Prior Projects

Accelerating Climate Change Response

2007 Resolution Calling for Nationwide Mobilization of Renewable Resources
A Brief Bio of EcoBridge
Prior Projects - Includes Berkeley Resolution (2003)
Prior Projects - Includes Coastal City Mayors' Letter to President Bush Urging Him to Reconsider the Kyoto Protocol (2001 & 2002)
Prior Projects - Includes San Francisco and New Orleans Mobilizing Resolutions (2001)
Prior Projects - EcoBridge Resolutions Supporting Kyoto Protocol Passed by U.S Cities 1998 - 2000:
San Francisco Resolution 606-98 July 13, 1998
Oakland Resolution 74693 December 8, 1998
New Orleans Resolution R-98-794 December 17, 1998
Also Atlanta, Miami, West Palm Beach, Ormond Beach, Lauderlakes
Why We Must Accelerate Reductions in Carbon Emissions
How U.S Can Achieve a Massive Reduction of Carbon Emissions by 2020
Article by Stanford Professors on Why Energy from Wind is Cheaper than Coal
An Abundance of Wind in the U.S to Meet Energy Needs - Study by Stanford Researchers

"Global warming is real; the risks it poses are real; and the American people have a right to know it and a responsibility to do something about it. The sooner Congress understands that, the sooner we can protect our nation--and our planet--from increased flood, fire, drought, and deadly heat waves." President Bill Clinton, July 25, 1998. [80]

BERKELEY RESOLUTION June 17, 2003

View Berkeley Resolution Calling for 60% reduction in Emissions by 2060

THIS RESOLUTION URGES THE CITY OF BERKELEY’S LEGISLATIVE AND CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES TO SPONSOR OR SUPPORT LEGISLATION CALLING FOR A NATIONAL POLICY THAT TARGETS U.S. REDUCTIONS IN CARBON EMISSIONS OF 60 PER CENT FROM 1990 LEVELS BY THE YEAR 2050, AND PROMOTES THROUGH FUNDING, INCENTIVES AND OTHER MEANS A NATIONWIDE MOBILIZATION OF RENEWABLE ENERGY RESOURCES AND AN ACCELERATED EXPANSION OF USE IN HOMES, BUSINESSES AND BUILDINGS OF ENERGY EFFICIENT TECHNOLOGIES AND PRODUCTS.

WHEREAS, the City of Berkeley has made a commitment to reduce greenhouse gases 15% below 2010 levels by 2020, has made a commitment to climate friendly cement; has implemented the use of biodiesel fuel in the City’s refuse trucks and other equipment; and various other policies consistent with the reduction of carbon emissions, including conservation; and

WHEREAS, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has estimated that to maintain stable atmosphere conditions, carbon emissions must not exceed 2 billion tons per year, requiring a 60 to 70 per cent reduction in emissions; and

WHEREAS, the United Kingdom has adopted an energy policy targeting a 60 percent reduction in carbon emissions from 1990 levels by 2050 with emphasis on renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies; and

WHEREAS, experts anticipate that atmospheric CO2 concentrations will double by 2050 unless countries back swift and deep cuts in emissions from cars, factories, power stations and homes. The World Wildlife Fund states in a report issued on August 31, 2000 that “Global warming under CO2 doubling has the potential to eventually destroy 35% of the world’s existing terrestrial habitats, with no certainty that they will be replaced by equally diverse systems or that similar ecosystems will establish themselves elsewhere[;]” and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Protection Agency states, “Sea level is rising more rapidly along the U.S. coast than worldwide. Studies by EPA and others have estimated that along the Gulf and Atlantic coasts, a one foot (30 cm) rise in sea level is likely by 2050. In the next century, a two foot rise is most likely, but a four foot rise is possible; and sea level will probably continue to rise for several centuries, even if global temperatures were to stop rising a few decades hence[;]” and

WHEREAS, Munich Re, one of the world’s leading insurance companies, issued a report in late 1998 suggesting that in the years ahead, large areas of the world, including the southeastern United States and Indonesia, may become virtually uninsurable; and

WHEREAS, a report commissioned by the UN Environment Programme, found that increasing temperatures caused by climate change would bring more frequent and more devastating storms that could cost $150 billion in insurance pay outs a year within the next decade, possibly bankrupting financial services firms; and

WHEREAS, in a 2001 study published in Science journal Stanford researchers, Mark Jacobson and Gilbert Masters demonstrate how the U.S can achieve a major reduction in emissions within a few decades. According to Professor Jacobson, “The U.S. could displace 10 percent of coal energy at no net federal cost by spending three to four percent of one year's budget on 36,000 to 40,000 large wind turbines and selling the electricity over 20 years, recouping all costs." The authors calculate that, by building about 250,000 new turbines, costing approximately $375 billion, America could eliminate almost two-thirds of its coal generated electricity, reducing its annual greenhouse gas emissions to seven percent below 1990 levels; and

WHEREAS, the U.S can achieve great reductions in carbon emissions by raising the energy efficiency standard of equipment used in homes and building such as heating, air conditioning, appliances, lighting, powering, television and equipment for conducting business, by raising the energy standards of home and building design, by promoting energy efficiency with new home buyers, or current homeowners, through greater access to information on energy performance of the homes they are considering buying or remodeling, and by increasing CAFE standards, over a 10 year period, from 27.5 to 45 mpg for cars and 21 to 34 mpg for trucks, which would reduce carbon emissions by 36 million tons per year; and

WHEREAS, energy efficiency and renewable power can meet 60% of the U.S. need for new electricity generating power plants over the next 20 years, according to the Department of Energy’s 2000 report, Scenarios for a Clean Energy Future (SCEF), displacing the need to build 790 of the 1300 plants called for by Vice President Dick Cheney in April, 2001. Besides significant reductions in sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon dioxide, and mercury, which damages nervous system development in children, the measures portrayed in SCEF could produce financial benefits to Americans, including energy savings, that exceed their direct costs; and

WHEREAS, prior to decisions concerning possible large scale installations of wind turbines, solar photovoltaic equipment or other modes of renewable energy resources in offshore areas, on public or private lands, there may exist the need for new federal and state regulations, guidelines and standards and also procedures allowing for public participation to discuss community concerns; and

WHEREAS, we hope that future generations will look back at the current period in time, with the knowledge that we employed every achievable means to rapidly and effectively address climate change.

NOW BE IT RESOLVED, that the Berkeley City Council urges its state legislative and congressional representatives to sponsor or support legislation calling for a national policy that commits the United States to reductions in carbon emissions of 60 per cent from 1990 levels by the year 2050. In line with such reductions this Council urges a nationwide mobilization of renewable energy resources to mitigate the loss of human life, property and ecosystems expected from climate change, and calls upon the City’s state legislative and congressional representatives to sponsor or support legislation that promotes large scale building of wind turbines, solar photovoltaic systems or other systems employing renewable resources and that offers generous state and federal tax credits sufficient to spur the widespread use of residential solar photovoltaic, solar heating and fuel cell systems and the purchase of hybrid and fuel cell vehicles, when available and to make available funding for retraining of coal industry workers; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Council request its state legislative and congressional representatives to urge President George W. Bush to propose legislation in line with the Department of Energy’s Scenarios for a Clean Energy Future, or to request the City’s congressional representatives themselves to promote such legislation or its equivalent; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that this City Council urge its representatives in the State Legislature and Congress to promote an increase over a 10-year period in CAFE standards from the present 27.5 miles per gallon to 45 mpg for cars and from the present 20.7 to 34 mpg for light trucks; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Council urge members of the State Legislature and of Congress representing this City to sponsor or support legislation creating necessary regulations, guidelines and standards, along with procedures for public participation, in sum to govern evenhandedly large scale installations of wind turbines, solar photovoltaic equipment and other renewable energy resources in offshore areas, on public or private lands; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk forward a copy of this resolution to members of the State Legislature and of the United States Congress representing this City and Rajendra K. Pachauri, Chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Prior Projects - Coastal City Mayors Letter to President Bush Urging Him to Reconsider the Kyoto Protocol

