May 21, 2011: Pacific Northwest Carbon Pricing Conference

This is an archived website; scroll down
for PPTs and videos from the conference.

New location: Health Sciences Room T439
(On May 1 we moved the conference to this new location
so that we could accommodate a larger crowd.)
Sponsored by:

CONFERENCE MISSION:

To convene a diverse group of concerned citizens, business and labor leaders, elected officials, students, and scholars to learn about and discuss carbon pricing as a strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and drive clean energy development.

CONFERENCE TOPICS

1. Successful case studies, such as British Columbia’s revenue-neutral “tax shift.”
2. Ongoing efforts towards carbon pricing in the U.S., such as the Western Climate Initiative, California’s cap-and-trade system, etc.
3. Political and technical challenges and opportunities for carbon taxes in the Northwest

(Presentations will be balanced with time for questions, dialogue, and networking).

SPEAKERS INCLUDE:

• Kimberly Harris, CEO, Puget Sound Energy
• Todd Myers, Washington Policy Center
• Cliff Mass, UW Atmospheric Sciences Professor
• Yoram Bauman, World’s First & Only Stand-Up Economist
• Jim McDermott, U.S. House of Representatives (videotaped)

For more information contact Patrick@carbonwa.org. Registration form (free but required) is at the bottom of this page.

AGENDA &  SPEAKERS (as of May 1)

REGISTRATION & COFFEE - 8:30-9am

Please allow 5-10 extra minutes to find our room, which is in the T-wing of the Health Sciences Building: Health Sciences Room T439. Most of the building doors will be closed on the day of the conference, so please follow these directions (also in PDF) closely, and in case of disaster call Yoram at 206-351-5719.

• If you are walking, biking, or busing, the easiest thing to do is find your way onto the Burke-Gilman trail and then walk up onto the overpass that leads directly into the 4th floor of the T-wing; someone will be stationed at the door to let you in.
• If you are driving, please follow the map on page 4; you will need to pay $5 at the gatehouse, and then you can park underground in the S1 lot; then make your way to street level and---staying outside---walk north up the stairs into the courtyard between Wing F and Wing D; continue until you enter the E-Wing of the Health Sciences building, and then follow the signs to the conference.
• If you need wheelchair access please call Yoram at 206-351-5719.

SESSION ONE (9-10am)  Introduction

1. Welcome & comedy [Yoram Bauman, Stand-Up Economist and UW Program on the Environment] (YouTube 1.1, 1.2)
2. Climate update [Cliff Mass, UW Atmospheric Sciences Professor] (PDF, PPT, YouTube 1.3, 1.4)
3. Political update: federal, state, regional, state [Bonnie Frye Hemphill, Climate Solutions] (PDF, PPT, YouTube 1.5)
4. Q&A : 10 min (YouTube 1.6, YouTube 1.7)

Break (10:00-10:10am)

SESSION TWO (10:10-11:10am) Tax policy

1. British Columbia experience   [Jeremy Hewitt, Climate Action Secretariat, BC] (PDF, PPT, YouTube 2.1, 2.2) [Jeremy Hewitt’s views expressed in these videos do not necessarily reflect those of the Province of BC; also, to clarify a mis-statement in video 2.2, there was not one major business association in BC that opposed the carbon tax.]
2. How it could work in WA   [Eric de Place, Sightline Institute] (PDF, PPT, YouTube 2.3, 2.4)
3. Impacts on electricity  [Jim Lazar, energy consultant] (PDF, PPT, YouTube 2.5, 2.6)
4. Q&A : 10 min (YouTube 2.7, 2.8) [Jeremy Hewitt’s views expressed in this video do not necessarily reflect those of the Province of BC]

Break (11:10-11:30am)

SESSION THREE (11:30-12:30) Revenue options

1. Tax shift  [Todd Myers, Washington Policy Center] (PDF, PPT, YouTube 3.1, 3.2)
2. Other spending programs [John Burbank, Economic Opportunity Institute] (PDF, PPT, YouTube 3.3, 3.4)
3. Fee and dividend [Senator Maria Cantwell staff member Joel Merkel] (PDF, PPT, YouTube 3.5, 3.6)
4. Q&A : 10 min (YouTube 3.7, 3.8)

