As the U.S. Congress and Administration continue negotiations on the funding of the government for the remainder of this fiscal year, which ends September 30, 2011, we must remain cautious of the funding cuts made by the House of Representatives in their version of the budget. Lead by newly elected Republican members, the House drastically reduced spending for science, education and the environment with serious implications for the American future. Passed by the House on February 19, 2011 the bill (House Resolution 1) has been sent to the Senate for its action.
Addressing climate change, the House virtually eliminated all funding for climate research and prohibits the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources such as power plants, factories and refineries.
Additionally, the budget passed by the House will(1):
- Prohibit the EPA from collecting information about the sources and amounts of global warming pollution and making this information available to the public.
- Prohibit the EPA from setting limits on global warming pollution from power plants, factories and refineries, among the most significant sources of greenhouse gas pollution in the United States.
- Prevent the United States from contributing to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the international body tasked with reviewing the most recent scientific and technical information on climate change.
- Eliminate funding for the development of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Climate Service — a program to efficiently supply scientific data and information about climate change and its impacts.
- Reduce or eliminate funding for dozens of clean energy and climate change-related programs across government agencies.
- Eliminate or reduce sources of international climate finance funding, inhibiting the U.S.’s ability to honor its international climate commitments.
In the Department of Energy a $2 billion reduction targets the agencies and offices with the most innovative clean energy research programs, including(2):
- The agency which would be hardest hit would be the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E), which funds both the riskiest and most transformative, early-stage energy innovation projects, and would lose a staggering 75% of its budget under H.R. 1.
- The Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), which was responsible for roughly 34% of the DOE’s energy innovation investments in 2010, would lose 35% of its FY10 budget.
- The Office of Science, which funds critical early-stage energy innovation research, would see a 20% decline in its budget. Office of Science devoted 20% of its 2010 budget to energy innovation funding, while supporting additional fundamental physical science research.
- The Office of Nuclear Energy, which devoted 41% of its funds to energy innovation projects in 2010, would lose 23% of its budget.
- Meanwhile, the Office of Fossil Energy would see an 11% reduction in its budget. 43% of the office’s 2010 budget was devoted to energy innovation efforts.
If enacted these reductions will:
- Hasten climate change and ensure that it is more severe.
- Result in a long-term, negative economic impact upon the U.S. that will soon be far greater than the cost savings claimed by the House Republicans. The economic, public health, and social impacts upon other nations will be immeasurable.
- Result in increased unemployment as a consequence of a reduced economy and the loss of job opportunities in clean energy.
- Hasten the consumption of our fossil fuels. There appears to be universal agreement that we are already past “Peak Oil” with total oil production continuing to decline in the future. Consequently, energy prices will continue to increase and depress our economy; our energy prices and economy will become increasingly sensitive to foreign events, such as the current situation in Libya; and products such as plastics and fertilizer which are manufactured from fossil fuels will become more expensive and scarcer. Oil is indeed already “too valuable to burn”.
While attempting to curry political gains, the House has done essentially nothing to reduce the debt or aid the economy. To the contrary, by cutting $62 billion reduction from only the non-defense/non-security discretionary sector of the budget and including amendments that alter policy, not spending, and completely avoiding the hard financial choices that must be made the House has produced a bill that is counter-productive to their avowed objectives. While reducing the total budget only one-sixteenth of one percent, the highly selective budget cuts and policy changes will ensure higher energy prices, increase our dependence upon foreign oil, reduce job opportunities, and harm public health. Additionally the House bill contains reductions of funding for education that negatively impact our children, who will become the generation of scientists, engineers and physicians that must deal with the consequences of climate change.
By passing this budget the U.S. House of Representatives has done us a disservice, and if H.R. 1 is enacted as the final bill Congress will have done a disservice to the future generations of our world.
_______________________