In the years 2001 and 2002 EcoBridge worked with the office of Venice Mayor Paolo Costa, urging mayors of coastal cities to sign onto the following letter to President George W. Bush. The letter asks the President to reconsider the Kyoto Protocol. The project culminated with a press conference in Venice on May 21, 2002, making public the letter to President Bush. Participants were Venice Mayor Paolo Costa, Oakland Mayor Jerry Brown, Barcelona Mayor Joan Clos and members of the Italian Senate and Parliament.
Coastal cities are on the front lines of climate change. They will take on the brunt of global warming. Nothing better exhibits the varied threat of climate change now and in the coming decades, than the plight of coastal cities. It is the coastal city that will be vulnerable to increasing storms due to sea level rise, damage from sea level rise to business and residential property, floods from storm surges, loss of life due to storm surges, pollution in rivers and ocean water derived from flooding or heavy storm runoff, loss of road infrastructure to flooding, shore erosion, damage to port facilities, loss of beach areas and sand, salt water encroachment on groundwater aquifers and rivers, loss of wetlands, not to mention the costs to cities of building protective structures, and the yearly maintenance of those structures. It is inevitable that the status quo can not be maintained under conditions of sea level rise, even with extensive efforts to build protective structures.

The letter follows:

Mr. George W. Bush
President of the United States of America
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

As Mayors, we would like to underline the dangers that our local communities, all located on delicate coastal areas, are facing due to global climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions. Our cities will be heavily affected, not only by the raising of the sea level, but also by the probable intensification of extreme climatic conditions. The case of Venice and its lagoon is a prime example. A world cultural and environmental heritage of mankind is destined to suffer tremendously, because of the intensification of periodical flooding, by the effects of global climate changes. Consequently, international support that Venice is receiving for its ordinary maintenance, much of it coming also from private donors from the United States, is bound to be rendered useless.

We are convinced that the role of National governments must be supported by the voice of local governments in order to tackle the task of reducing the dramatic effects on climate forecast by international experts. We are aware of the important responsibilities that cities will have to face in order to contribute to this task, and we are committed to take rapid and cogent actions by orienting our urban policies towards reducing greenhouse emission, specifically in the fields of energy, transport and waste treatment.

But we need to feel that we are part of a global plan which cannot pretend to be successful without the essential role of your Country. This is why we feel that we have to express our deepest concern about the position that your administration has recently assumed towards the Kyoto Protocol. We are convinced that the Kyoto Protocol should not be discarded but reviewed and improved by exploiting its globality and flexibility.

We urge you to reconsider your position. We are confident that you are going to assume a leading and proactive role in fighting against global warming by contributing to create the reference framework within which we, as mayors of some of the more important coastal cities in the world, are going to concentrate the efforts of our local policies.

Sincerely,

1. Paolo Costa, Mayor of Venice, Italy
2. Cesar Maia, Mayor of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
3. Abdel Mounim Ariss, Mayor of Beirut, Lebanon
4. Kari Nenonen, Mayor of Oulu, Finland
5. Ormir Rusi, Mayor of Shkodra, Albania
6. Tarso Genro, Mayor of Porto Alegre, Brazil
7. Alan Lloyd, Mayor of Swansea Wales, UK
8. Vido Boddanovic, Mayor of Dubrovnik, Croatia
9. Joan Miquel Nadal I Male, Mayor of Tarragona, Spain
10. Joan Clos, Mayor of Barcelona, Spain
11. Inaki Azkuna, Mayor of Bilbao, Spain
12. Hirotaro Yamasaki, Mayor of Fukuoka, Japan
13. Mamadou Diop, Mayor of Dakar, Senegal
14. Fabio Sturani, Mayor of Ancona, Italy
15. Giuseppe Pericu, Mayor of Genoa, Italy
16. Simeone di Cagno Abbrescia, Mayor of Bari, Italy
17. Miri Hoti, Mayor of Durres, Albania
18. Sarlis Chryssanthos, Mayor of Corfu, Greence
19. W.J Deetman, Mayor to the Hague, The Netherlands
20. Mohammad Hanif, Mayor of Dhaka, Bangladesh
21. Jacques Peyrat, Mayor of Nice, France
22. Russell Goodway, Lord Mayor of Cardiff, Wales, UK
23. Mary Jane C. Ortega, Mayor of San Fernando, Philippines
24. Ivan Skaric, Mayor of Split, Croatia
25. Leona Detiege, Mayor of Antwerp, Belgium
26. Omar El Bahraoui, Mayor of Rabat, Morocco
27. Job Cohen, Mayor of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
28. Greg Nickels, Mayor of Seattle, Washington
29. Dimitris Z. Archondakis, Mayor of Rethymnon, Greece
30. Eric Milligan, Lord Provost of Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
31. Walter Veltroni, Mayor of Rome, Italy
32. Joao Barroso Soares, Mayor of Lisboa, Portugal
33. Anibal Ibarra, Mayor of Buenos Aires, Argentina
34. Andreas Dais, Mayor of Igoumenitsa, Greece
35. Mariano Arana, Mayor of Montevideo, Uruguay
36. Ken Livingstone, Mayor of London, England
37. Qassim Sultan, Director General of Dubai Muncipality, United Arab Emirates
38. Michael Mulcahy, Lord Mayor of Dublin, Ireland
39. Vojko Obersnel, Mayor of Rijeka, Croatia
40. Jens Kramer Mikkelsen, Lord Mayor of Copenhagen, Denmark
41. Rosa Russo Jervolino, Mayor of Naples, Italy
42. Umberto Scapagnini, Mayor of Catania, Italy
43. Per Ditlev Simonsen, Mayor of Oslo, Norway
44. Richard Leese, Leader of Manchester City Council
45. Alderman Peter Marais, Mayor of Cape Town, South Africa
46. Marc H. Morial, Mayor of New Orleans, Louisiana, USA (signed on August 24, 2001)
47. Blas Aprile, Mayor of Mar del Plata, Argentina
48. Jerry Brown, Mayor of Oakland, California (signed on September 5)
49. Tonis Palts, Mayor of Tallinn – Estonia (signed on September 5)
50. Jean – Paul L’Allier, Mayor of Quebec – Canada (September 13)
51. Jim Soorley Mayor of Brisbane, Queensland – Australia (September 18)
52. Michael Feinstein, Mayor of Santa Monica, California, USA (September 19)
53. Shirley Dean, Mayor of Berkeley, California (USA), (September 25)
54. Moti Lal, Mayor of Nausori, Fiji Islands, (September 26)
55. Josephine M. Williams, J.P.Mayor of Nadi - Fiji Islands (October 1, 2001)
56. Tadatoshi Akiba, Mayor of Hiroshima – Japan (October 1, 2001)
57. Ying – jeou Ma, Mayor of Taipei – Taiwan (October 5, 2001)
58. Cr. Lakshman Prasad Maharaj, Mayor of Lautoka - Fiji Islands (October 11,2001)
59. Pradeep Singh, Mayor of Labasa - Fiji Islands, (October 11, 2001)
60. Frank Chang-ting Hsieh, Mayor of Kaohsiung – Taiwan, (October 11, 2001)
61. Kazutoshi Sasayama, Mayor of Kobe – Japan, (October 12, 2001)
62. Kevin Byrne, Mayor of Cairns, Queensland – Australia, (October 12, 2001)
63. Dannel P. Malloy, Mayor of Stamford, Connecticut (November 5, 2001)
64. Willie L. Brown, Jr., Mayor of San Francisco, California (November 20, 2001)
65. Mara Giulianti, Mayor of Hollywood, Florida (November 21,2001)
66. Joel T. Daves, Mayor of West Palm Beach, Florida (November 21, 2001)
67. Joe Schreiber Mayor of Tamarac, Florida (November 30, 2001)
68. Jeremy Harris Mayor of Honolulu, Hawaii (December 7, 2001)
69. Thomas M. Menino, Mayor of Boston, Massachusetts (January 3, 2002)
70. Christopher Krohn, Mayor of Santa Cruz, California (January 10, 2002)
71. Mary Jane Carr, Lord Mayor of Newcastle, England (February 6, 2002)
72. Marty Blum, Mayor of Santa Barbara, California (February 13, 2002)
73. Lee B. Brown, Mayor of Houston, Texas ( March 14, 2002)
74. Paul D. Novack, Mayor of Surfside, Florida (April 19, 2002)
75. David Dermer, Mayor of Miami Beach, Florida (May 17, 2002)

