Hello my name is Doctor Williams, I have a PhD in Environmental

Economics from the London School of Economics and Political Science.

I currently work for the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change) along with consulting and advising for several different green
energy companies and organizations.
Id like to address and clarify several points made in Sections 1, 2, and 4
of bill number 2-2016 Full Expansion of Cap and Trade, concerning
aspects of the system proposed and specifically how it will effect our
national economy. As we heard in my fellow expert Doctor Glenns
speech our climate is in serious danger. And this affects and will
continue to affect each and every one of us equally. however I
understand that many of you may have concerns related to the impact on
our economy. We have been presented with projections all over the
board, some of which saying controlling carbon emissions will be an
economic disasters and others saying no solution or rather business as
usual will be catastrophic to our world along with our economy.
The solution suggested in this piece of legislation is a step in the right
direction, and something that I, as an expert can endorse. A cap and
trade solution is the most free market solution that we can implement,
and we can see from places this has already being used, that it is in fact
NOT very harmful to the economy.
There are several cap and trade programs in place all over the world,
including two in the United States which is really where we should
focus. The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative or RGGI is the nation's
first cap and trade program aimed at reducing carbon emissions. The
RGGI is composed of 9 states in the northeast United States including
New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts. A study of the economic
impacts of the RGGI conducted by Analysis Group in 2015 shows that
1.3 billion in economic benefits and 14,000 job years were generated by
this cap and trade program from 2012 to 2014. The majority of these
benefits came from the quarterly auctions producing 983 million dollars.

Of particular note the states that spent the most of their money on energy
efficiency actually saw the greatest increase in economic growth.
Another example of a well functioning cap and trade system is the
system currently in place in the state of California, as briefly mentioned
in the preamble. We have seen from the implication of this cap, the
economy is not affected much in the preliminary years. 85% of
emissions are covered by the cap in initial years, not including
transportation and heating fuel. Because of this the citizens are not
greatly affected, rather the corporations and bigger companies stand to
lose the most.
The second part of the cap and trade system, the trading part is done in
California using a quarterly auctions system similar to that of the RGGI,
as is also suggested in section 5 of this bill. The 4 auctions that have
been held in California thus far have had great success. The first
generating 525 million dollars in state revenue, going entirely towards
environmental programs in the state.
The real impact on the economy is seen once transportation and heating
fuels are added to the cap, which just happened in 2015 in California.
However, several programs were also written into the bill to ensure that
disadvantaged communities, which tend to be effected the most by
economic downfalls, would be accounted for. The bill states that 25% of
the revenue generated in the second auction would be spent on programs
that benefit these disadvantaged communities. Because of this, the
people of California were not significantly impacted by the cap and trade
system they are now a part of. And the environment is better off for this.
Cap and trade is a market based solutions for reducing carbon emissions.
In market based systems the more participants there are the more
efficient the market. As more states adopt cap and trade and trade with
each other as is happening in the RGGI the more economic benefits will
be realized all while meeting the goal of reducing carbon emissions.

I wholeheartedly suggest that this bill is passed for the good of our
climate, our people, and our world.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2010/07/30/the-benefits-of-cap
-and-trade-would-have-exceeded-its-costs/
https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/reports/2015/05/27/1138
65/cutting-carbon-pollution-while-promoting-economic-growth/