Menendez: Transportation Missing From Climate Change Debate

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Menendez: Transportation Missing From Climate Change Debate stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 07- 7-09 01:18 PM   |   Updated: 08- 7-09 05:12 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Menendez

The next phase of the climate change debate began Tuesday morning in the Senate, but with a big piece missing. The heads of all the relevant government agencies were in attendance at the environment committee hearing except for one: Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.

LaHood was also left off the guest list at the banking subcommittee hearing that Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) called specifically to address concerns that transportation, which accounts for more than 30 percent of all emissions, is being left out of the climate bill debate.

"In my view, the Department of Transportation needs to be at the table," Menendez told the Huffington Post Tuesday afternoon, referring to the Environment and Public Works Committee hearing as well as the broader Senate debate. "One of the elements of this is clearly finding the right mix of mass transit and planning. They already have the expertise which would otherwise have to be created independently."

[UPDATE: A senior staffer for Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) told the Huffington Post that while he declined to appear Tuesday, Lahood has dispatched an undersecretary to appear at a transportation-focused EPW climate hearing next week. "We consider transportation a top priority," the staffer said.]

The Waxman-Markey climate change bill, which narrowly passed the House late last month, delegates authority on fuel efficiency standards to the White House and an electric vehicle grid to the Energy Department and the EPA. It does little to address transportation emissions directly, however, and Menendez wants the Senate version of the bill to correct that omission.

"Transportation accounts for nearly one third of our emissions and yet it does not appear to be on Congress's radar screen as one third of the solution," Menendez said at the banking subcommittee hearing. "If we do not provide substantial resources in the Senate's comprehensive climate bill to fund clean transportation infrastructure projects and incentivize sensible land use policies around those projects, then we will fail to adequately address emissions reduction in the transportation sector."

That would be a mistake, say environmental advocates. Transportation emissions are responsible for 47 percent of the net increase in total U.S. emissions between 1990 and 2003 -- growing faster than any other U.S. source of greenhouse gases, according to the Department of Energy -- and the department expects transportation energy use to have increased 48 percent between 2003 and 2025.

Transportation is the largest end-use source of carbon dioxide, the most common greenhouse gas, even without including emissions generated from manufacturing the vehicles or extracting and refining their fuel.

Story continues below
advertisement

Additional funding for the Federal Transit Administration and greater local and regional planning is necessary to cut total vehicle miles traveled, Menendez said, noting that the FTA has $400 billion worth of projects on the books but can only spend $1.5 billion per year.

But vehicle-usage incentives -- like, say, convenience for consumers and money for local governments -- are the root of the problem, said Dan Sperling, director of the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California, Davis.

"Most of the funding is tied to vehicle use and population and a few other factors, so right now if you increase vehicle use you get more money." Sperling said. "Waxman-Markey has nothing to do with vehicle usage essentially, and that's a problem."

Pricing is one way to moderate vehicle usage, Sperling said, but additional land-use controls and improved public transit services -- more stations and stops, for example -- are just as important.

Sierra Club spokeswoman Ann Mesnikoff said Waxman-Markey and Obama's new fuel efficiency standards are good steps. Like Menendez, however, she said meaningful climate change legislation can't ignore LaHood's department.

"It's important that the climate bill recognizes the importance of transportation," she said. "We need to have a comprehensive policy in the climate bill that will deal with transportation effectively."

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

The next phase of the climate change debate began Tuesday morning in the Senate, but with a big piece missing. The heads of all the relevant government agencies were in attendance at the environment c...
The next phase of the climate change debate began Tuesday morning in the Senate, but with a big piece missing. The heads of all the relevant government agencies were in attendance at the environment c...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
31
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
photo

Thank you Senator Menendez -- you make us proud in NJ!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:44 PM on 07/07/2009
- LMPE I'm a Fan of LMPE 64 fans permalink

Had we built mass transit in every major city (and a system for the entire country), this wouldn't be an issue.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:23 PM on 07/07/2009

Thank you, Senator Menendez!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:20 PM on 07/07/2009
- RomeoMD25 I'm a Fan of RomeoMD25 51 fans permalink

Exxon Mobile Funded latest climate bill(interesting)

Industries and individual companies with a stake in the landmark House climate and energy bill poured money into lobbying early this year

Exxon Mobil Corp. spent the most within that group, paying $9.3 million on lobbying the first quarter of this year.
Last year the company spent $29 million, its highest level ever.

Carbon and CO2 (carbon dioxide) are fundamental for all life on Earth. CO2 is a colorless, odorless, non-toxic gas.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:12 PM on 07/07/2009
photo

Non-toxic....?

Hmm.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:30 PM on 07/07/2009
- fumes I'm a Fan of fumes 76 fans permalink
photo

you're thinking of CO..

CO = carbon monoxide which is toxic

CO2 = carbon dioxide is plant food

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:23 PM on 07/08/2009
photo

Ok Romeo.

You've been spouting this drivel all over huff po today. Most all of your arguments are old denier claims that have been debunked as often as they crop up. You can not change the fundamentals of chemistry, climate science, or history to suit your whims. The 'data' you submit is partial and incorrect and has been plucked out of context of much more conclusive reports that refute your every post.

