Today’s OpenEurope Daily Briefing has an eye-opener from the UK for those on the Hill who believe that the push for carbon-dioxide (read: energy) rationing can work with a click of the heels and the repetition of mantra that “we’ll just avoid Europe’s problems.” That is precisely the ruse a recently deposed House subcommittee chairman rudely used when I brought in some EU parliamentarians to warn him of the debacle in Europe, and John Dingell used it to explain his support of trying it here in the U.S.

My counsel then is the same as now. If you know how to avoid Europe’s mistakes — other than by just not adopting this climatically meaningless, competitiveness-killing feel-good gesture in the first place — please phone Europe. Because oddly they can’t unlock the secret you possess. From Open Europe:

Ofgem warns of power blackouts and soaring energy bills to meet EU rules
The Times reports that energy regulator Ofgem has warned of power blackouts and spiralling consumer prices, and raised the prospect of partial renationalisation of the industry in order to maintain the UK’s energy security. Alistair Buchanan, Ofgem’s Chief Executive, said that the crisis had been compounded by an “unholy trinity” of factors — including the impact of the recession on energy industry investment, Britain’s growing reliance on imported gas as North Sea supplies are depleted and the closure of nine ageing coal-fired and oil-fired power stations by 2015 in order to meet EU pollution laws, a move that will scrap almost a third of UK generating capacity.
The FT notes that Ofgem’s report concludes that European targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions and developing renewable energy will create a huge demand for investment over the coming decade. The £200bn needed to achieve the most ambitious goals for renewable energy would mean doubling the rate of investment seen over the past 10 years.
The Ofgem report notes that investment in low carbon technology is being hampered by uncertainty over the carbon price.
The EU’s emissions trading scheme is supposed to achieve the right price to encourage investment and reduce carbon emissions but Ofgem has suggested that the UK may have to introduce its own minimum price in order to promote the required investment to meet EU renewables targets: “Although a minimum carbon price would best work as part of a European wide scheme, if this did not happen it may be necessary to consider a minimum GB carbon price. By reducing uncertainty about the price of carbon it would encourage investment in low carbon technologies.”
The Mail reports that Ann Robinson, of the price comparison website uSwitch.com, said energy bills could reach around £5,000 by 2020 in order to cover the required investment. Meanwhile, the FT reports that, after a power struggle between the Commission and member states, the EU has reached an agreement that the Commission and the European Investment Bank will have a final say as to which projects receive funding to test carbon capture and storage technologies across Europe. Although it is not compulsory, member states are expected to contribute to the test projects, potentially resulting in billions of additional euros.

Remember, carbon cap-and-trade is not actually designed to reduce emissions, and has proven emphatically that the opposite will occur when you include those offset schemes that politicians cannot resist tacking on to satisfy constituencies and wave around a provision declaring they’ve ensured it really won’t cost much because you really won’t have to do what they boast out of the other side of their mouths to other constituencies that they’ve made you do. Hence the EU flailing around in recent months for carbon taxes on top, despite the lack of jurisdiction (“competence”) over EU-wide taxation.

If the 2010 elections don’t become a referendum on cap-and-trade/EPA power-grab/Kyoto II, and soon, then Republicans really aren’t ready yet to come back in from the cold.