Sen. Alexander, other LCFS-backers, have some explaining to do
Under the headline “Low-Carbon Fuels: Are We Serious About Energy Security or Not?,” Carter Wood – NAM’s one-man blogging savant – wrote this:
One of the many campaigns the environmentalist left has organized to cripple U.S. energy production and consumption is an attack against high-carbon fuels, i.e., fuels that are derived from heavy crude that requires additional refining. In the brave new world we live in, carbon is bad because it contributes to global warming/climate change/doom.
In simpler terms: The American greens hate the success of Canada’s oil sands and they want to prevent any similar development in the United States, including shale oil.
To promote low-carbon fuel mandates is to reject U.S. energy security, plain and simple.
Unfortunately, some members of Congress continue to disregard the fact that an LCFS would increase prices at the pump for every single American consumer, threaten our energy security and good-paying jobs during a time of economic downturn. Not to mention that an LCFS may actually increase global greenhouse gas emissions.
Take for example U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN), the third-ranking Republican in the Senate. Here’s just a sample of some of his statements about an LCFS:
“A low-carbon fuel standard is a more effective way to deal with carbon from fuel than economy-wide cap-and-trade, which would only raise prices and might not reduce carbon.” (“Alexander Pushes Nuclear Power As ‘The Cheap, Clean Energy Solution,’” The Chattanoogan, 7/7/09)
“[Sen. Alexander] also called for a low-carbon fuel standard, which he argues would not raise the price of gasoline.” (Kate Sheppard, “How will key senators vote on a climate bill?,” Grist, 7/29/09)
“Alexander wants Congress to put in place a ‘low-carbon fuel standard,’ which he said would “not deliberately raise the price of gasoline.” (Kate Sheppard, “Tennessee Republican comes out swinging against cap-and-trade bill,” Grist, 7/14/09)
“I would rather put caps on power plants and a low-carbon fuel standard on fuel. Again, that is the kind of government action that doesn’t pick and choose winners.” (Senator Lamar Alexander’s Speech at the Banquet Dinner of the Brookings Institution’s Plug-In Electric Car Conference, 6/11/08)
“Another bill [Sen. Alexander] introduced would have established a low carbon fuel standard.” (Herman Wang, “Alexander defends environmental record,” Chattanoogan Times Free Press, 7/29/09)
“If you put in a low carbon fuel standard today on fuel, you deal with 30 percent of the carbon, without this whole contraption of taxes and mandates, and you gradually lower it and you shift people to what is probably lower fuel costs, which is electric cars or maybe biofuels.” (Kevin Walker, “AFBF exec criticizes climate change bill at Senate hearing,” Farm World, 7/22/09)
“In the hearing the other day we had on climate change, I proposed and the committee adopted, a low -carbon fuel standard.” (U.S. Senate floor debate on the Farm, Nutrition, and Bioenergy Act of 2007, Congressional Record, 12/12/07)
“I will now broaden my legislation to include two other major sectors of the economy, one, a low carbon fuel standard for the fuels used in transportation–transportation produces another one-third of America’s greenhouse gases.” (U.S. Senate floor debate, Congressional Record, 10/18/07)
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA), who has push for a job-killing LCFS in his state, has even applauded Sen. Alexander’s LCFS efforts:
“Governor Schwarzenegger issued the following statement today after the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee adopted the amendment by Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) to establish a National Low Carbon Fuel Standard (NLCFS).
‘I applaud today’s action by the Environment and Public Works Committee in adopting an amendment to establish a national version of California’s groundbreaking Low Carbon Fuels Standard. By adopting our approach of enforceable standards and market competition to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, this amendment to the Lieberman-Warner legislation, if passed, would dramatically increase low carbon fuels, expand consumer choice and reward innovation.’” (“Governor Schwarzenegger Issues Statement on Adoption of National Low Carbon Fuel Standard Amendment Modeled after California’s Policy,” Release, 12/5/07)
Some politicians view an LCFS to be a safe alternative to cap-and-trade, and from everything we’ve seen, it appears Sen. Alexander is properly assigned to that category. But just like there’s no such thing as a safe cigarette, a safe LCFS doesn’t exist either. Any way you slice it, a plan that seeks to undercut one of America’s most important strategic allies and deny entry to one of its most secure sources of energy is bad policy for the Untied States, and even worse policy for American consumers.
That’s the message of Secure Our Fuels, and with your help, it’s one will be able to carry far and wide.