July 5, 2009 — The more your read. The more you come to learn and understand. So it goes with viewpoints.

A reader called on Thursday to discuss my recent column about whether we are protecting the environment or our pocketbooks with the proposed energy policy. Discussing the topic made me take another look at the policy that might turn upside down the way we utilize energy.

The Obama Administration is pushing along the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 that was narrowly passed in the House.

The key component is a cap and trade system that is designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent by 2020 and create “green” jobs.

It would put a limit on the amount of pollution industries can output and if they go beyond those limits they would have to purchase pollution permits.

Initially, the bill as it stands would give away 85 percent of the permits. The industries, which are targeted, would not have to pay up front. Which doesn’t make any sense. The long-term intent of the bill is to reduce the emissions and also create a pool of funds that can be used for more “green” energy initiatives.

Those companies that might come under their emission limits could sell their permits to those who over produce gas emissions.

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated the economic impact. It estimates price increases for energy because companies will either have to refit their operations to reduce emissions, costing them more and where will these costs be sent? Their customers will bear cost.

CBO says if the bill passes, the average American family will pay about $680 annually.

This doesn’t incorporate the cost of reduced employment by businesses that cannot afford higher energy prices.

In essence the cap and trade bill will tax citizens through higher energy costs, goods and services. There is no way around it.

While proponents see this as a first step to reducing greenhouse gases and making some headway toward controlling climate change it will cost everyone in the long run. I guess reduction of jobs would mean fewer people using energy to go to and from work, thus reducing emissions. It doesn’t work.

As to the reducing America’s dependence on foreign oil, the cap and trade really has no direct impact other than driving the cost of gasoline, diesel and airplane fuel higher and higher.

It doesn’t launch efforts to discover new forms of fuel. It doesn’t commit to building more nuclear power plants. It shows no signs of providing incentives for more refineries. It only creates a financial trading system similar to Wall Street that gives industries a way out of polluting the atmosphere.

Left unregulated will this cap and trade market turnout like Wall Street with its speculators and complex derivatives.

Last year when gasoline prices hovered and exceeded $4 per gallon, people really began to think about conservation. Instead of making two or three trips around town, people consolidated their errands into one trip. They stayed closer to home when vacation time rolled around.

Taking a bite out of the pocketbook forces everyone to be better stewards of their resources.

I am all for conserving energy. Adjust the thermostat during summer to 78 degrees and 72 in winter. Reduce the extra driving to use less gasoline. We can all do our part, but without higher prices of energy and definitely without a federal machine that will make energy cost everyone more.

Government should be about helping its citizens remove the obstacles in front of them so they can fulfill their lives and enjoy the pursuit of happiness and freedom.

Is cap and trade really worth it? At this point I think not.

Will we have to endure it? It looks likely if Democrats get their way in the Senate. Be prepared for a dramatic change in the way we utilize energy. Life will never be the same if this bill is signed into law.

It is time to rethink this bill and the impact it will have on Americans.