Although CELB’s sources have reported that the kick-off meeting for the Advisory Committee of the Ten Year Energy and Environment Cooperation Framework (E&E Framework), originally scheduled for December 1, may have been postponed, let me introduce you to the confirmed Advisory Committee members:
- Thornton, John (Chairman of the Advisory Committee), Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Brookings Institution
- Chu, Steve, Director, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
- Haass, Richard, President, Council on Foreign Relations
- Holliday, Charles, Chairman and CEO, DuPont
- Krupp, Fred, President, Environmental Defense Fund
- McNerney, James, Chairman, President and CEO of The Boeing Company
- Roberts, Carter, President and CEO, World Wildlife Fund
- Rodin, Judith, President, the Rockefeller Foundation
- Seligmann, Peter, Chairman of the Board and CEO, Conservation International
- Sterba, Jeff, Chairman and CEO of PNM Resources
- Tercek, Mark, President and CEO of The Nature Conservancy
- Yergin, Dan, Chairman, Cambridge Energy Research Associates
My first reaction on receiving the names was that I had mistakenly been sent the RSVP list for the Secretary’s going away party. Had Carla Hills sent in her regrets?
Although each member of the Committee is obviously a talented professional, they are not the individuals who one would first consult ”on the status of energy and environment cooperation with China; on general energy and environment challenges facing the United States and China; and on the means to further promote and enhance cooperation on energy and environment challenges that face both the United States and China.”
Some of the organizations are the correct ones, but the individuals are wrong. The rationale may have been that an organization’s head can call upon those within his organization who have the most expertise regarding US-China energy and environmental cooperation. But if that was the thought, it was not a good one. It will make for very inefficient meetings, and it is insulting to those who have developed the relevant expertise.
It is also very strange that in a field with so many talented women, only one of the 12 is female. Where is Elizabeth Economy (Council on Foreign Relations), Erica Downs (Brookings Institution), Lynn Price (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory)? What about the Barbara Finamore from the Natural Resource Defense Council and US-China Green Energy Council, Jennifer Turner from China Environment Forum, or Peggy Liu from the Joint US-China Cooperation on Clean Energy?
One explanation for the list is that it designed to give an impression of gravitas to domestic and Chinese audiences, the effect is exactly the opposite. The target audience will be quite small, but also quite knowledgeable. The key participants know each other. Just yesterday at the Tongji event with the EPA Administrator, a Chinese professor of environmental engineering mentioned Elizabeth Economy and her groundbreaking book “The River Runs Black” (we were asked to convey to Ms. Economy the fact that the Huang Pu River is now “clean” 1). If the people who count aren’t on the list, the people who do the counting won’t give it much credence.
How did the list get put together? Its hard to say. It doesn’t take long on Google to find significant connections between high Treasury officials and the committee members. 2
What is clear, however, is that Treasury is either not serious or is clueless when it comes to running energy and environmental programs. It is time for the chair of the joint U.S.-China Steering Committee for Energy and Environment Cooperation to be transferred to EPA and the Department of Energy. My reccommendation to the new team: let Treasury do Treasury stuff, and the environmental and energy people do their jobs, both in the US and in China.
- I assume the professor meant “cleaner,” I haven’t checked, but I’d be surprised if the Huang Pu stretch through downtown Shanghai is ranked by the Chinese authorities as anything better than Class III, and Class IV would not shock me. ↩
- To Treasury’s credit, however, it left half of the committee slots open, presumably to be filled once the new administration takes over. ↩
3 responses so far ↓
1 geoff // Dec 2, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Charlie-
BTW, I got Tercek right, but just named him at his old org, Goldman, and not at his new one, Nature Conservancy.
Thx for keeping us in the loop though. I enjoyed your take, and agree with you. Too many talented women left off the list, and also too high level. It’ll be interesting to see where this goes in the next administration.
2 cmcelwee // Dec 2, 2008 at 5:22 pm
You are absolutely correct Greg, and congratulations on being our only winner! Its hard to keep all the former Goldman employees on the list straight. Sorry though, only one free meal per contestant.
3 cleaner greener china // Dec 2, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Charlie.
With you 100%.
This is clearly a case of looking good, and doing little. For me, I do like the fact that someone thought that inviting NGOs to the table was a good idea, but perhaps it would be better if we were just bringing the programming people into this rather than the politicians.
As for Treasury’s ability to pick the right people for the environment… they are proving it is tough to do that with the economy in general.
R
Leave a Comment