|
Ted Lieu on Energy & Oil
|
|
Reduce greenhouse gas emissions; end fracking
[Lieu's State Senate record]:- AB 32, the landmark Global Warming Solutions Act that created a statewide greenhouse gas limit that would reduce emission by 25% by 2020. (Coauthor, Chapter 488, Statutes of 2006)
- SB 1066 resulted in more than
$3 million in local grants for climate change adaptation to cities such as Los Angeles and Hermosa Beach and organizations such as Heal the Bay. (Author, Chapter 611, Statutes of 2012)
- AB 236 prioritized the purchase of fuel-efficient state fleet cars
and required alternative fuel capable vehicles to actually use alternative fuels. (Author, Chapter 593, Statutes of 2007)
Ted Lieu's environmental priorities: - Reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S.
- Enact a moratorium on all well
stimulation including fracking and acidizing both on-shore and off-shore in California.
- Increase and expand renewable energy requirements for utilities as well as increased and expanded incentives for increased development in renewable energy.
Source: 2014 California House campaign website, TedLieu.com
, Oct 10, 2014
Regulate greenhouse gas; no Keystone & no offshore drilling
Q: Do you support building the Keystone XL pipeline?A: No.
Q: Do you support reducing restrictions on offshore energy production?
A: No.
Q: Do you believe that human activity is contributing to climate change?
A: Yes.
Q:
Do you support the federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions?
A: Yes. I believe the federal government should set greenhouse gas reduction goals. This is working in California not just for carbon emissions, but also for renewables and efficiency.
I was proud to support California's landmark renewable portfolio standard, as well as its most recent increase to 33% by 2020.
As a Member of Congress, I will continue to champion policies that discourage fossil fuel use and encourage renewables and efficiency. I would also reintroduce the Waxman-Markey bill to tackle climate change.
Source: VoteSmart 2014 Cal. Congressional Political Courage Test
, Aug 30, 2014
Slow down fracking until scientific study is completed
Excerpts from Legislative Counsel's Digest:- This bill would require, by 2015, an independent scientific study on well stimulation treatments, including acid well stimulation & hydraulic fracturing.
- Regulates disposition of well
stimulation fluids.
- The bill requires a permit prior to performing a well stimulation treatment.
- Requires a supplier claiming trade secret protection for the chemical composition of additives used in a well stimulation treatment to disclose the
composition to the division.
Status:Passed House, 54-20-4; passed Senate 29-8-2; signed by Gov.Brown, 9/20/2013OnTheIssues Explanation: "Fracking" extracts more oil and gas from otherwise non-productive wells. The
controversy includes that fracking causes earthquakes (hence the "scientific study"), as well as issues about disposal of the large volumes of potentially toxic liquids used. This bill slows the implementation of fracking. (Ted Lieu voted YEA).
Source: California legislative voting records: SB 4
, Sep 11, 2013
Cut greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020
California Proposition 23, the Suspension of AB 32 (2010)- Proposition 23, which would have suspended AB 32, the "Global Warming Act of 2006," was on the Nov. 2, 2010 ballot in California as an initiated state statute, where it was defeated.
-
AB 32 was passed by the California State Legislature and signed by Arnold Schwarzenegger.
- AB 32 required that greenhouse gas emission levels in the state be cut to 1990 levels by 2020.
- In their campaigns for and against Proposition 23, supporters
and opponents each adopted nicknames for the measure clarifying their respective views of it. Supporters called Proposition 23 the California Jobs Initiative, and opponents called it the Dirty Energy Proposition. Supporters of the measure filed a
lawsuit that resulted in a change to the measure's title and summary.
- Legislative outcome:
- AB 32 passed Senate 23-14-3 on 8/30/06; passed House 47-32-0 on 8/31/06; Rep. Ted Lieu voted AYE; approved by Gov. Schwarzenegger, 9/27/06
Source: Ballotpedia.org on California ballot measure voting records
, Sep 27, 2006
Voted YES on banning offshore oil drilling in Gulf of Mexico.
Lieu voted YEA Interior & Environment Agencies Appropriations
Congressional Summary: House amendment to H.R. 5538, the Interior & Environment Agencies Appropriations bill for FY 2017. This amendment would prohibit funds to be used to research, investigate, or study offshore drilling in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico Planning Area of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).
