Proponent: I-1631 is not just about a carbon fee, it’s about the economy
Oct 17, 2018, 5:24 AM | Updated: 10:05 am
(AP)
(AP)
Arguments are mounting around Washington’s proposed carbon fee, with some favoring the added cost, and others saying it’s poorly planned.
“When you were a kid, your mamma said ‘you made a mess in your room, you can clean it up,’” Brad Warren told KIRO Radio’s Dave Ross. “This is a moment like that. We made a mess. We can clean it up.”
Warren is executive director of National Fisheries Conservation Center. He says that Initiative 1631 will ultimately benefit the region by encouraging a new energy economy, providing new jobs while attempting to curb drastic effects of climate change.
“If we allow this course to continue unchanged, there will not be as many people,” he said. “We will become self-limited faster than we wish. Food supply. Water supply. Those are two big ones.”
I-1631
Bill Gates has come out in favor of the initiative, arguing that it will send a market signal, spurring clean energy innovation, which will be good for Northwest business. Bill and Melinda Gates have donated $1 million to the I-1631 campaign. The campaign has raised about $11 million total. Climatologist Cliff Mass has opposed the initiative, arguing that it doesn’t go far enough. He says that a better plan would be a revenue neutral tax that increases the cost of carbon pollution without hitting the average consumer’s wallet.
Warren argues that nine other East Coast states have implemented similar carbon policies for their coal-fired power plants – a “modest price” — and used the money to increase fuel efficiency and develop clean energy. They are known as the East Coast’s Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Delaware, and Maryland. Warren says rather than a fee, they raise money with the market, then invest 50-60 percent in energy efficiency.
“They have reduced emissions by more than 50 percent in nine years, they have generated tens of thousands of jobs, they have added billions of dollars to their GDP, and in the last three years, they avoided buying close to a billion dollars worth of fossil fuels in the region,” Warren said. “Because they don’t need to. They are getting all their work done, they are growing their economy, they are growing jobs, and they are not spending as much money on fuel.”
Warren also diverts from critics when it comes to the history of carbon fee proposals in the state. He opposed Washington’s I-732 (experts like Mass favored it), saying it was poorly designed and wouldn’t hit targets for emissions reductions. He said it took money and gave it away in tax breaks and freebies.
“It takes money, that’s why you raise the price,” Warren said. “Not because a price signal makes people squeal and they turn into angels suddenly. Because you use the money solve the problems you’ve got. It’s a problem we are all affected by. Everyone has a stake in a solution and when we get the solutions right, we actually spend less money on energy. That’s the lesson from the East Coast.”
