How will carbon capture affect your utility bill? Posted by Joe Lucas on 04/20/2009 08:00:00 AM

I know, I talk a lot about the need to keep the compliance costs of reducing greenhouse gas emissions affordable, and there is really some promising news on that front.

At George Washington University’s Accelerating Greenhouse Gas Reductions symposium, Professor Ed Rubin from Carnegie Mellon University gave attendees an update on carbon capture and sequestration technologies, including cost estimates and the overall importance of the technology in our low-carbon toolkit.

From the outset, Professor Rubin stated that “coal will not go away for many decades” and that alternative sources would not easily be able to achieve the large CO2 reductions needed to stabilize CO2 concentrations.

“[CCS] would allow continued coal use as a bridge to a more sustainable future,” said Professor Rubin, noting that CCS was also a potential link to carbon-free transportation, as the cheapest way to make hydrogen was from coal (hydrogen, of course, is seen as a possible alternative to traditional gasoline).

Moreover, Professor Rubin said that economic models show that including CCS in a portfolio of low-carbon energy options significantly reduces the costs of mitigating climate change. If we were talking about needing to hit smaller reduction numbers, he said, we’d be talking about a different type of solution.

But just how much will carbon capture technology cost? And how will it affect your utility bills?

Professor Rubin said that if we apply today’s carbon capture technology to a gasification plant, the initial capital and generating costs would increase 30 to 50 percent. However, these are not increases consumers would immediately see in their monthly utility bill, as utility bills reflect costs from a mix of electricity generation.

In the long-term, CCS has great implications for the cost of electricity, said the professor, who cited DOE figures that CCS could potentially reduce the total cost of electricity by 19-28 percent.

While the benefits of commercial-scale CCS are many for the economy, climate and our national security, Professor Rubin along with the other panelists noted that we need to start walking the walk—and that government action is needed to help us remove legal and regulatory impediments that slow our technological success.

Affordable electricity as important as ever Posted by Joe Lucas on 04/10/2009 03:58:43 PM

With all the talk of climate legislation, it’s important we not forget the effects new regulations could have on American consumers.

Thanks to the use of low-cost coal, many Americans have long enjoyed the benefits of affordable electricity. Unfortunately, many consumers could see their utility bills rise significantly under some proposed climate legislation plans.

The New York Times recently explored how Missourians could be adversely affected by higher electricity rates. In the article, several Show Me-staters explain their concerns over climate change, but worry that the costs associated with new legislation will fall on those who can least afford it.

Here at ACCCE, we support federal climate legislation, but we also know that American consumers must be insulated from skyrocketing electric bills. To that end, we crafted our climate strategy based on several legislative principles – which include cost-containment measures to protect both individual consumers and our economy.

Affordable electricity is a bright spot for many in these trying economic times. Let’s do all we can to make sure it stays that way.

Compressing the cost of carbon capture Posted by Joe Lucas on 03/11/2009 12:01:34 PM

The cost of deploying carbon capture and sequestration technologies—the latest advancement in a suite of clean coal technologies—is a topic that is getting some press these days.

It seems that people are figuring out that telling the American people that something can’t be done isn’t too popular, so the new line of attack is that it will be too expensive. (According to one New York Times blogger, the price of carbon sequestration rests largely on the purported price of carbon dioxide emissions under a carbon trading or carbon tax policy.)

I agree that the cost is critically important. First, the cost for deploying CCS has to be viewed in comparison to other alternatives. In most cases, displaced coal generation would be replaced with natural gas and nuclear – both of which have higher costs (and in the case of natural gas could increase energy imports). When you look at the facts here (especially given the opportunity costs of not having these technologies for deployment in China, India and other countries) it becomes clear why the deployment of CCS is so crucial.

Second, we can and should take every opportunity we can to drive down the cost of deploying these technologies (just like we did for technologies to capture SO2 and NOx). That starts with robust programs to spur the development and deployment of these technologies. It also includes policy frameworks to ensure that we don’t unnecessarily raise compliance costs (through allowance auctions versus allocations) realizing that higher compliance costs are just passed along to the consumer in the form of higher electricity costs.

There is no reason to be concerned about the ultimate cost of CCS if we’re smart enough to approach this in a way that ultimately makes sure the consumer is paying the lowest possible cost for the emissions reduction. If we do that, we’ll have a policy that works for both the environment and our economy.

Why we need to fight for affordable energy Posted by Joe Lucas on 03/09/2009 12:02:49 PM

As if we needed another reason to fight for affordable energy...

... a study released today says that American families faced the biggest increase in energy costs on record last year, driven in large part by costs for transportation fuels driven by global demand.

For the half of the U.S. families earning $50,000 or less, energy costs consumed 20 percent of after-tax income in 2008. The study also reveals energy costs consumed a quarter of after-tax income when families made $30,000 or less.

Click here to see the study.

Affordable energy has never been more important Posted by Joe Lucas on 02/26/2009 01:38:40 PM

I’ve mentioned a few times that affordable energy is vital to rebuilding our economy.

What do I mean by that?

Well, it’s a fact that American businesses need affordable electricity.

According to Economy.com’s 2008 North American Business Cost Review, energy costs are second only to labor costs in determining the viability of a business in a given location.

So that’s why you see states like Kentucky with traditional low-cost energy doing very well at attracting manufacturing jobs. Georgia doesn’t have many coal industry jobs, but coal provides over 60 percent of the state’s electricity. As a result of the low electricity prices that coal provides, Georgia sees a significant economic impact. Other states like California and several in New England that have among the highest costs of electricity have lost industry.

How expensive is electricity in your state? Take a look at this map.