Prior Projects: New Orleans and San Francisco Mobilizing Resolutions

NEW ORLEANS RESOLUTION   (R-01-326) Passed May 17, 2001
BY: COUNCILMEMBER GUSMAN
SECONDED BY: COUNCILMEMBER SAPIR

       WHEREAS, the American people during World War II rose up against powerful and aggressive enemies and began an extraordinary production of military materiel: guns, tanks, aircraft, munitions. This massive mobilization was a miraculous endeavor by the citizens of this country, and together with the men and women of the armed forces, comprised the foundation of victories long since celebrated; and

      WHEREAS, there is now a new enemy, climate change, which poses a threat to human life and property, and challenges the quality of life of present and future generations of Americans. This powerful enemy gaining strength with each new day, has escalated its aggression, invading and harming ecosystems all over the world, threatening a mass destruction of ecosystems by mid-century; and

      WHEREAS, the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has concluded that the global climate is warming. The IPCC projects by the end of the 21st century an increase in global mean surface temperatures of 2.5 degrees to 10.4 degrees Fahrenheit, leading to an increase in sea level between 6 and 37 inches; and

      WHEREAS, the world is producing annually about 6 billion tons of carbon emissions, of which the United States is responsible for about one-fourth of global emissions. The IPCC has estimated that to maintain stable atmospheric conditions, carbon emissions must not exceed 2 billion tons per year, therefore requiring a reduction of 60 to 70% in annual carbon emissions; and

      WHEREAS, the IPCC "business as usual" scenario of carbon dioxide increase (IS92a) in the 21st century anticipates a doubling of carbon dioxide over pre-industrial levels around the year 2065; and

      WHEREAS, the World Wildlife Fund says in a report issued on August 31, 2000 that “Global warming under CO2 doubling has the potential to eventually destroy 35% of the world’s existing terrestrial habitats, with no certainty that they will be replaced by equally diverse systems or that similar ecosystems will establish themselves elsewhere.”; and

       WHEREAS, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency warns that Louisiana will see warmer temperatures from global warming, as well as more severe droughts, floods and sea level rise. The National Assessment report by the US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) says that of its two primary climate models, the Hadley climate model predicts about a 4 degrees to 5 degrees Fahrenheit increase in temperatures in southeastern United States over the coming decades, while the Canadian climate model predicts about a 10 degrees F increase; and

       WHEREAS, the EPA warns that possible responses to sea level rise include building walls to hold back the sea, allowing the sea to advance and adapting to it, and raising the land (e.g., by replenishing beach sand and/or elevating houses and infrastructure). Each of the foregoing would be expensive, either in out-of-pocket costs or in lost land and structures. For example, the cumulative cost of sand replenishment to protect Louisiana’s coast from a 20-inch rise in sea level by 2100 is estimated at $2.6-$6.8 billion; and

       WHEREAS, the Kyoto Protocol requires industrial countries to reduce their greenhouse emissions by 5.2% below 1990 levels by the years 2008 to 2012. We have reached a point where the 5.2% reduction is woefully inadequate if we are to challenge the accelerating pace towards a doubling of carbon dioxide by mid-century. A 5.2% reduction in carbon emissions does not approach the 60% to 70% that scientists recognize as the cutback necessary to stabilize the atmosphere; and

       WHEREAS, any progress in reducing carbon dioxide must include increasing CAFE standards above the present 27.5 miles per gallon for passenger cars and 20.7 for light trucks. President Bill Clinton’s 1996 “Car Talk” commission found that in the first ten years of the phase-in, an increase in CAFE standards from 27.5 to 45 mpg for cars and 20.7 to 34 mpg for light trucks would account for a reduction in carbon emissions of 36 million tons per year — almost half of the amount necessary to reduce emissions to 1990 levels; and

       WHEREAS, Americans during World War II experienced heavy sacrifices involving the loss of loved ones, and also lesser sacrifices, such as the rationing of food and the shortage of material goods. Future generations must look back at the current period in time and understand that we did all we could, and as fast as we could, to address climate change and stabilize the atmosphere. This generation has that opportunity by directing funds from the federal budget surplus, after protecting social security, to renewable energy resources; now therefore

        BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, that this council urges a nationwide mobilization of renewable energy resources as a model, beyond requirements of the Kyoto Protocol, to mitigate the loss of human life, property and ecosystems resulting from continued anthropogenic interference with the climate system in accordance with current scientific thought. While the goal of this legislation is to accelerate efforts to stabilize atmospheric conditions, in answer to the accelerating pace of climate change, we are also striving to mitigate the environmental burden of future generations. This resolution urges representatives of New Orleans in the Louisiana State Legislature, as well as all of the city’s congressional representatives to pursue legislation that promotes such a mobilization of renewable resources. Also, we are asking our elected representatives in the State Legislature and Congress to promote a funding of renewable sources through the application of funds from the federal budget surplus, after allowance has been made for social security protection; and

       BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the New Orleans City Council promote the goals established in the Clinton Administration’s 1996 “Car Talk” commission, namely an increase over a 10-year period in CAFE standards of from the present 27.5 miles per gallon to 45 mpg for cars and from the present 20.7 to 34 mpg for light trucks; and

       BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this City Council cooperate with other coastal cities in establishing an ad hoc or permanent association of coastal cities, whose purpose is to favor any city, state or federal legislation protective of coast cities against global warming or any other environmental threat; and

       BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this City Council supports any opportunity taken by its chairman or his designee(s) and/or the Mayor to join with other cities in voicing a united support for such an escalation of action to combat global warming.

       THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION WAS READ IN FULL, THE ROLL WAS CALLED ON THE ADOPTION THEREOF AND RESULTED AS FOLLOWS:

YEAS: Carter, Gusman, Sapir, Shea, Singleton, Thomas, Willard-Lewis – 7
NEAS: 0
ABSENT: 0
AND THE RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED.    Emma J. Williams, Clerk of the Council

SAN FRANCISCO RESOLUTION NO. 490-01 (Passed June 12, 2001)
[Resolution urging nationwide mobilization of renewable energy resources.]

Resolution urging nationwide mobilization of renewable energy resources, beyond the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol, to stabilize atmospheric conditions and to mitigate the ecological and economic damage and injury to human life caused by global warming.

