Press Releases

 

Entries in Carbon Tax (88)

Saturday
Jun112011

Cooler Heads Digest 10 June 2011

Announcements

The Heartland Institute's Sixth International Conference on Climate Change will be held in Washington, DC on June 30 - July 1, 2011. Visit the event's Web site at http://climateconference.heartland.org/ 
for more information or to make your reservations.

In the News

Notice How All the Energy Breakthroughs Are in Oil and Natural Gas?
Wall Street Journal editorial, 10 June 2011

In Denial: Thomas Friedman's (Self) Limits to (Intellectual) Growth
Michael Lynch, Master Resource, 10 June 2011

Need a Light Bulb? Uncle Sam Gets To Choose
Virginia Postrel, Bloomberg, 10 June 2011

When Will Scientists Detect a Warming Signal in Hurricane Damages?
Marlo Lewis, GlobalWarming.org, 8 June 2011

Where's the Global Warming?
James Taylor, Forbes, 8 June 2011

The Democrat War on Science
William Yeatman, GlobalWarming.org, 8 June 2011

Will MSM Look into the Global Warming Abyss and Find Their Character?
Russell Cook, Big Government, 7 June 2011

Obama's Commerce Pick and Other Disasters for the Economy
H. Sterling Burnett, National Center for Policy Analysis, 6 June 2011

Michigan in EPA's Carbon Vise
Henry Payne, Planet Gore, 6 June 2011

Obama's Funny Math on the Auto Bailout
John Berlau, National Review Online, 6 June 2011

The Electric Car Albatross
Eric Peters, American Spectator, 6 June 2011

Study: Rising Forest Density Offsets Climate Change
Alister Doyle, Reuters, 6 June 2011

Overestimating Wind Generation
Lisa Linowes, Master Resource, 6 June 2011

Obama's Energy Policies Benefit the Powerful at the Expense of Everyone Else
Deneen Borelli, Fox News, 5 June 2011

News You Can Use
Marlo Lewis

The Cost of Obama's War on Energy

According to a new study by NERA Economic Consulting, two pending anti-energy regulations issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (the Clean Air Transport Rule and Utility Maximum Available Control Technology Rule) will impose $184 billion in cumulative costs on the electricity sector, increase average U.S. electricity prices in 2016 by 12%, and reduce net U.S. employment by 1.4 million jobs during 2013-2020.

Inside the Beltway
Myron Ebell

Chamber's Job Summit Keynoted by Leading Job Destroyer

The National Chamber Foundation's Campaign for Free Enterprise has announced that Jeffrey Immelt will be the keynote speaker at their Jobs for America Summit on July 11 at the U. S. Chamber of Commerce.  Immelt, the CEO of General Electric, is America's leading crony capitalist and promoter of cap-and-trade legislation.  No word on whether the speakers will include fellow cap-and-trade promoters Jim Rogers, CEO of Duke Energy, and John Bryson, former CEO of Edison International, whom President Obama has nominated to be Secretary of Commerce.  These proponents of energy-rationing polices are willing to raise energy prices and thereby make people poorer and destroy American jobs because they calculate that it will boost their companies' profits.

Center for American Progress Shills for T. Boone Pickens

The ironically-named Center for American Progress posted a blog by Daniel Weiss and Stewart Boss this week that argues that conservative groups are opposing the T. Boone Pickens Earmark bill (H. R. 1380) that would provide subsidies to Big Natural Gas on the grounds that subsidies distort the market, while at the same time the same groups are defending subsidies to Big Oil.  For the record, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, for which I work, opposes all subsidies and mandates.  These include subsidies to oil companies.  The claim that groups like CEI support tax subsidies for oil companies is based on the ridiculous re-definition by the left of standard business deductions taken by all companies as tax subsidies when taken by oil companies. 

Weiss's lengthy blog is predictably inane.  But it is obtuse even by the standards of the Center for American Progress.  Big Oil and Big Natural Gas are one and the same.  BP America is the largest producer of natural gas in the United States.  Exxon Mobil owns the world's largest privately-owned reserves of natural gas.  Thus, by supporting multi-billion dollar taxpayer subsidies for natural gas, the Center for American Progress have convicted themselves of being in the pocket of the oil and gas industry.  They are almost certainly being paid off by T. Boone Pickens to flack for the Pickens-Your-Pockets Plan.      

Across the States

Oklahoma

Two weeks ago, Oklahoma became the latest State to launch high profile litigation against the Environmental Protection Agency. The subject of the lawsuit is the Regional Haze provision of the Clean Air Act. For a Regional Haze primer, click here. Suffice it to say, it is an aesthetic regulation meant to improve the vistas at National Parks, not a public health standard meant to protect human beings. Also, it affords States a uniquely large discretion among Clean Air Act provisions.

Despite State primacy under the Regional Haze rule, the EPA rejected Oklahoma's plan and is requiring pollution controls that would increase electricity prices in Oklahoma by 10 to 12 percent. Oklahoma elected officials balked at the EPA's demands, and on May 31, Attorney General Scott Pruitt filed a suit in federal court alleging that the EPA violated Clean Air Act procedures in the course of overruling the State's plan.

