Ranking Member Johnson Reacts to EIA Analysis of Hall Clean Energy Standard
(Washington, DC) - The findings of this study were predictable when it was first requested, and not because the policy scenarios modeled here represent reality. That said, the EIA is not to blame. Not surprisingly, some of my Republican colleagues do not support the President’s proposal for a Clean Energy Standard (CES), and the requested analysis was designed to show a worst-case cost scenario by omitting a number of important factors and sensitivities that would have made for a much more comprehensive and realistic picture of our future energy economy. In fact, the CES proposed by Chairman Hall that was analyzed by EIA in this report is altogether very different from the policy envisioned by the President and Congressional leaders and from what would likely ever be developed or implemented. For this reason, the report refers to the scenario modeled as the “Hall CES” or “HCES”.
For example, the Hall CES does not adequately anticipate how regulatory certainty and innovative policies can mobilize capital and unleash the power of the public and private sector in revamping our aging energy infrastructure with new, cleaner, more efficient and sustainable technologies. Unfortunately, just when we are starting to get a glimpse of the progress we can achieve when we support our energy innovation sectors, House Republicans are trying to cut the very programs that will get us there.
This is hardly the last and only word on the costs and benefits of a Clean Energy Standard. In fact, various stakeholders have done more comprehensive analyses and are continuing to run models to help determine the lowest-cost and most effective design for a CES. Later this month we expect to see the results of another EIA study requested by Chairman Bingaman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, which should provide a more rigorous analysis accounting for such critical factors as flexibility in purchasing, trading and banking of the clean energy credits. In short, there are a number of ways to construct a sensible Clean Energy Standard, and Senator Bingaman has requested that EIA do several “sensitivity runs” to show the market impacts of multiple policy options. I would urge my colleagues wait for the results of more informed analyses such as these before coming to premature conclusions on the costs of achieving a clean energy future.
Next Article Previous Article