WP&L and WPS warn of higher rates because of pollution rules

From an article by Tom Content published in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on August 19:

Two state utilities said this week new federal pollution rules will lead to higher electricity costs come January.

Wisconsin Public Service Corp. of Green Bay said its residential customers can expect an increase of more than $4 a month next year, including about $2 linked to the new rules designed to limit air pollution from coal-fired power plants.

The utility said it would see higher costs of about $32.6 million in 2012 from the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule that was finalized recently by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. That will result in rates going up by 6.8% instead of 3.4%, the utility said.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency last month finalized stronger regulations for Wisconsin and 26 other states aimed at curbing air pollution from long-distance sources.

Environmental groups praised the new rule because it would reduce acid rain and air pollution as well as help curb health effects from dirty air linked to coal plants. The EPA projected the rule will save up to 34,000 lives a year and prevent more than 400,000 asthma attacks as well as 19,000 admissions to hospitals. . .

The new rule has been in development for several years but the first phase of compliance hits utilities in 2012. WPS said it won't have time to install pollution controls by next year at its plants, but will be able to comply by purchasing credits from other utilities that have cut emissions.

The utility also said it plans to operate its coal plants less next year than it otherwise would have, and will buy more power from the Midwest wholesale power market as a result, a move that it said is also a factor in higher costs for customers. . . .

On Thursday [August 18], Wisconsin Power & Light Co. [Alliant] of Madison said it would face an additional $9 million in costs linked to the air pollution rule. With the change, the utility is now seeking an increase in 2012 of $20 million, or 2%, utility finance manager Martin Seitz said in a filing with state regulators.

Todd Stuart, executive director of the Wisconsin Industrial Energy Group, criticized the increases, and he noted that large energy users like paper mills will see higher than average increases, compared with homeowners and small businesses. Paper mills served by WPS could see a 9% hike, he said. . . .

"Industry always cries wolf whenever EPA tries to reduce air pollution," said Katie Nekola, lawyer with the conservation group Clean Wisconsin. "The fact is, the new rule will affect old, inefficient, unnecessary coal plants that should have been shut down long ago. The continued operation of those old units is costing ratepayers money, but you don't hear industry complaining about that."

PSC issues final report on the potential for carbon sequestration

From a news release issued by the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin:

MADISON – The Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC) in partnership with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) today issued a final report on the potential for geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide produced by coal-fired power plants serving Wisconsin electricity consumers.

Based on recommendations by the Governor's Task Force on Global Warming, the PSC and the DNR formed a Study Group to look into the potential for geologic carbon sequestration to help satisfy Wisconsin’s need for cleaner sources of electricity. Geologic sequestration involves a process of capturing carbon dioxide produced by power plants that otherwise would be released into the atmosphere and securely storing, or sequestering, the carbon dioxide (CO2) underground.

Carbon dioxide is one of several known greenhouse gases (GHG) that contribute to global warming.

“In a greenhouse gas limited economy and with Wisconsin’s reliance on coal for electric generation, carbon sequestration makes sense.” said PSC Commissioner Mark Meyer.

"Wisconsin is in a strong position to support ongoing carbon sequestration efforts and collaborate with other states and regions in making carbon sequestration possible.”

Key findings of the Study Group include:

+ Several promising technologies are being developed and tested for capturing carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.
+ Carbon dioxide can be captured either pre- or post-combustion, depending on the type of power plant, and compressed for transport and sequestration.
+ Long-distance transport of carbon dioxide is a proven, viable option with over 3,000 miles of pipeline already in use for this purpose nationwide.
+ Wisconsin should consider a holistic approach to carbon sequestration that addresses both the public and private interests involved and will allow Wisconsin to work effectively and efficiently with adjacent states to implement proposed projects.
+ Wisconsin may benefit long-term from the further exploration and development of CO2 storage in the region; however, it is not very likely to happen in the short-term (2 to 5 years) or mid-term (5 to 20 years).

The final report also includes analysis of three potential scenarios in which carbon from generating facilities serving Wisconsin customers could be captured, transported and sequestered.

Wind generation reduces climate-changing emissions

From a report titled "The Facts about Wind Energy’s Emissions Savings" prepared by the American Wind Energy Association:

. . . four of the seven major independent grid operators in the
U.S. have studied the emissions impact of adding wind energy to their power grids, and all four have found that adding wind energy drastically reduces emissions of carbon dioxide and other harmful pollutants. While the emissions savings depend somewhat on the existing share of coal-fired versus gas-fired generation in the region, as one would expect, it is impossible to dispute the findings of these four independent grid operators that adding wind energy to their grids has significantly reduced emissions. . . .

DOE data show that wind and other renewables’ share of Texas’s
electric mix increased from 1.3% in 2005 to 4.4% in 2008, an increase in share of 3.1 percentage points. During that period, electric sector carbon dioxide emissions declined by 3.3%, even though electricity use actually increased by 2% during that time. Because of wind energy, the state of Texas was able to turn what would have been a carbon emissions increase into a decrease of 8,690,000 metric tons per year, equal to the emissions savings of taking around 1.5 million cars off the road.

Political gridlock not likely to forestall energy regulation

From an article by Tom Content in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Bayside — The partisan divide on Capitol Hill means cap-and-trade legislation is all but dead, so businesses need not worry about their carbon footprint, right? Wrong, speakers at a summit on energy efficiency said Tuesday.

The Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and global corporations such as Wal-Mart are leading the nation down a path of "quiet regulation" of greenhouse gases, despite the political rhetoric and battles that have created gridlock in Congress, Mark Thimke, environmental lawyer at Foley & Lardner, said during the Green Manufacturing Summit at the Schlitz Audubon Nature Center.

But corporate initiatives have gone beyond Wal-Mart, he said.

Suppliers to 62 corporations must provide information as part of a greenhouse gas supply chain initiative launched this year. That effort includes Racine County-based manufacturers S.C. Johnson & Son Inc. and Diversey Inc., formerly JohnsonDiversey.

Thimke said that means a host of companies that may have thought they didn't have to worry about greenhouse gases should start paying attention.

"Even if you aren't one of the big companies and you are selling to these people, you need to know where you're at," Thimke said.

Energy efficiency is a carbon strategy because emissions are linked to energy production.

Efficiency opportunities abound for many manufacturers, said Jon Dommissee of Bradley Corp., a manufacturer of commercial plumbing fixtures, which co-sponsored the event.

"There's a lot of energy wasted - and there's a lot of money wasted," he said.

Xcel's CEO among those calling for a tax on carbon

From an article by Neal St. Anthony in the Star Tribune, Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN:

Dick Kelly, CEO of Xcel Energy Inc., is irked that Congress hasn't raised his taxes.

"We need a price on carbon," said Kelly, who runs a multistate utility in the vanguard of next-generation efficiency and cleaner-energy programs.

Kelly, Duke Power CEO Jim Rogers and other utility executives have been expecting Congress to pass cap-and-trade legislation, which would effectively place a tax on carbon emissions. Both Xcel and Duke have moved expeditiously in recent years to modernize old coal-fired plants, switch to wind and natural gas, and implement conservation programs in a bid to cut their carbon dioxide emissions by up to 25 percent by 2025 and meet state mandates to reduce pollutants that climate scientists say lead to global warming.

"The industry could have worked with the 'Kerry-Lieberman' bill in the Senate, but the Republicans backed away and started calling it 'cap-and-tax,'" Kelly said.

So instead of providing incentives for the utility industry to invest in next-generation, clean-coal programs and promising carbon-diversion efforts, the U.S. Senate is now considering more rules and mandates instead. Kelly and Rogers think that's a mistake.

'Let's move forward'

"There is growing consensus in the electric utility industry to act now, so let's move forward," Rogers wrote earlier this summer. "Duke Energy and other electric utilities are already scheduled to retire and replace virtually all coal and other large power plants with cleaner and more efficient technologies by 2050.

"A clear and predictable federal energy and climate policy can accelerate these projects and put private capital to work more rapidly. It can also create millions of jobs. This would not only reduce greenhouse gas emissions but would also reduce sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and mercury emissions. That would improve air quality across the board."

Environmentalist Bill McKibben: We're losing climate battle

From an article by Nathan Vine in the Stevens Point Journal:

CUSTER -- Bill McKibben said he considered himself fortunate to be at the 21st annual Midwest Renewable Energy Fair.

Being in a Midwestern atmosphere that he characterized as "very clear, practical and ready to get things done," McKibben said it was a great backdrop for the theme of his keynote address at the fair Saturday.
McKibben, an internationally known environmentalist and founder of the 350.org campaign, said those who seek to fight the planet's climate problems face a difficult task.

"We're losing, and losing pretty badly to do what we need to make this planet work," McKibben said. "If we are going to win, it's going to take an enormous amount of that practical spirit."

