Tag Archives: Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI)

Pennsylvania’s Gov. Shapiro’s Misguided Attempt to Cure a Very Healthy Climate

From Watts Up With That?

By Gregory Wrightstone

Somebody should tell Gov. Shapiro that his state of Pennsylvania is doing very well environmentally. Overall, the weather has been getting better and agricultural production is up.

Nevertheless, he repeatedly attacks the producers and users of energy to address a supposed climate crisis. His administration is trying to keep Pennsylvania trapped in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), which the Commonwealth Court ruled an illegal tax. Recently, he proposed a new energy tax and the expansion of a program to force consumers to buy larger amounts of expensive and unreliable wind and solar power.

Shapiro’s angst may stem from predictions by the state Department of Environmental Protection that climate change induced by emissions of carbon dioxide would lead to extreme weather and environmental harm — including both floods and droughts — and would damage Pennsylvania’s $80 billion agricultural sector.

Yet, nothing could be further from the truth.

It is a fact that atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased since 1750 to 420 parts per million from 280. Most of that 50% increase is probably from CO2 emissions that began a steady rise with the Industrial Revolution and accelerated after World II because of vigorous economic growth.

However, almost nothing supports the popular claim that recent modest warming has been caused by carbon dioxide. In fact, geological evidence overwhelmingly indicates that this warming trend is simply another in a series of warming and cooling cycles operating since the end of the last glacial advance more than 10,000 years ago. Moreover, our current warming trend started more than 300 years ago, long before we began emitting CO2 in earnest in the mid-20th century.

To put the governor at ease, we turn to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s U.S. Historic Climate Network. Even though the network’s temperature record is biased toward the global warming narrative by both corrupted and manipulated data, it still offers reassurance that Pennsylvania’s climate has been becoming more benign since at least 1895.

Over the past 130 years, Pennsylvania’s average temperature has increased about one-half a degree Fahrenheit. Considering that cold is up to 20 times as lethal as heat, warmth is a good thing for anybody familiar with the Keystone State’s winters. Average maximum temperature has remained unchanged and the percentage of days above 100 degrees has declined significantly — by more than half.

As for the claim of increasing drought, since 1895, the state’s average annual precipitation has increased to 45 inches from 40 and the severity of droughts has decreased slightly but steadily.

Neither has flooding become more of a problem since the beginning of the 20th century. In fact, numerous data points around the state show fewer floods over time.

For example, the flood crests for the decades of the 2000s and 2010s are about 60% that of the 1900s and 1910s for the Allegheny River at Franklin, Venango County. Similar declines in flooding were recorded for the Ohio River at Pittsburgh, the Susquehanna River at Williamsport and for Bucks County, where George Washington crossed the Delaware and famously experienced a particularly harsh Pennsylvania winter.

As for agricultural health, food production in Pennsylvania and around the world is up, partly because of a warmer climate, which has increased the U.S. growing season by more than two weeks and lessened the threat of killing frosts in the late spring and early autumn. Also contributing to better crop yields are the fertilization effect of more CO2 and the use of fertilizers derived from foolishly maligned fossil fuels. This boost in productivity has enabled farmers to support 8 billion people, 10 times the population of 300 years ago.

An overall greening of Earth that has been widely attributed to modern warming and high concentrations of atmospheric CO2 is unsurprisingly reflected in Penn’s woods. Since 1955, the state’s standing timber has increased fivefold. Worldwide, tree cover has grown by more than 2 million square kilometers, a 7% increase.

So, with all the good news, why the pressure to increase energy prices and subsidize favored industries at a cost of billions of dollars? The purported answer is to quench the fever of an allegedly overheating planet.

Well, consider that the calculated theoretical heating that would be averted by 2100 if Pennsylvania eliminated all emissions of carbon dioxide would be 0.008 degrees Fahrenheit, an amount too small to measure.

Gov. Shapiro should heed the caution to first do no harm because his climate prescriptions are sure to damage the interests of people who need abundant, affordable energy.

This commentary was first published at Broad + Liberty on April 30, 2024.

Gregory Wrightstone, a Pennsylvania native, is a geologist; executive director of the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Va.; and author of “Inconvenient Facts: The Science That Al Gore Doesn’t Want You to Know” and “A Very Convenient Warming: How modest warming and more CO2 are benefiting humanity.”

