11/5/2019 |
Morgan |
Folger |
Environment America |
Philadelphia |
Pennsylvania |
Emissions from our cars, buses and trucks have overtaken electric power plants as the number one source of global warming emissions in the United States. Our nation’s top scientists warned in the... read more Emissions from our cars, buses and trucks have overtaken electric power plants as the number one source of global warming emissions in the United States. Our nation’s top scientists warned in the update to the National Climate Assessment that regions across the country are already experiencing the impacts of climate change. If we keep burning fossil fuels, those impacts -- from massive wildfires to extreme weather -- will get worse.
To stave off the worst impacts of global warming, we need to cut carbon pollution as quickly as possible, get clean energy on the grid, and tackle what is now the region’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases -- our transportation system. We use massive amounts of fossil fuels to move people and goods around the region, and that needs to change. We have the technology to replace this dirty system with clean, electric cars, trucks, and buses powered by the sun and the wind.
The Transportation and Climate Initiative is yet another step forward for the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic to reduce the harmful effects of climate change and global warming on our communities. We need to accelerate the transition to zero-emission transportation. With an absence of leadership at the federal level, state and local action is more important than ever.
Program Design Elements
Equity
We support expanding low-carbon and clean mobility options in urban, suburban, and rural communities. We support transparency by reporting the changes in transportation emissions over time, which will allow us to track our progress to reduce global warming pollution throughout the region. The program should limit any impacts it may have on the most vulnerable.
Applicability
Affected Fuels and Emissions
We support the point of regulation laid out in the framework. While traditional fuels like diesel and gasoline account for the majority of transportation emissions, alternative transportation fuels like biofuels also contribute to climate change and should be regulated. Corn-based ethanol, has little to no net greenhouse gas benefit and brings with it other environmental concerns. One model approach is the low-carbon fuel standard adopted by California, which sets targets for lifecycle greenhouse gas emission reductions from transportation fuels. The LCFS has the benefits of being explicitly targeted at reducing carbon pollution and incorporating all fuels, helping to drive not only the adoption of sustainable biofuels, but also the use of electricity and oil-based fuels from sources with lower carbon emissions.
Regulated Entities
We support regulating emissions from Prime Suppliers. Fuel supply infrastructure should also be regulated to ensure that we do not continue to invest in infrastructure for fossil fuels. We need to stop burning virtually all fossil fuels in order to preserve a livable climate, and that means implementing a moratorium on oil and gas pipelines, gas plants, and any other new fossil fuel infrastructure.
Compliance and Enforcement
Emissions reporting requirements
Reporting is an important part of the program to ensure fuel suppliers are held accountable to their emissions. This will also ensure that year over year, the program is truly reducing emissions from transportation fuels.
Monitoring and Verification
A third party verification of emissions reporting will ensure accountability and consistency across the region, rather than relying on each state to verify their own reporting. Emissions should be reported monthly.
Flexibility, Allowance Allocation, and Stringency
Flexibility and Cost Containment
While flexibility allows for a more nimble program, cost-containment provisions should be limited by issuing additional allowances at a set price. Cost-containment can significantly relax the emissions cap and weaken the program’s ability to reduce global warming pollution quickly and effectively. Any cost-containment mechanism should be set at a high trigger price that increases over time.
Auctions and Allocation
We strongly support auctioning 100% of allowances. This will mean most of the proceeds can be allocated directly to climate solutions.
Regional Caps and Allowance Budgets for Each Jurisdiction
We support a strong initial emissions cap and establishing a descending cap on transportation-sector emissions. We recommend that the emissions reduction goals are at the very least consistent with the goals of the Paris Agreement and incorporate all transportation fuels. We also recommend maintaining a “floor price” for allowances to assure a stable flow of revenue into carbon-cutting transportation programs if emissions dip below the level of the cap.
Regional Program Administration
Market Monitoring and Auction Administration
Much like RGGI, Inc., a regional organization is an effective way to administer the program, with representatives from each of the states engaged in the program.
