Thursday, July 9, 2009

A Look at HR 2454: The Climate Bill

The House has recently passed HR 2454, otherwise known as the climate bill. HR 2454 has now made its way to the Senate, and whether or not it passes there could determine how much our lives will change forever.

In short, the bill is very expensive, and creates an entirely new level of control that the federal government will have over our day-to-day lives.

To read for yourself the bill that was passed by the House and has been transferred to the Senate, you can access the bill through the House of Representatives website.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c111:3:./temp/~c111BF8pge::

If you’ve never read a piece of legislation, let me warn you. Some of it is very dry; some it requires the reading of other pieces of legislation that have been cited; and, well, some it reads like it’s written in a language I don’t speak.

I practice conservation; I believe in environmentalism; I want clean air, water, and soil; but I also believe in the fundamental concept of American freedom; and, although HR 2454 is based on the theory of trying to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and making our country more “green,” it does so in such a way as to limit our freedoms, our choices, and make basic everyday expenses much more expensive for all of us, regardless of income level. In other words, those making far less than $250,000 per year will paying a great deal of new taxes and new expenses.

HR 2454 is lengthy, as are most pieces of legislation. But, here are few pieces to consider.


Section 121:

“(A) UTILITY PLAN FOR INFRASTRUCTURE- Each electric utility shall develop a plan to support the use of plug-in electric drive vehicles, including heavy-duty hybrid electric vehicles. The plan may provide for deployment of electrical charging stations in public or private locations, including street parking, parking garages, parking lots, homes, gas stations, and highway rest stops….”
[D] “`(ii) include, to the extent feasible, the ability for each plug-in electric drive vehicle to be identified individually and to be associated with its owner's electric utility account, regardless of the location that the vehicle is plugged in, for purposes of appropriate billing for any electricity required to charge the vehicle's batteries as well as any crediting for electricity provided to the electric utility from the vehicle's batteries; and `(iii) review the determination made in response to section 1252 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 in light of this section, including whether time-of-use pricing should be employed to enable the use of plug-in electric drive vehicles to contribute to meeting peak-load and ancillary service power needs.'”


In other words, under this bill the electric companies and/or the government that service our homes with electricity will be required to implement public and private ways to power-up electric cars and to find ways to bill us for this new use of electricity. Will we have to pay more during seven a.m. or five o’clock drive-time? Will we all have a license or credit card-like device to insert into a public power source so they know whom to bill? Apparently, these are up to the individual organizations to decide.

Although very few Americans have hybrid or fully electric vehicles, power sources will be necessary if the electric car is the car of the future. But, keep in mind that on top of all of the other expenses we’ll be paying, the government and/or the electric companies will be passing the expense of these new implementations on to us, the consumers.

It would be interesting, no doubt, to pull in to a parking space and have an electric power source there, but are they really necessary? Gasoline companies don’t pay to install pumps at gas stations; the gas stations pay to have the pumps installed. And, if we have electric-power-stations in lieu of gas stations, why would we need additional power stations other than commercial power stations with the possible exception of our home? We don’t have a gasoline pump anywhere other than commercial stations. And, if there were public power sources, there would be no need for an electric version of the gas station, meaning that many, many people would be put out of business and out of an income. After all, how often would there be a need to stop off for power when one can simply plug the car in at home overnight or in a parking space? And, doesn’t this mean that electrical costs would be required to be exactly the same in every city and every state with a mainframe connecting all of the power sources? How else could we be identified as the consumer using a power source when we’re traveling out of state?

And, yet, aren’t we also getting ahead of ourselves? To reiterate, very few people need these power sources at this time. And, the car manufacturers are giving interviews claiming to be in the process of making new, improved, more gasoline-efficient vehicles to be released in the next few years—not electric or hybrid cars. If the electric car is the car of the future, then why should anyone ever buy another gasoline-powered vehicle? It would not be paid off before we’ll be taxed for driving a gasoline-powered vehicle instead of an electric one.