LUNCH (12:30-1:15pm, provided by the conference organizers on the Panera pay-what-you-will model)

SESSION FOUR (1:15-2:15pm) Perspectives Panel Discussion

Moderated by Ernique Cerna, host of KCTS 9 Connects

1. Kimberly Harris, CEO, Puget Sound Energy
2. Lars Johansson, NW Energy Angels
3. Llewellyn Matthews, Northwest Pulp and Paper Association
4. Jim DiPeso, Republicans for Environmental Protection
5. Bill Messenger, Washington State Labor Council

YouTube 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7, 4.8
Break (2:15-2:30pm)

SESSION FIVE (2:30-3:30pm) Political context and next steps

1. A view from D.C. [Jim McDermott (videotaped)]
2. Polling and voter perceptions [Patrick Leslie] (PDF, PPT, YouTube 5.1, 5.2)
3. Door-to-door lessons [Bob Jeffers-Schroder] (YouTube 5.3)
4. Lesson from CarbonWA [Phil Mitchell] (PDF, PPT, YouTube 5.4, 5.5)
5. Closing thoughts [Lisa Fitzhugh, YouTube 5.5, 5.6, 5.7]

We're putting the (carbon tax) band back together!

Hello all: This blog has not had much traffic this year because the Senate climate bill was keeping us in a holding pattern, but now that the Senate bill is dead the time has come to make a strong push for a state-level carbon tax. I am personally committed to that goal, and I've talked to others who are also enthusiastic about trying to fill the vacuum left by the failed federal bill and the struggling regional (WCI) effort.

So:

1. I definitely think we should work on an economists' letter along the lines of the 2007 letter from BC. Anybody interested in working on that with me should let me know.
2. Someone (I think someone in our group!) posted a carbon tax proposal on the website the governor is using to solicit budget ideas. If you've got a free minute or two to register and vote please do: right now the carbon tax proposal has -31 votes :)
3. Other ideas from yours truly: Write up some guiding principles for our group? Write another op-ed? Update the website? (Some deeper thinking about how to best use technology would also be fabulous.) If you have other ideas please email me or comment below!
4. If you're interested in taking part in once-a-month meetings (we used to hold these but haven't for a while), please let me know your availability and preferences for lunchtime (or 5pm?) meetings in downtown Seattle.
5. FYI, Jon Yoder of WSU and I presented our economists' view of carbon pricing (PDF) before the State Energy Strategy advisory committee earlier this month, and as far as I know folks there and at Dept of Commerce are still seriously considering a carbon tax, as are some environmental groups in town. If I have additional updates on those fronts I'll let you know.
   

PS. If you're confused about the title of this post, it's adapted from a quote from the movie Blues Brothers. Video here :)

Updates (and no meeting this week)

Hey everyone: Sorry for the late notice on this, but let's not meet on Thursday. Here's the news:

1) The Waxman-Markey time line continues to be hit by delays: Joe Romm at Climate Progress says that "now it is officially impossible to imagine a Senate vote before November. And I’d say it’s now at most 50-50 the vote isn’t until December or January."

2) Todd Myers is going to be meeting with some state legislators this month, and I'm going to try to do the same. If you have any connections or want to join the fun please let me know!

3) Last time I emailed out an invitation for thoughts on Waxman-Markey (and a heads-up that I was writing something about my own thoughts). Below are some excerpts from an email from David Oliver; I'd be happy to forward the entire email to anybody who wants it. And I can also email you a draft of an op-ed I'm working on, which (as it happens) overlaps quite strongly with David's thoughts. (The bottom line is that I think Congress should pass Waxman-Markey without the cap, and that we should keep working on a stronger form of carbon pricing.) Comments welcome, and of course I should remind everyone that the CarbonWA group as a group has no stance on Waxman-Markey but that individual members of the group are free to share their own opinions. (And if anybody else has opinions they want to share with the group please send them my way!)

4) I'm going to have trouble making meetings for the next few months because of my teaching commitments. So... hopefully we can get work done via email, and if anybody is gung-ho on meetings then let me know and we can go from there! :)

PS. I got a boost in the arm from reading Elizabeth Kolbert's plug for carbon taxes in the New Yorker. Check it out!


*********************
Dr. David W. Oliver

My background is PHD physics MIT, 33 years at GE R&D Center including managemnet positions and review of GE business strategies.

