And how much will we have to pay to those same companies for the wealth created by fossil fuels?

barbarians at the gate

Connecticut climate superfund bill would make fossil fuel companies pay

Connecticut lawmakers are considering a bill that would create a “climate superfund” program requiring major fossil fuel companies help pay for the costs of adapting to climate change.

The proposal, recently introduced by the General Assembly’s Environment Committee, would force certain oil, coal and gas companies to compensate the state for their role in emitting large amounts of climate-warming greenhouse gases. The money would fund projects aimed at protecting communities from climate-related hazards that are becoming more common, such as floods and heat waves.

The idea of creating a climate superfund in Connecticut has become a hotly contested issue, stirring debate at the state Capitol and beyond. Supporters say it would hold corporate polluters accountable for climate-related damages already felt. Industry groups, however, argue it could further drive up Connecticut’s energy prices, already among the highest in the nation.

The program is based on a simple principal [for simpletons]: those responsible for polluting the environment should help cover the costs of cleaning it up.

I assume that means anyone who’s ever heated his house with fosil fuels, driven to work, or run a manufacturing machine must pay up, eh?

Connecticut’s superfund proposal applies that same concept to climate change. Rather than targeting contamination at a specific site, it would seek to recover costs associated with damage from global warming more broadly.

Kindergarten thinking by and for kindergartners

“At the core of this issue is a simple lesson we all learned in primary school — if you make a mess, you clean it up,” Julianna Larue, an organizer for Sierra Club’s Connecticut chapter, wrote in a recent op-ed.

Under the program, the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection would collect payments from qualifying companies and deposit the money into a dedicated fund for climate adaptation projects. Companies would be held “strictly liable,” meaning that it doesn’t matter whether they intended to cause harm or not.

Who would have to pay? [Consumers, you dumb dolts]

The program would only target entities that released more than 1 billion metric tons of greenhouse gases between Jan. 1, 1995, and Dec. 31, 2024. The bill doesn’t just look at what comes out of a company’s own facilities. It also counts emissions tied to extracting, refining and transporting fossil fuels.

Once the state determines which companies meet that threshold, it would put them into a “public registry” and send them “notices of cost recovery demands.” Each company would pay a share of Connecticut’s total climate-related costs based on its share of emissions above the 1 billion ton mark. For example, if a company emitted 1.5 billion tons during that time period, only the 0.5 billion above the threshold would factor into its payment.

And of course, there’ll be the usual graft for “minorities” to dip their beaks, else what’s a slush fund for?

Where would the money go?

The bill would create a nonlapsing “cost recovery fund” to pay for climate adaptation projects across the state.

Eligible projects could include fortifying coastal wetlands, upgrading stormwater systems, improving roads and bridges, protecting sewage treatment plants from flooding, expanding microgrids and adding green spaces to address urban heat islands. Funds could also support efforts to protect farms and fisheries, according to the proposal.

At least 40% of program spending would need to go toward projects that directly benefit environmental justice communities — usually low-income areas that are hit harder by pollution and climate change, the bill states.

Supporters say a climate superfund would help support critical infrastructure projects to shield communities from the worst effects of climate change, while shifting more of that cost away from taxpayers.

Critics, including some business and energy industry groups, argue the proposal would raise Connecticut’s electric rates, which were the third highest in the country last year. “A fee imposed on oil and natural gas will only increase our energy prices in Connecticut,” said Pete Myers, senior policy director for the Connecticut Business and Industry Association.

Because Connecticut’s electric grid “relies heavily” on natural gas- and oil-fired power plants, any fees on companies supplying those fuels would ultimately be passed on to consumers, the CBIA argues. The organization has also warned that the measure could face legal challenges. 

Supporters counter that the fees are based on historic emissions, not current production, and wouldn’t automatically translate into higher energy prices. They argue Connecticut taxpayers are already paying for climate-related damage through infrastructure repairs and higher insurance premiums — costs that should be picked up by major fossil fuel producers instead.

It’s Magic!

“This policy makes polluters pay their fair share for the damage they’ve already done without raising prices for the rest of us,” Larue said. 

They say it’s magic; in fact, it’s just another tax on residents, camouflaged under a green blanket. Unaddressed however, is how to account for the incredible wealth that cheap, abundant fossil fuels created, thanks to those Prometheuses who unleashed its power and brought it to the world. Mankind stayed poor and starving throughout history, unchanging, until the industrial revolution that was made possible by oll and coal. Which Hartford Democrat will be the first to acknowledge that debt and dig into her pocket to pay it back?