Heritage Foundation recommends voting NO: (7/13/2016): The Gulf of Mexico continues to be a very important asset for our energy future and it continues to produce significant amounts of oil and natural gas. Yet the Eastern Gulf of Mexico has not participated to this point despite its significant potential. A 2014 Heritage Foundation report said: "Excessive regulations and bureaucratic inefficiencies have stymied oil production and prevented the full effects of the energy boom." This amendment would block any potential progress that could take place by preventing the necessary work that would need to be prepared in the East Gulf for potential lease sales and eventual
production.
Sierra Club recommends voting YES: (1/12/1974): The Sierra Club believes that no offshore petroleum exploration should occur unless and until the following conditions are met:
- Strengthen the Coastal Zone Management System.
- Lease sales should be prohibited in areas that possess:
- High seismic activity
- Fragile or unstable geological structures
- Proximity to particularly diverse or productive marine ecosystems, or marine sanctuaries
- Where visual impact of offshore structures would significantly reduce aesthetic values
- Where the risks are unusually high.
- Petroleum exploration and production must be subject to automatic, heavy fines for all oil spills regardless of cause.
- The Sierra Club opposes leasing of lands beyond 200 meters depth until international agreements [define] ownership of sea floor resources.
Legislative outcome: Failed House 185 to 243 (no Senate vote).
Source: Supreme Court case 16-H5538B argued on Jul 13, 2016
50% clean and carbon free electricity by 2030.
Lieu co-sponsored H.Res.637/S.Res.386
Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States should establish a national goal of more than 50 percent clean and carbon free electricity by 2030 for the purposes of avoiding the worst impacts of climate change, growing our economy, increasing our shared prosperity, improving public health, and preserving our national security.
- Whereas failing to act on climate change will have a devastating impact on our Nation's economy, costing us billions of dollars in lost GDP;
- Whereas extreme weather, intensified by climate change, has already cost taxpayers billions of dollars each year in recovery efforts, and this will only continue if climate change is left unaddressed;
- Whereas climate change will have devastating public health implications, including increased asthma attacks and exacerbation of other respiratory diseases, especially in vulnerable populations;
-
Whereas inaction on climate change will disproportionately impact communities of color and exacerbate existing economic inequalities;
- Whereas the transition to a clean energy economy is feasible with existing technology;
- Whereas the transition to clean energy will create millions of jobs and will increase our country's GDP and increase disposable household income;
Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States should--- Establish a national goal of more than 50 percent clean and carbon free electricity by 2030; and
- Enact legislation to accelerate the transition to clean energy to meet this goal.
Source: Resolution for 50% Carbon-Free Electricity by 2030 16-HRes637 on Mar 3, 2016
Green New Deal: 10-year national mobilization.
Lieu co-sponsored the Resolution on Green New Deal
This resolution calls for the creation of a Green New Deal with the goals of:
- achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions;
- establishing millions of high-wage jobs and ensuring economic security for all;
- investing in infrastructure and industry;
- securing clean air and water, climate and community resiliency, healthy food, access to nature, and a sustainable environment for all; and
- promoting justice and equality.
The resolution calls for accomplishment of these goals through a 10-year national mobilization effort. The resolution also enumerates the goals and projects of the mobilization effort, including:building smart power grids (i.e., power grids that enable customers to reduce their power use during peak demand periods);upgrading all existing buildings and constructing new buildings to achieve maximum energy and water efficiency;removing pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation and agricultural sectors;
cleaning up existing hazardous waste and abandoned sites;ensuring businesspersons are free from unfair competition; andproviding higher education, high-quality health care, and affordable, safe, and adequate housing to all.Opposing argument from the Cato Institute, 2/24/2019: While reasonable people can disagree on some aspects of the Green New Deal's proposals, one fact is uncontroversial: the US cannot afford them. The Green New Deal would likely cost upwards of $6.6 trillion per year. The federal government should look for cheaper ways to address problems like climate change. Instead of the Green New Deal, the federal government could adopt a revenue??neutral carbon tax to decrease emissions without exacerbating the fiscal imbalance. Economists from across the political spectrum support carbon taxation as the most cost??effective way to address climate change. And a carbon tax would be most effective if uniformly adopted by other countries, too.
Source: H.Res.109/S.Res.59 19-HR0109 on Feb 7, 2019
Page last updated: Jun 16, 2020