Section 123

“(b) Financial Assistance- The Secretary of Energy may provide financial assistance to an automobile manufacturer under the program established pursuant to subsection (a) for the reconstruction or retooling of facilities for the manufacture of plug-in electric drive vehicles or batteries for such vehicles that are developed and produced in the United States.”

In other words, more of our tax dollars will be given to the automakers. In turn, I’m certain, we will be paying a higher price at the car lot as well not only because of the new technology but also because the government loans will need to be repaid with interest. Groceries and other items delivered by large trucks will also increase when the delivery companies, farmers, and the manufacturers of consumer products are hit with the expense of mandated new or updated vehicles.

An additional requirement of manufacturers:

Section 127

“(14) new cars sold in the United States that are equipped with an internal combustion engine should allow for fuel competition by being flexible fuel vehicles, and new diesel cars should be capable of operating on biodiesel…”

Section 132

[4] “(D) Enabling the development of a Smart Grid (as described in section 1301 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (42 U.S.C. 17381)) for State, local government, and other public buildings and facilities, including integration of renewable energy resources and distributed generation, demand response, demand side management, and systems analysis.”

If or when the Smart Grid is implemented, to my understanding, it will not only place limitations on the amount of electricity we can consume in the privacy of our homes on a regular basis, but the new technology will result in greater electric costs. Additionally, apparently no one will be exempt from being connected to the Smart Grid if they want electricity because Section 291 makes the provision that homeowners insurance cannot be denied to anyone [a] “(c)) based solely on the fact that the dwelling is not connected to or able to receive electricity service from any wholesale or retail electric power provider.”

Section 152

“`(6) NET METERING FOR FEDERAL AGENCIES- Each electric utility shall offer to arrange (either directly or through a third party) to make interconnection and net metering available to Federal Government agencies, offices, or facilities in accordance with the requirements of section 115(j). The standard under this paragraph shall apply only to electric utilities that sold over 4,000,000 megawatt hours of electricity in the preceding year to the ultimate consumers thereof. In the case of a standard under this paragraph, a period of 1 year after the date of the enactment of this section shall be substituted for the 2-year period referred to in other provisions of this section.'”

If a local electric company sells over four million megawatt hours, why does the federal government have any need to know? And, then, what do they intend to do with that information?

HR2454 also creates the Office of Consumer Advocacy (Section 319) which sounds like it would benefit the consumer until one reads on to learn that, although they will hear and investigate consumer complaints, it will consist of government-paid employees who will additionally “(E) collect data concerning rates or service of public utilities and natural gas companies under the jurisdiction of the Commission…” If a person has a complaint against their local utility, why would there be any need to include the federal government in the issue—unless, possibly, the utilities will no longer be privately or corporately owned but, rather, government entities.

Section 304 concerns building codes and, in effect, making those codes more energy efficient. Of course, public buildings, including public housing, will be upgraded to the new standards (Section 286 mentions providing credit to Fannie and Freddie for these tasks), and any new or retrofitted building that meets the new standards will carry a label saying as much.

Section 204 discusses this labeling program and adds that “(3) MEANS OF IMPLEMENTATION- In adopting the model labeling program established under this section, a State shall seek to ensure that labeled information be made accessible to the public in a manner so that owners, lenders, tenants, occupants, or other relevant parties can utilize it. Such accessibility may be accomplished through… (iv) a sale that is recorded for title and tax purposes consistent with paragraph (8)…” Meaning that if you want to buy, sell, or build a home, it will have to meet the new energy-efficient standards and receive the label before being finalized.

Section 211 places restrictions on the lumens and wattage of indoor, outdoor, and portable light fixtures. Section 212 adds new standards for other appliances such as furnaces and snack machines while Section 213 hits upon faucets, washing machines, and toilets (water efficiency) with the intent to [A][iii]“(I) prescribe a minimum level of energy efficiency or a maximum quantity of energy use.” I guess this means that a home will be limited in how many dishes they can wash or how many loads of clothes can be washed. These, of course, would also be additional standards that would be required to be met if a family wanted to buy or sell.

