As President Obama said in his speech, America has postponed getting off our oil addiction for decades. In the late 1970s, President Carter made the first call to wean ourselves off from oil – if we had done it then, the job would have been completed in 1985.
Recent polls show that Americans want the government to prioritize renewable energy. A poll conducted by Benenson Strategy Group found that 63% of likely 2010 voters support an energy bill that limits pollution and encourages companies to use and develop clean energy.
Why then is the energy bill languishing in the Senate? The House approved a bill a year ago, and versions have passed in Senate committees. It’s time for a Senate vote, but like every single bill since Obama entered office, Republicans filibustered it, forcing 60 votes for passage instead of a simple majority.
Those 60 votes are nowhere to be found because conservative Democrats and all Republicans are against the bill. How can that be if the majority of Americans are in favor of it?
Typical criticisms of the bill – it will destroy jobs, destroy our economy and increase taxes –
are simply not true.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its analysis of the bill a few days ago. It concludes the opposite is true: the American Power Act will boost our economy, create jobs and reduce costs for American families and businesses.
Passing the American Power Act, according to the EPA, would create 440,000 jobs a year through 2020 and 540,000 jobs a year through 2030 while saving families $35 a year on utility bills. And it would cut greenhouse gas emissions by 45%.
The most controversial part of the bill is the cap on carbon emissions, but it is that very cap that is pivotal in reaping the rewards of industry and job growth.
A carbon cap would trigger the transition to energy efficiency and clean energy by making fossil fuels more expensive. It is the very investments in energy efficiency and renewable energy that would spark economic activity. The cap drives job gains in many sectors, including manufacturing, construction, services, and trade.
Comprehensive energy and climate legislation would shift energy investments and expenditures over the coming decades to new technologies, such as efficient appliances, green and healthy building materials and systems, and wind, solar, geothermal and tidal energy. Clean technologies would comprise a much larger share of the energy economy – the direction we want to go in.
Electricity and natural gas prices would rise because of carbon prices, but those increases would be more than offset by reduced energy consumption and utility rebates. Efficiency investments lead to immediate employment increases because the work is labor intensive, and lead to long term increases in GDP from energy savings and lower carbon prices. EPA projects the legislation would save $312 billion in the economy through 2030, a third from industrial efficiency and the remainder from building retrofits.
In a report released today, the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy shows that if the energy bill enhanced efficiency provisions even more, we would triple the number of jobs created, get four times the energy savings, and save families more than $200 a year. Using less energy translates directly into job creation and savings for all Americans.
And passing the energy bill doesn’t mean an end to oil drilling, coal mining and nuclear. Those industries continue to get support through the bill – the only hope for getting 60 votes. Why Republicans are so attached to dirty, dangerous fuels is hard to understand.
Last week there was a major vote on a resolution by Senator Murkowski (R-AK) to remove EPA’s right to regulate greenhouse gases, which, by the way, was instituted by the US Supreme Court. It also would have nullified the new fuel economy standards for cars and light-duty trucks, which would reduce our reliance on oil, while saving Americans significant money at the pump.
Luckily, the resolution was voted down. But if Republicans take over the majority of Congress in the mid-term elections, we’ll move right back to this kind of antiquated ideology.
It’s that kind of thinking that’s confused Americans about climate change – they’re no longer so sure it’s happening. They’re not so sure we should spend money on it, but the EPA analysis of the energy and climate change bill shows that addressing the issue will contribute to economic growth, not harm it.
The National Climatic Data Center, which has been measuring the weather since 1880, said today that global temperatures were the warmest on record for January through May. Arctic sea ice melted 50 percent faster than average in May.
The earth is getting perilously close to exceeding a 2 degree Celsius global temperature increase – the goal the world has set to prevent devastating consequences.
Inaction and outdated thinking have run their course. Our choice as Americans is to demand a clean energy bill or close our eyes and hope it’s not true, and continue sending $100 million a day to Iran and live through environmental disasters like the today’s Gulf oil spill.
Senate Democrats held a meeting yesterday to review which measures might be included in an energy and climate bill that could get the elusive 60 votes. They emerged without a clear path – they simply can’t find a formula that can garner the votes.
The only solution, from my point of view, is to take the same path Democrats took to pass health care reform. They should use the Reconciliation process to pass the energy bill so they can pass it with a simple majority.
Americans should understand that if they vote Republican in the mid-term elections, an energy and climate bill will never be passed.
++++
Rona Fried, Ph.D. is CEO of SustainableBusiness.com
Loading...