Climate plan will cost consumers plenty

Stuart A. Sanderson, Colorado Mining Association

Published November 29, 2007 at 5:18 p.m.

Text size

The op ed by William Becker concludes that finding a cure for global warming will be easy and won’t needlessly or excessively increase energy costs. If that is true, then there is a certain bridge in Brooklyn available at a bargain basement price.

It is also contrary to the statements by one of the prime sponsors of climate change legislation, Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, who recently stated that reducing greenhouse gas emissions will cost the electrical and industrial sectors “hundreds of billions of dollars.” This will in turn result in job losses and higher utility bills for electricity consumers. As Xcel Energy recently announced, its Colorado climate plan will require yet an additional $12 monthly hike in electricity rates for consumers already burdened with higher rates due to the use of high cost natural gas. And that may just be the tip of the proverbial iceberg, not to mention the subsidies, mandates (20% in Colorado) and tax credits for renewable energy that will add to energy costs.

Becker blames the current energy crisis on our dependence on foreign oil, citing wind and solar as the answer, but misses the point that coal, not oil, accounts for the bulk of current electricity needs in the U. S. and is used to generate 72% of electricity in Colorado. There is no shortage of coal, our most affordable and abundant energy source, as the U. S. has more coal than any other nation on earth. And coal’s potential is not limited to electricity generation - coal to liquids fuels technologies may also be used to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

Finally, what will greenhouse gas reduction mandates in Colorado accomplish, other than power plant closures and higher electricity rates? Colorado accounts for only 1.7 per cent of national carbon emissions. That doesn’t even include China, India and the developing world, which will account for the bulk of carbon dioxide emissions in the future. Thus, it is clear that the solution lies in developing technologies and a consensus to reduce greenhouse gas emissions worldwide, not just in one state. The promise lies in Colorado’s emergence as a clean energy technological capital, not in the implementation of costly mandates, the benefits of which are unproven.

Stuart A. Sanderson President Colorado Mining Association

This Speakout has not been edited.

Subscribe to the Rocky Mountain News