Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) registered his support for comprehensive clean energy legislation, emphasizing the benefits of a strengthened wind energy infrastructure both nationally and at a state level.

In a statement circulated to regional news outlets and organizations, Sen. Johnson decried South Dakota’s lagging wind energy sector and voiced his support for an energy bill currently being considered in the Senate, which he said would bolster the industry.

“Soon the Senate will consider climate change legislation that could finally help South Dakota to live up to its wind generating potential and capture the benefits of a cash crop that is just blowing across our landscape,” Sen. Johnson said.

Stressing the opportunity for America to become a “global leader” in clean energy, Sen. Johnson went on to highlight the broad economic opportunities afforded by a clean energy bill and criticize those who seek to defeat it with exaggerated cost estimates: “These scare tactics just present a status quo approach that leaves us all vulnerable to oil spikes in a global market and high gas prices that crush family budgets like we saw last summer.”

A new government study comes to the same conclusion as most others: clean energy legislation would cost little for the average consumer.
 
According to the Energy Information Administration, the nation's foremost energy projection authority, the American Clean Energy and Security Act, passed by the House in June, would cost only about $114 per household in increased energy bills by the year 2020.
 
Despite flaws in the analysis that artificially inflate the cost of the bill, the EIA study was in line with recent estimates from other nonpartisan groups, including the Congressional Budget Office and Environmental Protection Agency, which pegged the cost at less than a dollar per day by 2020.
 
The bill requires energy companies to help consumers mitigate costs during the crucial early years of the emissions-limiting system. The EIA study does not take into account the extension of consumer protection measures beyond the year 2025.
 
Adding to the growing consensus, the CBO reported last week that emission offsets could cut the costs of the bill by 70 percent from 2012 to 2050. The Government Accountability Office, an arm of the CBO, concluded that consumer costs could be largely offset if revenues are properly utilized.
 
Building on the findings, Senate leaders say they’re prepared to move forward with their own version of the House bill.
 
Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) says he will meet a September committee deadline set by Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) for global warming legislation. According to Sen. Baucus, the Finance Committee is already planning for hearings and mark-ups on an emissions-limiting piece of clean energy legislation.

The Chevy Volt, GM’s much anticipated foray into the electric car market, was officially announced Monday. According to company representatives, the car will get 230 miles per gallon in the city, representing a huge step forward for efforts to curb transportation emissions.
 
The Volt, which is due out next year, runs on a battery that can be recharged by its 1.4-liter gasoline engine, improving on the standard set by other popular electric and hybrid vehicles. When parked, it can be recharged at a household outlet.
 
This announcement represents the most concrete evidence to date of what National Wildlife Federation President Larry Schweiger has called a "transformational change ... for everyone in this country who uses electricity in any way."
 

New York Governor David A. Paterson signed an executive order establishing an 80 percent emissions reduction goal by the year 2050.
 
Gov. Paterson stressed the importance of curbing harmful emissions as well as the economic opportunities afforded by the move to a clean energy economy:
 
“Climate change is the most pressing environmental issue of our time. By taking action, we send a signal that New Yorkers will do our share to address the climate crisis and we will do it in a way that creates opportunities for innovation and entrepreneurship to flourish.”
 
New York becomes the eighth state to set an 80 percent goal for the year 2050, joining California, Connecticut, Florida, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey and New Hampshire. Judith Enck, New York’s deputy secretary for the environment, noted the significance of the growing group: "When you have New York and California together on this, you know, these economies are larger than some nations. We can really make national progress on this."
 
The executive order may lead to a strategy-mapping state emissions bill similar to the law adopted by California in 2006.
 
Pennsylvania and members of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a 10-state trading program for power plant emissions, are also considering adopting a low-carbon fuel standard.
 
Jackson Morris, air and energy program director for Environmental Advocates of New York, said the reduction goal helps President Obama affect change on emissions.
"We firmly believe that New York making this announcement today helps President Obama in his quest to achieve 80 percent reduction by 2050," Morris said.
 
Gov. Paterson is also forming a climate action council, featuring the heads of major state agencies. The group is tasked with creating a climate action plan by September 2010 and setting out a logistical strategy for achieving the emissions goals.

It seems opponents of clean energy are increasingly resorting to dirty tactics in their fight against climate legislation.

Washington lobbying group Bonner & Associates recently sent fraudulent letters to U.S. Representative Tom Perriello (D-Va.) purporting to represent the local chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and Creciendo Juntos, a Latino advocacy network, and asserting opposition to the American Clean Energy and Security Act.

The notes first surfaced in June, when, two weeks prior to a House vote on the clean energy bill, Rep. Perriello's office received letters urging the freshman representative not to vote for the legislation, which institutes an emission-limiting system and initiatives to stimulate job growth. Rep. Perriello ultimately supported the bill.

The six letters contained nearly identical language and were 'signed' by fictitious members of each organization.

Bonner & Associates has been accused of so-called 'astroturfing' in the past, and has lobbied on behalf of utility companies and obstructionist groups. This time, the firm did not register to lobby against the clean energy bill for any company or organization, a requirement in many cases.

Victims of the deception campaign have been vocal in their condemnation of the firm.