Court derails Keystone State’s membership in RGGI

“RGGI, like all so-called green initiatives, is based on the false premise that emissions of carbon dioxide from human activities are overheating the planet,” Wrightstone explained. “CO2 is in fact an essential plant food, and modern increases in atmospheric levels of the gas have contributed to record crop harvests and an overall greening of Earth. The decision to kill RGGI is a vote for benefitting humanity and a prospering economy.”

From CFACT

A plan by former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf (D) to circumvent the legislative process and force the state to join the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) was thwarted Nov. 1, when Pennsylvania’s Commonwealth Court ruled the move violated the state’s constitution.

The court ruled that Wolf’s unilateral move from 2019, which would have Pennsylvania abide by RGGI’s emissions-trading scheme, constituted the imposition of a tax and thus required legislative approval. Now, the current administration of Gov. Josh Shapiro (D) has 30 days to appeal the decision to the state’s Supreme Court.

RGGI is a consortium comprising the states of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Virginia that caps and reduces CO2 emissions from power plants through periodic auctions of emission credits. Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin (R) is spearheading efforts to remove his state from the consortium, saying that membership in RGGI places an inordinate burden on low-income electric-utility ratepayers.

The majority on the five-judge panel that heard the Pennsylvania case sided with Republican Senators who argued the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) did not have the constitutional authority to collect revenues from RGGI auctions, and that only the legislature can levy taxes. Judge Michael Wojcik spoke for the panel’s majority in addressing the sensitive constitutional issue of taxation:

“Where, as here, the moneys generated and received by the Commonwealth’s participation in the auction are ‘grossly disproportionate’ to the costs of overseeing participation in the program or DEP’s and EQB’s [Environmental Quality Board] annual regulatory needs, and relate to activities beyond their regulatory authority, Pennsylvania’s participation in RGGI are invalid and unenforceable,” he wrote. “Stated simply, to pass constitutional muster, the Commonwealth’s participation in RGGI may only be achieved through legislation duly enacted by the Pennsylvania General Assembly…”

“We are gratified by the court’s decision and are pleased to have been part of the widespread opposition to RGGI,” said Gregory Wrightstone, executive director of the Arlington, Va.-based CO2 Coalition. “Our analysis found RGGI to be unscientific, unnecessary, economically damaging, and of no environmental benefit.”

False Premise

“RGGI, like all so-called green initiatives, is based on the false premise that emissions of carbon dioxide from human activities are overheating the planet,” Wrightstone explained. “CO2 is in fact an essential plant food, and modern increases in atmospheric levels of the gas have contributed to record crop harvests and an overall greening of Earth. The decision to kill RGGI is a vote for benefitting humanity and a prospering economy.”

Judge Wojcik’s clear statement that states participating in RGGI are imposing a carbon tax on their citizens has both constitutional and economic consequences. As Wrightstone explains:

”RGGI would have imposed a tax on emissions of carbon dioxide from power plants that burn coal and natural gas to generate electricity, adding hundreds of thousands of jobs in the state’s energy sector. The 2019 proposal by Gov. Wolf is believed to have accelerated the July [2023] closing of the state’s coal-fired power plant at Homer City and to have discouraged the development of new fossil-fuel generation in the state.”

Gov. Shapiro’s administration is widely expected to appeal the RGGI ruling to the state’s Supreme Court.

Virginia needs natural gas

 From CFACT

By Craig Rucker 

Virginia stands at an energy crossroads.

Governor Glenn Youngkin and the Virginia Air Pollution Board have wisely taken steps to protect Virginia’s future energy needs by withdrawing from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).  The usual suspects have brought a lawsuit in an attempt to stop them.

There is more to it than that.

Dominion Energy has acknowledged that wind and solar projects are insufficient to keep Virginia’s lights on and has requested that natural gas plants and modular nuclear reactors be built as backup. CFACT delivered written testimony to the State Corporation Commission in support of Dominion’s plan, urging them to go further still by making natural gas the primary instead of the backup power source of electricity generation.

Read CFACT’s full submission at CFACT.org.

A Dominion spokesman conceded in an email that “renewables alone cannot reliably serve the unprecedented growth in customer demand expected over the next 15 years.”

