Download gcc_press re collapse_all_1_001

GCC Collapse
Press Clip Summary
Energy Daily, March 2 1,2000, “GM Withdraws for Global Climate Coalition,” by Howard Buskirk.
Santa Fe New Mexican, March 19,2000, “No Chicken Little; Real danger lies in global warming,” by
Jill Cliburn.
Toronto Star, March 18,2000, “Big 3 Dump Greenhouse Lobby,” by David Goodman
Bulletin’s Frontrunner, March 17, 2000, “Big Companies Dropping Out of Global Climate Coalition.”
Deseret News, March 17,2000, “GM quits anti-pact lobby.”
Vancouver Sun, March 16, 2000, “The Big three are big polluters, scientists say,” by Justin Hyde.
AP Online, March 15,2000, “GM Quits Global Warming Lobby Group,” by David Goodman.
Associated Press, March 15, 2000, “Environmental group ranks Big Three among worst polluters,” by
Justin Hyde.
Davton Daily News, March 15,2000, “Business Headlines.”
Detroit News, March 15, 2000, “Metro/State Briefs.”
Greenwire, March 15, 2000, “Climate Change: GM Drops Out Of Global Climate Coalition.”
Grist Magazine, March 15, 2000, “The Daily Gist: Fine Then, We Quit Too.”
Houston Chronicle, March 15, 2000, “Business Briefs.”
Los Angeles Times, March 15, 2000, “Autos.”
Record (Bergen County, NJ),March 15,2000, “GM Quits Group Opposed to Global Warming Treaty,
Environment.”
WashinPton Post, March 1 5, 2000, “Financial: Digest.”
Associated Press, March 14, 2000, “GM joins DaimlerChrysler, Ford, quits global warming lobby
group,” by David Goodman.
Greenwire, March 13, 2000, “Climate Change: Southern Co. Drops Out of GCC.”
Atlanta Journal, March 10, 2000, “Southern alters stand on warming: Power conglomerate withdraws
from coalition fighting treaty to control greenhouse gases,” by Charles Seabrook.
Baltimore City Paper, March 8, 2000, “Feeling the Heat: The Auto Industry Meets Global Warming,”
by Curt Guyette.
Chemical Week, March 8, 2000, “Climate Change: Texaco Splits From Industry Lobbying Group,” by
Neil Franz.
Ozone Action
Page 2
Oil Daily,Marcli 7, 2000, “GCC to Maintain Pressure on Kyoto Accord, Denies Loss of Clout With
Texaco’s Departure,” by Manimoli Dinesh.
Octane Week, March 6, 2000, “Texaco Exits Climate Coalition.”
Plain Dealer, March 5,2000, “Texaco Drops Out of Coalition; Questioning Global Warming.”
Detroit News, March 3,2000, “Detroit could see red, feel blue over not being green enough,” by Jon
Pepper.
Global Warming Today, March 2,2000, “Texaco Announces Decision to Leave GCC.”
WashinPton Post, March 2,2000, “Texaco, the third-largest U.S. oil company, said it’s dropping out of
the Global Climate Coalition.. .”
Energy Daily, March 1,2000, “Texaco Leaves Global Climate Coalition,” by George Lobsenz.
Greenwire, March 1, 2000, “Climate Change: Texaco leaves anti-Kyoto coalition.”
Oil Daily, March 1, 2000, “Texaco Pulls Out of Global Climate Coalition.”
Reuter Financial Report, February 29,2000, “Texaco quits anti-Kyoto climate change group,” by
Andrew Kelly.
Press (Christchurch), February 18, 2000, “GM, it’s a question of ethics,” by Seth Robson.
Global Warming Today, February 14,2000, “Groups Take Aim at Corporate GHC Emissions.”
Janesville Gazette, January 3 1, 2000, “Ford chairman takes global warming seriously,” by Johii
Passacantando.
Star-Ledger, January 30,2000, “Green wave: Corporate America shows signs of becoming a better
friend of the environment,” by Kitta MacPherson.
Christian Science Monitor, January 24, 2000, “Businesses take ‘greener’ stand on global warming,” by
Brad Kn ickerbocker.
Octane Week, January 24,2000, “Climate Change Group Loses Second Major Automaker.”
Detroit Metro Times, January 18, 2000, “Feeling the heat: The auto industry meets global warming,” by
Curt Guyette.
Global WarminP Today, January 18,2000, “Religious Groups Campaign Against Oil Company.”
Albion Recorder (MI), January 17,2000, “Ford moves ahead while policymakers lag behind.”
Marshall Chronicle (MIL January 17, 2000, “Ford moves ahead while policymakers lag behind.”
Monroe News (MI), January 16, 2000, “Ford deserves applause for environmental stance.”
News Journal (Murfreesboro, TN), January 16,2000, “DaimlerChrysler Corp. quits global warming
treaty lobbying group.”
Updated: Murch 22, 2000
Page 3
Ozone Action
Detroit Metro Times, January 12, 2000, “Feeling the heat: The auto industry meets global warming,” by
Curt Guyette.
Financial Times, January 12,2000, “World News: The Americas: Religious groups stand up for God’s
creation: A multi-faith coalition is flexing its financial muscle to press big business over the
environment,” by Nancy Dunne.
Financial Times - London, January 12,2000, “Religious groups work to ‘save creation’,” by Nancy
Dun n e.
Port Arthur News (TX), January 12,2000, “Environmental groups pressure oil company.”
Western Livestock ReDorter, January 12, 2000, “DaimlerChrysler quits anti-warming group.”
Air Daily, January 1 1,2000, “Chrysler Leaves Anti-Kyoto Group.”
Daily Gist, January 1 1, 2000, “For God’s Sake.”
Investor’s Business Daily, January 10,2000, “Warming Evidence Convinces Daimler To Halt
Lobbying.”
Citizen Tribune (Morristown, TN), January 9, 2000, “DaimlerChrysler Corp. Quits Group That Attacks
Global Warming Treaty.”
Monroe News (MI), January 9,2000, “DaimlerChrysler Corp. quits lobbying group.”
Reporter (Fond Du Lac, WI), January 9,2000, “DaimlerChrysler quits group that attacks global
warming treaty.”
Tribune (Kokomo, IN), January 9, 2000, “DaimlerChrysler Corp. quits group that attacks climate
treaty.”
Albany Times Union, January 8, 2000, “DaimlerChrysler exits coalition.”
Journal Inquirer (Manchester, CT), January 8,2000, “Carniaker warms to greenhouse theory.”
Muncie Star Press (IN), January 8, 2000, “DaimlerChrysler goes on record for Kyoto global warming
treaty.”
News (Kenosha, Wn3 January 8, 2000, “DaimlerChrysler quits group against climate treaty.’’
Observer (Dunkirk-Fredonia. NY), January 8, 2000, “DaimlerChrysler Corp. quits lobby that attacks
global warming treaty.”
Rockford Register Star, January 8, 2000, “DaimlerChrysler quits lobbying group.”
Royal Oak Tribune (MI), January 8, 2000, “DC quits lobbying group that attacks global warming.”
Times and Democrat (Orangeburp, SC), January 8, 2000, “Global warming worries DaimlerChrysler.”
Ann Arbor News, January 7, 2000, “DaimlerChrysler quits group that attacks climate treaty.”
Updated: March 22, 2000
Page 4
Ozone Action
Beaver Dam Citizen (WIZ January 7, 2000, “Daimler Chrysler quits group.”
Danville Commercial News (IL), January 7,2000, “DaimlerChrysler quits group opposed to treaty.”
Detroit Free Press, January 7, 2000, “DaimlerChrysler Corp. withdrew.. .”
Detroit News, January 7, 2000, “DCX quits global warming unit,” by David Mastio
Escanaba Press (MI), January 7 , 2000, “Automaker pulls out of environmental group.”
Grand Rapids Press, January 7, 2000, “DaimlerChrysler quits lobbying group: The company now
believes there may be evidence for global warming.”
Herald-Argus (LaPorte, IN), January 7,2000, “Daimler-Chrysler quits group that attacks pollution
agreeni e n t .”
Herald-Citizen (Cookeville, TN), January 7 , 2000, “DaimlerChrysler Corp. quits group that attacks
global warming treaty.”
Herald-Palladium (MI), January 7,2000, “Chrysler quits anti-global warming group.”
Ironwood Globe (MI), January 7, 2000, “DaimlerChrysler Corp. quits lobbying group that attacks global
warming.’‘
Janesville Gazette (WI), January 7, 2000, “DaimlerChrysler quits climate talks.”
Journal (Flint, MI), January 7, 2000, “DaimlerChrysler: Quits climate lobby.”
Journal (Stephens Point, WI), January 7, 2000, “DaimlerChrysler Corp. quits group that attacks treaty.”
Marion Republican (IL), January 7 , 2000, “DaimlerChrysler quits group that attacks treaty.”
MontPomew Advertiser (AL), January 7 , 2000, “DaimlerChrysler quits lobbying group.”
New York Times, January 7 , 2000, “DaimlerChrysler Leaving Climate Coalition.”
Oakland Press (Pontiac, MI), January 7,2000, “DXC bows to global warming, drops out of lobbying
group.”
Port Huron Times Herald (MI), January 7, 2000, “DaimlerChrysler quits climate coalition.”
Record (Hackensack, NJ), January 7 , 2000, “DaimlerChrysler drops opposition to climate pact.”
Record-Courier
(Ravenna, OH), January 7,2000, “DaimlerChrysler quits lobby group.”
Rome News-Tribune (GA), January 7,2000, “Carmaker quits group attacking Kyoto treaty.”
Telegram (Adrian, MI), January 7,2000, “Kyoto opposition dropped.”
WashinPton Post, January 7,2000, “DaimlerChrysler joined Ford.. .”
Updated: Murch 22, 2000
Ozone Action
Page 5
Dow Jones News Service, January 6, 2000, “DaimlerChrysler To Leave Global Climate Coalition,” by
Joseph B. White.
Financial Times, January 6, 2000, “Companies warm to environmental issues,” by Nancy Dunne.
Portsmouth Herald (NH), January 6, 2000, “Groups sound call for candidates to address global
warming.”
Rockford Register Star (IL), December 25, 1999, “Chrysler weighs global warming: Firm may end
treaty opposition.”
Port Huron Times Herald (MI), December 24, 1999, “Chrysler president outlines future,’’ by Catherine
Strong.
Birmingham News, December 23, 1999, “Chrysler may exit lobby group.”
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, December 23, 1999, “Chrysler gives an update.”
Mount Pleasant Sun (Gratiot County edition), December 23, 1999, “DaimlerChrysler looks ahead.”
Washington Post, December 21, 1999, “GM, Honda Team Up To Lower Emissions,” by Frank Swoboda
and Warren Brown.
Detroit Free Press, December 20, 1999, “Ford talks green but pushes gas guzzlers,” by Debra Saunders.
Kankakee Journal (IL), December 16, 1999, “Ford lifts veil on campaign of denial,” by Kevin J.
Sweeney.
