Intro about ace rule
-history
-intentions
The Affordable Clean Energy Rule (ACE Rule) is a new plan for clean energy standards in the United States. It was proposed in August of 2018 with intentions to replace the 2015 Clean Power Plan (CPP). The ACE rule’s principal claim is to keep energy affordable and promote American energy dominance. This is predominantly achieved by reduction of compliance costs as well as giving states flexibility to create their own plan for energy production. While these may sound great in theory, there are much better options for an energy policy that fits America’s current and future needs. An energy policy that acknowledges the centrality of energy to modern life and focuses scientific and corporate attention on developing less destructive forms of energy is desperately needed.
B1 critiquing ace rule
Renewable energy is the key to fighting climate change. Continuing to promote the use fossil fuels is no longer an option without extreme consequences. The most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change identified “with high confidence” severe risks from climate change, including disruptions to human health, food and water systems, infrastructure, and natural ecosystems.
B2 offer an overview of my policy idea/something that would be better than the ace rule
The goal of an innovative, current, and successful clean energy policy should be to have the new technology of renewable energy drive out the old technology of fossil fuels. It’s been done before: tapes replaced records, CDs replaced tapes, and MP3s replaced CDs. Cars replaced horses and cell phones replaced landlines—and someday, the electric car will replace the internal combustion engine. There are many things a policy needs to do to achieve these results. They are as follows: putting a price on carbon, requiring a percentage of each states power supply to be renewable energy, using “market-based incentives and regulations for investment in low carbon technologies”, as well as dedicating more of the research budget to renewable energy sources and climate change.
However, this provides organizations the incentives to innovate and develop new ways of operating. Subsidies and tax credits can be used to promote and discourage certain behaviors. A good example of this is the market place of home ownership. In 1940, mortgage interest and property were made tax deductible which led to a 18.3% increase in home ownership in 20 years. At the end of the day, certain things such as rules around clean energy must be government enforced. We can not rely on others to ensure that critical resources are maintained in a sustainable way. Incentives for “good behavior” are unfortunately not enough to persuade some to think of the negative impacts of their actions. Therefore, we need to put a price on carbon. Protecting the environment requires rules, laws, and regulations. -this gives organizations the incentives to innovate and develop new ways of operating
“the technology breakthroughs that require the transition to a sustainable economy will be developed by emerging partnerships between an active government, vibrant research establishment, and a fully engaged private sector”
B4 financial
When proposing any kind of policy, the question shoots to money. How are we going to finance clean energy? There are many ways that clean energy is going to make and cost money. The main cost of clean energy right now is the investment in research. While many private companies are making and marketing clean energy, it is not enough on its own. The government needs to reallocate funds from the federal research budget to focus on a renewable, clean energy project. This year, President Trump signed a $1.3 trillion spending package (https://appropriations.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=395158) which is the largest increase since 2009. However, the allocations for Biological and Environmental Research (BER) decreased by 43.0% since last year (https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44888.pdf). The work of Americas scientists and engineers could lead to cost savings, uncover new policy options, and further push the movement from fossil fuels to renewable sources.
B5 benefits
There are also long-term financial benefits of the clean energy movement. Stable energy prices because there are few limiting factors, improved public health, a Harvard University Study estimated the public health effects of only coal cost $74.6 billion per year, and creation of jobs (https://chge.hsph.harvard.edu/files/chge/files/MiningCoalMountingCosts.pdf) as forms of renewable energy are more labor intensive than its fossil fuel counterpart.