In wake of the Gulf Coast oil spill, much has been made of the future of the energy industry and the need to address our nation’s energy sources. The movement is receiving renewed support by President Barack Obama who, in his address to the nation regarding the oil spill, advocated comprehensive energy legislation.
“The tragedy unfolding on our coast is the most painful and powerful reminder yet that the time to embrace a clean energy future is now,” Obama said. Attention to this issue is excellent, but we must go about fixing it in the right way. However, the climate bill currently before the Senate does not do that.
The best way to address our energy crisis is through a strong cap-and-trade program. The Environmental Protection Agency defines “an environmental policy tool that delivers results with a mandatory cap on emissions while providing sources flexibility in how they comply.” The EPA also notes that success in cap and trade will encourage programs to be innovative and efficient in the way they deliver energy.
The House of Representatives passed a cap-and-trade bill last summer and established clear standards. By 2020, the emission of greenhouse gases must be reduced by at least 17 percent. By 2050, they must be reduced by 80 percent or more. The bill would also help businesses transition to clean energy, hence innovation.
The Senate bill blocks state cap-and-trade programs and places limitations on the EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. While power plants and factories are subject to a cap-and-trade program, the oil industry is not—and keep in mind this is the industry responsible for the disaster affecting marine wildlife and coastal states’ economies.
This bill also encourages offshore drilling and nuclear power plants, both of which can be detrimental to the environment. Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., added provisions to the offshore drilling segment in hopes of quelling fears of Senate liberals that this climate bill would encourage more reckless behavior from the oil industry.
States can opt out of offshore drilling under the new language, but they would do so at a price. States that allow offshore drilling can attain a 37.5 percent royalty share. In other words, it really pays to allow offshore drilling.
Incentives hidden in legislation will not breed a better energy future for us. Funneling resources such as time, money and brainpower into research for alternative energy sources is a strong start. Embracing a strong cap-and-trade program would result in the research and the innovation we need.
The time for embracing a clean energy future is now – a future that does not include nuclear power or offshore drilling. There are plenty of safer, viable alternatives to end our addiction to fossil fuels.
Andrew can be reached at andrew.hedlund@asu.edu.