St. Louis Post-Dispatch ,December 15, 1999, “Ford’s great-grandson says ‘no more lying’ when it
comes to the environment,” by John Passacantando.
The San Francisco Chronicle, December 14, 1999, “Protecting Mother Earth and Gas Guzzlers.”
Daytona Beach News-Journal (FL), December 13, 1999, “Ford lifts veil on campaign of global
warming denial,” by Kevin J. Sweeney.
Detroit Free Press, December 13, 1999, “Ford’s Sense: Company takes lead with smart steps to clean
air.”
Lewiston Morninp Tribune, December 13, 1999, “Ford quits adding to global warming smokescreen.”
Muskegon Chronicle (MI), December 13, 1999, “Ford leaves campaign of denial over global warming,”
by Kevin J. Sweeney.
Oil and Gas Journal>December 13, 1999, “Climate change issue a litmus test for oil company survival,:
by David Knott.
Atlantic City Press (NJ),December 12, 1999, “Ford clears the air on global warming,” by John
Passacantando.
Salt Lake Tribune, December 12, 1999, ‘‘Bill Ford Lifts the Veil on Campaign of Denial Over Global
Warming.”
Updated: March 22, 2000
Ozone Action
Page 6
Southern Illinoisian (Carbondale-Herrin, IL), December 12, 1999, “Ford shifts gears on global
warming,” by John Passacantando.
Sun (Lady Lake, FL), December 1 1, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks global warming,” by
Catherine Strong.
Scarlet and Black (Grinnell College), December 10, 1999, “Joint Board passes GCC resolution: FTP
sees resolution as part of national fight for the environment,” by David Nathan.
Iowa State Daily, December 10, 1999, “Citing protests, Ford withdraws from Global Climate Coalition,”
by Alison Storm.
Erie News (PA), December 10, 1999, “Sign of the times: Ford abandons anti-environment industry
organization,” by Jolin Passacantando.
Lansing State Journal (MI), December IO, 1999, “Auto exec lifts veil on global warming,” by Kevin J.
Sweeney (Ozone Action).
STAR (Anniston, AL), December 10, 1999, “Monumental decision: Ford shifts gears on global
warming, leaves anti-green coalition,” by John Passacantando.
Atlanta Journal and Constitution, December 9, 1999, “Cleverly named group hides polluters.”
Editorial.
Herald News (Fall River, MA), December 9, 1999, “Ford move could start trend,” by .John
Passacantando.
Journal Times (Racine WI), December 9, 1999, “Earth Day Network praises Ford.”
Latino Internacional- Central Florida (Orlando), December 9, 1999, “Ford se retira de grupo de
cabideo que ataca acuerdo medioambiental,” by Catherine Strong.
New London Day (CT), December 9, 1999, “Another global warming convert.”
Record (Bergen County, NJ1, December 9, 1999, “Ford Motor’s Quiet Revolution,” Op-Ed by Kevin
Sweeney.
The Record (Hackensack, NJ), December 9, 1999, “Ford Motor’s Quiet Revolution,” Op-Ed by Kevin
Sweeney.
DiePo Union-Tribune, December 9, 1999, “Corporate Shifts on Global Warming?” Op-Ed by John
Passacantando.
Rocky Mountain News, December 8, 1999, “Ford quits group that denies global warming.”
Virginian-Pilot (Norfolk, VA), December 8, 1999, “Ford Leaves Lobby.”
Deutscher Naturschutzring (DNR)/ German League for Nature and Environment, December 8,
1999, “Ford steigt aus der Anti-Klima-Koalition der Wirtschafi aus,” by Aiija Koehne.
Iron Mountain News (MI), December 8, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks global warming.”
Updated: March 22, 2000
Ozone Action
Page 7
Naples Daily News, December 8, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks global warming.”
Rockv Mountain News (Denver, CO), December 8, 1999, “Ford quits group that denies global
warming.’.
Washindon Times, December 8, 1999, “Ford Motor Company Withdrew.”
AAA Wire: Associated Press, December 7, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks global
warming.”
Arizona Star, December $7,1999, “Ford quits group opposing global warming treaty.”
Aumsta Chronicle (Aupusta GA), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks global
warming.”
Baltimore Sun, December 7, 1999, “Ford withdraws from group that denies global warming.”
Berlin Reporter (Berlin, NH), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks global
warming .”
Boston Globe, December 7, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks global warming.”
Call (Woonsocket, RI), December 7, 1999, “Ford shifts gears on global warming.”
Celena Standard (OH), December 7, 1999, “Ford leaves warming foes.”
Charlotte Sun Herald, December 7, 1999, “Ford quits group over global warming.”
Chronicle (Marshall, MI), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks global warming.”
Commerical-News (Three Rivers, MI), “Ford quits group that attacks global warming.”
Corning Leader (NY), December 7, 1999, “Ford withdraws from lobby group.”
The Courier (Forest Citv, NC), December 7, 1999, “For d withdraws from lobby group.”
Crescent-News (Defiance, OH), December 7, 1999, “Ford Motor Co. quits the lobbying group that
attacks global warming.”
Des Moines Repister, December 7, 1999, “Ford concedes global warming exists.’’
Detroit Free Press, December 7, 1999, “Ford’s Clean Break: Automaker the latest to renounce lobby
skeptical of global warming.”
Detroit News, December 7, 1999, “Ford Quits Global Climate Coalition.”
Express (Newport, VT), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits group attacking global warming issue.”
Florida Times-Union (Jacksonville), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits group opposed to climate treaty.”
Fox News, December 7, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks global warming.’’
Updated: Muvch 22, 2000
Ozone Action
Parre 8
Global Warming Today, December 7, 1999, “Ford Decides to Leave GCC.”
Greenwire, December 7, 1999, “Enviros, Industry React To Ford’s Withdrawal.”
Hazleton Standard-Speaker (PA), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks climate
treaty,” by Catherine Strong.
Herald (Hagerstown, MD), December 7, 1999, “Ford says it accepts global warming.”
Herald-Dispatch (Huntington, WV), December 7, 1999, “Ford will no longer fight Kyoto climate
treaty..’
Herald-Palladium (Benton Harbor-St.
Climate Coalition.”
Joe, MI), December 7, 1999, “Ford Motor drops out of Global
Herald-Sun (Durham, NC’), December 7, 1999, “Ford switches gears on global warming.”
Herald-Tribune (Sarasota, FL), December 7, 1999, “Ford leaves emissions lobbying coalition: It’s a
sign of discord over how to respond to global warming.”
Iowa State Daily, December 7, 1999, “Cut ties to the GCC,” Editorial.
Intelligencer (Wheeling, WV), December 7, 1999, “Ford Quits Group.”
Item (Sunbury, PA), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits group that attacks global warming.”
Journal (Middletown, OH), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group.”
Journal Review (Crawfordsville, IN),December 7, 1999, “Ford Motor Co. quits lobbying group.”
Los Angeles Times (LA-Low Beach Met Area, December 7, 1999, “Ford Says Global Warming
Exists. ”
Los Angeles Times (San Fernando Valley edition), December 7, 1999, “Ford Says Global Warming
Exists.’.
Los Angeles Times (LA-Long Beach Met Area), December 7, 1999, “Ford Quits Groiip Opposing
Kyoto Climate Treaty.”
Los Angeles Times (Orange Counw edition), December 7, 1999, “Ford drives Ford in the right
direction; The world’s No. 2 auto maker repudiates industry denials about effects of warming.’’ OpEd by Kevin Sweeney.
Los Angeles Times (San Fernando Valley edition), December 7, 1999, “Ford drives Ford i n the right
direction; The world’s No. 2 automaker repudiates industry denials about effects of warming.” Op-Ed
by Kevin Sweeney.
Macomb Daily, December 7, 1999, “Ford, coalition part ways over environmental differences.”
Mininp Journal (Marquette, MI), December 7, 1999, “Ford acknowledges global warming.”
Updaled: March 22, 2000
Ozone Action
Parre 9
Modesto Bee, December 7, 1999, “Ford leaves lobbying group that denies global warming.”
MSNBC News Services, December 7, 1999, “Ford quits climate change skeptics: Carmaker leaves
Global Climate Coalition, still opposes Kyoto.”
New York Times, December 7, 1999, “Ford announces its withdrawal from Global Climate Coalition,”
by Keith Bradslier.
News (Ann Arbor, MI), December 7, 1999, “Ford stops fighting climate treaty,” by Catherine Strong.
News (Birminpham, AL), December 7, 1999, “Ford Motor Co.. . .”
News (Dayton, OH), December 7, 1999, “Ford leaves group against emission controls,” by Keith
B radshe r.
News (Florence, SC), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks global warming,” by
Catherine Strong.
News (Monroe, MI), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks global warming.”
News and Observer (Raleigh, NC), December 7, 1999, “Ford Abandons Fight Against Kyoto Accord.”
Oakland Press (Pontiac, MI), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits opposing climate treaty.’’
Palatka Daily News (FL), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks global warming.”
Pantagraph (BloominPton, IL), “Ford quits group that attacks warming.”
Pittsburgh Post and Gazette, December 7, 1999, “Ford turning ‘green.”’
Pocono Record (StroudsburP, PA), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks global
warming.”
The Post-Standard (Syracuse, NY), December 7, 1999, “Ford calls for action to end global warming.”
Press (Atlantic City, NJ), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group opposed to climate treaty.”
Press (Grand Rapids, MI), December 7, 1999, “Ford changes stance on global warming: The
automaker now says credible evidence of climate change exists and companies should work together
to find solutions.”
Press-Herald (Portland, ME), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits coalition that denies global warming.”
Record (Bergen County, NJ2, December 7, 1999, “Ford Changes Stance on Global Warming.”
Record (Hackensack, NJ), December 7, 1999, “Ford Changes Stance on Global Warming.”
Reuters, December 7, 1999, “Ford latest to renounce lobby skeptical of global warming.’’
San DiePo Daily Transcript, December 7, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group.”
Seattle Times, December 7, 1999, “Ford says evidence shows global warming is a threat.”
Updated: Murch 22, 2000
Ozone Action
Page 10
Sentinel (Holland, MI), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits anti global warming group.”
Sentinel (Santa Cruz, CA), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits Global climate Coalition,” by Catherine
Strong.
Star-Banner (Ocala, FL), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits coalition to ‘address environmental issues,”’
by Catherine Strong.
Newark Star Ledger, December 7, 1999, “Ford cools to global warming coalition.”
Sun (Jackson, TN), December 7, 1999, “Ford distances itself from lobbying group.”
Sun-Gazette (Williamsport, PA), December 7, 1999, “For Motor Co. Quits Lobbying Group Over
Global Warming Flap.”
Republican (Rushville, IN), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks global
warming .”
Ft. Worth Star-Telepram, December 7, 1999, “Ford quits group that doubts theory of global warming.”
Minneapolis Star-Tribune, December 7, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks global warming.”
Telegraph-Herald (Dubuque, IA), December 7, 1999, “Ford latest to leave controversial group.”