My knowledge and instincts both tell me that what is most vital in policy is a fixed long term price for fossil fuels. Any policy that results in price fluctuations will inhibit the industrial investment that must be made. Cap and Trade will enhance thosse fluctuations. Trade part will be subject to fraud without any possibility of monitoring and prosecution.

The Larson bill, ignored in congress and by many green organizations, could have worked.

Our congress will distort any legislation that is not driven by public demand and outrage into benefits for their districts and contributors. This is neither cynical nor critical. It is the basis of representative government. The reality is that US public is apathetic regarding climate change and the vested interests are among the most wealthy in the nation.

There is an extremely low probability that the Waxman bill can deliver the long term fixed fossil fuel price needed as it clears congress. It does not do so in present form.

*********************

August update (and no meeting this week)

Hey everyone: Sorry for the long silence since my last email, but things are moving rather slowly on the climate front because of health care and the Congressional recess coming up soon &etc. So:

1) Let's not meet this week, but let's pencil in our next meeting downtown on Th Sept 3 from 12-1pm. Agenda TBD, but one obvious centerpiece is how to move forward through the molasses. If anybody has thoughts they'd like to email out to the group please send them my way and I'll forward them along.

2) I'm hearing a lot about the Waxman-Markey bill getting pushed even further down the road, e.g., an email from Environmental Defense Fund says "the hoped-for September debate on climate will have to wait until at least October – and perhaps November or even December" and Joseph Romm of ClimateProgress says the Senate vote won't be "until at least November" and "I’d say it’s at least 50-50 the vote isn’t until December or January". (Recall that the international negotiations in Copenhagen are the first two weeks of December.) If the Washington State legislature is thinking of taking up WCI again in their next session, the timing will be tricky, e.g., because the environmental community will be putting together their top priorities in the fall. Depending on how the cards fall there may well be an opening for our proposal. (Yes it may seem that I'm grasping at straws, but so be it :)

3) Just a heads-up that I'm working on an op-ed or blog piece about my own thoughts on Waxman-Markey. If anybody objects because that would interfere with the neutrality of the CarbonWA group, please email me to let me know. On the other side of the spectrum, if any of you want to share your own opinions about Waxman-Markey with me and/or the rest of the group, that would be interesting too, so send them my way. (Please be clear about whether your thoughts are for public consumption &etc.)

Notes from June 4 meeting

Below are notes from today's meeting, which was a good one, thanks everyone!

In attendance: Christy Nordstrom, Marshall Baker, Anne Engstrom, Anna Fahey, Dorothy Craig, Bruce Flory, Riley Morton, Catherine Carey, Yoram Bauman, Phil Mitchell.

* Anna Fahey (Communications Specialist from Sightline) shared with us public opinion research. (This material was sent out by Yoram via emai; Anna didn't want it posted on the web.) The Yale survey that Phil mentioned is here.

* Updates:

• The op-ed is finished (!) and Todd Myers and Bruce Flory are going to submit it to the Seattle Times tomorrow; a nearly-final draft was also sent out via email to avoid putting it on the web.
  
• The website is looking good but we need to work on the About Us page.
  
• There hasn't been much change on the policy front, but here's an updated spreadsheet (carbonwa8.xls) that is less busy than the previous version.
  
• On the legal front, Phil's got a contact who can hopefully help and Yoram is trying to set up a meeting with state constitutional law expert Hugh Spitzer.
  
• On the outreach front, Yoram gave a talk at WWU and some students and faculty were supportive.
  
• One piece of bad news is that signature-gathering pledges are only at 15,000; hopefully the op-ed piece &etc will help build momentum.
  
• And of course there are lots of rumors and opinions about the Waxman-Markey, the WCI, etc. (Following Greg Mankiw, I recommend these pieces voting Yes by Robert Stavins and No by Martin Feldstein.) Our niche is to be ready as a "Plan C" alternative if these measures fail. (Some members of our group want them to fail and some don't, so our job as a group is to walk the fine line of what-if, and I think the op-ed does a great job of doing that.)

* Next meeting: Thursday July 2, 12-1pm, downtown.

Position paper from the Budget and Policy Center

Read it here.

