Should N.C. curb greenhouse gases?, Charlotte Observer, July 5, 2005:
A climate-change bill before the N.C. House this week would place North Carolina among states that aren't waiting on federal solutions for a warming world.
The bill creates a study commission to recommend whether the state should take action to curb greenhouse gases. Most climate scientists believe carbon dioxide and other gases from man-made sources are trapping the Earth's heat, driving up temperatures and sea level as polar ice melts.
[...]
Eight states, chiefly in the Northeast and West, have taken significant steps to curb gases, says the advocacy group Environmental Defense. This month California set statewide targets to drop greenhouse-gas emissions 25 percent by 2020. New Mexico enacted similar goals.
On July 7, 2005 the NC House of Representatives voted 78-29 for the NC Global Warming Act. In May the NC Senate voted for, 44-6.
What is in it for NC? Sea level rise may threaten the NC coastal tourism industry someday. If you have ever vacationed at the Outer Banks you know that this is big business.
When I worked at East Carolina University in the 1990s, I met Stan Riggs, a coastal geologist who is a well-known expert on sea level rise and NC barrier islands. Last year he spoke at the NC Coastal Federation's annual meeting (Rising sea level threatens isles):
... he displayed maps depicting the long-term future of what will happen if sea level continues to rise at this rate and if the quantity and magnitude of storms keep battering the North Carolina coast - the barrier islands will collapse, he said.
"It's not a question of whether these maps are right; it's a question of how fast it's happening," said Riggs ... .
Individual states are addressing the possible economic threat of climate change by pursuing their own limits on greenhouse gas emissions. Will climate federalism work? Probably not. State-level action will face the same problems that state regulations faced for air and water pollution before the federal Clean Air and Water Acts were enacted in the early 1970s. One problem is that uneven regulation might lead individual states to become pollution havens.
The major benefit of climate federalism may be to put pressure on the federal government to impose limits on greenhouse gas emissions instead of relying on voluntary restrictions.