Times (Bay City, WI), December 7, 1999, “Ford quits group that attacks global warming.”
Times Herald Record (Middletown, NY), December 7, 1999, “Ford bows out of group opposing
climate treaty.”
Toronto Sun, December 7, 1999, “Ford backs climate pact.”
Tulsa World (OK), December 7, 1999, “Ford changes global-warming position.”
Valley Morning Star, December 7, 1999, “Ford quits group that opposes climate treaty.”
Wall Street .Journal, December 7, 1999, “Ford Leaves Coalition that Opposes Global Warming.”
WashinPton Post, December 7, 1999, “Ford Shifts on Global Warming: Automaker Decides to Quit
Coalition Battling Kyoto Treaty,” by Warren Brown and Martha M. Hamilton.
Associated Press, December 6, 1999, “Ford Quits Lobbying Group,” by Catherine Strong.
Reuters, December 6, 1999, “Ford exits anti-Kyoto climate change group,” by Patrick Connole.
Cable News Network, December 6, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks global warming.”
CBS Marketwatch Online, December 6, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group.”
CNN.com, December 6, 1999, “Ford quits lobbying group that attacks global warming.”
Dow Jones News Service, December 6, 1999, “Ford Leaves Coalition That Opposes Global Warming.”
Updated: March 22, 2000
P
-
..
~~
steve.pedery@sEGr,
-~
1O:m
_ AlFll
_ TJE3I§7JJSlX
_ ~ _ _ _Toawn Clinton.Plan
_
~~~~~
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 97 10:30:17 PST
From: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
Subject: USA Today on Clinton Plan
To: [email protected]
Global warming plan gets chilly reception
WASHINGTON - Environmentalists, members of Congress, business groups and even
some U.S. allies rushed Wednesday to attack President Clinton's plan to combat
global warming almost as soon as it was announced.
Environmentalists said the plan doesn't do enough to lower production of
greenhouse gases, the pollutants that many scientists think hasten global
warming by trapping heat in the atmosphere.
"The plan . . . fails to protect our children," said Carl Pope, president of
the Sierra Club.
Industry leaders said the economy would be disrupted
"It's a flawed plan and it won't work," said William O'Keefe, chairman of the
Global Climate Coalition, an industry lobbying group. He said the plan would
lead to an energy tax, driving up fuel prices.
Legislators complained developing nations wouldn't be required to cut
pollutants.
"If (the president) brings this treaty to the Senate, it'll be very
embarrassing for him and his administration," said Sen. Charles Hagel, R-Neb.
The Senate must ratify any agreement.
Clinton would limit emissions of greenhouse gases by 2010 to the same level as
1990, or 3.3 billion tons a year.
The current total emissions by industrialized nations is 3.5 billion tons per
year. Most of that is carbon dioxide created when fossil fuels are burned.
By contrast, the European nations are fighting for a target of 2.8 billion tons
of greenhouse gases a year by 2010; Japan has proposed a target of 3.1 billion
tons a year by 2010.
Hugo Paemen, ambassador to the USA for the European Union, said it would be
difficult to reconcile the U.S. and European proposals before December when
final treaty talks begin in Kyoto, Japan. Talks already are under way in
Germany to draft that agreement.
Clinton's plan also calls for spending $5 billion over 5 years on
energy-efficient technology and renewable energy sources such as solar power
The plan promises incentives for companies that cut emissions before 2008 and
allows sales of pollution credits by companies below emission limits to firms
unable to meet the standards.
- .~
-A
Some groups, such as the Environmental Defense Fund, praised the plan as a good
starting point. And Jerry Mahlman, a climate expert at Princeton University
said the president's plan, if adopted by the entire world, would prevent the
most dire climate scenarios.
By Traci Watson, USA TODAY
f'
Los Angeles Times Archives & Professional Res ...
Page 1 of 3
Sunday, December 7, 1997
Home Edition
Section: PART A
Page: A-8
Showdown at Global Warming Summit;
Climate: More than 800 registered lobbyists are at gathering in Japan. Two of the biggest are dueling
to influence its outcome.;
By: MAGGIE F A U E Y
TIMES STAFF WRITER
KYOTO, Japan
While government officials debate the future of the planet behind closed doors here at the global
warming conference, another wrangle is occurring on the floor of the conference center in a place
known as the Smoke Pit.
Crouching next to a knot of officials shrouded in cigarette smoke, whispering strategies behind a
cupped hand, is the man who critics say has the desire and the power to cause negotiations here to
fail to produce an international accord.
Meet Daniel Pearlman, a U.S. lobbyist for oil, gas and power interests. He has been dubbed "the high
priest of the carbon club" and is as respected by his critics for his encyclopedic knowledge of
international and environmental law as he is reviled for the way he uses what he knows.
A portly chain-smoker with as many drooping chins as a basset hound, the secretive Pearlman will
not name his clients, does not give interviews and has only rarely had his picture published--once,
years ago, when he was photographed with a robed Kuwaiti sheik who was trying to block the
camera; the other time, last week, when a paparazzo environmentalist snapped him and printed the
result in a newsletter with a caption referring to the jowly cartoon character Deputy Dawg.
Keeping a close eye on Pearlman here, with one hand on a cellular telephone and the other clutching
a draft agreement, is Bill Hare. He is a reedy Australian physicist who is now a director of
Greenpeace. As much as Pearlman is protected by shadows, Hare and his confrontational nonprofit
environmental group are sustained by the limelight.
The chess game between these opposing advocates may have, in its own way, almost as much to do
with the outcome of the Kyoto conference as the officials who sign any deal.
The agreement due to be signed Wednesday would force developed countries to reduce emissions
from burning fuels. These emissions, scientists say, trap the Earth's heat like a greenhouse roof and
potentially cause: the melting of polar icecaps; extreme weather such as droughts and flooding; and
the spread of tropical diseases. At stake in Kyoto this week are the way countries create and use
energy; thousands of jobs; the state of nations' economies; and the living environment of billions of
people.
Most of those who came to Kyoto believe that global warming is a real problem that must be
confronted.
http://www.latimes.com/archives/doc/3633/temp/temp.329
12/8/97
c.
Los Angeles Times Archives & Professional Res ...
Page 3 of 3
just one of their concerns. But he is a real one.
"One of our main strategies is to keep delegates intellectually honest, to separate politics from facts,"
Hare said.
He contends that Exxon Chairman Lee R. Raymond, for example, recently told an audience in
Beijing that global warming is a myth and that oil is the lifeblood of economic growth. "Then he
turns around and says that the [oil and gas] industry can't accept the Kyoto agreement because
developing countries like China aren't doing enough to limit their emissions," said Hare. "It's
spectacular hypocrisy."
For Hare and his peers, part of the challenge is being creative and effective with little orno money.
The cost of a recent, influential $13-million advertising campaign sponsored by the Global Climate
Coalition equaled Greenpeace's entire annual budget. That means that Hare and his colleagues must
rely, instead, on attention-getting, confrontational acts to make their point--ramming oil tankers and
whalers, conducting noisy protests and hanging banners on smokestacks.
In Kyoto, the message has been more playful: Greenpeace has been serving coffee and eggs prepared
with heat from solar panels; on Friday, the group unveiled a "carbonosaurus" dinosaur made of oil
cans and old engines.
But, Hare said: "I think our influence has been mostly outside this meeting [rather] than in it. The
public believes there is a global warming problem, and that allows the negotiations to occur.
[Environmental groups] have helped make the issues prominent here," and they believe their key
battle may lie ahead, in getting lawmakers, such as those in Congress, to ratify any Kyoto accord.
Hare makes a quick call on his cell phone, checks his watch and starts across the conference hall for
yet another strategy session on the science of influence.
"I guess I am a lobbyist," he says with a grin. "But I always think of myself as a physicist."
Descriptors: ENVIRONMENT; SUMMIT CONFERENCES -- JAPAN; AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL; GREENHOUSE EFFECT; ENERGY INDUSTRY; WORLD ECONOMY;
Copyright (c) 1997 Times Mirror Company
Note: May not be reproduced or retransmitted without permission. To talk to our
permissions department, call: (800) LATIMES, ext. 74564.
If you have a question about your account, check here or message
web.billinn@,latimes.com. If you have other questions, check Helr,
Archives
The Los Angeles Times archives are stored on a SA VE (tm) newspaper library system from MediaStream,
Knight-Ridder Inc. company.
Inc., a
http ://www.latimes.com/archives/doc/363 3ltempltemp.329
12/8/97
Copyright 1996 Information Access Company,
a Thomson Corporation Company
IAC (SM) Newsletter Database (TM)
Environmental Information Networks, Inc
Global Warming Network Online Today
November 7,1996
LENGTH: 210 words
HEADLINE: API Presents Session on Warming, Economic Impact
BODY:
The American Petroleum Institute (API) will host a special presentation
entitled "Climate Change: International Economic Implications" during its 1996
Annual Meeting, which is scheduled to take place on Sunday, November 10, in the
Constitution Ballroom A of the Grand Hyatt Hotel in Washington, DC between 2:OO
and 4:OO p.m'.
The economic impact of imposing mandatory targets that limit emissions of
carbon dioxide in different countries will be the main topic of the global
climate session.
W. David Montgomery and Paul M. Bernstein of Charles River Associates and
William F. O'Keefe, executive vice president of API and chairman of the Global
Climate Coalition will be among the speakers at the session.
Montgomery is renowned for developing a computer model that analyzes the
consequences for employment and economic growth when strict limits are imposed
on emissions.
The annual meeting will be attended by API members as well as representatives
of foreign countries, international banks and global climate policy experts. For
further information, contact Michael Shanahan, phone 202-682-8 128.
(API RELEASE: 10/29)
c
Copyright 1996 The Financial Times Limited
Financial Times
October 30,1996, Wednesday LONDON EDITION 1
SECTION: MANAGEMENT; Pg. 16
LENGTH: 706 words
HEADLINE: Spared the Spar experience:
Dialogue with interested parties can avert harmhl environmental
controversy, writes Leyla Boulton:
BODY:
The last thing most company directors would want to do is involve
environmentalists in corporate policy-making. But that is precisely what more
companies should do, according to the government's Advisory Committee on
Business and the Environment (ACBE), which is made up of senior business people.
A year after environmentalist protests forced Shell to abandon dumping its
obsolete North Sea oil installation, Brent Spar, at sea, guidelines produced by
ACBE urge businesses to promote a "genuine two-way dialogue" with the public
before taking potentially controversial decisions.
This means deciding on a case-by-case basis who "interested parties" might
be, whether environmentalists, consumers, local residents or shareholders.
Companies should then think laterally about how such outside parties might
view, misunderstand or misconstrue a proposed course of action. The next step is
to begin a dialogue to win their support, or to thrash out an alternative
solution acceptable to all.
Besides averting Brent Spar-style nightmares, this approach can offer a
source of competitive advantage. But ACBE also warns that dialogue "provides no
guarantee that high-profile sensational media reporting will be avoided, or that
agreement will be reached".
