Letter below was submitted for publication to Bernardsville News on 04-17-15. It was published with some minor edits in the print edition on 04-23-15 and is published on line here.
EDITOR:
In a letter published here on February 26, I proposed that President Obama and Congress adopt compromise legislation that would authorize the Keystone XL pipeline and include sense-of-Congress language that follows:
“Human activities are increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases and thereby contributing to global warming and climate change. The federal government should act to reduce these activities.”
New data show broad support in America for this finding and proposal. The Yale project on Climate Change Communication has surveyed public attitudes on these issues for many years. On April 6 it published an extensive analysis on line. It lists fourteen claims and proposals, and the percentages of agreement and disagreement with each.
There are data for the whole country, for individual states, and for individual counties and congressional districts within each state. Maps allow one to point and click on a region to select data. I report some percentages of agreement below. (Click Yale Climate Opinion Maps and see more.)
The analysis begins with this claim: “Global warming is happening.”
Large majorities agree: All US (63%) and all NJ (68%). Results for counties in our region are Morris (66%) and Somerset (70%).
The next claim is: “Global warming is caused by mostly human activities.”
About half agree: US (46%), NJ (52%), Morris (46%), Somerset (54%).
Four statements are proposals for government action: fund research for renewable energy; regulate carbon dioxide (CO2) as a pollutant; set limits on CO2 emissions from coal-fired power plants; require electric utilities to produce 20% of electricity from renewable sources.
The averages for these four proposals to regulate CO2 emissions and use more renewable energy show support by large majorities: US (69%), NJ (74%), Morris (71%), Somerset (73%).
I have argued several times in this space that the most effective government action will be implementation of a system of carbon fee and dividend.
- Impose a fee on each fossil fuel, based on the quantity of CO2 produced when it is burned.
- Start low and raise the fee by a fixed amount each year.
- Divide fee revenue into equal shares and return it to citizens as dividends.
- Allow consumers, business community, and free market to pick winners and losers.
This system will require Congressional authorization, so it’s useful to look at survey results for our local congressional districts. Data for District 7, represented by Leonard Lance, average 71% support for the four government actions in the survey, and data for District 11, represented by Rodney Frelinghuysen, average 72%. Voters in these districts tend to be conservative, so the broad support for government action is surprising and very significant.
The last survey statement is: “A carbon tax if refunded to every American household.”
This appears to be a proposal for a system of carbon fee and dividend, and I could be discouraged by the relatively low levels of support: US (44%), NJ (49%), Morris (46%), Somerset (45%). The 43% support in both District 7 and 11 is lower than the state average. For three reasons I am not discouraged.
- The proposal uses the inappropriate word “tax”, a turnoff for most people and a show-stopper for many. A system that refunds carbon fee revenue to households is not a tax.
- The concept of a system, that will collect fees, divide the revenue, and return it to citizens, is novel and not well understood.
- Most important, the survey data show that large majorities support government action to reduce CO2 emissions and move to renewable energy.
Those of us, who share these objectives and propose a strategy of carbon fee and dividend, have a two-part challenge: persuade members of Congress and their constituents that implementation of a system of carbon fee and dividend really is the best strategy, and that a fee, that is returned to people to use as they decide, is not a tax. We will work to meet this challenge.
Bill Allen 04-17-15