Additional Program Design Elements
Investment of Proceeds
There should be more specific direction for states to invest proceeds. While it is true that every jurisdiction has unique transportation needs, there should be a menu of options they can pick and choose from, and we should limit investments that won’t achieve significant emissions reductions. This program is about addressing global warming pollution, and the proceeds from the program should go to doing just that. Improved air quality and more affordable access to transportation go hand in hand with cleaning up our transportation system. Ultimately we need to decide how to invest these proceeds in a way that will best address climate change. Leaving that decision up to the jurisdictions without specific parameters would result in missed opportunities to cut global warming pollution. TCI must reinvest auction revenue in programs to reduce carbon pollution from the transportation sector and limit any impacts the program may have on the most vulnerable.
We recommend that proceeds from TCI go to projects such as:
Replacement of fossil fuel vehicles with those using electricity or other fuels with zero tailpipe emissions - including vehicles used for personal travel, freight movement and public transportation.
Expansion of public transportation service and infrastructure; incentives for carpooling, vanpooling, and other forms of shared and active transportation; and investment in “transportation demand management” efforts to reduce vehicle travel.
Investments in infrastructure to support low- or zero-carbon transportation, including rail, bike paths, sidewalks, electric vehicle charging, etc.
Incentives/assistance for local governments to encourage accommodating new growth in walkable/compact areas.
Cars account for 60 percent of our transportation pollution. If we make it easier, more affordable, and more pleasant to take a train or bus, to share rides, or to bike or walk, then more of us will choose to travel without a car or even not own a car at all.
We urge you to exclude certain projects from investment. The program should not invest in highway expansion and conventional road maintenance expenditures that have traditionally been paid for through gas taxes and other “user fees” or general revenues. Our car-dependent transportation system is dangerous, harms our communities, and is the nation’s leading source of global warming pollution. Highway expansion fuels additional driving that contributes to climate change, doesn’t solve congestion, and is expensive. Highway expansion can also cause irreparable harm to communities – forcing the relocation of homes and businesses, widening “dead zones” alongside highways, severing street connections for pedestrians and cars, and reducing the city’s base of taxable property.
Complementary Policies
TCI is a step in the right direction to reduce pollution from transportation. Participating jurisdictions should continue to be ambitious and forward-thinking as they shape the future of transportation in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic.
TCI states should adopt complementary policies designed to further reduce transportation emissions and build a more modern, cleaner and healthier transportation system. TCI states should:
Require that all new cars sold after 2035 be electric. To accelerate this transition, states should adopt California’s zero-emission vehicle program, pass legislation expanding EV tax rebates, develop a robust network of charging infrastructure.
Require that all transit and school buses be electric by 2030. To accelerate this transition, states should dedicate new resources and technical assistance to help bus operators go electric.
Set a goal of doubling the number of people who walk, bike or take public transportation by 2030. To get there, states should increase investment in public transportation systems, redesign streets to improve safety and accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists, adopt policies to support transit-oriented development and sustainable living, and shift away from policies that prioritize the type of transportation projects, like new highway construction, that have contributed to the problems with our current system.
In summation, we must do all we can as fast as we can. The longer we wait to cut carbon pollution, the more rapidly the planet will warm, robbing our kids and grandkids of the stable climate that we have taken for granted.
Sincerely,
ConnPIRG
Environment America
Environment Connecticut
Environment Maine
Environment Maryland
Environment Massachusetts
Environment New Jersey
Environment New Hampshire
Environment New York
Environment Rhode Island
Environment Virginia
Maryland PIRG
MassPIRG
New Jersey PIRG
New Hampshire PIRG
PennEnvironment
PennPIRG
Rhode Island PIRG
U.S. PIRG |
USPIRG Environment America TCI 2019 Comments.pdf |
11/5/2019 |
Anne |
Reynolds |
Alliance for Clean Energy New York |
Albany |
New York |
On behalf of the Advanced Energy Economy Institute and its affiliate in New York State, the Alliance for Clean Energy New York, we are writing to express our general support for the Framework for... read more On behalf of the Advanced Energy Economy Institute and its affiliate in New York State, the Alliance for Clean Energy New York, we are writing to express our general support for the Framework for a Draft Regional Policy Proposal that was released on October 1.
