Archive for the ‘Fossil Fuel’ Category

Buyer beware of self-serving ad campaignsMarch 11th, 2009 by E. Calvin Beisner

Millions of Americans saw ads in the recent “Coal is Filthy” campaign against permits for new coal-fired electric generating plants. The ads seemed to promote a clean environment.

But companies behind the campaign weren’t environmental groups. They were energy companies–specifically, natural gas companies. Why were they trying to get voters to pressure politicians against coal? Economists call it rent seeking: lobbying government for policies that enrich one group at the expense of taxpayers generally or of competing businesses.

What the ad campaign didn’t say was that natural gas is more expensive than coal. While there’s nothing wrong with using it, the notion that shifting from coal to natural gas will be of net benefit is dubious. Modern coal-fired plants are amazingly clean, and the small amounts of pollution they emit pose extremely low risk to health.

But every dollar increase in natural gas prices costs American consumers $22 billion per year for heating, air conditioning, food, consumer goods, and services–leaving them with $22 billion less for health care, education, and other uses. And as more electricity production shifts to natural gas, rising demand will cause rising prices, hurting American consumers.

Stealth tax on the poorMarch 4th, 2009 by E. Calvin Beisner
  "Revenue" doesn't grow on trees.
 

Expected tax revenues in the President’s 
budget raise serious questions.

In his televised address to Congress, President Obama again promised that 95 percent of working families wouldn’t see their taxes rise by “a single dime.”

Yet, the budget he released two days later calls for $78.7 billion in new revenues in 2012 from a cap-and-trade program to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. As former House Speaker Newt Gingrich pointed out, that’s just clever sleight-of-hand to slip a massive energy tax into the budget. The money for that revenue will come out of the pocket of folks who, directly or indirectly, depends on fossil fuels.

Did you catch that? That means every American will see their costs rise. Fossil fuels run our transportation system, most of our electrical generating system, and much more. One electric utility CEO who supports reducing carbon emissions calls it a “carbon tax” that he will have to pass on to his customers, resulting in an estimated 13% rate increase.

“The least taxed under the new plan,” quipped Gingrich, “will be the Amish.”

Funny bumper sticker seen during a recent ice storm  
The hidden energy tax increase will impact
every household, but most especially the poor.
 

Humor aside, carbon cap-and-trade is a regressive energy tax that will most impact the poor. The Department of Energy’s latest figures show that millions of below-poverty level households already spend a much greater share of their income on home energy use than the rest of us. That percentage rises substantially (common estimates are 20-25% or more) when indirect costs, like growing and transporting food to grocery stores, are included. We are about to punish the poor in the name of reducing fossil fuel use. The wealthy will easily cope, but our poorest neighbors will soon face very difficult choices.

Cap-and-trade’s hidden expense and disproportionate impact on the poor is another example of why Christians must stand up and speak the truth about environmental care and poverty. Will you start by taking a moment to forward this to your family and friends? They can join you in signing the WeGetIt.org Declaration; the web site also features some practical ideas for caring for the environment and the poor, Biblically.

High energy prices killJanuary 28th, 2009 by The WeGetIt.org Team

Why is it important to keep energy prices low?

You could ask Marvin E. Schur–if he were still alive. But he froze to death inside his home in Bay City, Michigan, days after the city electric utility limited his electricity flow because the 93-year-old widower, with no children, had $1,100 in unpaid electric bills.

This tragedy should be a stark reminder of the stakes in this discussion. Politicians who want to raise taxes on fossil fuels to fight manmade global warming, like environmentalists who want to restrict energy production, need to admit the consequences of their policies. Both cause energy prices to rise, making it less affordable to low-income people like Mr. Schur.

Because cold snaps kill ten times as many people as heat waves, global warming, if it happened, would reduce temperature-related death rates. But multiplying scientific discoveries over the last three years have greatly reduced the likelihood that greenhouse gas emissions are even a significant, much less major, cause of global climate change.

It’s time to abandon global warming hype, for the protection of the poor.