Complete list of press releases

Contact:
Korinna Horta, Environmental Defense, khorta@environmentaldefense.org, (001)202.572.3325
Samuel Nguiffo, Center for Environment and Development, Cameroon (011)237.22 95 24
Delphine Djiraibe, Chadian Association for the Promotion and Defense of Human Rights, Chad, (011)235.299509

(Washington, DC – April 23, 2007)  In the wake of the recent Wolfowitz saga at the World Bank, scientists and environmentalists recently released a “Project Non-Completion Report” that highlights substantial flaws in the World Bank’s “Project Implementation Completion Report” (ICR) for the Chad-Cameroon Oil and Pipeline Project. The report also calls for the World Bank to accept responsibility for their role in the project and includes recommendations to immediately address the outstanding environmental, livelihood and compensation problems resulting from the project.

“The World Bank should be held accountable and must properly address the failure to deliver poverty reduction and protection of indigenous peoples and the environment in the Chad-Cameroon project,” said Archbishop Desmond Tutu. “The World Bank’s ‘Decade for Africa’ should not become a mockery.”

The Chad-Cameroon Oil and Pipeline Project was officially inaugurated in 2003, and at an estimated cost of US $4.2 billion represents the single largest on-shore investment in Africa today. Recognizing that oil, gas and mining projects have a legacy of impoverishment, human rights abuses, poisoned landscapes and often violent conflict, the ExxonMobil-led Consortium behind the project made World Bank participation a pre-condition for the project. However, the project has fallen far short of the Bank’s original vision of creating an “unprecedented framework to transform oil wealth into direct benefits of the poor.” In fact, there is evidence (some reflected in World Bank statements and official reports) that the project has increased poverty and degraded the environment, and that the struggle over the control of oil revenues has aggravated security problems in the country, especially in the region bordering on Sudan’s Darfur region.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:
Diane Slaine-Siegel, 917-853-5664-c (Sunday), 212-616-1267 (weekdays), dslaine@environmentaldefense.org

WHAT:
Environmental Defense will launch a print advertising campaign tomorrow (Monday) linking pollution from traffic congestion to an increased risk of cancer, heart and lung disease for millions of New Yorkers. The bottom half of the ad features a wide shot of traffic congestion. The upper half of the ad has a close up photo of a tailpipe billowing smoke with the following headline superimposed over it: “I LOVE THIS TOWN BUT THE TRAFFIC IS KILLING ME.” The ad copy concludes: “Support Congestion Pricing. For more information, go to www.allchokedup.org.” The ad will appear in major New York newspapers.

WHY:
Mayor Michael Bloomberg today announced a congestion pricing proposal as one of 100+ initiatives in his PLANYC to create the world’s cleanest and healthiest city and to reduce global warming pollution 30 percent by 2030.

Environmental Defense advised the Mayor’s team creating the plan for a sustainable New York and is committed to seeing this plan become law. Environmental Defense will continue to work for significant action by the Governor, the state legislature and the city council, both this year and next.

In March, Environmental Defense released the report “All Choked Up – Heavy Traffic, Dirty Air and the Risks to New Yorkers [PDF].”

WHO:
Andy Darrell, Director, Living Cities Program, Environmental Defense/ Member, The Mayor’s Sustainability Advisory Board, is available to discuss the ad campaign and the benefits of a congestion pricing system for New York City.

Environmental Defense praised New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg for unveiling a groundbreaking plan today to make New York the world’s cleanest, healthiest city and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 30 percent by 2030. Environmental Defense advised the Mayor’s team creating the plan for a sustainable New York.

“Mayor Bloomberg’s extraordinary plan will bring benefits to all New Yorkers,” said Fred Krupp, president of Environmental Defense and member of the environmental commissions established by President Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush. “The Mayor has shown global leadership by transcending politics to act now on climate change. I hope Washington follows the Mayor’s example so we can solve this problem for our children and generations to come.”

The plan is comprised of more than 100 initiatives to address the critical environmental challenges facing New York City. It will includes bold steps to reduce air pollution and traffic congestion, lower energy costs, develop energy efficient buildings, revitalize parks and fund new mass transit projects.

“This visionary plan delivers solutions to two of the biggest challenges facing New York: climate change that threatens our very existence and the increasingly polluted air we breathe every day,” said Andy Darrell, Director of the Living Cities Program at Environmental Defense, a national non-profit organization, and a member of the Mayor Bloomberg’s Sustainability Advisory Board. “Mayor Bloomberg’s plan is good for every New Yorker: from the asthmatic child growing up in traffic-clogged neighborhoods to the small business owner who wants to cut energy costs and the Wall Street CEO who wants to lead the way to a green economy. We are committed to seeing this plan become law and will continue to work for significant action by the Governor, the state legislature and the city council, both this year and next.”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:
Michael Shore, 828-582-3141

(Raleigh, NC - April 20, 2007) Duke Energy today issued a “Request for Proposals” (RFP) seeking bids for power generated from renewable energy sources, including sun, wind, water, organic matter and others. The announcement comes as the NC General Assembly discusses adoption of a renewable energy and efficiency portfolio standard that would require utilities to meet energy demand from resources that include up to 20% renewable energy. The following statement may be attributed to Michael Shore, senior air policy analyst with the North Carolina Office of Environmental Defense.

“Duke Energy has seen the light. Solar and other clean energy sources are part of our future. Duke’s interest in renewables reflects the strong support in the legislature for setting a portfolio standard during this session. North Carolina can show leadership in the fight against global warming by adopting a standard that requires utilities to meet demand from resources that include renewables and efficiency.”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:
Mark Brownstein, (917) 279-4644
Tony Kreindler, (202) 572-3378, (202) 210-5791

(Washington – April 19, 2007) Environmental Defense today called on President Bush to abandon a misguided strategy that promotes coal-based fuel as an alternative to gasoline, warning that it would have dangerous consequences for the climate and national security if it comes without a cap on carbon emissions.

In a letter delivered to the White House, Environmental Defense president Fred Krupp said the Administration should heed urgent calls from scientists and military leaders to act now on climate change and cap global warming pollution, rather than encourage a short-sighted alternative fuels policy that does more harm than good. The letter noted “promoting transport fuel from coal absent a national strategy to cap and substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions is like throwing kerosene on a raging fire.”

“If the Administration’s goal is national security, it doesn’t make sense to pursue policies that make the planet hotter and the world more unstable,” Krupp said. “Promoting liquefied coal without limits on greenhouse gas emissions is simply promoting the worst effects of climate change – scarce food and water, competition for resources, and new threats to America.”

The Administration’s own figures show that coal-based fuel results in more than twice the greenhouse gas pollution than the conventional gasoline it would replace. Without full capture and storage of the carbon dioxide, the coal-to-liquids process results in a 118.5 percent increase in global warming pollution over traditional oil-based fuels, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

“Why on earth would we be relying on 70-year-old technology to solve 21^st century challenges?” asked Peter Goldmark, Climate and Air Director for Environmental Defense. “Back to the Future is a funny movie, but a lousy energy policy.”

Environmental Defense is urging Congress and the Administration to enact a national cap-and-trade system for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, which would encourage all fuel producers to account for the cost of global warming pollution and drive investments in clean energy.

“The sooner emissions are capped, the sooner we can get to work on new ways of using coal to ensure energy independence and national security without risking the dangers of climate change,” Krupp said.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:
David Waskow, Director, International Program, Friends of the Earth U.S., (202) 492-4660
Jennifer Kalafut, Campaign Coordinator, Oil Change International, (202) 415-4047
Bruce Rich, International Program Director, Environmental Defense, (202) 572-3334

(Washington, DC - April 18, 2007) Environmental organizations today applauded Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) for introducing legislation that seeks to end subsidies for the international operations of oil companies.  The “End Oil Aid” bill, introduced yesterday, calls on international financial institutions including the World Bank, Export Import Bank and Overseas Private Investment Corporation to stop financing oil and gas projects.

“Every year American taxpayers commit billions to financial institutions like the World Bank, which in turn lavish subsidies on the same oil companies who are earning record profits while fueling global warming,” said David Waskow, International Program Director at Friends of the Earth U.S. “We congratulate Congressman Hinchey on taking a long overdue step to end the scandal of ‘oil aid’”

Each year U.S. agencies such as the Export-Import Bank (Ex-Im) along with international financial institutions like the World Bank provide financial support worth billions of dollars in the oil and gas industry. In 2005, Ex-Im authorized $1.5 billion in financing for projects in the oil, gas and petrochemicals sector. And according to the Bank Information Center, support for oil companies by the International Finance Corporation—the World Bank’s private sector arm—skyrocketed by 77 percent between 2005 and 2006. ^[1]

“Oil aid not only wastes taxpayer dollars, it supports projects that can fuel corruption and conflict in developing countries and cause irreversible social and environmental impacts on the local communities there,” said Jennifer Kalafut, Campaign Coordinator at Oil Change International.