Before commenting on individual components of the framework, we would like to underscore the importance, timeliness, and wisdom of a multi-state initiative to tackle greenhouse gas emissions from the transport sector. In New York, the recent passage of the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Action demonstrates that New Yorkers are ready for action on climate change, including measures addressing transportation. In contrast to the electricity sector, emissions from transportation are on the rise and are making up a larger and larger percentage of state and regional greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, it is imperative that states take quick action to cap and gradually reduce these emissions.
Further, just like our states are connected by numerous roads and railways, our policies should be coordinated among states whenever possible, to maximize the beneficial impact and minimize unintended consequences. For this reason, we fully support the initiative for multiple states to work together to align policies.
Some further points:
-- We agree that equity is an important consideration of the Framework for a Draft Regional Policy Proposal. Including this perspective from the outset will lead to a stronger and more sustainable program.
-- At the present time, we believe it is correct to have the program apply to wholesale motor vehicle fuels that are delivered for use into a TCI jurisdiction or removed from storage in a TCI jurisdiction. This scope tackles an important emissions sector in a way that is efficient, targeted, and defined. It is appropriate to tackle the transportation sector independently. The electricity sector is already covered by RGGI and a suite of complementary policies, and the building heating sector, which does need to be addressed more affirmatively, will need a different set of complementary policies than the transportation sector. Further, the alternatives for the transportation sector are commercially available and ready to be phased in over time.
-- The emissions reporting, monitoring, and verification components of the framework also make sense; it is important to include these design elements early in the process.
-- Inclusion of a gradually declining cap is critical to the success of the program. It sends a clear market signal that can stimulate private investment in research, development, and deployment, which will lead to lower costs.
-- Finally, the reinvestment of proceeds is an absolutely critical component of this framework. Proceeds should be reinvested by states into transit and vehicle electrification. The importance of a long-term and enduring dedicated funding source for these initiatives cannot be overstated. It has been crucial to the success and progress on the electricity side in New York and elsewhere, and it needs to be created and maintained for the transportation sector as well.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments in support of the Transportation Climate Initiative Framework for a Draft Regional Policy Proposal. We look forward to TCI continuing to request and reflect public comments as this regional policy evolves.
Respectfully submitted,
Anne Reynolds, Alliance for Clean Energy New York
Matt Stanberry, Advanced Energy Economy Institute
|
- |
11/5/2019 |
Sean |
Burke |
Northeast Clean Energy Council |
Boston |
Massachusetts |
|
Joint Comments on TCI Framework.pdf |
11/5/2019 |
Morgan |
Butler |
Southern Environmental Law Center |
Charlottesville |
Virginia |
Please see the attached comments from the Southern Environmental Law Center on the TCI Framework for a Draft Regional Policy Proposal. Thank you for your consideration of our comments. Please see the attached comments from the Southern Environmental Law Center on the TCI Framework for a Draft Regional Policy Proposal. Thank you for your consideration of our comments. |
2019-11-05 SELC comments on TCI Framework.pdf |
11/5/2019 |
Pete |
O'Connor |
Plug In America |
Newton |
Massachusetts |
Plug In America supports the Draft Framework Proposal of the Transportation and Climate Initiative. We urge states to sign on to the Memorandum of Understanding as soon as possible to accelerate... read more Plug In America supports the Draft Framework Proposal of the Transportation and Climate Initiative. We urge states to sign on to the Memorandum of Understanding as soon as possible to accelerate carbon reductions in the transportation sector.
We support the Equity goal of the Framework. Electric vehicles generally provide significant societal benefits, and not only to their drivers. These societal benefits include reduced emissions of greenhouse gases and criteria air pollutants and downward pressure on electricity rates (including for non-EV owners) through improved utility asset utilization. Additional programs specifically aimed at increasing the benefits to low- and moderate-income populations can include replacement of diesel transit buses with electric buses; battery assurance programs for buyers of used EVs; and, EV car-sharing programs in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.