WHEREAS, Global climate change is destroying ecosystems all over the world and poses a grave threat to human life; and

WHEREAS, Carbon dioxide, one of the most prevalent of these greenhouse gases, stays in the atmosphere for more than a century and greatly contributes to global warming; and

WHEREAS, Requirements set forth in the Kyoto Protocol, which call for industrial countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by 5% below the 1990 levels in the commitment period 2008 to 2012, are woefully inadequate to slow the accelerating pace of carbon dioxide emissions; and

RESOLVED, that the San Francisco Board of Supervisors urges a nationwide mobilization of renewable energy resources, beyond requirements of the Kyoto Protocol, to mitigate the ecological and economic damage and injury to human life caused by global warming; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors promote the goals established in President Bill Clinton’s 1996 “Car Talk” commission, namely an increase over a 10-year period in CAFE standards from the present 27.5 miles per gallon to 45 mpg for cars and from the present 20.7 to 34 mpg for light trucks; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the San Francisco Board of Supervisors cooperate with other cities in establishing an ad hoc or permanent association of coastal cities, whose purpose is to advocate any city, state or federal legislation protective of coast cities against global warming or any other environmental threat; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk of the Board forward a copy of this resolution to members of the State Legislature and of the United States Congress representing San Francisco.

Supervisor Peskin
Board of Supervisors 6/12/01

Prior Projects - Resolutions Supporting Kyoto Protocol Passed by U.S Cities 1998 - 2000
San Francisco Resolution 606-98 July 13, 1998

SUPPORTING THE KYOTO PROTOCOL ON CLIMATE CHANGE AS A SMALL BUT SIGNIFICANT MEANS TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND STABILIZE THE GLOBAL ATMOSPHERE, AND AS A NECESSARY FIRST STEP TOWARD MAINTAINING THE HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS OF SAN FRANCISCANS, AND URGING SENATORS BOXER AND FEINSTEIN TO PURSUE RATIFICATION OF THIS AGREEMENT BY THE U.S SENATE.

WHEREAS, The United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has concluded that the global climate is warming and projects an increase in global mean surface temperatures of 2 to 6 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the 21st century, leading to an increase in sea level of 6 to 37 inches; and,

WHEREAS, The five warmest years on record have all occurred in the 1990's and precipitation has increased by 10% in the United States during the 20th century, most of which has been in extreme events (floods and storms) rather than moderate, beneficial rains; and,

WHEREAS, The expected loss of wetlands areas due to sea level rise, the loss of forests due to the stress of increasing temperatures, and the loss of wildlife populating these forest and wetlands areas will have negative impact on our quality of life and the lives of future generations; and,

WHEREAS, Climate change is already threatening the planet with a spread of infectious diseases, which will move farther northward and to higher elevations, and the World Health Organization projects tens of millions more cases of malaria and other infectious disease as a result; and

WHEREAS, The practices leading to excess emission of climate-changing chemicals are both local and global in nature, and the City of San Francisco recognizes that its long-term well-being cannot be secured without action at both levels; and,

WHEREAS, The City of San Francisco has begun to address its local contribution to global climate change through:

Setting a long-term goal of eliminating climate-changing and ozone-depleting emissions and toxics associated with energy production and use, as set forth in the Sustainability Plan adopted in 1997.
Passage of Resolution #227-95, Supporting San Francisco's Participation in the Cities for Climate Protection Campaign, in which it pledged to take a leading role in reducing energy consumption, establishing a greenhouse gas reduction goal, and developing a local action plan to reduce local emissions of greenhouse gases and increase energy efficiency.
Numerous other energy conservation and energy efficiency policies, such as the Residential Energy Conservation Ordinance developed by the City and county of San Francisco; and,

WHEREAS, The best efforts of the City and County of San Francisco to reduce its contribution to the climate change problem will make little difference unless efforts are also made at the regional and national levels; and

WHEREAS, With full participation of United States government representatives, on December 11, 1997, a modest agreement was brought forth in Kyoto, Japan to begin the process of addressing climate change. Subject to ratification of the U.S. Senate, the United States agreed to reduce carbon emissions by 7% below 1990 levels by the year 2012; now, therefore, be it

RESOLVED, That the City and County of San Francisco supports the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change as a small but significant means to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and stabilize the global atmosphere and as a necessary first step toward maintaining the health and quality of life for future generations of San Franciscans; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Clerk of the Board forward a copy of this resolution to Senators Boxer and Feinstein for their assistance in ratifying the agreement in the Senate.

Sponsoring Supervisor Sue Bierman. Ayes included Ammiano, Brown, Katz, Kaufman, Leno, Teng, Yaki, Yee.
Signed by Mayor Willie Brown on July 31, 1998

Oakland Resolution 74693 December 8, 1998

RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE KYOTO PROTOCOL ON CLIMATE CHANGE AS A SIGNIFICANT MEANS TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND STABILIZE THE GLOBAL ATMOSPHERE, AND AS A NECESSARY FIRST STEP TOWARD MAINTAINING THE HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS OF OAKLANDERS, AND URGING SENATORS BOXER AND FEINSTEIN TO PURSUE RATIFICATION OF THIS AGREEMENT BY THE SENATE.

WHEREAS, the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has concluded that the global climate is warming; and

WHEREAS, the IPCC projects by the end of the 21st century an increase in global mean surface temperatures of 2 to 6 degrees Fahrenheit, leading to an increase in seal level between 6 and 37 inches, and

WHEREAS, the five warmest years on record have all occurred in the 1990's, 1997 being the warmest yet. In july of 1995, the second warmest year on record, a heat wave hit the Midwest killing over 500 people in Chicago alone; and

WHEREAS, according to Dr. Thomas Karl, senior scientist of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Climatic Data Center: "High temperatures are likely to become more extreme, and because night temperature will increase by at least as much as daytime temperatures, heat waves should become more serious; and

WHEREAS, the expected loss of wetlands areas due to sea level rise, the loss of forests due to the stress of increasing temperatures, and the loss of wildlife population these forest and wetland areas will have an effect on our quality of life and the lives of future generations; and

WHEREAS, climate change is already threatening the planet with a spread of infectious diseases, which will move farther northward and higher elevations. The World Health Organization projects tens of millions more cases of malaria and other infectious diseases. "The spread of infectious disease will be the most important public health problem related to climate change," states Jonathon Patz, a John Hopkins microbiologist who is working on the issue at eh U.S. Environment al Protection agency; and

WHEREAS, on December 11, 1997, a modest agreement was brought forth in Kyoto, Japan, to begin the process of addressing climate change. Subject to ratification of the U.S. Senate, the United States agreed to reduce carbon emissions by 7% below 1990 levels by the year 2012, while the European Union and Japan agreed to an 8% and 6% cut in emissions, respectively. As the Montreal Protocol of 1987 led to the world-wide reduction of the ozone-destroying chemical, chloroflourocarbon, the Kyoto agreement has spurred hope that we can begin to mitigate greenhouse gases; and

WHEREAS, a city council is sometimes called upon to register its support for an environmental issue. The monumental potential for human and environmental damage posed by global warming requires the United States to begin the process of addressing climate change. As Dr. George M. Woodwell, noted scientist and founder of Woods Hole Research Center said, "The risks of global warming are real, palpable, the effects are accumulating daily and the costs of correcting the trend rise with each day's delay." If the voices of future generations, the unborn children of tomorrow, could be heard, they would plead for action; so therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the Oakland City Council support the Kyoto plan as a small but significant step to reducing greenhouse gases and stabilizing the global atmosphere. We strongly urge Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer to do everything within their power to vigorously pursue the ratification of the Kyoto agreement.

