Last spring in the Oregon Legislature, we were told by the majority party that the “Low Carbon Fuel Standard”, Senate Bill 324, would reduce the “carbon intensity” of Oregon’s road fuels by 10 percent over a decade. The term refers to life-cycle carbon emissions, which include those created by the production and transportation of a fuel, for instance, in addition to its use in your car. We would all “breathe better” and be “proud” of our “clean air” due to “clean fuels”. One of the many arguments we in the minority party made was “at what cost”? From yesterday’s Oregonian Editorial Board we get to some of that argument: “A defining quality of the low-carbon fuel standard is its opacity. It will boost the price of fuel by up to 19 cents of gallon, the state estimates. But that cost will be rolled into the price at the pump, leaving consumers completely in the dark about the fact that they are, in effect, being taxed to support low-carbon fuels. And if they knew this, polling suggests, they wouldn’t like it very much.”
Now that “19 cents per gallon” could also go as high as $1.29 by some estimates. Whatever the amount, we now know that numbers were “made up” to bolster the “clean fuels” idea. Here are the full details from the editorial:
Oregonians should be contacting each of their State Representatives and Senators, the Governor and the Secretary of State, demanding that SB 324 be repealed.
And now as of yesterday, we have even more “clean fuels” coming our way:
Note this from the article: “Sen. Doug Whitsett, a Klamath Falls Republican on the interim environment committee, on Wednesday said he would likely oppose the plan. “It’s a sales tax on fossil fuels is what it is,”.
We have SO many pressing problems in Oregon, one of which my colleagues heard about this week in our Rural Communities, Land Use and Water Committee, and that is: WATER. We are running out of water in Oregon and it’s not about to get better just because it’s raining right now. But water is not a “sexy” issue for either party. Republicans are focused on “terrorism” and Democrats are focused on “minimum wage”. Both should be concerned with whether all of that will be moot should we run out of water.
More to come on this issue.