Center for the Environment
 |
Launched in 2003, WPC’s Center for the Environment focuses on free-market solutions to environmental issues. It brings balance to the environmental debate and promotes the concept that human progress and prosperity work in a free economy to protect the environment. It is a resource for Northwest residents concerned about the environment and is a clearing-house for academic research from other think tanks and institutions. The Center for the Environmental offers a unique and innovative perspective on environmental policy. Along with Policy Brief, Policy Notes, Legislative Memos, and Opinion Editorials, the Center also issues a regular monthly publication called “Environmental Watch”. |
-
What's New
-
About the Center
-
Events
Environment Publications | Environment Blog
7th Annual Environmental Policy Luncheon & Conference
Click for more information
Featuring Climatologist Pat Michaels
Lunch is preceded by morning panel discussions on environmental policy topics such as free market environmentalism.
Washington Policy Center responds to the Governor's letter to the Washington State Congressional Delegation asking them to support cap and trade legislation
This week Governor Gregoire wrote a letter to members of the Washington State Congressional Delegation asking the members to support pending federal legislation that would establish a cap-and-trade system across the United States. In her letter she writes:
“The United States cannot afford to wait any longer to take comprehensive action to break our dependence on foreign oil while at the same time seizing the opportunity to develop 21st Century energy technologies, create jobs, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and arrest global warming.”
In the letter, the Governor offers up “examples” and “evidence” for why these policies are necessary. However, our research and analysis of the cap-and-trade system proposed in the state of Washington and that system’s experience in Europe, demonstrates that many of the claims and arguments that the Governor provides are misleading or not based in the consensus science.
Todd Myers and Brandon Houskeeper have highlighted the areas of the Governor’s letter that diverge from accepted science or are at odds with experience and environmental economics.
Read the full letter and WPC's responses here
May - June Environmental Watch: King County “EcoConsumer” Advice:
Bad for Consumers and the Environment
Twice a month, the King County EcoConsumer offers advice to those who want to spend a little more on products to help preserve the environment. The advice offered, however, too often strays from scientific and economic reality and replaces dogma with sound advice. This month the Environmental Watch examines the EcoConsumer’s claims about “food miles,” green jobs, protectionism and old growth and finds them lacking. Consumers who actually care about the environment should take a more reasoned look at the products they buy and avoid eco-fads that cost more but do little to help the environment.
Read the May - June Environmental Watch here >>
Todd Myers talks about free market environmentalism with Mike Siegel on Sound Business (KKOL),
April 2009 Environmental Watch: Ratepayers and Taxpayers Pay for Seattle’s Solar Agenda
When President Obama was elected last year, cities began looking at ways to spend the expected stimulus money on “shovel ready” projects in their community. In Seattle’s requests submitted to the US Conference of Mayors, they listed two projects to add solar panels to local projects costing a total of $8.2 million. This month’s Environmental Watch examines those projects and finds that not only were the projects not “shovel ready,” but that in one case the cost estimates were padded and in the other the solar project paid for itself only after 40 years and millions in government subsidies. Worse, internal e-mails show that the top priority appears to be scoring political points rather than actually supporting projects that help the environment. It is a cautionary tale of what happens when government spends money without an eye to the costs and benefits of the projects they advocate.
Read the April 2009 Environmental Watch here >>
Green Bonds - are they worth it?
Today the House Capital Budget Committee will consider HB 2334, asking voters to approve a $3 billion package to fund capital improvement projects that promise increased health, safety and energy efficiency in public facilities.
Supporters of the legislation claim the bonds would be repaid in part from cost savings of improved energy efficiency. In addition, proponents highlight requirements to use performance based contracting to achieve the savings.
Unfortunately, these claims are misleading and could potentially threaten the bond ratings of other investments.
Read Brandon Houskeeper's blog post here
What Washington’s “Green” Schools Tell Us about HB 2334’s $3 Billion Spending Plan
In an effort to promote “green” jobs and to encourage energy savings in schools, universities and public buildings, the legislature is considering HB 2334, which would send a $3 billion bond proposal to voters this fall. The money would fund projects designed to save energy, as well as improve health and safety in public buildings. Supporters claim the bill would create 90,000 new jobs in 2010-11. Funding to repay the bonds would come in part from expected energy savings.
