Subscribe today to the Washington Examiner magazine and get Washington Briefing: politics and policy stories that will keep you up to date with what’s going on in Washington. SUBSCRIBE NOW: Just $1.00 an issue!
PARSING HOUSE DEMOCRATS’ NEXT BIG CLIMATE PUSH: House Democrats want to prove they’re serious on big, bold climate legislation this year. But after a string of largely partisan messaging bills on the issue last year, it isn’t clear how much success they’ll have drawing Republican support for a comprehensive climate package.
Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee will unveil the next big steps in their climate policy push this afternoon. Details so far are sparse, but leaders on the committee like Chairman Frank Pallone of New Jersey told reporters last year it would be an extensive effort with robust commitments to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
The idea is to fill out much of the policy details behind Democrats’ 100% clean economy by 2050 push, Congressman Paul Tonko of New York, who chairs the environment subcommittee and has been leading work on the effort, told reporters last year.
Democrats introduced a target-setting bill in November, meant to unite the party behind that goal even amid intraparty disputes about how quickly and intensely legislation should address climate change.
More progressive members of the party, led by Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, are pushing a Green New Deal, which would couple rapid economy-wide emissions cuts with progressive policies in healthcare and other areas that even centrist Democrats have raised concerns is too far-reaching.
Should they focus on smaller measures? A big, comprehensive climate change bill isn’t likely to get very far, or anywhere, with the Republican-led Senate, and it isn’t clear whether Republicans in the House could support such a measure.
House Republicans have instead called on Democrats to work with them to pass a bundle of smaller legislative actions that would make strides in cutting emissions by encouraging energy efficiency and providing funding for low-carbon technologies like carbon capture and advanced nuclear.
Even as Democrats prep their big climate push, they’re partnering with their Republican counterparts on other smaller climate bills.
Tonko, along with Republican Pete Olson of Texas, introduced a new bill late Tuesday that would slash emissions from potent greenhouse gas refrigerant chemicals known as hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs. That bill already has a bipartisan companion in the Senate with more than 30 co-sponsors.
The committee also announced a markup next week of nine smaller climate and energy bills, many of them bipartisan.
2021 positioning: The big push by House Democrats, though, might ultimately be an effort to put pieces in place for a new Congress, and potentially a new White House, in 2021.
Whether that strategy pans out — and whether it undermines bipartisan cooperation on many of these smaller measures — remains to be seen.
Welcome to Daily on Energy, written by Washington Examiner Energy and Environment Writers Josh Siegel (@SiegelScribe) and Abby Smith (@AbbySmithDC). Email [email protected] or [email protected] for tips, suggestions, calendar items, and anything else. If a friend sent this to you and you’d like to sign up, click here. If signing up doesn’t work, shoot us an email, and we’ll add you to our list.
REPUBLICAN TOM REED FLOATS TECH-NEUTRAL CLEAN ENERGY TAX CREDIT: Republican Tom Reed unveiled a bipartisan bill Wednesday to provide federal tax subsidies for “first-of-a-kind” clean energy technologies for combating climate change.
“We are putting our thumb on the scale to encourage energy innovation through the tax code,” Reed, a centrist House Ways and Means Committee member from New York, told Josh in an exclusive preview of his bill.
Many Republicans have supported providing tax subsidies for renewable energy, but the party has mostly focused on increasing R&D spending to address climate change.
“Hopefully, this shows there are Republicans who want to come to a compromise position on climate change and use the tax code in a way that can solve this problem,” Reed said of his bill.
How Reed’s approach is different. His Energy Sector Innovation Credit is unique in that it is technology-neutral, providing new electricity sector tax credits to use applications rather than specific energy sources.
So, while existing clean energy tax policy provides subsidies for wind and solar, for example, Reed’s bill would direct credits to applications such as energy storage, carbon capture for natural gas plants, advanced nuclear reactors, and offshore wind.
“What I have seen through tax credits is, when you pick winners and losers, it can become heavily distortive,” Reed said. “This is about leveling the playing field by making it technology-neutral and open to reward innovation.”
OIL MARKETS HAVE MUTED RESPONSE TO IRAN MISSILE ATTACK: Oil markets have barely responded to the latest escalation between the U.S. and Iran.
Prices spiked but then quickly slipped Wednesday morning after Iran’s missile attack against U.S. military bases in Iraq.
The price of Brent crude climbed 4% to $71.75 a barrel and then fell to about $67 a barrel as of this writing. West Texas Intermediate climbed 4.7% to $65.65 a barrel and then fell to roughly $61. Prices fell after President Trump tweeted that “all is well” late Tuesday night.
“We are not forecasting a shortage of supply unless we have a catastrophic escalation, which we don’t see,” the United Arab Emirates’ energy minister, Suhail al-Mazrouei, told Reuters early Wednesday.
