/PRNewswire/ -- Today, as the Senate contemplates whether now is the time to act on climate proposals, the U.S. Climate Task Force released a new analysis of how Europe's cap-and-trade program has worked in practice. The report, "Europe's Emissions Trading System," by Harvard economist and international trade expert Richard Cooper, details how this approach has produced substantial volatility in the price of carbon, proven to be vulnerable to significant abuses, and has failed to spur any meaningful reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
In order for a climate program to achieve significant, long-term effects, Dr. Cooper notes, "a steady, persistent price signal should be sent to all decision-making agents that they should reduce CO2 emissions at all times." Such a signal can be achieved through a revenue-neutral, carbon fee or tax.
"Dr. Cooper's in-depth analysis supports what many long speculated - carbon trading schemes are costly and ineffective," adds Dr. Elaine Kamarck, former senior policy advisor to Vice President Al Gore and current CTF Co-chair. "These failings may explain why a 2009 Hart Research survey found that only two percent of US voters hold very positive view of cap and trade - the system at the core of the current Senate bill. Using the trials and errors of Europe's ETS as guideposts, Washington lawmakers can make a much needed course correction on America's climate policy."
CTF Chair Dr. Robert Shapiro, former U.S. Under Secretary of Commerce and senior advisor to Bill Clinton notes, "the myriad problems inherent in Europe's ETS will only be exacerbated in the US. While permit prices fluctuated from 30 Euros at its height to zero Euros at its five year low, the EU reduced GHG emissions by a mere two percent. If the US Congress truly aims to pass effective, long-term climate legislation - as it must -- a carbon-based tax of the type that been highly successful in Scandinanvia is the only sensible course."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Showing posts with label cap and trade. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cap and trade. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Price Carbon Campaign: Kerry-Lieberman Bill Is No Match for Climate Challenge
/PRNewswire/ -- While senators John Kerry (D-MA) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) should be commended for their tireless efforts on climate and energy legislation, several flaws in their proposal will prevent it from reducing carbon dioxide to levels that are safe and sustainable, the Price Carbon Campaign said in a statement today.
"The Kerry-Lieberman bill fails the acid test of climate legislation, which is to provide clear signals on emission prices. Investors, entrepreneurs and households all need certainty in future fuel and energy prices, but Kerry-Lieberman hides these crucial price signals behind a curtain of cap-and-trade," said economist Charles Komanoff, co-founder of the Carbon Tax Center, one of the campaign members.
The Kerry-Lieberman bill also allows polluters to purchase carbon offsets, which will delay by precious decades America's transition to clean energy, the campaign said.
"Instead of making needed investments in renewable energy, utilities will have the much cheaper option of investing in third-world projects aimed at cutting carbon," said Tom Stokes, Coordinator of the Climate Crisis Coalition. "Most of these offsets do nothing to reduce current emissions, and they allow polluters in the U.S. to keep burning coal and other dirty fuels."
The campaign also said the Kerry-Lieberman bill fails to adequately protect American households from rising energy costs.
"We need to cut CO2, but we shouldn't stick hard-working families with the bill," said Marshall Saunders, Founder and President of Citizens Climate Lobby, another campaign member. "We believe all the revenue derived from pricing carbon should be returned to everyone, either through direct payment or payroll tax reductions."
The Price Carbon Campaign supports the "People's Climate Stewardship Act," introduced by Dr. James Hansen at the Climate Rally in Washington, DC, on April 25. Rep. John Larson (D-CT) and Bob Inglis (R-SC) have each introduced bills based on the same paramount principles: steadily-increasing carbon fees and recycling the revenue back to the American people.
The Price Carbon Campaign includes Climate Crisis Coalition, Carbon Tax Center and Citizens Climate Lobby.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
"The Kerry-Lieberman bill fails the acid test of climate legislation, which is to provide clear signals on emission prices. Investors, entrepreneurs and households all need certainty in future fuel and energy prices, but Kerry-Lieberman hides these crucial price signals behind a curtain of cap-and-trade," said economist Charles Komanoff, co-founder of the Carbon Tax Center, one of the campaign members.
The Kerry-Lieberman bill also allows polluters to purchase carbon offsets, which will delay by precious decades America's transition to clean energy, the campaign said.
"Instead of making needed investments in renewable energy, utilities will have the much cheaper option of investing in third-world projects aimed at cutting carbon," said Tom Stokes, Coordinator of the Climate Crisis Coalition. "Most of these offsets do nothing to reduce current emissions, and they allow polluters in the U.S. to keep burning coal and other dirty fuels."
