August 24, 2005

  9 States in Plan to Cut Emissions by Power Plants

By ANTHONY DePALMA

Officials in New York and eight other Northeastern states have come to a
preliminary agreement to freeze power plant emissions at their current
levels and then reduce them by 10 percent by 2020, according to a
confidential draft proposal.

The cooperative action, the first of its kind in the nation, came after
the Bush administration decided not to regulate the greenhouse gases
that contribute to global warming. Once a final agreement is reached,
the legislatures of the nine states will have to enact it, which is
considered likely.

Enforcement of emission controls could potentially result in higher
energy prices in the nine states, which officials hope can be offset by
subsidies and support for the development of new technology that would
be paid for with the proceeds from the sale of emission allowances to
the utility companies.

The regional initiative would set up a market-driven system to control
emissions of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, from more than 600
electric generators in the nine states. Environmentalists who support a
federal law to control greenhouse gases believe that the model
established by the Northeastern states will be followed by other states,
resulting in pressure that could eventually lead to the enactment of a
national law.

California, Washington and Oregon are in the early stages of exploring a
regional agreement similar to the Northeastern plan. The nine states in
the Northeastern agreement are Connecticut, Delaware, Maine,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and
Vermont. They were brought together in 2003 by a Republican governor,
George E. Pataki of New York, who broke sharply and openly with the Bush
administration over the handling of greenhouse gases and Washington's
refusal to join more than 150 countries in signing the Kyoto Protocols,
the agreement to reduce emissions that went into effect earlier this year.

Mr. Pataki, who may be considering a run for the Republican nomination
for president, has refrained from criticizing President Bush directly,
but he has repeatedly said that the states need to act on their own even
if the Bush administration has not made the issue a priority.

Preliminary details of the region's emission reduction goals were
included in a confidential memo circulated among officials of all nine
states that was given to The New York Times by a person who supports the
enactment of national legislation to control emissions, but who did not
want to be identified because he was not authorized to have the memo.

Andrew Rush, a spokesman for Governor Pataki, declined to comment on the
draft because it was not a final document. However, he said, "a
tremendous amount of progress has been made and we look forward to
continuing to work with the other states so that we can reach a final
agreement that will build on the governor's strong record of protecting
the environment and reducing harmful emissions."

Samuel Wolfe, assistant commissioner for the New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection, who has been actively involved in the
negotiations, said that there is still work to be done on the proposal
but that "the states are working very productively to resolve the issues
and we have very high hopes of getting a resolution through to all the
states by the end of September."

In a statement, James L. Connaughton, chairman of the White House
Council on Environmental Quality, tried to put the states' initiative in
a positive light. "We welcome all efforts to help meet the president's
goal for significantly reducing greenhouse gas intensity by investing in
new, more efficient technologies," he said.

In recent years, New York and other Northeastern states have
aggressively tried to reduce power plant emissions. Several have joined
together to sue coal-fired power plants in Midwestern states that
produce sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide that drift across state
borders and cause acid rain in the Northeast.

The Northeastern region is itself a substantial producer of greenhouse
gases. Environmental groups calculate that the region's carbon dioxide
emissions are roughly equivalent to those of Germany.

While any reductions achieved in the region would be significant,
environmentalists believe that the real importance of the cooperative
effort is in the example it sets for other states.

"We're not going to solve the problem of global warming in the
Northeastern states," said Dale S. Bryk, a senior attorney with the
Natural Resources Defense Council who has been watching the regional
effort since it was proposed by Governor Pataki in a letter to the other
governors in April 2003. "but we're showing that we have the American
ingenuity to do this and we're setting a precedent in terms of the
design of the program."

As outlined in the draft, the regional carbon dioxide control plan would
set specific caps on emissions that would drop over time.

The hope is that by providing long-range incentives for the electric
generating companies to comply, the program will make improvements more
cost-effective.

Emissions would be capped at 150 million tons of carbon dioxide a year,
a figure that is about equal to the average emissions in the highest
three years between 2000 and 2004. Each of the nine states would have
its own cap. New York's, at 65.6 million tons, would be the largest.
Vermont's would be the smallest, with 1.35 million tons.

The caps would be enforced starting in 2009. By that time, restricting
emissions to levels prevailing now would, in effect, require a reduction
of emissions relative to power output, because electric generation is
expected to increase between now and then. The 150 million-ton cap would
be sustained through 2015, when reductions would be required, reaching
10 percent in 2020. The Kyoto protocol freezes emissions at the 1990
level and imposes a 7 percent reduction in 2012.

Environmentalists say there are too many variables involved to directly
compare the two programs, but they are believed to achieve roughly the
same kind of carbon reductions. However, some environmentalists are
disappointed with the draft plan. They argue that much deeper cuts were
achievable.

"Its good that they are going to be talking about actual reductions,"
said Robert J. Moore, executive director of Environmental Advocates of
New York. "However, the targets that are being contemplated, though a
positive step, are somewhat less than ambitious."

Gavin J. Donohue, president of the Independent Power Producers of New
York, said that meeting the proposed caps "would be very difficult" for
electric generators in New York, especially now that the price of oil
has soared.

Mr. Donohue, who once worked for Governor Pataki in the Department of
Environmental Conservation, said that his principal concern was assuring
that the limits will not put electric generators in New York and the
other states at a competitive disadvantage with states that were not
constrained.

The Bush administration's rejection of the Kyoto Protocols has caused
deep divisions nationwide, with many local governments attempting to
force the administration to taking action by passing their own carbon
dioxide rules.

Earlier this year, for example, the mayors of more than 130 cities,
including New York and Los Angeles, joined in a bipartisan coalition to
fight global warming on a local level by agreeing to meet the emissions
reductions contained in the international pact.

One part of the proposal that is not yet final deals with the sale of
emission allowances under a cap-and-trade system. Such systems allow
generating companies that have not used all of their emission quotas to
sell the right to emit more pollution to competitors. In this way, the
total amount of pollution can be controlled, while the economic
viability of the companies is protected.

When this system was used in Europe, the carbon dioxide allowances were
given to the generating companies. The Northeastern states are
considering withholding some allowances and selling them to the
generating companies.


--
www.e-laser.org
Laser@inventati.org

Rispondere a