Energy, Climate and Jobs? Do Not Sacrifice Effective for Expedient
Posted February 3, 2010 at 7:11 pm 
Filed in: Yesterday, during a town hall meeting in New Hampshire, President Obama publicly acknowledged that the Senate may pass an energy bill without a cap-and-trade component. (Moderates from both parties have been pushing the Administration to accept such an approach.) Both issues have until recently been almost inseparable. A focus on job creation has also been added to discussions about the possible shape of climate and energy legislation. There is no doubt that there is some substantial overlap between different proposals relevant to each and that they both have the potential to create new jobs, but attempting to group all three of them together may be misguided.
The challenges of climate change and energy security are simply so large, complicated and important that a heavily “watered-down” bill including some climate provisions, some energy provisions, and some job creation proposals, will be a mistake and insufficient to generate the long-term results that are so desperately needed.
One issue (among many) is the provisions which are inconsistent between the two broadly defined goals. And from an energy (and economic, and security) perspective there are several important short- to medium-term proposals that will be inconsistent with reducing carbon emissions, such as expanded offshore drilling. A second major issue is the focus on long- and short-term goals. Job creation is an immediate challenge for the Administration and Congress, and any jobs bill should reflect this. (85,000 jobs were lost in December 2010 alone and the unemployment rate still stands at 10 percent.) Energy and climate legislation will have an impact on the nation for decades to come. Just consider that by 2035, U.S. primary energy-related emissions of carbon dioxide are forecast to increase by over 500 million metric tons and energy consumption is expected to increase 15 percent.
Energy, climate change and jobs need to be addressed. If addressing them as one really is the optimal way to secure our energy supplies, mitigate the damage caused by carbon emissions, and create jobs, then this should be our way forward. But let us not sacrifice an effective solution to a problem in one for a short-lived political win in another. These challenges are fundamental to the future of this nation and are much too important to be squeezed haphazardly into any emotionally-driven, compromise legislation.
Previous Post
March 5, 2010
March 4, 2010
March 3, 2010
