en
Written by John Egan for Industrial Info Resources (Sugar Land, Texas)--After forging numerous across-the-aisle compromises during his 36 years in the U.S. Senate, President Joe Biden earned a reputation as a dealmaker. The president's negotiating skills are being put to the test following a decision last week by Senator Joe Manchin (D-West Virginia), chairman of the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee, to block the $150 billion Clean Energy Performance Program (CEPP), the environmental centerpiece of the president's $3.5 trillion "Build Back Better" agenda.
At a town hall last Thursday, Biden acknowledged the CEPP was in danger of being jettisoned. But he suggested Manchin could support moving the $150 billion to other programs to protect the environment and stem climate change.
The CEPP is the Biden administration's effort to accelerate the decarbonization of the Electric Power sector. That plan would effectively create a national clean energy standard by requiring electric companies to increase their use of non-emitting generation 4% each year. Those that exceeded that floor would be rewarded, but those that did not would be penalized. For more on the CEPP, see September 20, 2021, article - Clean Electricity Payment Plan, Solar Power Can Transform U.S. Electricity Business. That plan had variously been called the Clean Electricity Performance Plan and the Clean Electricity Payment Plan.
Biden's overall Build Back Better proposal was being advanced in the Senate under that chamber's budget reconciliation rules, which eliminated the threat of a filibuster and required only 51 votes to pass. The Senate is split 50-50, and Vice President Kamala Harris can cast a tie-breaking vote.
To pass the Biden plan, the Democrats either need to secure "yes" votes from all 50 senators in their party, or find a way to get enough support from moderate Republican senators to offset potential defections by Manchin and fellow Democrat Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.
Manchin and Sinema had long ago signaled their concern over the $3.5 trillion cost of the president's overall Build Back Better agenda, which included a significant expansion of the social safety net, as well as steps to decarbonize the electricity sector. But until recently, neither senator would provide a specific list of how much was too much, which programs they could support, and which went over the lines they drew in the sand.
The changed last week, when Manchin disclosed his opposition to the CEPP. The senator--who hails from the second-largest coal-producing state, and one of the largest producers of natural gas, and who benefits financially from investments in the coal business--rejected the CEPP because, he said, it would pay companies in the Power Industry to do what they already were doing: shutting down coal generation and replacing some of that lost generation with renewable energy.
It doesn't appear that the president can overcome the senator's opposition by rounding up enough Republican senators to vote for the CEPP. As chair of the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee, Manchin would hold sway over any legislative language that would be drafted by his committee regarding the CEPP.
Manchin's move to kill the CEPP comes two weeks before the start of a U.N. conference on climate change in Glasgow, Scotland, as Biden is trying to re-establish the country's role in slowing or halting climate change. Then-President Barack Obama signed the Paris Agreement in 2015, but President Donald Trump reversed that after his election in 2016. Biden has rejoined the Paris Agreement and has taken an "all of government" approach to try to slow the emission of carbon dioxide, including boosting spending on the nation's electric vehicle infrastructure and expanding the transmission network, both of which are in the $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill, for which there appears to be sufficient votes to pass the Senate.
As White House aides scrambled to respond to the Manchin move to oppose the CEPP, they first looked at a carbon tax, long favored by economists but long seen as a toxic non-starter in Washington. A modified carbon tax, which exempted transportation fuels, was a head scratcher, as it would likely boost greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector, the largest single source of greenhouse gas emissions, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The White House and its climate change supporters also were said to be considering cuts to emissions through a combination of executive orders and the potential acceleration of regulatory actions already underway. But there was recognition that these would be controversial efforts, almost certain to trigger litigation. After seeing numerous Trump administration initiatives overturned by federal courts, the Biden administration is keenly aware that the efforts that were most likely to survive legal challenges were legislation that was passed by Congress, and regulatory decisions that met all of the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act. Enacted after World War II, the act serves as a guide for the development of regulatory actions by an agency of the executive branch.
Biden has set a goal for the U.S. to cut its greenhouse gas emissions 50% this decade, as a step toward completely decarbonizing the U.S. economy by 2050. According to a study released this week by the Rhodium Group (New York, New York), the U.S. is on track to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 17% to 25% by 2030.
