In The News
PROTESTING TOO MUCH
Wednesday October 7, 2009
As its authors are quick to note, the Kerry-Boxer bill is about jobs. It's about putting "millions of people back to work," as one sponsor claimed. It will "create good-paying jobs in every region of the country." And it will create, according to one study, 1.9 million new jobs. Such elaborate claims, repeated at every turn, raise suspicion: why are the authors of a massive new energy tax obsessed with jobs? Why are they, in a word, "protesting too much"? One need only read Kerry-Boxer to find the answer.
In Section 311, titled "Climate Change Worker Adjustment Assistance," the authors clearly admit the bill will put people out of work. The bill provides "adjustment assistance" to workers who have been "adversely affected" by the bill's mandates, which will cause higher energy prices, fewer jobs, and slow the economy. In other words, we'll sack your job, and then put you on green welfare. Not exactly the best recipe for putting "millions of people back to work."
Under the bill, workers from the "energy-intensive manufacturing" sector, among many others, can get federal assistance if the Secretary of Labor determines that "a significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers' employment site have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated from employment" because of Kerry-Boxer. Workers can also get handouts if "sales, production, or delivery of goods or services have decreased" as a result of "any requirement" of Kerry-Boxer.
In Section 311, titled "Climate Change Worker Adjustment Assistance," the authors clearly admit the bill will put people out of work. The bill provides "adjustment assistance" to workers who have been "adversely affected" by the bill's mandates, which will cause higher energy prices, fewer jobs, and slow the economy. In other words, we'll sack your job, and then put you on green welfare. Not exactly the best recipe for putting "millions of people back to work."
Under the bill, workers from the "energy-intensive manufacturing" sector, among many others, can get federal assistance if the Secretary of Labor determines that "a significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers' employment site have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated from employment" because of Kerry-Boxer. Workers can also get handouts if "sales, production, or delivery of goods or services have decreased" as a result of "any requirement" of Kerry-Boxer.
In Michigan, A Yellow Light For Green Jobs
Some Question Focus of Ailing State's Governor
Tuesday October 6, 2009
LANSING, Mich. -- If the future of American manufacturing lies in green industries, the Michigan governor's pursuit of jobs offers a cautionary tale.
Four years ago, Jennifer M. Granholm set out to remake her state, which took an exceptional walloping with the decline of the auto industry, as a pioneer in creating environmentally friendly jobs. Today, however, jobs are still disappearing much faster than she can create them, raising questions about how long it will take Michigan and other hard-hit states to find new industries to employ their workers.
Since taking office in 2003, Granholm has created 163,300 positions, her office says. She expects that a recent infusion of more than $1 billion from the Obama administration aimed at nurturing car battery and electric-vehicle projects will generate 40,000 more positions by 2020.
In the past decade, however, as the auto industry has grown smaller, Michigan has lost 870,000 jobs -- about 632,000 of them during Granholm's tenure. The number is expected to reach 1 million by late next year, the end of her term.
Four years ago, Jennifer M. Granholm set out to remake her state, which took an exceptional walloping with the decline of the auto industry, as a pioneer in creating environmentally friendly jobs. Today, however, jobs are still disappearing much faster than she can create them, raising questions about how long it will take Michigan and other hard-hit states to find new industries to employ their workers.
Since taking office in 2003, Granholm has created 163,300 positions, her office says. She expects that a recent infusion of more than $1 billion from the Obama administration aimed at nurturing car battery and electric-vehicle projects will generate 40,000 more positions by 2020.
In the past decade, however, as the auto industry has grown smaller, Michigan has lost 870,000 jobs -- about 632,000 of them during Granholm's tenure. The number is expected to reach 1 million by late next year, the end of her term.
ABSURD RESULTS
Monday October 5, 2009
In EPA's proposal to "tailor" greenhouse gas regulation under the Clean Air Act, one senses real panic over a perplexing and overwhelming post-Massachusetts world. "In short, without this tailoring rule," EPA warns, "the administrative burdens would be immense, and [the Title V and PSD programs] would immediately and completely overwhelm the permitting authorities." As it turns out, regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act isn't so easy. This is not the fault of Justice Kennedy and the liberal bloc of the Supreme Court. EPA has chosen its path. Now EPA is looking for a way out. Its solution is to evade the law.
The Act's pre-construction program for stationary sources covers major sources that emit 100 or 250 tons (depending on who's emitting) of regulated pollutants. That limit was designed for conventional pollutants (sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides). But applying it to CO2 means even the local mom and pop operation could be covered. So EPA now says that anyone emitting less than 25,000 tons of GHG annually is exempt, for a time. This is due, EPA pleads, to administrative necessity-again, because of permit pandemonium.
The Act's pre-construction program for stationary sources covers major sources that emit 100 or 250 tons (depending on who's emitting) of regulated pollutants. That limit was designed for conventional pollutants (sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides). But applying it to CO2 means even the local mom and pop operation could be covered. So EPA now says that anyone emitting less than 25,000 tons of GHG annually is exempt, for a time. This is due, EPA pleads, to administrative necessity-again, because of permit pandemonium.
Tulsa World Editorial: What the ...?: Congress scuttles road funding
Monday October 5, 2009
What's up with those geniuses in Congress? First they scurry around to get massive stimulus funding in the pipeline in an effort to quickly jump-start the economy, and then they fiddle around and let regular transportation funding that would further aid the recovery lapse.
Not a good recipe for ensuring that the recovery will continue.
Oklahoma transportation leaders learned this week that two squirrelly actions by Congress will force the state to slash its November contracts from $53.5 million to only $6.2 million.
A total of 18 state projects, including three in the Tulsa area, will be delayed by the actions that left the Oklahoma Department of Transportation with no federal funds to expend next month.
The congressional actions - or should we call them inactions - are difficult for the average citizen to understand, but the failure of our national leaders to address this situation is incomprehensible.
Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla, tried valiantly this past week to have at least some of the funding restored but unfortunately was unsuccessful. "Now we are going to pay the price,'' said Inhofe.
If action isn't taken fairly soon to restore the funding, the impact on Oklahoma could eventually reach $135 million.
ODOT Director Gary Ridley made the salient observation that the state was urged to hurry up and spend stimulus funding to create jobs, and now we're being forced to delay phases of some of those projects that were expedited. Didn't anyone think this course of action through?
Not a good recipe for ensuring that the recovery will continue.
Oklahoma transportation leaders learned this week that two squirrelly actions by Congress will force the state to slash its November contracts from $53.5 million to only $6.2 million.
A total of 18 state projects, including three in the Tulsa area, will be delayed by the actions that left the Oklahoma Department of Transportation with no federal funds to expend next month.
The congressional actions - or should we call them inactions - are difficult for the average citizen to understand, but the failure of our national leaders to address this situation is incomprehensible.
Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla, tried valiantly this past week to have at least some of the funding restored but unfortunately was unsuccessful. "Now we are going to pay the price,'' said Inhofe.
If action isn't taken fairly soon to restore the funding, the impact on Oklahoma could eventually reach $135 million.
ODOT Director Gary Ridley made the salient observation that the state was urged to hurry up and spend stimulus funding to create jobs, and now we're being forced to delay phases of some of those projects that were expedited. Didn't anyone think this course of action through?
E&E; News: Bill Signing 'Not Going to Happen' by Copenhagen
Friday October 2, 2009
President Obama is not expecting to have a final global warming bill signed into law by the time diplomats convene in December to hash out details on a new international climate treaty in Copenhagen, the White House's top energy adviser said today.
"Obviously, we'd like to be through the process," Carol Browner said during an event in Washington hosted by The Atlantic magazine. "But that's not going to happen. I think we'd all agree the likelihood that you'd have a bill signed by the president on comprehensive energy by the time we go in December is not likely."
But Browner said U.S. diplomats would still be in a good position at the climate talks as they work from the House-passed bill and further progress in the Senate. "We could be out of committee," she said. "Certainly, in the Senate we could perhaps be headed to the floor. There could be a leadership bill out there. We will go to Copenhagen with whatever we have."
Senate Democratic leaders in recent weeks have openly questioned whether the climate bill could get floor time before the major U.N. climate conference in Denmark, and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), the legislation's lead sponsor, has been saying for months that a final law isn't necessary for the negotiations.
"Obviously, we'd like to be through the process," Carol Browner said during an event in Washington hosted by The Atlantic magazine. "But that's not going to happen. I think we'd all agree the likelihood that you'd have a bill signed by the president on comprehensive energy by the time we go in December is not likely."
But Browner said U.S. diplomats would still be in a good position at the climate talks as they work from the House-passed bill and further progress in the Senate. "We could be out of committee," she said. "Certainly, in the Senate we could perhaps be headed to the floor. There could be a leadership bill out there. We will go to Copenhagen with whatever we have."
Senate Democratic leaders in recent weeks have openly questioned whether the climate bill could get floor time before the major U.N. climate conference in Denmark, and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), the legislation's lead sponsor, has been saying for months that a final law isn't necessary for the negotiations.
WATCH: Inhofe on Kudlow Speaks About Obama Backdoor Energy Tax
Friday October 2, 2009
The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) proposed greenhouse gas rules are meant to intimidate lawmakers into passing climate change legislation, one Republican senator argued Thursday.
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), a global warming skeptic and ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works committee, said that EPA was unlikely to follow through on its threat to issue new rules to businesses on emissions.
"They can do it, but I have a different feeling about this," Inhofe said during an interview yesterday evening on CNBC. "I don't think they really want to do it; I think they want to use this to intimidate Congress to pass this."
Inhofe said that the Obama administration and the EPA wouldn't want to have to take responsibility for imposing new measures that could result in higher taxes and fees for families and businesses, and would rather hang that burden around the necks of lawmakers in Congress.
He said that the EPA's notice this week that it is considering issuing new rules unilaterally if Congress doesn't act.
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), a global warming skeptic and ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works committee, said that EPA was unlikely to follow through on its threat to issue new rules to businesses on emissions.
"They can do it, but I have a different feeling about this," Inhofe said during an interview yesterday evening on CNBC. "I don't think they really want to do it; I think they want to use this to intimidate Congress to pass this."
Inhofe said that the Obama administration and the EPA wouldn't want to have to take responsibility for imposing new measures that could result in higher taxes and fees for families and businesses, and would rather hang that burden around the necks of lawmakers in Congress.
He said that the EPA's notice this week that it is considering issuing new rules unilaterally if Congress doesn't act.
Oklahoman: Highway Money Issues Jeopardize Oklahoma Projects
Inhofe, Other Lawmakers Race to Find a Solution to Funding Woes
Friday October 2, 2009
Inaction by Congress has jeopardized millions of dollars in highway funds for Oklahoma and may lead the state Transportation Department to cancel all bid awards next month, state transportation Director Gary Ridley said Thursday.
Congress failed on Wednesday, the last day of the federal fiscal year, to head off a planned $8 billion in cuts to state highway departments nationwide. Moreover, lawmakers have only given a 30-day extension to highway funding, restricting what Ridley's department can legally commit.
It's a double whammy for the state Transportation Department. The funding cut - called a rescission - means less money for road and bridge projects. And the short extension prevents the department from obligating money it isn't authorized to spend.
"It is really a problem," Ridley said.
Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe, a Republican, tried to resolve the problem late Wednesday, working with Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. The two came up with a plan to extend the current highway bill for three months and to use money from the Troubled Asset Relief Program - the financial industry bailout funds - to patch the funding hole.
Congress failed on Wednesday, the last day of the federal fiscal year, to head off a planned $8 billion in cuts to state highway departments nationwide. Moreover, lawmakers have only given a 30-day extension to highway funding, restricting what Ridley's department can legally commit.
It's a double whammy for the state Transportation Department. The funding cut - called a rescission - means less money for road and bridge projects. And the short extension prevents the department from obligating money it isn't authorized to spend.
"It is really a problem," Ridley said.
Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe, a Republican, tried to resolve the problem late Wednesday, working with Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. The two came up with a plan to extend the current highway bill for three months and to use money from the Troubled Asset Relief Program - the financial industry bailout funds - to patch the funding hole.
Tulsa World: Road Projects Hit Pothole
Friday October 2, 2009
WASHINGTON - A double-whammy from the federal government will force Oklahoma next month to slash a $53.5 million contract letting on road projects to $6.2 million, according to figures provided Thursday by state Transportation Secretary Gary Ridley.
"We are not doing too good right now,'' Ridley said in something of an understatement.
U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., who unsuccessfully worked into Wednesday night to prevent or at least buffer the double dose of bad news for road projects, said the impact will be devastating for construction workers in Oklahoma.
"Now we are going to pay the price,'' said Inhofe.
Projects not expected to be on the state's November list include three in the Tulsa area:
$1.8 million for a system of traffic sensors to provide real-time traffic information on message boards for the Interstate 44 widening project between Riverside Drive to Yale Avenue.
"We are not doing too good right now,'' Ridley said in something of an understatement.
U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., who unsuccessfully worked into Wednesday night to prevent or at least buffer the double dose of bad news for road projects, said the impact will be devastating for construction workers in Oklahoma.
"Now we are going to pay the price,'' said Inhofe.
Projects not expected to be on the state's November list include three in the Tulsa area:
$1.8 million for a system of traffic sensors to provide real-time traffic information on message boards for the Interstate 44 widening project between Riverside Drive to Yale Avenue.
Wall Street Journal: Rent-Seekers Inc.
Friday October 2, 2009
It isn't often an energy company (of all things) gets to present itself as an environmental crusader, cozy up to Washington rulemakers, buy political protection, and pad its bottom line-all in one neat little announcement. So give Pacific Gas & Electric, PNM and Exelon credit for going for the gold.
The three utility giants have made news recently by quitting the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Their finer sensibilities, they explained, would no longer allow them to associate with an organization lacking in environmental fervor. How dare the Chamber demand the Environmental Protection Agency be transparent about the science it is relying on to regulate all carbon energy use. Heresy! "As a company with a clear and strong position on the importance of addressing climate change," we must go our own way, lamented PG&E;'s CEO Peter Darbee.
Fortunately for Mr. Darbee, that way leads to the bank. As much as supporters of cap and tax would like to spin this as a new corporate ethic, the reality is less edifying. The lesson here is that big business political rent-seeking is alive and thriving.
"The carbon-based free lunch is over," declared Exelon CEO John Rowe, neglecting to mention that his company's free lunch is only beginning. Under the House's climate-change bill, a few utilities-primarily those that have made big bets in renewable and nuclear energy-are poised to clean up once Congress hands them carbon emission credits. The bill sets aside 35% of the free credits for utilities. Exelon and other "renewable" utilities will get a huge piece of that pie.
The three utility giants have made news recently by quitting the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Their finer sensibilities, they explained, would no longer allow them to associate with an organization lacking in environmental fervor. How dare the Chamber demand the Environmental Protection Agency be transparent about the science it is relying on to regulate all carbon energy use. Heresy! "As a company with a clear and strong position on the importance of addressing climate change," we must go our own way, lamented PG&E;'s CEO Peter Darbee.
Fortunately for Mr. Darbee, that way leads to the bank. As much as supporters of cap and tax would like to spin this as a new corporate ethic, the reality is less edifying. The lesson here is that big business political rent-seeking is alive and thriving.
"The carbon-based free lunch is over," declared Exelon CEO John Rowe, neglecting to mention that his company's free lunch is only beginning. Under the House's climate-change bill, a few utilities-primarily those that have made big bets in renewable and nuclear energy-are poised to clean up once Congress hands them carbon emission credits. The bill sets aside 35% of the free credits for utilities. Exelon and other "renewable" utilities will get a huge piece of that pie.
Cooling Down the Cassandras
Thursday October 1, 2009
In this headline on a New York Times story about the difficulties confronting people alarmed about global warming, note the word "plateau." It dismisses the unpleasant -- to some people -- fact that global warming is maddeningly (to the same people) slow to vindicate their apocalyptic warnings about it.
The "difficulty" -- the "intricate challenge," the Times says -- is "building momentum" for carbon reduction "when global temperatures have been relatively stable for a decade and may even drop in the next few years." That was in the Times's first paragraph.
In the fifth paragraph, a "few years" became "the next decade or so," according to Mojib Latif, a German "prize-winning climate and ocean scientist" who campaigns constantly to promote policies combating global warming. Actually, Latif has said he anticipates "maybe even two" decades in which temperatures cool. But stay with the Times's "decade or so." By asserting that the absence of significant warming since 1998 is a mere "plateau," not warming's apogee, the Times assures readers who are alarmed about climate change that the paper knows the future and that warming will continue: Do not despair, bad news will resume.
The "difficulty" -- the "intricate challenge," the Times says -- is "building momentum" for carbon reduction "when global temperatures have been relatively stable for a decade and may even drop in the next few years." That was in the Times's first paragraph.
In the fifth paragraph, a "few years" became "the next decade or so," according to Mojib Latif, a German "prize-winning climate and ocean scientist" who campaigns constantly to promote policies combating global warming. Actually, Latif has said he anticipates "maybe even two" decades in which temperatures cool. But stay with the Times's "decade or so." By asserting that the absence of significant warming since 1998 is a mere "plateau," not warming's apogee, the Times assures readers who are alarmed about climate change that the paper knows the future and that warming will continue: Do not despair, bad news will resume.
