Skip to main content

Climate Change Regulations on the Economy


Climate Change Regulations on the Economy
We are starting to see the effects of climate change all around the globe, but Colorado legislature is
starting to take focus of it. Some of the various negative effects that will occur because of the changing
climate in Colorado include the decline in water availability for agricultural purposes and a higher risk
of wildfires. However, there are legislatures in Colorado that avoid drafting laws that deal with climate
change because this state relies heavily on the oil and gas industry for tax revenue. 
Scientists and engineers have come up with solutions to reduce our carbon footprint in ways
such as electric vehicles or wind and solar energy efficient inventions. The problem is these are
expensive. I would love to be driving a Tesla instead of my 2005 Honda Pilot, but I don’t have the
money for that, same with most Americans. The same goes for healthier food options, they are more
costly. Farmers markets are better for the environment because instead of trucks traveling across the
country to deliver food to grocery stores, local vendors can just drive across the street and set up stands.
However, fresh food is higher priced than canned foods and other unhealthy choices, and it also loses
its viridity faster, contributing to food waste in America. Climate change is a ‘rich person's problem’
because most Americans are worried about paying off their mortgages or utility bills, not ways they
impact the earth. I believe global warming should be a priority for our government, but it seems
unrealistic to assume Americans are going to drastically change their ways unless someone comes up
with a cheaper mass produced invention to reduce carbon emissions. We can’t go back in time to a
world where there’s no cars on the road, so let's make more affordable electric cars. Or find a way to
store solar energy. Everybody should be focusing on solutions that would fit our current society
because most Americans won’t go out of their way to save the environment. 
Democratic lawmakers in Colorado are pushing for discussion about climate change this session.
Their current solution is to enforce stricter regulations for oil and gas sites, but that could affect
Colorado’s revenue significantly. The Denver Post states that oil and gas in Colorado generates over
$1 billion in taxes each year and account “for over 89,000 direct and indirect jobs.” I reiterate that
Colorado needs to come up with a cost effective solution that doesn’t contribute to such a dramatic
loss in jobs if stricter laws were enforced. Democratic legislatures at the state level are trying to push
power toward local government authorities to decide what the future of drilling operations look like
for their town. “Republicans want to roll back the government’s authority to restrict the actions of
private citizens and landowners, while Democrats want to update the law’s language and protections
to better account for new scientific findings regarding climate change” (Straayer, 275). Here is another
example of a common clash between Democrats and Republicans concerning a problem that we all
face. Proposition 112 “which sought to keep 2,500 feet between new oil and gas operations and any
home in Colorado” was voted down 57% to 43% (Jaffe, 2018). However, “the oil and gas industry spent
more than $40 million to oppose 112” (Colorado Sun, 2018). The industry is nervous because as
soon as laws shift towards limiting oil and gas production, there is no turning back. Lawmakers are
going to try next year to get it passed and now that climate change has become more of a topic of
conversation, Democrats have a higher chance. Proposition 112 is essentially a ban on the oil industry
because if it passed, “about 85% of the state-owned and private land in Colorado would be off limits
to drill rigs...the measure would put about 34,000 oil and gas industry jobs at risk” (Jaffe, 2018).
That is a significant amount of jobs that Colorado cannot afford to lose, especially in smaller towns
such as Erie, Broomfield, and Lafayette. Colorado’s Democratic controlled Senate passed a reform
bill back in April of this year that “prioritizes the protection of public safety, health, welfare, and the
environment in the regulation of the oil and gas industry by modifying the oil and gas statutes and
hands more regulatory authority to local governments” (Colorado General Assembly, 2019). Colorado
is unique compared to other states because of its diverse geography that contains multiple open
terrains, a dream for oil and gas companies. Colorado is also home to Weld County, which is not only
the fourth largest oil field in the U.S., but also provides 90% of Colorado’s crude oil production.
“In 2018, oil and gas production contributed $490 million in tax revenue, about 60 percent of overall
tax dollars for Weld”. In other words, a majority of Weld County’s revenue comes from oil, so the
reform bill that was passed in April could work in Weld’s favor if local council chooses not to change
any laws. Although not every city is like Weld in terms of production, there has been a dramatic
increase in oil and gas production in Colorado since 2000. Even though Governor Jared Polis believes
that climate change is an extreme threat, oil and gas production in Colorado has never been higher
(shown below).
This graph should show that however local government decide to handle new restrictions, it could
severely affect Colorado’s revenue in a negative way unless they propose a new solution. 
In theory, climate change should not be a partisan issue because all of us only get this one
planet to live on, yet it is still a politically split matter. Colorado’s political agenda also reflects what
is happening in D.C. and the current administration has halted progress towards a cleaner earth.
Presidents that are concerned about treaties not passing in Congress, can go over the head of the Senate
and sign executive agreements with other countries. The Obama administration used this loophole to
sign the Iran Nuclear Accord an the Paris Climate Agreement (Straayer, 333). However, Obama’s
approach worked during his Presidency, but in effect, cleared a path for President Trump to withdraw
from both of those agreements. Because most Americans turn their heads towards national news,
Trump’s decision pushed those were undecided about whether climate change should be prioritized
over the economy, further back.
The anger that some people feel towards legislation that supports stricter regulations on oil and gas
companies comes from a place of fear. Fear that they will lose their job and that the price of their
primary source of energy will increase undoubtedly. People don’t like change and these are changes
that nobody knows the true outcome yet, good or bad. Economists and scientists will spend the rest
of their lives running tests to provide evidence for governments so they can make the most informed
decisions and citizens will hold them accountable.  Everybody should be worried about our earth and
the effect of climate change. I see the only way to get everybody on board is if there was a less
expensive, more energy efficient, job providing, economic boosting, invention. Easy right?