The Rhodium Group's study, "Pathways to Paris: A Policy Assessment of the 2030 US Climate Target," was released October 19. It had two primary conclusions:
At a town hall last Thursday, Biden acknowledged the CEPP was in danger of being jettisoned. But he suggested Manchin could support moving the $150 billion to other programs to protect the environment and stem climate change.
The CEPP is the Biden administration's effort to accelerate the decarbonization of the Electric Power sector. That plan would effectively create a national clean energy standard by requiring electric companies to increase their use of non-emitting generation 4% each year. Those that exceeded that floor would be rewarded, but those that did not would be penalized. For more on the CEPP, see September 20, 2021, article - Clean Electricity Payment Plan, Solar Power Can Transform U.S. Electricity Business. That plan had variously been called the Clean Electricity Performance Plan and the Clean Electricity Payment Plan.
Biden's overall Build Back Better proposal was being advanced in the Senate under that chamber's budget reconciliation rules, which eliminated the threat of a filibuster and required only 51 votes to pass. The Senate is split 50-50, and Vice President Kamala Harris can cast a tie-breaking vote.
To pass the Biden plan, the Democrats either need to secure "yes" votes from all 50 senators in their party, or find a way to get enough support from moderate Republican senators to offset potential defections by Manchin and fellow Democrat Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona.
Manchin and Sinema had long ago signaled their concern over the $3.5 trillion cost of the president's overall Build Back Better agenda, which included a significant expansion of the social safety net, as well as steps to decarbonize the electricity sector. But until recently, neither senator would provide a specific list of how much was too much, which programs they could support, and which went over the lines they drew in the sand.
The changed last week, when Manchin disclosed his opposition to the CEPP. The senator--who hails from the second-largest coal-producing state, and one of the largest producers of natural gas, and who benefits financially from investments in the coal business--rejected the CEPP because, he said, it would pay companies in the Power Industry to do what they already were doing: shutting down coal generation and replacing some of that lost generation with renewable energy.
It doesn't appear that the president can overcome the senator's opposition by rounding up enough Republican senators to vote for the CEPP. As chair of the Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee, Manchin would hold sway over any legislative language that would be drafted by his committee regarding the CEPP.
Manchin's move to kill the CEPP comes two weeks before the start of a U.N. conference on climate change in Glasgow, Scotland, as Biden is trying to re-establish the country's role in slowing or halting climate change. Then-President Barack Obama signed the Paris Agreement in 2015, but President Donald Trump reversed that after his election in 2016. Biden has rejoined the Paris Agreement and has taken an "all of government" approach to try to slow the emission of carbon dioxide, including boosting spending on the nation's electric vehicle infrastructure and expanding the transmission network, both of which are in the $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill, for which there appears to be sufficient votes to pass the Senate.
As White House aides scrambled to respond to the Manchin move to oppose the CEPP, they first looked at a carbon tax, long favored by economists but long seen as a toxic non-starter in Washington. A modified carbon tax, which exempted transportation fuels, was a head scratcher, as it would likely boost greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector, the largest single source of greenhouse gas emissions, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The White House and its climate change supporters also were said to be considering cuts to emissions through a combination of executive orders and the potential acceleration of regulatory actions already underway. But there was recognition that these would be controversial efforts, almost certain to trigger litigation. After seeing numerous Trump administration initiatives overturned by federal courts, the Biden administration is keenly aware that the efforts that were most likely to survive legal challenges were legislation that was passed by Congress, and regulatory decisions that met all of the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act. Enacted after World War II, the act serves as a guide for the development of regulatory actions by an agency of the executive branch.
Biden has set a goal for the U.S. to cut its greenhouse gas emissions 50% this decade, as a step toward completely decarbonizing the U.S. economy by 2050. According to a study released this week by the Rhodium Group (New York, New York), the U.S. is on track to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 17% to 25% by 2030.
The Rhodium Group's study, "Pathways to Paris: A Policy Assessment of the 2030 US Climate Target," was released October 19. It had two primary conclusions:
- Without new action, the U.S. will not meet its 2030 target
- Joint action by Congress, the executive branch and subnational leaders can put the 2030 target within reach, but all must act.