Oklahoma joins a number of States that are challenging Obama's EPA in court. Virginia, Texas, and Alabama are suing the EPA over its regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. West Virginia and Kentucky are challenging the EPA's practice of issuing \223do or dare\224 Clean Water Act permits for surface coal mines, whereby the applicant must adhere to \223non-binding\224 guidance documents or face an EPA veto.

New Jersey

Governor Chris Christie this week unveiled an anti-energy \223Master Plan.\224 Among the lowlights, Governor Christie announced a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants, huge subsidies for solar power, and a target to generate 22.5% of the Garden State's electricity from renewable energy sources by 2020. He said his plan is \223responsible and achievable.\224 In fact, it is grossly irresponsible of the Governor to pursue the unachievable goal of switching a fifth of the State's electricity portfolio from affordable, reliable conventional energy to expensive, unreliable renewable energy.

Around the World
Marc Scribner

World Bank Will Propose Global Carbon Tax

With the Kyoto Protocol essentially dead, the prospects for a legally binding treaty to fight the supposed problem of climate change are dim. Thus stymied, the environmentalist/internationalist coalition behind the push for a global regime to reduce greenhouse gas emissions has a new strategy: a global carbon tax. The World Bank indicated this week that it will propose international levies on air travel and shipping at the October G20 finance meeting. The goal is to raise $100 billion annually.

Wednesday
Feb162011

Josiah Bartlett Center - RGGI: Report and Repeal 

 

Josiah Bartlett Center releases report as key Committee approves repeal

The Josiah Bartlett Center for Public Policy, New Hampshire’s free-market think tank, published an in-depth report on New Hampshire's particaption in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative as the House Science Committee votes to repeal the program.  The report, authored by Lead Investigator Grant Bosse, finds that the country's deep and lasting recession has cut demand for electricity and greenhouse gas emissions far more than RGGI.  He also writes that nearly half of the programs' revenues have gone to private sector businesses, creating a ratepayer subsidy for politically-preferred firms.

"But RGGI veers far from this market-based approach in how it allocates cap-and-trade auction revenues. The collapse of the secondary market means that almost all RGGI costs will be borne by utilities, and passed along to ratepayers. In New Hampshire, the PUC has doled out nearly half of RGGI grants to private businesses who have no obligation to repay the money. A multi-billion dollar university like Dartmouth College and an international conglomerate like Stonyfield parent company Group Danone could surely afford to pay for their own energy efficiency upgrades, or at the very least pay back ratepayers out of their lower electric bills."

New Hampshire has received more than $28 million in RGGI auction revenues since December of 2008, but has already committed more than $35 million to energy-efficiency programs and to balance the state budget.  Bosse projects that New Hampshire may have trouble selling off its remaining carbon credits this year.

"At Auction 9, only 75% of the available allowances were sold. At Auction 10, just 57% cleared at the Reserve Price. The next auction, scheduled for March 9, 2011 will see nearly 42 million allowances up for sale. Unless bidders come forward to purchase most or all of these allowances, New Hampshire and its partner states may not be able to count on finding willing buyers for their unsold allowances."

Meanwhile, the House Science Committee has approved a bill that would repeal RGGI in New Hampshire.  Bosse files a story at New Hampshire Watchdog on the key vote.

Friday
Sep242010

CEI - Today in the News: Carbon Prices, Green Energy, and the Pledge for America 

 

Carbon Prices

 

GE's CEO Jeffrey Immelt wants the U.S. government to set a long-term price for carbon so the U.S. can compete with China in the green energy market.

 

Adjunct Scholar Fran Smith criticizes Immelt's proposal.

 

"Immelt said that a carbon pricing scheme would create jobs[.][. . . .] Doesn’t sound like it, if he has in mind a cap-and-tax scheme. (Here’s also a useful primer on costs of global warming policies.)"

 

 

 

Elizabeth Warren

 

President Obama has picked Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Warren to run the new Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection--but he's managed to bypass a Senate vote on her nomination through a technicality. 
 
Senior Counsel Hans Bader explains Obama's strategy.

 

"To avoid having the Senate vote on her nomination (as the Constitution’s Appointments Clause clearly requires for such presidential appointees), which might result in her nomination being defeated, the administration has formally appointed her not to be Director of the Bureau (the position she will in fact be exercising), but rather to two other White House and Treasury Department positions that did not historically require Senate confirmation — positions from which she will informally control the Bureau.  In essence, President Obama is circumventing constitutional checks and balances, as Yale Law Professor Bruce Ackerman, a staunch liberal, notes today in The Wall Street Journal."

 

 

The Pledge to America

 

The GOP unveiled their "Pledge to America" yesterday.

 

Vice President Wayne Crews talks about where the writers of the "Pledge" should go from here.

 

"We may need to think well beyond this political pledge; What kind of society is sustainable over centuries?  How about over thousands of years? Whatever the requirements, we have to make sure that America is the kind that can survive. Even with creeping government growth and paternalism, a handful of centuries is enough to wipe out precious freedoms if government is not restrained. So we want to see packages like this pledge, but also serious, fundamental extensions of it that ask questions not driven merely by responses to the antics of an opposing  party."



