Kaine favors stronger efforts to address climate change

Posted to: Environment News Virginia

RICHMOND

Gov. Timothy M. Kaine on Thursday told his Commission on Climate Change that he welcomes its recommendation for cuts in greenhouse gas emissions that are deeper than what he originally proposed as part of Virginia's plans to combat global warming.

Speaking to the 30-member commission as it debated the details of its final report, due next week, Kaine said he intends to carry out as many of the panel's recommendations "as we reasonably can."

The governor did not offer a specific agenda but said he would adopt measures against global warming through the state budget process, in legislation to be introduced next year, and through executive orders.

Kaine, a Democrat entering his final year in office, said 2009 will see a focus on energy and environmental issues through various initiatives that he collectively called "Renew Virginia."

Despite a $2.5 billion deficit that could go higher, the governor said he intends to increase funding for environmental programs next year. He expressed hope that the administration of President-elect Barack Obama, as part of national stimulus package, will provide federal money for infrastructure projects in Virginia such as new rail lines and more public transit.

In addition to creating jobs and minimizing traffic congestion, Kaine said, the projects also would reduce air pollution and emissions of carbon dioxide that contribute to global warming.

The Governor's Commission on Climate Change, after meeting for nearly a year, is recommending that Virginia cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent by 2020 and 80 percent by 2050.

When Kaine formed the panel last year, he asked members to find ways to reduce those emissions by 30 percent by 2025.

"Going further makes a lot of sense," Kaine said Thursday.

Environmental groups praised the commission's bolder recommendation for emission cuts but took umbrage that it did not endorse mandatory requirements that utilities produce electricity with a certain percentage of renewable energy sources, such as solar, wind and geothermal.

The commission, instead, is suggesting the state offer incentives for utilities to generate 15 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2025. It would be a voluntary target, without penalties for missing the mark.

"Unfortunately, in the absence of a mandatory standard for renewable energy production, it will remain difficult for Virginia to reach the greenhouse gas emission reductions the commission recognizes are needed," said J.R. Tolbert, field organizer for Environment Virginia, an advocacy group.

Among its more than 100 recommendations, the commission also is urging the state to mandate energy efficiencies and conservation so Virginians use 19 percent less electricity in 2025, compared with 2006.

The panel - consisting of scientists, government officials, politicians, engineers, industry executives, utility leaders and environmentalists - expresses support for developing more nuclear power in Virginia.

It also embraces greener building codes in all counties, cities and towns, and suggests that, in phases, all new commercial offices be required to be constructed with green architecture and energy savings.

Kaine has been criticized by environmental groups for backing a large, new coal-fired power plant in Southwest Virginia - a project sponsored by Dominion Virginia Power and expected to emit tons of carbon emissions.

He faced more questions about the plant Thursday.

"Coal is going to be part of the equation," Kaine told reporters. His approach, he said, is to invest in clean-coal technology and shut down older, dirtier coal-fired plants.

With the Wise County plant in Southwest Virginia, Dominion is proposing strict limits on mercury and other pollutants and has agreed to switch an older plant in the mountainous region to natural gas, Kaine said.

The climate commission had tried to pass a policy statement that no new coal-fired power plants should be built in Virginia until technology exists to capture carbon emissions. That technology, called carbon sequestration, is at least 12 years away.

The policy was defeated by one vote.

Scott Harper, (757) 446-2340, scott.harper@pilotonline.com

COMMENTS ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here; comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its websites. Users must follow agreed-upon rules: Be civil, be clean, be on topic; don't attack private individuals, other users or classes of people. Read the full rules here.
- Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the report violation link below it.

DSWX makes no sense

Very idiotic comments. Obviously it is YOU that has not studied "science". If you had any idea about the history of weather patterns, you'd see that the earth in fact has gone through MANY cooling and warming periods with absolutely NO impact by man.

Did you know that by February of 1872, many upper Midwestern states had seen NO snow for that entire winter?

Did you know that the ice age ended before man could have any impact?

Did you know the average temperature in the 1930's was warmer than the past 11 years?

Did you ever hear of the "little ice age" which lasted for hundreds of years and ended over 100 years ago?