However, TCI is missing a key opportunity to advance equity through progressive funding of the program. If TCI were to incorporate aviation fuels, it would address a rapidly-growing source of greenhouse gas emissions while ensuring that the revenue flowing into the program is more progressive in its distribution. Higher-income individuals would contribute a larger share of the revenue if aviation fuels were included, and a lower share of the program cost would fall on low-and moderate-income populations.
We strongly encourage participating jurisdictions to include education and outreach programs for transportation electrification and other low-carbon options among their programs for the investment of proceeds. One of the biggest obstacles to transportation electrification is the lack of awareness among consumers of the suitability of the current vehicles and infrastructure for their transportation needs. Increased awareness will lead to increased deployment, which will lead to lower costs of electric vehicles.
With regard to the cap and allowance budgets, Plug In America believes that transportation electrification can continue to accelerate, enabling the TCI jurisdictions to achieve their emission reduction targets. The budgets should be stringent enough to provide some impetus for this technology transition. We recommend that flexibility and cost containment provisions not be so lenient as to negate the benefits of acting promptly to move to low-carbon transportation options.
The allowance auctions will provide one lever for reducing emissions from transportation, as the price mechanism drives companies and individuals to reduce the carbon burden of their transportation options. The investment of proceeds will provide another lever, enhancing the affordability, availability, or accessibility of low-carbon transportation options. We look forward to remaining engaged as the Framework develops into concrete policy. |
- |
11/5/2019 |
Samantha |
Dynowski |
Sierra Club Connecticut |
Hartford |
Connecticut |
Thank you for the opportunity to provide written comments from stakeholders in Connecticut. Thank you for the opportunity to provide written comments from stakeholders in Connecticut. |
CT Stakeholder Response - TCI Draft Regional Policy Proposal.pdf |
11/5/2019 |
Ashley |
Remillard |
Agility Fuel Solutions |
Costa Mesa |
California |
Please see attached for Agility Fuel Solutions' comments on the draft framework. read more Please see attached for Agility Fuel Solutions' comments on the draft framework. |
Agility Fuel Solutions - Comment Letter re TCI Framework (Nov 5 2019).pdf |
11/5/2019 |
Alex |
DePillis |
Vermont Agency of Agriculture, Food & Markets |
Montpelier |
Vermont |
Attached please find the joint comments of the Vermont Agency of Agriculture and the Vermont Clean Cities Coalition (https://vtccc.w3.uvm.edu/).
These comments were developed in... read more Attached please find the joint comments of the Vermont Agency of Agriculture and the Vermont Clean Cities Coalition (https://vtccc.w3.uvm.edu/).
These comments were developed in coordination and consultation with Vermont Fuel Dealers Association, Dairy Farmers of America, Agrimark Coop, Vermont Department of Public Service, and Energy Vision. We have also shared a draft with the Agency of Natural Resources, and had the benefit of their assistance to understand how the eventual rules might work.
|
Comments on framework final.docx |
11/5/2019 |
Georgia |
Murray |
Appalachian Mountain Club |
Gorham |
New Hampshire |
|
11-5-2019_AMC_TCI_comments.pdf |
11/5/2019 |
Tristan |
Taber |
University of Southern Maine |
Hallowell |
Maine |
I live in Hallowell, ME. I care about this because air quality is vital to our health. I support Governor Mills for participating in the regional design process. I hope that the policy design... read more I live in Hallowell, ME. I care about this because air quality is vital to our health. I support Governor Mills for participating in the regional design process. I hope that the policy design reflects the best and latest available science on climate emissions from transportation and will tough on pollution. I request that the policy have a strong component of equity that ensures that low-income, rural, or aging populations are not hurt by this program -- after all an old jalopy is all some people can afford. I think that it is wonderful that this is a bipartisan project. I would love to see increased access to clean public transit in my community. Especially with winter setting upon us, I think it is important to recognize the double impact of diminished air quality from low cloud layers and increased exhaust from individual vehicles. Incentives like rebates for purchasing electric or hybrid vehicles could go a long way to making a better world for ourselves, our children, and grandchildren. |
- |
11/5/2019 |
Lindsey |
Mendelson |
Maryland Sierra Club |
College Park |
Maryland |
