CAP AND TRADE REALLY WORKS

RGGI Cap-And-Trade Boosted State Economies: Report

Connecticut has invested energy credits in green jobs and sustainable energy. Hails program a success.
New York on the other hand has tragically squandered its credits to plug the budget deficit gap! What a waste, taking the easy way out.

RGGI Cap-And-Trade Boosted State Economies: Report

The Huffington Post Joanna Zelman Posted: 03/ 1/11 02:39 PM

Read More: Cap And Trade, Cap-And-Trade, Climate Change, Ct Rggi, Nh Rggi, Politics, Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, Repeal Rg, Rggi, Rggi Ct, Green News

If cap-and-trade is truly dead, the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) is desperately fighting to resuscitate it.
RGGI was formed by ten states in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic, focused on reducing CO2 emissions through cap-and-trade programs. RGGI reported this week that state programs have already seen many economic and environmental benefits.
States are expected to sell emission allowances through auctions, and invest their proceeds in consumer benefits. Participating states are reportedly investing, on average, 80 percent of their CO2 allowance proceeds to consumer benefit and energy programs. The report's findings are based on a two-year analysis of program investments, specifically focused on energy efficiency, renewable energy, bill payment assistance, and additional programs.
Overall the report finds that state investments have created jobs, reduced energy costs, and generated high economic returns.
The states have taken different approaches to achieve their communal goal of reducing CO2 emissions from the power sector 10 percent, by 2018. For example, in Connecticut, while most proceeds from CO2 allowances are going towards expanding programs focused on efficient and renewable energy, a small portion of their proceeds are aimed at additional climate programs. Nearly 70 percent of their investments are focused on energy efficiency, with 23 percent for renewable energy, and seven percent for other programs and administration.
The Energy Conservation Management Board (ECMB) runs energy efficiency programs in Connecticut. The ECMB consists of 14 members who advise the state's three electric distribution companies on programs that are both cost-effective and energy efficient. Programs are focused on public outreach, process improvement, and workforce development.
Reports show that between 2008 and 2009, these CT programs produced $3 to $4 for every $1 invested. Nearly 2,700 jobs are directly attributed to energy efficiency, with an average employment income of $50,000 per year. ECMB's energy efficient programs also reportedly benefit low-income consumers -- through auditing, weatherization, and retrofitting programs, consumers saw an estimated $6 million dollars in annual energy savings.

Story continues below

Advertisement

Regarding renewable energy programs in CT, the Connecticut Clean Energy Fund (CCEF) is focused on promoting clean energy sources. Last year, 14 schools and seven town buildings approved projects to install solar PV systems with CO2 allowance proceeds. RGGI estimates that these systems will produce nearly 1,500 megawatt-hours of electricity annually.
Connecticut also has a Small Business Energy Advantage Program (SBEA) focused on enabling small business owners to reduce their energy budgets. 1,900 businesses received assessments and upgrades in 2010, which saved participants over $5.8 million annually. According to RGGI, the upgrades also prevented nearly 18,000 tons of CO2 emissions per year.
The report offers the following story:

Chick's Drive-In, a landmark restaurant in West Haven, Connecticut, was just one of nearly 1,900 small businesses to benefit from SBEA in 2010. Through SBEA, the restaurant received financial incentives for the purchase and installation of more efficient lighting and refrigeration equipment. As a result, the owner Joseph "Chick" Celentano is now saving hundreds of dollars on his electricity bill each month. The eatery will save 468,000 kilowatt-hours of electricity--the equivalent of planting 56 acres of trees or saving more than 17,000 gallons of gas--over the lifetime of the new equipment.

