waxman-markey bill: michigan state fact sheet

8/14/2019 Waxman-Markey Bill: Michigan State Fact Sheet

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/waxman-markey-bill-michigan-state-fact-sheet 1/4

The climate change bill under consideration by Congress ignores the impacts oneveryone who uses or produces petroleum fuels like gasoline, diesel and naturalgas. So it will hit both households and businesses hard – everyone who uses cars,trucks, planes, trains, and tractors or the thousands of products produced ortransported using these fuels. It will create an uneven playing field for U.S. refinerswho will lose market share and jobs to foreign competitors who do not have to limittheir own greenhouse gas emissions.

Higher prices: The bill will touch every family and every business that uses oil products.

According to one government analysis, the bill will raise prices to $5.10 per gallon forgasoline and $5.60 per gallon for diesel fuel. 1

Less disposable income: According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA),average household energy costs could increase as much as $1,870 in 2030. 1

That’s 5.3 percent of today’s average per capita disposable income. 2

Fewer jobs and lower wages: EIA’s study, as well as those commissioned by theNational Black Chamber of Commerce, the National Manufacturers Association and

the American Council for Capital Formation all reach the same conclusion about jobs – that as a consequence of this legislation, there will be more than 2 million fewer jobsin 2030, even with new green jobs created. 3 One analysis expects the wages of workerswho remain employed to fall and for the loss to become greater over time. 4 Anotheranalysis shows that the unbalanced approach of the bill by itself will produce additional

unemployment, destroying more than 2 million jobs nationwide as soon as 2011.5

For Michigan this could mean a loss of 52,156 jobs over the next couple of years.If those jobs were lost today, it would increase Michigan’s unemployment rate from14.1 percent to 15.1 percent. 6

Less wealth: One analysis projects the bill would reduce aggregate gross domesticproduct (GDP) by $9.4 trillion over the next 26 years. 5 For Michigan this could mean areduction of as much as $9 billion in our state’s gross state product (GSP)on average over this period. 7

Less energy security: U.S. refiners will have to buy a disproportionate share of newallowances, increasing their costs and giving a competitive advantage to non-U.S.refiners. One analysis concludes that as a result of this legislation, fuel imports willdouble by 2030 from what they would have been. 8 Contrary to the bill’s intention,America will be less energy secure.

Little environmental gain, big economic pain: Even the federal Government AccountabilityOffice (GAO) warns that cap and trade legislation could make American companies lessable to compete internationally and could drive American jobs overseas to countries

that do not limit greenhouse gas emissions, thus driving up international emissionsenough to offset or overwhelm U.S. cuts. 9

MichiganThe people of

Learn more at API.org

will be hurt by the Waxman-MarkeyClimate Bill.

1 U.S. Energy Information Administration, “Energy Market andEconomic Impacts of H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energyand Security Act of 2009,” August 4, 2009.

2 API calculation based on U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysisdata.

3 EIA (August 2009); CRA International (August 2009); ScienceApplications International Corporation, “Analysis of the Waxman-Markey Bill ‘The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009’ (H.R. 2454) Using the National Energy Modeling System(NEMS/ACCF-NAM2),” prepared for the National Association of Manufacturers and the American Council for Capital Formation,August 12, 2009.

4 CRA International, “Impact on the Economy of the AmericanClean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (H.R. 2454),” preparedfor the National Black Chamber of Commerce, August 2009.

5 The Heritage Foundation, “Son of Waxman-Markey: More PoliticsMakes for a More Costly Bill,” edmemo no. 2450, May 18, 2009.Revised and updated June 16, 2009.

6 API calculations based on U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics statedata and The Heritage Foundation estimate of job losses from

“Impact of the Waxman-Markey’s Climate Change Legislationon the States,” webmemo #2585, August 19, 2009.7 The Heritage Foundation, “Impact of the Waxman-Markey

Climate Change Legislation on the States,” webmemo #2585,August 19, 2009.

8 EnSys Energy, “Waxman-Markey (H.R. 2454) Refining SectorImpact Assessment,” prepared for the API, August 21, 2009.

9 “Climate Change Trade Measures, Estimating Industry Effects,”U.S. GAO testimony before the Committee on Finance, U.S.Senate, July 8, 2009, pp5-6.



