Club For Growth Continues To Propagate Clean Energy Lies

October 20, 2010 12:58 pm ET

Club for Growth has released a new ad that attacks Scott McAdams (D-AK) and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) for supporting clean energy legislation. Contrary to the ad's false claims, investing in clean energy legislation would boost America's economy by billions and create up to 1.9 million American jobs — including 4,000 in Alaska — at very little cost to taxpayers. And despite the ad's insinuation that McAdams' supports cap-and-trade, he has not yet expressed his position on the policy; rather, he favors the "responsible development" of Alaska's natural resources.

CFG: "Alaskan Jobs"

Do 49,000 Alaskan jobs matter to Scott McAdams and Lisa Murkowski? Washington's cap-and-trade energy tax would kill those jobs in the years ahead while driving up electric and gas prices here. Murkowski backed a cap-and-trade scheme. McAdams' union backers favor one, too. Joe Miller puts Alaskan jobs first and opposes the energy tax. Joe Miller. For Senate. For Alaska. Club for Growth Action is responsible for the content of this advertising. 

Clean Energy Legislation Would Boost The Economy...

Clean Energy Legislation Would Boost GDP By Up To $111 Billion. According to the University of California-Berkeley: "Comprehensive clean energy and climate protection legislation, like the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES) that was passed by the House of Representatives in June, would strengthen the U.S. economy by establishing pollution limits and incentives that together will drive large-scale investments in clean energy and energy efficiency...New analysis by the University of California shows conclusively that climate policy will strengthen the U.S. economy as a whole. Full adoption of the ACES package of pollution reduction and energy efficiency measures would ... boost GDP by $39 billion-$111 billion. These economic gains are over and above the growth the U.S. would see in the absence of such a bill." [UC Berkeley, accessed 1/22/10]

Clean Energy Legislation Would Boost Household Income By Nearly $1,200 Per Year. According to the University of California-Berkeley: "Full adoption of the ACES package of pollution reduction and energy efficiency measures would create between 918,000 and 1.9 million new jobs, increase annual household income by $487-$1,175 per year. ... These economic gains are over and above the growth the U.S. would see in the absence of such a bill." [UC Berkeley, accessed 1/22/10]

...Create Millions Of American Jobs...

Alaska Will Gain 4,000 Jobs From An Investment In Clean Energy Technologies. According to the Center for American Progress and the Political Economy Research Institute, "Alaska could see a net increase of about $350 million in investment revenue and 4,000 jobs based on its share of a total of $150 billion in clean-energy investments annually across the country. This is even after assuming a reduction in fossil fuel spending equivalent to the increase in clean energy investments. Adding 4,000 jobs to the Alaska labor market in 2008 would have brought the state's unemployment rate down to 5.6 percent from its actual 2008 level of 6.7 percent." [Center for American Progress and the Political Economy Research Institute, Clean-Energy Investments Create Jobs in Alaska, 6/17/09]

Investment In Clean Energy Technology Would Create Up To 1.9 Million American Jobs. According to the University of California-Berkeley, "new analysis by the University of California shows conclusively that climate policy will strengthen the U.S. economy as a whole. Full adoption of the ACES package of pollution reduction and energy efficiency measures would create between 918,000 and 1.9 million new jobs." [UC Berkeley, accessed 1/22/10]

... And Have A Negligible Effect On Gas Prices...

The American Clean Energy And Security Act Will Increase Prices By Just Cents On The Dollar.  According to the Environmental Protection Agency: "The increase in gasoline prices that results from the carbon price ($0.13 in 2015, $0.25 in 2030, and $0.69 in 2050 under Scenario 2 - H.R. 2454)is not sufficient to substantially change consumer behavior in their vehicle miles traveled or vehicle purchases at the prices at which low GHG emitting automotive technologies can be produced." [EPA Analysis of the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 H.R. 2454 in the 111th Congress, pg 61, accessed 9/28/09; emphasis added]

  • Gasoline Prices Rose $2.59 Under President Bush.According to the Energy Information Administration, from January 22, 2001 to July 14, 2008, the average price of a gallon of regular gasoline raised from $1.456 to $4.054. [Energy Information Administration, accessed 9/28/09]

New Fuel Efficiency Standards Would SAVE Drivers $3,000 On Gasoline.  According to USA Today: "The rules would phase in with 2012 models, when the current rules end, and escalate so that by the 2016 model year, the industry would have to average the equivalent of 35.5 miles per gallon. The administration estimates the rules would add an average of $1,100 to the price of a car but could save $3,000 on fuel over the vehicle's life." [USA Today9/16/09]

By 2025, A Clean Energy Standard Would Save $95 Billion On Energy & Gas Bills.  According to the Center for American Progress: "A national renewable electricity standard, a key piece of the clean energy legislation currently before Congress, would save households and businesses in every state billions of dollars in electricity and natural gas bills... The numbers come from the Union of Concerned Scientists, who earlier this year analyzed a renewable electricity standard that would aim to have 25 percent of our electricity come from renewable sources by 2025. They found that this standard would save families and businesses $95 billion in electricity and natural gas bills through 2030 and spur new investments and hundreds of thousands of new clean-energy jobs." [Center for American Progress, 5/19/09