Works Cited

Hood, Grace. “Weld County Wonders What's Next For Colorado's Oil And Gas Reform.” Colorado Public Radio, Colorado Public Radio, 1 July 2019, www.cpr.org/2019/04/16/weld-county-wonders-whats-next-for-colorados-oil-and-gas-reform/.

“U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent Statistics and Analysis.” Colorado - State Energy Profile Analysis - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), 2019, www.eia.gov/state/analysis.php?sid=CO.

Woodruff, Chase. “How Colorado Towns Are Starting to Use Their ‘Local Control’ of Fracking.” Westword, 4, 5 July 2019, www.westword.com/news/how-colorado-towns-are-starting-to-use-local-control-of-fracking-11399130.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Immigration Visas and Polarization

Megan King  The story I decided to investigate in National News is , “ Federal Judges Block Trump Policy Targeting Legal Immigrants on Public Benefits ” by Claire Hansen demonstrates how difficult the policymaking procedure can be. In regard to the separations of powers, this ideology does give each branch equal representation, which in this case was to block a new policy. In this situation, three judges filed lawsuits because the new policy the Government was going to implement that visas could be denied if they think that immigrants who are going to use public benefits. It is known as the “public charge” policy which is basically, “any individual who is deemed likely to accept a benefit is considered a public charger” which was just another attempt from the Trump Administration desiring to stop immigration (Hansen). There has already been policies in place that set up circumstances that Immigration Courts and the Government have set up to deny immigration residence just in...

Proposition DD: Let the Bets Flow

On November 5 th , 2019, one of the two measures placed on the ballot in Colorado was Proposition DD, giving the electorate a referendum on the legality of sports betting within the state; it also would impose a tax upon the net revenue of those establishments accepting such bets, the majority of which would provide funding for the Colorado Water Plan and the remainder of which would be used to regulate sports betting and provide services for gambling addiction. Since 1992, gambling on the outcome of most sporting events had been outlawed nationally under the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, or PASPA, though with the Supreme Court’s decision in Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association , this Act was deemed unconstitutional, and state legislatures became free to legislate regarding sports betting and its legality. Proposition DD was put to a public ballot under the provisions of the TABOR amendment to the Colorado Constitution, a ‘Taxpayer Bill of Rights’ ...

The Proponents of Proposition DD

Proposition DD and its proponents One of the most significant and noteworthy results of the recent elections in Colorado was the passing of Proposition DD. A legislative proposition is a proposal placed on the ballot by the state legislature itself. The legislature in Denver referred the measure with House Bill 1327 during the spring season, with easy bipartisan support. [1] The proposition however did not receive such widespread support from the public, only narrowly passing, and being too close to call on election night. This is illustrated below. [2] The passage of Proposition DD legalised gambling on sports events, beginning in six months’ time; making Colorado the nineteenth state to legalise sports betting. Colorado’s seventeen casino operators will be eligible to apply for licenses for both physical and online sportsbooks, with the Colorado Division of Gaming being tasked to regulate the market. [3] ‘Yes on Proposition DD’ raised about $2.83 million for ca...