Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Duke CEO Rogers: we want more nukes, slower pace to carbon cleanup


We were interested to see the testimony of Duke CEO Jim Rogers, who is scheduled to testify tomorrow at the House global warming hearings. Though Rogers notes he was invited to appear as a member of the United States Climate Action Partnership (USCAP), he calls for some things that might make some of the other USCAP members just a little uneasy.

For instance, he will call for more nuclear power, attack the renewable energy provisions of the Waxman Markey bill, attack the notion of reducing legal barriers to citizen suits, oppose energy efficiency requirements and will call for weaker near-term emission reduction targets and greater use of “offsets.” (Many environmentalists are concerned the draft bill already is too generous in this regard.)

Here are some excerpts:


I am particularly pleased today that I have been invited to testify as a member of
the United State Climate Action Partnership (USCAP). Duke Energy is a founding
member of this unique coalition that includes both industry and environmental
organizations…

Targets and timetables: The discussion draft proposes to begin the
program in 2012, using a 2005 baseline. The start-up date is the same that
was used in the last Congress and now allows too little time to begin
compliance. The early targets, while within the USCAP range, are very
aggressive. I would recommend the Committee follow President Obama’s
proposal of setting a near-term goal of achieving 1990 levels by 2020.

Offsets: USCAP members recognized the need to promote offsets as a
viable tool to provide cost-effective emission reductions. However, I was
surprised the discussion draft discounts these allowances, requiring
covered entities to turn in 1.25 offset credits in lieu of one emission
allowance. I believe the Congress and subsequent rules will ensure these
offsets are verifiable, permanent, measurable, enforceable and additional.
They will be limited either legislatively or through a regulatory process that
will make it challenging for projects to qualify. So why then, after the goldplating,
should they be discounted? Why, if companies can use them to
achieve the same environmental benefit at a lower cost for their
customers, does the government treat them as a compliance step-child?..

Citizen suits: The proposal reducing legal barriers to filing citizen lawsuits
either against the government or companies that emit greenhouse gases, I
believe, is a prescription for regulatory chaos and uncertainty. We should
spend our time, energy and money in addressing the problem – not tying
the courts up in endless litigation.

My position on a renewable electricity standard is clear. I think this issue belongs,
appropriately, to the states… we still have no evidence that wind or solar can be commercially viable in many parts of the country...

As for the proposed energy efficiency standard, as co-chair of the National Action
Plan on Energy Efficiency, I have been involved with a group of consumer
advocates, state regulators, environmental groups, utilities and others which has
developed a set of proposals that will achieve the goals in the discussion draft
without resorting to specific mandates.

USCAP did not come to an agreement on nuclear but I have said before and say
again that a truly serious long-term carbon reduction plan is an empty plate
unless we, as a nation, commit to making it possible once again to build nuclear
power plants. Other countries will be deploying this technology to meet their
carbon reduction commitments, and so should we.

1 comment:

Regulation Rita said...

The Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC) is having an open meeting on May 14, 2009.

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee (CAAAC) on November 19, 1990, to provide independent advice and counsel to EPA on policy issues associated with implementation of the Clean Air Act of 1990. The Committee advises on economic, environmental, technical scientific, and enforcement policy issues.

DATES AND ADDRESSES: Open meeting notice; Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. App. 2 section 10(a)(2), notice is hereby given that the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee will hold its next open meeting on Thursday May 14, 2009 from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. at the Almas Conference Center located at 1315 K Street, NW., Washington, DC. Seating will be available on a first come, first served basis. The Permits, New Source Review and Toxics subcommittee will meet on May 13, 2009 from 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. The Economic Incentives and Regulatory Innovations subcommittee Work Group will meet on May 13, 2009 from approximately 1 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. These meetings will be held at the Hamilton Crown Plaza at 1001 14th Street, NW., Washington, DC, next to the Almas Center. The Clean Air Excellence Awards Program will be presented at the Almas Conference Center starting at 4:30 p.m. on May 13, 2009. The Mobile Source Technical Review subcommittee meeting will be held on May 13, 2009 at the Loews Madison Hotel, 1177 15th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005; a separate Federal Register Notice has been created for this meeting. The agenda for the CAAAC full committee meeting on May 14, 2009 will be posted on the Clean Air Act Advisory Committee Web site at http://www.epa.gov/oar/caaac/.

This information came from http://www.CyberRegs.com