I am particularly interested in the new climate bill that is before the US Senate. It’s called the “Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act” – which is a mouthful, even from a bunch of American politicians.  Before I’d finished reading the title of the Act, I knew someone had flipped the dial to the spin cycle.

The object of the Bill is to reduce the gases linked to global warming and to force power sources to shift away from fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas, which release heat-trapping gases, and toward cleaner sources of energy such as wind, solar and geothermal heating.   The Bill seeks to impose national limits on emissions of heat-trapping gases from major pollution sources (power plants, refineries and factories), placing a cost on the privilege of polluting to those that do it.   Hence, these major pollution sources are motivated to seek cleaner alternatives. The bill would require reductions in U.S. emissions of 20 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 while providing incentives for renewable energy technologies.   It’s a big deal to the “E” people – those who people care about the Environment and those people who care about the Economy.  I care about both, so I decided to look into it – put on my flak jacket, fins, mask and snorkel and dive in…deep.

Let me say from the outset that I am behind the “Climate Act” one-hundred percent behind it, because it absolutely means cleaner air, cleaner water, healthier people, a preserved environment, abundant wildlife and MORE JOBS.  Yes, more jobs, more employees, more office space filled.  I know that this is true now that I’ve resurfaced, but it wasn’t easy to divine that truth, or the consequences of that truth from the all the weeds of hyperbole.   Those Washington currents – all that spinning – in both directions – nearly drowned me.  So let me take you through my bathyspheric adventure into climate legislation. This will be a multi-day dive, so take a deep breath.

Today, we’ll start at on the surface with things like labels. I don’t know about you, but labels confuse me. Maybe it’s that tricky English language thing or perhaps Madison Avenue has moved to our Nation’s capital, but I’m confounded when I read any news coming out of Washington. What are “low carbon jobs”?  Are they like low carbon cigarettes – same thing in a different marketing wrapper? How about “Clean Coal”– if I burn it or bathe in it will I actually be cleaner?

Do they put clean coal in low carbon jobs?

And then there’s “Cap and Trade”. It sounds like a great game – like a combination of beer pong and baseball cards. Or “Pollution Credits” – who’s going to believe that they get credit for polluting? What crazed politician thought that one up? Are these just euphemisms, or are they real? The truth is both.

Let me explain each – the truth and consequences:

Low Carbon Jobs:   Not some filtered version of your regular day-to-day slog, these are jobs directly borne out of the “Climate Bill”. They are jobs in new energy industries like solar, wind and geothermal power. Strong regulation of greenhouse gases will not only shift existing jobs to new, more environmentally sensitive, industries, but it will also create jobs through greater investments to develop an efficient and robust power grid. The push for cleaner, better, more efficient energy – forced through this legislation – will spur a new wave of entrepreneurialism in what some call the Low Carbon Economy.

Clean Coal:  This is a euphemism – no doubt about it. Coal is not clean, unless you use it to filter your water.  However, the intention is good. The term describes new technologies that seek to reduce the environmental impact of coal energy generation such as greater filtration, chemical washes and other means of carbon capture. Coal energy is very dirty stuff, so pay close attention to what you hear on the radio and TV.

Cap and Trade: This term describes an administrative policy used to control pollution by providing economic incentives for successful reductions in the emissions of pollutants. Cap and Trade legislation sets limits or “a cap” on the amount of pollutants that can be emitted into the environment and polluters or other groups are issued emission permits or allowances for the right to emit a specific amount of each pollutant. If they exceed those amounts, they pay a penalty which is essentially a tax on polluting.   Polluters can trade for these “Pollution Credits” allowing them to pollute more in the short term, but it is expensive, and there is a total limit on the number of credits, so the organization that traded the credits to the polluter must pollute less –  thereby respecting a limit on overall emissions.  Clean operators can sell their allotted credits to dirty operators. The natural result of this legislation over time, if properly administrated, is to force polluters to reduce their emissions through new techniques and technologies. Essentially, it creates a market for pollution credits enabling operators to successfully reduce emissions without tanking the company.  Again, more jobs, more employees, more office space filled.

These are just a few of the labels.  I’ll talk about them more as we continue our dive tomorrow.  See us at www.buildingengines.com