Agenda for Th meeting downtown 12-1pm, June 4

Here's a draft agenda for Thursday's meeting, which as usual will be 12-1pm in the 5th floor conference room at 1402 3rd Ave:

12:00-12:05: Introductions

12:05-12:30: Anna Fahey, Communications Specialist from Sightline, will share her public opinion research on carbon taxes, willingness-to-pay, cap-and-trade &etc.

12:30-12:50: Updates on legal, policy, op-ed, website, signature-gathering pledges, and WCI/Waxman-Markey.

12:50-1:00: Next steps and next meeting (Th July 2, but maybe cancel or move to Mon July 6?)

PS #1: Last week I attended a UW law school conference on climate change and human rights, and the message I left with is that the niche we're trying to fill---what happens if WCI and Waxman-Markey don't pass?---is an important one. The attendees (including folks who have actually read all 900 pages of Waxman-Markey :) were not optimistic about the prospects of Waxman-Markey passing both houses of Congress before the next turn-over of the Senate (after the 2010 election), and it sounds like there's lots of concern that nothing substantial will happen at the international negotiations in Copenhagen in December, either. So that puts attention back on state- and regional-level action, which is exactly our niche.

PS #2: Phil Mitchell sent out the message below to his network last week, and I wanted to share it with all of you because it does a great job of staking out our position viz-a-viz enviros who want action on climate change. Enjoy, and hope to see you Thursday!


A ballot initiative to abolish the state property tax and replace it with a carbon tax.

I hope you got a chance to celebrate last week at the EPA hearings -- it was a blast. While we do have much to celebrate, we also have to keep our eyes on the prize: policy action that will actually work to halt global warming.

First, let me recap where we stand.

We've been trying to pass a regional cap on climate pollution (Western Climate Initiative). This past session our reps in Olympia had the chance to move it forward and failed to act. We will try again next year. I call that Plan A.

Then there's federal action. As you know, a massive climate bill is finally moving through Congress, but it's future is unclear. That's Plan B.

The question is, what should we do if state and federal action continues to stall? I'm inviting you to get involved in Plan C.

Plan C is a ballot initiative to abolish the state property tax (and replace the revenues with a carbon tax). This is a brilliant idea. It is a carbon tax with a difference -- it actually saves you money (if you own property), unless you're an energy hog that won't reduce your carbon footprint. If you don't own property and are low income, it raises enough revenue to provide you a rebate. And it actually has a chance of passing, because it targets the state property tax, which people hate.

And it will steadily reduce our emissions of global warming pollution. More details are below.

I think this is a great idea and should be our backup plan if Plans A and B go nowhere. I myself have committed to work on it -- if it's a go -- and I'm asking you to do the same.

Please write back to me and let me know if you'll pledge to gather signatures. We are building a coalition of partners, and having signature pledges from you will really help recruit additional partners.

The pledge is to gather 900 signatures between early February 2010 and late June 2010. You won't do this in one afternoon (unless you get 10 friends to help), but it's doable. And of course we'll provide you with training and lists of good signature-gathering locations &etc... all we need is your time and enthusiasm!

Understand that we are committing to do this only if Plans A and B continue to go nowhere. This initiative is being led by Yoram Bauman, an economist who co-authored an excellent Sightline book on Tax Shifting. It is inspired by a successful carbon tax that was passed in British Columbia.

Thanks for reading and I look forward to hearing from you!

Phil

Details
We're still working on the policy details, but the gist of it will be (1) imposing a carbon tax of $30-50 per ton of CO2, which amounts to about $0.30-$0.50 per gallon of gasoline or about $0.03-$0.05 per kWh of coal-fired power, with the tax rate increasing over time; (2) using the majority of the revenue to repeal the state portion of the property tax; and (3) using a smaller portion of the revenue to offset impacts on low-income households and perhaps also reduce business taxes and/or increase funding for clean energy research and for K-12 math/science education. FYI this proposal is roughly similar to the award-winning carbon tax currently in effect in British Columbia.

Since the whole point of a carbon tax is to reduce the risk from harmful carbon emissions, some may be concerned that revenue from a carbon tax would decrease over time and fail replace the property tax revenue needed to support our schools. The truth is that by increasing the tax at a slow but steady rate, we can maintain a stable revenue stream even as carbon emissions fall.