In the last post I listed ten reasons to support the Energy Bill passed in the U.S. House. Here are some things you might find interesting about the bill. I’ve tried, I really have, to keep my opinions out of this list.
- It’s long, really long. When it it was first introduced into the House (H.R. 2454) it was about a document of about 600 pages. The approved House version ended up being 1428 pages! You can view it here.
- Known as the “American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009,” its purpose is to create clean energy jobs, achieve energy independence, reduce global warming pollution and transition to a clean energy economy.
- It’s divided into five titles: I. Clean Energy; II. Energy Efficiency; III. Reducing Global Warming Pollution; IV. Transitioning to a Clean Energy Economy; V. Agricultural and Forestry Related Offsets.
- It passed the House by just seven votes, 219 – 212.
It was introduced by Congressmen Henry Waxman and Edward Markey. And the bill is known as the Waxman/Markey Bill. - The bill will lead to a reduction of U.S. carbon emissions 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, and 83% below by 2050. The bill puts a cap on most of greenhouse-gas emissions. Companies can reduce their emissions to meet their cap, or buy allowances from other companies (cap and trade).
- Opponents (most Republicans, some Democrats, the oil industry & the National Association of Manufactures) claim that the cap and trade is the same as a really big tax on U.S. energy. To some there has been an overstatement as to what it will cost. The most reliable study by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office predicts an average cost of $175/year to U.S. households; partisan groups but the cost between $3,000 to $4300 per year per household.
- Like most bills, there were many compromises in order to obtain votes from both Republicans and Democrats. For example to appease Democrats and Republicans in states whose power companies rely heavily on coal for fuel, the cap on carbon was increased, and the percentage of power produced using alternatives was reduced.
- The bill is complicated and not perfect, but it has brought to the surface the fact that human induced climate change is happening around the world—in one sense resulting in extreme weather conditions: heavy downpours, rising temperature and sea level, rapidly retreating glaciers, thawing permafrost, lengthening growing seasons, lengthening ice-free seasons in the ocean and on lakes and rivers, earlier snowmelt, and alterations in river flows.
- The National High School Debate Topic for 2008/2009 was “alternative energy” and the debate was couched in this language:Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase alternative energy incentives in the United States. House Bill H.R. 2454 has provisions for alternative energy, but because of late-breaking deal-making, power companies will not have to generate as much power from alternatives (solar, wind, geothermal)—at least for now. This means that there will not be as much money going for the development of new solar and wind companies, electric car and public transit systems. I don’t know whether House members consulted the resources that high school students used to formulate debate strategy on alternative energy, but you might find it very valuable. This link will take you the “Debate Central” resource (National Center for Policy Analysis ) for high school students on the topic of alternative energy. It’s a powerful site, and you might find it very valuable for the coming year as you begin to plan your courses. Here is a link to the high school national debate topic on alternative energy at the University of Michigan Documents Center.
- The debate in Washington now shifts to the U.S. Senate where they will take up a similar energy bill. It going to be very difficult for the bill to pass in the Senate, even with 60 Democrats.
Resources:
0 Comments