A Columbia University study of how senators voted on the 2008 climate bill reveals that 'no' votes were far more likely to come from coal-producing states. That factor was stronger than any but party affiliation, Christa Marshall of ClimateWire reports for The New York Times. "Dealing with U.S. coal is going to the biggest thing they're going to have to resolve," Columbia sociologist Dana Fisher told Marshall.
Swaying coal-state senators may be further complicated by a divide between Western and Eastern coal, Marshall reports. Some experts say Western coal is better suited for carbon-capture-and-sequestration technology supported by the bill, and interests of the two regions could conflict. States like Missouri, which gets more than 85 percent of its electricity from coal but produces little, have also reaped the benefits of cheap power. Rural electric cooperatives, which get 80 percent of their power from coal, could be a key factor in climate-bill negotiations.
The co-ops and some Midwestern utilities are pushing for more free carbon-dioxide emissions allowances in the bill for states that have traditionally low electric prices. Glenn English, the head of the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, told Marshall the "basis of a deal" on climate change would revolve around helping coal consumers weatherize their homes to cut costs, and authority for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to site electrical transmission lines, bypassing state utility regulators. (Read more)
Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa is trying to round up Senate votes for such a deal, or something to cushion the impact of higher electric rates, Philip Brasher of the Des Moines Register's Washington Bureau reports. Harkin fears that the formula for emissions allowances in the bill "will unfairly and disproportionately raise electricity costs in certain regions of the country," Harkin spokesman Grant Gustafson told Brasher. (Read more)
No comments:
Post a Comment