Climate 411

A Cap on Carbon is a Private Sector Stimulus Bill

By Sharyn Stein / Published: July 21, 2010

About one million new jobs in the clean energy field have been created by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, better known as the stimulus bill. That’s according the latest report from the Council of Economic Advisers.

That’s good news for the clean energy economy, and for those Americans who are looking for work. But we can’t rely on tax dollars to finance growth indefinitely. The stimulus bill is a jump start, not a long-term fix.

We need to harness the power of private sector investment if we hope to see long-term growth and job creation. And the best way to do that is through a clean energy bill with a limit on carbon pollution.

That’s what EDF’s president Fred Krupp says in today’s column by New York Times writer Tom Friedman:

As Fred Krupp, the president of Environmental Defense Fund, notes: U.S. utility companies today “are sitting on billions of dollars in job-creating capital — but they will not invest in new energy projects until they have certainty on what their future carbon obligations will be. In just one state, Indiana, there are 25 power plants 50 years old or older. The fleet needs to be modernized, and Senate paralysis is keeping it from happening. A recent study from the Peterson Institute projects annual investment in the sector in the next 10 years would rise by 50 percent as a result of climate legislation — an increase of nearly $11 billion a year.”

That’s new employment from a private sector stimulus.

Political analyst Joe Lockhart is saying almost the same thing. Lockhart is quoted in the Atlantic’s blog in a piece, Cap-and-Trade: The Next Best Stimulus?

We’re rapidly approaching the end-date of our near-term economic solutions – and it’s not clear that we have a policy to get private dollars moving again once those solutions end. That makes movement on a utility-first cap on carbon emissions essential.

The bottom line: If we pass a climate and clean energy bill with a carbon cap, we’ll create jobs without increasing deficit spending.

Also posted in Economics, Greenhouse Gas Emissions / Comments are closed

From the blogosphere: new green jobs, a proposal on low carbon fuel standards, and VoteVets supports clean energy legislation

By Rebecca Rasch / Published: July 20, 2010

Treehugger and CleanTechnica both wrote on the new Council on Economic Advisors report finding that nearly 1 million new jobs were created by the stimulus bill, and “one of the areas where Recovery Act funds are stimulating the most private investment is the clean energy sector.”

In response to reports that senators are considering adding a low carbon fuel standard (LCFS) into the pending climate and energy bill, Michael Levi blogged about what impact this might have on the legislation, potential obstacles and opportunities. While he lauds the goal of reducing emissions, he recommends adding a price ceiling on the tradable permits refiners, blenders, and importers would be required to hold.

Grist posted the new ad from VoteVets, in which Brigadier Gen. Steven Anderson, “who served under Gen. David Petraeus in Iraq, calls clean energy legislation not only a military priority, but an American mission.”

Also posted in Cars and Pollution, Climate Change Legislation, Economics, Policy / Comments are closed

The Evidence Continues to Pile Up: Climate Legislation is Affordable. The Time to Cap Carbon is Now.

By Nat Keohane / Published: July 20, 2010

As the debate on climate legislation gears up in the Senate, evidence continues to accumulate that a climate bill will be affordable and provide a much-needed boost to our economy.

A new analysis released by the Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration (EIA) of the comprehensive climate and energy legislation introduced by Senators Kerry and Lieberman (the American Power Act or APA), confirmed that under the bill, the American economy would continue to grow robustly, and the cost to households would be minimal.  Here are the facts:

  • Under climate policy, U.S. GDP would grow by a third over the period 2008-2020, and would nearly double by 2035. A “business as usual” scenario with no climate policy would add only a tiny fraction to output — just two-tenths of a percent (0.2%) in total over the next two decades.  To put this in perspective, GDP is projected to reach $27.8 trillion by New Year’s Day 2035 under business as usual; under climate policy, it will get there by the middle of February.
  • Under climate policy, U.S. employment is projected to grow 8% by 2020 and 22% by 2035, relative to 2008.
  • The estimated cost to the average American household is $167 in the year 2020 (in 2009 dollars) – less than six dollars a month per person.  (The EIA also reports an annualized figure of $206 over the entire period.)
  • Estimated electricity prices would be only 4% higher in 2020 under the policy than they would be without it.
  • Allowance prices in 2020 and 2030 are even lower than EIA projected under the House-passed climate legislation (HR2454).

The EIA’s analysis also points out that the vast majority of reductions would come from the electric power sector.  That’s relevant to current debates, as the Senate is currently considering a scaled-down version of the cap included in APA that would only cover the power sector.  Under such a policy, allowance prices would be lower — making household costs and other economic impacts even smaller.