The comment attached has been endorsed by 779 members and supporters of the Maryland Sierra Club as of November, 5th 2019. Maryland Sierra Club members and supporters sent this comment along with... read more The comment attached has been endorsed by 779 members and supporters of the Maryland Sierra Club as of November, 5th 2019. Maryland Sierra Club members and supporters sent this comment along with individualized messages directly to Governor Hogan. The comment attached is for the record. |
TCI framework Comment from Maryland Sierra Club members and supporters.pdf |
11/5/2019 |
Maria |
Becker |
Retail fuel station and convenience store |
Parkville |
Maryland |
TCI I’m against this program and I feel that our government should practice what they preach it should start there,then present the numbers. Have All government officials use public transportation... read more TCI I’m against this program and I feel that our government should practice what they preach it should start there,then present the numbers. Have All government officials use public transportation and electric cars. We are not going to fix this with a tax. A tax will just give government more money to mismanage. Plus we contribute less green house gases then China.Europe and America contribute less greenhouse gasses then China ........ FIX CHINA. As a small business I’m still paying a delivery (gas fee) for every delivery I get that started when gas was over $4 per gallon and it was never removed from any delivery and our volume sales of gas didn’t go down. A small percentage of neighborhood people got rid of the gas guzzlers when cash for clunkers happened and that caused a shortage of used parts for older vehicles. I’m done ranting. |
- |
11/5/2019 |
Eric |
DeGesero |
Fuel Merchants Association of New Jersey |
Cranford |
New Jersey |
|
TCI Draft Framework Comments.pdf |
11/5/2019 |
Rajesh |
Saxena |
252 |
Capitol Heights |
Maryland |
This TCI Plan does not seem to take into account the small businesses that employ thousands of unskilled and skilled workers. It seems they are bent upon killing the crux of small business... read more This TCI Plan does not seem to take into account the small businesses that employ thousands of unskilled and skilled workers. It seems they are bent upon killing the crux of small business community.
They should think of stopping issuance of new business licenses to big gas station companies like WAWA, Royal Farms, Seven Elevens who are just busy opening new gas stations like mushrooms in the name of development and counties are helping them without keeping anything like what TCI is trying to achieve.
I know at least five big gas stations having come up in one single zip code 20743 while at least 4 more are about to come. a curvy will reveal there are not only one but two or three stations on every corner of each road. Stop supporting big companies and help sustain the existing businesses. |
- |
11/5/2019 |
Sam |
Wade |
Coalition for Renewable Natural Gas |
Sacramento |
California |
Please see our attached comment letter. Please see our attached comment letter. |
191105 RNGC Comments on TCI Program Design Framework.pdf |
11/5/2019 |
Barbara |
Kiss |
General Motors |
Detroit |
Michigan |
|
TCI_GMComment_FINAL 1.pdf |
11/5/2019 |
RAVINDER |
ANAND |
252 |
Upper Marlboro |
Maryland |
I am opposed to the TCI plan as outlined I am opposed to the TCI plan as outlined |
- |
11/5/2019 |
Jenifer |
Bosco |
National Consumer Law Center |
Boston |
Massachusetts |
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the TCI Framework for a Draft Regional Policy Proposal. The National Consumer Law Center (NCLC) is a non-profit organization that works for economic... read more Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the TCI Framework for a Draft Regional Policy Proposal. The National Consumer Law Center (NCLC) is a non-profit organization that works for economic justice for low-income and other disadvantaged people in the U.S. through policy analysis and advocacy, publications, litigation, and training. NCLC submits these comments on behalf of our low-income clients. Our comments focus on equity issues, program design, and other elements that may directly affect low-income consumers. Please see attached comments, in PDF format. |
TCI Comments 11 05 2019 NCLC.pdf |
11/5/2019 |
Ted |
Harris |
Pennsylvania Petroleum Association |
Harrisburg |
Pennsylvania |
The Pennsylvania Petroleum Association represents over 400 companies who operate in the petroleum industry throughout the state. Our association opposes the Transportation Climate Initiative which... read more The Pennsylvania Petroleum Association represents over 400 companies who operate in the petroleum industry throughout the state. Our association opposes the Transportation Climate Initiative which would create an upstream tax for Pennsylvania motorists who already pay the highest gasoline taxes in the country. Independent motor fuel marketers who employee tens of thousands of jobs in Pennsylvania will be forced to operate in a marketplace that is purposely designed to put them out of business.
