A plan to set Connecticut on a course toward achieving net zero carbon emissions throughout the economy by 2050 was approved by House lawmakers on Thursday, giving hope to climate advocates for one of their top legislative priorities.
The legislation, House Bill 5004, would strengthen the state’s existing carbon-reduction goals and create a new “Clean Economy Council” to develop strategies and policies to help meet those targets. In addition, it offers a variety of incentives and programs for solar canopies, energy-efficient heating and cooling systems, heat pumps, green jobs and sustainability-focused businesses.
“It’s where to we need to get to and how are we going to get there,” said state Rep. John-Michael Parker, D-Madison, co-chair of the Environment Committee and one of the bill’s architects. “Let’s put these plans in place, think about funding, think about the process [moving] forward, but do it in a reasonable and responsible way.”
Under current law, Connecticut has pledged to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 80% between 2001 and 2050. As preliminary step toward meeting that goal, lawmakers enacted a plan three years ago to obtain all of the state’s power needs from carbon-free sources by 2040.
H.B. 5004 would go a step further, setting a “net zero” emissions goal by the midpoint of this century. Net zero refers a point when any emissions are offset by efforts to remove those gases from the atmosphere, either through carbon-capture technology or more natural means such as planting forests and grasslands.
Many scientists and advocates say achieving net zero emissions by 2050 is necessary to prevent the global temperatures from rising to dangerous levels.
Republicans in the House criticized H.B. 5004, however, raising skepticism over the science behind climate change and inquiring about the feasibility of such a goal. Several pointed out that Connecticut has consistently lagged behind meeting its existing emissions targets, despite years of efforts.
“At times, I wonder whenever we put these bills out if we actually are trying to achieve something rather than put words in books,” said Rep. Tim Ackert, R-Coventry.
House Democrats succeeded in passing legislation very similar to H.B. 5004 last year — it even had the same bill number — only watch it fall victim to a Republican filibuster on the last day of the legislative session.
To avoid a similar fate this session, proponents say they’re giving the Senate plenty of time to consider the bill before the legislature adjourns on June 4.
House Speaker Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, told reporters Thursday that “there was a lot of finger pointing and blame and conspiracy theories,” after the failure of H.B. 5004 last year.
“I like nothing more than to prove people wrong,” Ritter added. “They said, ‘You guys didn’t really want to do the bill, you didn’t really want to do an environmental bill.’ It’s back, May 1, six weeks to go we’re setting it up.”
In order to ease opposition to the bill, Parker said that several sections dealing mostly with a study of natural gas usage and other energy topics were removed ahead of Thursday’s debate.
Additionally, this year’s version of the bill excluded language declaring a “climate crisis,” that was a centerpiece of last year’s legislation. While the “crisis” outlined in that bill would not have granted the governor emergency powers as in other natural disasters, it became the subject of intense debate.
“It was just such a flashpoint for opponents making a big fuss about it,” said Lori Brown, the executive director of the Connecticut League of Conservation Voters. “But it didn’t really do anything, and it was one of those things that got left behind.”
Parker, the bill sponsor, said some of the energy-related provisions that were removed from the bill could end up being included in separate legislation being drafted by the legislature’s Energy and Technology Committee to address electric prices. Still, critics of the bill raised concerns that some of the incentives for technologies like electric heat pumps would add further demand onto the grid, raising prices even higher.
“There are a lot of initiatives in this bill that are high drains on electricity,” said Rep. Patrick Callahan, R-New Fairfield, a ranking Republican on the Environment Committee. “What’s missing is where we get our baseline power from.”
Parker responded that the purpose of the Clean Economy Council, which the bill would establish, is to develop strategies for advancing clean energy in a way that is not harmful to the state’s economy.
After more than three hours of debate, the House passed the bill late Thursday afternoon by a party-line vote of 98 to 47.
It now heads to the Senate. Majority Leader Bob Duff, D-Norwalk, said Senate Democrats had yet to begin discussions regarding the legislation, which he acknowledged was a “priority” for the House.
“We’ll certainly caucus it and give it the same deference the House gives to Senate priority bills,” Duff said.
This story was originally published by the Connecticut Mirror.