ACBE says decisions based on purely ''scientific" arguments are often less
easy to communicate than some of the emotional, aesthetic and symbolic values
cited by the critics of business.
"While the company can and should challenge . . . factual information used by
'interested parties' if it believes it to be inaccurate or insufficient, to
simply denigrate other values . . . is almost always counter-productive," ACBE
says in a report accompanying the guidelines.
L
Mike Clasper, vice-president of Procter and Gamble Europe and a member of the
committee, says a number of companies have already embraced greater openness and
public consultation as a matter of good management.
Businesses travelling this route have found an increasingly receptive
audience among environmentalists who had formerly been among their toughest foes
in the past.
Greenpeace, better known for its direct action campaigns such as the one
which humbled Shell last summer, now also works with companies in promoting
solutions to environmental problems.
Only recently, says Peter Melchett, executive director of Greenpeace UK, says
business used to "pat us on the head and say 'there, there little boys and girls
from Greenpeace, we're the grown-ups. We'll deal with the problems'."
Jonathon Porritt, another environmentalist who favours more co-operation with
business, says that from a purely practical point of view, he is amazed "that
industry has taken so long to understand the cost of secrecy''. He adds: "Any
suggestion of deals stitched up behind closed doors is manna from heaven for
environmentalists.
Rodney Chase, managing director of British Petroleum, admits there are risks
to opening up big corporate decisions to public scrutiny. But he has no doubt
such risks are worth taking.
"It is essential that more and more of what we do should be . . . open to
influence by legitimate public interest groups," he says. Such an approach did
not mean sacrificing a company's self-interest, but "creating inside the company
a willingness to think about the interests of others while creating new
opportunities for profitable business".
One challenge for his own industry will be the likelihood of growing
opposition to the development of new oil and gas reserves, particularly
off-shore, he said.
Public disquiet over another problem, global warming, prompted BP's decision
earlier this year to quit the so-called Global Climate Coalition, a lobby group
which questions the severity of the problem.
The guidelines also recognise that some gaps between the two sides may simply
be too big to close. In such cases, they conclude, the final decision on what to
do rests firmly with the company.
For copies of and comments on Integrating the Environment into Business
e
Decisions: The Consensus Approach, contact ACBE Secretariat, Department of Trade
and Industry, Room 4/97, 151 Buckingham Palace Road, London SWlW 9SS. telephone
0171 2151984, fax 0171 2151621.
Copyright 1996 Chattanooga News-Free Press Company
Chattanooga Free Press
September 29, 1996, Sunday
SECTION: WEEKEND; Pg. k2
LENGTH: 790 words
HEADLINE: Hearing Strange Voices Lately?
BYLINE: J.B. Collins, Free Press Urban Affairs Editor
BODY:
Apparently ovewhelmed by the grandeur of the moment, a member of a visiting
group from Romania suddenly broke into the singing of an aria from a classic
opera.
There was no music. Just the resounding voice of this man from a foreign land
who obviously was so overcome by the ambiance as he stood on the stage of the
beautiful theater he just had to express himself.
Others of his touring group, surprised by the spontaneous outburst,
momentarily halted conversations among themslves and listened.
They smiled and applauded at the end.
Another of the group mounted the stage and he too began to sing, still
without accompaniment. Then, one by one, others joined until a chorus echoed
through the empty building as if making a special test of its acoustical
excellence.
When the brief impromptu performance ended, the group applauded themselves
and laughed aloud. It was a special moment during the group's tour of the city.
Gaines Hobbs, who served as guide, was impressed. Hobbs, Assistant to Mayor
Gene Roberts, said he was touched by the poignance of the moment.
Later, when the group was en route to another attraction, it broke into a
chorus of "Chattanooga Choo Choo."
This upbeat attitude is typical of groups visiting the city, Mr. Hobbs said,
observing that they just seem happy to be here.
And the number visitors is increasing, especially those from foreign lands.
Chattanooga has been getting attention in world forums like the one last
spring in Istanbul, Turkey, where Mayor Roberts and Councilman Dave Crockett
were among Chattanooga representatives in a major session. Chattanooga received
special attention when it was presented with a United Nations Award for
environmental achievement.
Some feel that the city got its foot in the global door when it was
recognized as a clean-air city after being tabbed a few years earlier as having
the dirtiest air. Other cites wanted to know how Chattanooga did it.
And it hasn't hurt that Councilman Crockett has made a number of contacts
with leaders throughout the world, telling the story of Chattanooga's
environmental and economic progress. Mayor Roberts thinks "Dave's pied pipering"
is getting results.
Some of the groups come through the Chamber of Commerce, some through
RiverValley Partners and some through the mayor's office.
Shirley Pond, administrative assistant to the mayor, has a friend in Prague
(Czech Republic). She once worked in the mayor's office here as an intern. When
she called Shirley recently she said she had just been listening to Mayor
Roberts on BBC (British) radio.
There seems to be a number of factors working in Chattanooga's behalf to
attract attention of visitors. And when they get here, Chattanoogans with the
responsibility to do so make sure they have a good time and see the right
things.
Jackie Lockett, a city councilwoman from Brownsville, Texas, was impressed
that Chattanooga "is way ahead of us with their stormwater control program."
Mr. Hobbs wants to be sure that while they see what they come to see,
visitors don't leave without seeing other worthwhile features, like
pollution-free electric buses, the Tennessee Aquarium, the beautiful Riverwalk,
and getting a chance to sing a solo a cappella on the stage of the Tivoli.
A recent group of Japanese Jaycees were especially interested in the
Chattanooga Neighborhood Enterprise, Mr. Hobbs said. "They couldn't believe that
a needy family could have a home of their own for just $500 down.''
The increase in foreign interest in Chattanooga was noted in an article in
the September edition of Envirolink, a local publication highlighting efforts to
improve the environment and the economy through education and
government-community partnerships.
A page-one article written by Florence Conner noted that "the myriad of
voices speaking in tongues" heard in this city in recent weeks ''wasn't tourists
spilling over from the Olympics or a religious convention."
"It was coming," the article said, "from foreign visitors drawn by
Chattanooga's growing reputation as "a city worth watching.'
It
WHAT'S the real answer?
Is the "globe" warming or cooling?
The Clinton administration recently moved to enforce tighter restrictions on
greenhouse gas emissions as a step toward halting global warming.
But according to a report from the Global Climate Coalition, 100 American and
European scientists issued a warning against "premature actions on global
warming.
I'
GCC reported: "Global composite temperatures for June continued a seven-month
trend of cooler than normal readings, according to Dr. John Christy, associate
professor of atmospheric science in the Earth System Science Lab at the
University of Alabama in Huntsville."
Copyright 1996 PR Newswire Association, Inc.
PR Newswire
December 3,1996, Tuesday
SECTION: Financial News
DISTRIBUTION: TO BUSINESS AND ENVIRONMENTAL EDITORS
LENGTH: 520 words
HEADLINE: Global Climate Coalition Elects Officers, Announces New Members
DATELINE: WASHINGTON, Dec. 3
BODY:
The Global Climate Coalition (GCC) last week elected officers for 1997 at
its semi-annual board of directors meeting in Washington, D.C. The officers
include: William F. O'Keefe, Chairman of the Board; Robert H. McFadden, Vice
Chairman - Policy; Constance D. Holmes, Chairwoman - Operating Committee; Robert
Beck, Vice Chairman - Operating Committee; John Shlaes, Executive Director;
Thomas Parker, Jr., Secretary; Bruce A. Steiner, Treasurer; Ray L. Harry and
Gordon H. Fry, At Large Members.
Also last week, the GCC announced that Baker Refractories and the Cyprus Amax
Minerals Company are the latest companies to join the industry coalition that
coordinates business participation in the scientific and economic policy debate
on global climate change.
The addition of Baker Refractories and Cyprus Amax Minerals raises the total
number of GCC members to fifty-nine. According to the Coalition, membership has
never been higher since the GCC was organized in 1989. Eleven new companies
have joined this year alone, including three U.S. auto makers, the Air Transport
Association, and Allegheny Power.
The GCC is an organization of private companies and business
trade associations, representing more than 230,000 firms. Membership includes
a broad range of business fiom virtually every sector of the U.S.
economy. Transportation industries such as the airlines, railroads, or
automobile manufacturers share a common interest in U.S. energy policies with
independent and investor-owned power generating companies, the petroleum
industry, chemical firms, the paper and aluminum industries, and owner-managed
small businesses across the country.
I
'
"Our membership continues to grow, both in number of members and diversity,"
said John Shlaes, GCC executive director. "That's because companies know that
GCC is a strong and effective industry voice when it comes to representing
legitimate business concerns about reducing greenhouse gas emissions by limiting
energy use," Shlaes said.
While the Coalition opposes mandatory limits on greenhouse gas, the
GCC continues to support scientific and economic research to advance
the understanding of earth systems, develop true and workable partnerships
with other nations through the diffusion of U.S. technology and know-how,
and refine the tools necessary for decision making with respect to
long-term economic strategies to address potential climate change.
"It is clear that many uncertainties need to be resolved regarding
climate change," Shlaes said, "but that does not mean we shouldn't begin to
promote increasingly successful voluntary programs and develop
cost-effective approaches between countries, such as Joint Implementation, to
promote emissions reductions."
This summer, the Clinton Administration announced in Geneva that the United
States supports legally-binding limits on greenhouse gas emissions. The
Coalition argues that such a policy will require new energy taxes or a cap on
energy use that will drive up energy prices and negatively affect the
U.S. economy. SOURCE Global Climate Coalition CONTACT: Tom Calcagni for the
Global Climate Coalition, 202-383-3859
4
NEWS
California backs off destruction of records
San Francisco. California’s state Environmental Protection Agency (Cal-EPA) has
suspended a controversial plan to destroy
records of dissenting scientific opinions
about risk to public health from industrial
emissions, chemicals and hazardous waste.
Under a ‘records retention policy’
introduced last spring, the agency ordered
state scientists to destroy research data and
internal records that differed from final
policy directives on hazard assessment.
The policy would affect documents
maintained by the Offxe of Environmental
Health Hazard Assessment, which makes
policy on toxicity, carcinogenicity and safety
measures related to agricultural chemicals,
hazardous wastes and industrial emissions.
Cal-EPA said the policy would foster free
exchange of opinion by protecting the
identity and views of the scientists involved.
But the move was criticized by scientists,
environmentalist groups and free-speech
advocates, who claim that the policy was
designed to do just the opposite - namely
to censor debate about public health risks.
Last week, a few hours after a public-
interest lawsuit charged the agency with
violating the public’s right to know about
the workings of government, Pete Wilson,
the governor of the state, ordered the
agency to maintain its records and clarify
any confusion over the policy. Cal-EPA
agreed not to destroy the documents, but
said it would keep them in confidential files.
The Natural Resources Defense Council,
the Environmental Law Center and the
Society of Professional Journalists had filed
a joint suit against the agency in San
Francisco. They said Cal-EPA had no legal
basis to keep the documents secret, and was
violating state public-records laws.
