 
Organizations Speak out on Proposed Senate
Climate Bill
May 13, 2010
A number of associations and organizations involved with both construction
and manufacturing have spoken out against the Kerry-Lieberman American
Power Act. The Associated General Contractors of America (AGC),
for example, issued a statement saying that by establishing new
regulatory Obstacles and robbing transportation funds, the bill
will make it more difficult to cut pollution and emissions from
the built environment. Likewise, the American Materials Manufacturing
Alliance (AMMA), a group of energy-intensive, trade-exposed industries
(EITEs) that includes The Aluminum Association, the American Chemistry
Council, the American Forest & Paper Association, the American
Iron and Steel Institute, The Fertilizer Institute and Portland
Cement Association, also issued a statement saying that while they
appreciate the efforts the bills authors have made to
solicit the views of our organizations and our member companies
... We believe that compared with past bills, the legislation released
today invests more in U.S. manufacturing competitiveness. However,
in several key areas, more must be done to ensure the global competitiveness
of EITEs and the retention of American jobs.
In the AGC statement, Stephen E. Sandherr, the groups chief
executive officer, said, Improving the efficiency of our built
environment
presents one of the greatest opportunities to
reduce power consumption and cut greenhouse gas emissions. After
all, the nations building inventory accounts for 35 percent
of the nations manmade greenhouse gas emissions and consumes
40 percent of the nations energy, while our aging and inefficient
transportation network accounts for another 27 percent of energy
consumption and 27 percent of greenhouse gas emissions.
Despite this tremendous opportunity, Senators Kerry and Lieberman
have proposed legislation that makes it harder to construct new,
more energy efficient buildings and factories, improve aging infrastructure
and eliminate the traffic congestion that wastes fuel and pollutes
our environment. By allowing the EPA a virtually free hand to approve
or deny construction and rehabilitation projects, the bill creates
regulatory obstacles that will raise construction costs, delay projects
and stifle demand. Worse, by taking funds raised through the proposals
new transportation fees and committing all but a small percentage
to unrelated spending, the legislation leaves our aging and inefficient
roads, airways and transit systems vastly underfunded.
Sandherr says the inevitable consequences of this bill are
higher taxes, fewer jobs, and continued reliance on wasteful buildings,
inefficient infrastructure and leaky water systems, and encourages
Congress and the Administration to focus on the measures the AGC
has identified in its Building a Green Future plan (CLICK
HERE to read the plan).
Our green construction plan identifies steps public officials,
developers, and the construction community must take to lessen the
impact of our built environment. Measures in the plan include doubling
existing energy efficiency tax credits for commercial buildings;
passing the Building Star program that invests $6 billion in improving
the efficiency of commercial buildings; and speeding reviews and
boosting tax credits for green building projects. The plan also
calls for public building projects to incorporate state-of-the-art
environmental solutions and for the federal government to make pragmatic
investments in research and technology
What the Senators
appear to have forgotten is you cant simply regulate a greener
future, you have to build it.
And from a manufacturing perspective, the AMMA says that while
the new legislation includes funding for energy efficiency and for
clean energy sources and technologies, the funding must be boosted
significantly to meet the objective of keeping U.S. manufacturing
competitive.
The bill also does not address increased energy costs: cost
containment is key to preventing the transfer of U.S. manufacturing
production and jobs to more carbon-intensive developing nations,
known as carbon leakage. Carbon leakage results in higher
net global greenhouse gas emissions. The bill does not create a
single national program for regulating greenhouse gases (GHGs).
Instead of fully pre-empting EPA regulation of GHGs under the Clean
Air Act, the bill preempts regulation only under specific sections,
and only for covered stationary sources. Moreover, EPA
retains its authority to develop New Source Performance Standards
for non-covered sources and to regulate GHGs under other federal
statutes (e.g. Clean Water Act). In addition, the Department of
Interior retains its authority to regulate GHGs under the Endangered
Species Act. The bill falls short of the uniformity needed to prevent
uncertainty and delay in investments that could help drive economic
recovery, add U.S. jobs and expand energy efficiency and clean energy
technology.
AMMA adds, The U.S. industrial sector is the only sector
of the U.S. economy whose GHG emissions are falling, and we supply
many of the materials the nation uses for energy efficiency and
renewable energy. We will continue to work constructively with Senators
as climate legislation is discussed, and ask that policymakers develop
policies that maintain the global competitiveness of the U.S. manufacturing
sector.
CLICK
HERE to read the full statement from AGC.
CLICK
HERE to read the full statement from AMMA.
Need more info and analysis about the issues?
CLICK
HERE to subscribe to USGlass magazine.
|