Bruce Rich, International Program Director at Environmental Defense, praised Congressman Hinchey’s bill as a “path-breaking initiative to end perverse policies that, in the words of Sir Nicholas Stern, former chief World Bank economist, and head Advisor to the United Kingdom Government on the Economics of Climate Change and Development, ‘distort the market in favor of existing fossil fuel technologies’ as well as reduce the incentive to develop innovative climate friendly energy sources.”

“We must combat global warming by helping put countries around the world on a path toward a clean energy future, but oil aid does the exact opposite,” said Waskow. “Combustion of oil and gas causes more than a third of global greenhouse gas emissions, fueling a climate crisis whose impacts will be felt most severely in poor countries.”

[1] See the Bank Information Center report at: www.bicusa.org/ifc_spreadsheet.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:
Janea Scott, 213-386-5501 ext 102, jscott@environmentaldefense.org
Meg Little, 202-572-3387, mlittle@environmentaldefense.org

(Washington, DC - April 17, 2007) - Today Environmental Defense welcomed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s overdue proposal to clean up new, small engines and strongly encourages EPA to finalize these standards by the end of the year. Ozone pollution can contribute to reduced lung capacity, lung airway irritation and inflammation, asthma attacks, increased ER visits and admissions and increased mortality. This proposal covers small watercraft, lawn and garden equipment. These small engines, such as lawn mowers and recreational boats, are responsible for about 25% of smog-forming hydrocarbon emissions from mobile sources.

These small gas-powered engines have considerable per-engine emissions and are significant contributors to smog pollution in communities nationwide. In fact, EPA estimates there are over 52 million residential and commercial walk-behind lawn mowers and ride-on lawn, garden, and turf equipment in-use in the United States today, with estimated usage of 3 billion hours per year. On a per engine basis, small gas-powered engines emit more smog-forming pollution than highway cars, for example, a handheld piece of turf equipment can emit as much hydrocarbon as three cars and as much nitrogen oxides as 65 cars. This proposed rule would reduce HC and NOx from lawn and garden equipment by about 35% from the last set of standards and would reduce HC and NOx from recreational boats by about 70%.

“While small in size, these engines are big polluters”, said staff attorney Janea Scott. “More than half of the people in our country are living in areas that don’t meet basic public health criteria for ozone-smog. The summer-time ozone season looming right around the corner highlights how important it is to clean up these engines as quickly as possible.” Ozone pollution can contribute to reduced lung capacity, lung airway irritation and inflammation, asthma attacks, increased ER visits and admissions and increased mortality.

The technology to clean up these engines is readily available and cost-effective nationwide. In fact, California has already adopted rigorous emission standards for these engines. Additionally, four of the top manufacturers of these small engines, including Honda, Kawasaki, Kohler, and Tecumseh, have all voiced public support for adoption of federal standards that match the cleaner California emission standards.

View EPA press release here.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:
Sharyn Stein, sstein@environmentaldefense.org, 202-572-3396
Meg Little, mlittle@environmentaldefense.org, 202-572-3387
Lisa Swann, swann@nwf.org, 703-438-6083

(Washington, D.C. – April 12, 2007) - As Congress considers a massive new water projects bill, a new report released today shows how flood risk is increasing because of poorly designed and managed federal flood-control projects, damage to coastal wetlands and global warming. The report by leading national environmental organizations Environmental Defense and National Wildlife Federation touches on several issues currently under debate in Congress as it considers passage of a $15 billion water projects bill, the Water Resources and Development Act (WRDA). The full House and Senate will likely vote on the bill soon after Congress returns from its April recess.

“We learned from Hurricane Katrina that our federal flood-control policies are broken and putting lives at risk,” said Jennifer Kefer, principal author of the report and a consultant for Environmental Defense. “We found that even as the Army Corps of Engineers has spent $123 billion on flood control projects since the 1920s, flood damages in real dollars have tripled. Because global warming is already leading to more severe storms, the time has come to ensure that flood prevention measures take people out of harm’s way instead of putting people in danger.”

