The op-ed “Pa. communities should be allowed to choose clean energy” (April 7, TribLIVE) neglected to mention just why the United States has led the world in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and fails to mention the costs of burdensome government mandates and mischaracterized legislative proposals.
First, Pennsylvania’s embrace of competitive markets has resulted in the second-largest reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from the power generation space among any state since 2005, and, economywide, Pennsylvania has reduced its emission across all sectors more than all states combined that participate in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. In Pennsylvania, the private sector is deploying billions of dollars into low-and zero-carbon energy technology every year. Empowering businesses and individuals to choose the energy resource that makes the best sense for them will result in faster and more cost-effective environmental progress.
Second, bills to preserve this ability pending in the Legislature ensure consumers continue to have energy options. These policies will ensure that property owners will have access to install the energy resource that fits their needs.
Finally, according to a study conducted by ICF, banning natural gas use in homes would increase households’ annual costs by nearly 50% while only reducing overall emissions by 1%. Such a mandate also would add as much as $15,000 to the cost of building a new home.
Inflation is eroding the paychecks of Pennsylvania families, hurting low-income families the most. Innovation and competitive markets — not costly government red tape and energy taxes — are more effective approaches to energy policy.
Kevin Sunday
Harrisburg
Kevin Sunday is director of government affairs for the Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry.