Energy Bill Priorities pt 2: Clean Energy Investment

While many see climate change as the primary urgency guiding environmental policy, others cite the current recession as means to set aside global warming concerns. As mentioned previously, for the first time since being asked, a majority of Americans feel it is okay to sacrifice environmental protection for economic strengthening.

However, a post-election Zogby poll indicated that 78% of Americans feel clean energy investment is important to boosting our economy. Once again, the economy and environment aren't necessarily two sides of the same coin. While American's primary concerns are financial, the public overwhelmingly supports exploring eco-friendly means towards helping the economy.

This brings us to the issue of framing. Framing refers to the manner in which concepts are discussed within public discourse and the ensuing political ramifications thereof. When discussing environmental issues, framing is particularly crucial. As Richard Alexander, author of Framing Discourse on the Environment, writes:

...the perceptions or non-perceptions of ecological crises..., such as global warming...are not sensorially experienced. It is the many-voiced discourse of scientists that is the source of our knowledge of such issues. These voices are filtered and very often distorted by the media presentations of such happenings (p. 3).

So the information trickling down to the public about climate change is the product of several layers of "many-voiced" filters from research scientists to media reporters and politicians. The way we understand the environmental issues at hand is almost entirely grounded in language.

Going back to our poll stats, a viable option for climate change policy becomes apparent. Perhaps the best way to pass positive legislation is to frame policy in terms of what the people (78% of them) want to hear: (clean) energy, investment, and cash money.

Nancy Pelosi gets it. In a recent interview she claimed, "I believe we have to [pass a cap-and-trade bill] because we see that as a source of revenue. Cap-and-trade is there for a reason. you cap and you trade so you can pay for some of these investments in energy independence and renewables."

While cap-and-trade is certainly a measure geared towards mitigating climate change, it should be framed in terms of its potential to stimulate the economy. Furthermore, as Breakthrough Institute's Adam Zenel points out, such framing eliminates from cap-and-trade the contentious focus on a "hard" carbon cap. A quantifiable ceiling for carbon emissions is sought after by many progressives, yet focusing upon investment, energy, and revenue avoids a significant amount of political resistance.

As Teryn Norris, also of Breakthrough Institute, states, "By focusing climate policy on direct public investment in the clean energy economy, Democratic leaders position themselves on strong political ground and force Republicans to oppose job creation, economic revitalization, and energy independence."

Energy Bill Priorities pt 1: Climate Change

Even among environmentalists, conservation has a wide-array of goals and there has always been considerable debate on what steps to prioritize in the defense of the natural world. Now that we've got an energy bill in Congress, it's finally time to figure out some coherent objectives.

Climate change is all the rage today, yet it still evokes considerable controversy. In fact, in a recent Gallup poll, for the first time since being asked the question in 1984, more Americans say that economic growth takes precedence over environmental protection. As Teryn Norris, Project Director at the Breakthrough Institute, says: "In the midst of economic crisis, Americans are far more worried about keeping their jobs and paying their energy bills than they are about global warming."

However, many don't feel the need to draw a distinction...

Lester Brown, perhaps today's premier environmental spokesman and author of Plan B 3.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization, has advocated a carbon tax:

The most efficient means of restructuring the energy economy to stabilize atmospheric CO2 levels is a carbon tax. Paid by the primary producers—the oil or coal companies—it would permeate the entire fossil fuel energy economy. The tax on coal would be almost double that on natural gas simply because coal has a much higher carbon content. As noted in Chapter 11, we propose a worldwide carbon tax of $240 per ton to be phased in at the rate of $20 per year between 2008 and 2020.

This is perhaps the most hardcore policy towards attacking climate change. It holds emitters accountable in dollar amounts proportional to their ecological perpetration. Don't spew the grime, if you can't pay the fine.

The most popular policy geared towards climate change is cap-and-trade. Earth Defense Fund's Fred Krupp discusses the vast benefits of such a program, particuarly as opposed to a carbon tax:

We can’t find an example of any air-pollution problem ever solved without a quantitative limit on the pollution that can be dumped into the air, and that’s what a cap is. It’s an enforceable guarantee to the public. Tax proposals don’t measure up [to binding emissions limits], so they don’t spur the innovations and the emissions reductions we need. Moreover, if a [carbon] tax proposal were to be taken seriously, the number of exemptions would be huge; consider our 17,000 page IRS code.

Admirably, the President has come out strong in prioritizing his own cap-and-trade program, which would decrease U.S. carbon emissions by 20% below the 2005 level by 2020 and 83% by 2050. Obama seeks to auction 100% of emission allowances generating about $150 billion in 10 years to be invested specifically in green jobs and technology. While the investment in energy is an integral part of his plan, the forefront of the cap-and-trade idea is climate change.

Several environmental experts as well as the Prez himself have prioritized attacking global warming, while certainly collecting revenue and stimulating the economy. The key is that the framing of such policies, "carbon tax" and "cap-and-trade" place climate change as paramount in our economic policy objectives, a noble goal and I think I speak for tree-huggers everywhere when I say...finally.