The report shows how global warming is increasing flood risks around the country. In coastal areas, where half of the U.S. population lives, rising sea levels increase damage from storm surges. In the Atlantic, warming ocean temperatures have doubled the destructive potential of hurricanes and the number of Category 4 and Category 5 hurricanes over the last 30 years. Inland, global warming will lead to stronger storms and convert snow into rainfall, which likewise increases flooding. The new report focuses on a few vulnerable areas in particular, including:

• New York City, a peninsula whose citizens don’t usually think of themselves as coastal residents. Global warming is causing rising ocean temperatures, increasing the risk of hurricanes along the entire Atlantic coast. Four of New York’s five boroughs are islands, it is surrounded by 1,500 miles of coastline, and many of its emergency exit routes are tunnels whose entrances are built less than 10 feet above current sea levels, leaving the city vulnerable to increasingly powerful storms.
• Coastal Louisiana, where much of the natural hurricane buffer provided by wetlands has been destroyed as a result of poorly designed manmade projects, including levees and navigation canals. More than 1.3 million acres of wetlands, forest, and marshes – an area larger than the state of Delaware – have disappeared since the 1930s. All of the levees that collapsed during Hurricane Katrina were exposed to open water, while all those levees buffered by wetlands survived. Yet wetland restoration efforts continue to move slowly, and it remains uncertain whether new levees will be constructed in densely populated areas and if those levees will have the effect of encouraging new development on vulnerable land.

“Right now Congress has a choice between real reform, or bringing home more bacon,” says David Conrad, National Wildlife Federation Senior Resource Specialist. The Congress has embraced a system that directs scarce dollars based on political horse-trading, rather than favoring those projects with the greatest practical need.”

“Global warming has raised the stakes and we can no longer afford to allow politics to guide federal flood-control policy,” said Lisa Moore, a scientist in the Climate and Air Program at Environmental Defense. “We need to fix our priorities, and fund critical repairs now.” The report calls for changing the criteria for evaluating Corps projects so we can move taxpayer dollars where they are most needed and stop encouraging development in flood prone areas. It also calls for better environmental standards and independent, expert review of Corps projects to de-politicize the system. Environmental Defense and National Wildlife Federation support incorporating these critical reforms in WRDA.

Read the full report here [pdf].

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:
Bill Chameides, Environmental Defense, 212/505-2100
Tony Kreindler, Environmental Defense, 202/572-3378, 202/210-5791

(Washington – April 6, 2007) Leading international scientists today offered new hope for fixing the climate problem in a report that says we can avoid the worst impacts of global warming if we act now to limit greenhouse gas emissions.

According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the early effects of global warming are happening faster than most expected and we could cross dangerous tipping points if emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases continue unabated. But the IPCC report suggests the sooner we act, the lower the risk will be for crossing the line where catastrophic changes become irreversible.

“The grim future predicted by the world’s most respected climate scientists can be avoided if we start now to cut emissions by about 2 percent a year,” said Bill Chameides, chief scientist at Environmental Defense. “The best way to address the climate problem – the only one that guarantees the reductions we need – is to put a real cap on emissions.”

Without prompt action, the effects of business-as-usual greenhouse gas emissions will threaten billions of people worldwide, IPCC said today. The longer we wait, the sharper the cuts will have to be, adding not only economic strains, but also reducing the likelihood that we will be successful.

According to the IPCC, the effects of inaction could include:

• More deaths, disease, and injury from heat waves, storms, and droughts
• Increased flooding in heavily populated coastal areas
• Food and water shortages for hundreds of millions of people
• Extinction of up to 30 percent of species globally

Experts say a temperature increase of just one degree Fahrenheit over the warming expected from the carbon dioxide already in the atmosphere could take us to the tipping point. Those same experts say we can help avoid crossing that threshold by cutting U.S. emissions by about 80 percent from current levels by 2050.

Environmental Defense is urging the U.S. Congress to create a cap-and-trade system for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, an approach that sets enforceable emissions reduction requirements and lets companies and the market find the most effective and efficient ways to meet them.

“If Congress unleashes the cash and creativity of the private sector with a cap-and-trade system, America can lead the world in a low-carbon technology revolution to meet the climate challenge,” said Environmental Defense President Fred Krupp.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:
Meg Little, mlittle@environmentaldefense.org, 202-572-3387

(Washington, DC – April 4, 2007) – Environmental Defense, in cooperation with Pollution Probe in Canada, released today the first-ever study comparing the European Union’s new REACH regulation with industrial chemicals policies in the U.S. and Canada. The report, titled Not That Innocent: A Comparative Analysis of Canadian, European Union, and United States Policies on Industrial Chemicals, offers a blueprint for addressing both long-standing deficiencies and newly emerging concerns over how government manages the potential risks of industrial chemicals.

