Heating up to Cool the Planet

By Jane Holtz Kay

As Maine goes against global warming, so might go the nation.

With summer heating up after a long, weird winter and a soggy spring, the Pine Tree state's first climate-change law to cut down CO2 emissions is a landmark to avert planetary meltdown.

At the same time, three New England states are taking legal action to reduce carbon dioxide -- the primary greenhouse gas that causes global warming. The precedent-setting suit by the attorneys general of Massachusetts, Connecticut and Maine demands that the administrator of the EPA regulate CO2 emissions under the Clean Air Act.

While the administration's belligerent non-believers dismiss The Kyoto Protocol, the New England states' bold lawsuit argues that the EPA has an obligation to regulate emissions to "protect the public from global warming pollution."

Now.

"It's becoming increasingly obvious not only that global warming is a huge problem but that we cannot rely on the federal government to do the right thing," says James Milkey, Chief of the Environmental Protection Division of the Massachusetts Attorney General's Office one steamy summer afternoon. Within 60 days from their June motion, they'll know if they can cut that primary greenhouse gas (ghg).

The Maine laws, and the multi-state litigation, are bold steps to end-run the recalcitrant administration and stop that other acronym: "WMD" -- Weather of Mass Destruction. This deadly WMD is the carbon-dioxide-induced weather pattern that breeds soaring temperatures, a capricious climate, rising sea levels --and disastrous consequences for the planet.

With the Clean Air Act up for renewal such labors gather steam on many fronts. While President Bush describes the diminished Clean Air Act as "Clear Skies," the Sierra Club's conservation organizer Jeremy Marin translates that phrase to "Clear Lies."

Simultaneously, as the White House weakens pollution standards, scratches the mention of "global warming" from the clean air act, dismisses CO2 controls, and distorts science in misleading recommendations, activists, politicians and scientists are reacting.

Environmentalists from the National Wildlife Federation estimate an increase of 13 percent in emissions in the next decade if this new act goes through while a bi-partisan group of senators has joined the fray, insisting that the cost of reducing CO2 is negligible.

Public agencies have already acted across the country, struggling to diminish greenhouse gasses with cleaner power, less-polluting smokestacks and a low-fuel fleet. Environmental organizations like Greenpeace and the Public Interest Research Groups (PIRG) have staged protests. They have struggled to pass the Kyoto Protocol abroad and worked to reduce discharges at home to compensate for U.S. failures on the world stage.

In the face of bizarre weather, melting ice caps, and warnings from respected scientists, a new cadre of citizens has joined ranks, too. A recent University of Oregon survey, funded by the National Science Foundation, found that more than 80 percent of Americans believe we should reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Abroad, Europeans have threatened to take this nation (whose four percent of the world's population spews out 25 percent of its carbon dioxide) before the World Trade Organization.

"The EPA has twice found that carbon dioxide contributes to global warming," says the Sierra' Club's Marin, noting predictions that New Englanders will suffer the temperatures of North Carolina in 50 or 60 years if carbon dioxide goes unregulated. "Why isn't the EPA regulating carbon dioxide on its own?" he asks.

The answer is clear to anyone watching the besotted president's romance with the oil and fossil fuel industries. Beyond its blind-eye to global warming, the administration's new clean air act is dirtier and more dangerous than before. The version on the table lets industry smog the skies by permitting 50 percent more pollution from soot-forming sulfur dioxide and three times the toxic mercury from coal-fired power plants.

Whether the tri-state legal advocates will succeed in court is uncertain. Whether the funds and facilitators of Maine's legislation will enforce their greenhouse gas-cleaning and make it a standard-bearer for other states to cap emissions, remains to be seen. Either way, while our heads of state dally and deny, these green standard-bearers stir public awareness.

The planet stews and the waters rise, but some intrepid activists and attorneys have made a brave attempt to turn the tide.

This article appeared at TomPaine.com on July 21, 2003.

Back to Articles Index