Lighten up on carbon reduction

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to our or .

| Sourced From |

Gov. Mitch Daniels and U.S. Reps. Mike Pence and Steve Buyer have some significant non-allies in their vehement opposition to the carbon reduction legislation now moving through Congress.

Among them are most of the Midwest’s governors, who already have signed a regional cap-and-trade agreement; and Indiana’s largest electric utility, whose boss accepts the need for congressional action and insists it will benefit rather than punish this coal-dependent region — if the region’s leadership pulls up to the table.

The legislation already has undergone modification to ease fears of spiking energy costs. It undoubtedly is in for more. Yet Daniels and the congressmen have staked out positions of two-fisted defiance, accusing coastal states of “declaring economic war on the Midwest” (Pence) and “seeking to exploit politically weaker colonies in order to prop up their own decaying economies” (Daniels).

Their worry about the costs and risks of reducing coal dependence is shared by the nation’s third-largest consumer of coal. But when James Rogers, chairman of Duke Energy Corp., testified before Congress May 19, it was not in opposition. For the nation and the Midwest, he declared, huge dollars stand to be gained, not lost.

“I understand the arguments against action on energy and climate with concerns focused on the economy,” Rogers said. “However, the reality is we can’t afford not to act if we hope to compete and lead. The right comprehensive energy and carbon legislation can provide not only the certainty and rules of the road by which we can plan, build and compete, it will also protect consumers, help us advance efficiency and alternative technology efforts, and all while cleaning up the environment. The sooner Congress provides a clear set of rules, the sooner investments can be made.”

He cited a study that projects low-carbon energy markets to reach $450 billion a year by 2012. “Without a U.S. carbon program, we will not be participating in this lucrative market.”

Ann Murtlow, president of Indianapolis Power & Light Co., agrees that the industry needs certainty. “Climate change legislation is political reality,” she says. “It is in our best interests to make sure it’s done in a way that not only gives the desired economic benefits, but at the lowest cost.”

Clearly, coal will reign in Indiana for many years to come; but the costs of burning it will rise — along with the economic and environmental benefits of alternative energy. That makes it plain good business to shrink coal’s slice of the pie. As proponents, such as Rogers and Rep. Baron Hill, a member of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, acknowledge, the transition will be difficult; but obstinacy is not an option.