In between being honored by a pair of standing ovations, and the announcement that the MREA had planted a tree in his honor next to others planted for founding members of the event and past speakers at the event, McKibben focused on the work that still needs to be done.

He pointed out that despite the obvious effects of too much carbon in the atmosphere -- which now stands at 392 parts per million, and which he hopes to reduce to 350 -- from the increase of global temperature to the pollutive effect on the oceans, political forces and the fossil fuel industry have successfully kept substantive change from being made.

"The only way we are going to have the kind of change we need is to radically increase the cost of fossil fuels," McKibben said. "To do that, we need to be engaging in the political battle that we haven't been able to."

McKibben has tried to rally support to that battle through his work with 350.org. In 2009, he and his team coordinated some 5,200 events in 181 countries in one day to bring awareness to the problem of carbon. This year on Oct. 10, they are planning a global work party, where people can take on environmentally friendly projects.

Bill McKibben leads list of Energy Fair keynote speakers, June 18-20

From the announcement of keynote speakers for the Energy Fair of the Midwest Renewable Energy Associaiton:

On Saturday, June 19, 2010, join us to hear an inspirational keynote address from noted environmentalist, activist and author, Bill McKibben. Bill is the founder of 350.org, an international climate campaign. He frequently writes about global warming, alternative energy, and the risks associated with human genetic engineering. Beginning in the summer of 2006, he led the organization of the largest demonstrations against global warming in American history.

Bill has written many books including The End of Nature and is a frequent contributor to various magazines including The New York Times, The Atlantic Monthly, Harper's, Orion Magazine, Mother Jones, The New York Review of Books, Granta, Rolling Stone, and Outside. He is also a board member and contributor to Grist Magazine. Bill has a new book out, Eaarth, that details how we can't continue the unsustainable consumer culture and gives us hope for a more sustainable future.

Visit Bill McKibben's website to learn more.

Clean Energy Jobs Act will prepare state companies for carbon rules

From a news release issued by the business coalition Clean, Responsible Energy for Wisconsin’s Economy:

(MADISON, Wis.)—The proposed Clean Energy Jobs Act will prepare Wisconsin businesses for upcoming federal climate legislation, especially as it relates to managing carbon output, the coalition for Clean, Responsible Energy for Wisconsin’s Economy (CREWE) announced today.

As exemplified by a report in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, businesses must brace “for a variety of new mandates aimed at disclosing to investors the carbon risks they face.” Rules are already in place from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Securities and Exchange Commission, among other agencies.

“Regardless of when federal climate legislation will be passed, the provisions in the Clean Energy Jobs Act will steer local companies in the right direction in addressing their carbon output,” Thad Nation, executive director of CREWE, said. “We need to do everything we can to help our state’s businesses because their viability directly affects Wisconsin’s economic climate.”

The Clean Energy Jobs Act (AB 649/SB 450) includes energy efficiency programs and renewable portfolio standards that aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from state businesses.

CREWE is a coalition that formed to advocate meaningful change in energy policy consistent with the Governor’s Global Warming Task Force final report, which will have a positive impact on Wisconsin’s economic development and security while fostering job creation.

CREWE’s membership consists of CleanPower, Alliant Energy, EcoEnergy, Johnson Controls, Xcel Energy, C5•6 Technologies, Axley Brynelson, Madison Gas and Electric, Orion Energy Systems, Forest County Potawatomi Community, Wisconsin Energy Corp., Poblocki Sign Company, Emerging Energies of Wisconsin, MillerCoors, America Transmission Co., WPPI Energy, DTE Energy Services, Kranz, Inc. and Greenwood Fuels.

Coal is king in Wisconsin

From an article by Mike Ivey in The Capital Times:

You might not know from all the breathless stories about biomass, wind power or solar energy, but Wisconsin is burning coal like there is no tomorrow.

A new report from Clean Wisconsin notes that while coal use dropped 9.3 percent in the U.S. last year, it was rising in the land of Packer football and factory farming.

Wisconsin increased its consumption of coal for electric production by 1.1 percent between November 2008 and November 2009, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration's February 2010 "Electric Power Monthly."

The increase is directly attributable to Wisconsin's recent construction of three new coal plants which cost nearly $3 billion in construction costs alone, the group said.

"The $16 billion river of dirty fossil fuels flowing into our state is getting deeper," said Peter Taglia, staff scientist at Clean Wisconsin, the state's largest environmental advocacy organization. "Coal is the dirtiest source of power production, and, with no fossil fuel reserves of our own, we create significant environmental and economic harm to our state by relying on coal to meet our energy needs."