Sponsoring City Councilmember, Nancy Nadel. Passed December 8, 1998.

New Orleans Resolution R-98-794 December 17, 1998

WHEREAS, the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has concluded that the global climate is warming with projections by the end of the 21st century of increase in global mean surface temperatures of 2 to 6 degrees Fahrenheit is leading to an increase in sea level of about 6 to 37 inches; and

WHEREAS, the five warmest years on record have all occurred in the 1990's with 1997 having been the warmest yet. In 1995, the second warmest year on record, a heat wave occurred in July in the midwest killing over 500 people in /Chicago; and

WHEREAS, the expected loss of wetland areas due to a rise of sea level, the loss of forests due to the stress of increasing temperatures, the loss of wildlife populating these forests and wetland areas will have an effect on our quality of life and the lives of future generations; and

WHEREAS, on December 11, 1997, an agreement was brought forth in Kyoto, Japan to begin the process of addressing climate change. Subject to ratification of the U.S. Senate, the United States agreed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 7% below 1990 levels by the year 2012, while the European Union and Japan agreed to an 8% and 6% cut in emissions, respectively; and

WHEREAS, the monumental potential for human and environmental damage poses by global warming requires the United States to begin the process of addressing climate change; now therefore

BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, That this Council endorse the Kyoto Protocol in which the U.S., the European Union and Japan have agreed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and requests the Clerk of Council to forward copies of this resolution to the Louisiana Congressional Delegation for their assistance with the U.S. Senate's ratification of the Kyoto Protocol.

THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION WAS READ IN FULL, THE ROLL WAS CALLED ON THE ADOPTION THEREOF AND RESULTED AS FOLLOWS:

YEAS: Carter, Glapion, Hazeur-Distance, Sapir, Singleton, Terrell, Thomas - 7 NAYS: 0

Also Atlanta, Miami, West Palm Beach, Ormond Beach, Lauderlakes
Atlanta City Council, Georgia, Resolution No. 00-R-0640, Adopted May 1, 2000
Lauderdale Lakes City Commission, Florida, Resolution No. 99-150, Adopted September 16, 1999
Ormond Beach City Commission, Florida, Resolution No. 99-140, Adopted August, 1999
Miami City Commission, Resolution No. 99-360, Adopted May 11, 1999
West Palm Beach City Commission, Resolution No. 564-98, Adopted December 14, 1998

Why We Must Accelerate Reductions in Carbon Emissions

Carbon Emissions Are Taking Off As Carbon Sinks Are Crippled

The world is producing annually about 6.5 billion tons of carbon emissions. The IPCC has estimated that to maintain stable atmosphere conditions, carbon emissions must not exceed 2 billion tons per year. However, global emissions of carbon are expected to increase by 3.5 billion tonnes, or 50 percent by the year 2020. Dr Nebojsa Nakicenovic, lead author for Working Group II of the IPCC says, "the IPCC SRES scenarios exceed the 10 billion tons of (elementary) carbon by 2020 and the highest ones are in the vicinity of 13 billion tons."

"The tundra now is beginning to emit carbon, as before in the 1970's, it was a carbon sink." says San Diego State University biologist, Dr. Walter Oechel, appearing in the documentary Hot Time in Alaska [122]

Boreal forests, a major carbon sink, are threatened by bark beetles and fire. These forests, which cover about a third of the earth's entire forested area are found in Alaska, Canada, Northern Russia and elsewhere.

During the past 20 years there has been a stark decline of more than 9% in primary production of phytoplankton (the bottom of marine species’ food chain) in the North Pacific Ocean , while in the same period phytoplankton of the North Atlantic has decreased by 7%. These microscopic ocean plants also account for about half the uptake of CO2 from the environment into plant cells by photosynthesis.

See NASA Web Site

Loss of Reflective Capability of Ice

Ice and snow both strongly reflect the sun's rays, keeping the earth cool. But as global warming melts glaciers, as well as ice in the Arctic and Antarctic, it exposes land and water. Land and water, being darker surfaces reflect less solar heat back out into space, allowing the atmosphere to absorb more warmth. In fact, ice absorbs less than half the sunlight that falls on it, but ocean surfaces absorb about 90%.[57] As can be expected, more ice and snow will melt.

In a N.Y Times article (Nov. 17, 1999) it was reported that scientists have discovered that from 1993 through 1997 average Arctic sea ice thickness was six feet. This represents a significant reduction in Arctic sea ice from 1958 through 1976 when average thickness measured 10 feet. This means that in less than 30 years, there has been a 40% loss of arctic sea ice. In a Washington Post article (Dec. 3, 1999) it was noted that Arctic sea ice is shrinking at a rate of 14,000 square miles annually, an area larger than Maryland and Delaware combined.

The Antarctic Peninsula has seen an increase in average temperatures of almost 5 degrees Fahrenheit in the last 50 years. Heavy sea ice has been the norm in the Antarctic, but in the 1990's sea ice disintegration has begun, notes Robin Ross, a biological oceanographer with the University of California at Santa Barbara. During the year 1998, the Antarctic displayed a record low in winter sea ice.

Svein Tveitdal, Managing Director of GRID-Arendal which is UNEP's key polar centre said, "The loss of ice in the Arctic could lead to a sudden, acceleration, of global warming. Ice reflects radiation or heat from the sun back into space. Absorbed radiation over snow and ice is three times lower than over land. Reduced ice and snow cover might trigger an accelerated climate change." [88]

Deaths Due to Climate Change

A study, by scientists at the World Health Organization (WHO) and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, determined that 160,000 people die every year from the effects of global warming, from malaria to malnutrition, children in developing nations seemingly the most vulnerable. These numbers could almost double by 2020.

"We estimate that climate change may already be causing in the region of 160,000 deaths...a year," Professor Andrew Haines of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine told a climate change conference in Moscow. Haines said the study suggested climate change could "bring some health benefits, such as lower cold-related mortality and greater crop yields in temperate zones, but these will be greatly outweighed by increased rates of other diseases." Haines mentioned that small shifts in temperatures, for instance, could extend the range of mosquitoes that spread malaria. Water supplies could be contaminated by floods, for instance, which could also wash away crops. See Planet Ark Story

In June, 2003, 1700 people died during a heat wave that hit India, while 35,000 died in the heat wave that slammed Europe the following August.

Decline in Ocean's Plankton

The microscopic plants, phytoplankton, so vital to the survivability of marine species, may be declining in ever warming ocean waters, say scientists.

Watson W. Gregg, a NASA biologist at the Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland says that the greatest loss of phytoplankton has occurred where ocean temperatures have risen most significantly between the early 1980's and the late 1990's. In the North Atlantic summertime sea surface temperatures rose about 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit during that period, Gregg said, while in the North Pacific the ocean's surface temperatures rose about 7/10ths of a degree.(San Francisco Chronicle, David Perlman, Science Editor, October 6, 2003). See Ocean Plant Life Slows Down And Absorbs Less Carbon

Plankton are a major carbon sink in addition to world forests, other green plants, the permafrost, the earth's soil and atmosphere. Plankton take in about half of all the world's CO2, using the carbon for growth, while releasing oxygen during the process of photosythesis. During the past 20 years there has been a stark decline, more than 9%, in primary production of plankton, while in the same period plankton of the North Atlantic has decreased by 7%. Less plankton; less carbon uptake.

Increased Flooding

In a report issued in November, 1999 the Britain's Meteorological Office warned that flooding in Asia and Southeast Asia would increase more than ninefold over the coming decades. Floods are already increasing worldwide, and in the 1990's weather-related catastrophes increased many times (see graph). The year 1998 was the worst on record, with 96 floods in 55 countries.