Written by Senior Health Program Scientist, Richard A. Denison, Ph.D., the 140-page report identifies “best practices” from among the policies in the three jurisdictions that most effectively ensure protection of human health and the environment.

For the last several decades, government policies have granted the tens of thousands of industrial chemicals already in commerce a strong “presumption of innocence,” with companies largely free to produce and use such chemicals as they’ve seen fit in the absence of compelling evidence of harm.

“Mounting evidence shows that many of these chemicals are actually not that innocent,” said Denison. “Existing policies have allowed chemicals to accumulate in the environment and in the bodies of virtually all people on earth—while failing to deliver the information needed to determine what risks they pose.”

One profound consequence of current policies is that government, the public and often companies themselves know very little about the potential risks of most such chemicals, and companies have little or no incentive to develop better information.

“The lack of good information not only means we don’t know which chemicals may pose risks,” Denison noted. “We also fail to learn which ones pose little or no risk, and hence might serve as viable substitutes.”

The study released today describes a paradigm shift beginning to take place in all three jurisdictions toward policies that are knowledge-driven and place more of the burden of providing and acting on that information on those who stand to profit financially from the production and use of chemicals. “Companies that make and use chemicals are arguably in the best position to internalize information about risk and use it from the outset to design out risk from their products,” said Denison.

Read the report here.

CONTACT:
Fred Krupp, President, 212/505-2100
Vickie Patton, Senior Attorney, 303/440-4901
Tony Kreindler, 202/572-3378, 202/210-5791

(Washington, DC - April 2, 2007) – The Supreme Court held today that carbon dioxide and other heat trapping gases are “air pollutants” that are within EPA’s power to control under the Clean Air Act,  and the U.S. government already has authority to regulate them. The ruling is a significant victory for the environment and adds new momentum for federal action on climate change.

The Court ruled that EPA must reconsider the regulation of greenhouse gases for motor vehicle tailpipes. A similar case involving the regulation of global warming pollution from new coal plants is pending in the lower courts; EPA also will be required to reevaluate its stance on greenhouse gases from these generating facilities. EPA’s failure to address the urgent problem of global warming underscores the imperative of congressional action that prevents further foot-dragging by the Agency.

“Today, the highest court in the land decided that the Clean Air Act clearly empowers EPA to address the pressing problem of global warming pollution. Unfortunately, EPA has refused to act and swift congressional action will be critical to ensure real progress,” said Environmental Defense President Fred Krupp.  “The Court did all it can, but if we’re really going to fix climate change, Congress has to pass a cap on global warming pollution, and soon.” 

The Environmental Protection Agency previously declared it did not have the power under the Clean Air Act to regulate global warming pollution. By a 5 to 4 margin the Court overruled that position, ordering the Agency to reconsider regulating greenhouse gas emissions. 

Environmental Defense is urging Congress to put an economy-wide cap on carbon emissions and set the U.S. on the path to an 80 percent reduction from current levels by mid-century.

The global warming case (Massachusetts, et al. v. EPA, et al., No. 05-1120) arises from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s denial of a petition to limit global warming pollution from new motor vehicles. EPA reasoned that global warming pollution did not constitute an “air pollutant” within the meaning of the federal Clean Air Act. That term is defined to encompass “any” “substance or matter which is emitted into or otherwise enters the ambient air.” The Court held that the Clean Air Act is “sweeping” and “unambiguous” in encompassing global warming pollution.

The federal government also claimed that the states and environmental organizations were not injured by the adverse effects of global warming pollution, despite the body of evidence in the case demonstrating the serious and direct impacts of global warming pollution on human health and the environment. The high Court rejected that argument.

In a second case (Environmental Defense, et al. v. Duke Energy, No. 05-848), the Court ruled that industrial smokestacks and power plants must meet today’s cost-effective pollution control standards when facilities are refurbished. 

“This is a huge win for clean air. The Court ruled unanimously that industrial facilities and power plants seeking to expand their operations must use modern clean air technology to reduce air pollution. The high Court’s decision upholding these clean air safeguards means we’ll have healthier air and less childhood asthma,” said Krupp. “We’re very proud of our work in this case — it’s going to make a real difference in people’s lives.”

