News Room
News Items from the Senator
| |
| |
| May 11th, 2009 |
|
Media Contact(s): Mark Eddington or Andrea Saul, (202) 224-5251 |
|
Printable Version |
|
|
HATCH: COSTS OF CAP-AND-TRADE PROGRAM WOULD FAR EXCEED BENEFITS
|
| |
WASHINGTON – Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) grilled economists during a Senate Committee on Finance hearing on the implementation of a carbon cap-and-trade program, questioning them about how much it would cost Utah consumers and about its overall benefit in terms of reducing global warming.
During the recent hearing, Hatch asked expert witness Anne Smith, Practice Leader of Climate and Sustainability of CRA International, this simple question: “Do you believe that implementing a cap-and-trade program or a carbon tax would result in net job losses?” She gave him a simple answer: “yes.”
Hatch cited a study by the Rural Electric Cooperative Association, which concluded that a carbon cap-and-trade program that charged $50 per metric ton would result in a 70 percent increase in the electric bill for the average Utah family.
Hatch also asked about the overall cost and benefit of a cap-and-trade program, posing the following question to the expert panel:
“Some climatologists believe that implementing a cap-and-trade or a program that would reduce carbon emissions by 83 percent in the year 2050 would reduce temperatures by only nine-hundredths of 1 degree Fahrenheit. Are we sacrificing million of jobs in order to reduce climate change by nine-hundredths of 1 degree?”
Again, Smith confirmed that this was a fair assessment of the U.S. contribution to reducing warming with an aggressive cap-and-trade program.
During her testimony, Smith stated:
“The precise level of U.S. emissions will not affect climate risks in any quantifiable way if they are on a general track towards near-zero emissions. This is particularly true because global climate outcomes over the next century will be determined by controls on developing country emissions much more so than by a few percentage points of difference in U.S. emissions during the next couple of decades.”
After the hearing Hatch stated, “How can responsible policymakers move forward on important new programs without a serious cost-benefit analysis? I find it hard to believe that congressional Democrats and the Obama administration would be willing to force all this hardship on our people and our nation’s economic health for the promise of a nine-hundredths-of 1-degree reduction in the climate. They must be living in the twilight zone if they believe this is what voters want.”
|
| |
| ### |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
