Climate Change Legislation in the 108th Congress (CRS Report for Congress)
Premium Purchase PDF for $24.95 (19 pages)
add to cart or
subscribe for unlimited access
Pro Premium subscribers have free access to our full library of CRS reports.
Subscribe today, or
request a demo to learn more.
| Release Date |
Revised Jan. 6, 2005 |
| Report Number |
RL32055 |
| Report Type |
Report |
| Authors |
Brent D. Yacobucci and Kyna Powers, Resources, Science, and Industry Division |
| Source Agency |
Congressional Research Service |
| Older Revisions |
-
Premium June 9, 2004 (19 pages, $24.95)
add
|
Summary:
Climate change and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were an issue in the 108th Congress, as
they
were over the preceding decade. Bills directly addressing climate change issues ranged from those
focused primarily on climate change research ( H.R. 1578 and S. 1164 ) to
comprehensive emissions cap and trading programs for all six greenhouse gases ( S. 139
and H.R. 4067 ). Additional bills focused on GHG reporting and registries
( H.R. 6 (Senate-passed), H.R. 1245 , S. 17 , and S. 194 ), or on power plant emissions of carbon dioxide ( H.R. 2042 , S. 139,
S. 366 , and S. 843 ).
These climate change bills differed within and across categories. Among the climate change
research bills, there were common and divergent research focuses. For example, a few bills,
including S. 139 and S. 1164 , would have directed research on historical
instances of climate change to develop climate change models. Additional bills focused on research
to examine vulnerabilities to climate change in the United States, particularly with respect to human
health, environmental, and economic outcomes. Furthermore, some bills would have promoted
research on political and technological options to reduce GHG emissions.
Among the six bills with GHG reporting and registry requirements, there were also differences.
The primary difference between reporting bills was how each determined which entities must report.
H.R. 6 (Senate version), H.R. 1245 , H.R. 4067 , and
S. 139 would have established GHG emission thresholds, usually around 10,000 metric
tons of carbon dioxide (or equivalent) per year, above which an entity must submit records of its
GHG emissions. However, H.R. 6 and H.R. 1245 excluded farms from the
reporting requirement. The remaining bills, S. 17 and S. 194 , would have
tasked the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with establishing the
threshold requirement.
There were also similarities and differences between cap and trade bills. Specifically,
H.R. 2024 , S. 366 , and S. 843 would have focused on fossil
fuel-fired electric generating facilities, while S. 139 and H.R. 4067 would
have covered a broader array of sources. Furthermore, H.R. 2024, S. 366, and
S. 843 would have capped one GHG -- carbon dioxide -- while S. 139 and H.R.
4067 would have capped all six GHGs.
This report briefly discusses basic concepts on which these bills were based, and compares
major provisions of the bills in each of the following categories: climate change research, GHG
reporting and registries, and cap and trade programs. This report will not be updated.