The campaign also said the Kerry-Lieberman bill fails to adequately protect American households from rising energy costs.
"We need to cut CO2, but we shouldn't stick hard-working families with the bill," said Marshall Saunders, Founder and President of Citizens Climate Lobby, another campaign member. "We believe all the revenue derived from pricing carbon should be returned to everyone, either through direct payment or payroll tax reductions."
The Price Carbon Campaign supports the "People's Climate Stewardship Act," introduced by Dr. James Hansen at the Climate Rally in Washington, DC, on April 25. Rep. John Larson (D-CT) and Bob Inglis (R-SC) have each introduced bills based on the same paramount principles: steadily-increasing carbon fees and recycling the revenue back to the American people.
The Price Carbon Campaign includes Climate Crisis Coalition, Carbon Tax Center and Citizens Climate Lobby.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Climate Change Legislation Will Increase Diesel Prices, Hurt Consumers
/PRNewswire/ -- The American Trucking Associations (ATA) First Vice Chair Barbara Windsor told the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee today that the current cap-and-trade proposal will increase the price and volatility of diesel fuel for the trucking industry without significantly reducing carbon emissions.
"ATA strongly supports efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and make this country more energy independent," said Windsor, who is President and CEO of Hahn Transportation in New Market, Md. "However, an economy-wide cap and trade system is not the answer." Proponents of an economy-wide cap-and-trade system say increasing the price of fuel will reduce consumption, Windsor said, but that does not hold true in the trucking industry.
"In our industry, a higher fuel price does not translate into fewer miles traveled because the nation depends on trucks to deliver nearly 100 percent of the food, clothes, and medicines that we use in our daily lives," said Windsor. "Instead, this increase in diesel prices will raise logistics costs within the economy and hurt the American consumer."
Cap-and-trade requires oil refineries to purchase emission allowances that cover their direct refining operations and the amount of carbon produced by downstream combustion of the produced fuels. "The costs associated with obtaining these allowances will be passed on the fuel consumers in the form of higher prices," said Windsor. "A major petroleum supplier to the trucking industry has advised that diesel fuel costs could rise by up to 88 cents."
"Should Congress move forward with a cap-and-trade carbon control system, oil refinery carbon caps should apply only to the refinery's direct carbon emissions and not to the downstream combustion of the products they produce such as gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel," said Windsor.
Cap-and-trade also will increase price volatility as carbon prices will fluctuate. Volatile fuel prices make it very difficult for trucking companies to accurately predict expenses and pass them on to customers.
ATA is concerned with the support of various investment banks for cap-and-trade. These firms would profit from volatility in the energy futures markets and a carbon derivatives market. Congress must reform commodity trading before creating new derivative carbon markets.
Windsor's testimony suggested alternative methods of reducing carbon emissions from the trucking industry. These alternatives are set forth in ATA's environmental sustainability plan, which would reduce fuel consumption by 86 billion gallons and reduce the carbon footprint of all vehicles by nearly a billion tons over the next 10 years. The sustainability plan includes: a national 65 mph speed limit and governing new truck speeds to 65 mph or below; decreasing idling; reducing highway congestion through highway infrastructure improvements; increasing fuel efficiency through EPA's SmartWay Program; promoting the use of more productive truck combinations; and supporting national fuel economy standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks.
"Our plan can achieve real results with far less cost and disruption to our industry sector than under a cap-and-trade scenario," said Windsor.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
"ATA strongly supports efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and make this country more energy independent," said Windsor, who is President and CEO of Hahn Transportation in New Market, Md. "However, an economy-wide cap and trade system is not the answer." Proponents of an economy-wide cap-and-trade system say increasing the price of fuel will reduce consumption, Windsor said, but that does not hold true in the trucking industry.
"In our industry, a higher fuel price does not translate into fewer miles traveled because the nation depends on trucks to deliver nearly 100 percent of the food, clothes, and medicines that we use in our daily lives," said Windsor. "Instead, this increase in diesel prices will raise logistics costs within the economy and hurt the American consumer."
Cap-and-trade requires oil refineries to purchase emission allowances that cover their direct refining operations and the amount of carbon produced by downstream combustion of the produced fuels. "The costs associated with obtaining these allowances will be passed on the fuel consumers in the form of higher prices," said Windsor. "A major petroleum supplier to the trucking industry has advised that diesel fuel costs could rise by up to 88 cents."
"Should Congress move forward with a cap-and-trade carbon control system, oil refinery carbon caps should apply only to the refinery's direct carbon emissions and not to the downstream combustion of the products they produce such as gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel," said Windsor.
