April 4, 2006

CALIFORNIA: Are New Taxes a Viable Option?

The venture capitalist says YES. The Governor says NO.

The question is - Are energy consumers willing to pay more at the pump to finance clean energy solutions?

Yesterday, the Mercury News of the Silicon Valley reported that billionaire Vinod Khosla was bankrolling a new California State initiative to raise $4 Billion through new taxes on oil producers to kickstart development of alternative energy solutions. According to the story: "The revenues could be used for a number of purposes, such as subsidies to buy clean, alternative fuel vehicles or incentives to stimulate alternative fuel production." Excerpts from the story are below.

Today, the Sacramento Bee reported that Governor Schwarzenegger had rejected a recommended gasoline tax to finance reductions in greenhouse gas emissions originally considered (and then rescinded) by his Climate Action Team before issuing their final CAT Report which was released yesterday. Excerpts from their article below.

What's your opinion?

-------------------

Valley man bankrolls clean-energy initiative
OIL FIRMS TO PAY TAX TO FUND FUELS, CARS
By Matthai Chakko Kuruvila
Mercury News
Vinod Khosla is bankrolling a ballot initiative that would tax oil producers and subsidize alternative energy -- technologies he invests in as one of the valley's most prominent venture capitalists.

If California voters embrace the November initiative, the tax on oil companies could generate $4 billion for projects intended to reduce the state's dependence on oil by 25 percent within a decade.

"We've got a climate crisis on our hands,'' said Khosla, a Republican who is joining Hollywood mogul Stephen Bing, a Democrat, to bankroll the initiative. ``We have an energy crisis on our hands. We have our oil feeding Middle East terrorism, and we need to do something about it. Besides, consumers are paying too much.''


--------------------

Bipartisan plans look to cut greenhouse gas
State could be the first to force industry to reduce emissions linked to global warming.
By Chris Bowman and Edie Lau
Sacramento Bee

California would become the first state to require power plants and other heavy industry to reduce emissions linked to global warming under bipartisan plans released Monday.

Recommendations from Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's environmental advisers and a companion bill introduced by Democratic legislators would require a 10 percent cut in current levels of climate-altering gases by 2020.

But on Tuesday, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said he hopes to sign legislation this year, and will host discussions in six cities statewide to examine proposals designed to reduce greenhouse gases.

Schwarzenegger in particular said he would not support a new tax on gasoline, an idea that was once recommended but dropped by the Climate Action Team.

The proposals, applauded by environmentalists, would require power companies, fuel refineries, oil and gas miners, cement manufacturers and owners of landfills to regularly report emissions of carbon dioxide, the principal "greenhouse gas," so named because of its heat-trapping effect in the atmosphere.

The governor's advisers recommended a cap-and-trade approach that would allow companies that more than meet the ceilings on global warming pollution to sell emission credits to those that underperform.



technorati

3 comments:

Charlie Peters said...

support NO on ethanol in November, oil refiner welfare, initiative

The $0.51 per gal. to the refiners for adding 5.6% ethanol to California gas is about $500,000,000.00 per year.

The "Global warming" and "shortage of oil reserves" may add over $1.00 per gal. to the profit in California.

That may be about $100billion in profit from California motorists.

The science is interesting but so is the money.

A $7Trillion UN carbon tax to save us from global warming may assist in moving the big 3 to China with public private partnership helping to move the market to hydrogen to save the children

Charlie Peters
(510) 537-1796
Clean Air Performance Professionals

Charlie Peters said...

How about improving the system we have?

Ask for a fuel ethanol waiver allowed in the 2005 energy bill

Fuel ethanol uses lots of water

Audit "Smog Check" to fix the fault in more of the failed cars

Chief Sherry Mehl, DCA/BAR, has never found out if what is broken on a Smog Check failed car gets fixed, never

Improving Smog Check and fuel policy can cut car impact in half in 1 year and save money

About $20 billion in savings in first year

I'm confused about promoting products from offshore rather than improving our system

Clean Air Performance Professionals

Anonymous said...

Should Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger consider a $17/gallon "fee" on corn fuel ethanol use?

* Lower price for food, gas, water, beer and cleaner air… and… funds for the budget from oil profit

* Clean Air Performance Professionals