The Duke Energy case originated in December 2000 when the United States filed a civil enforcement action charging that Duke had engaged in extensive expansions at 30 coal-fired electric generating units (eight power plants) in North and South Carolina without modernizing its air pollution controls as required under the Clean Air Act. Similar Clean Air Act enforcement cases are pending nationwide against coal-fired power plants and other industrial pollution sources. Today’s decision will also halt a broad policy initiative by the EPA that relied on the lower court decision to weaken the clean air standards for power plants nationwide.

Environmental Defense was a plaintiff in both cases. 

(March 30, 2007 - Austin) One month after negotiating the groundbreaking environmental accord with the prospective buyers of Texas energy giant TXU, Environmental Defense reaffirmed its opposition to the remaining old-style coal plants still proposed across Texas.

“The backers of the remaining coal plants should be on notice,” said Environmental Defense regional director Jim Marston. “We designated significant resources to the TXU fight and expected it to last longer than it did. And now we’re prepared to focus our attention on the rest of the gang.”

Highest on Environmental Defense’s priority list are the three proposed plants that would use out-dated technology. The largest is an 800-megawatt unit that NRG plans to build near Jewett, in Limestone County. The other two are slated for Pt. Comfort in Calhoun County and Bremond in the heart of Robertson County.

The group also corrected published misstatements about its position on the three coal plants that TXU will continue to pursue.

“We didn’t negotiate away our position on the Oak Grove or Sandow units that TXU still plans to pursue,” Marston said. “We still think the plant designs are dirtier than they have to be. We had already made a settlement offer in our legal case against the Sandow unit, and simply agreed to keep that legal settlement offer open.”

In addition to the significant impact the proposed coal plants would have on local air quality in Dallas/Ft. Worth, Austin and Waco, Environmental Defense has opposed the massive coal build out because of the millions of tons of new global warming pollution the plants would produce. Though the TXU agreement may set a positive environmental precedent within the energy industry, the plants still planned represent tens of millions of tons of unnecessary global warming pollution.

“Our work is not done,” Marston said. “At a time when other states are tackling global warming pollution head on, Texas is still poised to allow a massive increase in carbon emissions when there are cheaper, faster and cleaner energy alternatives on the table.”

“To be honest,” Marston continued, “we were hopeful that the other coal companies would learn about TXU and offer to work with us to find a productive alternative to their dirty plants. We remain optimistic, but we have to keep up the fight to protect our health and our planet.”

Environmental Defense, a leading national nonprofit organization, represents more than 500,000 supporters. Since 1967, Environmental Defense has linked science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships to create breakthrough solutions to the most serious environmental problems. The Texas office was established in Austin in 1990.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:
Tony Kreindler, 202/572-3378, 202/210-5791 (Cell) AKreindler@EnvironmentalDefense.org

(Washington, DC – March 29, 2007) - Environmental Defense today announced the launch of a new national media campaign urging the U.S. Congress to put a firm cap on carbon emissions, highlighting the need for an economy-wide limit on global warming pollution to meet the climate challenge.

Environmental Defense will run ads in major online outlets across the country to underscore the need for a mandatory cap on carbon. Scientific consensus says we need to reduce emissions by 60 to 80 percent by mid-century to avoid dangerous interference in the climate, and only a cap can guarantee those results.

Alternatives such as a tax on carbon do not guarantee emission reductions and could stifle economic innovation, and proposals that do not account for emissions from all economic sectors fail to get the job done.

“We’re sending the message to the congressional leadership that small steps won’t get us to where the science says we need to be. It might seem easier, but there’s no safety valve in the science and no escape hatch in the math,” said Steve Cochran, national climate campaign director for Environmental Defense.

Pioneered by Environmental Defense as an economically efficient way to control sulfur dioxide emissions from electric utilities, a cap-and-trade system for carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases would set a hard limit on emissions and let businesses and the market find the best ways to make reductions.

The cap-and-trade approach is the foundation of several bills now pending in the Senate. It also is the goal of business leaders ranging from the CEOs of major manufacturers and utilities that have joined with Environmental Defense in the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, to the heads of America’s big three car companies and technology innovators and investors across the country.

The ads and more information on cap-and-trade can be found online at www.capcarbonpollution.org.