If cutting greenhouse gas emissions is your thing, natural gas should be your hero. America’s ample supply of low-emissions, domestically produced natural gas permitted the U.S. to dramatically reduce its emissions as the rest of the world, including Europe, flatlined or increased.

Mathematician David Wojick did a brilliant job in CFACT’s submission of crunching the numbers that prove how crucial it is to Virginia to secure reliable power.

Central to Wojick’s thesis is that wind and solar are intermittent sources of power, and the infrastructure to store the energy they produce is prohibitively expensive, does not exist, and is not about to.

“Consider the simple case of a 12-hour night with low wind fulfilling that load.” CFACT’s submission explains, “The storage requirement is 60,000 MWh, over six times the proposed storage capacity. Even if the batteries had a 10-hour capacity, they would not come close to meeting the need… Even worse, this simple case is far from the worst likely to occur. Multiple cloudy, hot and cold days with low wind are common in Virginia. Detailed historical analysis will be needed to estimate the likely maximum required storage capacity correctly, and it will certainly be in the hundreds of thousands of MWh. Even assuming huge battery price reductions, this much storage would be prohibitively expensive. Gas-fired backup power is a better option.”

Wojick then leads CFACT’s submission to a more powerful conclusion, “Instead of building new gas-fired generating capacity to backup renewables, it will be far more cost-effective to use gas as a primary energy source. Having gas capacity sit idle simply because the wind is blowing or the sun is shining for part of the day is redundant and expensive.”

Read CFACT’s excellent submission in support of natural gas for Virginia.

Natural gas and nuclear power plants cannot be quickly turned off and on like a light switch.  The power grid is undependable without them.  The generating plants must, therefore, operate continually.

The smartest move is to cut the redundant and unreliable wind and solar out of the picture and use what works.

Author

Craig Rucker

Craig Rucker is a co-founder of CFACT and currently serves as its president.

Greens sue to keep Virginia in RGGI

From  CFACT

By Bonner Cohen, Ph. D. 

In a move that came as no surprise to anyone who has followed the knock-down, drag-out fight over Virginia’s participation in a controversial multistate carbon credit-trading scheme, environmental groups are suing to block the Old Dominion’s withdrawal from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).

On August 21, the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), on behalf of several Virginia green groups, filed suit in Fairfax County Circuit Court to prevent Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) from having the state part company with RGGI. RIGGI is an 11-state compact of northeastern and mid-Atlantic states to cap and reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from power plants. Its current members are Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia.

Virginia joined RGGI in 2021 after Democrats, who controlled the General Assembly and the governor’s mansion at the time, passed a sweeping energy/climate measure that called for the state to phase out carbon-based fuels. Youngkin, who was elected governor later that year, came into office vowing to take Virginia out of RGGI.

That has been easier said than done, in large part because Democrats remain in control of the state Senate, where they have killed Republican-backed legislation to exit the compact. Unable to do the deed legislatively or through an executive order, Youngkin pursued his goal through regulatory means. In June, the State Air Pollution Control Board – with a majority of member appointed by Youngkin – voted to begin the process of exiting RGGI. After a 30-day review period, the governor officially filed a notice of withdrawal at the end of July, with an effective date of Dec. 31.

“A Regressive Tax”

“RGGI remains a regressive tax that does not do anything to incentivize the reduction of emissions in Virginia,” Travis Voyles, state secretary of natural and historic resources, said in an Aug. 21 statement. He noted that the board “believes that Virginia is not required to be in RGGI” and that state Attorney General Jason S. Miyares (R) has issued an opinion that the board has the authority to act, The Washington Post (Aug. 23) reported.

The forthcoming legal battle will focus on what the Democrat-passed 2021 energy law said about Virginia joining RGGI. Environmental groups – as well as Democratic lawmakers – contend that the Youngkin administration exceeded its authority in overriding an act passed by the Assembly. But the Youngkin administration argues that the 2021 energy law “authorizes” Virginia to join RGGI, but does not compel it.

Youngkin’s claim that RGGI is a regressive tax was confirmed by Dominion Energy, the states largest utility, which said it added about $2.39 to the average customer’s monthly utility bill to cover the cost of complying with RGGI. “The State Corporation Commission suspended that surcharge last year in anticipation of Virginia withdrawing from RGGI and at Dominion’s request during a time when rising fuel charges were increasing customer costs,” the Post reported. “But Dominion succeeded in getting a slightly higher surcharge returned this summer, arguing that it has continued to accrue costs from RGGI even as fuel costs have come down.”

