Is taking on global warming a good deal for Kansas?  In truth, a limit on global warming pollution will create economic growth and alleviate the greatest environmental threat our planet faces. 

President Obama's plan to limit global warming pollution is good policy because it requires carbon reductions of 80 percent by 2050, as Nobel-prize winning scientists have agreed we must to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. 

It's also a good plan because it will speed our transition to a clean energy economy.  A “green recovery” will renew our infrastructure, transform our transportation system, invest in new clean energy technologies, enhance our national security, and leverage private investment.   

The most promising way to reduce global warming pollution, the cap and trade, builds on the market approach used in the 1990 Clean Air Act.  A cap and trade system sets a firm limit on global warming pollution and sets up an accompanying market to reward smart and innovative companies for making real reductions. This approach will provide businesses with financial incentives to innovate their way to reduced emissions and greater efficiency.

The cap and trade approach to carbon regulation will benefit the country as a whole, and Kansas in particular given our state's central location and valuable wind resources (the third best in the nation).  It's no wonder that forward thinking institutions like Johnson County and Cloud County Community Colleges see opportunity to train up our young people for the good paying local green collar jobs to come.  

Should we be subsidizing technology that is not cost competitive?  It is difficult to find an industry that we as taxpayers are not already subsidizing (banking, automotive, insurance, airline, farm, etc.).  

The Energy Information Administration reports that electricity generated from fossil fuels receives greater direct subsidy than electricity generated from renewable sources. In 2007, electricity generation using refined coal was supported by direct Federal subsidies in an amount more than half of the wholesale electricity price.   This does not seem to be a “free market” to me. 

Legislation that invests in our clean energy future will lower our unemployment rate and create tens of thousands of new jobs.  And these will be attainable jobs as estimators, sales people, project managers, engineers, factory workers, electricians, sheet metal-workers, machinists, and truck drivers that will benefit our economy for years to come.

It's one thing to create jobs in urban money centers; we've all seen just how stable those are.  It's something very different to create jobs in local communities- like counties in western Kansas where depopulation is a real issue due to a lack of new good paying local jobs. The good news is that a green collar job can give your children or grandchildren some greater chance to earn a living and raise their families nearby if they wish.

Given the choice, doesn’t job creation with environmental benefits sound more productive than continuing to debate the finer points of coal plant permitting?  Some times we just need to recognize a good deal when we see one.