Waxman Markey Cap and Trade’s Biggest Losers: Chemical Plants and Chemicals
Posted June 25th, 2009 at 2.37pm in Energy and Environment.
When it comes to cap and trade, Texas Congressman Gene Green asserted,
I’d like to vote for a bill, but I’m not going to vote for one unless I think it’s going to be good for the area I represent.”
He went on to say his district had “more chemical plants than I can count.”
This is a problem for proponents of cap and trade, because the chemicals industry is one of the most energy-intensive industries in the United States. Since cap and trade artificially drives up the price of energy by taxing the use of carbon-emitting fossil fuels, the news is grim for Congressman Green’s chemical plants.
According to The Heritage Foundation analysis of the Waxman-Markey cap and trade bill, over the 2012-2035 timeline, chemical industry job losses average over 25,000. By 2035, a projected 47,800 jobs are lost below the baseline - without a cap and trade bill. There will be 32,000 fewer jobs when the emissions reductions commence in 2012.
Cap and trade isn’t good for Congressman Gene Green’s district - or any Member’s district, for that matter. This is the definition of mutually exclusive.
- Author: Nick Loris
- Interact: Sphere
- Share This
June 26, 2009 Reigh Gunderson Midland, MI writes:
Re cap & trade. Read the WSJ 6/26/09. “The Climate Change Climate Change.” Global warming is NOT true. It is a scam.
Go to http://www.icecap.us for ongoing details.