House Passes Historic Bill to Curb Climate Change
Republicans Argue That Legislation Is Too Costly and Will Damage Economy; Prospects in Senate Remain Murky
By GREG HITT and STEPHEN POWER
WSJ
WASHINGTON -- Landmark legislation to curb U.S. greenhouse-gas emissions was approved by the House of Representatives in a close vote late Friday, securing an initial victory for a cornerstone of President Barack Obama's agenda.
After months of negotiations, the Democratic-controlled House has narrowly passed sweeping legislation calling for the nation's first-ever limits on pollution linked to global warming. Stephen Power explains the bill's implications.
The 1,200 page bill -- formally known as the "American Clean Energy and Security Act" -- will reach into almost every corner of the U.S. economy. By putting a price on emissions of common gases, such as carbon dioxide, the bill would affect the way electricity is generated, how homes and offices are designed, how foreign trade is conducted and how much Americans pay to drive cars or to heat their homes.
The House climate bill, approved by a 219-212 vote Friday evening, would mandate that 15% of the nation's electricity come from sources such as wind and solar power by 2020, potentially expanding the market and profit potential for companies in those sectors. Towards that goal, it seeks to boost nascent industries such as wind-generated electricity and solar power.
(More here.)
By GREG HITT and STEPHEN POWER
WSJ
WASHINGTON -- Landmark legislation to curb U.S. greenhouse-gas emissions was approved by the House of Representatives in a close vote late Friday, securing an initial victory for a cornerstone of President Barack Obama's agenda.
After months of negotiations, the Democratic-controlled House has narrowly passed sweeping legislation calling for the nation's first-ever limits on pollution linked to global warming. Stephen Power explains the bill's implications.
The 1,200 page bill -- formally known as the "American Clean Energy and Security Act" -- will reach into almost every corner of the U.S. economy. By putting a price on emissions of common gases, such as carbon dioxide, the bill would affect the way electricity is generated, how homes and offices are designed, how foreign trade is conducted and how much Americans pay to drive cars or to heat their homes.
The House climate bill, approved by a 219-212 vote Friday evening, would mandate that 15% of the nation's electricity come from sources such as wind and solar power by 2020, potentially expanding the market and profit potential for companies in those sectors. Towards that goal, it seeks to boost nascent industries such as wind-generated electricity and solar power.
(More here.)
Powered by Blogger
2 Comments:
It’s interesting that the WSJ waits until the last sentence in the seventh paragraph to really acknowledge who the deciding voters were -- the eight Republicans that defied party messengers.
Speaking of messengers, did you see the letter that Presidential Candidate Pawlenty sent to the Minnesota House delegation telling them vote against it for a variety of reasons including that the average family electrical bill would raise $1500 by 2035. Funny how the WSJ story states The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated the bill would have a modest impact on family budgets. The CBO projected an annual economy-wide cost in 2020 of $22 billion, or about $175 per household.
Remember when Governor Tim Pawlenty (who retired as Governor on June 2 2009) signed the Next Generation Energy Act of 2007 stated “The best time to have taken action on energy issues would've been 30 years ago. The second best time is right now. The nation has been asleep at the switch, but here in Minnesota we are kick-starting the future by increasing our nation-leading per capita renewable fuel use, boosting cost saving measures and tackling greenhouse gas emissions."
Key points in the legislation : The bill establishes statewide Green House Gas reduction goals of 15 percent by 2015, 30 percent by 2025, and 80 percent by 2050 and Minnesota’s electric utilities to provide 25% renewable electricity by 2025.
What is in the Federal Legislation ?
- Reducing greenhouse gases by 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050 through a cap-and-trade program that allows pollution permits to be bought and sold.
- Requiring electric utilities to produce at least 12 percent of their power from renewable sources such wind and solar energy by 2020
Is there a real difference between what Pawlenty approved and what Congress approved ?
NO.
In fact, wouldn’t it be easier for Minnesota to achieve its goals if all states were seeking the same objective ?
If Pawlenty imagines “Minnesota as America’s ‘Renewable Fuels Capital”, wouldn’t that mean more jobs in our state if other states actively were seeking Minnesota produced energy from wind and biofuels projects ?
I've been trying to make some sense of this bill for myself, since I've been also following the Canadian discussion months ago. What I dont get are the confusing numbers. SOme people claim the real cuts of CO2 come in only from 2026 (http://ehsmanager.blogspot.com/2009/06/hansen-waxman-markey-bill-this-is-just.html) while others "The bill establishes statewide Green House Gas reduction goals of 15 percent by 2015, 30 percent by 2025, and 80 percent by 2050...".
So how is it really?
Julie
Post a Comment
<< Home