(April 5, 2006) The California Chamber of Commerce and a coalition of business groups this week advocated a job-friendly, global approach to dealing with greenhouse gas issues.
“When considering recommendations made to reach Governor Schwarzenegger’s laudable goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, we must ensure that California’s ability to create and retain jobs is not compromised through this process,” said Chamber President Allan Zaremberg in a statement on behalf of the SEE California coalition (Sustainable Environment & Economy for California) in response to the April 3 release of the final report of the California Climate Action Team.
“Throughout our continuing analysis of the Climate Action Team (CAT) report released today, we will analyze the recommendations with a focus on economic impacts and ensuring that California continues to remain competitive in the global marketplace,” Zaremberg said.
The CAT recommended caps on emissions and other actions to reduce greenhouse gases — the non-toxic carbon byproducts of burning fossil fuels. The most common greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and hydrofluorocarbons.
The CAT is headed by Dr. Alan Lloyd, who recently resigned as secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency, and consists of representatives from a number of state entities.
Wrong Approach
Pending legislation to implement some recommendations of the Climate Action Team includes AB 32 (Pavley; D-Agoura Hills) and SB 1368 (Perata; D-Oakland), both opposed by the Chamber and SEE California.
Zaremberg cautioned that arbitrary statewide emissions caps, such as those contemplated in AB 32 and SB 1368 and in the CAT report, will increase the price of electricity and the cost of manufacturing in California, while also limiting the available power sources to meet California’s energy demands.
“By pushing employers out of California, this approach may actually lead to an increase in emissions globally at the expense of California jobs — further demonstrating that climate change is a global issue that cannot be addressed effectively solely at a state level,” Zaremberg said. “Also, the CAT report again recommends the imposition of an additional gas tax, which would be severely detrimental to California’s economy.”
Practical Approach
The Chamber and coalition support as a practical approach AB 1925 (Blakeslee; R-San Luis Obispo), which requires the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission to make recommendations on how to facilitate and provide incentives for cost-effective strategies to contain, sequester and recycle carbon dioxide created during the generation of electricity.
The Chamber and SEE California believe the ultimate result of AB 1925 “will be a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, without risking the state’s energy supply or sources, or harming California’s growing economy and jobs climate,” said Zaremberg.
The Chamber also supports AB 2021 (Levine; D-Van Nuys), which helps California achieve its energy-saving targets by requiring municipal utilities to invest in cost-effective, energy-efficient technologies.
Committee Action
AB 1925 won unanimous approval from the Assembly Utilities and Commerce Committee on April 3. It will be considered next by the Assembly Natural Resources Committee.
AB 2021 also passed Assembly Utilities and Commerce on April 3 and moves on to Assembly Natural Resources.
SB 1368 passed the Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee on April 4.
Staff Contact: Dominic DiMare