TRIRIGA Insights

Last Friday, President Obama addressed the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen. During his short speech to the plenary session, the President reiterated the commitment of the United States to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. As expected, the President specifically stated his GHG emission reduction goals of 17% by 2020 and over 80% by 2050 from 2005 levels. President Obama also expressed his disappointment with the lack of progress at the conference toward forming a legally binding climate change treaty while also reaffirming his conviction that, "America is going to continue on this course of action to mitigate our emissions and to move towards a clean energy economy, no matter what happens here in Copenhagen."

As was widely expected, the Copenhagen conference ultimately fell short of delivering a binding international climate change treaty. However, due in large part to President Obama's direct negotiations with China, India and several other key developing and industrialized countries, the conference did produce an interim climate change accord that received nearly unanimous approval by the attending nations and kept the possibility of a future legally binding treaty alive.

Although certainly not as strong as a legally binding international treaty, the Copenhagen Accord will likely influence climate change legislation in the US simply because China, India and many other developing countries have made a commitment to reduce their own GHG emissions. China's previous reluctance to commit to reducing the carbon intensity of its economy was an especially large barrier to US climate change legislation. By accepting the Copenhagen Accord, China has certainly made it easier for sponsors of US climate change legislation to gather the sixty votes necessary to break a filibuster and pass climate legislation in the Senate. As long as developing countries continue to show a commitment to reduce their own emissions and as long as the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) regulation of GHG emissions through the Clean Air Act remains a real possibility, climate change legislation will likely become law within the next two years.

In contrast to the uncertainty surrounding the timeframe and structure of federal climate change legislation, large organizations will likely be affected immediately by the EPA's Mandatory GHG Reporting rule or by one of the increasing number of state and local energy and environmental laws. The EPA's Mandatory GHG Reporting rule and other proposed regulations will directly affect organizations with carbon intensive facilities. At the state level, California continues to lead the way with legislation to track and reduce GHG emissions and energy use in facilities. At the local government level, cities are competing for the title of "Greenest City" by enacting tough energy standards in building codes and requiring large public and private buildings to monitor and report on energy use. The City of New York recently enacted a series of bills to reduce energy use in public and commercial buildings. These measures include more stringent building codes and periodic energy audits and retrocommissioning for large buildings. This trend towards legislation that addresses GHG emissions and energy use in existing buildings is certain to spread to more cities in the near future.

Each new energy and GHG law that is enacted will make it more expensive for organizations to ignore their own energy use and carbon emissions. In order to effectively comply with the multitude of current and planned energy and GHG laws and make cost effective improvements to reduce environmental impact, large organizations require environmental sustainability software to track and manage carbon emissions, energy use and environmental impact.