OIL INDUSTRY LEADER CREDITS SHALE BOOM FOR MARKET CALM: The head of the American Petroleum Institute says resilient oil markets have proved correct the Trump administration’s bet that surging U.S. oil production can compensate for disruptions in the Middle East.
“The key point about Iran is were it not for American energy leadership we would not see the stability in these commodity markets we are seeing today,” Mike Sommers, API’s president and CEO, told reporters at the group’s State of American Energy event Tuesday.
“If American production goes offline, you will see incredible instability in these markets,” he added. “The incredible benefits of the American energy revolution have given this industry and this country incredible flexibility from a national security perspective.”
Sommers’ national security angle provides a preview of another line of defense the oil and gas industry will take as it tries to fend off Democratic proposals to limit fossil fuels and ban fracking.
Trump made the same argument Wednesday in his address about Iran’s attack, saying, “we are independent and we don’t need Middle East oil.”
The U.S. still imports a lot of oil from the Middle East.
PFAS VETO THREAT: The White House isn’t a fan of legislation the House is considering this week dealing with “forever chemicals,” or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS.
The legislation would “supersede” the Environmental Protection Agency’s existing requirements under the law to deal with chemicals like PFAS, the White House said in a statement of administration policy late Tuesday. The administration added the bill would “create considerable litigation risk, set problematic and unreasonable rulemaking timelines and precedents, and impose substantial, unwarranted costs” for the public and private sectors.
The veto threat suggests the Democratic-led PFAS bill could largely amount to a messaging bill. House Republican energy leaders have also criticized the bill, saying Democrats made it a partisan grab-bag of legislative efforts that go too far.
It won’t be completely partisan, though: A handful of Republicans, particularly those from states heavily contaminated by PFAS, are likely to vote for the measure later this week. Two Republicans, Michigan’s Fred Upton and West Virginia’s David McKinley, voted with Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee to approve the bill in November.
NAFTA 2.0 SPLITS DEMOCRATS ON CLIMATE: Whether Senate Democrats think the new North American trade deal passes muster on climate change issues depends on who you ask.
At least two — Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island — have said they’ll oppose the trade deal because it doesn’t include strong enough environmental and climate change provisions.
Sanders, during the last Democratic debate, said it was an “outrage” the NAFTA deal didn’t mention climate change. Whitehouse, in a statement Tuesday, said the deal “continues to protect corporate polluters by allowing oil and gas giants to oppose environmental regulation,” and doesn’t include a binding process to enforce environmental commitments.
Some of their counterparts, though, are willing to accept the new deal: Tom Carper of Delaware, the top Democrat on the Senate environment committee, said Tuesday the deal is better than NAFTA, includes “enforceable” environmental provisions, and deserves bipartisan support in the Senate.
Elizabeth Warren, Sanders’ progressive counterpart in the Democratic 2020 race, has also said she’ll support the trade deal. She may be losing some climate credibility for it, though.
“This trade deal is a huge win for fossil-fuel billionaires and for multinational corporations,” Stephen O’Hanlon, a spokesman for the youth climate group Sunrise Movement, told HuffPost of Warren’s position. “It undermines her commitment to the Green New Deal.”
DEMOCRATIC ATTORNEYS GENERAL HELP WASHINGTON BLOCK COAL: California and five other states are coming to Washington’s defense as it attempts to block construction of a coal export terminal on its western shores. The states filed an amicus brief backing Washington’s position earlier in the week.
The coal and railroad industry are appealing their case, hoping to get better luck from a federal appeals court after a district court upheld Washington’s denial of a permit for the project based on negative environmental impacts.
Washington’s rejection of the project — known as the Millennium Bulk Terminal Project — has been a flashpoint between Democratic-led states using environmental laws to block new fossil fuel infrastructure and efforts of industry and the Trump administration to tie their hands.
AUTOMAKERS SET TO MERGE MESSAGES: America’s two largest largest automobile trade groups are merging just as the Trump administration is considering a major revision of fuel efficiency rules.
Global Automakers and the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers on Wednesday announced the formation of a new group, the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, representing manufacturers and supply chain partners that together produce nearly 99% of light-duty vehicles sold in the U.S.
John Bozzella, former president and CEO of Global Automakers, will lead the organization.
“As the singular, clear and respected voice of the automotive industry, it will be the role of this organization to help guide our members and partners through the exciting technological advances and transitions in the industry,” Bozzella said.
The Rundown
Wall Street Journal Iraq oil industry’s progress is threatened by tensions
New York Times Marine labs on the water’s edge are threatened by climate change
Calendar
THURSDAY | JAN. 9
10 a.m. 2123 Rayburn. The House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Energy Subcommittee holds a mark up of nine bills to improve energy efficiency, promote clean energy, increase energy sector jobs and modernize our energy infrastructure.
TUESDAY | JAN. 14
10:30 a.m. 2322 Rayburn. The House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Environment and Climate Change Subcommittee holds a hearing entitled, “Promoting American Innovation and Jobs: Legislation to Phase Down Hydrofluorocarbons.”
