Affect of Cap-and-Trade on Arkansas
A new study released by The Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis reveals the tremendous costs and energy price spikes that Arkansas residents will incur should Congress enact the Waxman-Markey climate change legislation. Inevitably the bill will affect each state differently," explains Heritage's energy and economic policy team. "Some states are more energy-intensive than others, and some rely a great deal on manufacturing to fuel their economies. Regardless, the costs in every state are significant."
On June 26, a 1,427-page climate change bill introduced by Representatives Henry Waxman (D–CA) and Edward Markey (D–MA) passed the House by a narrow margin. The bill, also known as Waxman–Markey, includes a number of alarming provisions, chief among them a cap-and-trade program that would attempt to curb global warming by imposing strict upper limits on the emission of six greenhouse gases, with the primary emphasis on carbon dioxide (CO2). The mechanism for capping these emissions requires emitters to acquire federally created permits (or "allowances") for each ton of greenhouse gas emitted.
Because these allowances carry a price—and because 85% of the United States' energy needs come from carbon-emitting fossil fuels—Waxman–Markey is best described as a significant tax on energy use. Since everything Americans use and produce requires energy, the tax hits U.S. pocketbooks again and again. The Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis forecasts severe consequences, including skyrocketing energy costs, millions of jobs lost, and falling household income and economic activity—all for negligible changes in the global temperature
Workers and families in Arkansas may be wondering how cap-and-trade legislation would affect their income, their jobs, and the cost of energy. Implementing Waxman-Markey would put a chokehold on Arkansas's economic potential, reducing gross state product by $3.67 billion in 2035.
Consumers would be hit hard. Between 2012 (when the restrictions first apply) and 2035 (the last year of this analysis), the prices of electricity and gasoline will rise sharply when compared to prices in a world without cap and trade. By 2035, Americans living in the state of Arkansas will see their electricity prices rise by $1,358.72 and their gasoline prices rise by $1.27 per gallon solely because of Waxman-Markey.
As the economy adjusts to shrinking gross domestic product (GDP) and rising energy prices, employment will take a big hit in Arkansas. Beginning in 2012, job losses will be 14,133 higher than without a cap-and-trade bill in place. And the number of jobs lost will only go up, increasing to 25,594 by 2035.
Contrary to the claims of an economic boost from green investment and green job creation and "postage stamp" costs, the Waxman-Markey climate change legislation does the complete opposite by increasing energy prices-thereby causing a considerable reduction in the rate of economic growth, the amount of GDP, household incomes, and employment.
David W. Kreutzer, Ph.D., is Senior Policy Analyst for Energy Economics and Climate Change, Karen A. Campbell, Ph.D., is Policy Analyst in Macroeconomics, William W. Beach is Director of the Center for Data Analysis, Ben Lieberman is Senior Policy Analyst in Energy and the Environment, and Nicolas D. Loris is a Research Assistant in the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation.
Tags: Arkansas, cap-and-trade, carbon tax, Carbone Dioxide, CO2, Ed Markey, Henry Waxman, The Heritage Foundation To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
On June 26, a 1,427-page climate change bill introduced by Representatives Henry Waxman (D–CA) and Edward Markey (D–MA) passed the House by a narrow margin. The bill, also known as Waxman–Markey, includes a number of alarming provisions, chief among them a cap-and-trade program that would attempt to curb global warming by imposing strict upper limits on the emission of six greenhouse gases, with the primary emphasis on carbon dioxide (CO2). The mechanism for capping these emissions requires emitters to acquire federally created permits (or "allowances") for each ton of greenhouse gas emitted.
Because these allowances carry a price—and because 85% of the United States' energy needs come from carbon-emitting fossil fuels—Waxman–Markey is best described as a significant tax on energy use. Since everything Americans use and produce requires energy, the tax hits U.S. pocketbooks again and again. The Heritage Foundation's Center for Data Analysis forecasts severe consequences, including skyrocketing energy costs, millions of jobs lost, and falling household income and economic activity—all for negligible changes in the global temperature
Workers and families in Arkansas may be wondering how cap-and-trade legislation would affect their income, their jobs, and the cost of energy. Implementing Waxman-Markey would put a chokehold on Arkansas's economic potential, reducing gross state product by $3.67 billion in 2035.
Consumers would be hit hard. Between 2012 (when the restrictions first apply) and 2035 (the last year of this analysis), the prices of electricity and gasoline will rise sharply when compared to prices in a world without cap and trade. By 2035, Americans living in the state of Arkansas will see their electricity prices rise by $1,358.72 and their gasoline prices rise by $1.27 per gallon solely because of Waxman-Markey.
 |  |
As the economy adjusts to shrinking gross domestic product (GDP) and rising energy prices, employment will take a big hit in Arkansas. Beginning in 2012, job losses will be 14,133 higher than without a cap-and-trade bill in place. And the number of jobs lost will only go up, increasing to 25,594 by 2035.
Contrary to the claims of an economic boost from green investment and green job creation and "postage stamp" costs, the Waxman-Markey climate change legislation does the complete opposite by increasing energy prices-thereby causing a considerable reduction in the rate of economic growth, the amount of GDP, household incomes, and employment.
David W. Kreutzer, Ph.D., is Senior Policy Analyst for Energy Economics and Climate Change, Karen A. Campbell, Ph.D., is Policy Analyst in Macroeconomics, William W. Beach is Director of the Center for Data Analysis, Ben Lieberman is Senior Policy Analyst in Energy and the Environment, and Nicolas D. Loris is a Research Assistant in the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation.
Tags: Arkansas, cap-and-trade, carbon tax, Carbone Dioxide, CO2, Ed Markey, Henry Waxman, The Heritage Foundation To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Posted by Bill Smith at 9:00 AM - Post Link
7 Comments:
1) Anybody who tries to predict thirty years in the future will be wrong.
2) The people who finance the research of the Heritage Foundation have one goal: to sway public opinion against any regulation it deems anti-business. It has no responsibility or interest in accurate research.
3) There is good reason to believe that the CO2 reductions mandated by Waxman/Markey over the next two decades could be done entirely through energy efficiency gains at minimal cost. In fact, it will probably save the economy billions of dollars, just as CAFE standards save consumers a hundred billion dollars every year.
Are we to beleive Bryce Anderson above - I don't think so. As his bio on Goggle's bogger.com says:
"Socialist food-monger and left-wing lunatic with delusions of grandeur . . . and actively seek to reclaim the means of production for the proletariat."
And all those expert Ph.D. researchers at the Heritage Foundation obviously don't know more than Bryce.
We both know that one of the best offensive plays around is "mis-direction" .... get the defense to look one way while the real play is going in another direction ..
Could the Obama Adminstration using this proven strategy .... getting everyone focused on healthcare when his real agenda is on a different path ??
If true .... then what is his real goal ??... Read More
Think about it !!!!
I hate to even think what his REAL goal is.
Extrapolating, the aggregate effect on all 50 states, nationally disastrous!
This is not about the effects on each state, this is about signing the copenhagen treaty Kyoto that will allow the UN to be the world government. I am not a kook or conspiracy theory, this is real and a State Rep approach me about this matter and is perplexed on how to get the message out!
there is no glow bull worming and co2is not a so called green house gas.they use faulty cause and effect,co2 does not cause warming,warming causes more co2 to be released from the ocean.more co2 is good for plant growth so you know these people are liars all they want is to harm america.national socialist democrats have done every thing they can to harm america because they are traitors to the canstituion.
Post a Comment
<< Home