All of EIA’s projections are consistent with an array of estimates from the most credible analyses available, in particular, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).  EPA’s estimates for the cost to the average American household are comparable to EIA’s (amounting to just a few dollars a month for the average individual American).  And just last week, CBO reported that APA would reduce future deficits by approximately $19 billion over the next decade.  It also estimated even lower allowance prices under APA than under HR2454, which CBO also projected would cost the average American just a few dollars a month by the year 2020.

That is a small investment in a clean energy economy that will create jobs, reduce pollution and increase America’s energy security.  And it’s always important to remember that all of these analyses only look at one side of the ledger – they do not take into account the huge costs of inaction on climate change.

Studies like those from EIA, EPA, and CBO confirm that we can readily afford a comprehensive climate and energy bill that would boost our economy, reduce our dependence on imported oil and help avert dangerous climate change.  There is no more time to waste – the Senate needs to pass a cap on carbon now.

Also posted in Climate Change Legislation, Economics, Policy / Comments are closed

July 19th, 2010 – The voices of a new clean energy future

By apickren / Published: July 19, 2010

Norwich Bulletin- “Our view: Energy bill deserves bipartisan support”

“Cap-and-trade has come to take on a negative connotation. It shouldn’t. Connecticut, along with the other New England states, has been actively involved in the sale of emission allowances for several years — successfully, and profitably.” 

“Essentially, we get cleaner air, less harmful pollutants damaging the environment, less dependency on fossil fuels, more jobs created through emerging alternative energy programs, less debt passed on to future generations and ultimately, cheaper energy.”

The Huffington Post– “Time to Unleash American Innovation on Energy and Climate Change”

By Lowell Feld, Communications manager of NRDC Action Fund

“We need to start now, with comprehensive, clean energy and climate legislation. We need to encourage the transition from a fossil-fuel, carbon-based energy economy to one powered by energy efficiency, solar, wind, and possibly even cutting-edge new technologies like microalgae-to-oil plants.”

“The potential for multiple, simultaneous “wins” – on national security, environment, jobs, the economy, the trade deficit, etc. – is clearly there. The only real question is, what are we waiting for to seize that potential?”

 The Voices of a New Clean Energy Future is a series from individuals who understand the importance of passing comprehensive climate and clean energy legislation – business leaders, politicians, policy experts, and concerned citizens like you. EDF is proud to highlight their voices and contributions to the climate and energy debate.

Also posted in Climate Change Legislation, Policy / Comments are closed

Latest reports on the climate debate

By Rebecca Rasch / Published: July 16, 2010

On Grist, Frank Senso asks why the Gulf oil spill hasn’t done more to advance comprehensive climate and energy legislation. “A few weeks ago we talked to John Pemberton of Southern Company, who says that instead of furthering the debate over a climate bill, the oil spill as stalled it. The emotional power of the disaster will make congressional members less likely to compromise and take “small steps forward”: “We still have a long term energy debate in congress that is not going to solved with short term political decisions.”

Over at Treehugger, Brian Merchant speculates if utilities are supporting climate legislation in hopes of getting trading their support for exclusion from new EPA Clean Air Act regulations. Needless to say, he is opposed to this deal: “Giving the biggest, dirtiest polluters in the nation a license to dodge regulations in exchange for that is a tradeoff that’s simply not worth making.”

Christian Parenti of The Nation has a (lengthy but) good piece on Huffington Post stating that “the fastest, simplest way” to spur innovation and growth in clean energy and technology and away from fossil fuels, “is to reorient government procurement… to use the government’s vast spending power to create a market for green energy. After all, the government didn’t just fund the invention of the microprocessor; it was also the first major consumer of the device.”

Also posted in Climate Change Legislation, Policy / Comments are closed

July 16th, 2010 – The voices of a new clean energy future

By apickren / Published: July 16, 2010

Pocono Record- “It’s time to end our oil addiction”

By Kathleen Rogers, president of Earth Day Network

“We need a structural shift to make our economy oil independent. This starts at the grassroots level by mobilizing our family, friends and neighbors to support federal, state and local solutions to our oil dependence. We need a clean energy and climate proposal that is comprehensive and ambitious enough to incentivize real energy independence.”

“We need to make a statement to the oil companies and the government that American society can no longer afford to depend heavily on oil.”

NY Times- Editorial: “A Tale of Two Targets”

“The Senate spent this week searching for ways to water down the modest greenhouse gas emissions targets in the House-passed energy bill, which opponents claim — wrongly and shortsightedly — will injure the economy.”

“Nobody expects the Senate to go as far as the European ministers advocate. But there is no excuse for the Senate’s backward march. We all live on the same planet, and it is getting warmer.”

The Voices of a New Clean Energy Future is a series from individuals who understand the importance of passing comprehensive climate and clean energy legislation – business leaders, politicians, policy experts, and concerned citizens like you. EDF is proud to highlight their voices and contributions to the climate and energy debate.

Also posted in Climate Change Legislation, Policy / Comments are closed