CUB Adopts Climate Change Resolution
Posted on June 1, 2005 by oregoncub
Tags, Utility Regulation
CUB is proud to announce that our Board of Directors has adopted a Climate Change Resolution. As an organization that deals with the regulation of the production of electricity and other energy resources that have been linked to human-influenced climate change, we are happy to have made this step toward incorporating into our work a broader view of what is in customers’ and in society’s best interest. The Resolution reads as follows:
The CUB Board of Directors is increasingly convinced by the science underlying global climate change and is increasingly concerned about the potential financial, environmental and social impacts of global climate change. Energy production is a significant contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. The impacts of global climate change could be devastating and true costs may be enormous. In analyzing the costs of resource development, CUB will not be constrained by attempts to impute the cost of potential carbon dioxide adders [additional costs that may be added to fuel costs in an attempt to take into account the potential regulatory response to climate change], but may consider the greater costs of global climate change when establishing a position.
CUB supports policies and changes to policies that will reduce Oregon’s emissions of greenhouse gases.
So why did we feel this resolution was necessary, and why now? Global climate change may well become the dominant policy and cost driver in the energy industry in the decades to come. The scientific community is nearly unanimous in the opinion that the evidence is strong that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.
EXTENDED BODY:
Consider the following statements from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 2001 report (see link below).
Globally, it is very likely that 1998 is the warmest year on record and the 1990s the warmest decade.
The atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) has increased 31% since 1750. The present CO2 concentration has not been exceeded during the past 420,000 years and likely not during the past 20 million years.
Emissions of CO2 due to fossil fuel burning are virtually certain to be the dominant influence on the trends in atmospheric CO2 during the 21st century.
The average global surface temperature is projected to increase by 1.4 to 5.8 degrees centigrade in the next 100 years.
Further thought comes from http://www.peopleandplanet.net:
No one knows for sure exactly how sensitive the earth’s climate system is to elevated greenhouse gas levels. Most computer models suggest that a doubling of CO2 (from a pre-industrial level of around 270 parts per million (ppm) to 550 ppm) would lead to a temperature rise of about 3°C. So why is the IPCC’s figure - of 1.4°C to 5.8°C by 2100 - so broad? The reason is that the biggest uncertainty of all is future human use of fossil fuels. A business-as-usual path would lead to atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations nearing 1000 ppm by the end of this century, pushing the planet closer to the latter figure of extreme warming. A cleaner development path - with renewables substituting for oil, coal and gas - would constrain warming at a much lower level. (Mark Lynas, “Stormy path to a warmer world”.)
One fairly modest proposal, as published in Science last year, would be to stabilize current CO2 emissions at the current level of 7 billion tons of carbon per year for the next 50 years. While this proposal is fairly modest compared to other proposals, accomplishing the proposed task itself would be a significant victory, because in the next 50 years CO2 annual emissions are expected to double.
Recently the Governor’s Advisory Group on Global Warming issued its strategy for greenhouse gas reductions in Oregon. This group recommends the following emission reduction goals:
By 2020, achieve a 10% reduction below 1990 greenhouse gas levels.
By 2050, achieve a climate stabilization emissions level of at least 75% below 1990 levels.
These kinds of greenhouse gas reductions will require some serious adjustment to business as usual. The energy sector is a prime candidate for reductions. As noted above, fossil fuel burning is the major source of man-made causes of CO2 emissions. In fact, the electricity industry alone represents 40% of CO2 emissions in the United States. In turn, U.S. CO2 emissions account for 25% of global CO2 emissions. Therefore, the electricity industry in the U.S. accounts for 10% of CO2 emissions throughout the globe.
CUB is going to be faced with some difficult policy choices in the years to come. Coal is increasingly becoming a fuel of choice because the market for coal is less volatile than the natural gas market. One reason for this is because the real costs of CO2 are not incorporated in the market costs of coal. With one utility, PacifiCorp, very heavily reliant on coal, we have become familiar with the future risks of coal for utility consumers. Because of other economic and social pressures in the Western region, we believe that if a sensible policy on coal and CO2 is to emerge, it will emerge from Oregon.
That’s why CUB is glad to be able to incorporate this larger perspective involved in our energy choices into the debate.
For more information, please visit this link:
Climate Change 2001 IPCC Third Assessment Report
To keep up with CUB, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter!
03/10/17 | 0 Comments | CUB Adopts Climate Change Resolution