Who Owns The Sky?Frank O'DonnellJune 28, 2007Frank O'Donnell is president of Clean Air Watch, a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization aimed at educating the public about clean air and the need for an effective Clean Air Act.
Dick Cheney would say yes, but most of us would disagree. Still, that’s one of the key questions as Congress considers how to limit and reduce global warming pollution. The U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee is set to examine this and related issues this morning. Many of the biggest coal-burning power companies claim they own the sky—and should be paid billions of dollars to reduce their emissions. A new Clean Air Watch white paper concludes that the 10 most polluting electric power companies collectively could pocket $9 billion every year under the wrong kind of cap-and-trade program—one that hands out emission credits free to companies based on past pollution levels. One company alone—Ohio-based American Electric Power—could rake in more than a billion and a half dollars every year. AEP has been among the polluters that have lobbied in favor of free credits. Talk about gall: The very companies that have polluted the upper atmosphere now want to be rewarded. It would be unconscionable to reward their destructive behavior by simply giving them free credits—and windfall profits. The polluters should have to pay to clean up the mess they’ve made for us, and for future generations. We could learn a thing or two from Europe’s mistakes. In the European Union market that launched in 2005, the credits were given away to industry. Many power companies raised their rates, and pocketed windfall profits without reducing emissions. Specifically, Congress should stipulate that the federal government auction off allowances. Polluting companies would have to bid against each other for a portion of the atmosphere they intend to use — within overall limits that reduce carbon dioxide levels. Auction proceeds could be used for socially beneficial programs, which could include help for such things as low-income residents, worker transition assistance or protecting wildlife. One of the key concerns raised in a recent Congressional Budget Office analysis was that lower-income citizens could pay extra under a cap-and-trade system which gave free credits to industry. An auction system could blunt that possibility. In a foreword to our white paper, Larry J. Schweiger, President and CEO of the National Wildlife Federation, said “it’s time these companies started getting the bill.” Schweiger added that “a cap-and-trade program that does not require companies to pay for carbon permits, and instead gives them away for free in perpetuity, would be fundamentally unjust. No-cost licenses to pollute would deprive the public of the resources and revenues with which to aid the economic transition to a low-pollution world, and with which to address the impacts of global warming.” As you might expect, some of the nation’s biggest polluters are already bristling at the suggestion that these anticipated windfall profits might slip away. (AEP is taking no chances: According to Federal Election Commission records , AEP’s political action committee has already written checks for more than $270,000 in campaign contributions this year, including to such key figures as Reps. Rick Boucher, D-VA, John Dingell, D-Mich., Steny Hoyer, D-MD, and Senators Max Baucus, D-MT, and Lamar Alexander, R-TN. ) Will campaign cash mean more than thoughtful comments, such as that by former Labor Secretary Robert Reich last week on public radio’s Marketplace ? “I mean, it's our atmosphere, right?” Reich said. “Think of a national park or a national forest. No company is simply allowed to take what they want from it, free of charge. Why should the atmosphere be any different?” he added. Indeed, why should it? |