Section 215 further discusses water conservation, including the government’s right to [b] “(6) regularly review and, when appropriate, update WaterSense criteria for categories of products, buildings and landscapes, and services, at least once every 4 years…” So, there is a possibility of our having to retrofit or purchase an appliance every four years to maintain the label stating the home meets the standards.

Sections 821, 222, and 841 address the greenhouse emissions from vehicles. I’ve actually wondered, considering the rebates discussed in Section 347, if non-electric or non-hybrid vehicles will be taxed in some way if HR 2454 passes. Or, perhaps, will gasoline-only powered engines be illegal to drive? Will they be able to pass emissions tests, a requirement for a vehicle to be driven on the road? If the result is additional taxes, it is one more expense. If the result is to make them illegal or unable to pass emissions testing, then many who own gasoline-only powered vehicles because they were unable to afford to purchase a more expensive hybrid or electric vehicle, will be unable to drive to work or anywhere else. Public transportation does not conveniently travel to all locations, particularly in rural areas, so many may be forced into purchasing a new vehicle that they cannot afford.

Even after reading HR2454 (and not liking what I read), I still have questions, questions that the government would still have to decide if HR 2454 became law. That makes me feel uneasy, at best.

Section 265, interestingly, allows the Secretary of Energy to fund colleges to conduct surveys and research into how the public conserves energy, how we feel about conserving energy, and how and why we conserve energy. This is one of many sections in HR 2454 where tax dollars are used to fund a project or to create a new government office or commission.

Section 299E, Green Banking Centres, states that any consumer applying for a mortgage or building loan or a loan to retrofit their home to the new standards put forth in HR 2454 must be given information regarding the regulations, standards, and sources of information of the necessary changes.

Section 722 is frightening. It begins: “(a) Prohibition- Except as provided in subsection (c), effective January 1, 2012, each covered entity is prohibited from emitting greenhouse gases and having attributable greenhouse gas emissions, in combination, in excess of its allowable emissions level. A covered entity's allowable emissions level for each calendar year is the number of emission allowances (or offset credits or other allowances as provided in subsection (d)) it holds as of 12:01 a.m. on April 1 (or a later date established by the Administrator under subsection (j)) of the following calendar year.” Section 723 then discusses the penalty as being fines determined from an equation that would baffle Einstein.

In other locations, HR 2454 discusses tree-planting programs, reduction in deforestation, energy efficient communication devices, reducing international industrial pollutants, and funding for job training in green energy-conservative fields.

Although some proponents of HR 2454 have argued that this legislation will create jobs, this theory is difficult to understand. To begin, any jobs created during the transitional phase of implementing new technology would be merely temporary; these workers would again be unemployed after implementation. Secondly, there is an entire section of HR 2454 designed to regulate the federal compensation of workers who lose their jobs due to this legislation. This list includes not only workers in the energy-fields, but also workers in fields that merely use energy—a statement which applies to every business who turns on a light switch. Section 425, 426, and 427 discuss these dislocated workers, potential relocation payments (3 times the worker’s weekly salary (426, 3, B), potential training programs that may be made available to them, and the payments for lost wages that may be available to them. If this bill were designed to create jobs, then why was so much attention focused on the many that will lose their jobs, their incomes, because of this bill?

Section 452 creates a National Climate Service (NCS), but doesn’t the EPA already do these tasks delegated to the NCS?

The bill also places new regulations on farming, thereby continuing to increase the resulting cost of groceries.

Whew! I’m all for going green, but I can’t afford HR 2454. More importantly, I have great concerns regarding its impact regarding the level of governmental control it would create, its impact on our freedom of choice, our freedom of living our day-to-day lives.

Study HR 2454, which is now before the Senate, and determine how you feel about it. If you like it or if you don’t, contact your government representatives and let them know.

No comments:

Post a Comment