Cal-EPA has the right to keep some
documents confidential. But according to
Terry Francke, director of the California
First Amendment Coalition, a free-speech
watchdog group, such action requires the
status of the documents to be resolved in
court. Destroying documents, he says,
subverts California’s open-records laws by
making such court scrutiny impossible.
Francke argues that the agency’s action
conflicts with both public access to
government operations and the norms of
scientific practice. “The presupposition in
the development of science is that all
information should not only be public, but
widely disseminated so discussion can
advance on the validity of the research and
its findings,” he says.
Other protests have come from the
California Association of Professional
Scientists, a labour union for scientists
employed by the state. They argue that
scientific integrity would be compromised
under the new policy, and that important
data on public health would be destroyed.
A memorandum ordering the enactment
of the plan instructed state employees to
dispose of all documents and other
communications prepared during the
course of policy formulation “which contain
other policy proposals not adopted or
reflected in the final decision”. Correspondence, electronic messages and scientific
data would all be assessed on whether the
information they contained was reflected in
policy. If in doubt, the documentation was to
Sally Lehrman
be destroyed.
Companies cool to tactics of global warming lobby
London. The Global Climate Coalition
(GCC), the US energy lobby group that has
challenged some of the main conclusions of
United Nations climate scientists about the
severity of manmade global warming, has
suffered a setback to its lobbying efforts with
the resignation of two member companies
and the possibility of further withdrawals.
BP America, a subsidiary of British
Petroleum, and the Arizona Public Service
Company, a Phoenix-based electric power
utility, are pulling out of the group, which
earlier this year accused scientists working
for the lntergovemmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) of distorting the conclusions
of a key report in order to over-emphasize
the role of human activities in climate
change (see Nature 383,287; 1996) .
Klaus Kohlhase, head environment
adviser at BP headquarters in London, says
that BP felt its interests in the United States
were not best represented by remaining in
the coalition. But BP, he says, will stay
a member of the International Climate
Change Partnership, an alternative industry
lobby group which he describes as “a more
moderate and conciliatory”body.
Mark De Michele, chief executive of the
Arizona Public Service Company, partly
shares that sentiment. “Global climate
change is a serious problem and we need to
take steps to deal with it,” says De Michele,
one of the architects of a Clinton administration-backed initiative to persuade power
utilities voluntarily to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions. “I was concerned that to continue
470
to attack the science - which the GCC is
basically doing -is not the way forward.”
Representatives of environmentalist
groups, such as the US Climate Action
Network, the Natural Resources Defense
Council and Greenpeace, say that the resignations are a significant development. Paul
Horsman, head of oil campaigns at Greenpeace, claims that some members of the
energy industry are realizing that the GCC
has lost credibility and are re-grouping
around other organizations, such as the
climate change partnership and the Business
Council for a Sustainable Energy Future.
But Bill OKeefe, president of GCC and a
vice-president of the American Petroleum
Institute, shrugs off the resignations. “We’re
adding members, not losing them,” he
says. “We have eight to ten new board members, and are still the leading business voice
in climate change.”
Both BP and the Arizona Public Service
Company, says GCC’s executive director
John Shlaes, were ‘general’ members, a
category he describes as “an educational
forum”. ‘Board‘ membership, on the other
hand, entitles companies to influence
GCC policy, and costs US$20,000 annually
(general members pay US$2,500).
This summer, the GCC mounted a vociferous campaign to contest a report written
by scientists working for the IPCC, which
had been re-edited just before publication.
The GCC claimed that the alterations
amounted to “scientific cleansing”. The scientists said the changes were necessary to
clarify parts of the text that had earlier confused policy-makers. The ensuing war of
words caught the attention of Republican
members of the US Senate, who convened a
series of hearings into the matter.
Several GCC member companies are
understood to have been uneasy about the
organization’s aggressive tactics. And in
July, a senior US administration official
weighed in by indirectly referring to the
GCC as “naysayers and special interests
bent on belittling, attacking and obfuscating
climate change science”, in a speech to the
annual conference of the climate convention
in Geneva (see Nature 382,287; 1996).
But the withdrawal of the Arizona Public
Service Company is also believed to have
been influenced from another quarter -the
Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility, an association of institutional investors
representing US churches and other religious-based investments. The centre, which
claims to represent combined investments of
US$70 billion, has asked each GCC member
company - where its affiliates are shareholders - to resign from the coalition.
Ariane van Buren, director of the centre’s
environment programme, says the GCC
should not be allowed to do further harm to
the process of dealing with global climate
change. “In no case should [a member] conipany allow its name to be associated with
any additional GCC activities that distort
the facts.” Companies, she says, should join
“responsible business coalitions”.
Ehsan Masood
NATURE
.
VOL 383
. 10 OCTOBER 1996
627 National Press Building !
Washington, D.C.20045
(202) 638-4260
Telefax: (202) 662-9744
ED Volume 24, Number 105
Monday, June 3,1996
Administration Gets A Slice Of Humble Pie
BY DENNIS WAMSTED
The Clinton administration last week got the first
taste of the humble pie it will be forced to consume
for backing the 4.3 cent reduction in the federal
gasoline tax proposed this spring by COP presidential candidate Bob Dole.
In releasing a report on the greenhouse gas issue,
John Shlaes, executive director of the Global Climate
Coalition, said: “After responding so quickly to the
recent spike i n oil prices, the administration should be
sensitized to the economic impact of higher energy
costs.”
And the slightly higher gasoline prices that prompted
the political uproar will pale i n comparison to the price
increases due to greenhouse gas reduction proposals
now being considered by the United States and other
nations, Shlaes said.
According to the GCC review, prepared for the
coalition by the WEFA Group and H. Zinder & Associates, complying with a proposal to cut greenhouse gas
Anti-Nuclear Groups
Challenge Energy
Department EIS
A host of anti-nuclear and
weapons site watchdog groups put
the Energy .Department on notice
Friday: Either start over and complete a new environmental impact
statement for the stockpile stewardship program, or prepare for a nasty
court battle.
The notice came in the form of a
two-page letter to Energy Secretary
Hazel O’Leary from some 90
groups, including Energy Research
Foundation, Environmental Action
Foundation, Government Accountability Project, Natural Resources
Defense Council and Nuclear
Information -& Resource Service.
In their letter, the groups warned
O’Leary that the draft programmatic
EIS completed by the department on
its stockpile stewardship program “is
so fundamentally flawed that even a
substantially revised version of the
(Continued on page 2)
emissions 20 percent from 1990 levels by 2005 would
cost U.S. consumers a pretty penny-lots of pretty
pennies.
Specifically, the report indicated that gas prices
likely would climb to around $2 a gallon under the
most likely scenario for complying with such a mandate. At $2 a gallon, gas would be 80 cents more
expensive than the nationwide average fqJ.995.of., ,.
$1.20.
.. .
Under that scenario, a carbon tax of $280 per metric
ton would be required to bring the United States into
compliance by 2005, the WEFA-Zinder study said. And
even though this tax would be offset by reductions in
other taxes, the U.S. economy would take a beating,
according to Mary Novak, senior vice president of
WEFA’s energy services group.
Overall, complying with such a mandate would
result in a loss of up to $305 billion (in 1994 dollars)
from the U.S. gross domestic product by 2005, she said.
With these costs in mind, Shlaes challenged the
administration to answer one question: “What are we
(Continued on page 2)
FERC Changes Course, Takes
Activist Position On Market Power
BY MARY O’DRISCOLL
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission signaled its intent last
week to play a more active role on questions of market power, rejecting an
application from the Mid-Continent Area Power Pool for market-based
rates.
The May 28 deficiency letter, from Applications Division Director
Donald Gelinas, orders MAPP to submit a generation dominance study for
each jurisdictional pool member and, because transmission constraints
have become a focus of the Primergy merger debate, requires the pool to
ascribe a transmission component to whatever coordination transactions its
members are engaging in.
MAPP submitted a revised operating agreement, which includes a
proposal for pool-wide market-based rates, in late March. In responding to
FERC’s requirements that all market-based rate applicants demonstrate a
lack of generation dominance, MAPP noted that its three largest members
already have qualified for market rates, and that no other member accounts
for more than 5 percent of total MAPP capacity.
Not good enough, FERC said. “This does not reflect the commission’s
requirements with respect to generation dominance. You are required to
submit a generation dominance analysis for each jurisdictional member.
The analysis for each member should include in the market share calcula(Continued on page 3)
A’ITENTION: COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. It isunlawful to photocopy this page without written permission from the publisher.
X-Sender: [email protected]
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 09:44:51 -0400
To: farrance, ksims, brandon, cvpatter
From: John Passacantando <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: SSI Infoupdate: Report on Economics of Climate Change-Part
2
>From: Kevin Robert Gurney <[email protected]>
>To: "John Passacantando (E-mail)" <[email protected]>,
>
"Kelly Sims (E-mail)" <[email protected]>
>Subject: FW: SSI Infoupdate: Report on Economics of Climate Change-Part 2
>Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 10:07:47 -0700
>
>
>-----Original Message---->From: [email protected] [SMTP:[email protected]]
>Sent:
Wednesday, July 16, 1997 10:18 AM
>To:
undisclosed-recipients:;@ucsusa.org
>Subject: SSI Infoupdate: Report on Economics of Climate Change-Part 2
>
>[Continued from Part I ]
>
>** The Economic Doomsayers
>
> The Global Climate Coalition --the most prominent lobby group representing
>fossil fuel-intense industry on the climate issue -- has based its recent
>lobbying campaign on two different modeling efforts: a U.S. national economic
>analysis and an international trade analysis, both developed primarily by the
>Charles River Associates (EPRKRA 1996, CRA 1997, respectively). The GCC has
>claimed that these studies prove that actions to mitigate climate change will
>significantly burden the U.S. economy. Yet, both these studies vastly
>overestimatethe costs of mitigation policies. In particular, the Charles River
>Associates (CRA) results fall far outside the range of results found in 14
other
>economic models (Krause 1997). In terms of cost estimates for cutting U.S.
>carbon emissions, CRA results were roughly five times higher than the next most
>pessimistic model in the study -- results that emerge from the kinds of
>omissions noted in the first section of this update and a series of more
>specific biases that further exacerbate its negative outcome.
>
> Perhaps its most glaring bias was an unusually high carbon tax. The CRA
>report assumes that a tax of approximately $200 per ton of carbon will
represent
>the main policy instrument by which the US curtails greenhouse gas emissions.
>This is an inappropriateassumption, however, since neither economists nor the
Clinton Administration advocate reliance on a single policy measure; those that
>do favor a carbon tax don't proscribe one of such magnitude. Yet the model
>implications of CRAs unrealistic carbon tax alarm both the public and
>policymakers.