Cap-and-trade also will increase price volatility as carbon prices will fluctuate. Volatile fuel prices make it very difficult for trucking companies to accurately predict expenses and pass them on to customers.
ATA is concerned with the support of various investment banks for cap-and-trade. These firms would profit from volatility in the energy futures markets and a carbon derivatives market. Congress must reform commodity trading before creating new derivative carbon markets.
Windsor's testimony suggested alternative methods of reducing carbon emissions from the trucking industry. These alternatives are set forth in ATA's environmental sustainability plan, which would reduce fuel consumption by 86 billion gallons and reduce the carbon footprint of all vehicles by nearly a billion tons over the next 10 years. The sustainability plan includes: a national 65 mph speed limit and governing new truck speeds to 65 mph or below; decreasing idling; reducing highway congestion through highway infrastructure improvements; increasing fuel efficiency through EPA's SmartWay Program; promoting the use of more productive truck combinations; and supporting national fuel economy standards for medium- and heavy-duty trucks.
"Our plan can achieve real results with far less cost and disruption to our industry sector than under a cap-and-trade scenario," said Windsor.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
State-by-State Analysis of Waxman-Markey Cap and Trade Legislation Paints Dour Picture for Nation's Economy
/PRNewswire/ -- The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and the American Council for Capital Formation (ACCF) today unveiled a comprehensive study on the impact of The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, also known as the Waxman-Markey Bill (HR 2454). The bill aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to cap the amount of carbon that is emitted by U.S. industry. The legislation does so by mandating a cap and trade program and other provisions governing fuel choices available to businesses and consumers. This bill passed the House of Representatives by a slim margin (219-212) earlier this summer. The Senate is expected to release its version of climate legislation in September.
The study, which was commissioned by the NAM and ACCF and conducted by Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) using NAM and ACCF input assumptions, assesses the impact of the Waxman-Markey Bill on manufacturing, jobs, energy prices and our overall economy. The NAM and ACCF released national data as well as the analysis for 15 industrial states that would be impacted greatly if this or similar legislation is signed into law. The full report, including the data covering the remaining 35 states will be released in the coming weeks.
Jay Timmons, executive vice president of the NAM said, "Climate change is a very complex issue and I hope Senators will look closely at this study as they consider climate change legislation this fall. At a time when our country is struggling to come out of our longest and deepest economic downturn since the Great Depression, lawmakers should be focused on policies that provide incentives for businesses so they can create jobs and grow. Unfortunately, this study confirms that the Waxman-Markey Bill is an 'anti-jobs, anti-growth' piece of legislation. Further, leaders of countries such as China and India have made it clear they have no intention of reducing their own emissions. Waxman-Markey would give an edge to overseas competitors, discouraging domestic investment and the creation of American jobs."
The NAM/ACCF study accounts for all federal energy laws and regulations currently in effect. It accounts for increased access to oil and natural gas supplies, new and extended tax credits for renewable generation technologies, increased World Oil Price (WOP) profile, as well as permit allocations for industry and international offsets. Additionally, the provisions of the stimulus package passed in February are included in this study. Key findings include:
-- Cumulative Loss in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) up to $3.1 trillion
(2012-2030)
-- Employment losses up to 2.4 million jobs in 2030
-- Residential electricity price increases up to 50 percent by 2030
-- Gasoline price increases (per gallon) up 26 percent by 2030
Dr. Margo Thorning, senior vice president and chief economist for ACCF, highlighted the importance of reviewing economic findings while debating the climate change legislation. "This data shows that we cannot divorce the environmental impacts from potential economic damages. Policymakers may have the best of intentions when it comes to the environment, but it's crucial that we compare the economic cost to the legislation's actual impact on global GHG reductions. Considering that developing countries such as China and India have publicly stated that they will not undertake similar emissions policies, there would be almost no global environmental benefits from the bill. Ultimately, this study shows that Waxman-Markey, would significantly decrease employment and increase energy prices at a time when we can least afford it."
Further, this study shows industrial states would be disproportionately impacted by high energy prices, loss of jobs and income. The 15 states analyzed in the initial study include:
1. Arkansas
2. Illinois
3. Indiana
4. Iowa
5. Kentucky
6. Michigan
7. Minnesota
8. Missouri
9. North Carolina
10. Ohio
11. Pennsylvania
12. Tennessee
13. Virginia
14. West Virginia
15. Wisconsin
SAIC used a modified version of the National Energy Modeling System, NEMS/ACCF-NAM 2, and the NAM and ACCF input assumptions, to quantify the impact of the Waxman-Markey bill.
