ASME's analysis has generated a considerable degree of interest from Congress, several federal agencies, the White House, industry, and state government officials. The reason is simple: Until ASME's effort, no national scientific or engineering society of ASME's size, prestige, and nonpartisan stature had attempted to outline in an unbiased manner the challenges that would be faced by the power generation, transportation, buildings, and industrial sectors of the U.S. economy if the Kyoto climate change protocol were to be ratified by the U.S. Senate. ASME's reputation for excellence in the design of many of the systems and the equipment used in all the economic sectors examined in the paper is a key reason for the significant government and industry interest.

The conclusions of ASME's paper boil down to this: It would not be possible, using the best technology currently available, for the United States to meet its obligations under the Kyoto Protocol by 2008-2012, without costly, nonsustainable changes in the nation's power generation mix. The paper does not take into account political emission reduction tools such as emission trading and carbon taxes. The protocol, which was signed by the United States in November 1998, but has yet to be submitted to the Senate for ratification, requires a reduction in six greenhouse gas emissions to a level seven percent below what existed in 1990. The ASME paper concludes that carbon emissions would have to be reduced approximately 550 million metric tons in a time span of approximately 10 years, but finds opportunities for at most only about 164 million metric tons in the time allowed.

How ASME's paper came about is a study in teamwork, outreach, and cooperation among varied interests toward achievement of a common goal. At the 1997 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, several ASME members expressed strong interest in the Society's becoming involved in the climate change issue. While it was understood that consensus among ASME's various sectors on the validity of climate change would likely not be possible, it was thought that consensus based upon the technological challenges posed by the Kyoto accord was not only possible, but necessary.

Thus, shortly after the Congress, a Global Climate Change Task Force, chaired by former ASME Presidents Ernest Daman and Charles Velzy, was formed, comprising representatives from industry, government, and academia. The task force worked under the auspices of the Councils on Engineering and Public Affairs, and was charged with developing a position statement responding to the Kyoto accord requirements.

At its April 1998 meeting, ASME's Industry Advisory Board met, with climate change as the meeting theme. Speakers from the White House, the Department of Energy, the power generation industry, and the automobile industry outlined the state of climate change science and theory, and the challenges associated with carbon dioxide emission reductions on the scale envisioned by Kyoto. As a result of the presentations and discussions, the board recommended that ASME include it in the development of the task force's position paper effort. The advisory board ultimately endorsed the position paper in October 1998. The ASME Board of Governors adopted the final position statement as a general position paper of the Society at its November 1998 meeting.

ASME, in conjunction with the American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) and the American Association of Engineering Societies (AAES), held a Congressional luncheon briefing on Feb. 12, 1999, to discuss the findings of the ASME paper and an AIChE paper. ASME President Winfred Phillips joined advisory board member James Markowsky, a senior executive at American Electric Power Service Corp., and Elisabeth Drake, associate director for new technologies at MIT's Energy Laboratory, in a panel discussion moderated by ASME task force co-chair Daman. Following the luncheon, the panelists briefed officials at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.

ASME members and staff are continuing to work with interested parties to promote the findings of the paper. AAES, made up of 27 engineering societies representing nearly one million engineers worldwide, recently issued a statement on the issue, based largely on ASME's analysis. In addition to recent meetings with Congressional staff, the Energy Committee of the Council on Engineering is planning two workshops in Washington this summer to address research issues in the power generation and transportation sectors.

Francis Dietz works in ASME Government Relations in Washington, D.C.

home | features | news update | marketplace | departments | about ME | back issues | ASME | site search

© 1999 by The American Society of Mechanical Engineers