As more details surfaced late Friday about the Climate Change Bill proposed by House Democrats, it appears that the legislation would create a much looser cap-and-trade program than initially sought by the Obama administration.
The administration said it wanted 100% of greenhouse gas emissions to be auctioned to polluting industries, a move that would raise billion of dollars in government revenue.
The administration said it could be flexible on this percentage, allowing some credits to be given away to certain industries that could be hit hardest by potential increases in energy prices and competition from abroad.
However, the plan approved by the House Energy and Commerce Committe under chairman Henry Waxman would give away up to 85% of the pollution permits, according to a document posted on the committee’s Web site
The document said 35% of the credits will be allocated to the power industry. Energy-intensive industries, such as the cement, glass and paper manufacturing sectors, will get 15% of the free permits. An additional 9% would go to the natural-gas sector, 2% to oil refiners and 1.5% to users of heating oil. These emission allocations would not phase out until between 2026 and 2030.
The auto industry would get 3% of the free credits up to 2017, for investments in clean-vehicle technology. The remaining free allocations, about 10%, would be divided among the carbon-capture and storage industry, clean-energy research and development, deforestation-prevention projects, and help for other countries to adapt to climate changes.
White House spokesperson Robert Gibbs called the House Democrats’ plan a "first step in the process" but a "very positive" one.
Some environmentalists, including Greenpeace called for a "Do-over," stating that the bill was a "weak start" and that near-term targets for emissions reductions would not put the nation on track "to avoid the worst impacts of global warming."
Under the proposed bill, revenues generated by the 15% of auctioned permits would be distributed to low-income and moderate-income families to help offset possible energy price increases.
There was some confusion last week concerning a full House vote on the bill. It now appears that House leadership expects to pass the bill, with or without Republican support, by August.
In Related News…
New York Times columnist Paul Krugman on Sunday wrote about how the environmental community is faced with making tough compromises with a centrist government in Washington–and whether or not the Waxman-Markey bill is good enough.
Read that column at the link below.
Loading...