>
> Based on the assumption of a very high carbon tax, CRA then concludes that
>many industries will be threatened by the tax and will simply relocate
overseas,
I_
J oh nP ~
assacantan
_ 2 - ! ! 0
9, 3 *
: ! -
! 5 7 9 7 J W F ________________
SS~oLQ%i2teXep~p
~
>particularly to developing countries. In fact, relatively few industries are so
>carbon intense so as to be severely impacted by a carbon tax. A more balanced
>analysis than CRAs has shown that energy and energy-intensive industries
>contribute less than 9 percent to U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) (Krause
> I 997, Muller 1997). For all other industries -- which represent
approximately 90
>percent of jobs and economic output in the U.S. -- energy costs are but a small
>percentage (less than 3 percent) of their total costs.
>
> Even in carbon-intense industries, however, a more realistic tax level ($20
>to $50 per ton of carbon) combined with no regrets policies would significantly
>reduce the likelihood of relocation. Industry may also be able to earn carbon
>credits through joint implementationor emissions trading that could reduce the
>economic impact of carbon taxes. If impacts on a small portion of
>carbon-sensitive U.S. industries cannot be avoided, policies aimed at retaining
>these industries -- such as border tax adjustments or energy efficiency credits
>-- could be implemented.
>
> The CRA also overstates the potential for job loss overseas -- likely the
>biggest threat perceived by the U.S. public. Once again, however, both Krause's
>and Muller's analyses have shown that the number of jobs represented by energy
>and energy-intensive industries in this country amount to less than 5
percent of
>U.S. workers. Still, attention should be paid to those jobs that could be
>threatened by an emissions reduction policy. This can be done in two ways.
>
> First, the estimated economic gains from no regrets measures could more than
>pay for the impact suffered by coal miners, oil drillers, and others affected.
>Investment in retraining and restructuring could alleviate local employment
>adjustments. For example, estimated economic benefits of $50-200 billion per
>year from no regrets policies would be 10 to 40 times the entire payroll of the
N . S . coal mining industry. Second, with a well-designed no regrets policy, the
>estimated number of jobs created in less carbon intense industrial sectors are
>larger than those projected to be lost. The result is a net gain in employment
>in the overall economy rather than a net loss -- one of the main points of the
>"Energy Innovations" study.
>
> With their excessively large cost estimates in hand, the GCC goes on to
claim
>that the pain to the U.S. economy won't even achieve any environmental benefit.
>In their opinion, the current scope of the international climate
negotiations ->to produce binding emissions reductions commitments only for developed
countries
>and delayed and/or differential commitments for developing nations -- will only
>produce international "emissions leakage." In essence, emissions-intense
>activities in industrialized countries, according to their scenario, will
simply
>be displaced to those nations without binding commitments, resulting in no real
>emissions reductions on a global scale. Furthermore, the GCC argues that
>reductions in fossil-fuel consumption in the developed world would cause
>fossil-fuel prices to drop, leading to greater fossil fuel consumption in
>developing countries and thereby producing greater carbon emissions.
>
> The concern about international emissions leakage is a legitimate one and is
>shared by many in the environmental community. However, the real world
potential
>for leakage is poorly characterized, and several modeling studies have come to
>different conclusions about its magnitude. The 1995 IPCC assessment noted that
>"currently, there is no consensus among economists about the magnitude of
>leakage. More research is needed and it would be particularly helpful if
leakage
>rates were calculated for identical simulations employing a consistent set of
>assumptions, as has already been done in estimating the costs of climate change
>policies" (IPCC 1996~).
In the meantime, it would be more useful to devise
>policy measures to address leakage and limit the hyperbole around the subject.
>
>** Conclusion
>
> Reducing greenhouse gas emissions will undoubtedly have an impact on the
>economies of the world. A growing number of economists and policy experts,
>however, has concluded that policies exist which both reduce emissions and
>contribute to economic growth. Many of these policies incorporate no regrets
>options -- instruments which simultaneously promise greenhouse gas reductions
>and other economic and environmental benefits.
>
> The modeling work promoted by the fossil interests suffers from a series of
>simplifications and omissions which consistently bias the consideration of
>climate change policy towards high costs and limited benefits. The most
>important of these omissions is the lack of no regrets policy measures. A
number
>of additional simplifications contribute as well, such as the use of market
>discount rates, the limited interaction between policy and industrial
>innovation, the lack of powerful international mechanisms such as emissions
>trading, and the limited consideration of damages to the environment and
>economies of the world as a result of climate change.
>
> On the other hand, much recent analytical work incorporating no regrets and
>other policy approaches shows that greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced
while
>the economy grows. The bottom line is that modernizing our energy use is good
>for the economic well-being of the country and will improve our health and
>environment .
>
.......................................................................
>References
>
>Florentin Krause, "The Costs and Benefits of Cutting U.S. Carbon Emissions: A
>Critical Review of the Economic Arguments of the Fossil Fuel Lobby,"
>International Project for Sustainable Energy Paths, El Cerrito, CA, May 1997.
>
>Frank Muller, "Will the Climate Change Convention Shift U.S. Jobs to Developing
>Countries?, Economic Policy Institute, May 1997.
>
>Robert Repetto and Duncan Austin, "The Costs of Ciimate Change Protection: A
>Guide for The Perplexed," World Resources Institute, 1997.
.
Tohn PassacSii€aTo,
09:44 AMTIZ~ S F b i E l J ~ R i $ i j F € o n ___-_
- ~________-~.-__--~-_______.__~
~
~
>
>Curtis Moore and Alan Miller, "Green Gold: Japan, Germany, the United States,
>and the Race for Environmental Technology," Beacon Press, Boston, MA, 1994.
>
>Stephen J. DeCanio, "The Energy Paradox: Bureaucratic and Organizational
>Barriers to Profitable Energy-Saving Investments," Department of Economics,
>University of California, Santa Barbara, August 4, 1995.
>
>Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Economic and Social Dimensions of
>Climate Change," James Bruce, Hoesung Lee, and Erik Haites, (eds), Cambridge
>University Press, 1996.
>
>Alliance to Save Energy, American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy,
>Natural Resources Defense Council, Tellus Institute, and Union of Concerned
>Scientists, "Energy Innovations: A Prosperous Path to a Clean Environment,"
>June 1997.
>
>
>
John Passacantando
Executive Director
Ozone Action
1636 Connecticut Ave., NW
Third Floor
Washington, DC 20009
phone 202-265-6738
fax
202-986-6041
www.ozone.org
7
pp---_
Page 3
22ND STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format
Content and programming copyright 1997 Cable News Network
Transcribed under license by Federal Document Clearing
House, Inc. Formatting copyright 1997 Federal Document
Clearing House, Inc. All rights reserved. No quotes from the
materials contained herein may be used in any media without
attribution to Cable News Network. This transcript may not
be copied or resold in any media.
CNN
SHOW: CNN INSIDE BUSINESS 16:OO pm ET
October 11, 1997; Saturday 4 : O O pm Eastern Time
Transcript # 97101100V36
TYPE: SHOW
SECTION: News; Business
LENGTH: 3308 words
HEADLINE:
Top Business News of the Week
BYLINE: Valerie Morris, Eileen O'Connor, Eugenia Halsey, Ed Garsten, Fred
Katayama, Sherri Sylvester, Kavin Smith, Jeanne Moos
HIGHLIGHT:
This week on INSIDE BUSINESS, CNN takes a look at how the White House is
spinning the greenhouse effect. And the prize at the bottom of every box of
Cracker Jacks will soon belong to Frito Lay. We'll take a look back at a
century old American icon, and at star salaries this season.
BODY :
VALERIE MORRIS, INSIDE BUSINESS: This week on INSIDE BUSINESS, the planet
Earth has a new public relations direct, President Clinton. We'll take a look at
how the White House is spinning the greenhouse effect. And the prize at the
bottom of every box of Cracker Jacks will soon belong to Frito Lay. We'll take
a look back at a century old American icon. And we'll give you an inside look
at star salaries this season, all on this week's edition of INSIDE BUSINESS.
Welcome to INSIDE BUSINESS. I'm Valerie Morris in for Deborah Marchini.
White House consciousness raising on global warming reached new heights this
week with a day long teach-in at Georgetown University. Eileen O'Connor has the
story.
EILEEN O'CONNOR, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over):The president
was greeted by demonstrators on Monday at Georgetown University, showing just
how hot the whole debate over global climate change has become. The president
says the United States must commit to reducing greenhouse gases.
PRES. WILLIAM J. CLINTON: We must be prepared to commit to realistic and
binding goals on our emissions of greenhouse gases. Critics say curbing carbon
Page 4
CNN INSIDE BUSINESS, October 11, 1997
fuel consumption will greatly damage the U.S. economy and without developing
countries in Africa or China signing on, the long-term benefits, they argue,
could be negligible. Industry leaders argue alternative energy sources like
solar or wind power should be more developed and placed in use before committing
to limits.
WILLIAM O'KEEFE, AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE: That doesn't require a
mandate. That requires an investment climate and a government-industry
partnership focused on that objective.
O'CONNOR (voice-over):The White House admits the science is in exact but
argue when there is categoric proof, it may be too late.
CLINTON: It would clearly be a grave mistake to bury our heads in the sand
and pretend the issue will go away.
O'CONNOR: So the White House will continue with more of what it calls public
awareness events designed to make the case for a global treaty.
Eileen O'Connor, CNN, the White House.
MORRIS: The Clinton administration is not content with just saving the planet
for our grandchildren. In the wake of several high profile cases of bad food,
its seeking expanded powers to regulate and recall tainted meat. But that
proposal ran into trouble this week on Capitol Hill. Eugenia Halsey has the
story.
EUGENIA HALSEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over):The recall this summer of 25
million pounds of ground beef from a Hudson processing plant in Nebraska has
once more put the spotlight on food safety. A lot of people were shocked to
learn the government didn't have the power to recall the meat but had to rely on
the company to do it voluntarily. At a hearing on Capitol Hill, Agriculture
Secretary Dan Glickman asked Congress to give him recall authority plus the
ability to fine companies up to $100,000 a day for meat safety violations.
DAN GLICKI", AGRICULTURE SECRETARY: It's an insurance policy
HALSEY (voice-over):The measure is backed by consumer groups. Nancy Donley
lost her only child to a bad burger.
NANCY DONLEY, SAFE TABLES OUR PRIORITY: There is a clear conflict of interest
having for profit companies responsible for policing and recalling, if
necessary, their own product.
HALSEY (voice-over):But several senators were skeptical of whether broad new
government powers to recall meat would make it safer.
SEN. BOB KERREY, ( D ) , NEBRASKA: That all may be fine and good, but we've got
to change our procedures.
HALSEY (voice-over):Senators Richard Lugar and Tom Harkins said they will
try to come up with a more comprehensive bill than the administration's, one
Page 5
CNN INSIDE BUSINESS, October 1 1 , 1997
that will include preventative measures such as beef irradiation. Irradiation
can kill germs like evidence. coli. Although many people are scared of it, it
does not make food radioactive. Glickman says the Food and Drug Administration
will probably approve beef irradiation soon.
GLICKMAN: We support any new technology that improves public safety. As you
know, we do use irradiation for trichinosis in swine and for poultry and FDA is
currently evaluating a petition to approve its use for other meats, including
ground beef.
