Sep 30 2009
Center for Biological Diversity
We have good news, bad news, and more work to do on the Senate version of the climate bill just introduced today.
Thanks to you, we won a key victory: The Senate bill maintains the authority of the EPA to curb greenhouse gas pollution under the Clean Air Act. One of our most successful environmental laws, the Act is safe for now, and you helped make that happen by speaking up. While Big Coal, Oil, and Gas and opponents in the Senate will undoubtedly continue their attacks on the Act, with your help we will work to ensure that this vital safety net for reducing greenhouse pollution is retained.
But the crisis is still urgent. While the Senate bill recognizes the absolute necessity of stronger emissions reduction targets, the targets in the Senate bill — like those in the House bill — are tragically inadequate. This legislation would not save the polar bear and hundreds of other species and ecosystems because it simply does not go far enough fast enough.
The scientific consensus is clear: We must reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide to no more than 350 parts per million. Leading climate scientists have called for reductions of approximately 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, and yet this bill aims to deliver only a 20-percent reduction from 2005 levels by then. These cuts, while a start, simply will not stop runaway global warming. Not by a long shot.
Please take one minute today to ask your Senator to work to strengthen the bill’s emissions reduction targets and to oppose all future efforts to roll back the Clean Air Act.
Click here to find out more and take action.
Sample letter:
Subject: Stronger Emissions Reductions Targets Needed in Senate Climate Bill
We need a climate bill that sets strong, science-based emissions reduction targets and that builds upon the successful existing tools of the Clean Air Act, our strongest and best tool for reducing greenhouse pollution.
The scientific consensus is clear: Leading climate scientists have called for greenhouse gas emissions reductions to 350 CO2 ppm, or approximately 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 to avoid climate catastrophe. Yet the Senate version of the bill introduced today aims to deliver only a 20-percent cut from 2005 levels by 2020. We need strong, science-based emissions reduction targets — now.
Consequences of a mere 2-degree Celsius temperature increase include the displacement of millions of coastal residents due to sea level rise, irreversible loss of entire ecosystems, loss of agricultural yields, increased water stress for billions of people, and the triggering of multiple climactic “tipping points” such as complete loss of summer Arctic sea ice and the irreversible melting of the Greenland ice sheet.
The United Nations’ top climate scientist, Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, personally endorsed a 350-ppm target.
A U.N. project to quantify the financial costs of climate change on nature concluded that current climate targets are not enough to save the world’s coral reefs. “Stabilising at anything more than about 350 ppm will lead to further destruction…” said Alex Rogers, of London’s Institute of Zoology.
According to the International Panel on Climate Change, the world’s leading scientific authority on the climate crisis, a pathway to even 450 ppm requires the United States to reduce emissions by 25-40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020. To reach a level of atmospheric CO2 of 350 ppm, greenhouse gas emissions from the United States and other developed countries should be reduced by 40-45 percent below 1990 levels by 2020.
Please work to ensure that the vital safety net of the Clean Air Act to reduce greenhouse emissions is retained by opposing all efforts to roll back our nation’s most successful environmental law.
And please support dramatically strengthening the emissions reduction targets in the Senate climate bill. While no doubt an ambitious goal, failing to get to 350 ppm, which can be achieved by reducing emissions by 40-45 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, is not an option.