The IPCC now estimates that temperatures might reach as high as 11 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of this century. Such temperature increases may lead to the flooding of more than 2 million square miles of coastal lands, displacing millions of people in Bangladesh, Egypt, China, Indonesia and very likely many in the U.S., of which 50% of the U.S population lives on or near coastal areas.

Destruction of Ecosystems

Experts anticipate that atmospheric CO2 concentrations will double by 2050 unless countries back swift and deep cuts in emissions from cars, factories, power stations and homes. See UNEP Press Release The World Wildlife Fund states in a report issued on August 31, 2000 that “Global warming under CO2 doubling has the potential to eventually destroy 35% of the world’s existing terrestrial habitats, with no certainty that they will be replaced by equally diverse systems or that similar ecosystems will establish themselves elsewhere." See World Wildlife Fund web site

Work on this page in progress

How U.S Can Achieve a Massive Reduction of Carbon Emissions by 2020

Thru a Mobilization of Renewable Energy
Thru Increasing Energy Efficiency
Achieving Major Reductions in Vehicle Emissions
Thru a Mobilization of Renewable Energy

Writing in the August 24, 2001 issue of the journal "Science," associate professor Mark Jacobson and teaching professor Gilbert Masters, two energy experts from Stanford's Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, show that wind power is an abundant, clean and affordable alternative to coal and other fossil fuels. These researchers note in the article , “Much of the recent U.S. energy debate has focused on increasing coal use. However, the cost of wind energy is now less than that of coal."

"If you want to solve this country's energy problem, the U.S. needs to consider some type of large scale program," said Jacobson. The scientists mention in the article that for every 36,000 to 40,000 turbines, we could displace 10% of U.S. coal at a cost of $61 to $80 billion, including O&M plus initial costs (also the present value of payments to date from the black lung-disease benefits program). This could be supported at no net federal cost by investing 3% to 4% of one year's $2.02 trillion budget in turbines and selling the electricity over 20 years. California (example of a state taking the initiative) could provide 10% of its 1999 electricity by buying 4500 to 5000 turbines at 7.5% to 9.9% of one year's $101 billion budget and selling the electricity over 20 years." Furthermore, they calculate, by building from 214,000 to 236,000 turbines, America could eliminate almost two-thirds of its coal generated electricity, and as of 1999, reduce U.S greenhouse gas emissions to seven percent below 1990 levels, thereby meeting the U.S target goal under the Kyoto Protocol. And it could do all that well ahead of the Kyoto agreement's target deadline period of 2008 - 2012. Coal produces 56% of U.S. electricity. Natural gas, which costs three-and-a-half times more than coal per unit of energy produced, generates 10% of our electricity. About 61 percent of U.S. coal production comes from strip mines.

Sounds like pie in the sky? Take the war production during World War II. On 3 January 1942, President Roosevelt directed a speed up in production to obtain:

(1) 60,000 airplanes in 1942 and 125,000 in 1943 (rate of annual production had reached 20,000 by November1941).
(2) 45,000 tanks in 1942 and 75,000 in 1943.
(3) 20,000 AA guns in 1942 and 35,000 in 1943.
(4) 500,000 machine guns each year.

The direct cost of energy from large wind turbines has dropped to three to four cents per kilowatt-hour, comparable with that from new pulverized coal power plants. Given that "health and environmental costs (of coal) bring the total costs coal-generating electricity to 5.5 cents to 8.3 cents/per kilowatt hour," wind energy is unequivocally less expensive than is coal energy. Jacobson and Masters cite statistics from the Centers for Disease Control showing that coal dust kills some 2,000 U.S. mineworkers each year and has cost taxpayers about $35 billion in monetary and medical benefits to former miners since 1973.

If we are going to solve this country's energy problem and address the threat of climate change seriously, the U.S. needs to undertake the large scale program this article is talking about. The federal government could either go into the energy business for itself (Consider TVA ), or it could foster wind energy through tax incentives that would utilize private investment.

Contacting Dr. Jacobson, EcoBridge has learned that subject wind turbines are the 1.5 megawatt (1 megawatt = 1000 kilowatts) kind, costing $1,000 per kilowatt or $1.5 million per 1.5 megawatt (MW) wind turbine. Actual turbine costs are about 80% of $1.5 million or $1.2 million, the remainder being primarily installation costs, specifically: grid connection (9%), foundation (4%), land (2%), electrical installation (2%), financing (1%), roads (1%), and consulting sessions (1%). If the U.S government produced the electricity, it could recoup its costs in 20 years in revenue from electricity generation, similar to its government-run TVA program. Annual maintenance of individual wind turbines would cost on average 1.5% - 2.5% of the cost of the wind turbine, running approximately about $18,000 to $30,000 annually.

The article states that one of the disadvantages of wind turbines is that they have been linked to the accidental deaths of migratory birds that get caught inside the powerful turbine blades. However, compared to the damage that climate change is causing bird species now and will cause in the future (see The Present Danger of Global Warming - The Danger to Birds ), these turbine blades pose a fraction of the threat. And that can be overcome by placing the wind turbines out of migratory routes.

The authors end the Science article, saying, “By 2000, Germany had 6113 MW of installed turbines, more than the United States (2554 MW) or Denmark (2300 MW). Sweden and Denmark have wind parks offshore, where winds are faster than over land. Clearly, the United States has not maximized its wind potential.” [105] Actual article follows as printed in the August 24, 2001 issue of the journal, Science:

Exploiting Wind Versus Coal
by Mark Z. Jacobson* and Gilbert M. Masters
Taken from the journal 'Science', August 24, 2001 issue

Much of the recent energy debate in the United States has focused on increasing coal use. However, the cost of wind energy is now less than that of coal. Shifting from coal to wind would address health, environmental, and energy problems.

Energy costs from a new coal power plant are low [(3.5 to 4 ¢/kWh) (1) ], but coal-mine dust kills 2000 U.S. miners yearly, and since 1973, the federal black lung-disease benefits program has cost $35 billion (2) . Coal emissions also cause acid deposition, smog, visibility degradation, and global warming; its particles increase asthma, respiratory and cardiovascular disease, and mortality (3) . Health and environmental costs bring the total costs to 5.5 to 8.3 ¢/kWh (4) .

Wind is a clean energy source. We estimate its costs as follows: installing a 1500-kW turbine with a 77-m rotor diameter and design life of 20 years costs $1.5 million (4) (-7), which pays for the turbine (80%), grid connection (9%), foundation (4%), land (2%), electrical installation (2%), financing (1%), roads (1%), and consultancy (1%) (4) (7). Amortizing this over 20 years at 6 to 8% interest gives $131,000 to $153,000 per year. Adding annual operation and maintenance (O&M) (4,6,7) leads to an estimated annual cost of $149,000 to $183,000.

A turbine's annual energy output (kilowatt-hours/year) is about P x 8760 x (0.087V-P/D2) (7), where P is rated power (in kilowatts), V is mean annual wind speed (meters/second) at rotor height ~50 m, D is rotor diameter (meters), and 8760 is hours/year. With a mean annual 50-m wind speed of 7 to 7.5 m/s [which occurs across all of North Dakota, 70% of South Dakota, and large tracts of the West, Great Plains, East, and Northeast (8), the turbine energy produced is 4.7 to 5.2 x 106 kWh/year. Dividing turbine cost by energy produced and adding manufacture and scrapping costs (7) gives the energy cost of a large turbine as 3 to 4 ¢/kWh. Reported costs for large plus small Danish turbines are 4 ¢/kWh (9) . These numbers suggest that the total costs of wind energy are less than those of coal energy.