Taglia said the increase "highlights the need to maintain strong renewable energy standards and energy efficiency provisions in the Clean Energy Jobs Act."

PSC issues draft report on the potential for carbon sequestration, seeks comment

A news release issued by the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin:

MADISON – Today, the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC) in partnership with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources issued a draft report on the potential of geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide produced by Wisconsin’s coal-fired power plants. The PSC is asking for public input on the draft report.

Based on recommendations by the Governor's Task Force on Global Warming, the PSC and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources formed a Study Group to look into the potential for carbon sequestration in Wisconsin, a process of capturing carbon dioxide produced by coal-fired power plants that would otherwise be released into the atmosphere and securely storing, or sequestering, the carbon dioxide underground. Carbon dioxide is one of several known greenhouse gases (GHG) that contribute to global warming.

“New regulations limiting greenhouse gas emissions appear to be inevitable,” said PSC Commissioner Mark Meyer. “These regulations could radically change the economics of coal-fired electric generation unless the associated carbon dioxide emissions are reduced. I want to thank the work group for their hard work in preparing this report. It is in step with keeping Governor Doyle’s vision of Wisconsin being a leader in producing cleaner more efficient energy.”

Wisconsin currently relies on coal for roughly 38% of the state’s installed electric generating capacity and 66% of actual generation. Coal has historically been an abundant and inexpensive fuel for electric generation, but it also emits more carbon dioxide per unit of electricity than any other fuel in common use, making it the largest source of GHG in Wisconsin and nationally, responsible for more than 30% of total emissions.

The Study Group found that several promising technologies are being developed and tested for capturing carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. Carbon dioxide can be captured either pre- or post-combustion, depending on the type of power plant, and compressed for transport and disposal. The Study Group also found that long-distance transport of carbon dioxide is a proven, viable option with over 3,000 miles of pipeline already in use for this purpose nationwide.

The Study Group conducted its business publicly. All meetings were open to the public, and associated documents were available to the public via the Public Service Commission website.

The PSC is looking for the public to comment on the draft report by April 2, 2010. The draft report, An Investigation to Explore the Potential for Geologic Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide Produced by Wisconsin’s Electricity Generation Fleet, can be found by visiting the PSC website and clicking on the Regulatory Filing System (ERF) at http://psc.wi.gov/. Type case numbers 5-EI-145 in the boxes provided on the ERF system.

NREL sudy shows 20% wind is possible by 2024

From a news release issued by the National Renewable Energy Lab:

[T]he U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) released the Eastern Wind Integration and Transmission Study (EWITS). This unprecedented two-and-a-half year technical study of future high-penetration wind scenarios was designed to analyze the economic, operational, and technical implications of shifting 20 percent or more of the Eastern Interconnection’s electrical load to wind energy by the year 2024.

“Twenty percent wind is an ambitious goal, but this study shows that there are multiple scenarios through which it can be achieved,” said David Corbus, NREL project manager for the study. “Whether we’re talking about using land-based wind in the Midwest, offshore wind in the East or any combination of wind power resources, any plausible scenario requires transmission infrastructure upgrades and we need to start planning for that immediately.”

The study identified operational best practices and analyzed wind resources, future wind deployment scenarios, and transmission options. Among its key findings are:

•The integration of 20 percent wind energy is technically feasible, but will require significant expansion of the transmission infrastructure and system operational changes in order for it to be realized;
•Without transmission enhancements, substantial curtailment of wind generation would be required for all 20 percent wind scenarios studied;
•The relative cost of aggressively expanding the existing transmission grid represents only a small portion of the total annualized costs in any of the scenarios studied;
•Drawing wind energy from a larger geographic area makes it both less expensive and a more reliable energy source – increasing the geographic diversity of wind power projects in a given operating pool makes the aggregated wind power output more predictable and less variable;
•Wind energy development is a highly cost-effective way to reduce carbon emissions – as more wind energy comes online, less energy from fossil-fuel burning plants is required, reducing greenhouse gas emissions;
•Carbon emissions are reduced by similar amounts in all scenarios, indicating that transmission helps to optimize the electrical system and does not result in coal power being shipped from the Midwest to New England States;
•Reduced fossil fuel expenditures more than pay for the increased costs of additional transmission in all high wind scenarios.

How does the everyday Joe benefit from Green Power?

