Americans Want to Limit Climate Gases, Even If It Raises Costs

WASHINGTON, DC, May 1, 2009 (ENS) - Strong, comprehensive climate and energy legislation likely would reduce energy bills, not increase them, finds a new analysis by the Union of Concerned Scientists.

Based on a U.S. Department of Energy modeling system, the analysis performed by the Union of Concerned Scientists shows that combining a carbon dioxide cap-and-trade program with energy and transportation policies would result in "dramatic emissions reductions" and net savings for the typical U.S. household of $300 per year in 2020 and $900 per year in 2030.

This is the approach used in a bill now making its way through the House of Representatives authored by Chairman Henry Waxman of the Energy and Commerce Committee and Chairman Edward Markey of the Energy and Environment Subcommittee.

The Waxman-Markey legislation has four sections:

A clean energy title that promotes renewable sources of energy, carbon capture and sequestration technologies, low-carbon fuels, clean electric vehicles, and the smart grid and electricity transmission;
An energy efficiency title that increases energy efficiency across all sectors of the economy, including buildings, appliances, transportation, and industry;
A global warming title that places limits on emissions of heat-trapping pollutants;
A transitioning title that protects U.S. consumers and industry and promotes green jobs during the transition to a clean energy economy.

"The true cost remains the great unknown in the Waxman-Markey legislation," wrote the committee's Ranking Minority Member Joe Barton in a letter to Waxman and Markey on Tuesday requesting a hearing to call witness of the Republicans' choosing who will testify on the economic cost of the legislation.

In the Senate today, Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe called the U.S. EPA's finding earlier this month that carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare "a ticking time bomb."

"This so-called "endangerment finding" sets the clock ticking on a vast array of taxes and regulation that EPA will have the power to impose across the economy, and all with little or no political debate or Congressional control," Inhofe warned.

Inhofe cited recent testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee by Dr. John Christy of the University of Alabama-Huntsville on the climate impacts of regulating carbon emissions. Christy said such regulations would be “an undoubtedly expensive proposition” and would have “virtually no climate impact.”

But the Union of Concerned Scientists said today, "Economic scare tactics from opponents of climate and energy legislation are failing to undermine public support for addressing global warming."

Operated by Shell Wind Energy, this wind farm in Brazos, Texas generates power without greenhouse gas emissions. (Photo courtesy Shell WindEnergy)

To prove its point, the scientists' group cites two recent national opinion polls.

Public opinion surveys by ABC News/Washington Post and NBC News/Wall Street Journal conducted in April found that a majority supports climate and energy legislation even if it would increase energy costs.

A survey sponsored by NBC News/Wall Street Journal interviewed 1,005 adults between April 23 and 26. Pollsters asked half the respondents to approve or disapprove of a proposal they said was made by President Barack Obama.

Proposal: "Charging a fee to companies that emit greenhouse gases, which might results in higher utility bills, and using the money to provide tax cuts for middle-income Americans."

More than half, 58 percent, approved; 35 percent disapproved and seven percent were not sure.

Pollsters asked the other half of the respondents the question in a different way. They did not mention President Obama, but they reminded respondents that greenhouse gases cause global warming and said that new climate and energy policies might increase utility bills.

They asked, "Would you approve or disapprove of a proposal that would require companies to reduce greenhouse gases that cause global warming, even if it would mean higher utility bills for consumers to pay the charges?"

Slightly more than half, 53 percent, said they approved; 40 percent disapproved and seven percent were not sure.

The ABC News/Washington Post poll interviewed 1,072 adults between April 21 and 24. This poll found that even though Americans are concerned that federal legislation could "raise the price of things," they still want the government to pass policies that address global warming.

Overall, 75 percent of the poll respondents said they want the federal government to initiate policies addressing climate change, while 77 percent said they are concerned that climate legislation would increase prices.

To subscribe or visit go to: http://www.ens-newswire.com