Jan 152015

There are nearly 260 million passenger vehicles on our roads today. The exhaust from these carbon dioxide-emitting vehicles is regarded as a primary cause of climate change. Advocates say the next best thing to eliminating internal combustion engines and burning fossil fuels is to increase vehicle efficiency and burn clean fuels. Critics cite the cost of pollution control technology to consumers. Supporters warn of the increasing number of vehicles on the road each day. Most say that continued reduction of vehicle emissions will be difficult to achieve without the development of new fuel technologies. Biofuels are fuels produced from living organisms such as plants. Sometimes, fermentation is used to extract sugars and starches in crops such as corn to produce ethanol. However, it is debated whether emissions from the production and use of ethanol are less than from oil. There is also concern over the price of food, as a third of our corn crop is diverted to ethanol production. Algae that are used in the production of biodiesel are an example of an advanced biofuel. The most promising of these advanced fuels could be cellulosic biofuels, high energy fuels derived from low nutrient, high yield plants such as woody biomass, energy gasses, forest slash and agriculture waste.

Pending Legislation:

H.R.1462 – RFS Reform Act of 2013

I oppose reforming current vehicle emissions policy and wish to defeat H.R.1462

I support amending the Clean Air Act to revise the renewable fuel program to require ‘renewable fuel,’ be now defined as advanced biofuel; prohibiting the EPA from allowing the introduction into commerce of gasoline containing greater than 10% ethanol, and wish to pass H.R.146

 Posted by at 12:00 am
Jan 152015

Electricity generation accounts for about 45% of our total carbon emissions including carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide. These pollutants result from the burning of coal in our factories and 6,500 power plants. This situation has been improved by the emerging use of cleaner-burning natural gas which is replacing coal in some power plants. However, coal pollutants remain a leading cause of climate change and many other environmental and health problems. Besides its effects on global warming, burning coal creates smog, soot, acid rain and toxic air emissions. The dirtiest coal-fired power plants, many of which are older than 45 years, are mostly owned by our biggest energy companies. Removing some pollutants from coal-fired factories and plants can be accomplished with sulfur dioxide scrubber systems which remove harmful particulates and gases from industrial smokestacks. However, these scrubbers have been installed on only about half our power plants. Retrofitting the remaining facilities with this carbon capture technology is not economically feasible because of their age. Health advocates say the only way to reduce pollution from these plants is for utilities to develop adequate scrubbers or to replace these outdated facilities altogether. To this end, advocates feel a carbon tax is appropriate since it will encourage these corporations to reduce emissions one way or another. Supporters also say carbon taxes will make clean energy comparatively cheaper and will help address the problem of industrial polluters not paying the social costs of their emissions. The Obama administration is now requiring coal-fired power plants to reduce emissions by 20%. This will likely spur states to create cap and trade programs, forcing utilities to pay for the pollutants they emit. Critics claim a carbon tax could increase consumer’s utility bills.

Pending Legislations:

H.R.1486 – No Carbon Tax Act of 2013

S.332: Climate Protection Act of 2013

I oppose reforming current industrial emissions policy and wish to defeat H.R.1486 and S.332

I oppose the EPA from devising or implementing a carbon tax; on emissions, including carbon dioxide emissions generated by the burning of coal, natural gas, or oil; or coal, natural gas, or oil based on emissions, including carbon dioxide emissions that would be generated through the fuel’s combustion, and wish to pass H.R.1486

I support requiring EPA to impose a carbon pollution fee on any manufacturer, producer, or importer of a carbon polluting substance; and a carbon equivalency fee on imports of carbon pollution-intensive goods; requiring 50% of the amounts received each year as a result of this carbon tax to provide amounts to state and local programs that assist communities in adapting to climate change, improving the resiliency of critical infrastructure, and protecting environmental quality and wildlife, and wish to pass S.332

 Posted by at 12:00 am
Jan 152015

The Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) is a rule designed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the fuels used by our transportation industry. This rule limits the burning of fossil fuels, such as diesel and gasoline, and promotes the use of biofuels, natural gas, propane, and electricity. California, Oregon and Washington have adopted LCFS rules in the past few years and a court of appeals has recently upheld the right of a state to enact these regulations. About a dozen other states are considering similar laws. In order to comply with the low-carbon standard, oil companies could blend more ethanol into gasoline products, purchase credits from electric utilities supplying electricity to electric vehicles, or sell hydrogen for vehicles that use this as a fuel. Environmentalists claim LCFS rules are a state-response to our federal government’s inability to pass legislation to reduce the emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. They say that about 40% of our air pollution is caused by gasoline and diesel-burning engines. They claim that if our overall emissions are to be reduced, low carbon fuel standards must play a role. Opponents claim LCFS rules will drive up gasoline prices, and result in higher prices for other consumer goods in which transportation costs are a factor.

Pending Legislation: None

I oppose reforming current Low Carbon Fuel Standard policy

I support identifying a legislator who will sponsor a bill to formulate Low Carbon Fuel Standards that are modeled after guidelines of the California Air Resources Board

 Posted by at 12:00 am