Skip to content

May 18, 2004

<b>JEFFORDS, CARPER BILLS MUCH MORE COSTLY THAN CLEAR SKIES</b><br>EIA study shows Clear Skies better for the environment without harming the economy

WASHINGTON, DC -- According to a new study by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) the Inhofe/Voinovich Clear Skies Act would provide a more economically balanced way of reducing power plant emissions than the Clean Air Planning Act sponsored by Senator Carper, or the Clean Power Act sponsored by Senator Jeffords and cosponsored by Senators Kerry, Clinton, Edwards and fifteen others. The new report examining all three clean air bills shows that the Clear Skies legislation is more likely to achieve significant improvements to the environment while simultaneously balancing economic needs. The other two bills would inflict substantial harm on the economy including significant American job losses according to the EIA report.


“As I’ve said all along, Clear Skies is the most aggressive presidential initiative in history to reduce power plant emissions, and it will reduce emissions faster and less expensively than any other legislation before the Senate,” said Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), Chairman of the Committee on Environment and Public Works. “The President has stated -- and history has proven -- that, with the right policies, environmental protection and economic growth can coexist. This Clear Skies legislation, which will bring significant health benefits to the American people without causing damage to the economy, achieves that important balance. Neither the Clean Air Planning Act nor the Clean Power Act is economically feasible for our nation.”


EIA found that, if the Jeffords Clean Power Act passed, the cumulative cost to real GDP from 2009 - 2025 would be nearly $1 trillion dollars -- thirteen times more expensive than Clear Skies.


Put in terms of a family’s electricity bill, the additional cost of the Jeffords bill would mean paying an extra $305 a year by 2010. The Clear Skies bill, however, would be more cost-effective at only an extra $19 a year.

Put in terms of jobs, the United States coal industry would lose 30,000 jobs in just five years if the Jeffords bill becomes law. Over the next twenty years manufacturing would lose 154,000 jobs. The Clear Skies bill is in stark contrast to those losses under the Jeffords bill; in fact, the report found that coal jobs would remain relatively stable through 2025 under the Clear Skies bill.


Next Article » « Previous Article