From Ask Bob, a feature on the Web site of Madison Gas and Electric.

Midwest group unveils cap-and-trade climate change plan

From a story by Stephanie Hemphill on Minnesota Public Radio:

St. Paul, Minn. — Representatives from six Midwest states and one Canadian province completed a plan today to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The advisory group recommends a cap-and-trade program that calls for close to 20 percent reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, and 80 percent reduction by 2050.

Under the plan, most of the permits to emit carbon dioxide will be allocated to utilities and industry for a small fee at first. But they'll gradually be shifted to an auction, where the price is expected to go up over time. After 18 years, all the permits will have to be acquired by auction.

When the advisory group was set up, the president was George W. Bush, who made it clear he was not interested in government action on climate change. Now, Congress is moving quickly to present President Barak Obama with a plan, which he pushed strongly during his campaign.

Members of the Midwestern group, with representatives from Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan and Manitoba, all said they think a national plan is a better way to go. But they wanted a regional plan to influence the national debate. Some members say the Midwest has special needs that Washington might overlook.

"Our region is coal-dependent, and has a lot of heavy industry, and so could be affected disproportionately compared to other areas like the Pacific Northwest," said Ron Thilly, CEO of a Wisconsin utility. "So it's important that the Midwest do a good job in influencing the structure of a cap and trade program so that it mitigates the costs to consumers while at the same time achieving the environmental objectives."

Environmental groups pushed for even more aggressive goals, but compromised. Henry Henderson of the Natural Resources Defense Council says his group supported an auction for permits from the very beginning, arguing that the money could be used to help homeowners deal with higher energy costs, and to invest in weatherization and other energy-efficiency programs.

But in the give-and-take of the advisory group meetings, Henderson says he came to recognize the needs of industry too.

"There are parts of heavy industry in the Midwest, including the coal generators, who need to invest to clean up their emissions," he said. "They need to have the resources to do that, and we have an understanding of this from this intense discussion."

That willingness to bend has been a hallmark of the process, according to Jesse Heier, a staff member for the Midwestern Governors Association.

Oil & gas industry seeks energy dependence, ignores peak oil, and opposes climate protection plans

The oil and gas industry's energy policy: Drill, baby, drill! Import, baby, import!:

+ Increase, not decrease energy production by promoting all sources. [In other words, peak oil doesn't exist.]
+ Encourage energy efficiency as a core American principle.
+ Encourage investment in advanced technologies and long-term energy initiatives.
+ Allow market forces to allocate products and adjust to changing conditions.
+ Refrain from new taxes that make it more expensive to develop our domestic supplies.
+ Support the need to participate actively in global energy markets rather than isolate the U.S. [In other words, become more dependent on foreign sources.]

From print ad of the oil and gas industry:

Congress will soon consider massive new taxes and fees – which could easily exceed $400 billion – on America’s oil and natural gas industry, yet this level could produce devastating effects on our economy, all when America can least afford it.

These unprecedented taxes and fees would reduce investment in new energy supplies at a time when nearly two-thirds of Americans support developing our domestic oil and natural gas resources. That would mean less energy, and it would cost thousands of American jobs, actually reduce local, state and federal revenue, and further erode our energy security.

Learn more and tell Congress to oppose these proposals to impose $400 billion in tax hikes on America’s oil and natural gas companies. By using SocialCapital, you can voice your opinions to public officials and members of Congress about key energy issues via Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and more.

PSC issues final Strategic Energy Assessment

From a news release issued by the Public Service Commission:

MADISON – The Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSC) has issued the final Strategic Energy Assessment – Energy 2014, which includes recommendations for a more regional and coordinated approach to energy generation, transmission and renewables planning, as the country moves closer to enacting comprehensive greenhouse gas regulation.

In the final report, the Commission directs PSC staff to prepare a detailed statewide analysis that evaluates how Wisconsin utilities might go about cost-effectively meeting medium-term greenhouse gas reduction targets. The staff analysis will describe potential power plant additions and retirements, possible repowering and fuel switching, and any other measures or costs that may go into complying with a national cap and trade program. This analysis will then be made available for comments from utilities and other interested stakeholders.

“Federal greenhouse gas regulations are coming,” said PSC Chairperson Eric Callisto. “We need to have a comprehensive, least-cost strategy that will enable Wisconsin to comply with new climate change regulation in as cost-effective a manner as possible. The analyses that we will undertake as part of Energy 2014 will, at least in part, help this state meet that challenge. . . .”

