The Climate Change Lobby

This article explains the proliferation of lobbyists on climate change in the United States (US) and what are their agendas. According to the author, the lobbying efforts are responding to opportunities presented by the following predicted government actions: "Specifically, the president asked Congress to send him legislation 'that places a market-placed cap on carbon pollution.' The new president has pledged to set annual targets that put the nation on course to an 80 percent reduction (from 1990 levels) in fossil fuel emissions by 2050. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she plans a floor vote on climate change before December, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said late last week that he would attempt to bring a global warming bill to the Senate floor by summer’s end."

Further, "A Center for Public Integrity analysis of Senate lobbying disclosure forms shows that more than 770 companies and interest groups hired an estimated 2,340 lobbyists to influence federal policy on climate change in the past year [2008], as the issue gathered momentum and came to a vote on Capitol Hill. That's an increase of more than 300 percent in the number of lobbyists on climate change in just five years, and means that Washington can now boast more than four climate lobbyists for every member of Congress." The Center's estimate is that expenditures on climate change lobbying were more than US$90 million.

The group of lobbyists, who include ex-members of the US Congress, represent a roster of interests seeking to influence the climate change issue. The roster is growing, and its make-up is changing as well. In 2003, the group included a range of interests led by power companies with nine environmental groups opposing them. In 2009, US Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers are leading voices against climate action, while other industry coalitions support action on greenhouse gasses; members of the finance sector are lobbying for legislation to allow for buying and selling emissions permits (such as carbon credits); and cities, public transit agencies, universities, and others are looking for shares of revenue from this new financial possibility.

Some scientists fear that the intensifying of lobbying will cause delays, as stated here: "The danger is that special interests will dilute and torque government policies, causing the climate to pass tipping points, with grave consequences for all life on the planet." Previous legislative opportunities, including ratification of the Kyoto protocol, have met with insufficient support. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chair Barbara Boxer called for a hearing to begin at the end of February 2009 to clarify the issues.

The article focuses on strong lobbying organisations, such as the clean coal industry lobby, representing mining firms, coal-hauling railroads, and coal-burning power companies, which promotes coal power with restricted emissions as a source of electricity. Also, the US Chamber of Commerce "ran ads featuring energy-starved Americans cooking eggs over candles and jogging to work on auto-free streets." Some companies do not endorse this "bleak scenario" approach because they want to provide "bridge" technologies for cleaner use of coal and make the equipment for low- or no-carbon alternatives: natural gas, wind, and nuclear. They join financial players who would serve as brokers, project developers, financiers, verifiers, and consultants in an emissions "permit" market. "Companies such as Point Carbon provide carbon market analysis and online emission trading services. One of the finance and marketing industry's main goals is to push for a climate policy that allows companies to meet their carbon reduction goals with the help of "offsets" - investments in greenhouse-gas reducing projects such as wind farms." Concerns about "offsets" include the difficulty in regulating them so that greenhouse gas emissions are actually reduced. There is also a public image issue if the financial sector, now blamed by some for the weakened US economy, becomes the broker for energy and energy credits. Further, some lobbyists are also asking for job protection in industries of high energy consumption. Others lobby for growth in the alternative energy sector as an offset for job loss.

The "Cap and Trade" system which includes limiting emissions and allowing trading of energy consumption credits is criticised for the possible generation of "special interest millionaires". A suggested substitute programme is a tax on fossil fuels at the source, remitted as a dividend to citizens coping with higher energy costs. This, advocates claim, would reduce consumption. However, lobbyists are arguing against legislation that would run contrary to the economic stimulus now being addressed. The current administration has included US$60 billion for renewable energy, technology research, and a massive energy efficiency programme in its economic stimulus package. President Obama's stated goals are an 80 percent reduction in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, and returning emissions to their 1990 levels by 2020. The article concludes that lobbyists are "reading the tea leaves" to predict the energy legislation future of the US.

Editor's notes:

• Center staff writer Matthew Lewis led the research, and David Donald, the Center's data editor, completed the analysis.
• There are 7 stories that are part of the Center's Climate Change Lobby project, including a climate lobby database searchable by company/organisation, lobbyist, sector, and time frame. Click here for more information.
• Click here to learn more about the project's methodology, including details about how the data was retrieved and analysed.