployment in this state. "

Westsider wrote on Mar 6, 2008 11:19 AM:

" Nobody has a zero-carbon footprint, Marianne. Not even you if you so much as eat food transported from somewhere else. "

this is funny wrote on Mar 6, 2008 11:37 AM:

" Funny how we just had a record year of cold that was lower average then the last 100 years of "warming" I hear they're trying to blame the cold on global warming! lol LOL lol Aslo funny how if you study history you see just how cyclic the earth is..... lakes drying up with settlements discovered in the bottom of them, settlements under the English Channel, four foot higher tide marks on ocean islands, tropical plants under Antarctic ice.... But hey, who cares about history right?!? Nothing to be learned there. We just gotta capitalize on the scare while the money is still GREEN. That is what going GREEN is about. "

What a waste of time and money wrote on Mar 6, 2008 11:42 AM:

" Oh here go those "feel good" Liberal Democrats in Olympia again. I can just here them now: "Hey look you fools who follow us. We are doing great things for the environment." And only the fools who follow them and the Tax Queen believe them. "

To Westsider wrote on Mar 6, 2008 11:44 AM:

" First, I apologize for bad grammar and punc - typing from iPhone.
Second of all. In order to appease the people that actually believe that the world is not polluted, I should have said carbon neutral - meaning for every ounce I cause to be emitted I offset with actions that improve the quality. Like planting a tree, growing a garden (8th grade science here photosynthesis).
Third, in order to have a zero carbon footprint, an individual takes steps to offset the emissions they put into the atmosphere.
For example, Buy green tags (check with your local PUD - it is a program through the Bonneville Environmental Foundation). Collect rain water for watering grass. Buy food from your local community supported agriculture. Buy local - not just for industries. Chicken from Kelso, farmers at Saturday Market, milk from Alpenrose Dairy (SW Portland), beer from Portland, buy apples from WA and Oregon, pears from Hood River. Recycle & resuse.
Instead of buying canned food - buy local or grow it yourself and can it yourself.
Yes. Zero carbon footprint is possible. "

Anti-life wrote on Mar 6, 2008 11:59 AM:

" Carbon dioxide and methane are the result of living. If you breathe or pass gas, you are contributing to "global warming." I suggest we all hold our breath until the atmosphere cools down. "

digdug wrote on Mar 6, 2008 12:01 PM:

" The mills are going to shut down anyways so who cares. Watching those mills pump out crap is disgusting. Only ignorant people want to keep those mills running forever. And by the way, Global Warming does not mean the earth gets hot all the sudden. It involves drought, massive storm systems, and of course extinction. Sure mother earth has cycles, but get a clue, humans are not going to come out on the other end of this cycle. Kudos to Washington and the U.S. for leading the way (as usual) for the rest of the world. "

grams wrote on Mar 6, 2008 12:06 PM:

" Oh for goodness sakes. What there IS proof of is fluctuations in geologic, meterologic history that involves ice ages. So whether or not we are in a curve right now is ambigious. If we have the knowledge, the tools and respect for our planet why should we not want to do what ever it is in our power to do to nurture it? Don't tell me that all those people in mega-cities love breathing smog! I lived in Longbeach California for over a year before I ever realized that there were mountains off in the distance. And that was waaay back in the middle of the last century folks. And "this is funny" you better do some historic research in regard to flucuations in weather. Nature works on her own time not ours. She works over periods of centuries, or in momentary catostrophic ways. Just depends on the balance that is or isn't there. And yes GUV you need to be heard from sooner rather than later!!!! "

Save money wrote on Mar 6, 2008 12:30 PM:

" Where is the evidence that we will lose money if we try to reduce our carbon emissions? I suggest you'll save money and should act regardless of 'global warmin'. From a logical and risk management stance, check out www.manpollo.org to save money. "

Nomanon wrote on Mar 6, 2008 1:51 PM:

" There is no such thing as zero emmissions, nor is there no such thing as carbon neutral. Here's why:
Airplanes, trucks, buses, trains, electric generating plants, factories, cars, lawnmowers & edgers, logging equipment, mills, chicken and hog farms, dairy and beef cattle, oil refineries, ships, and many, many more
things contribute to our environment.
Even plastic,which is so ubiquitous, is made of petroleum derivatives. Every time you use an electric appliance, you are using electricity generated from an oil, gas, coal, or nuclear powered generating station. Even all the proposed alternate forms of fuel such as ethanol and hydrogen require a lot of energy to produce, and that energy comes from electricity, coal, oil, or gas. Of course, we all know that world supplies of oil, gas, and coal are finite, and we must prepare now for our futures. The transition is not going to be sudden, nor will it be easy. We cannot ignore the call to improve our environment, but we cannot go into it blindly either. "

Just Me wrote on Mar 6, 2008 1:59 PM:

" The change in water temp of the oceans is and will continue to change the airflows.These are the airflows that determine ice/desert/temperate climates.If we don't change our ways, we will either be living underwater, in a desert, or an ice cave. To put it in laymans terms, imagine you live in the shower, now imagine someone flushes the toilet, not fun but you will manage.Now imagine they turn off the water heater=global climate change. "

Mike wrote on Mar 6, 2008 4:38 PM:

" Digdug is right on with this one! We may already have tipped the climatological balance to far to save humanity.But to have any chance to save us, the polar bears,and who knows how many other species, we need act now,in a comprehensive if not draconian matter. The danger we collectively face cannot be overstated.This is a crisis that everyone in the world should unite around! "

Gary wrote on Mar 7, 2008 5:44 AM:

" Interesting
http://www.odu.edu/ao/instadv/quest/greenhouse.html

Global warming may not be all bad compared to the alternative. If we hurry the cooling(which I don't think we can),we all will be wishing for warming.
If it was possible for us to change the weather don't you think the military would be using it as a weapon? "

buckleyone wrote on Mar 7, 2008 6:58 AM:

" Mike, polar bears, keep up, there's more than ever. Plenty of oil too, right here, just need to pump it. Green means transfer of wealth that's it. "

gatoraid wrote on Mar 7, 2008 10:35 AM:

" I would call our Washington state legislature "ignorant", however, they know the true facts about the myth of MAN CAUSED global warming. The ice caps have returned, the polar bears are happily reproducing and the winters are getting cooler. BUT ... they have to capitalize on the MAN CAUSED global warming in order to line their coffers with more of our money so that they can buy votes from their everincreasing band of minions. "

Citizen wrote on Mar 13, 2008 2:53 PM:

" Well it took a couple of days for me to find the most appropriate message for this. Mr. "Just the Facts" is selling us "Just the Corporate Lies" once again. Please please go to this link and read all about that conference he thinks so much of:

http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/contributors/1567

Kert Davies, a campaigner for Greenpeace, called it "the largest convergence of the lost tribe of skeptics ever seen on the face of the earth." Frank O'Donnell, head of Clean Air Watch, told The Washington Post's Juliet Eilperin that the conference "looks like the climate equivalent of Custer's last stand." The League of Conservation Voters' Gene Karpinski, said he was "sure that the flat Earth society had a few final meetings before they broke up."

more at the link. "

Top Jobs
More Top Jobs
Top Garage Sales
More Top Garage Sales
Top Rentals
More Top Rentals