You gotta' be kidding me: Joe Manchin to draft climate legislation

[aocommunalpunch]

WASHINGTON — Joe Manchin, the powerful West Virginia Democrat who chairs the Senate energy panel and earned half a million dollars last year from coal production, is preparing to remake President Biden’s climate legislation in a way that tosses a lifeline to the fossil fuel industry — despite urgent calls from scientists that countries need to quickly pivot away from coal, gas and oil to avoid a climate catastrophe.

…

But Mr. Manchin is also closely associated with the fossil fuel industry. His beloved West Virginia is second in coal and seventh in natural gas production among the 50 states. In the current election cycle, Mr. Manchin has received more campaign donations from the oil, coal and gas industries than any other senator, according to data compiled by OpenSecrets, a research organization that tracks political spending.

He profits personally from polluting industries: He owns stock valued at between $1 million and $5 million in Enersystems Inc., a coal brokerage firm which he founded in 1988. He gave control of the firm to his son, Joseph, after he was elected West Virginia secretary of state in 2000. Last year, Mr. Manchin made $491,949 in dividends from his Enersystems stock, according to his Senate financial disclosure report.

Read more: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/9/19/2053267/-Joe-Manchin-to-draft-climate-legislation-You-gotta-be-effin-kiddin-me?pm_source=story_sidebar&pm_medium=web&pm_campaign=recommended

[lagomorph777]

1. And Matt Gaetz to draft anti-pedophile legislation?

[sarcasmo]

2. The guy bought by coal, writing climate legislation. Epic Fail.

[jimfields33]

3. Seems unusual until it says he chairs the energy panel

I think it’s his job to do this.

[Volaris]

10. Well, that would be the FIRST problem I suppose..

[Hugh_Lebowski]

4. That sort of thing would be in his job description, I'm pretty sure

The bigger problem I'd say is his chairing the Energy Panel in the first place.

[Bettie]

5. So, it will consist of

more fossil fuels and a law banning all forms of renewable energy, while also removing emissions limits on, well, everything.

That is what I'm expecting.

[LonePirate]

6. Isn't this like asking a fox to build a new henhouse?

[CrispyQ]

7. The human species is FUBAR.

From Google:

In order to stabilize CO2 concentrations at about 450 ppm by 2050, global emissions would have to decline by about 60% by 2050. Industrialized countries greenhouse gas emissions would have to decline by about 80% by 2050.

What happens when CO2 reaches 450 ppm?

For years scientists have said that if atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide reach 450 parts per million (ppm) the planet would heat up by an average of 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. They have also said that if the world crosses that threshold, ecosystems worldwide would suffer serious damage.

What is the significance of 350 ppm?

“PPM” stands for “parts per million,” which is a way of measuring the ratio of carbon dioxide molecules to all of the other molecules in the atmosphere. Countless scientists, climate experts, and governments officials agree that 350 ppm is the “safe” level of carbon dioxide.

Is 400 ppm bad?

Passing the 400 ppm threshold will not trigger any devastating effect by itself, but it does provide one metric of just how fast humans are emitting carbon dioxide. It is the concentration of carbon in the atmosphere that actually intensifies the greenhouse effect, in turn warming the climate.

We've already passed 400 ppm.

Letting coal man write climate legislation shows that there is ZERO political will to SERIOUSLY address climate change.

[modrepub]

8. Probably Not The Best Thing

But this is going to be compiled under a lot of scrutiny. Give him a shot and see what he does.

I don't expect a lot but the energy markets and those who use it are moving away from fossil fuels regardless of what Joe does or tries to do. Renewables and less CO2 intensive natural gas are the cheapest forms of producing electricity. With more folks demanding something be done, the market is taking steps on its own to alleviate the impacts of climate change. Nothing government folks can do about that.

[BSdetect]

9. Not a good idea Dems. Very poor decision.

[msongs]

11. give him nothing he wants on energy unless he supports other dems agenda items nt

[Amishman]

12. Makes some kind of pragmatic sense, he can't oppose his own damn bill

Is a weak and loophole filled climate change bill better than none at all? Probably.

[aocommunalpunch]

13. 2.7 degrees is a real possibility

And a weak and loophole filled climate change bill will only help that. There is no good spin on this.

[Amishman]

16. If the only options are a weak bill and no bill, the former is surely better

Pass the best bill we can today, and if in the future we have the votes, strengthen it later.

And if a Manchin drafted bill is the best we can do (and it looks like it may very well be), then let's do it.

We control the House and Senate by the thinnest of margins, we can't let perfect be the enemy of good.

[Captain Zero]

14. He's not writing it. He's transcribing whatever

The pacS for the energy sector send over to him. Might be his handwriting but it's their Christmas list.

[Sgent]

15. The most liberal bill possible

is one that the 40th/50th most conservative member of the Senate will vote for. Same thing happened with Lieberman and the ACA.