March 2008

CEI has said it again and again: cap and trade is a lobbyist’s dream. No matter how many times a presidential candidate refers to cap and trade as “market based,” it still requires central planning of the economy, because emissions—and therefore energy use—must be rationed. That means big government. But bureaucratic complexity is a lobbyist’s best friend, because it provides myriad nooks and cranny’s into which they can stuff special favors for their special clients.

As reported by E&E News, the games have already begun,

“A brewing debate among electric utility companies over the best approach for curbing climate change has burst into public view.

Companies with substantial baseload generation from nuclear power and natural gas, such as Florida Power & Light and California giant Pacific Gas & Electric, want to sway Congress toward establishing an auction as the primary method for distributing credits in a new U.S. carbon market.

But utilities carrying significant coal capacity, such as American Electric Power Corp. and Duke Energy Corp., are pressing lawmakers to go with what they know. That means following the example of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments and setting up a new climate law that includes free credits given to industry based on historic emission levels.”

On Friday, the LA Times reported that Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has made a political career of fighting climate change, commutes by jet to his office in Sacramento.

Of course, that’s not very climate-conscious of the governor.

According to figures compiled by the Helium Report, the governor's Gulfstream jet does nearly as much damage to the environment in one hour as a small car does in a year, according, an online publication for buyers of luxury items.

If Schwarzenegger keeps this up, he soon might match Al Gore’s gigantic carbon footprint.

Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said recently that he hopes to have a draft cap-and-trade bill out for comment by mid-April, according to a Greenwire story by Darren Samuelsohn.  This will begin what I expect will be a lengthy period of pushing and shoving by energy producers, industrial energy users, and environmental pressure groups over who the winners and losers are going to be.  Dingell and Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.), Chairman of the committee’s Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee, will be under enormous pressures from all these special interests.  The only group that won’t have much clout are the consumers who will end up paying more for energy and most other goods and services if rationing policies are enacted.  On the Senate side, the Democratic leadership is aiming at a vote in May or June on the Lieberman-Warner cap-and-trade bill.  The American Environment Coalition is circulating a joint letter opposing Lieberman-Warner for signatures.

President Bush re-iterated his position in the new round of international negotiations on an agreement to succeed the Kyoto Protocol, which expires at the end of 2012.  According to a story by Jon Ward in the Washington Times, Bush said, “In order for there to be effective international agreements, these agreements must include solid commitments from every major economy, and no country should get a free ride.”  This means that the United States is relying on China and India to save us from energy rationing policies.  Although this shows a lack of leadership that the U. S. should be providing, the good news is that India and China look solid.  According to Barun Mitra, the director of the Liberty Institute (a fellow member of the Cooler Heads Coalition) in India, who was visiting Washington today after attending the big Heartland Institute (a fellow member of the Cooler Heads Coalition) global warming conference in New York City, access to energy is the top issue in Indian politics.  All the major parties support dramatic increases in energy production.  As Barun said, the public would quickly turn against any future government that tried to limit energy use.

If I may peek outside the Beltway for a moment, I thoroughly enjoyed Heartland’s conference and judge it a great success.  It got some negative press in the establishment media, but the event itself was heartening and energizing.