SB 324 Repeals sunset on low carbon fuel standards.

VOTE:NO

Signed into Law

SB 324A Repeals sunset on low carbon fuel standards.

Hows that working out for British Columbia?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/07/15/why-revenue-neutral-isnt-and-other-costs-of-the-bc-tax/

HJR 10 and HJR 11, proposes a constitutional amendment to ‘allow’ carbon taxes, and raise the tax on Oil and Natural Gas and HB 2082 will impose a carbon tax on Fuel suppliers and Utilities. This is just the tip of the iceberg that is heading our way! I can hear that rocket heading skyward! Posted here:
https://oregoncitizenslobby.org/economic-development-land-use/

Here is a Commentary that states the obvious, Main Stream Media will not listen to an opposite view on Climate Change. The science is settled!

The Climate Con Goes On by Paul Driessen

HB 2450 is the House version of SB324 . This bill will unduly affect rural Oregonians placing an excessive burden on the very people who already provide the food and shelter required by metro areas. Please represent your district in this matter, and actively oppose this measure.

===========================

SB 324-A Has NO sunset, NO time limit, NO guarantees the carbon standard will even do what it is supposed to do! After six years, NO Carbon Standard is available and the cost is speculative. The goal of NO cost increase has been removed and a 4 percent rise in cost of fuel is now acceptable.

There are NO alternative fuels the Oil suppliers can provide that will meet carbon standards and credits will have to be traded for those that can not comply. Is this not the objective, Carbon Trading? There is an Emergency Clause that will not allow Oregon Citizens to bring this to the vote of the people. How is this an emergency when this has sat around for six years, with NO results and NO true timetable, as the dates and objectives keep changing at the whim of the DEQ. They do not even have to follow any rules, if they disagree with their findings.

SB 324 A removed “[(d) ‘PADD 5 region’ means the Petroleum Administration for Defense District 5 states of Arizona, Nevada, Oregon and Washington.] .

Will this put Oregon at a disadvantage if there are no comparison required?

Also removed [(d) The commission shall provide exemptions and deferrals as necessary to mitigate the costs of complying with the low carbon fuel standards upon a finding by the commission that the 12-month rolling weighted average price of gasoline or diesel in Oregon is not competitive with the 12-month rolling weighted average price in the PADD 5 region.]”

No exemptions, does this mean only carbon trades allowed?

The amendments remove “[(d) ‘PADD 5 region’ means the Petroleum Administration for Defense District 5 states of Arizona, Nevada, Oregon and Washington.]

reduces the average amount of greenhouse gas emissions by 2025 or later if they decide that date will not work.

removes [compressed] natural gas, adds liquefied petroleum gas.

Removes Exemptions for [liquefied petroleum gas and other alternative] fuels.

Allows Carbon trading for those that can not comply to the standards.

Removes (d) The anticipated effects of the December 31, 2015, repeal of sections 6 and 7 of this 2009 Act on the availability of low carbon fuels and the development of biofuels production facilities and electric vehicle infrastructure in Oregon.]

========================

Senate Committee On Environment and Natural Resources

Follow this Committee: e-Subscribe Email |

Meeting Details 2/2/2015 3:00 PM, HR C

requires suspension of compliance with low carbon fuel
standards set in 2009 of 10 % carbon reduction in Oregon fuels over the course of a decade if the cost of compliance would exceed four per cent of projected average annual cost of gasoline or diesel in Oregon. Would allow compliance upon certain findings.

This is Government imposing a failed policy on the Scare that the planet is warming because of the use of Carbon based fuel by humans is causing the climate to change. Carbon does not lead but follows temperature. Temperature has remained steady for the last 16 years, with no increase even though more Carbon has been released. The Climate models used in 2009 did not predict this pause, but instead made claims of impending doom of Polar Bears, no glaciers would be left, and the sea would rise and engulf Islands and low areas on the coasts. None of this has happened!

SB 324 removes the Sunset from ORS 754 2009, without including a new Sunset which leaves the door open till that magical four percent figure is found!

SECTION 2. Section 6, chapter 754, Oregon Laws 2009, is amended to read: incremental cost of compliance with the low carbon fuel standards during the first compliance year will not exceed four percent of the projected average annual retail price of gasoline or diesel in Oregon.

Consumer cost safety net is removed: ‘[(d) The commission shall provide exemptions and deferrals as necessary to mitigate the costs of complying with the low carbon fuel standards upon a finding by the commission that the 12-month rolling weighted average price of gasoline or diesel in Oregon is not competitive with the 12-month rolling weighted average price in the PADD 5 region.]”

Oregon is considering using the costly and conteasted Carbon Fuel Standards policy of California and British Columbia.
Why would it be any different in Oregon. Only two others are mandating highe transportation fuel costs, could there be a reason?

No tags for this post.

SB 324 Repeals sunset on low carbon fuel standards.

What’s the buzz?

How to find a bill or agenda