"Policymakers and the public must have a clear understanding of the potential impact of climate change legislation to assess whether it will cause more economic harm than environmental good," concluded Timmons.
The national and 15 state-by-state economic impacts can be found by visiting: http://www.accf.org/publications/126/accf-nam-study
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
The study, which was commissioned by the NAM and ACCF and conducted by Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) using NAM and ACCF input assumptions, assesses the impact of the Waxman-Markey Bill on manufacturing, jobs, energy prices and our overall economy. The NAM and ACCF released national data as well as the analysis for 15 industrial states that would be impacted greatly if this or similar legislation is signed into law. The full report, including the data covering the remaining 35 states will be released in the coming weeks.
Jay Timmons, executive vice president of the NAM said, "Climate change is a very complex issue and I hope Senators will look closely at this study as they consider climate change legislation this fall. At a time when our country is struggling to come out of our longest and deepest economic downturn since the Great Depression, lawmakers should be focused on policies that provide incentives for businesses so they can create jobs and grow. Unfortunately, this study confirms that the Waxman-Markey Bill is an 'anti-jobs, anti-growth' piece of legislation. Further, leaders of countries such as China and India have made it clear they have no intention of reducing their own emissions. Waxman-Markey would give an edge to overseas competitors, discouraging domestic investment and the creation of American jobs."
The NAM/ACCF study accounts for all federal energy laws and regulations currently in effect. It accounts for increased access to oil and natural gas supplies, new and extended tax credits for renewable generation technologies, increased World Oil Price (WOP) profile, as well as permit allocations for industry and international offsets. Additionally, the provisions of the stimulus package passed in February are included in this study. Key findings include:
-- Cumulative Loss in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) up to $3.1 trillion
(2012-2030)
-- Employment losses up to 2.4 million jobs in 2030
-- Residential electricity price increases up to 50 percent by 2030
-- Gasoline price increases (per gallon) up 26 percent by 2030
Dr. Margo Thorning, senior vice president and chief economist for ACCF, highlighted the importance of reviewing economic findings while debating the climate change legislation. "This data shows that we cannot divorce the environmental impacts from potential economic damages. Policymakers may have the best of intentions when it comes to the environment, but it's crucial that we compare the economic cost to the legislation's actual impact on global GHG reductions. Considering that developing countries such as China and India have publicly stated that they will not undertake similar emissions policies, there would be almost no global environmental benefits from the bill. Ultimately, this study shows that Waxman-Markey, would significantly decrease employment and increase energy prices at a time when we can least afford it."
Further, this study shows industrial states would be disproportionately impacted by high energy prices, loss of jobs and income. The 15 states analyzed in the initial study include:
1. Arkansas
2. Illinois
3. Indiana
4. Iowa
5. Kentucky
6. Michigan
7. Minnesota
8. Missouri
9. North Carolina
10. Ohio
11. Pennsylvania
12. Tennessee
13. Virginia
14. West Virginia
15. Wisconsin
SAIC used a modified version of the National Energy Modeling System, NEMS/ACCF-NAM 2, and the NAM and ACCF input assumptions, to quantify the impact of the Waxman-Markey bill.
"Policymakers and the public must have a clear understanding of the potential impact of climate change legislation to assess whether it will cause more economic harm than environmental good," concluded Timmons.
The national and 15 state-by-state economic impacts can be found by visiting: http://www.accf.org/publications/126/accf-nam-study
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
The Role of Forest Carbon in Emerging Ecomarkets Will be Significant, Says Environmental Economist Ricardo Bayon
(BUSINESS WIRE)--Forest carbon will play a significant role in emerging environmental markets designed to address climate change, despite the reluctance of some countries to accept forest carbon offsets, predicted environmental economics expert Ricardo Bayon at a seminar for forestry professionals representing all facets of the industry.
“Forest carbon has been ostracized by the world’s largest carbon markets – those in the European Union,” said Bayon, co-founder and partner of merchant bank EKO Asset Management Partners, which invests in new and emerging markets for such environmental commodities as carbon, water and biodiversity. “But that will change.”
U.S. carbon markets, which have been slower to emerge than those in the EU, have, however, embraced forestry, he said, noting that several states already have developed emissions cap-and-trade systems that rely on land use, land-use change, and forestry (LULUCF) projects to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.
“California is a bellwether,” said Bayon, speaking at ImageTree Corporation’s headquarters and live via the Web at the third and last event of this year’s ImageTree Idea Leadership Series. “Not only is forestry not the ugly duckling in California; but, in fact, it also is currently the preferred carbon-offset mechanism, largely because other offsetting methodologies are still being approved, and I expect other states to follow California’s lead in developing forestry carbon projects,” he said.