• Projections of energy savings from “green” schools and the energy-saving elements have been
consistently overestimated. In many cases, those elements have increased costs.
• Recent reports and statements from the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, the
Department of Ecology and facilities directors confirm that previous projections have not been met.
• Claims of energy savings are based on apples-to-oranges comparisons of new “green” buildings
compared to hypothetical buildings built to minimum standards or to buildings with an average age of
40 years old.
• Energy saving projects should meet a reasonable estimate of benefits to ensure the state does not spend
$10 to save $1.
Read the whole Legislative Memo here (PDF)
Money (and Green Jobs) for Nothing
Today, Rep. Hans Dunshee will announce his $3 billion spending plan for "creating jobs by funding construction of safety, health and energy-saving improvements to public facilities." The goal is apparently to provide spending similar to the federal "stimulus" package. Since the state budget must be balanced, however, the money must be bonded as future debt to be paid by taxpayers.
If the bill passes the legislature it would go to the public in November.
The sponsor claims that the bill will pay for itself. Half of the energy savings from spending on energy efficiency in public buildings will be placed into an account to pay off the bond. Further, he says that the bill would create 90,000 jobs, although he does not say how long each of those jobs would last or describe the quality of those jobs.
Several questions and challenges come to mind...
WPC Research on "Green" Schools Spurs KING 5 News Investigation
Analysis of data from school districts shows mandate isn't saving the money its proponents promised
WPC's Center for the Environment Director Todd Myers appeared on KING 5 News March 24th in a special 
investigative report on our state's "green" buildings mandate. Lawmakers passed the mandate for one-size-fits-all "green" government building construction standards in 2005 based on numerous promises, including that it would reduce energy costs for state buildings and increase test scores. WPC looked at the data and discovered the top-down mandate has failed to live up to its proponents' promises and in some cases is actually using more energy and costing more than non-green buildings. After reviewing WPC's research, KING 5's Susannah Frame decided to investigate school district claims, resulting in at least one official confirming there are no actual cost savings from these mandates.
Suspending Failed "Green" Building Rules Can Save Schools Millions
2009 Agenda for Effective Environmental Stewardship
Should the State Follow "LEED" of Get Out of the Way?
Cap-and-Trade Could Cost Washington as Many as 18,292 Net Jobs, $5.7 Billion in Personal Income
Economic research institute finds deficiencies in Western Climate Initiative’s analysis of impacts from recommendations
Seattle — Specific proposals that several Western states would implement to comply with a proposed cap-and-trade carbon emissions control pact would destroy jobs and erode income, according to a report co-released by a national economics institute and the Washington Policy Center.
In a thorough review of the claims made by the Western Climate Initiative (WCI), the Beacon Hill Institute (BHI) at Suffolk University identified several flaws made by the seven state consortium, calling into question so-called cost savings ranging between $11.4 billion and $23.5 billion. These flaws render WCI’s projections useless in determining the WCI’s cost to state economies.
The complete study is available online here
You can also learn more at www.beaconhill.org
Read the full Press Release here
Justifying Washington Cap-and-Trade with European Myths and Shoddy Science
March 2009 Evironmental Watch
The State Department of Ecology, led by Director Jay Manning, is making an all-out push to salvage a cap-and-trade proposal designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Washington.What seemed likely last year is now a tough sell, with the economic downturn and the prospect of significant new government costs, making a new regulatory scheme unappealing to most legislators...
Read the March issue of Evironmental Watch here (PDF)
New op-eds from the Center for the Environment
Which Way for Environmentalism: Science or NIMBYs, by Todd Myers, February 2009
The Puget Sound Business Journal published this op-ed on March 6, 2009
Suspending Failed “Green” Building Rules Can Save Schools Millions, by Todd Myers, February 2009
The Spokesman Review published this op-ed on February 28, 2009
The News Tribune published this op-ed on March 3, 2009
Create incentive to cut emissions with carbon price, by Todd Myers, February 2009
The Seattle Times published this op-ed on February 23, 2009
Center for the Environment Annual Legislative Briefing
On February 10th, the Center for the Environment held their annual Environmental Policy briefing on the capitol campus in Olympia.
