What does the #BuildBackBetter Framework (whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/…) and emerging bill have in store for #ClimateAction and #CleanEnergy? @yayitsrob gives you a great tour through the key components @TheAtlantic theatlantic.com/science/archiv… A brief 🧵 w/Rob as our guide...
First, a $320 billion package of tax credits for electric vehicles, heat pumps and energy efficient buildings, clean energy, transmission, energy storage, carbon capture and industrial decarbonization, are the core of the plan.

Here's what is in store for the power sector ⚡️ ⤵️
There are new tax credits for investment in electricity transmission (a key priority, since @Princeton Net-Zero America study shows we've gotta expand US transmission by as much as 60% by 2030) and energy storage and a new $180/ton credit kick-start direct air capture technology
Then there's the stuff you and I will see in our own lives: tax credits, fully refundable in most cases, for consumer and business purchases of electric vehicles, energy efficient building upgrades, electric heat pumps to electrify water or space heating, rooftop solar and more.
But wait, that's not all: one of the areas that has been significantly strengthened in the emerging final bill (relative to the House version from September) is funding for industrial decarbonization. Industry is neck-and-neck with transport & power for largest emitting sector.
There's even more the intrepid @yayitsrob didnt have time/space to include: grants for state efficiency & EV programs, $ to build out EV charger networks and key long-distance transmission, funding to electrify buses, postal service fleet & ports, a new "Green Bank'...
...low-cost financing programs at DOE to backstop investment in clean energy, advanced manufacturing & transmission, the creation of a new Civilian Climate Corps, significant programs to help ag & forestry sectors suck up CO2 & rural utilities to shift to cleaner power sources.
So is it enough? Here's @yayitsrob's closing. Our @Princeton/@EvolvedEnergy REPEAT Project (repeatproject.org) is standing by to model every provision in the final bill, count up the tons & see how it compares to Bidens' 2030 goal to cut US emissions to 50% below peak level
But beyond the tons, I think @yayitsrob's piece starts to get at something that is underappreciated about the #ClimateAction programs in the #BuildBackBetter deal. They aim to not just reduce tons but FUNDAMENTALLY TRANSFORM every major emitting sector in the economy.
From electricity and industry to transportation, buildings and agriculture, the BBB has programs in each sector designed to drive transformative innovations and new technologies, grow new industries, build supply chains, reshape consumer and business habits and practices and more
Just think about how much the power sector has been transformed over the past decade, since the last time Congress tried to pass major #ClimateAction policy in 2009/2010, thanks to tax credits & support for wind, solar, EVs, and yes, unconventional gas (shale gas).
So if/when #BuildBackBetter passes, it would not only put the US w/in striking distance of 2030 emissiosn goals, it would also transform each major sector of the economy and set up much greater cuts -- all the way to net-zero. And THAT is perhaps the most important part of all.
Thank you for coming to my TED talk ;-)
@threadreaderapp unroll please

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with JesseJenkins

JesseJenkins Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @JesseJenkins

29 Oct
It's been fast & furious around here, so I've not had time to share some fun news: as of this month, I've joined the Advisory Board of @Eavor, developer of advanced closed-loop geothermal energy technology. Clean, firm, flexible power, widely available. eavor.com
My research has consistently illustrated the value of 'clean firm power' -- available any time of the year, as long as needed -- as critical complement to 'fuel saving' variable renewables & energy-limited 'fast burst' batteries or demand flexibility. eg: sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
Furthermore, we find that FLEXIBLE firm resources are more valuable than those that operate constantly as always-on "baseload" generation. When prices are zero much of the time, producing flat out all the time isn't as valuable as shifting your output to the most vaulable times.
Read 13 tweets
28 Oct
More details on the #ClimateAction provisions in #BuildBackBetter framework via @WhiteHouse, which they are (rightly) calling "The largest effort to combat climate change in American history" 🧵
.@WhiteHouse claims: "The framework will start cutting climate pollution now, and deliver well over one gigaton, or a billion metric tons, of greenhouse gas emissions reductions in 2030 – at least ten times larger than any legislation Congress has ever passed"
REPEATProject.org awaits details to model final bill, it appears BBB Framework retains most programs in the House budget bill, except the Clean Electricity Performance Program, while repurposing most of the $150b allocated for CEPP to strengthen & expand other programs.
Read 31 tweets
27 Oct
.@SenJeffMerkley @SenWarren et al are taking issue w/subsidies for "blue" hydrogen saying we cant support "energy sources that could worsen greenhouse gas emissions." Good thing BBB makes H2 PTC explicitly contingent on lowering lifecycle GHG emissions! Here's how it works ⤵️
Here's the letter merkley.senate.gov/news/press-rel…

Merkley, Warren, Raskin, and other signatories are climate champions. But their attention/concern is misplaced here. Unless the House language is substantially altered, only hydrogen that lowers greenhouse gas emissions will get support.
Also, EPA is working on much more stringent regulations on upstream emissions of methane from gas supply chains, an area also targeted by methane fee in the House bill (which may or may not still be in final deal), so lifecycle emissions of blue H2 will drop as those go to work.
Read 4 tweets
25 Oct
Correct. Plus losing methane fee would mean losing ~130 million tons of CO2-equivalent emissions (100 year global-warming potential as EPA inventory uses; a lot more if using 20 year potential). That's ~10% of the total House package's emissions cuts via repeatproject.org Image
EPA is restoring/expanding regulations on upstream oil and gas methane emissions and can make back up some (or all?) of these tons. eenews.net/articles/metha…

So perhaps the Biden Administration sees these as overlapping policies and therefore less critical to get over finish line?
Criticall, our REPEAT Project did NOT assume EPA regulations on methane were in place (as rules are still pending) when estimating impact of methane fee.
Read 4 tweets
20 Oct
Can pending Congressional legislation deliver Biden's #ClimateAction goals as #COP26 nears? Will losing the CEPP be a fatal blow? How far on the path to net-zero can we get?

REPEAT Project from Princeton ZERO Lab & @evolved_energy out today has answers @ repeatproject.org Image
I am happy to announce launch of the REPEAT Project, a new initiative of my @Princeton ZERO Lab w/@ErinNMayfield @dartmouth & @evolved_energy, which provides regular, timely & independent environmental & economic evaluation of federal energy & climate policies as they’re proposed Image
Today we launch our website at repeatproject.org & a preliminary report analyzing impacts of the House Build Back Better Act and the Senate Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. We also present Existing Policy (where we are now) + Net-Zero Benchmarks (where we want to go)
Read 21 tweets
30 Sep
To start: I'd love a $20/t carbon price from Congress. That said: given current political stalemate on the Hill, what political impasse does it solve that brings us closer to passage of Build Back Better? Honest question.
Manchin seems to want to minimize contraction of coal sector. Any meaningful price that hits power sector ($10/t or more?) could decimate coal. So it exempts power sector?
Both Manchin and Sinema seem to want a smaller package thats fully paid for. But a carbon tax used for general revenue would violate POTUS pledge not to raise taxes on the working class. So how does that square? Tax and dividend doesn't raise net revenues for other programs.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(