The lies you're spewing about the infalibility of these scientists and that it passed some "peer review" is just silly. And for those that think scientists and others don't have millions and billions of dollars to make on cap and trade and other craziness that will destroy our economy need to wake up from your dream.

Weather and climate have changed for ages and will CONTINUE to change for ages. If man has caused all the so called "global warming" (you liberal idiots have only RECENTLY changed your stance to "climate change" when you saw the earth's tem

Science

Scientists have no financial stake in global warming (except those few skeptics receiving funding from the oil companies). Whether the earth was cooling or warming or whether it was caused by humans or sunspots or something else, scientists would receive government funding to research it.

Caspar: Did you read the article you cited? "The relatively chilly temperatures compared with recent years are not evidence that global warming is slowing however, say climate scientists at the Met Office. 'Absolutely not,' said Dr. Peter Stott."

Tooth Man...

I would like to know where you get your information from???

Global Warming Causes Cold Winters

Looks like the British scientists are saying that 2008 will be the coldest year in a decade. Must be all that Global Warming causing that, heh?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/dec/05/climate-change-weather

The limits of the Governor's power

The total human contribution to the Greenhouse Effect is less than 1% (more than 70% is water vapor alone) and Virginia's contribution would make a difference of somewhere between 0.01% and 0.001%.

So, why doesn't Kaine just issue an executive order dimming the Sun by about 0.5%. It would accomplish just as much and wouldn't cost us $Billions in lost wages.

While he's at it, he could also issue an order decreasing the force of gravity by 20% and then I wouldn't need to go on a diet.

Global Warming

This is a barefaced Tax hustle!

The Scientists that support this nonsense are getting a payoff in the form of government Grants for funding of this specious junk science.

Millions of years before Humans were on the Earth, the seasons changed and there were cooling spells and warming spells. (If they (scientists) don't support the government’s position on Global warming, they do not get the government grants!)

GW was certainly not caused by humans since there were none on the face of the Earth at that time.

Actually the symbiotic relationship between humans and plants is unique in that we breathe in oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide which is plant food and plants take in Carbon dioxide and exude oxygen which is good for Humans.

Not that this guy ever convinced me that he was the best guy for the position and now he confirms it with this nonsense.

Science

Global warming is occurring and human activity is a primary contributor. That conclusion is supported by broad consensus of the world’s scientists, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, National Academy of Sciences, American Meteorological Society, American Geophysical Union, American Association for the Advancement of Science, NASA, and the EPA. You can either rely on the overwhelming scientific evidence or the insults of these anonymous comments.

Really People...

It is not "Global Warming" it is "Climate Change”, the issue is far broader then just "warming". Sure in areas where it is winter we are seeing record lows but in summer areas we are seeing record highs... We are seeing an increase in natural disasters, polar ice caps and sea ice melting and other "changes". Get your heads out of the sand and quit with your right wing, conservative spin. Even if there is no "Climate Change", which I can admit is possible since it is only a theory, what is wrong with doing something good for the environment?

Global warming science

The gross scientific ignorance reflected in the comments here regarding global warming is nothing less than astounding. And what a reflection of the lack of scientific education and understanding of the scientific method. Global warming is unequivocal. The science is strongly peer-reviewed (the foundation of all legitimate science). It is also basic physics. None of the warming of the past 30+ years can be explained simply by natural causes. Not solar variation, not sunspots, not cosmic rays, not natural cycles. Nada. It is only when anthropogenic sources of greenhouse gases are considered can the warming be explained. Read the peer-reviewed science instead of regurgitating absurd anti-science lies that someone told you. And no, there has not been global warming on Mars or Jupiter either; that is just another disingenuous lie. Finally, we are talking about *global* *climate* change, not weather. The ridiculous comments regarding how cold it was yesterday in any city or country is absolutely irrelevant and a complete non-sequitor. Learn the fundamental difference between "climate" and "weather" before showing everyone that you do not know what you are talking about.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Please note: Threaded comments work best if you view the oldest comments first.

More articles from: Environment rss feed    News rss feed   


Toolbox


Partners

special features