HALSEY: But Glickman says he doesn't consider irradiation a silver bullet.
Consumer groups fear irradiation will shift attention away from trying to make
meat cleaner. A modernized meat inspection system championed by the Clinton
administration is currently being phased in. But many health experts say the
nation is still a long way from having a fail safe system.
Eugenia Halsey, CNN, Capitol Hill.
MORRIS: When we come back, a sneak preview of the new rides for ' 9 8 and candy
coated popcorn, peanuts and a prize. Cracker Jacks has a new owner. We'll
bring you that story when INSIDE BUSINESS returns.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MORRIS: Car buyers, start your engines. The 1 9 9 8 s are ready to roll. Well,
most of them, that is. Detroit is a buzz with the debut of next year's models
and Ed Garsten takes us now for a ride through his video showroom.
ED GARSTEN, CNN DETROIT BUREAU CHIEF (voice-over):A new Butte, a handsome
escort, a mini van from Japan, a Benz with bounce, a Seville that's been
barbered, a Vet with a view, the Beetle's come back. Woah, let's put them in
reverse and give them the once over, slower. Well, here's the brute Butte, the
new Dodge Durango sport utility vehicle. Chuck Mazurie didn't wait long to sign
on the dotted line and this one's going home with him.
CHUCK MAZURIE, CAR BUYER: It offers for me for the size, the additional wheel
base and functionality that I was looking for.
GARSTEN (voice-over):At a base price of about 27 grand, the Durango fits
between the Ford Explorer and Chevy Suburban. And for about $10,000 more, you
can get behind the wheel of a new SUV from Mercedes Benz, a mix of luxury, value
and toughness.
VOICE OF LEON MANDEL, PUBLISHER, "AUTO WEEK": You get in that thing and you
drive it on the road and you think it's a Mercedes sedan. You get in that thing
and drive it off the road and think you're in the world's best mountain
climbing, ditch surviving vehicle.
GARSTEN (voice-over):Japanese auto maker Toyota is building its new mini
van, the Sienna, in the United States, but it still has those distinctive Toyota
features.
HANDEL: It has all of the things that you need, all the doors that you can
Page 6
CNN INSIDE BUSINESS, October 11, 1997
possibly put on a mini van plus its walk through.
competitive Japanese mini van.
It should be the first really
GARSTEN (voice-over):The Sienna starts at just over $21,000 but can balloon
to over $27,000 with extras. Talk about extras, at $ 4 0 , 0 0 0 to $50,000, the
recoiffed Cadillac Seville sports 'em all, from a 4 2 5 watt Bose sound system to
a powerful North Star engine to a super squishy seat.
ED BERGER, CADILLAC: We have 10 computer controlled air cells actually in the
seat and they, the sensors measure body pressure.
GARSTEN (voice-over):A couple of cars with new bodies include the restyled
Chrysler LH line and the sporty Escort ZX2. It carries a sticker of just over
$16,000.
CAR BUYER: I think it's beautiful.
very beautiful.
I think it's a good car.
I think it's
GARSTEN (voice-over):$ 4 6 , 0 0 0 buys the rag top version of the new look
Corvette. About $21,000 takes home the nifty Volkswagen Passat (ph).
MANDEL: It's a very comfortable car.
has a lot of amenities.
It's very roomy.
It's commodious. It
GARSTEN (voice-over):And finally, Beetlemania makes a comeback. These are
sneak peek photos from V.W. of the long lamented Beetle, due out next year.
MANDEL:
It's pretty high tech and it's moderately expensive.
GARSTEN (voice-over):And while a lot of these new models look like they'll
be hot seller, sales overall, well, they weren't so hot, and that's good news
for consumers because for the most part, the auto companies are holding the line
on 1 9 9 8 pricing and offering some enticing rebates. So it's an economical time
to cruise the showrooms and strike a deal on a new set of wheels.
Ed Garsten, CNN, Detroit.
MORRIS: One of America's most endearing and enduring and beloved snack foods
is getting a new owner, Frito Lay, adding some sugar to its line of salty snack
foods by acquiring Cracker Jack from Borden Foods. And like the Volkswagen Bug,
this pop icon was a German invention. But over the years, Cracker Jack has
become as American as baseball and apple pie. Fred Katayama explains.
FRED KATAYAMA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over):The crack of the bat goes hand
in hand with Cracker Jack, especially in the seventh inning stretch. But the
game's over between Cracker Jacks and Borden Foods. Borden is selling the
cherished snack to the maker of Doritos, Frito Lay. More than 17 billion boxes
have been sold since the popcorn and peanuts snack debuted in 1 8 9 3 . Borden,
which bought the Cracker Jack company in 1 9 6 4 , sold $ 6 0 million worth last year.
Over the century, the snack featuring Sailor Jack and Bingo grew into an
American icon.
BRUCE WEINDRUCH, HISTORY FACTORY CEO: We were a country that had boundless
Page 7
CNN INSIDE BUSINESS, October 11, 1997
frontiers, the frontier closed and we needed entertainment, we needed
commodities that were meant for an urban area and Cracker Jacks was that.
KATAYAMA (voice-over):A surprise came with each box. The toys reflected the
changing eras - - paper tanks during W.W.11, space men in the 6 0 s to the Wish
Bone cartoon character of today. Mention Cracker Jacks and people remember the
prizes.
1ST CONSUMER: Searching for the prize was the greatest, you know, whether it
be like, I can't remember what used to be in there, little plastic toy soldiers
or whatever. But it was the prize in my mind.
2Nd CONSUMER: We were trying to eat 'em as fast as we could because we wanted
to see the prize on the bottom.
KATAYAMA (voice-over):Frito Lay will not leave this American icon alone.
vows to freshen up the taste of the product and launch new ads.
It
(on camera) Cracker Jack collectors say the change in ownership marks the end
of an era, boosting the value of their toys. One thing is clear, Frito Lay is
getting a cracker jack of a product.
Fred Katayama, CNN Financial News, New York
MORRIS: The prizes that you get in Cracker Jacks these days are stuff like
stickers, tattoos and holograms. But the prizes from the early days, such as
the 1915 baseball card of shoeless Joe Jackson are worth thousands today.
Next up, TV stars with five figure a week salaries complaining about being
underpaid? We're going to give you the poop on who's making what and cable TV
is taking a bigger than ever share of the network audience. But will that
translate into ad revenue? We'll find out more when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MORRIS: Ever since Jerry Seinfeld demanded and got $1 million per episode,
contract negotiations for prime time salaries have gone into orbit. Sherri
Sylvester brings us the latest from the network compensation front.
(CLIP FROM "HOME IMPROVEMENT")
SHERRI SYLVESTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over):Tim Allen began his work
week with reports of a pay raise, a hefty one. Industry trades say the ''Home
ImprovementI1 stock could take home $1.25 million per episode, up from his
current $750,000.
DELLA REESE: I can't get any kind of understanding from anybody.
SYLVESTER (voice-over):Della Reese began her week a bit
differently. The "Touched By An Angel" player complained to the press that
her raise, reportedly from $40,000 to $50,000 per episode, is not enough. It is
more than $1 million a year but significantly less than her costar, Roma Downey
(ph).
Page 8
CNN INSIDE BUSINESS, October 11, 1997
REESE: For six years I've given the very best that I've got and I'm giving
Mr. Moondress (ph) the very best that I've got and it's working because we're
number two. Then why shouldn't I benefit like everybody else is benefiting?
SYLVESTER (voice-over):"Touched By An Angel" is consistently one of the top
five rated shows, a rarity for CBS. "Home Improvement" is often ABC's highest
rated series.
JAMIE TARSES, PRESIDENT, ABC ENTERTAINMENT: You understand why people are
paying what they have to pay because as the assets become fewer and further
between, you need these hit shows, even if they end up being loss leaders.
SYLVESTER (voice-over):Loss leaders because it is only in syndication that
series become profitable, shows that air daily in reruns such as Seinfeld.
(CLIP FROM
"
SEINFELD")
WARREN LITTLEFIELD, PRESIDENT, NBC ENTERTAINMENT: When you have huge success
and you've lived through your contract and everything's up for grabs, we're
really comfortable negotiating in the marketplace and paying for success.
SYLVESTER (voice-over):It was hardly business as usual when Jerry Seinfeld
was granted a million dollar per episode paycheck. The rest of the ensemble
held out as well. This season, they are each reportedly earning $600,000 per
show.
MICHAEL RICHARDS: When you get money, it's really about what you bring to the
table creatively.
JASON ALEXANDER: We were enough of the formula for the success of the show
that we were, that we merited some of the participation in that profit.
SYLVESTER (voice-over):A theme echoed by the "Friends1'cast. After holding
out for more money, all six were given contracts that will escalate their pay
over the next three years to $120,000 per show. Six figure a week paychecks are
the norm for TV stars Kelsey Grammer (ph), Bill Cosby, Michael J. Fox and Don
Johnson. The networks are banking on stars to bring a return on their
investment.
Sherri Sylvester, CNN, Hollywood.
MORRIS: Just how high can a TV star's salary go when cable is gnawing away at
network viewership? Even with their highly rated fall premieres, the big three,
ABC, CBS and NBC, are steadily losing viewers. But advertisers are still paying
a premium to the networks. Kevin Smith takes a look at the steady march of the
cable industry.
(CLIP FROM "HISTORY CHANNEL" COMMERCIAL)
KEVIN
channels
claiming
cable in
SMITH, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over):With an abundance of new niche
and more original programming than ever before, cable television is
a growing share of the audience. For the past year, viewers watching
prime time increased from 3 1 to 3 4 percent while the audience for the
Page 9
CNN INSIDE BUSINESS, October 11, 1997
big three networks fell from 51 percent to 47 percent. That's making cable more
attractive to advertisers.
JOSEPH OSTROW, PRESIDENT & CEO, CABLETELEVISION ADVERTISING BUREAU: Cable
represents the growth medium. It's the place where growth is taking place so
that when you buy in you're likely to get a bonus because of escalating
audiences.
SMITH (voice-over):Yet advertising rates for broadcast TV are higher than
ever as network television remains one of the few ways to reach a mass audience,
as high as tens of millions of people.
(CLIP FROM "ALLY MCBEAL", COURTESY FOX TELEVISION NETWORK)
SMITH (voice-over):Fox Television has bucked the trend and has seen ratings
for its broadcast network grow over the past year, especially during the summer
months when the big three networks schedule reruns.
GILES LUNDBERG, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, FOX BROADCASTING COMPANY: The days of
hanging up the gone fishing sign for two or three months are over. We had a
very aggressive slate of original programming this past summer. The results
were very positive.
SMITH (voice-over):With cable here to stay, the broadcast networks are also
hedging their bets by owning cable channels as well, like ABC's stake in ESPN
and Lifetime, NBC's CNBC and FOX'S FX.
(on camera) Some argue the eroding market share for broadcast television is
really no big surprise. They say it's kind of like soap, as more and more new
products take up shelf space, the older brands inevitably lose market share.
