The Environment

Bill Clinton: "Green" economy offers great rewards

SEATTLE (Reuters) - The shift to a green economy is the biggest economic opportunity facing the United States since the military buildup to World War Two, former President Bill Clinton said on Thursday.

Addressing the U.S. Conference of Mayors' Climate Protection Summit, Clinton said initiatives to combat global warming, such as the retrofit of old buildings and switching to more fuel-efficient cars, would create jobs and boost wages.

"In my view for the United States, it is the greatest economic opportunity we've had since we mobilized for World War Two," Clinton said. "If we do it right, it will produce job gains and income gains substantially greater than the 1990s."

Clinton spoke to a group of U.S. mayors who have agreed to meet the goals of the Kyoto Protocol, the international agreement for fighting climate change.

President George W. Bush rejected Kyoto and its mandatory emissions caps in 2001, but more than 700 cities representing 75 million Americans have agreed to cut their heat-trapping gas emissions 7 percent from 1990 levels by 2012.

Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels has spearheaded the movement.

During the speech, the former president said the Clinton Climate Initiative would extend its purchasing consortium of energy-efficient and clean-energy products to 1,100 U.S. cities to get volume discounts for items like green vehicles and alternative energy technologies.

The purchasing consortium was set up for a group of some of the world's 40 largest cities, including New York and London.

Cities account for 2 percent of the world's landmass, but produce 75 percent of the world's carbon emissions, according to Clinton.

Most scientists link greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide emitted from the burning of fossil fuels, to global warming that could lead to heat waves, stronger storms and flooding from rising sea levels.

Bush rejected the Kyoto plan, saying it will cost U.S. jobs and that it unfairly burdened rich countries while exempting developing countries like China and India.

Clinton rejected the notion, saying America must prove to China, India and other developing nations that addressing the climate change problem will stimulate their economies.

Al Gore, Clinton's vice president, shared this year's Nobel Peace Prize with the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for raising awareness of global warming.

Don't let Congress gut one of America's bedrock environmental laws

The National Environmental Policy Act is a landmark environmental law that has protected America's natural heritage for more than 30 years. NEPA requires federal agencies to study and disclose the environmental effects of their actions and to review major projects for potential environmental and public health impacts. The law also ensures that the public is included in decisions concerning proposed federal projects. When enforced, NEPA protects local communities and promotes sound, inclusive decisionmaking.

While many agree that the act could work better, the Bush administration and some members of Congress are using the pretense of "improving and updating" the law to try to undermine its core provisions. By chipping away at NEPA, the Bush administration would have even greater ability to open up America's last remaining wildlands to rampant energy development, logging and other destructive activities.

As part of the effort to undercut NEPA, a House Resources Committee task force issued a draft report late last year -- without input from Democratic task force members -- calling for fundamental changes to the law that could easily be used as a springboard for anti-NEPA legislation this spring. Specifically, the report recommends restricting the public's ability to participate in and challenge an agency's decisionmaking process, and requiring that "reasonable alternatives" to federal projects be supported by sizable studies. Both of these provisions would tilt the scale in favor of industry over the American public.

The task force is accepting comments on its draft report until February 6th.

== What to do ==
Send a message, before the February 6th comment deadline, showing your support for NEPA and urging the task force to reconsider the draft report's recommendations.

== Contact information ==
You can send an official comment to the NEPA Task Force by clicking here. Or use the contact information and sample letter below to send your own message.

NEPA Draft Report Comments
c/o NEPA Task Force
House Resources Committee
1324 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Email: nepataskforce@mail.house.gov
Fax: 202-225-5929

== Sample letter ==

Subject: Don't weaken NEPA

Dear NEPA Task Force Members,

I am very concerned that the recommendations made by the National Environmental Policy Act Task Force would weaken NEPA in profound and fundamental ways. NEPA is the best tool Americans have to learn how federal projects may affect them. It also is the best tool the federal government has to examine proposed projects and obtain public input. By making sure that the public is informed and that alternatives are considered, NEPA has stopped some unwise and harmful projects and made countless projects better.

Even though the draft report acknowledges that public participation is fundamental to NEPA's success, the task force has made several recommendations that would dramatically limit public involvement in the NEPA process. Specifically the recommendations would 1) add mandatory timelines for the completion of NEPA documentation and only allow for occasional extensions; 2) place significant restrictions on a citizen's ability to participate in the public process and to challenge an agency's decisionmaking; and 3) require that "reasonable alternatives," including those proposed by individual citizens or community groups, be supported by "feasibility and engineering studies," which could require significant technical and financial resources.

I urge you to reject any recommendations to amend NEPA and embark on drastic regulatory changes that would reduce public participation. Thoughtful analysis and review of NEPA have long recognized a need, however, to improve NEPA implementation. Requiring monitoring of project impacts, improving management oversight and providing agency staff with adequate training and resources are all good ideas that should be considered and would not require amending NEPA or its regulations.

I strongly urge the task force to reconsider its recommendations.

Sincerely,

[Your name and address]