The Climate Bill inside the Infrastructure Bill

The US takes a major step forward on the path to carbon neutrality.

Late Friday, the House passed Biden’s infrastructure bill. As the Washington Post aptly observed, the bill is the biggest climate legislation to ever move through Congress. It also attracted key support from some Republicans, which was essential to passing it in both houses of Congress. Biden is pushing for an even bigger companion bill, but the infrastructure bill is a huge victory in its own right.

One major area of spending is transportation. Some of that goes for roads and bridges. But as the Washington Post reports, there’s a lot of money for rail and mass transit:

“Another $66 billion will go to passenger and freight rail, including enough money to eliminate Amtrak’s maintenance backlog. Yet another $39 billion will modernize public transit, and $11 billion more will be set aside for transportation safety, including programs to reduce fatalities among pedestrians and cyclists.”

There’s also $7.5 billion in funding for zero and low-emission buses and ferries. There’s another $7.5 billion to build out charging capacity for electric vehicles, and $6 billion for energy storage.

The law also addresses a big bottleneck in the energy system: lack of adequate long-distance transmission capacity. We will need much more robust transmission to achieve a carbon neutral grid. For instance, Iowa can generate more wind power than it can get to markets in Chicago and further east. Transmission also helps to deal with weather issues: even if it’s too cloudy for solar in one state, the sun may be shining a state or two over. The effort to build new transmission has been stymied, however, by resistance from utilities and state governments.

Under an earlier law,  the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission had the power to designate national transmission corridors where new transmission is urgently needed. If states refused to authorize transmission projects in those corridors, FERC could take over and approve the projects. Unfortunately, federal court rulings created a giant loophole. The infrastructure bill overturns those judicial decisions. That’s not a cure-all for the barriers facing new transmission lines but it does eliminate a major roadblock.

Much more will need to be done if we’re going to get the transmission we need built as quickly as we need it. The infrastructure bill does some of that work with its other provisions, not least by investing $65 billion in new transmission.  Transmission isn’t a glamorous part of the energy system, but it’s crucial to an effective transition away from fossil fuels.

On top of the provisions that will help reduce carbon emissions, the law also provides $47 billion to assist communities in adapting to climate change. That’s the first real non-military federal funding for climate change adaptation.  Given the rash of droughts, wildfires, floods, and heat waves we’ve been seeing, this funding is badly needed.

The Democrats’ legislative effort had been stalled so long that it seemed doubtful they were ever going to pass anything. The companion “reconciliation” measure, if it eventually passes, would do even more for climate action. But even standing alone, the infrastructure bill is a big win for the climate.

 

, , , , , ,

Reader Comments

3 Replies to “The Climate Bill inside the Infrastructure Bill”

  1. All we keep proving for 50 years, is that the modus operandi of our instittutional leaders has produced a total failure to protect the human race from global warming since the First Earth Day in 1970.

    Our leaders still refuse to join together to implement global warming solutions with the required sense of urgency. Even today at COP 26 when climate change disasters and consequential deaths are increasingly out of control around the world because our brains are not wired to save us from ourselves, as documented by Berkeley’s CALIFORNIA MAGAZINE SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2006 GLOBAL WARNING ISSUE COVER STORY:
    Can We Adapt in Time? https://alumni.berkeley.edu/california-magazine/september-october-2006-global-warning/can-we-adapt-time

    INCONVENIENT TRUTH 2006: We didn’t adapt in time even though Gore also warned us in 2006.
    So now we have a new INCONVENIENT TRUTH 2021: Greta Thunberg slams COP26 as a ‘failure’ at youth protest in Glasgow (Greta is a student who is now teaching the scholars:
    Can scholars adapt in time? https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/05/europe/cop26-youth-protests-friday-intl/index.html

  2. The human race appears to be in extremis due to our inabilities to control global warming, threats against our democracy, worldwide spread of disease, racism, violence, power of money over humanity, overpopulation, etc. and the fact that too many people tend to believe propaganda that is repeated often enough especially if it gives them a perceived advantage.

    There are far too many institutional problems out of control today, especially where everyone in one institution (political party, rich vs poor, etc.} wants advantages over everyone else!

    This was reported today: Little time, but ‘mountain to climb’ at UN climate talks https://apnews.com/article/climate-science-europe-united-nations-environment-and-nature-dad7d2b8d41c3fb0ad929194ade6f726

    Does anyone have solutions we can implement or will the power of money cause us to lose total control over the future of the human race?

    Yes, it’s complicated and involves many fields of knowledge to poduce the right solutions, that is why I keep saying academic institutions like Berkeley are our last and best resort for saving the human race.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

About Dan

Dan Farber has written and taught on environmental and constitutional law as well as about contracts, jurisprudence and legislation. Currently at Berkeley Law, he has al…

READ more

POSTS BY Dan