Solar Energy News  
Effective Carbon Control Policy Can Improve Competition Climate And Power Costs

Beyond the environmental impact of rising carbon dioxide levels, Apt and co-authors warn of three adverse consequences of delaying effective carbon control incentives: 1. Investment in effective carbon control strategies will be stifled 2. Taking more draconian measures at mid-century will likely cost twice as much as implementing more moderate measures now 3. Aging plants will be replaced by new, high carbon-emissions plants, whose future carbon-control retrofits will cost much more than if added during initial design and construction.
by Staff Writers
Pittsburgh PA (SPX) Feb 23, 2007
Jay Apt, a professor at Carnegie Mellon University's Tepper School of Business and co-author of a forthcoming paper outlining incentives for controlling carbon emissions, warns of the consequences of delay in enacting effective electric sector policy. He will present his research in a presentation titled "Controlling Carbon in the United States Electric Power Sector," Feb. 18 at the American Association for the Advancement of Science's (AAAS) annual meeting in San Francisco.

His presentation will be part of a session titled "Energy or Climate Security: Do We Have to Choose?"

Apt, executive director of Carnegie Mellon's Electricity Industry Center, argues that the cost of sector-wide carbon controls could double if policymakers wait to respond until faced with public panic over adverse environmental effects. During the AAAS session, Apt will discuss the research of he and co-authors David W. Keith of the University of Calgary and M. Granger Morgan, co-director of the Electricity Industry Center and head of Carnegie Mellon's Department of Engineering and Public Policy. The Electric Industry Center is jointly housed in the Tepper School and the university's Department of Engineering and Public Policy.

In the United States, electric power production generates more carbon dioxide than any other sector of the economy, meaning the electricity industry will have to assume the biggest burden for its reduction. If implemented in an orderly way, an 80 percent reduction of carbon dioxide from power plants is likely to cost about half of what the U.S. spent complying with the Clean Air Act a generation ago. Beyond the environmental impact of rising carbon dioxide levels, Apt and co-authors warn of three adverse consequences of delaying effective carbon control incentives:

1. Investment in effective carbon control strategies will be stifled

2. Taking more draconian measures at mid-century will likely cost twice as much as implementing more moderate measures now

3. Aging plants will be replaced by new, high carbon-emissions plants, whose future carbon-control retrofits will cost much more than if added during initial design and construction.

Apt and co-authors urge policymakers to adopt a two-prong approach to creating market-based incentives to reduce carbon emissions. A carbon portfolio standard would provide certainty about future carbon dioxide emissions targets, and federal loan guarantees for capital construction costs would help reduce the barriers to widespread adoption of emissions-control technology.

The authors also warn that delay in enacting effective carbon emissions controls will erode U.S. competitiveness, as foreign companies continue to develop control technology patents.

"A carbon portfolio standard is the least-cost national solution," the authors conclude.

Related Links
Carnegie Mellon University
Powering The World in the 21st Century at Energy-Daily.com
Our Polluted World and Cleaning It Up
China News From SinoDaily.com
Global Trade News
The Economy
All About Solar Energy at SolarDaily.com
Civil Nuclear Energy Science, Technology and News
Powering The World in the 21st Century at Energy-Daily.com



Memory Foam Mattress Review
Newsletters :: SpaceDaily :: SpaceWar :: TerraDaily :: Energy Daily
XML Feeds :: Space News :: Earth News :: War News :: Solar Energy News


A New Russian Energy Monopoly For Better Or For Worse
Moscow (RIA Novosti) Feb 16, 2007
What should we make of the recently announced decision by Gazprom and Siberian Coal Energy Company (SUEK) to set up a new power generation champion? The authorities have both endorsed the transaction and hurried to forecast a bright outlook for it on the Russian energy market. The reaction of the business community, however, was more equivocal. On the one hand, this seems to be a logical final stage in the consolidation of the industry.







  • Czech Government Rejects Australian Bid For Uranium Mine
  • Russia, RSA Discuss Nuclear Cooperation Program - Agency Head
  • Swedish nuclear reactor shut down
  • Russia Pins Energy Hopes On New Nuclear Monopoly

  • Global Warming Is Real But Not A Priority
  • Russia, Kyoto Protocol And Climate Change
  • In Chilly Washington Global Warming Gets New Airing
  • Blair Wants New Climate Change Deal Before Exit

  • European Ministers Uphold Hungary's Right To Ban GMO Crop
  • Ban Subsidies To Deep-Sea Fishing Bandits
  • Roses Are Red But Chocolate Can Be Green
  • Architectural Plan Revealed Of Doomsday Arctic Seed Vault

  • Chimpanzees Found To Use Tools To Hunt Mammalian Prey
  • St Petersburg Court Rejects Schoolgirl Suit Over Darwinism
  • Rat Like Senses A Whisker Away From Humans
  • Antarctic Warming To Reduce Animals At Base Of Ecosystem As Penguin Shift South

  • Engine Helps Satellites Blast Off With Less Fuel
  • NASA Solicits Ideas For Constellation Ground Work
  • New Space Technology Provides Less Shake Rattle And Roll
  • DemoFlight 2 Launch Update



  • Scientists Gear Up For Envisat 2007 Symposium
  • ITT Passes Critical Design Review for GOES-R Advanced Baseline Imager
  • Sandstorm Over The Mediterranean
  • 3D Upstart Eyes Google Earth With Helicopter

  • Light Carbon-Fiber Structure Protects Heavy Space Cargo
  • High-Quality Helium Crystals Show Supersolid Behavior
  • Under Pressure, Vanadium Won't Turn Down The Volume
  • Introducing The Coolest Spacecraft In The Universe

  • The content herein, unless otherwise known to be public domain, are Copyright Space.TV Corporation. AFP and UPI Wire Stories are copyright Agence France-Presse and United Press International. ESA Portal Reports are copyright European Space Agency. All NASA sourced material is public domain. Additional copyrights may apply in whole or part to other bona fide parties. Advertising does not imply endorsement, agreement or approval of any opinions, statements or information provided by Space.TV Corp on any Web page published or hosted by Space.TV Corp. Privacy Statement