ferential between the free credits it receives and the amount
of carbon it emits. This would cost the industry billions of
dollars, lead to a spike in oil prices that would be passed
through to shippers, and contribute to a severe shipping
and economic slowdown, critics warn.
Based on private-sector estimates that, over 10 years, the
cap-and-trade measure would cost polluters in all industries
between $650 billion and $1.3 trillion, freight costs could rise
anywhere from 6 to 10 percent or even higher, analysts say.
“There will be significant increases in fuel costs for all
modes,” says C. Randal (Randy) Mullett, vice president,
public relations and government affairs for Con-way Inc.
And in what some consider an ironic twist, carbon emissions would end up being reduced as an economic contraction leads to fewer goods being shipped and fewer conveyances needed to haul them.
“It is a horrific outcome if you are in the transportation
world,” Burnley says.
G. Tommy Hodges, first vice president for the American
Trucking Associations, said in congressional testimony in
early June that the 2 percent allotment only covers refiners’
emissions at the facility level and ignores emissions
from the burning of petroleum products. This
oversight, Hodges warned, leaves “
downstream users, such as trucking companies, exposed to dramatic and sudden fuel price spikes.” ATA urged
Congress to craft carbon-reduction
laws that treat so-called mobile
sources such as commercial trucks differently from traditional sources.
There is no shortage of groups lining up
against cap and trade. The conservative think tank
Heritage Foundation has called the proposal a “massive
energy tax” that will damage the economy, increase unemployment by about 30 percent, send energy prices soaring,
and do little to actually reduce global warming. Heritage
projects that cap and trade would lower temperatures by
a scant 0.2 degrees by the end of the century.
Global consultant CRA International, in a study commissioned by the National Black Chamber of
Commerce, predicts motor fuel prices—the study doesn’t distinguish between gasoline and diesel fuel—would
climb 59 cents a gallon by 2050 if the current version of
cap and trade becomes law.
Some predict even bigger fuel hikes. The American
Petroleum Institute, the petroleum industry’s trade
group, says the law could increase energy costs by 88
cents a gallon for diesel fuel, 83 cents for jet fuel, and 77
cents for gasoline.
There are international trade risks as well, critics warn.
Heritage says that because India and China will not move in
lockstep with U.S. environmental goals, the legislation may
compel U.S. manufacturers to move operations to countries
with less-stringent environmental laws.
The other side
Supporters of cap and trade argue that such a system is a
more flexible option than a “carbon tax” that would fall
equally on everyone’s head.
Advocates of carbon-reduction mechanisms like cap and
trade say they may trigger higher energy costs in the short
run but will yield significant savings starting as soon as
2020, as businesses and consumers find ways to reduce their
energy consumption.
In a two-year study released in May, the Union of Concerned
Scientists (UCS) said the United States could by 2020 reduce
emissions by 26 percent below current levels, with businesses
and consumers saving $346 billion in that year. The study also
predicted that by 2030, emissions could be slashed by 56 percent, with resultant savings of $465 billion.
Carbon-reduction technologies installed in freight trucks
could produce net savings—savings after efficiency investments and higher energy costs are factored in—of $38 billion by 2030, while keeping emissions constant at 2005 levels, according to the UCS study.
Eric de Place, senior researcher at Sightline Institute, a
Seattle-based think tank that supports the legislation, says
he expects cap and trade’s impact on the freight industry to
be “relatively modest.” He declined to provide specific numbers but said it might end up increasing fuel prices by a “few
nickels” per gallon over the decades.
De Place also cited International Monetary Fund data
showing that if the cap and trade provisions were applied
on a global scale, they would shave only one-half of 1 percent off world economic activity over the next 50 years. He
says concerns that cap and trade will trigger the greatest
transfer of wealth in history are “nutty.”
Asleep at the switch
As for what’s next, opponents of the Waxman-Markey bill
are hoping its most onerous language will be watered down
or stripped away when it reaches the Senate. However, given
Majority Leader Reid’s support of the House bill, Burnley
calls such wishes “naive in the extreme.”
Burnley says the transportation industry fumbled its
opportunity to lobby for its interests as the bill was being
crafted and must now face the consequences.
“The transportation community was asleep at the
switch,” he maintains.
Go to http://www.dcvelocity.com