Under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, the United States proposed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 7% below 1990 levels. As of 1999, the target could be satisfied by replacing 59% of 1.89 x 1012 kWh/year (10) in coal energy with 214,000 to 236,000 turbines, thereby reducing coal-CO2 emissions (499 Tg-C/year) (11) by 59%. At six turbines per square kilometer, the turbines could be spread over 194 x 194 km2 of farmland or ocean.

Alternatively, every 36,000 to 40,000 turbines could displace 10% of U.S. coal at a cost of $61 to $80 billion, including O&M plus initial costs (also the present value of payments to date from the black lung-disease benefits program). This could be supported at no net federal cost by investing 3 to 4% of one year's $2.02 trillion budget in turbines and selling the electricity over 20 years. Similarly, California could provide 10% of its 1999 electricity (2.35 x 1011 kWh/year) (12) by buying 4500 to 5000 turbines at 7.5 to 9.9% of one year's $101 billion budget and selling the electricity over 20 years.

One concern with turbines is harm to birds This might be mitigated by siting turbines out of migration paths. (see The Present Danger of Global Warming - The Danger to Birds )Also, turbine output is unresponsive to electricity demand. This is moot when wind is one of many energy sources. Finally, remote turbines require extra transmission lines. This cost can be offset with turbine mass production. Government promotion would also catalyze private investment.

By 2000, Germany had 6113 MW of installed turbines, more than the United States (2554 MW) or Denmark (2300 MW) (13) . Sweden and Denmark have wind parks offshore, where winds are faster than over land. Clearly, the United States has not maximized its wind potential. More on wind turbines from Mark Jacobsen. Spatial and Temporal Distributions of U.S. Winds

References and Notes
1.Office of Fossil Energy, Department of Energy (2001); see fossil.energy.gov/coal_power/special_rpts/market_systems/market_sys.html
2.National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (2001); see www.cdc.gov/niosh/mngfs.html
3.C. A. Pope, Aerosol. Sci. Technol. 32, 4 (2000).
4.R. Y. Redlinger et al., Wind Energy in the 21st Century (Palgrave, New York, 2001).
5.Enron Corporation (2001); see www.wind.enron.com/PRODUCTS/15/15.html
6.Energy Information Administration (EIA) (2001); see www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/assumption/tbl43.html
7.G. M. Masters, in preparation.
8.Pacific Northwest Laboratory/National Renewable Energy Laboratory (2001); see rredc.nrel.gov/wind/pubs/atlas/maps/chap2/2-01m.html
9.Danish Windturbine Manufacturers Assoc. (2001); see www.windpower.dk/articles/wtmindk.htm
10.EIA (2001); see www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epav2/epav2t1.txt
11.EIA (2001); see www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggrpt/carbon.html and the same but ending ...index.html
12.EIA (2001); see www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/california/statistics.html
13.American Wind Energy Assoc. (2001); www.awea.org
14.Funding was provided by the EPA, NSF, and NASA.

Back to How to Achieve a 60% Reduction in Emissions by 2050

Thru Increasing Energy Efficiency

Energy efficiency and renewable power can meet 60% of the U.S. need for new electricity generating power plants over the next 20 years, according to the Department of Energy’s 2000 report, Scenarios for a Clean Energy Future (SCEF), displacing the need to build 790 of the 1300 plants called for by Vice President Dick Cheney in April, 2001. Besides significant reductions in sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon dioxide, and mercury, which damages nervous system development in children, the measures portrayed in SCEF could produce financial benefits to Americans, including energy savings, that exceed their direct costs. See SCEF Web Site See Report by Natural Resources Defense Council

Back to How to Achieve a 60% Reduction in Emissions by 2050

Achieving Major Reductions in Vehicle Emissions

A reasonable combination of policy measures should be able to reduce U.S. transportation sector CO2 emissions by 20 to 25 percent by 2015 and by 45 to 50 percent by 2030 in comparison to a transportation future without any efforts to control carbon emissions, says a report by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.

"The U.S. is the owner of the world's largest transportation system, and reducing emissions from this system is critical to an effective greenhouse gas reduction strategy," said Eileen Claussen, president of the Pew Center. The PEW Center report, "Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from U.S. Transportation," written by David Greene of Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Andreas Schafer of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, stresses that while policy options are available today, the long lead time needed to turn over the nation's vehicles dictates that policies for the future must be implemented now. (See Environmental News Service Article)

2007 Resolution urging nationwide mobilization of renewable energy resources

RESOLUTION ADVOCATING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL URGE CONGRESSIONAL LEADERS AND OTHER NATIONAL LEADERS TO PROMOTE LEGISLATION THAT WILL BRING ABOUT A NATIONWIDE MOBILIZATION OF RENEWABLE ENERGY RESOURCES WITHIN 5 TO 8 YEARS.

WHEREAS, the American people during World War II rose up against powerful and aggressive enemies and, through a joint effort of government, business and labor, began an extraordinary production of military materiel: tanks, aircraft, ships and munitions. This massive mobilization brought, within five years, a weak US armed forces in 1940, ranked 18th in the world behind Switzerland to become within 5 years the most powerful military in the world; (1) and

WHEREAS, a Pentagon report documents that global warming poses a threat to this country’s national security, from rising seas, “mega-droughts,” famine and the potential for widespread rioting throughout the planet; (2) and

WHEREAS, scientists have determined that there is a relationship between warming ocean water and hurricane intensity, and have shown that there has been an annual average of 18 Category 4 or 5 hurricanes since 1990, almost double the 1970’s rate of 10 per year; (3) and

WHEREAS, the World Wildlife Fund reports that “Global warming under CO2 doubling has the potential to eventually destroy 35% of the world’s existing terrestrial habitats, with no certainty that they will be replaced by equally diverse systems or that similar ecosystems will establish themselves elsewhere.” (4) Biologists Chris Thomas and Lee Hannah report that climate change could lead to mass extinction and the loss of over a million species, while Terry Root, Stanford biologist states, “We are sitting at the edge of a mass extinction” and renowned paleontologist, Richard Leakey affirms, “I think we may well be looking at a mass extinction[;]”(5) and

WHEREAS, the World Conservation Union (IUCN) reports that “Up to 50% of the world’s coral reefs, home to 25% of all marine species, may be lost within the next 40 years unless urgent measures are taken to protect them against the paramount threat of climate change[; ]” (6) and

WHEREAS, positive feedbacks could accelerate temperature increases through a loss of melting ice in the Arctic, Antarctic and Greenland and the consequential loss of capacity to reflect heat back into space (7) and through the loss of CO2 consuming phytoplankton (8). Positive feedbacks could also hasten an increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide and more warming from thawing permafrost (9) and tundra biome (10) and from mounting forest fires; (11) and

WHEREAS, despite efforts to reduce carbon emissions, the global growth rate in CO2 was 3.2% from 2000 to 2005 compared to 0.8% in the previous 10 years, 1990 to 1999, while annual carbon emissions has grown from 6.4 billion tons in 2000 to 7.6 billion tons in 2005; (12) and

WHEREAS, the United Kingdom’s chief economist, Lord Nicholas Stern states that strong action costing about 1% of global Gross Domestic Product (GDP) could be sufficient to ward off the worst climate change impacts that could cost from 5% to 20% global GDP annually, “now and forever[;]” (13) and

WHEREAS, solutions now exist to curb greenhouse emissions sharply, using state and federal tax credits for purchases of a range of energy efficient products and equipment from compact fluorescent light bulbs to low energy use refrigerators to home solar installations to hybrid vehicles, and by employing state and federal subsidies for wind turbines and other alternative energy resources; and

