CCL Future Policy Objectives

Many thanks, Tony. 

Since I am part of the energy policy wonk tribe,  this post inspired me to contact a few of my former colleagues at National Renewable Energy Lab who have joined CCL but are not particularly active. I'm encouraging them to fill out the form, and we may also convene a discussion to brainstorm highest priority federal climate policy. This will be one way I heed Katherine Hayhoe's call to talk about climate change more often.

Hello Tony:  I was excited when I saw your post above.  I have wanted CCL to broaden its focus for a long time, and have some suggestions that have been gathering dust on the shelf.  Below is one that I posted in November 2019.  Except for the HR number I believe it is totally relevant today.  

The Next Act

Comment below was first posted in forums on the website of the Citizens’ Climate Lobby (CCL) in November 2019.  The town I refer to in the next-to-last paragraph is Bernards Township in NJ.

My somewhat optimistic working assumption is that a system of Carbon Fee and Dividend (CFD) will be enabled by HR 763 or similar legislation in 2021.  Carbon fees and carbon dividends will go live in 2022.

I propose that we in CCL then shift our emphasis from lobbying to education.

Most people will not have followed the progress of the legislation and will know nothing about CFD.  They will react slowly to the price signals produced by the carbon fees, and will contribute little in the early years to progress down the curve of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions.  We need a vigorous plan of outreach and education to produce proactive consumers, who will accelerate the drive down the GHG emission curve.  CCL volunteers should:

• Explain CFD to the consumer and business communities.
• Show consumers how they can project the dividends they will receive over ten or more years.
• Show them how they can project the rising costs of fossil fuels they will consume.
• Suggest how they can reduce consumption of these fuels.
• Point them to professionals who can help, such as energy auditors and home improvement contractors.
• Become the go-to people for anyone seeking information re global warming and what they can do about it.

Many in the business community will be alert and respond rapidly with goods and services that will help consumers consume less fossil fuel.  But not all will do this.  CCL volunteers should reach out to local business people, explain CFD, and discuss potential opportunities.

I estimate that $227 million in dividends will be distributed to the 27,000 residents of my town over the first ten years with CFD.  Knowledge of these funds should stimulate interest in the local business community.

CCL has committed staff and volunteers, and excellent organization and tools like this website.  No one is better positioned to reach out and provide the education and information proposed here.  Let’s begin now and plan how we will do this.

Bill Allen    (908-766-2876)

1. Broad positive messaging for how much better our world will look
2. Improving strengthening climate policy in non partisan way / defending it against ff lobbyists
3. Regional Policy  Advocacy + Implementation:
   1. State Policy advocacy
   2. Public Utilities Commission advocacy (I've heard this is low hanging fruit for local advocacy)
   3. City planning + adoption: this is so interesting, but helping cities create Climate Action Plans that minimize their footprint and improve their costs
4. Business
   1. Industry Group Advocacy through Business Climate Leaders (Chamber of Commerce is bullshit, ClimateVoice?? Speed and Scale, Breakthrough Energy???)
   2. Corporate shareholder advocacy and climate policy adoption (partner with Project Drawdown for corporate sustainability + As You Sow for shareholder advocacy)

So - short and succinct - I think the “principal” work in 2022 will be an extension of what we did this year … if BBB passes – we have an ongoing education and lobbying effort (esp if the GOP takes the house and/or senate) – you can be sure that most GOP will be against a carbon price and will do anything and everything in their power to abolish it  - we will need to attack this …. and if BBB/reconciliation does not pass (or does not have a carbon price) and we revert to a bill like 2307 - it will be CCL BAU … that said - it would be good to have secondary focus areas BUT I do not think our work on a carbon price is done even if BBB passes

--

Hey Tony,

Thank you for your time. 

The Citizens’ Climate Lobby Inclusion volunteers propose that future policymakers consider an amendment to the current carbon pricing and dividend policy to account for the social cost of carbon and create a carbon fund to make investments in community-led decarbonization projects on a local scale. 

Our proposal is as follows:

The carbon fund would be widely available to accept applications from community organizations and individuals to participate in projects that improve adaptation to climate change and reduce carbon emissions in their community. Applications would be reviewed on a census block group level and funds would be distributed according to need established by the CDC’s  2018 US Climate Resilience Toolkit Social Vulnerability Index.

Carbon Fund Requirements

1. Minimum Carbon Price of $62 
2. 35% of the Carbon Fund is returned to states and localities to invest directly into ratepayers (ie. utility companies to reduce electricity bills, programs to reduce the costs of living for low income individuals)
3. 50% of the total carbon fund directly benefits populations in and within ½ mile of vulnerable communities (Faber, 2019)
4. 10% of the fund is allocated to vulnerable communities for resource, technical assistance and other emergency impacts 

I am glad to see that CCL is expanding its focus. I am disappointed in the choice of new policy objectives. 

Our mission is to build political will for a livable world. How can we have a livable world if we are not working to adapt to the impacts of climate change? How can we have a livable world if we are only working on the United States?

I understand that we are trying to pursue policy that has a greater chance of getting bipartisan support, but I was hoping we would be more ambitious. I will support our new policy objectives, but I will also continue to push for action on adaptation to climate change and action on climate change internationally.

Brady ==
Our focus on the US Congress needs to be coupled with policies directed toward international as well as state and local climate actions here in the US.  As a result, I am now working more closely with other climate organizations that are focusing on the wide range of climate actions needed to solve our current challenges. 

I would also like to see us become more direct to the climate deniers who hold public office at federal, state, and local levels.  I realize that we cannot endorse candidates -- but our lack of involvement in the election process is disconcerting.  It would seem that we should be able to directly criticize those who are undermining climate actions (the NRA does this and maintains its nonprofit status).  Case in point - my congressman continues to refuse to acknowledge a need to combat climate change and is just "kicking the can down the street". After 3 years of trying to even slightly budge his position -- I am actively working for his defeat in November as a private citizen outside of CCL.   I have attached the letter to the editor I wrote based n his lack of action -- and I do NOT mention CCL to maintain CCL's nonpartisan approach.  t would be nice to see CCL establish a process to give ratings to legislators based on their climate voting record -- similar to the way this is done by the NRA.   But I doubt that will happen. 

In any case - I am hoping that CCL evolves in these areas -- but until then I will split my time between CCL and other organizations.  We fight nicely with words -- our opponents fight dirty with millions and millions of dollars - at this rate, we may succeed but it will be after most of the damage is already done ... 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Scott. I appreciate CCL's approach and I also think there is a place for other approaches to be taken simultaneously. I'm with you on continuing to support the work of CCL while also being involved in other action on climate change.

Same page Brady -- and though I will continue to support CCL goals and objectives -- I have chosen to be much more involved with state and local climate actions... I am happy to see CCL recognizing the need to broaden the policy approach ... however, currently CCL is still (1) almost 100% directed to US Federal (minimal state or local engagement) and (2) continues to focus on putting a price on carbon ... which is (at this point) an elusive goal -- we may get a price on carbon BUT it will require 100% commitment by the Dems and a climate-friendly GOP -- neither of which exist today (nor do I see them in our immediate future).  As a result, I am now focused on making a difference with concrete actions at the state and local levels. In closing - IMHO we will not see a price on carbon until we are over 2 degrees Celsius ... pretty sad - but that is the current state I am afraid ....