Rhode Island Senate Bill S0338

Rhode Island 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/21/25
• Refer: 2/21/25

Caption

Establishes a fee on companies that sell fossil fuels in Rhode Island and establishes a fund to disburse the collected funds.

Impact

The introduction of S0338 is expected to have significant implications for state laws governing fossil fuel consumption and environmental policy. By introducing a carbon pricing mechanism, the bill aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions while also addressing economic disparities. Furthermore, the bill seeks to offer financial relief to low-income residents who may be disproportionately impacted by rising energy costs due to the carbon fee. The structure of the economic and climate resilience fund promises to direct a portion of the collected fees toward enhancing energy efficiency and supporting clean energy technologies in the state, thus aligning with Rhode Island's goals for sustainability and resilience against climate-related challenges.

Summary

S0338, known as the Economic and Climate Resilience Act of 2025, is a Rhode Island legislative proposal that aims to establish a fee on companies selling fossil fuels within the state. This fee will be levied at the point of sale and is designed to generate funds for an 'economic and climate resilience fund'. The bill outlines the intention to utilize the collected funds for various purposes including dividends to residents and businesses, as well as investments in climate adaptation initiatives and renewable energy programs, particularly targeting low-income communities and small businesses. The implementation of this bill is tied to a regional carbon fee enacted by multiple states, emphasizing cooperation within the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).

Contention

While the bill is supported by many environmental advocates and legislators concerned about climate change, it may face opposition from certain business sectors wary of the financial burdens associated with increased fossil fuel fees. Opponents may argue that the legislature should consider alternative methods for funding climate resilience initiatives that do not impose direct costs on consumers and businesses. Additionally, debates around the potential effectiveness and fairness of the dividend distribution method, particularly regarding low-income households, could also be pivotal in the upcoming discussions surrounding this legislative proposal.