By Matt Dempsey, EPW

Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Ranking Member on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, today welcomed new economic analysis by the Coalition for Affordable American Energy (CAAE), a coalition of more than 180 trade associations and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The report analyzes the projected costs of the climate provision recently proposed in the Obama Administration’s 2010 budget. The study, conducted by Charles River Associates, predicts job losses and increased energy costs, as well as disparate regional impacts.

“The CAAE and Chamber analysis shows clearly that President Obama’s cap and trade proposal will destroy jobs, raise energy prices, and harm consumers,” Senator Inhofe said. “The American people are suffering enough without an additional national energy tax.  Congress instead should focus on passing an energy policy that encourages innovation, new technologies, and all forms of domestic energy production.”

Key Numbers from the CRA Report:

- Electricity costs are estimated to increase by 27% relative to baseline levels in 2020, rising by 44% in 2025.

- After an initial net job loss of 800,000 in 2015, net job losses are projected to more than double by 2020 to 1.9 million and continue to mount to a net loss of approximately 3.2 million jobs by 2025 from baseline levels.  While all regions of the country would be adversely impacted, the Southeast, Oklahoma, Texas, and California would be disproportionately affected. 

- The policy would force a shift towards the use of natural gas for electricity generation and thus demand increase would result in an estimated cost increase of natural gas to consumers of 56%.

Read the full report here.

By Tony Hake, Denver Weather Examiner

As legislators in Washington D.C. debated a climate change bill that would levy new taxes on businesses and potentially cost consumers, political theatre was in full view Friday at the House of Representatives.  The House Energy and Commerce Committee held hearings all last week on the legislation, culminating with the appearance of former Vice President Al Gore and former Speaker of the House and potential 2012 presidential candidate Newt Gingrich.

Democrats who support the measure and the ‘cap and trade tax’ it would bring, brought forth the self-appointed head of the global warming movement Al Gore.  Mr. Gore of course was full of his usual dire predictions of the Earth’s pending doom from carbon dioxide accumulation in the atmosphere unless immediate action is taken.  He likened those who doubted the theory to those who don’t believe man landed on the moon saying, “There are people who still believe that the moon landing was staged on a movie lot in Arizona.”

Perhaps Mr. Gore wasn’t aware but even some of those that have been to the moon and walked on its surface don’t believe all the hype about global warming.  It was just recently that a real moonwalker announced his doubts about the theory as well.  Dr. Harrison Schmitt, an Apollo 17 astronaut, moonwalker, and PhD holding geologist said, “Contrary to categorical statements by many politicians and unfortunately some scientists, including some colleagues of mine, the science of climate change and its causes is not settled - at least not to this geologist.”

Gore was able to quickly settle back into the role of politician being unable to answer a simple question about the cost of the bill, preferring instead to wave a New York Times newspaper in the air.  His responses to questions routinely ran over the allotted time, well after the red light came on signaling the end of his time.  Displaying his usual hubris, he lectured the panel challenging them to have the “moral courage” to confront the issue and bragged saying, “I gave my slide show to the Indian Parliament.”

One was left wondering if the presentation he gave to India and the House contained the slides that had previously been proven to be inaccurate that he had to remove. Mr. Gore touted that “I have read all 648 pages of this bill” and noted that, “It took me two transcontinental flights on United Airlines to finish it.” Unclear though was how much CO2 has been spewed into the atmosphere and carbon-based fuel burned during the former VP’s frequent jaunts across the country and the globe.  It is most likely more than the 9,116 gallons of fuel President Obama burned last week to make a speech in Iowa on Earth Day or the 53 ton carbon footprint of Prince Charles’ forthcoming European environmental advocacy tour will leave.

When questioned by Representative Marsh Blackburn (R-Tennessee) about whether or not Mr. Gore expected to profit from any legislation or if he had profited in the past, Gore chose to not answer the question directly.  Rep. Blackburn pressed, pointing out that Mr. Gore serves as member of the board for Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, an investment firm which stands to make billions off of climate change legislation.  Gore countered saying, “Every penny I have made, I’ve put in a nonprofit.” Of course that non-profit, as we have written about before, is the Alliance for Climate Protection for which Mr. Gore also serves as chairman.

Those touting the need for immediate action against global warming, including legislators on Capitol Hill, continue to refuse to allow any real debate on the issue.  Lord Christopher Monckton who served as science advisor to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, was invited to appear head to head with Gore.  Monckton is a climate change doubter who has publically challenged the former vice president to debate the issue.  Alas, that was not to be on Friday when House Democrats led by Henry Waxman canceled the appearance.  Monkton told Climate Depot, “The House Democrats don’t want Gore humiliated, so they slammed the door of the Capitol in my face.  They are cowards.”

Instead of Monkton, offering an opposing view to Gore was Newt Gingrich.  However, his appearance was not head to head with Gore as Gingrich instead waited outside the chamber for his turn to speak.  Once again we heard from another politician in debating energy policy and failed to provide any real debate on the scientific merits - or lack thereof - of the global warming theory. The former Speaker of the House apparently was not as well versed in the proposed legislation and admitted he failed to completely read the tome saying he stopped once it started discussing regulating the energy use of Jacuzzis. He did however present his own plan for America’s energy future.

Like Gore, Gingrich too was challenged by members of the opposing party.  Gingrich pointed out that punishing industry could do more harm than good saying, “We didn’t build the trans-continental railroad by punishing stage coaches.” Committee Chairman Henry Waxman replied, “Well I am glad you’re not in charge of foreign policy.” Ensuring he had the last word, Gingrich shot back, “I don’t think of the American people in the same terms as foreign dictators.”

Gingrich continued to remind the committee that a tax on industry would most likely result in a cost to consumers as it stands to reason that businesses will simply pass on any added costs.  He cited the study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology which showed the plan could cost American families $3,100 per year.  Democrats were quick to try to refute those claims and we once again saw how many of these studies can be manipulated for both sides’ advantage.

In the end we saw a microcosm of the debate on manmade climate change and global warming.  Politicians have usurped the issue for their own benefit - political and financial - all the while preventing any real discussion of the issue and highlighting their own hypocrisy.  Those like Al Gore and James Hansen run around making ‘sky is falling’ predictions sending everyone off the deep end without any real, rational discussion.  The polarization and politicization of the issue has both sides ignoring each other and making it impossible to know what the truth really is.  Read more here.