Friday
Jun112010

Murkowski resolution - CEI coverage 

In case you are tracking today's debate and vote on the Murkowski resolution of disapproval with respect to the EPA endangerment rule, I thought you'd be interested in ongoing commentary from energy policy experts at CEI.  Let me know if you would like to interview a CEI expert on this important vote.
 
On Twitter, Iain Murray is tweeting about it today: http://twitter.com/ismurray.  He also has write-ups on American Spectator: EPA Vote Coming Down to the Wire and NRO: Action Needed Now to Stop EPA Power Grab.
 
On Openmarket.org, Marlo Lewis:
 
Boxer ignores — and conceals — the simple fact that the Murkowski resolution would overturn the “legal force and effect” of the endangerment finding, not its scientific reasoning or conclusions.
 
The resolution is a referendum not on climate science but on who shall make climate policy: Elected lawmakers who must answer to the people at the ballot box or politically unaccountable bureaucrats, trial lawyers, and activist judges appointed for life?
Durbin claims that EPA made its endangerment rule after consulting with “scientists across America.” In fact, as the endangerment rule acknowledges, EPA largely based the rule on the IPCC reports. As the Climategate scandal reveals, the IPCC reports do not meet U.S. Government transparency and accountability standards.

On Dailycaller.com, Christopher Horner: Senate to vote on Obama’s power grab
EPA’s breathtaking Power Grab raises questions critical to our form of governance. The powers EPA has claimed for itself include staking out national policy on the contentious “climate” issue, and even amending the Clean Air Act on its own initiative and authority.

Friday
Jun112010

ALG Urges Senate to Restore Separation of Powers by Repealing EPA Endangerment Finding 

"Will the Senate vote to do its job, or will it instead vote to abdicate yet

more responsibility to an unelected, unaccountable executive bureaucracy?"

—ALG President Bill Wilson. 

 

June 10th, 2010, Fairfax, VA—Americans for Limited Government (ALG) President Bill Wilson today urged the Senate to vote in favor of Senator Lisa Murkowski's resolution that would repeal an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finding classifying carbon dioxide as a pollutant that Wilson said "violates the constitutional principle of the separation of powers."

"This is not necessarily an environmental, energy, or even a tax issue — it's a constitutional separation of powers issue," Wilson said.

"Even if a senator believes in the highly controversial dogma that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are harmful, he or she should be gravely concerned at the blatant power grab the EPA has engaged in to declare that those gases are covered under the Clean Air Act," Wilson explained.

"They are not, nor was it Congress' intention to regulate greenhouse gases when the Clean Air Act was authored.  Instead, it was a specious court ruling that greenlighted the unelected EPA to completely ignore the representative process of lawmaking by elected officials.  Senators now have the opportunity remedy that error in judgment by restoring Congress' prerogative in this area of policy," Wilson added.

In 2007, the EPA was sued to regulate greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide.  "At the time," said Wilson, "the EPA did the right thing and said it did not have the unilateral authority to make the Clean Air Act apply to CO2, that it was up to Congress to make such a determination."

Wilson said certain Senators were "using the threat of unilateral EPA action to bully lawmakers to act on legislation restricting carbon emissions," including Senator Mark Begich of Alaska who recently said, "We need a comprehensive energy plan and if this keeps the fire under these guys to get something major done, I'm all for it."

Wilson described Begich's comments as "abhorrent to the legislative process."

"The Senate cannot complain about an all-powerful executive that makes its own laws without any vote, and then do nothing to rein in the EPA's power grab to define whatever it wants as a harmful pollutant, and to arbitrarily determine to what extent they will be restricted," Wilson said.

As reported by the American Spectator, the EPA changed the way the Clean Air Act applies to CO2: "The plain language of the Clean Air Act would apply the regulations to anyone who emits more than 250 tons of CO2 in a year. That means fast food franchises, apartment buildings, and hospitals would be subject to regulations aimed at clamping down on pollution from large industrial facilities. Even the EPA recognized the absurdity of this result. It took it upon itself to rewrite the law, saying that what the Clean Air Act meant in this case was 25,000 tons, not 250, and issued what it called a 'tailoring rule' to this effect. This represents a significant assault on the principle of separation of powers."

"Will the Senate vote to do its job, or will it instead vote to abdicate yet more responsibility to an unelected, unaccountable executive bureaucracy? This nation was founded upon the principle of representation, wherein the just powers of government are derived from the consent of the governed.   For Congress to allow an agency to capriciously set the nation's energy policy, to cede that power to the executive, is dangerous, irresponsible, and unforgivable," Wilson concluded.

Attachments:

"Earth Not on Fire: The Threat Posed by the EPA's CO2 Endangerment Finding on the Individual and the Economy," Americans for Limited Government, June, 2010.

ALG Letter to U.S. Senate, June 8th, 2010.

"Apocalyptic EPA Should Not Be Setting Energy Policy," Editorial by ALG News, June 9th, 2010.

"The EPA's Reckless Endangerment," by ALG President Bill Wilson, June 8th, 2010.