The lawsuit spearheaded by SELC was filed against the State Air Pollution Control Board, the Department of Environmental Quality, and the department’s director, Michael Rolband. It argues they lack authority to Remove Virginia from RGGI. A court ruling in the case is not expected for several months.

Author


Bonner Cohen, Ph. D.

Bonner R. Cohen, Ph. D., is a senior policy analyst with CFACT, where he focuses on natural resources, energy, property rights, and geopolitical developments.

Articles by Dr. Cohen have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, Forbes, Investor’s Busines Daily, The New York Post, The Washington Examiner, The Washington Times, The Hill, The Epoch Times, The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The Miami Herald, and dozens of other newspapers around the country.

He has been interviewed on Fox News, Fox Business Network, CNN, NBC News, NPR, BBC, BBC Worldwide Television, N24 (German-language news network), and scores of radio stations in the U.S. and Canada.

He has testified before the U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, and the U.S. House Natural Resources Committee. Dr. Cohen has addressed conferences in the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and Bangladesh. He has a B.A. from the University of Georgia and a Ph. D. – summa cum laude – from the University of Munich.

States Reconsider: The Folly of Fear-Driven Climate Policies

From Watts Up With That?

“…calling the fee that customers pay a ‘hidden tax.’”

– Gov. Glenn Youngkin

“…the goals of the alliance are “ambitious and well-intentioned” but that they “conflict with Nevada’s energy policy objectives.””

– Gov. Joe Lombardo

Finally, some common sense is returning to the climate change debate. Governors Glenn Youngkin of Virginia and Joe Lombardo of Nevada are prioritizing the well-being of their citizens and the unique needs of their states over ill-founded climate alarmism.

In Virginia, Governor Youngkin recently concluded a review of new regulations, bringing the state closer to withdrawing from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) by the end of the year. The RGGI is a pact among twelve states that forces electricity producers to buy allowances for carbon emissions, a cost that consumers unjustly bear. Youngkin aptly refers to this cost as a “hidden tax” and seeks to shield Virginians from such unnecessary financial burdens.

https://www.virginiamercury.com/blog-va/youngkin-administration-completes-review-of-new-regs-to-pull-virginia-out-of-carbon-market-by-years-end/

On the other side, we have environmental groups and Democrats who argue that the RGGI is integral to Virginia’s carbon emission reduction strategy. They also celebrate the $500 million that the state has collected from allowance revenues. But these funds have been drawn from the pockets of tax-payers, and then repackaged as a necessary expense for climate change mitigation.

Out West, Governor Lombardo made the prudent decision to withdraw Nevada from the U.S. Climate Alliance. Lombardo acknowledges the alliance’s well meaning goals as “ambitious and well-intentioned”, yet rightfully asserts that they “conflict with Nevada’s energy policy objectives.”

https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/lombardo-withdraws-nevada-from-state-led-greenhouse-gas-reduction-coalition

These decisions by Youngkin and Lombardo illustrate a much-needed shift in approach to hysterical climate action. Overhyped, fear-driven policies often overshadow the fact that it is yet to be conclusively shown that human-induced climate change is a significant problem. This truth is overshadowed by global accords like the Paris Agreement or inter-state collaborations like the U.S. Climate Alliance that push for premature and potentially harmful actions, ignoring the unique needs, resources, and challenges of individual states.

Both Governors, prioritizing the welfare of their constituents and local economies, challenge these collective strategies. They highlight the importance of tailored, state-specific initiatives that balance environmental considerations with economic and social needs, all while questioning the alarmist climate narrative.

These sensible actions stir the climate change pot. They challenge constituents to ask: should we subscribe to the dominant narrative and rush into potentially detrimental collective efforts? Or should we take a step back, question the prevailing dogma, and strive for balanced, state-specific policies that prioritize the actual needs of our citizens?

It’s time for a reality check on climate action. What do you think of Virginia’s potential exit from the RGGI or Nevada’s withdrawal from the U.S. Climate Alliance?

HT/resourceguy for the twofer

You can explore more Climate Politics at our ClimateTV page