“Carbon markets have gained popularity around the globe as natural resources have become less plentiful and, therefore, more valuable,” continued Bayon. “Because we don’t pay for natural resources, we use too much and there’s no money to invest in maintenance; but this will change and world markets will decide the value of ecosystem services.”
Bayon added that the markets are also likely to compensate countries for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD), as the Kyoto Protocol, which sets binding targets for reducing emissions of carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases in industrialized countries, draws to a close in three years. “REDD is firming up as part of the international compliance carbon market agenda,” he said.
The major sticking points with REDD, Bayon said, are additionality (where planned carbon reductions would not have occurred without the additional incentive provided by emission reduction credits) and leakage (where there’s an increase in emissions in one area as another area introduces a strict emissions policy).
Countries can address the latter “by measuring forests at the national level, thereby minimizing intracountry leakage, and/or by using technology, such as remote sensing,” he said. “The future of REDD is tricky and politically risky, but it’s hopeful.”
In addition to such regional markets as those in California, and the U.S. Northeast, Bayon said he believes that the United States will approve a national cap-and-trade system. Early Senate legislation has been vetoed, he explained, but the House is considering the Dingell-Boucher climate change bill, designed to cap greenhouse gases and reduce emissions by some 80 percent by 2050.
A founder and former managing director of Ecosystem Marketplace, Bayon said that inherent in any cap-and-trade system that includes forestry is the need for independent mechanisms to measure and monitor carbon.
Bayon has co-authored a number of publications on environmental economics, including “The State of Voluntary Carbon Markets 2007: Picking up Steam,” “Voluntary Carbon Markets: An International Business Guide to What They Are and How They Work,” and, most recently, “Conservation and Biodiversity Banking: A Guide to Setting Up and Running Biodiversity Credit Trading Systems.” He also is a member of ImageTree’s advisory board.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
“Forest carbon has been ostracized by the world’s largest carbon markets – those in the European Union,” said Bayon, co-founder and partner of merchant bank EKO Asset Management Partners, which invests in new and emerging markets for such environmental commodities as carbon, water and biodiversity. “But that will change.”
U.S. carbon markets, which have been slower to emerge than those in the EU, have, however, embraced forestry, he said, noting that several states already have developed emissions cap-and-trade systems that rely on land use, land-use change, and forestry (LULUCF) projects to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.
“California is a bellwether,” said Bayon, speaking at ImageTree Corporation’s headquarters and live via the Web at the third and last event of this year’s ImageTree Idea Leadership Series. “Not only is forestry not the ugly duckling in California; but, in fact, it also is currently the preferred carbon-offset mechanism, largely because other offsetting methodologies are still being approved, and I expect other states to follow California’s lead in developing forestry carbon projects,” he said.
“Carbon markets have gained popularity around the globe as natural resources have become less plentiful and, therefore, more valuable,” continued Bayon. “Because we don’t pay for natural resources, we use too much and there’s no money to invest in maintenance; but this will change and world markets will decide the value of ecosystem services.”
Bayon added that the markets are also likely to compensate countries for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD), as the Kyoto Protocol, which sets binding targets for reducing emissions of carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases in industrialized countries, draws to a close in three years. “REDD is firming up as part of the international compliance carbon market agenda,” he said.
The major sticking points with REDD, Bayon said, are additionality (where planned carbon reductions would not have occurred without the additional incentive provided by emission reduction credits) and leakage (where there’s an increase in emissions in one area as another area introduces a strict emissions policy).
Countries can address the latter “by measuring forests at the national level, thereby minimizing intracountry leakage, and/or by using technology, such as remote sensing,” he said. “The future of REDD is tricky and politically risky, but it’s hopeful.”
In addition to such regional markets as those in California, and the U.S. Northeast, Bayon said he believes that the United States will approve a national cap-and-trade system. Early Senate legislation has been vetoed, he explained, but the House is considering the Dingell-Boucher climate change bill, designed to cap greenhouse gases and reduce emissions by some 80 percent by 2050.
A founder and former managing director of Ecosystem Marketplace, Bayon said that inherent in any cap-and-trade system that includes forestry is the need for independent mechanisms to measure and monitor carbon.
Bayon has co-authored a number of publications on environmental economics, including “The State of Voluntary Carbon Markets 2007: Picking up Steam,” “Voluntary Carbon Markets: An International Business Guide to What They Are and How They Work,” and, most recently, “Conservation and Biodiversity Banking: A Guide to Setting Up and Running Biodiversity Credit Trading Systems.” He also is a member of ImageTree’s advisory board.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
