by Abby Smith WASHINGTON EXAMINER| March 09, 2020
Climate activists are issuing a warning shot to Democratic lawmakers, calling for them to propose dramatically more aggressive policies to tackle greenhouse gas emissions.
The flagship climate bill House Democrats are promoting thus far, the CLEAN Future Act from lawmakers on the Energy and Commerce Committee, “represents a staggering failure of ambition and leadership,” write a coalition of environmental groups in a letter Monday to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
The legislation, led by Chairman Frank Pallone, a New Jersey Democrat, jeopardizes Pelosi’s promise of "ambitious leadership on climate" during her second tour as speaker, the groups write. The coalition includes Friends of the Earth, Center for Biological Diversity, 350.org, and the New Jersey chapters of the Sunrise Movement.
Their letter comes as the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis is preparing to release its report later this month, in which they’re expected to propose broad policy approaches to tackle greenhouse gas emissions. Democratic Florida Rep. Kathy Castor, who's chairwoman of the committee, is copied on the letter to Pelosi.
Pallone’s proposal “set the starting point for the Democratic position on climate in 2021 and beyond. He set that starting point in the worst possible place imaginable,” said Lukas Ross, a senior policy analyst at Friends of the Earth.
“Frankly, we badly want the House select committee and Congresswoman Castor to succeed where he so clearly failed,” Ross added.
Ross outlined three major areas where he and other activists would like to see Democrats outline stronger policy. First, the 2050 deadline set in the CLEAN Future Act is way too late, he said, arguing for a 2030 deadline that progressive lawmakers like New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have set in their proposals.
The House Energy and Commerce bill also shouldn’t rely on market mechanisms to reduce emissions, Ross added, pointing in particular to the clean electricity standard the bill would set up to target carbon emissions from the power sector.
That program would require utilities to produce 100% clean power by 2050, and it sets up a trading scheme to allow companies flexibility in how they comply. Any company that fails to meet its targets under the program would pay “alternative compliance payments” that would contribute to a fund used to support clean energy projects.
Ross said analysis shows, though, that the way the program is currently set up in the bill would reduce power sector emissions little beyond business as usual.
“Nothing would be required to happen beyond today’s announced retirements” of coal-fired power plants, said Bruce Buckheit, former director of the air enforcement division at the Environmental Protection Agency during the Clinton years. Buckheit is consulting with Friends of the Earth, and he conducted an analysis on the CLEAN Future Act’s clean electricity program.
What he found is that the program, as written in the draft bill, wouldn’t get any additional emissions reductions through 2030 over what is projected by the Energy Information Administration’s Annual Energy Outlook.
That’s because the carbon intensity rate used by the Democrats’ program would allow natural gas to earn credits as “clean” generation, Ross said.
According to Buckheit, that means the program would squeeze states such as Montana, West Virginia, and Missouri that have a lot of coal-fired power, but “essentially lets the Northeast off the hook.”
It also isn’t clear to Buckheit that any company would have to pay alternative compliance payments.
“Today’s market forces continue to lead the operations of those coal plants to reduce utilization and ultimately retire,” he said. “That is expected to continue, which frees up allowances for some period of time and leads to a glut.”
Buckheit acknowledged that “some of the drafting in the bill is poor, and I don’t know exactly what they mean to accomplish.” He said he has sent House Energy and Commerce Committee staff suggestions to correct the program.
But as written, “this build a bridge to a world of nuclear, renewables, and natural gas,” he said. “At the end of the day, this is not carbon neutral.” The overall stated goal of the CLEAN Future Act is to bring the U.S. economy to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.
Ross, of Friends of the Earth, was more directly critical. He pointed to draft legislation from Ocasio-Cortez and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who is vying for the Democratic nomination, that would outright ban fracking.
Compared to the Energy and Commerce bill, that draws a stark contrast “around what climate leadership looks like and what we expect from our climate champions,” Ross said. “We want a ban on fracking, not a bill that would subsidize fracking.”
---30---
No comments:
Post a Comment