Much of the discussion surrounding Republican Scott Brown’s victory
in the Massachusetts Senate race two weeks ago centered on the
election’s impact on the proposed health care bill. Brown’s win means
Democrats no longer have the 60 votes required to overcome a possible
filibuster.
But the ripple effects go beyond health care, says Greg Burns, a columnist for the Chicago Tribune. In a recent column,
Burns says Brown’s victory will force proponents of a cap-and-trade
program to settle for less ambitious sustainability goals, such as a
green jobs initiative and smaller energy-efficiency improvements.
While many commercial and institutional facilities continue to
implement sustainability initiatives, cap and trade definitely has been
on the backburner in terms of national headlines. With talk of
stimulating job growth and the overall economy still dominating the
news today, it is hard to imagine cap and trade becoming a white-hot
topic again any time soon.
To frame his column, Burns talks to the chief executive of Exelon
Corp., the nation’s largest nuclear power utility. Because nuclear
power plants emit little carbon, Exelon would benefit from a
cap-and-trade program. But the CEO seems resigned to the fact cap and
trade is not going to happen any time soon.
Despite a lack of a cap-and-trade program, organizations remain focused on the impact their facilities can have on the
environment. Whether or not managers want cap and trade, the reductions
in energy use and utility costs from green projects are difficult to
ignore. And regardless of what happens with cap and trade,
environmental initiatives will continue to be a part of managers’
decision making when assessing overall building operations.
Posted
02-02-2010 11:24 AM
by
Chris Matt