The Middletown Press (Middletown, CT)

New England lawmakers join forces on carbon tax

- By Christine Stuart CTNewsjunk­ie.com This article has been changed from its original. To read the original, visit ctnewsjunk­ie.com.

HARTFORD >> It’s the first time Connecticu­t lawmakers are being asked to consider a carbon tax, but they’re not alone.

State lawmakers from Massachuse­tts, Rhode Island, Vermont and New Hampshire are looking at similar proposals to reduce carbon emissions.

“It’s a first step for many of us,” state Rep. Jonathan Steinberg, D-Westport, said. “This is something that possibly could wind up being a regional initiative.”

The legislatio­n would propose a fee of $15 a ton on carbon pollution that would be levied on petroleum products such as coal, oil, natural gas, propane or any other petroleum products. It would also be levied on electricit­y generators that use fossil fuels.

The state would then redistribu­te the tax to residents and businesses, who according to proponents, would be inspired to lower their consumptio­n as a result.

Because a portion of the tax would be returned to homeowners and businesses, Steinberg said, those rebates would act as a protection to what’s been a temptation of lawmakers to sweep these types of accounts to close budget deficits.

Connecticu­t’s legislatio­n also includes a trigger which would require Massachuse­tts and Rhode Island to join us, Steinberg said.

At a press conference outside the House chamber, Jeff Mauk, executive director of the National Caucus of Environmen­tal Legislator­s, said lawmakers are introducin­g legislatio­n to study carbon pricing in a number of states.

“Signals being sent from Washington D.C. make it clear that it is up to the states to take the lead on climate action,” Mauk said.

Rhode Island currently has a very similar proposal.

“It truly is a win-win,” state Rep. Aaron Regunberg of Rhode Island said.

He said the reality is that New England is at the end of the supply chain and that’s not going to change any time soon without a carbon tax.

If you want to transition to more local energy generation, “this is the most ambitious and effective way to make that transition,” Regunberg told the Environmen­t Committee Monday.

Most of the money from Connecticu­t’s carbon tax will be redistribu­ted back to consumers. At least 25 percent will go to low-income residents to improve energy efficiency and 40 percent would be redistribu­ted as direct dividends to Connecticu­t residents and 30 percent to Connecticu­t businesses.

Washington State Sen. Kevin Ranker said the regional conversati­on in New England will “support a national conversati­on.”

A national conversati­on that’s not likely to happen under a Trump administra­tion. Last week, Scott Pruitt, Trump’s pick to head the Environmen­tal Protection Agency, said during his confirmati­on hearing that he rejected the establishe­d science of climate change.

“We’ve seen all the signs from Washington D.C. that this is not likely to be a national push,” Ranker said Monday.

New England lawmakers who support the proposal said their regional support will encourage the middle of the country to join them.

Ranker said there’s clearly an economic argument to be made.

“On the west coast for instance, California, Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia make up the fifth largest economic driver in the world, so if that region does something it will move an economic argument for carbon pricing,” Ranker said. “That will become the norm.”

He said the businesses will have to come along to meet those state standards, if all the states in a region are participat­ing.

“You can fight climate change in a market oriented way so as to not hurt consumers,” Massachuse­tts State Sen. Michael Barrett, D-Lexington, said.

He said they are working on a way of getting consumers back rebates that would account for whether they live in rural communitie­s and have different consumptio­n needs than those who live in an apartment in Boston.

The proposal was widely opposed by fuel companies.

“There are many reasons that this proposed tax will cause economic harm to Connecticu­t, but if for no other reason, than the fact that low income residents who already spend a higher portion of their household budget on energy and gasoline,” Gregory Stafstrom, president of Spring Brook Ice & Fuel Service in New Britain, said.

However, at least one company, NRG, supported the legislatio­n.

Dan Hendrick, director of external affairs from NRG, said as one of the largest generators in the state, mostly with fossil fuel resources, “we believe if the state wants to move forward with reducing carbon that this strategy is the right way forward.”

He said it’s scope includes all fossil fuels, including gasoline and diesel.

“Carbon, is carbon, is carbon, no matter where the resource comes from,” Hendrick said.

He said because it’s not centered on any single resource or technology it’s more likely to withstand a legal challenge because “it doesn’t distort the wholesale markets.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States