10-23-08 by dugan
Australia has a lot in common with the United States. It’s a nation
of immigrants with a cowboy-style history and a strong love of
individual rights. Aussies do put shrimp instead of steak on the
barbie–but that’s not a fighting matter. They’re also well ahead of
the U.S. on a national strategy to slow global warming. (See below for how much Australia is warming already).
Chevron, which
has big refineries and natural gas wells in Australia, has gone public in opposing the plan. What it’s doing tells much about how corporate polluters will oppose global warming curbs in the U.S.
Thee’s
already plenty of opposition by major polluters, including oil
companies and coal-powered utilities, to any potential U.S. plan to cap
carbon emissions. The most likely proposal, like Australia’s, would cap
emissions by selling and perhaps in some cases giving "emission
credits" to polluters, then steadily reducing the number of credits
available. Owners of the credits would be able to buy and sell the
credits on an open market. It’s far from perfect, but it’s a
market-style system that capitalist economies will swallow more easily
than a more effective straight carbon tax. (If you want to know more,
here are links to articles that illustrate cap and trade without th
e financial mumbo-jumbo).
In
Washington, opponents are still staying out of sight, trying to
influence any proposal before it even hits Congress. Oil and utility
lobbyists are making their case in the privacy and comfort of our
elected representatives’ offices, far from public view. Australia,
however, with a plan scheduled to go into effect in 2010, gives us a
taste of what’s being said in those clubby Capitol offices.
Chevron
and its local refining subsidiary, Caltex, would get about half of
their initial carbon polluter credits for free under the Australian
plan. But Chevron is demanding that it get 100% of the credits for
free, on the grounds that anything less would put it at a competitive
disadvantage. When would it pay for the credits? Basically when hell
freezes over, i.e. when there is global agreement on global warming
reduction plans. Here’s how Chevron puts it:
Caltex, half-owned by Chevron Corp., last month called for
an initial 100 percent free distribution of carbon permits to
all emissions-intensive industries that compete against rivals
outside Australia. Once overseas competitors have comparable
carbon costs, all permits can be auctioned, it said.
Last week, Chevron and Shell Oil made similar demands–and lightly veiled threats to pull out of Australia--regarding their offshore natural gas and liquefied natural gas projects.
You can be sure that Chevron, Shell, Exxon and others are making the same arguments in Washington—very, very privately.