The climate on climate change is changing

New warnings in report, new rulings by court

The demands for a legislative response are increasing.

WASHINGTON - A new round of warnings about global warming catastrophes on the heels of an environmental-friendly Supreme Court ruling Monday has stoked an already simmering debate in Congress about the urgency of climate-change legislation.

In a fast-shifting political landscape, environmental experts asked: Will the Democratic-run Congress act before it's too late? And does the Bush administration truly understand the implications of a warming planet?

"This is a real one-two punch," Dan Lashof, a global warming expert for the National Resources Defense Council, said of recent developments.

The week began with a Supreme Court ruling repudiating the White House for its lack of action on classifying carbon dioxide as a pollutant. The ruling could force the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate carbon emissions along the lines of other pollutants.

On Friday, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, made up of more than 2,000 scientists, released a policy guide for governments outlining potentially devastating effects around the world -- with less serious but still consequential changes in the Midwest.

The report describes a world where climate change may be global, but effects will largely be local.

In Congress, an array of bills to regulate greenhouse gases is moving through committees. Lashog said he sees momentum building in both the Senate and House for limits on emissions of carbon pollution. He expressed optimism that such legislation could see the light of day before the end of the Bush administration.

"We've probably waited londer than we should and we need to get moving right away," he said.

Any legislation to cap emissions on carbon dioxide faces resistance from the automotive industry and coal producers. Such bills will be closely watched in the coal fields of Illinois and St. Louis, home to the nation's two biggest coal companies, Peabody Energy Corp. and Arch Coal Inc.

Steve Tomaszewski, a spokesman for Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., said the congressman has worked to remind coal-state Democrats that coal-based energy, although it is the highest emitter of greenhouse gases in the country, will play a big part in America's energy future.

"Don't go out there trying to wipe coal from our natural energy portfolio, Tomaszewski said. 

He said Shimkus will attempt to hold House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., to her word that so-called cap-and-trade emissions legislation -- which gives industry flexibility within ever-decling pollution limits -- would not reach the House floor for a vote before summer.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and sponsored the most sweeping emission-control legislation to date, said Friday that the new scientific report underscores the urgency of Congress addressing global warming.

'An embarrassment'

The Bush administration, teaming up with representatives from Saudi Arabia and China, dove into a tussle to tone down the language of the report, going head-to-head with the report's authors.

At one point, Chinese officials insisted the report remove the word "very" from a phrase stating that scientists had "(very) high confidence that many natural systems, on all continents and in most oceans, are being affected by regional climate changes."

"The report's three authors refused to accept the change," Paty Romero, an author of the report, told reporters. "This resulted in an hours-long deadlock that was broken by a compromise to delete any reference to confidence levels."

Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., lashed out at the Bush administration's efforts to tamper with the science of climate change.

"This is the latest example of the Bush administration trying to change the science to fit their ideological agenda," Kerry said in a statement. "It's an embarrassment."

The Bush administration's Sharon Hays, who spoke for the White House at the climate panel proceedings, played down the proposed changes to the report, asserting during a news conference that U.S. officials "helped craft a report that robustly reflects the findings of this underlying, very long, technical document."

Midwest flooding, heat

The report by the scientific panel presented findings by geographical region. The Midwest would be insulated to a large degree from the immediate effects of an increase in temperature because of its moderate climate and an economic ability to adapt.

But responding to a question from the Post-Dispatch, authors warned that the St. Louis region could experience an increased risk of flooding, more frequent heat waves and greater levels of air pollution.

In the United States, the Southwest and West are more likely to feel the immediate impact of receding snow caps, depleting water stores and long dry spells.

The scientists spoke matter-of-factly about the possibilty of a 7- to 24-inch rise in sea levels, which would lead to more coastal flooding and threaten wetlands. 

Jonathan Patz, a professor at the University of Madison-Wisconsin, stressed the need for human adaptation to solve the climate crisis.

Some of these adaptations may not be all bad, he said, citing the Supreme Court's ruling that carbon dioxide should be listed as a health hazard, alongside the fact that the United States' number one epidemic is obesity and sixty percent of the nation's car trips are less than one mile. 

"When it comes to our health, I see a triple-win opportunity here," Patz said. "Imagine walking that trip instead of driving. You could improve personal fitness, reduce local air pollution and reduce greenouse gases that cause global warming."