Will
Congress Take Charge of Climate Issue, or Let Bureaucrats, Courts
Decide?
September 28, 2009
Last week, it was Pacific Gas
& Electric of California, followed quickly by PNM Resources of
New Mexico.
Today,
Exelon Energy, which serves four big industrial states in the Midwest
and Northeast, joined the parade of large utilities bailing out of the
U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
PG&E, PNM, and Exelon strongly
support passing legislation to limit carbon pollution. Fed up with the
U.S. chamber's hell-no stance against passing climate legislation, they
took a walk from an organization that has let obstructionists call the
shots.
Congress must put a price on carbon emissions in order to
drive investments in low-carbon energy. Utilities like PG&E,
PNM,
and Exelon would rather figure out how to make money off cleaner energy
technologies than stick with the U.S. chamber and waste the country's
time trying to make the world stand still.
A market-based
approach would give forward-looking utilities the incentive they need
to invest further in energy conservation, renewables, high-efficiency
gas, and advanced nuclear plants. For example, one-third of
PG&E's
electricity portfolio is made up of renewables, while Exelon runs
America's largest fleet of nuclear power plants.
The alternative
is the bureaucratic hammer. As Exelon CEO John Rowe said today,
"Inaction on climate is not an option. If Congress does not act, EPA
will, and the result will be more arbitrary, more expensive, and more
uncertain for investors and the industry than a reasonable,
market-based legislative solution."
Or, the courts could be in
the driver's seat. The 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled
September 21 that states and environmental organizations may bring
public nuisance litigation against utilities over their carbon
emissions.
The question for Congress is this: Will Democrats and
Republicans listen to Exelon and like-minded utilities and responsibly
work together to pass a reasonable, balanced, market-oriented climate
bill expeditiously? Or will they listen to the U.S. chamber and other
obstructionists, stall legislation, and risk putting EPA and/or the
courts in charge?
