Your Dec. 6 editorial correctly stated that “there is no low-cost option when it comes to climate change.” Many changes are needed. Some will be costly.

The Maine Climate Council considered which programs to recommend to our Legislature and governor to activate. We trust they will move appropriately to have our state meet its stated goals of reducing emissions 45 percent by 2030 and 80 percent by 2050.

Sen. Angus King, in a congratulatory speech for unveiling of the Climate Council’s plan, noted that Maine on its own cannot do it all. He’s right. Maine contributes 0.3 percent of the nation’s emissions, while the nation’s emissions are 15 percent of the global total. It will take federal action to encourage domestic and international emissions reductions. Sen. King said he’s ready for that.

So, what plan should he take to the Senate to make the greatest reduction in national emissions, and to incentivize international action? The answer is cash-back carbon pricing. That’s the advice of 3,589 U.S. economists, the World Bank and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

The Energy Innovation Act does that and has already been introduced in Congress on a bipartisan basis. Independent studies show that this cash-back policy will predominantly benefit low- and middle-income Americans and spur economic growth across income levels. It will also save lives from pollution-related respiratory illnesses, and climate-related extreme weather events.

Rep. Chellie Pingree is a co-sponsor of that proposal, Rep. Jared Golden understands it and Sen. Susan Collins made a similar proposal in 2009. Please, Sen. King, take the lead now.

Peter Garrett

Copy the Story Link

Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or login first for digital access. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.

filed under: