LOCATION/TYPE

NEWS HOME

[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]










Archive
RSS

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Get weekly updates

WHAT TO DO
when your community is targeted

RSS

RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Stripe

Donate via Paypal

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links

Alerts

Press Releases

FAQs

Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics

Videos

Allied Groups

Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005.

News Watch Home

Lawmakers from 9 states vow to put a price on carbon 

Credit:  By Robert Walton | Utility Dive | Feb. 1, 2018 | www.utilitydive.com ~~

Dive Brief:

Dive Insight:

The National Caucus of Environmental Legislators announced the coalition Jan. 31, saying that “by coordinating efforts, these legislators are leading a state-based movement to take action on climate.”

NCEL describes the Carbon Costs Coalition as a “multi-state coalition,” but in at least two of the states, there is sustained opposition to a carbon tax. Despite that, members of the coalition say a market-based solution to carbon emissions will work, and might be the only thing that does.

“Across the entire political spectrum, there’s a growing consensus that market-driven programs to address the real costs of carbon emissions are the answer,” Connecticut state Rep. Jonathan Steinberg said in a statement. “While the proposals of each state in this coalition vary, we are united in our end goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve public health and accurately account for the cost of carbon.”

In addition to Connecticut, states in the coalition include: Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. The coalition has been “meeting informally” for about two years, according to NCEL which, along with the Meridian Institute, has been lending coordination assistance.

The eastern state members of the coalition already engage in a regional greenhouse gas trading regime as a mechanism to reduce carbon emissions. All of the coalition members are taking a variety of steps to reduce emissions.

NCEL Executive Director Jeff Mauk said states are not waiting to see federal leadership and instead are tackling the problem on their own. “Carbon pricing is a market-based strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that is being praised by economists and leaders from across the political spectrum,” he said.

But while some lawmakers from the nine states may support a carbon tax, that doesn’t mean the state at large does.

Vermont is a member of the coalition, but last week Gov. Scott made clear he is opposed to a carbon tax. In a letter to members of the state’s Climate Action Commission, which Scott formed, he rejected calls for a study of market-based mechanisms.

“We know Vermonters cannot afford a carbon tax. It would also be highly regressive,” Scott wrote. “A regional carbon pricing system would also put the region … at another competitive disadvantage.

While Scott has rejected the study, a group of legislators and environmentalists is moving forward on the issue, the non-profit news site VTDigger reports.

Voters in Washington state rejected a carbon tax in the 2016 election. But Gov. Inslee last month released details of a proposed carbon tax on emissions generated by transportation fuels and power plants. The tax would be set initially at $20/ton beginning next July, rising annually by an inflation-adjusted 3.5%. A bill to enact such a proposal was passed Feb. 1 by a state senate policy committee.

Despite any skepticism, Connecticut state Rep. Jonathan Steinberg said “across the entire political spectrum, there’s a growing consensus that market-driven programs to address the real costs of carbon emissions are the answer.”

This post has been updated with additional details about actions in Vermont and Washington.

Source:  By Robert Walton | Utility Dive | Feb. 1, 2018 | www.utilitydive.com

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
   Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)
Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)

Share:

e-mail X FB LI M TG TS G Share


News Watch Home

Get the Facts
CONTACT DONATE PRIVACY ABOUT SEARCH
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.

 Follow:

Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook Wind Watch on Linked In

Wind Watch on Mastodon Wind Watch on Truth Social

Wind Watch on Gab Wind Watch on Bluesky