The requirements are not equitable and will hurt consumers and producers of motorfuels most. The bill would allocate only 2.25 percent of allowances to fuel producers,but make them responsible for 44 percent of emissions. Refiners would need to coveremissions from refineries and also consumer emissions from planes, trains, autos,

tractors, heating oil, and other petroleum use. In contrast, a few selected emitters willreceive enough free allowances to roughly match their obligation. For example, utilitiesget more than 35 percent of all allowances. This inequitable system of allocations willhurt consumers and producers of gasoline, diesel fuel, heating oil, jet fuel, propaneand crude oil.

The transition to new low-emission energy sourceswill take time. Unlike power generation, which has

the ability of switching to a low-carbon fuel source, there is no commercial-scale low-carbon source tofuel the nation’s 250 million cars.

We need an equitable plan that will address global climate change and improve, notweaken, our nation’s energy and economic security. Decisions made today will have

repercussions for decades to come.

The people of Michigan who use automobiles, trucks, planes, trains, heating oiland other non-transportation petroleum products are treated unfairly by theWaxman-Markey Climate Bill.




Source: EPA, “Energy CO 2 Emissions by State” (www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/state_energyco2inv.html) as interpreted by API.

Those states with the highest emissions per dollar of economic activity will face the greatest challenge toreduce them.

Metric Tons of Emissions per $1 Millionin State Economic ActivityI Least: 48 – 500I Most: 501 –2305




Emissions Ranked by State

1 Texas 663.872 California 390.643 Pennsylvania 277.004 Ohio 269.975 Florida 260.74

6 Illinois 242.817 Indiana 231.598 New York 210.919 Louisiana 191.56

10 Michigan 189.5811 Georgia 184.0012 North Carolina 153.5113 Kentucky 152.1514 Missouri 141.1115 Alabama 141.1016 New Jersey 134.5417 Virginia 128.9318 Tennessee 127.2519 West Virginia 113.1320 Wisconsin 110.5321 Oklahoma 106.0922 Minnesota 100.6523 Arizona 97.1724 Colorado 94.3425 South Carolina 87.2426 Washington 85.6127 Massachusetts 84.8328 Maryland 83.9129 Iowa 79.6730 Kansas 72.4631 Utah 66.0632 Mississippi 63.5633 Wyoming 62.8734 Arkansas 60.5435 New Mexico 58.9836 Nevada 49.5637 North Dakota 49.1638 Alaska 47.1239 Connecticut 43.3040 Nebraska 43.1041 Oregon 42.6742 Montana 36.2743 Hawaii 23.0544 Maine 22.9345 New Hampshire 21.2146 Delaware 17.7547 Idaho 15.8348 South Dakota 13.1949 Rhode Island 11.2850 Vermont 6.7951 District of Columbia 3.94

Rank StateTotal CO 2 Emissions

(2005 MMT CO 2)

1 Wyoming 2,305.472 West Virginia 2,132.543 North Dakota 2,015.014 Montana 1,213.645 Alaska 1,198.64

6 Louisiana 1,138.847 Kentucky 1,082.908 Indiana 970.749 Alabama 930.69

10 Oklahoma 873.2411 New Mexico 856.3712 Mississippi 781.8913 Utah 727.6614 Iowa 701.6315 Arkansas 697.8416 Kansas 686.3417 Texas 670.9518 Missouri 653.0919 South Carolina 623.0520 Ohio 612.2721 Nebraska 609.8522 Pennsylvania 566.4423 Tennessee 555.1524 Wisconsin 510.9425 Maine 509.8326 Georgia 505.7327 Michigan 503.8828 Arizona 448.7629 Nevada 445.1230 North Carolina 442.8631 Colorado 435.6832 Illinois 433.5733 Minnesota 429.1234 Hawaii 426.6935 South Dakota 426.5636 Florida 387.2637 New Hampshire 385.2338 Virginia 366.3739 Maryland 340.7740 Idaho 335.5741 Washington 320.2842 Delaware 314.2043 New Jersey 312.1144 Oregon 295.7345 Vermont 294.2946 Massachusetts 260.2947 Rhode Island 257.6248 California 240.8249 Connecticut 223.5050 New York 220.1851 District of Columbia 48.21

Rank StateTotal CO 2 /

$ Millions of GSP


waxman-markey bill: michigan state fact sheet

Documents