2009 Agenda for Effective Environmental Stewardship
As legislators and the Governor grapple with the economic challenges in Washington state, it is a good opportunity to reassess our environmental priorities to ensure that we are receiving the most environmental benefit in a way that truly promotes job creation and prosperity. Washington Policy Center’s 2009 Agenda for Effective Environmental Stewardship offers five proposals that prioritize projects with guaranteed environmental benefit, creating personal incentives to reduce greenhouse gases and conserve and harnessing the knowledge of millions of Washington residents who know best how to take steps toward sustainability.
Read the 2009 Agenda for Effective Environmental Stewardship here (PDF)
Is the Growth Management Act Working?
Since passage of the Growth Management Act (GMA) there have been no comprehensive, independent reviews assessing the economic impacts, environmental successes or progress toward the fourteen policy goals of GMA.
Before the Legislature adopts any additional amendments to the GMA, it should consider the following three questions:
1. What are the costs and benefits of the Growth Management Act?
2. How have amendments and Growth Management Hearing Board decisions changed the effectiveness and intent of the Growth Management Act?
3. Should further amendments to the Growth Management Act be approved without a comprehensive independent cost/benefit analysis?
Read the Legislative Memo here (PDF)
is interviewed about Seattle’s plans to become a “solar” city. He points out that these projects, sold as “stimulus”, will most likely be a waste of taxpayer’s money. Future generations will be left with the bill.
The Center for the Environment
Launched in 2003, WPC’s Center for the Environment focuses on free-market solutions to environmental issues. It brings balance to the environmental debate and promotes the concept that human progress and prosperity work in a free economy to protect the environment. It is a resource for Northwest residents concerned about the environment and is a clearing-house for academic research from other think tanks and institutions. The Center for the Environmental offers a unique and innovative perspective on environmental policy. Along with Policy Brief, Policy Notes, Legislative Memos, and Opinion Editorials, the Center also issues a regular monthly 
publication called "Environmental Watch."
Director Todd Myers
Todd Myers is the Director of WPC's Center for the Environment. He formerly served as Director of Communications for the Washington State Department of Natural Resources, and was Director of Public Relations for the Seattle SuperSonics and Director of Public Affairs for the Seattle Mariners. He has a Masters Degree from the University of Washington and has been with the Policy Center since 2004.
, Policy Analyst
 |
Brandon Houskeeper joined the Washington Policy Center in the fall of 2007 as the Director of WashingtonVotes.org and as a general policy analyst providing research and support on a variety of issues. Before joining the WPC, Brandon served as the Government Affairs Director for a professional home builders association bringing with him over six years of experience and understanding of the legislative process at the state and local level. Brandon earned his bachelor’s degree in Political Science from the University of Washington. |
Contact Information
For questions or for more information from the Center for the Environment please e-mail tmyers@washingtonpolicy.org or bhouskeeper@washingtonpolicy.org.
Check back often for more events
7th Annual Environmental Policy Luncheon & Conference
Click for more information
Featuring Climatologist Pat Michaels
Lunch is preceded by morning panel discussions on environmental policy topics such as free market environmentalism.
Center for the Environment
Annual Luncheon
On July 15th, WPC was pleased to have acclaimed author as our keynote speaker. Mr. Lomborg’s best sellers include Cool It and The Skeptical Environmentalist. He was named one of the 100 most influential people in the world by Time Magazine in 2004 and one of the "50 people who could save the planet" by the UK Guardian in 2008. The Daily Telegraph called The Skeptical Environmentalist "... probably the most important book on the environment ever written." In 2004 he started the Copenhagen Consensus Center, a conference of Nobel prize winning economists who come together to prioritize the best solutions for the world's greatest challenges.
More info, audio and video from the conference>>
