The Cost of Living for the Environment

I submitted this piece to Arnold Garcia, Editor of the Editorial Page of the Austin American Statesman:

After the months of sweltering heat this summer, the recent cooler temperatures and rain in central Texas have been a welcome respite. I am sure many of you, like me, are glad to turn off the air conditioners and water sprinklers for awhile. The costs of energy, of the use of our natural resources, can be costly to the earth and to the pocketbook. Unfortunately, I think our leaders in Washington, D.C., and here in Austin, Texas, have lost sight of the costs involved.

Take the current “Cap and Trade” legislation. This imposing piece of legislation promises to limit emissions, and in the words of one senator, to “save the world.” But it won’t save jobs. Texas alone stands to lose over $26 billion (that's right, with a "B") in gross state product, on average, per year, from 2012 to 2035. Personal income earned in Texas, on average, per year, would fall by $9 billion, with 94,000 jobs lost. Meanwhile, energy bills, on average, would increase $890 per household. For lower- and middle-class families in particular, that will be devastating to the family budget.

Our leaders here in Austin are now pushing through their own attempt to “save the world” with an aggressive energy plan to get 30 percent of our electricity from renewable energy by 2020. Mayor Lee Leffingwell has already issued an apology for the coming rate hikes needed to fund this plan. That apology will ring hollow when many of our families are unable to buy groceries or pay the electric bill due to increased taxes.

Our local Catholic Diocese has also cried foul over this plan, which they estimate will cost Austin residents about 50 percent more in utility payments per month. Msgr. Michael Mulvey made plain in his opinion last week what common sense thinkers already know: it will be the poor who will bear the highest burden. Diocesan spokeswoman Barbara Budde told a panel of statewide elected officials that many lower-income families spend as much as 75 percent of their income just to keep the lights on. But our city council stands ready to make it even tougher for such families to make ends meet – all to possibly reduce the projected rise in temperatures by a fraction of a percent of one degree by 2050?

Austin is renowned for its environmentally friendly policies and “green” culture. I have no problem with advancing responsible policies to preserve our natural resources. I do, however, have a problem with aggressive policies which hurt families and target the poor and those serving the poor in our city.

The free market has a long history of finding ways to do the impossible, when "the impossible" is in demand. Austin is a diverse city with a business-friendly climate, which has brought small and large businesses to our city from other states across the country. These entrepreneurs have used their ingenuity and ability to produce and provide products which people want and are willing to purchase.

A growing market of green products is popular and holds great promise for our future. Renewable energy sources like solar and wind power likewise hold great promise. But many of the costs involved are greater than the cost of standard products and electricity. Those who are able to pay the additional costs involved will pay it if the cost is worth it. Forcing it on everyone will only increase taxes and drive people and businesses away from Austin. Tax incentives and business-friendly policies can secure our environmental goals without further burdening our economy and personal budgets.

Elected leaders should always remember that it is people they represent. Protecting the environment is a laudable goal, but when they put the environment above people’s lives and livelihoods, it has gone too far.

The federal Cap and Trade legislation sets a target of about 2.5 tons of carbon emissions per person per year by 2050 to combat global warming. Even if this law works, surface temperatures would be lowered about one-tenth of one degree Celsius – in about 100 years. That one-tenth of one degree comes with a heavy price tag. The free market and the free will of people have the ideas and choices to do better. I just hope some on Capitol Hill and city hall are listening.