The PROVE IT (Providing Reliable, Objective, Verifiable Emissions Intensity and Transparency) Act of 2024 is a bipartisan bill in the United States Congress to study and report the greenhouse gas emissions intensity of many energy-related products produced in the United States and other countries.
The bill, introduced by Senators Chris Coons (D-DE) and Kevin Cramer (R-ND), seeks to obtain reliable data assessing the environmental impact of U.S. manufacturing practices and would It is compared with other countries, especially the major industrial countries.
PROVE IT will direct the Department of Energy (DOE) to conduct a study of the emissions intensity of nearly two dozen products, including aluminum, steel, cement and other energy-related products imported and produced in the United States.
The data collected will be published in an online repository, with the study updated every five years.
Some conservatives worry The data could lead to carbon taxes or import dutiesalthough the act provides that it does not confer federal authority to impose such taxes or duties.
Products affected by the bill include plastics, biofuels, crude oil, petrochemicals, refined petroleum products, fertilizers, glass, hydrogen, lithium-ion batteries, natural gas, pulp and paper, solar cells and panels, uranium and wind turbines.
John Curtis (R-UT), the sponsor of the House version of the bill (H.R. 7198), said in promoting the bill:
“We should accept the fact that American industry produces products that are cleaner and to better standards than anywhere else in the world… This bill is not just about proving our energy dominance; it’s about proving our energy dominance. ” This is to create a level playing field in international competition. Russia and China are unapologetically on the path to energy dominance without using any of the innovative technologies or regulations that will make our energy sources cleaner in the United States. This legislation will help American businesses compete globally, strengthen our trading relationships, and provide a reliable energy partner to our allies.
Another supporter, Rep. Peters, R-Fla., added:
“To combat climate change, we must compete globally so that all countries have stronger incentives to reduce emissions. Our CARES Act will provide data to demonstrate the benefits of high U.S. environmental standards while allowing countries like China to Responsible for its emissions-intensive practices. I'm excited to lead this effort alongside Rep. Curtis, demonstrating that even in an era of increasing partisanship, we can still work together to advance strong, common-sense environmental and energy policies.
Supporters of the 17-page bill hailed it as a meaningful step toward collecting product-level emissions data. They said improving processes for measuring, reporting and verifying product-level emissions would be important to implement “border adjustments” under the carbon tax.
But what good is the emissions data from such a study? Will lawmakers use the study's findings to impose unilateral carbon tariffs on imported products?
Supporters also said the United States would face “significant challenges” if it did not impose a domestic carbon tax. They concluded that if these emissions data were used to inform a well-designed border-adjusted carbon tax, the United States would be on the right track to achieve its net zero goal.
The bill has the support of climate activist groups, trade groups and lawmakers. They see it as a way to promote cleaner production practices and strengthen international trade relations.
However, “prove it” has rightly faced opposition from liberal groups and others who suspect it will lead to future regulations: carbon tariffs and taxes.
Some opponents of the bill saw similarities to the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), in which environmental data were collected. Used to tax methane. They worry that the CERTIFICATE Act will undoubtedly have similar results.
The bill aims to cooperate with the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). One of its supporters, Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-ND), has repeatedly advocated cooperation with the EU on climate policy. He wrote:
“We have an opportunity to counter Putin's playbook with a bold initiative that is consistent with European priorities… One aspect of that initiative could be a joint trade mechanism between the United States and the EU, with a common carbon fee on imported goods.”
The article “Why the PROVE IT Act Would Lead to a Carbon Tax” (CEI, April 29, 2024) notes that the bill (S. 1863) would not only collect information on the carbon intensity of commodities, but also provide a framework for imposing a carbon tax in the future. U.S. citizens are already overwhelmed by inflationary pressures from runaway spending, so there is no need for a carbon tax.
Author Daren Bakst is convinced The bill will result in an import carbon tax (tariff) and a domestic carbon tax.
Although supporters of the bill promote the myth that PROVE IT was not designed to impose a carbon tax, they argue that such a tax is necessary.
The fact that the bill’s backers, like Kevin Cramer and Chris Coons, see PROVE IT as a tool to hold other countries accountable for their emissions shows : This is a precursor to a carbon tax.
Although supporters of the bill promote the myth that PROVE IT was not designed to impose a carbon tax, they argue that such a tax is necessary.
About half of the bill’s sponsors also sponsor bills that would impose a carbon tax on imported and domestic products.
Tariffs on imported products, driven by trade law obligations and pressure from environmental groups, would weaken industry opposition to domestic carbon taxes.
Likewise, if domestic manufacturers are required to pay domestic carbon taxes, they would also like to see corresponding taxes levied on imported products to “create a level playing field.”
Therefore, it seems likely The CERTIFICATE Act may be a wolf in sheep’s clothing, a strategic move to drum up support for a carbon tax. Therefore, it would be a good idea for any legislator who opposes such a tax to reject the bill to avoid this situation.
The Institute for Energy Research (IER) agrees, noting that the PROVE IT Act is a “thinly veiled attempt to impose domestic carbon taxes and 'border adjustments' (tariffs, quotas, or both) on the U.S. economy.”
prove that it is equivalent to The U.S. version of “a United Nations-led initiative to politicize global trade to punish carbon dioxide emissions and therefore energy and economic progress.” Other countries that impose such tariffs will retaliate with similar tariffs on U.S. exports.
As an exporter of oil and LNG, the United States will be the loser in this bargain. As a result, the bill would politicize global trade, penalize CO2 emissions and hinder energy and economic progress.
In addition to taxation, This legislation will bring significant additional administrative costs to doing business. It also means carbon dioxide is a pollutant, but anyone who knows science knows that's not the case.
IER considers PROVE IT a “Trojan horse” that “will lead to new taxes on Americans, drive up prices, penalize energy use and legitimize extreme climate policies.”
Hundreds of interesting facts about the climate change scam can be found in Lynne Balzer's richly illustrated book, “Exposing the Big Climate Lie,” available on Amazon and other booksellers.