WHEREAS, the Energy Star program states that “if every American home replaced just one light bulb with a (compact fluorescent light bulb), we would save enough energy to light more than 2.5 million homes for a year and prevent greenhouse gases equivalent to the emissions of nearly 800,000 cars[;]” (14) and

WHEREAS, most of the 111 million households in the US (15) are not using compact fluorescent light bulbs (16). The cost of ten 25 watt compact fluorescent bulbs (the equivalent of 100-watt incandescent light bulb) for each household in the US would be approximately $6 billion, or 1/5th of 1percent of the US 2007 budget. Howard Geller, former chairman of the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy says replacing all US households’ incandescent light bulbs with compact fluorescent bulbs, “… alone could halt the growth in carbon dioxide emissions from the United States, given recent growth rates.” (17) and

WHEREAS, without an informed American public, action on climate change will be relatively slow and will result in economic, social and environmental consequences for current generations, but especially severe on future generations. A Pew Research poll taken June 13, 2006 shows that the American people are relatively unconcerned about climate change, especially when compared to other major countries, reflecting a lack of exposure to information pertaining to the degree of severity of climate change impacts on American health, property, agriculture, life style, economy, and environment; (18) and

WHEREAS, the United States, during World War II, provided a tremendous array of armament. “Between 1940 and 1945, the US contributed nearly 300,000 warplanes to the Allied cause. American factories produced more than two million trucks, 107,351 tanks 87,620 warships and 5,475 cargo ships….” All within a span of 5 years the US status changed from little more than a spectator of Hitler’s aggression to become the “Arsenal for Democracy[;]”(19) therefore be it

RESOLVED, that the City Council urge those national leaders noted below to work towards a nationwide mobilization of renewable energy resources, and build a coalition of government, industry and labor to promote the development of a wind turbine industry, second to none in domestic use of and export of such technology, and to make the US a model nation in reducing emissions, by targeting a 50% reduction in US carbon emissions from electricity production within 5 years and 75% reduction within 8 years, and promoting the same emissions-reduction targets worldwide; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED that the US leaders noted below be urged to promote legislation that will provide 10 free compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs to each of the approximately 111 million households in the US, at a cost of about $6 billion, and to end all sales of incandescent light bulbs (excepting specified bulbs having no equivalent CFL bulb being manufactured) within two years. To further reduce emissions and to promote goodwill around the world, consideration should be given to the US providing free CFL bulbs to the citizens of developing countries; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, to urge that the City Council’s representatives in Congress and the state legislature to establish significant tax credits for purchases of a range of energy-efficient equipment from compact fluorescent light bulbs and motion sensor switches, to home solar installations to hybrid vehicles; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council urge our national leaders to promote the development of a federally funded informational program to, uncompromisingly and aggressively, inform the American people on all threats of climate change, especially those dangers directly affecting this country, through television, radio and internet media; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk of the City Council forward a copy of this resolution to all representatives of the City in the state legislature and to the following political leaders: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senators Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, John McCain, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Daniel Inouye, Jeff Bingaman, Harry Reid, former Senators Al Gore, John Edwards, Members of Congress Henry Waxman, Dennis Kucinich, Tom Lantos, John Dingell, Bart Gordon, James Oberstar, former President William Clinton, former New York City Mayor, Rudolph Giuliani and Governor Mitt Romney.

(1) No Ordinary Time,book by Doris Kearns Goodwin. p.23, winner of Pulitzer Prize.
(2) The 2003 Pentagon report, commissioned by Pentagon defense adviser Andrew Marshall , authored by Peter Schwartz, CIA consultant and former head of planning at Royal Dutch/Shell Group, and Doug Randall of the California-based Global Business Network (GBN). Environment News Service, http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/feb2004/2004-02-23-09.asp#anchor1
(3) Researchers, Peter Webster and Greg Holland of National Center for Atmospheric Research, Judith Terry (Georgia Tech) and Hai-Ru Chang (Georgia Tech) http://www.ucar.edu/news/releases/2005/hurricanestudy.shtml
(4) World Wildlife Fund report, Global Warming and Terrestrial Biodiversity Decline by Jay R. Malcolm
Faculty of Forestry, University of Toronto and Adam Markham Clean Air-Cool Planet, 100 Market Street,
Suite 204, Portsmouth, NH 03801, August 31, 2000 http://assets.panda.org/downloads/speedkills_c6s8.pdf
www.panda.org/resources/publications/climate/speedkills/speedkills-wo.pdf
(5) Climate change threatens a million species with extinction, Chris Thomas and Lee Hannah, http://www.leeds.ac.uk/media/current/extinction.htm; Terry Root quotation: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/01/02/MN155029.DTL; Richard Leaky quote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4522663.stm More authors and studies: http://www.ecobridge.org/content/g_tht.htm#extinction .
(6) IUCN October 25, 2005 News Release,
http://www.iucn.org/en/news/archive/2005/10/pr_mpa_coral_reefs_climate_change.pdf
(7) Ted Scambos, researcher with the National Snow and Ice Data Center, part of the University of Colorado-based Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES), http://nsidc.org/news/press/20021207_seaice.html
(8) Report on nine years of NASA satellite data, Nature, December 7, 2006, by UC Santa Barbara professor Dave Siegel, NASA scientist, Gene Carl Feldman, see article by Jane Kay, http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/12/07/MNG1JMQUL01.DTL
(9) Permafrost reference see http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/06/060615-global-warming.html & http://www.pbs.org/saf/1404/resources/transcript.htm & http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/06/16/MNGKKJFD5M1.DTL & http://www.ucar.edu/news/releases/2005/permafrost.shtml
(10) Tundra reference see http://www.pbs.org/saf/1404/resources/transcript.htm , http://www.usgcrp.gov/usgcrp/Library/nationalassessment/10Alaska.pdf
(11) Forest Fires reference see study by Westerling, Hidalgo, Cayan & Swetnam in Science Journal, August 18, 2006, http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/rapidpdf/1128834.pdf
(12) Global Carbon Project. "On our current path, we will find it extremely difficult to rein in carbon emissions enough to stabilise the atmospheric CO2 concentration at 450 ppm and even 550 ppm will be a challenge," said Dr Josep Canadell, Executive Director of the Global Carbon Project. http://www.essp.org/en/media/press-releases/061110-press-releas-global-carbon.html; 2000 figure of 6.4 billion tons of carbon from WorldWatch Institute’s Vital Signs 2005 publication; 2005 figure of 7.6 billion tons from Earth Policy Institute web site: http://www.earth-policy.org/Indicators/CO2/2006_data.htm#fig1
(13) STERN REVIEW: The Economics of Climate Change, http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/independent_reviews/stern_review_economics_climate_change/sternreview_index.cfm http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/999/76/CLOSED_SHORT_executive_summary.pdf
(14) Energy Star web site http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=cfls.pr_cfls
(15) US Census Bureau, http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/NPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-qr_name=ACS_2005_EST_G00_NP01&-ds_name=&-redoLog=false
(16) Energy Information Administration, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/lighting/chap2.html American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE)
(17) Howard Geller, former chairman of American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) http://www.aceee.org/press/op-eds/op-ed1.htm . Also see Earth Policy Institute data through 2005, http://www.earth-policy.org/Indicators/CO2/2006_data2.htm
(18) Pew Research Center poll, June 13, 2006, http://pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/252.pdf#search=%22global%20warming%22 p.6
(19) No Ordinary Time, book by Doris Kearns Goodwin, “Between 1940 and 1945, the US contributed nearly 300,000 warplanes….” p. 608