COVERITLIVE.COM

12:20

Fred Barbash-Moderator - Adele Morris is our guest today, talking about the Waxman-Markey bill. She will join us shortly. You are welcome to submit questions in advance.

Adele is a Fellow and Deputy Director for Climate and Energy Economics at The Brookings Institution. Her expertise and interests include the economics of policies related to climate change, energy, natural resources, and public finance. She joined Brookings in July 2008 from the Joint Economic Committee (JEC) of the U.S. Congress, where she spent a year as a Senior Economist covering energy and climate issues. Before the JEC, Adele served nine years with the U.S. Treasury Department as its chief natural resource economist, working on climate, energy, agriculture, and radio spectrum issues. On assignment to the U.S. Department of State in 2000, she was the lead U.S. negotiator on land use and forestry issues in the international climate change treaty process. Prior to joining the Treasury, she served as the Senior Economist for environmental affairs at the President’s Council of Economic Advisers during the development of the Kyoto Protocol. She began her career at the Office of Management and Budget, where she conducted regulatory oversight of agriculture and natural resource agencies. She holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Princeton University, an M.S. in Mathematics from the University of Utah, and a B.A. from Rice University.

12:30

Fred Barbash-Moderator - Welcome Adele. And welcome readers. We'll take the first question now.

12:30

[Comment From Erin]
What are some of the trade offs between energy independence and climate protection?

12:30

Adele Morris - About 98% of the fuels used in U.S. electricity production are domestic, or at least North American. It’s misleading to link controlling greenhouse emissions from electricity to achieving meaningful energy independence. Oil, and transport fuels more specifically, raise the real energy security concerns. At least one domestic alternative to oil, coal-to-liquids, is bad for the climate, worse than oil. Better choices include electric vehicles and certain biofuels.

12:31

[Comment From Alvaro (Detroit)]
Even with a Democratic majority in the House and the full backing of the White House, the climate change bill barely passed. With all the hurdles in the Senate, what are the chances that somthing substative is actually passed?

12:32

Adele Morris -

I hope and expect a version of the bill will succeed in the Senate. It’s likely to be a bit different than the House version. I think it will be substantive, but it might offer more cost containment than the House version.

12:32

[Comment From Fred]
I’ve read stories that quote scientists – like James Lovelock - saying it’s just too late to stop climate change. Should we be trying to adapt our technology instead?

12:33

Adele Morris -

It’s not either/or. It’s both/and. Given the lags in the climate system, we will need to adapt to a changed climate even if we stopped emissions tomorrow. Adaptation is perhaps most critical in very poor countries whose populations are already vulnerable to adverse weather. We also need to control the risk of disrupting the climate by cost effectively reducing emissions – the sooner the better. This involves both making emitting more costly with a tax or cap and trade program and making not emitting cheaper through technology research.

12:33

[Comment From Karl Knapstein]
Ms. Morris, I feel "climate change" and "global warming" muddle the issue and we should focus our rhetoric towards National Security. Your thoughts?

12:34

Adele Morris - I think protecting the environment is a valid goal in and of itself. It may overlap with some national security concerns, such as energy security or the concern about climate refugees, but the climate needs protecting for ecological reasons that simply aren't national security issues.

Page 1 Next >