...At Minimal Cost To Families

Reuters: "Climate Legislation Moving Through Congress Would Have Only A Modest Impact On Consumers." According to Reuters: "A new U.S. government study on Tuesday adds to a growing list of experts concluding that climate legislation moving through Congress would have only a modest impact on consumers, adding around $100 to household costs in 2020. Under the climate legislation passed by the House of Representatives in June, electricity, heating oil and other bills for average families will rise $134 in 2020 and $339 in 2030, according to the Energy Information Administration, the country's top energy forecaster." [Reuters8/5/09]

EIA: Clean Energy Legislation Would Cost Only $0.23 Per Day. According to a House Energy and Commerce Committee factsheet of the Energy Information Administration's analysis of the American Clean Energy and Security Act: "The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) has completed an analysis of the American Clean Energy and Security Act (H.R. 2454), as passed by the U.S. House of Representatives... The overall impact on the average household, including the benefit of many of the energy efficiency provisions in the legislation, would be 23 cents per day ($83 per year). This is consistent with analyses by the Congressional Budget Office which projects a cost of 48 cents per day ($175 per year) and the Environmental Protection Agency which projects a cost of 22 to 30 cents per day ($80 to $111 per year)." [House Energy and Commerce Committee, EIA's Economic Analysis Of "The American Clean Energy And Security Act Of 2009," 8/4/09; emphasis original]

CBO: In 2020, Cap-And-Trade Will Only Cost An Average Of $175 Annually, "About A Postage Stamp A Day." In its analysis of the American Clean Energy and Security Act, the Congressional Budget Office wrote: "On that basis, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the net annual economy wide cost of the cap-and-trade program in 2020 would be $22 billion-or about $175 per household." Rep. Edward Markey noted it was "the cost of about a postage stamp a day." [CBO, 6/19/09; House Committee on Energy & Commerce Release, 6/20/09]

Cap-And-Trade Would DECREASE Energy Prices For Low-Income Americans. In its analysis of the American Clean Energy and Security Act, the Congressional Budget Office wrote, "households in the lowest income quintile would see an average net benefit of about $40 in 2020." [CBO, 6/19/09; emphasis original]

McAdams Favors "Responsible Development" Of Alaska's Natural Resources

McAdams Supports "Responsible Development of Arctic Oil and Gas Resources." According to McAdams' campaign website:

The easiest and safest way to add more oil to the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS) again has been staring us in the face for more than 30 years. ANWR holds up to 9 billion barrels of recoverable oil. Using today's directional drilling and small footprint technology, we can safely access this valuable reserve. Scott will bring new energy and ideas to the table to responsibly develop ANWR, including using revenues from ANWR to develop stranded renewable energy sources across America. Open Arctic Outer Continental Shelf to Responsible Development and Secure Alaska's Fair Share of Revenues- The future of our oil and gas industry depends on getting this right and so does the future of many North Slope communities. Alaska's Chukchi and Beaufort seas together could hold more than 22 billion barrels of oil and 100 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. The successful development of these reserves is key to the long-term viability of the Trans-Alaska Oil Pipeline and the future of the Alaska natural gas pipeline. [ScottMcAdams.org, accessed 10/20/10]

McAdams Favors A Renewable Energy Fund That Would Boost The Economy And Create Thousands Of Jobs In Alaska. According to McAdams' campaign website:

Scott will push to dedicate the federal ANWR revenues and more than half of the federal OCS revenues to a new Renewable Energy Permanent Fund for America. A 2008 Congressional report estimated ANWR development could generate more than $59 billion in federal revenues. Assuming a 5 percent real rate of return annually, the Fund could one day provide over $2.9 billion a year for renewable energy investment. This does not even include potential federal revenues from gas development in ANWR or federal revenues from OCS development.

Not only would this create jobs nationwide through ANWR development, the Fund would create thousands more from renewable energy development. For the past 30 years, we have invented key renewable technologies only to watch other countries take the lead in manufacturing them overseas. From wind turbines to photovoltaic solar panels to compact fluorescents -- all developed in the U.S. and now largely manufactured abroad - we've shot ourselves in the foot over and over again. We can do better. Alaska, in particular, has a unique role to play. Over 2 billion people worldwide don't have access to utility grids. Using our rural communities as a test bed, we can commercialize the technologies, shoring up the future for rural Alaska and creating jobs statewide. [ScottMcAdams.org, accessed 10/20/10, emphasis added]

McAdams: "Oil And Gas Are Going To Continue To Be A Critical Part Of Our Energy Future Until We Are Able To Bridge Into A New Energy Economy." In an interview with the Anchorage Daily News, McAdams said: "There's so many different packages out there, so many different vehicles. I do believe that climate change is real. I do believe that humans have an influence on climate change. But, you know, I also know that every energy realist in this country understands that oil and gas are going to continue to be a critical part of our energy future until we are able to bridge into a new energy economy. There is new oil and gas that comes on line all over the world. The difference is, when we extract in Alaska, when we develop in Alaska, we do it under the highest environmental standards on the planet." [Anchorage Daily News, 9/11/10]

Print