It
looks to ease provisions on renewable energy and greenhouse gas emissions.
By Josh Drobnyk |
CALL WASHINGTON BUREAU
With a landmark climate bill past the U.S. House, PPL and other energy
companies have turned their attention toward the Senate in hopes of easing
provisions that call for expanded use of renewable energies and significant
reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
At the same time, the Allentown
company, among the hundreds of organizations lobbying
Congress on the bill, is looking to maintain the percentage of pollution
permits allocated toward the electric utility industry in the House measure.
The Senate is on a much less aggressive schedule than the House, which narrowly
approved the American Clean Energy and Security Act on Friday. Hearings are
expected to begin before the Senate's August recess, but a final vote on a
measure isn't expected until September at the earliest.
''In the months to come, the Senate will take up its version of the energy
bill, and I am confident that they, too, will choose to move this country
forward,'' President Barack Obama said Monday.
Efforts to change key provisions in the
Senate version of the measure are already under way. The focus for PPL
is on loosening some of the bill's requirements while defending the allotment
of cap-and-trade permits geared toward the electric utility industry.
Under the House bill, PPL would have to get
20 percent of its electricity from renewable energy sources such as wind and
solar by 2020, although up to a quarter of that mandate could be obtained
through energy efficiencies. PPL spokesman
George Lewis said that's a far climb considering PPL
now generates about 1 percent to 2 percent -- not counting what it gets from
hydroelectric plants -- from renewables.
''We know that renewables are certainly an important
part of the solution, but to get from 2 percent to 20 percent in 10 years is
very ambitious,'' Lewis said.
The company also has its sights on slowing the House bill's schedule for
reducing emissions, arguing that provisions to cut emissions of heat-trapping
gases 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050 are too
ambitious.
Environmentalists say the schedule for capping emissions lays out a realistic
timeline to begin to curb gases that cause global warming, but the measure's
efforts to increase renewable energy production falls short.
''They simply don't go far enough in terms of promoting the type of clean
renewable energy sources that we know will be critical to achieving pollution
reductions,'' said Nathan Wilcox, energy and clean air advocate at
PennEnvironment.
The electric utility industry has backed the House's efforts to set up a
national standard for greenhouse gas emissions -- contending it is better than
having to deal with a patchwork of state regulations -- and pushed for a
cap-and-trade program over an emissions tax.
The program would set a ceiling for heat-trapping gas emissions, and the
ceiling would move lower over time. Companies would be allocated permits to
emit gases and be able to buy and sell the allowances from other companies
either in need of more permits or with extra to spare.
More than a third of the permits would go to utility companies, a percentage PPL's Lewis
said the company will be looking to keep in place in the Senate measure.
Pennsylvania lawmakers, many
representing coal-producing districts, proved a difficult bunch for sponsors of
the House bill, with 11 of the 19 House members -- including four Democrats--voting against the measure. U.S. Reps. Tim Holden, D-17th District; Charlie Dent, R-15th District; and Jim Gerlach,
R-6th District, opposed the measure. U.S. Reps. Paul Kanjorski, D-11th
District; Allyson Schwartz, D-13th District; and Patrick Murphy, D-8th
District, supported it.
Neither U.S. Sens. Bob Casey Jr. nor Arlen Specter, both Democrats, has
endorsed the House measure. Still, in an interview, Casey called the
legislation ''a very strong effort at reaching consensus on a lot of difficult
issues.'' And while saying he anticipated some changes in the Senate bill, he
doesn't expect differences in the major provisions.
It's unclear how the House measure would affect electricity prices. A
Congressional Budget Office study estimated that the bill would cost an average
of $175 a year per household. Conservative groups estimated a far bigger price
tag.
''We're not right now making any kind of projections, but I think everyone
agrees that this bill is going to increase electricity costs,'' Lewis said.
''The question is how much.''
Regardless of the climate bill, PPL is anticipating a 30 percent bump in
electricity rates with the industry's deregulation at the end of this year.