What is your problem with stewardship of the planet, anyway?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:51 PM on 07/07/2009
- RomeoMD25 I'm a Fan of RomeoMD25 51 fans permalink

Carbon dioxide, a benign, life giving molecule has been miscast by a world wide political movement to be an environmental hazard in what
will soon be discovered to be the hoax of the century. This molecule, CO2 is vital to all life on earth. It is exhaled by all living
things and even comes from nocturnal emissions by plants. It forms the bubbles in your soda, wine and beer. Standard air has 370 parts
per million (PPM) of carbon dioxide of which 93% comes from "natural sources" which are all beyond human control.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:11 PM on 07/07/2009
- frantaylor I'm a Fan of frantaylor 22 fans permalink

Okay, smartie, explain these graphs:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/warming/etc/graphs.html

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:17 PM on 07/07/2009
- onenvrnos I'm a Fan of onenvrnos 29 fans permalink
photo

Nice post...good facts.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:04 AM on 07/08/2009
- Sumocat I'm a Fan of Sumocat 32 fans permalink

Which means 7% comes from man-made sources, which compound continually and have no natural means of offset.

Or to put it another way, if your boat normally takes on 50 gallons of life-giving water an hour and your pump removes 50 gallons of water an hour, then you're safe. But then someone onboard starts dumping ocean water on deck. One gallon, two gallons, three gallons, etc. Fine, not enough to cause distress, but he doesn't stop and starts going faster. You going to stand there and let him continue?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:32 PM on 07/07/2009
- RedDogBear I'm a Fan of RedDogBear 65 fans permalink
photo

Foolish liberal. The H2O molecule is vital to all life on earth so of course it could never harm us.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:27 PM on 07/07/2009
- Chernynkaya I'm a Fan of Chernynkaya 564 fans permalink
photo

Thank you, Mr. Menendez, for stating what should be the obvious.

"Additional funding for the Federal Transit Administration and greater local and regional planning is necessary to cut total vehicle miles traveled, Menendez said, noting that the FTA has $400 billion worth of projects on the books but can only spend $1.5 billion per year." Why is that?

I live in LA, the largest city in the country. On weekdays, most bus service stops at 8:30 pm. How are working people supposed to get home? If you leave work at, say, 6pm you might be able to catch all your connections in time but you can't work overtime. I have a car, but my teenage daughter doesn't. The only choice for the vast majority of workers is to buy a gas-guzzling jalopy.

What genius would consider a climate change bill without factoring in the effects of cars?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:45 PM on 07/07/2009

To answer your last question. Congress or a room full of lawyerly windbags.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:07 PM on 07/07/2009
- frantaylor I'm a Fan of frantaylor 22 fans permalink

Boston has just re-instituted Night Owl service on the T. Maybe you should move.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:12 PM on 07/07/2009
- Chernynkaya I'm a Fan of Chernynkaya 564 fans permalink
photo

Listen, If I could move it'd be to Canada, or the UK- too old to learn French.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:01 PM on 07/07/2009
- frantaylor I'm a Fan of frantaylor 22 fans permalink

There is not a single manufacturer of passenger rail vehicles in this entire country, with the possible exception of the Bombardier (a Canadian company) division in Vermont that did some assembly work on the Acela trains.

Budd, Boeing-Vertol, Pullman, etc. are either out of business completely, or totally out of the rail business.

We will be buying our future mass transit from foreigners, like it or not.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:39 PM on 07/07/2009
photo

Too true. The US has become #1, once again, in the category of De-industrialized Nations.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:06 PM on 07/07/2009
    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:29 PM on 07/07/2009
- BBackSoon I'm a Fan of BBackSoon 39 fans permalink
photo

This is a subject that should be discussed. Where do we rank with the rest of the world on mass transit? I bet it is about the same as healthcare.

Maybe we could get GM to build modern versions of the streetcars they decimated at the beginning of the last century.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:27 PM on 07/07/2009
- frantaylor I'm a Fan of frantaylor 22 fans permalink

Maybe we should buy our rolling stock from foreigners who actually know how to build these things.

You probably are not familiar with the miserable experience Boston had with Boeing light rail vehicles.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:32 PM on 07/07/2009
- BBackSoon I'm a Fan of BBackSoon 39 fans permalink
photo

Maybe a smart foreign company would at least build them here.

But I understand.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:36 AM on 07/08/2009
- RedDogBear I'm a Fan of RedDogBear 65 fans permalink
photo

I agree with Mr. Menendez 100%. This is one of many examples where things that will benefit the environment also make sense for a number of other reasons. The way our cities are dependent on cars is just insane. It makes them more expensive and unlivable. It is so easy to get around major European cities using public transportation and there is no reason we couldn't do the same thing here starting ASAP.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:21 PM on 07/07/2009
photo

Oh God. These people actually believe that crap.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:20 PM on 07/07/2009
- Chernynkaya I'm a Fan of Chernynkaya 564 fans permalink
photo

Yeah, and we believe in evolution too.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:46 PM on 07/07/2009
photo

Are you suggesting that the US "CANNOT" control natural events better than Nature can? These masterminds all have university degree's of various sorts, surely, they know what's best?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:11 PM on 07/07/2009
- Sumocat I'm a Fan of Sumocat 32 fans permalink

Believe what? That burning gasoline consumes oxygen and releases energy and unbreathable vapors into the atmosphere? Yeah, that's ridiculous.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:20 PM on 07/07/2009
- Hank10303 I'm a Fan of Hank10303 46 fans permalink

On the right track

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:19 PM on 07/07/2009
photo

But, it's the wrong train.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:12 PM on 07/07/2009
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect