July 2008

The Environmental Protection Agency on July 11 released an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for regulating carbon dioxide emissions under the Clean Air Act.  This is the administration’s response to the Supreme Court’s 5 to 4 decision in April 2007 that the EPA did have authority under the act to regulate CO2. This advance notice is not so much a request for public comments as it is a draft regulatory rule several hundred pages long. However, it will indeed be open for public comment for 120 days beginning on the day it is published in the Federal Register in the next week or two.

The APNR was accompanied by a short introduction by EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson explaining why he thought that the EPA document demonstrated why using the Clean Air Act to regulate CO2 would be inappropriate, plus eight letters from the heads of other departments and agencies (Energy, Commerce, OIRA, etc.) summarizing their objections and a ten page-memo highlighting the problems such regulation would cause.  In addition, the White House put out a strong statement that argues that the EPA notice demonstrates the folly of trying to use the Clean Air Act to regulate something it was never designed to regulate and that calls on Congress to take action immediately to avoid the regulatory trainwreck that will ensue if EPA is allowed to proceed.

It may well seem odd that the White House should condemn a document produced by the administration and approved by the White House’s Office of Management and Budget.  But it makes sense. If OMB had tried to edit the document to conform to presidential policy (and make it less insane), they would have invited widespread and scathing criticism that they were censoring the EPA, ignoring and over-ruling expert opinion, trying to derail regulation mandated by the Supreme Court, persecuting scientists, kicking puppies, etc. This way, they are offering the Congress and the public a view of what is in store for the country if EPA is allowed to do what the career EPA staff are clearly eager to do. The result would be a bewildering number of new regulations that would be litigated for years, which once implemented would be colossally expensive and probably ineffective at reducing carbon dioxide emissions. The Congress and the next administration now have no excuse not to know what is coming unless they act to prevent it.

Paul Chesser, Climate Strategies Watch

Renewable portfolio standards that have passed in several states (and promoted by many other state climate commissions) are nothing more than another hidden energy tax (like cap-and-trade). That is no better illustrated than in a Raleigh News & Observer article today, which explains how Progress Energy is about to go to battle with North Carolina's Utilities Commission in order to raise rates so it can pay for its (state-required 12.5 percent minimum) renewable-sourced energy generation:

Progress Energy is ready to start charging customers extra to tap solar power and other renewable resources, but the power company is facing criticism that its proposed charges favor energy hogs.

The two sides will get a hearing today before the N.C. Utilities Commission, which will decide whether the Raleigh-based utility's request is reasonable. The hearing is the first public debate on how best to pay for the alternative energy that utilities must tap to meet a new state law.

Progress wants to charge households 46 cents a month, businesses $2.33 a month and industrial customers $23.38 a month. If approved, the new charges would go into effect in December.

Meanwhile environmental extremists are doing everything they can to kill a new Duke Energy coal-fired power plant that just obtained air quality permits. Unrelenting court battles are their strategy.

If renewables are such a great source of power that can replace fossil fuels, why the need to raise monthly electric rates? Why the need for massive subsidies? Oh, that's right — it's for all those great new "green" jobs!

Our rapidly growing national pro-consumer grassroots network is going to shake the halls of Congress next week in its demand for more American energy.

Led by the Congress of Racial Equality, a coalition of leaders from the African American, civil rights, agriculture, Christian, senior citizen and consumer rights communities will stage a "Stop The War On The Poor" Rally and press conference on the U.S. Capitol Grounds next Tuesday, July 15 at 2 p.m.

You can see details on this event here.

We expect a few dozen Members of Congress — both Democrats and Republicans — will participate in next Tuesday's rally.  This rally will kick off a large, highly integrated national campaign that will activate several million citizens by the end of this year to push for more domestic energy production. 

You can see a brief summary of the national "Stop The War on the Poor" campaign plan here.No industry or business representatives will be on the stage next Tuesday — only grassroots, consumer and community leaders.  However, you are encouraged to send representatives to attend the event and be a part of the crowd — that will lend to the success of the rally.  Please pass this on to your DC lobbyists or representatives, if your company has any.

One of the mysteries of the universe is why President Bush bothers to charge the fixed bayonets of the global warming theocracy. On the other hand, his Administration's supposed "cowboy diplomacy" is succeeding in changing the way the world addresses climate change. Which is to say, he has forced the world to pay at least some attention to reality.

For a perfect example of what is meant by "gesture politics" – an empty pledge given solely for effect, which the politician has no hope of honouring – one could not do better than this week's commitment by the G8 leaders on how they want us to fight climate change.

Cap-and-Trade “Minimizing”   [Larry Kudlow]

Yesterday I wrote that the McCain campaign is distancing itself and moving away from cap-and-trade. This is clear from the fact that the senator’s recent speeches do not mention cap-and-trade, and that the 15-page policy pamphlet issued by the campaign also makes no mention of cap-and-trade.

After several responses to my piece shot thru the blogosphere yesterday, Jill Hazelbaker, McCain’s communications director, issued a statement saying that any notion that the senator is abandoning or minimizing his support for cap-and-trade is “totally false.”

Well, as far as abandoning, that’s not what I said. I wrote that a McCain presidency might resurrect cap-and-trade, although it will be a much different format. But the key point is that several campaign advisors told me that the issue now is jobs and the economy, and of course $4 gas at the pump and $140 oil in the world market. Since cap-and-trade would not only establish the biggest government regulatory plan in history, and also would substantially raise gas and other fuel prices, the idea is a loser right now as every opinion-poll survey clearly shows.

Hence, the senator is being smart to move away from cap-and-trade and instead support drill, drill, drill for more energy supplies to reduce gas prices, as well as tax-cut plans to spur economic growth and jobs.

Mr. McCain is also correct to link drill, drill, drill with new energy-related job creation. In my formulation of this, nuclear power and clean coal are part of drill, drill, drill, as are natural gas and even alternative fuels. Last night former-Sen. Phil Gramm, who is ostensibly McCain’s most senior economic advisor, said as much on our program.

So while Ms. Hazelbaker may say that minimizing cap-and-trade support is totally false, she is engaging in a certain degree of cognitive dissonance on this subject. And let me note that the intent of my piece yesterday was to praise Mr. McCain on this topic, not to bury him.