If you really believe that Cap and Trade funds are to be used for development of Clean Energy think again !!!!!.
U.S. CLIMATE CHANGE POLICY DOCUMENT
Report of the Government Accountability Office
According to the EPA, carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel comes from placing a price on emissions is likely to raise the cost of production of many goods and services. The size of the impact will depend on the price of allowances, as well as the ability of producers to substitute the current technology with less emission-intensive processes . The inputs from fossil fuel combustion accounted for approximately 80 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions in 2007
According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), electricity generators derived about 49 percent of their electrical power from coal in 2007. The combustion of coal generates about twice as much carbon dioxide per unit of energy as the combustion of natural gas, the next most common fuel source for U.S. electricity generation, according to EIA.
According to the EPA the Energy and Security Act 2009 would cost the average household $80 to $111 per year. A similar study by CBO estimated average household costs to be $175 per year, with some lower-income households receiving a net benefit. On the other hand, research suggests that policy makers could mitigate or eliminate these effects by selling allowances to cover entities through auctions and returning the revenue back to consumers in the form of lump-sum rebates or tax adjustments.
Preliminary Observations on Options for Distributing Emissions Allowances and Revenue under a Cap-and-Trade Program
The Effects of a Cap-and-Trade Program Depend on the Use of Revenues or Allowance Value This is the gist of the GAO recommendations to the Senate Finance Committee to show how such funds are spent:
1) The government could reduce the overall cost of the program by reducing taxes on capital or income that currently make the economy less efficient.
2) The government could distribute lump-sum rebates to consumers, who would likely pay the bulk of the economic costs associated with a cap-and-trade program.
3) Revenues could be used to expand the Earned Income Tax Credit to assist low-income working families.
4) Policymakers could compensate covered entities for their increased costs through free allocation—an approach equivalent to selling allowances on the market and transferring all the revenue to covered entities.
5) Revenues could help fund climate-related programs or activities, including research and development, energy-efficiency programs, or international aid to developing countries that face challenges in mitigating and adapting to climate change.
Nowhere in the policy documents is there a mention of the funds generated through Cap and Trade being used for clean energy development like solar or wind energy. The powerful coal and oil lobbies simply would not permit issuance of such a document and they are the power behind the throne.
No comments:
Post a Comment