But not everyone paints as rosy a picture as RGGI. Reports found that states such as New York and New Jersey aimed to divert green energy funds toward saving their budgets. The Sierra Club's Jeff Tittel remarks on the raid, "Unfortunately, once government discovers a new source of money, it's like a potato chip: They keep going back for more."
Just yesterday, a Fox News headline gleefully gloated, "One Giant Leap Forward - New Hampshire Smacks Down Cap-And-Trade." The op-ed highlighted New Hampshire's House of Representatives newly passed vote to repeal RGGI, with House Speaker William O'Brian claiming, "The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative has always been a backdoor tax increase on the citizens of New Hampshire. RGGI is a perfect example of the cost of regulation to the public. Rarely has a program been as transparent in its attempts at income redistribution."
It seems that New Hampshire's House of Representatives may reflect U.S. Republican House sentiments overall. While 10 states may be participating in cap-and-trade initiatives, recent election results make it highly unlikely that a federal cap-and-trade program will be implemented in the near future.
Overall, while many consider the recent RGGI report a success story, skeptics remain dubious. Only time will tell if the programs can sustain themselves and inspire other states to follow suit.

Kuddle up to Kindle--$139

DON'T FORGET TO RECYCLE YOUR OLD ELECTRONIC PRODUCTS!

Thinking out of the box.........

This post will be real short. That's because it's a reaction to something I read and I need to do more research to make sure my idea's make sense. As you can see I'm willing to speak before I have all my facts straight. It seems all the rage these days especially in politics.
Oddly enough I'm going to comment on Ben Bernanke and his plan to pump $900 billion into the economy to create additional liquidity. He's going to start by purchasing $600 billion in Treasury's in an effort to keep interest rates low which should spur banks to lend and business to borrow so that they expand and hire new workers so that unemployment or underemployment decreases which will give us, the general public, the confidence to spend and save the economy, again!!!
Ben, haven't we tried this already and no one showed up?
The last time we tried this the banks took the money and held on to it. I assume they still have it since they just wanted to shore up their balances sheets and continue with business as usual which is why they are making great profits now at everyone's expense. Ben, didn't you find that embarrassing the last time? Is it necessary to do this again? Have you checked the world press today? They think your nuts because this policy will destabilize the world's economy's and cause inflation. Inflation may not be very harmful at this point but if your policy creates a cheaper dollar or on the flipside more expensive foreign currencies then won't it cost us, the American public---the Main Streeters more to buy goods since just about everything we buy is from China, Japan or a handful of European countries? What are you thinking?
Since I'm not an economist I could be wrong. But isn't it also true that every move you make is being telegraphed to the fixed income Wall Street crowd? Won't they be able to know what you are doing before you do it? And won't they be able to buy the securities you want to buy before you buy them and at a lower price so they can sell them back to you at a higher price?
This is completely nuts!!! Even Paul Volcker thinks so!!!
If you want to stimulate the economy put the money where it belongs and will do the greatest good. Try something new!!! Put the money on Main Street. Instead of helping the financial fat cats, help create a new breed of bank right on the corner of the only street light in town. Foster the creation of state owned banks! I believe there is only one in the entire country in either North or South Dakota. It lends money to small business' and other local borrowers who are trying to put the money to a good use locally and which can create jobs locally. Help all the states do this on a permanent or temporary basis so they can get the money flowing even though the big banks are not inclined to do so. Why continue to enrich the very people who don't need it right now? Doesn't this make more sense? And to get the money Downtown even faster you can foster a synergistic relationship between the SBA and these new State Banks!!! With the ability to borrow low interest rate funds from the Fed and an SBA with a new purpose we can create a financial dynamic outside of the traditional banking system to invigorate the economy in thousands of local towns and neighborhoods and create hiring and wealth through smaller local business'. These funds can also be used to spur creation of start-ups of green companies who want to manufacture or assemble wind turbines and all their other parts. Solar panels, energy efficiency contractors(lot's of construction workers out there can do this), wind farms, geothermal projects and so much more. These manufacturing activities are now being done on a massive scale in China, Germany, Spain, Brazil and other countries. We need more manufacturing jobs here dammit!!!. Don't you get it?
I said this would be short, I'm sorry, I was wrong. As I said at the beginning, I am not an economist and I need to do much more research on state owned banking. When I do I will be back with a better plan. Until then I hope, Mr. Ben Bernanke, that this gets to you somehow and you reconsider shelling out $900 billion to the wrong people.
I'm just saying.....
Allen Bauman

P.S.: If anyone does actually read this blog and agrees with me please pass it on through your social network so that they can let Ben Bernanke know what they are thinking. I'm interested in hearing opinions also......Thanks