Tim Freilich, who sits on the executive committee of Creciendo Juntos, claimed the firm "stole (its) name" and criticized the act as an example of "an activity that undermines Americans' faith in democracy."

Leaders at the NAACP, which recently ratified a resolution to fight global warming and its effects, were similarly outraged. Hilary O. Shelton, director of the NAACP’s Washington bureau, released a statement saying he was “appalled that an organization like Bonner and Associates would stoop to these depths to deceive Congress." Shelton further accused the firm of "exploiting the African-American community to achieve their misdirected goal."

Bill co-sponsor Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), in response to what he calls "an appalling abuse," said  that the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming would launch an investigation of the incident. "This fraud on Congress shows that some opponents of clean energy have resorted to forgery and theft to block progress," Markey said.

According to a new report by the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy, adoption of emissions-limiting public policy could cut U.S. energy bills in half by mid-century.

Investments in energy efficiency versus conventional energy use may lead to up to half of the emissions reductions that analysts say are necessary by 2050 in addition to spurring economic growth and job creation.

The report also suggests that many studies on the economic impact of climate legislation rely on models that underestimate the importance of advances in energy efficiency.

Because it is an "invisible energy source," many economic models have ignored the potential gains arising from energy efficiency improvements, according to John Laitner, director of economic and social analysis at ACEEE. "Energy efficiency is the cheapest and largest resource to satisfy the growing demand services in the U.S. economy."

According to an analysis by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the American Clean Energy and Security Act would cost the farming sector little in the short-term and yield great long-term benefits.

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, discussing the analysis and the role of rural America in fighting global warming in testimony before the Senate Agriculture Committee, said economic opportunities for farmers and ranchers resulting from the bill may "significantly" outpace costs:

"In the short term, the economic benefits to agriculture from cap and trade legislation will likely outweigh the costs. In the long term, the economic benefits from offsets markets easily trump increased input costs from cap and trade legislation."

Secretary Vilsack also noted that the USDA analysis is "conservative," not taking into account technological advances that would help farmers or the higher service costs farmers would command "as a result of enhanced renewable energy markets and retirement of environmentally sensitive lands domestically and abroad."

Provisions in the bill would reduce impacts on the cost of fertilizer, part of the reason it would only lightly impact agriculture in the near future. The analysis also found that income from biofuels would be worth a net return of at least $600 million a year.

Following the USDA analysis, agricultural groups reiterated their support for clean energy legislation. National Farmers Union President Roger Johnson testified before the Senate Agriculture Committee, saying farmers "do not agree with those who claim climate change legislation will be void of economic opportunities and incentives."

“Since passage of ACES, regional and national press has focused its efforts on negative scenarios for agriculture under a cap and trade system,” Johnson said. “I believe as the leader of a national organization, it is my responsibility to help change the conversation about this legislation.”

Three Democratic governors told the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee that curbing emissions and developing a national clean energy economy could mean more jobs and economic prosperity.

Citing the successes of their own states in greenhouse gas reduction and job creation, Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter, Jr., Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire, and New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine touted the benefits of adopting renewable electricity standards and other energy measures.

Gregoire said the state of Washington has created nearly 50,000 new green jobs in the last two years, twice the target number set for the year 2020. Corzine, who emphasized the need for national leadership in the clean energy revolution, said New Jersey is committed to reducing emissions by 80 percent and building wind farms offshore.

Overall, Ritter, Jr., said, the "lesson...for other states and the nation as a whole, it is that good energy policy and climate policy can energize the economy and help create good-paying private sector jobs."

The earth's leading greenhouse gas emitters are taking substantive steps toward clean energy innovation.

The United States and China announced plans on a joint clean energy research center, a compromise project aimed at developing clean building and vehicle technology and fostering a more convivial air between the two countries.

The project, which will be driven by headquarter facilities in both countries, is a significant part of the effort to lobby China to promote development of solar, wind, biofuels and other clean energy in the private sector, already a burgeoning movement.

One of the initiative's main proponents is U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu. Secretary Chu, who urged China to set carbon emission targets for the year 2050, also warned that the rising sea levels that will result from global warming would displace more people in China than in any other country. 

In addition to spurring clean energy development within China, U.S. officials pushed for a more open network for international communication: Commerce Secretary Gary Locke appealed to leaders of the new partner nation to avoid forcing trade barriers on clean energy technology: "We need to empower U.S. and Chinese entrepreneurs and innovators to create and collaborate free from artificial trade barriers."

Former Senator John Warner (R-VA) teamed up with the Pew Environment Group last week to announce a new project highlighting the links between national security threats and global warming.

"Leading military and security experts agree that if left unchecked, global warming could increase instability and lead to conflict in already fragile regions of the world," said Warner. "We ignore these facts at the peril of our national security and at great risk to those in uniform who serve this nation."

The project will bring together experts on science and military policy to evaluate joint strategies for preventing global warming and protecting national security interests.

This won't be the first venture to investigate the connection between climate change and national security: The National Intelligence Council, a projection arm of the Central Intelligence Agency, recently reported that global warming could threaten energy resources, damage military facilities, increase food shortages, and strain the economy, all of which would greatly burden national defense. Director Dennis Blair told Congress this year that "global climate change will have important and extensive implications for U.S. national security interests over the next 20 years."