Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chair Barbara Boxer had a press conference earlier this week, as I noted under Keeping Up the Pace in the post just below. I watched some of it today on C-Span while I was having lunch. In the press conference, Boxer, along with Democratic colleagues from the committee, outlined what the principles are going to be for climate change legislation.
Amy Klobuchar from Minnesota mentioned that the energy technology revolution is going to be very different from the information technology revolution in that the jobs are going to be available at different education levels, not just for folks with graduate degrees in computer science, and throughout the country, not just for people in Silicon Valley and other IT hotspots. (Go to minute 47:00 in the webcast.) Boxer further illustrated the importance of green jobs with examples of how California's requirements for energy efficiency and renewables are helping to bring some relief to the dire employment situation there.
New Senator Jeff Merkeley of Oregon said VC, research institutes, and many others are waiting for a price on carbon that will pull them into the market. (Go to 48:45 at the webcast.) This precisely echoes the underlying sentiment of Fred Krupp and Miriam Horn's "Earth: The Sequel": Innovation will flourish in response to economic incentives. See also Merkeley's release this week on green jobs and investment. He says, regarding the economic stimulus package before Congress, "This bill creates jobs now and lays the foundation to once again harness America's innovative know-how and lead the world in development and production of exciting new technologies. I'm especially pleased this bill focuses so much attention on capturing the new economic opportunities of green energy."
Finally, Boxer was asked about Cap-and-Trade vs. Carbon Tax and said, unequivocally, it's going to be cap-and-trade. Why? Because Europe and others are already doing it, the Western States and the Northeast are doing it, Obama has said that's the way to proceed, and she wants legislation to be consonant with what the rest of the world is doing. She further noted the successes that cap-and-trade produced on acid rain here in the US.
Here's what I wrote at this post nearly two years ago on that score:
One of the progenitors of the "cap-and-trade" system that allows polluters to accumulate "credits" is Environmental Defense, back when they were the Environmental Defense Fund. The system was conceived with sulfur dioxide in mind. Acid rain is largely a consequence of sulfur dioxide emissions from electrical and industrial power plants. The push for this system to be deployed within the acid rain title of the Clean Air Act reauthorization was led by EDF. See "The Cap and Trade Success Story" from Environmental Defense. Very interestingly to me, at yesterday's symposium, Peter Koster, CEO of the European Climate Exchange, said that after Kyoto when the Europeans were looking for compliance mechanisms, they were urged by Clinton and Gore to adopt a "cap-and-trade" system because of the success of the acid rain program in the U.S.
[Note: The FPA has upgraded its blog software and the font is going to be this one from here on out for my posts. We'll no doubt get used to it quickly.]
