Key Global Warming Bills pending at the State House:
Senate 534, “The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2007” Sponsor: Senator Pacheco
Summary: This is the key bill which sets the standards for all future Global Warming legislation. S.534 sets greenhouse gas emissions caps to 20% by 2020 and 80% by 2050—based on recommendations by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Click here for a draft of the bill.
House 3965, “The Comprehensive Energy Bill” Sponsor: House Speaker DiMasi. This bill is a major step forward in moving our energy policy to improved efficiency and increased use of renewable energy. Specifically the Bill:
• Requires electric and gas utilities to capture all cost effective efficiency first.
• Adopts the most stringent energy efficient building codes.
• Extends long-term contracts for renewable energy developers.
• Implements net metering thus encouraging small-scale renewable energy projects.
• Launches a home energy scoring system to highlight the efficiency of new homes upon purchase.
• And launches a tax incentive program for cellulosic ethanol.
While coal gasification is still included in the Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard (AEPS), it is now required to capture and sequester carbon dioxide and meet a greenhouse gas performance standard.
Click here for a draft of the bill.
Excerpts of letter sent to Governor Patrick on Coal Gasification from the Mass Climate Coalition July 2007
'Thank you for your leadership to date on advancing clean energy policy and raising the profile of the global warming challenge. In the context of climate policy, the undersigned organizations want to express to you our deep concerns regarding recent efforts by the coal industry, including new coal technology “start-ups”, to promote so-called “clean coal” as a global warming solution. We firmly believe that these new coal technologies – coal-to-liquids, integrated gasification combined cycle using coal, and emerging new coal gasification technologies – in their current form would be a step in the wrong direction for Massachusetts and the nation.
Please find attached a set of principles that we believe should guide whether new coal technologies are accepted or rejected by the Commonwealth. In summary:
1. New coal energy technologies or facilities should only be allowed in Massachusetts if there is no net increase in emissions of carbon dioxide produced.
2. “Sequestration ready” is not a substitute for on-the-ground sequestration of carbon dioxide.
3. We should invest first and foremost in truly clean energy, such as efficiency, demand response and renewable energy -- and funding should not be diverted from these clean energy resources to support coal-based technologies.
Consider, for example, current proposals that would have Massachusetts’s ratepayers fund incentives for coal gasification technologies. Even though some developers claim that the carbon dioxide pollution from the gasification process will be “sequestration-ready,” carbon capture and storage technologies are widely considered to be many years (if not decades) away from being proven commercially viable, geologically safe, and feasible in this region. Thus, coal gasification is in conflict with the first two principles stated above.
Opening the door to technologies like coal gasification will lock us into decades of increased carbon emissions. We must be especially cautious in regard to proposals to convert our half-century old coal plants in Massachusetts to “clean coal” technologies. These proposals may at first appear to be an improvement – an upgrade of an old technology to a new one. But given the absence of effective sequestration strategies, such upgrades could represent little more than a decades-long extension of the lifetime of outdated and highly polluting coal plants (such as the Salem power plant).
Instead of embracing and designing incentives for new coal energy technologies, we should adhere to the third principle above and invest in alternatives, which have much greater benefits and fewer negative impacts. As you know, there is substantial untapped energy efficiency available at a cost far cheaper than buying electricity. Further, low- and zero-carbon renewable energy technologies are poised for major growth in the coming decade. Given that we have finite resources to invest in the solutions to global warming, we believe that broadly beneficial alternatives such as energy efficiency and clean, safe renewable energy should take priority over questionable coal technologies.
With the Brayton Point, Salem Harbor Station, Mount Tom, and Somerset power plants, our coal burden is the heaviest of the New England states; in fact, as of 2004, Brayton Point was the largest single emitter of carbon dioxide of all 188 electricity generating facilities in the nine northeast states. We ask that you join us in upholding the above three principles and rejecting new coal facilities at this time.
As you noted in your campaign for governor, Massachusetts has rich intellectual resources and skilled workers, and if we can get clean energy right, the whole world will be our customer. Investing in new coal technologies would be getting it wrong. We urge the Commonwealth to instead invest in and promote technologies that will result in the greatest benefits in terms of greenhouse gas emission reductions and cost effectiveness. "
Transportation Legislation
House 3027 To encourage the purchase of energy efficient fuel vehicles Sponsor: Rep Marzilli
Summary: Provides auto sales tax and excise tax rebutes for fuel-efficient.
House 3067 To promote energy efficient vehicles Sponsor: Rep. Petersen
Summary: Sets excise taxes at zero for electric and hybrid vehicles, and at 2% for vehicles with 30 MPG in city driving and 35 MPG for highway driving.
Senate 1772, Concerning tax exemptions for clean and alternative fuel vehicles Sponsor: Senator O’Leary
Summary: Provides a sales tax exemption for purchasers of natural gas, hydrogen, electric, and hybrid vehicles
House 1079, Providing consumer choice and environ-mental protection by authorizing pay by the mile insurance Sponsor: Rep. Sciortino
Summary: Authorizes the insurance commissioner to base auto insurance rates on a per-mile basis. Instructs the commissioner to conduct a study of the relationship between miles drive and number of accident claims. Requires insurance companies to maintain at least 5% of their policies on a PAYD basis in 2009 and 2010, 10% in 2011 and 2012, and to offer PAYD to all drivers be-ginning in 2013.
House 725, Establishing a gas-saving tires program Sponsor: Rep. Brownsberger
Summary: Requires creation of a rating system for tires by July 2008. Requires that, by July 2011, all replacement tires be at least as energy efficient as original equipment tires, as long as the tires are cost-effective and there is no loss of safety or longevity. Allows the state to simply implement California’s program.