Jul 9 - McClatchy-Tribune Regional News - Patricia Daddona The Day, New London, Conn.


U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., plans to work to keep the overall structure of the House of Representatives' cap-and-trade bill intact while revisiting details that were criticized by big oil and environmentalists alike.

An early advocate of legislation that might reduce the impact of greenhouse gases on the environment, Lieberman said this week he would try to establish bipartisan consensus on some of the bill's more controversial elements by trying to gain support from lawmakers "who would like to say, 'yes,' who haven't said, 'no,' but aren't there yet" in terms of voting in favor of the bill this fall.

Connecticut-based and national petroleum trade groups and environmentalists alike said they have different but substantial concerns with key provisions of the new bill, and are looking to the Senate for improvements.

The American Clean Energy and Security Act narrowly approved by the House in June would impose limits on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, refineries and other entities. Pollution permits, also known as allowances or credits, would be bought and sold to meet those emissions limits.

The U.S. Senate held a hearing on the bill Tuesday and heard from President Obama's Cabinet on the need for measures the House bill outlines. The bill calls for polluting plants and firms to reduce U.S. emissions by 17 percent by 2020 compared with 2005 levels and by 83 percent by 2050.

Some of the concerns petroleum trade groups and environmentalists have raised include whether use of energy allowances are defined clearly, whether oil refineries should get more free allowances than the new bill provides, and whether there are adequate federal regulatory controls on what will become, in the words of energy experts, a brand new global marketplace.

Kyle Isakower, director of policy analysis for the American Petroleum Institute, said it is unfair that the House bill gives oil refineries only 2 percent in free allowances while the electric utility industry is in line to get 44 percent.

Consumers can expect to pay more for electricity and heating oil if the climate-change bill makes it to Obama's desk, but energy experts say its provisions would lessen that impact while reducing carbon emissions.

"Electricity costs are going to go up because of this," said Jim Norvelle, a spokesman for Dominion. "We're just trying to make sure that the increase is more reasonable."

Dominion of Virginia owns coal-fired plants that emit greenhouse gases as well as nuclear reactors like the ones at Millstone Power Station in Waterford, which do not. While the company has no plans to build any new reactors in Connecticut, it hopes to build one in Virginia, Norvelle said.

John Bilda, general manager of Norwich Public Utilities, believes the House bill as it stands would cost consumers quadruple what Connecticut's Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative cost. The state's incentive plan cost consumers an estimated $1 for every 500 kilowatt hours of electricity, he said.

According to the Congressional Budget Office's bill analysis, the cost of the cap-and-trade program is estimated at $175 a year per household.

Whether or not consumers register their views on the bill with lawmakers, senators like Lieberman are sure to hear from private industry and trade groups that have issues with details in the bill.

For instance, the amount of free allowances declines between 2026 and 2030, when full auctions begin, and Dominion believes it should not drop off as fast as it does.

"If companies have to buy allowances at auction and allowances become scarcer and more expensive, that accelerated period from 2026 to 2030 could increase the costs to consumers faster because those auction costs are going to be passed through," Norvelle said.

Environment Connecticut favors a strong bill, said program director Chris Phelps, but would like to see more of the value of pollution allowances go to consumers and back into energy efficiency, instead of being given away to the entities that pollute.

About 13 percent of the money reaped from the sale of allowances would be invested in energy efficiency and clean energy technology, while 55 percent would be used to assist consumers, the CBO found. Nineteen percent would go to power plants and other industries.

U.S. Rep. Joe Courtney, D-2nd District, who voted for the bill, said he believes if misinformation about the bill is cleared up, it has a fighting chance.

Claims that homeowners would be mandated to get an audit and a retrofit to an existing home, for instance, are "completely untrue," he said, and the bill's provision about energy labeling is limited to new construction.

"I do believe that climate change is real and as a nation we should be leading, not following, the rest of the world on it," Courtney said. "This is also a bill that builds the cost of fossil fuel carbon emissions into the cost of energy production and reduces dependence on fossil fuels.

"This bill actually levels the playing field for the rest of the country, because we're already doing this in Connecticut."

(c) 2009, McClatchy-Tribune Information Services