Biennially the PSC prepares a strategic energy assessment to evaluate the state’s current and future energy demands. The final report, based on data and information collected in 2007 and 2008 from Wisconsin utilities and power cooperatives highlights several conclusions:

· Mandatory constraints on greenhouse gas emissions at the state, regional and federal level appear to be inevitable, and will carry significant implications for Wisconsin’s electric utilities, as electric power generation is responsible for more than 30 percent of Wisconsin’s greenhouse gas emissions;

· Significant approved new generation coming online is expected to keep planning reserve margins near or above 19 percent through 2012 and based on already approved construction, the planning reserve margin for 2014 is expected to be nearly 12 percent. This number is expected to increase as more energy efficiency is implemented and new generation is proposed;

· Generation planning shows no new baseload generation is needed during this SEA period on a statewide basis;

· It is expected that the current and ongoing transmission system expansion and improvements will greatly enhance the ability to move electicity into and within Wisconsin by 2010; and

· Energy efficiency, conservation, and load control will play an important role in reducing Wisconsin’s energy costs and environmental impacts.

Pleasant Prairie experiment: Subtracting carbon from coal

From a post by Tom Content on JS Online:

The carbon dioxide catch-and-release experiment in Pleasant Prairie, which started last year, is getting some more attention today.

The We Energies power plant is the site of a project funded in part by the Electric Power Research Institute and the French company Alstom. Alstom has built a system at the state's largest coal-fired power plant that uses chilled ammonia to separate the carbon dioxide that's heads out into the atmosphere.

If all goes well with this test, the utility industry is planning a bigger demonstration of this technology at a coal plant in West Virginia.

Whatever technological change is forced on utilities, it won't come cheap, Wall Street Journal Environment Editor Jeffrey Ball writes in his column today.

"Whatever the truth about 'clean coal,' consumers will be paying for it one way or another," Ball writes.

The test is one way that the utility sector is preparing for regulation of greenhouse gases at some point by Congress. That's significant for Wisconsin given how much we rely on coal for power.

Climate scientist supports carbon tax and rebate

From a story by Tom Content in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

A federal carbon tax should be enacted but the money should be sent back to taxpayers, a leading climate scientist suggested Wednesday.

James Hansen, director of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York,who has been studying the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere for decades, said Wednesday that the U.S. government should enact a carbon fee-and-dividend that would persuade consumers to change how they use energy and reward those who reduce their carbon footprints.

"The person who does better than average in reducing carbon emissions will actually make money," he said.

In a keynote address to the Renewable Energy Summit in Milwaukee, Hansen said a national global warming policy is needed to thwart and reduce the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

"We have reached a point where there is a crisis," he said. . . .

Under Hansen's proposal, a tax, equivalent to $1 per gallon of gas would raise $670 billion a year, which would result in $3,000 being sent back to every adult in the country, and $1,500 per child, capped at a maximum of $9,000 for a family of four or more.

Hansen urged President Barack Obama to "have a fireside chat" to discuss the need for a carbon fee and of the need for Americans to change their energy habits.

A tax would also be a step toward energy independence from imported oil, said Hansen, who said a representative of the government of Saudi Arabia bristled at the idea during a dinner conversation.

"They realize that if you did this, the next time gasoline is $4 a gallon, $2 or $3 would stay in the U.S. and just be distributed back to the citizens as a dividend rather than all $4 going to the Middle East," Hansen said.

Operating in a World of Carbon Constraints: What Utilities Should Know

A brown-bag seminar from the Association of Energy Service Providers, 1:00 p.m. (Eastern), November 6:

The goal of this Brown Bag presentation is to address key U.S. greenhouse gas policy and market issues that are of increasing concern to electric utilities. The World Resources Institute* will address existing and anticipated U.S. Federal and state carbon constraint policies. Point Carbon will discuss the current and projected state of the carbon markets in the U.S. and address the issues that utilities need to be aware of in order to successfully operate in a carbon constrained environment. Participants will have a chance to obtain answers from carbon policy and market experts.

*The World Resources Institute is an environmental think tank that goes beyond research to find practical ways to protect the earth and improve people’s lives.

*Point Carbon is a world-leading provider of independent news, analysis and consulting services for global power, gas and carbon markets.

Speakers:
Lisa Zelljadt, Carbon Analyst, Point Carbon
Olga Chistyakova, Carbon Analyst, Point Carbon
Nicholas Bianco, Associate, World Resources Institute
John Larsen, Associate, World Resources Institute

Register for the online seminar here.