Posts Tagged ‘government’

Maureen O'Connor
Posted on : October 27th, 2009 | By : Maureen O'Connor | In : Cap and Trade

The cap and trade legislation as currently configured will increase costs for small businesses, while probably having little effect on big industry and large polluters.

We think that ultimately, the industries affected by Cap and Trade will pass along their increased C&T-associated expenses to consumers. We don’t foresee a major bump in consumer prices, because we don’t see C&T having a major impact on reducing carbon emissions.

As far as the impact on the sustainability industry Cap and Trade is not a green jobs creator. It is a vehicle created to lower emissions long term, assuage energy lobbyists and special interests and line a few Wall Street firms pockets at the taxpayers’ expense. New energy technologies and alternative energy infrastructure would benefit much more from a real “Carbon Tax” that mandated change, and in so doing, stimulate new, green industrial growth and positive environmental impact.

Tap dancing around emission standards with the smoke and mirrors approach of Cap and Trade won’t help consumers pay the future health insurance premiums and hospital expenses associated with the respiratory ailments and diseases caused by inhaling fossil fuel-based carbon emissions and air pollution. We’re afraid that to be effective in any way, Cap and Trade will need a major overhaul before it gets too far down the road.

Facebook
Twitter
Digg
del.icio.us
Technorati
StumbleUpon
MySpace
Google Bookmarks
LinkedIn
Jasmin Chua
Posted on : October 27th, 2009 | By : Jasmin Chua | In : Cap and Trade

According to a recent report from the U.S. Budget Office, the climate bill will actually end up curbing the budget deficit, instead of putting us deeper in the hole as critics insist. Cap-and-trade legislation, as reported by Bloomberg News, would raise $846.6 billion. Deduct the added $821.2 billion to federal spending and you still have a $24.4 billion net gain, which is a win-win all around. And this spending includes what are essentially cash allowances to factories and polluters. If this legislation passes, we could see greater energy efficiency, less pollution, and a growing sector of domestic green-collar jobs that will boost a flagging economy.

Facebook
Twitter
Digg
del.icio.us
Technorati
StumbleUpon
MySpace
Google Bookmarks
LinkedIn
Stephen Del Percio
Posted on : October 27th, 2009 | By : Stephen Del Percio | In : Cap and Trade

If it passes the Senate in its current form, the Waxman-Markey legislation could have serious repercussions for the real estate industry in terms of the energy efficiency mandates that it would impose. Earlier this year, the North American Industrial and Office Properties association commissioned a study to determine the feasibility of the 30 percent reductions in energy that would be imposed by Waxman-Markey. NAIOP focused on a four-story commercial office building in three different climate zones and concluded that, although efficiencies of 14 to 23 percent were possible given current technologies within a seven-year payback period, the 30 percent reductions that Waxman-Markey now contemplates would be extremely difficult for most building owners and operators to achieve absent significant financial incentives at the state and local levels. If passed in its current form, the legislation could thus impact all types of businesses if owners and operators seek to bridge that gap by passing the additional costs of compliance along to tenants or their customers.

Facebook
Twitter
Digg
del.icio.us
Technorati
StumbleUpon
MySpace
Google Bookmarks
LinkedIn