Remember, coal is a third of the price of other fuels, so it’s likely that if coal provides the majority of electricity in your state… you’ll have cheaper power and be in a better position to attract businesses.

Fixing the economy means going back to basics Posted by Joe Lucas on 02/23/2009 04:41:51 PM

Tomorrow night, President Obama will tell Congress that his highest priority is getting America’s economy back on track.

I couldn’t agree more.

Sometimes, getting back on track can be as simple as getting back to basics. And for the American economy and quality of life, affordable energy is truly a basic necessity.

Consider this: energy costs are second only to labor costs in determining the viability of a business in a given location. Thus, access to low-cost energy means stronger businesses and more jobs for American workers. Of course, for working families, lower energy costs mean more money to make ends meet in challenging economic times.

I believe affordable energy is critical to our economic recovery, and I would like to hear the president talk about how it is we are going to hold the line on rising energy costs as we meet more stringent environmental standards.

But that’s just my take. What would you like to hear? Tell us here at Behind the Plug, and click here to get involved in keeping energy affordable for American families.

Follow our commentary during President Obama's speech on Twitter.

A Regrettable Choice for Michigan Posted by Joe Lucas on 02/10/2009 10:50:54 AM

You may have read that Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm has decided to delay the process of reviewing air permits for the construction of coal-generated power plants in her state.

This is regrettable.

As American automakers shift to manufacturing plug-in hybrids to keep pace with President Obama’s challenge to put a million of these vehicles on the road, Michigan will require a robust supply of baseload electricity.

And renewable resources such as wind and solar alone will not be sufficient to meet that growing need.

Gov. Granholm also set a goal to reduce the carbon footprint associated with power generation in her state. That goal can be best met through deploying new technologies that capture and store CO2, not through mandates that would lessen Michigan’s reliance on affordable, domestic energy resources like coal – which currently provides more than 60 percent of Michigan’s power.

There are currently eight new coal plants being proposed in Michigan. Each of these projects provides an opportunity to create jobs for Michigan workers and ensure that electricity production keeps pace with the state’s projected energy needs. These plants can be retrofitted with advanced technologies to capture and store CO2. In fact, given the time necessary to permit and construct a new power plant today, it’s possible that these technologies would become available for deployment at or very near the time these new plants are put into operation.

Just like the rest of country, Michigan’s future energy needs will be best met by maintaining a diverse portfolio of energy resources. But even with the expanded use of renewables, coal will still need to play a significant role in meeting those needs.

Clean coal technology to the economic rescue Posted by Joe Lucas on 11/25/2008 04:24:00 PM

Coal has long been an economic boon for our nation, and with constantly evolving clean coal technologies, it will continue to play a vital role.

With the right investments in clean coal technology, the United States would have an opportunity to capture a growing share of the export market for coal-based fuel products that enhance efficiency and environmental performance to countries around the world.

After all, global demand for power generating technologies and services is anticipated to create a $480 billion export market over the next three decades and support more than 600,000 jobs in the U.S. power-equipment industry.

These jobs are getting greener every day. In fact, there is over $6 billion in clean coal research underway right now in 41 states — even ones not normally associated with coal production.

Click here to find a clean coal technology project near you.

Affordable power is more vital now than ever (did you see the stock market today?) Posted by Joe Lucas on 10/06/2008 07:25:40 PM

Tomorrow's presidential debate here in Nashville will be town hall-style. Given the stock market's free fall, we're bound to hear a lot about the economy.

Remember, coal is by far our most affordable fuel source. Here’s how some of our major energy sources stack up based on the average cost in dollars per million Btu for 2007 (annual average for the full year):

Coal — $1.78
Natural gas — $7.45
Petroleum liquids — $9.21

Here in Tennessee, site of tomorrow's presidential debate, 64.8 percent of electricity comes from coal. Remember: it's abundant, affordable and increasingly clean.

Credit Crunch = Lights Out? Posted by Joe Lucas on 10/06/2008 04:31:21 PM

A report recently released by the NextGen Energy Council poses an unsettling question: Could the U.S. face blackouts as early as next summer?

It’s certainly possible according to NextGen’s recent report, “Lights Out In 2009?”, which warns that if Western regions experience prolonged hot temperatures, “the potential for local brownouts or blackouts is high, with significant risk that local disruptions could cascade into regional outages that could cost the economy tens of billions of dollars.”

The report outlines the problem in simple terms:

1. U.S. baseload generation capacity reserve margins have declined to 17 percent in 2007 (down 30­–40 percent since the 1990s).

2. A 12–15 percent capacity reserve margin is the minimum required to ensure the stability of our grid.

3. The projected U.S. demand for electricity in the next 10 years has grown by 18 percent (well beyond the projected eight percent between now and 2016).

On top of all this, the Wall Street Journal reported this week that American utilities are feeling the credit crunch.

You see, the utilities need cash to build plants and transmission lines that help us keep the lights on. Given the tighter national purse strings, utility companies—just like the rest of us—are finding it tougher to secure the funds they need.

The situation is so dire that NextGen is recommending at least a $300 billion investment in generation and transmission facilities by 2016 just to keep the grid stable.

On top of the financial challenges, NextGen cites a handful of other barriers to getting new plants and transmission lines built, including the “opposition of well-funded environmental groups that oppose and file lawsuits against virtually every new infrastructure project proposed.” Among the thwarted new energy projects: clean coal plants and technologies that take our most abundant resource and turn it into an affordable source of baseload power for millions.

As we’ve said before, coal needs to be part of America’s energy solution. Does that solution include wind and solar? Absolutely. But as NextGen has shown us this week, coal is still one of our best options for producing baseload electricity. With a little support and ingenuity, coal can help us alleviate the pain our current economic and climate crises. 

Read more.