We in Washington state are blessed that much of our electricity is generated by hydroelectric dams.
Hydropower is not without its own environmental costs, but it does not emit the greenhouse gases that fuel climate change.
Because of the dams, we can claim we’re less responsible for climate change than other states and other nations, but that doesn’t excuse us from our responsibilities in sharing in solutions that will limit the production of carbon dioxide and related greenhouse gases.
Gov. Jay Inslee — following the work of his Carbon Emissions Reduction Taskforce, which is preparing a report to be released Nov. 21 — is expected to submit proposals to the Legislature that will curb carbon pollution while encouraging job production and bolstering the economy.
Among the expected proposals are two “polluter pays” market systems that would help limit greenhouse gases: a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade system. (The Guardian has an excellent “explainer” article that compares the two at tinyurl.com/GuardianCarbonCompare.)
A carbon tax would levy a tax for every ton of carbon dioxide produced, encouraging industry and others to find ways to limit the pollution. The revenue generated, as suggested by the task force, would be divvied up as tax credits and cuts to the state’s B&O tax and public utilities taxes.
A cap-and-trade system would set an overall ceiling for the state’s carbon emissions, then distribute carbon credits to emitters, either at no charge or through an auction. Industries that need to emit more carbon than their allocation would have to purchase credits on the open market from those industries that need less.
Both have their advantages and disadvantages. Among the advantages both options share, the state’s nonpartisan Office of Financial Management determined, there would be a small positive effect on jobs, gross domestic product and personal income, refuting the common charge from climate change deniers that such efforts would cost jobs and hurt our economy.
This isn’t uncharted territory; California and some states in the Northeast have established cap-and-trade systems that could provide Washington state with a model to emulate.
The responsibilities lie beyond those of industry. Motorists will have to share in solutions as well. Inslee also is expected to propose a clean-fuels initiative, again following the lead of California, that would blend gasoline with biodiesel, ethanol or other lower-carbon alternatives. The cost? On average, California’s cleaner-burning formula accounts for an additional 10 to 15 cents per gallon.
The results of tomorrow’s election and the makeup of the Legislature are likely to affect the success of these proposals and other task force recommendations. Regardless of the election results, Washington residents can add their voices to the calls that we move forward on initiatives like these.
The debate on whether climate change is a problem is over. Now we have to do something about it.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