But they can still clean up when it comes to making money.
Kevin Smith for CNN Financial News, New York.
MORRIS: Just when you think advertisers are out of control, now they've gone
completely bananas. Jeanne Moos makes the best on sneaky advertisers, when we
come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MORRIS: Most people feel they live and breathe advertising messages every day
until they are just about ready to scream. But what about eating them. That's
a new one, right? CNN's Jeanne Moos finds out that some advertisers feel the
quickest way to a consumer's wallet may be through his or her stomach.
JEANNE MOOS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over):Advertisers are so hungry for
attention they're putting their dollars where our mouths are. What do you get
when you combine Egg0 waffles with a promotion for "Batman, The Movie"?
Batwaffles.
EGG0 SPOKESWOMAN: And it serves a great purpose, you know.
syrup in place.
It keeps the
Page 10
CNN INSIDE BUSINESS, October 11, 1997
MOOS (voice-over):Better watch what you sink your teeth into.
(on camera) They're advertising on your food.
1ST CONSUMER: Oh
MOOS (voice-over): It's enough to drive a consumer bananas. Wait a minute,
the bananas are in on this.
(interviewing) Do you notice anything unusual about these bananas?
2ND CONSUMER: They're all the same size.
MOOS: NO.
3RD CONSUMER: That they're not very ripe.
MOOS: No, no.
(voice-over)The folks from Dole bananas were ripe for a deal proposed by the
American Dairy Association but what shoppers may not get is the connection.
BRENDA BELTRAM, AMERICAN DAIRY ASSOCIATION: What does milk have to do with
bananas and then that connection of cereal, banana and milk might hit the
consumer.
MOOS (voice-over):And then again, it might not.
4TH CONSUMER: Cereal.
See, I don't put bananas on my cereal so much.
MOOS (voice-over):Over a one month period, 100 million banana clusters with
"Got Milk?" logos w i l l be distributed nationwide.
4TH CONSUMER: Got bananas.
MOOS: Do you need milk?
Need bananas.
So you've got milk
4TH CONSUMER: I've got milk.
MOOS (voice-over):But it's not going to stop with bananas
BRIAN FOX, THE FRUIT LABEL COMPANY: I mean it i s a mini billboard.
MOOS (voice-over):Brian Fox is president of the Fruit Label Company. His
first project, to put over six million home video movie ads on apples, never
came to fruition. But he's got plenty of other plans.
FOX: I love the concept of putting car advertising on lemons.
MOOS: And they're talking about putting like a mayonnaise ad on an avocado so
you think to make guacamole.
5TH CONSUMER: Oh, that's true.
Oh, that's very good, yes.
MOOS (voice-over):There's a name for this kind of advertising.
,
Page 11
-
CNN INSIDE BUSINESS, October 11, 1997
FOX: It's a purer form of what we call guerrilla making. Again, you're
reaching people and they don't expect it and because of the surprise it sticks.
MOOS (voice-over):Well, we couldn't find a gorilla to test guerrilla making
on, so we settled for snow monkeys at the Central Park Zoo. First, the monkeys
ate the banana, then the entire peel. But there was something unappealing about
the label. Not one monkey but two seemed to find the ads offensive. Maybe
Barney the snow monkey would have preferred a Batman pop tart with sprinkles
shaped like bats.
KAREN KAFER, KELLOGG'S SPOKESWOMAN: Get this. The little pieces on the pop
tarts are called bat crunchlets.
MOOS (voice-over):Bat crunchlets, stickers on fruit. Next thing you know
we're going to have to inspect everything from grapes to string beans. First
you have to peel them off the fruit, then you have to peel them off yourself.
Talk about ads that get under your skin.
Jeanne Moos, CNN, New York.
MORRIS: And that's it for this edition of INSIDE BUSINESS. Do check out our
web site at cnnfn.com and for free Internet software call 1-800-WORLD-NET,xCNN.
I'm Valerie Morris in for Deborah Marchini.
you very much for joining us.
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
LOAD-DATE: October 11, 1997
Have a great weekend and thank
Page 3
24TH STORY of Level 1 printed in FULL format
Copyright 1997 Information Access Company,
a Thomson Corporation Company;
ASAP
Copyright 1997 PennWell Publishing Company
The Oil and Gas Journal
October 6, 1997
SECTION: No. 40, Vol. 95; Pg. 36; ISSN: 0030-1388
IAC-ACC-NO: 19845381
LENGTH: 1262 words
HEADLINE: Global warming costs, benefits debated; imposed reductions of
greenhouse gas emissions can boost unemployment level and consumer prices in US
BODY :
An international climate agreement requiring mandatory reductions of
greenhouse gas emissions could lead to dramatic increases in consumer prices and
unemployment in the U.S.
WEFA Inc., an economic consulting firm, reported that conclusion to the
Global Climate Coalition, which is fighting the Clinton administration'splan to
negotiate a global warming treaty at the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change slated for Kyoto, Japan, in December.
Study findings
Mary Novak, WEFA vice-president and project manager, said, "The national
economic cost is high, and it is important to recognize that energy-producing
states and export-dependent states will suffer a disproportionate share of the
burden.
(I
The study said mandatory emissions goals could result in a loss of gross
domestic product equal to $ 2 2 7 billion (1992 dollars) in 2010 alone, assuming
that 2010 emissions are held at 1990 levels.
Gail McDonald, GCC president, said, "What this report tells us loud and
clear is that the administration is flat-out wrong when it says we could reduce
greenhouse gas emissions effortlessly without any impact on our economy.I1
The report said energy-producing states such as Texas, Wyoming, Montana,
Louisiana, Oklahoma, and West Virginia would suffer "severe economic
disruption." It said Texas alone could expect a loss of economic activity equal
to about $ 19 billion by 2 0 1 0 .
Separately, William Niskanen, chairman of the conservative Cat0 Institute,
told a Senate Energy Committee hearing, "The major economic issues that underlie
this treaty are not sufficiently understood."
Niskanen, who was on President Reagan's Council of Economic Advisers, said
Page 4
The Oil and Gas Journal October 6, 1997
there is little reason to rush to a global warming decision, because the costs
of doing nothing appear quite small.
He noted the proposed treaty would exempt poor countries, despite the fact
they will soon produce about half of global carbon dioxide emissions.
Action urged
Meanwhile, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) urged the Clinton
administration to push for a treaty. It said, "The threat of global warming is
very real, and action is needed immediately. It is a grave error to believe that
we can continue to procrastinate."
UCS said most of the world's Nobel Prize winners in science, 98 out of 171,
have signed the UCS statement calling for immediate action.
Henry Kendall, UCS chairman, said, "We need to speed the transition away
from oil and coal while developing cutting-edge technologies involving wind,
biomass, and solar power. A move to clean energy and energy efficiency will
bring major benefits to both industrial and developing nations.'#
Interior Sec. Bruce Babbitt spoke to the UCS meeting in Washington, telling
them treaty opponents are trying to use "the tobacco defense" by claiming that
the science is inconclusive.
He said the global warming ''phenomenon is clearly understood. The science is
solid.
I'
Babbitt said the Montreal Protocol, in which nations agreed to reduce
chlorofluorocarbon use, can serve as a model for the Kyoto treaty, incorporating
reduction targets, emissions trading, and payments to developing countries to
help them reduce carbon use.
Auto industry reactions
Japanese automakers calculate they will be able to achieve a 15% improvement
in the fuel efficiency of their domestic gasoline-powered passenger cars from
fiscal 1995 to 2010, although they add that policy incentives will be required
to enable the industry to meet goals the government will propose at Kyoto.
More automakers are adopting emission-reduction technologies such as direct
gasoline injection engines and hybrid gasoline/electric systems. Such innovation
will enable greater improvements in fuel efficiency than previously expected,
the automakers say.'
Achieving a 15% cut in fuel consumption will depend greatly on consumer
willingness to opt for fuel-efficient cars, say officials of the Japan
Automobile Manufacturers Association.
BP view
Meanwhile, British Petroleum CEO John Browne urged the world's governments,
industries, and consumers to take the first steps toward dealing with possible
catastrophic global climate change.
Page 5
The Oil and Gas Journal October 6 , 1997
He said, "We need to take precautionary action now. We can't wait for a
finished, polished solution that has unanimous endorsement. Just as the science
of climate change is provisional, so too are the po1itics.I'
Browne said BP is setting targets to measure, report, and ultimately reduce
carbon dioxide emissions from its operations.
BP said the process will take a few years to establish, but once in place,
the targets and results will be independently verified and published.
BP also is working to develop its own internal emissions trading system to
encourage cooperation between different business units and achieve targets at
the lowest practical cost.
DOE study
The U.S. Energy Department released a report that said investment in energy
efficiency and clean energy technologies can reduce U.S. emissions of greenhouse
gases and produce energy savings that roughly equal or exceed the costs to
implement them.
The study by five DOE laboratories, peer-reviewed by industry and academic
specialists, demonstrates that the U.S. could hold down the costs of meeting
climate change goals through technological solutions such as advanced natural
gas turbines, biomass energy and biofuels, and energy-saving appliances.
It said the study concludes that progress in reducing greenhouse gas
emissions can be achieved without increasing the nation's energy bill. It
contends that many consumers and businesses could actually save money through
reduced energy use and lower overall energy bills.
Energy Sec. Federico Pena said, "This analysis shows that what's good for
the environment also can be good for the economy. Technology can and must play
an important role in addressing climate change."
DOE said current projections suggest that a carbon emissions reduction of
390 million metric tons would be needed to reduce U.S. emissions in 2010 to 1990
levels. The study models a scenario that combines a vigorous national technology
program with a domestic system of carbon trading to achieve the reduction.
The study concludes that such an approach could reduce emissions by as much
as 390 million metric tons. The analysis does not consider international
emissions trading and joint implementation that would lower the cost of meeting
any emissions reductions. Moreover, the study is not a full macro-economic
analysis.
The study estimated the potential costs of the reductions at $ 50-90
billion/year. Costs in the study include incremental investments to deploy clean
energy or energy efficient technologies by consumers and industry as well as
those associated with hypothetical increases in energy prices.
Also, DOE said the energy cost savings resulting from the use of these
technologies through 2010 total $ 70-90 billion/year. "This indicates that the
Page 6
The Oil and Gas Journal October 6, 1997
clean energy investments could produce energy cost savings roughly equal to or
greater than the costs of implementation, on a life-cycle basis."
William O'Keefe, chairman of the Global Climate Coalition, said the DOE
report "perpetuates the self-contradictory myth that 'free lunch' technologies
are readily available, if only we'd impose mandates on fossil fuel emissions
so that consumers and industry would begin using them."
He noted that the DOE study admits that it would take a $ 25/ton carbon
permit price on fossil fuels to reach the administration's goals.
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
IAC-CREATE-DATE:October 24, 1997
LOAD-DATE: October 25, 1997
Page 3
/
STORY of Level 1 p r i n t e d i n FULL format.
le.