The Transportation Climate Initiative does not appear to benefit all Pennsylvanians the same way. Fixed and low-income residents will be forced to pay higher prices at the pump. They are also less likely afford an electric vehicle regardless of the potential subsidies that could be available to them. The large number of residents who live in the rural communicates across the state will not be able to benefit from public transportation efficiencies in the same way as those who live in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and other populated areas.
Our membership and industry support a cleaner environment. We welcome the opportunity to work with the Georgetown Climate Center, policy makers, and other stakeholders to achieve this goal. We however do not support the current version of the Framework for a Draft Regional Policy Proposal. We ask that more consideration is taken before potentially introducing a policy that is unfair and has massive ramifications for our membership, citizens, and economy.
|
- |
11/5/2019 |
Eben |
Bein |
Our Climate |
Cambridge |
Massachusetts |
Dear TCI Team,
Our Climate is so grateful for your hard work to expand regional carbon pricing to a new sector of the economy and to do so in an inclusive, collaborative,... read more Dear TCI Team,
Our Climate is so grateful for your hard work to expand regional carbon pricing to a new sector of the economy and to do so in an inclusive, collaborative, bipartisan manner. On the whole, we stand by the comments submitted by the larger Massachusetts Campaign for a Clean Energy Future, particularly their two fundamental values that a carbon price must be science-based and equitable. However, we’d like to note several additional areas of concern:
1. Both the current TCI draft and the Massachusetts campaign document refer to RGGI as an effective precedent to emulate in several ways. We would like to reiterate that, for all the revenue RGGI has generated, we have yet to find a single economist who argues that the RGGI price ($5.20/ton at the Sept 2019 auction) has been high enough to drive the emission reductions needed to mitigate the climate crisis. This argument is further spelled out in this article from Vox <https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/2/28/14741384/rggi-explained>
When it comes to setting a cap, we think TCI should set an aggressive maximum of carbon neutrality by 2050, with interim targets of 45% emission reductions by 2030 that all participating states must adhere to. States can then individually choose to be more ambitious if they wish, but we must provide states where industry is strong the legal mandate to fight the climate crisis.
We are also very concerned about the language around “cap flexibility” and “set asides.” A responsible system must plan for what history has taught us--that industry will fight tooth and nail to dodge its financial responsibilities. The MA campaign critiques on limiting cap flexibility and banking of permits are correct but don’t go far enough. In a climate emergency, we should not allow for flexibility, set asides, or banking, period. Industry must not be given wiggle room.
2. In MA, we are very proud of the design of H.2810 which uniquely proposes redistribution of 70% of its funds directly to families to financially equip them to make greener decisions. These rebates are weighted by income to ensure financial protections for the low-income communities most affected by climate change. This is the only carbon pricing bill to my knowledge that has received explicit support from Environmental Justice organizations in MA, and we must consider whether a progressive rebate structure is possible in TCI to ensure that no family is left in a difficult situation.
Meanwhile, our team in New York is quite concerned that New York Renews Coalition which just passed the CLCPA and is designing the CCIA, will face similar complications to MA. The careful work to build relationships with EJ communities for our state level prices does not seem to be transferring to the TCI process. This is partially why NY’s participation in TCI is currently tenuous.
In my previous commentary, I mentioned the concerns of our partners at the Climate Justice Alliance. Since that time, they have released another set of criticisms on use of Cap and Invest as a structure <https://climatejusticealliance.org/climate-justice-alliance-disappointed-disingenuous-policy-design-principles-proposed-transportation-climate-initiative-tci/>. TCI must provide specific allowances and guidelines for the equitable use of funds that it invests and will give local Green Justice communities the power to design a way to use those resources that meets their needs as they see them, not as the TCI administrators perceive them.
Thank you so much,
Our Climate
|
- |