Share

Who Wins, Who Loses In Obama's Proposed Carbon Emissions Limits

June 3, 2014

Obama's Plan to Curb Coal

Obama's Plan to Curb Coal

The coal-fired Plant Scherer is shown in operation early Sunday, June 1, 2014, in Juliette, Ga. The Obama administration unveiled a plan Monday to cut carbon dioxide emissions from power plants by nearly a third over the next 15 years, in a sweeping initiative to curb pollutants blamed for global warming. (AP Photo/John Amis)

  • Obama's Plan to Curb Coal
  • Obama's Plan to Curb Coal
  • Obama's Plan to Curb Coal
  • Obama's Plan to Curb Coal

A few years from now the nation will begin making big changes in the ways it uses energy, and generate it from cleaner sources, if the Obama administration's proposed new limits on carbon dioxide emissions – announced at EPA headquarters in Washington Monday – are fully implemented as planned.

That means there will be winners and losers among our current mix of fossil fuel-based energy sources, of which coal is the biggest single source, providing nearly 40 percent of the power used by homes and businesses nationwide.

The proposed limits will likely help the biggest U.S. natural gas producer, Exxon Mobil, by increasing demand for its fuel, which emits half the carbon dioxide as coal. The biggest nuclear power generator, Exelon, and biggest wind farm operator, Next Era Energy, may fetch higher prices for their carbon-free power.

Companies that sell wind turbines, solar panels, or energy efficiency technology — such as General Electric, Siemens, First Solar and SunPower — may also come out winners.

AP Photo/Evan Vucci

EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy announces a plan to cut carbon dioxide emissions from power plants by 30 percent by 2030 on Monday at EPA headquarters in Washington.

Coal stands to be a big loser. Last year 78 percent of carbon dioxide emissions from the electric power sector came from coal.

(MORE: EPA: Here's How Power Plants Will Help Fight Global Warming)

Electric customers will almost certainly pay higher prices, according to several analysts and industry experts, though efficiency measures could reduce the impact of higher prices on power bills. The Obama Administration predicts power bills will shrink as a result of the rule.

The proposed rule, announced Monday, would require a 30 percent reduction in carbon dioxide from the electric power sector from 2005 levels by 2030. The rule isn't scheduled to become final until next year and it will likely face extensive political and legal challenges.

If the rule goes through, states will have until 2018 to develop their own plans to meet the new targets. How each state decides to do this will determine how much it will help or hurt customers, power companies, and others who supply fuels or technology to the industry.

Some states will likely set up or join an existing scheme that caps the amount of emissions from the power sector, but allows power companies to trade emissions permits with each other. These schemes, known as "cap and trade" programs, have the effect of increasing the value of low-carbon and carbon-free power.

Other states may instead require big improvements in energy efficiency or heavily subsidize renewable power generation such as wind and solar.

The impact of the rule, though, may be less than advocates and opponents say. Emissions have fallen so fast since 2005 that the country is already nearly halfway to its goal. Separate clean air rules are expected to have a side effect of reducing emissions by another 5 percent by 2018.

(MORE: The Worst CO2 Emitters in the History of the World)

That will leave the country 12 years to reduce emissions by another 10 percent, an amount Bernstein Research's Hugh Wynne calls "eminently doable."

Winners

  • Nuclear generators. If carbon-free power becomes more valuable to the marketplace, no one will benefit more than nuclear power producers such as Exelon, Entergy, Public Service Enterprise Group and First Energy.
  • Natural gas companies. Companies that produce natural gas, such as Exxon and Chesapeake Energy; or deliver it, such as Spectra Energy and Kinder Morgan; or produce power with it, like Calpine, could benefit. Bernstein Research estimates that a 10 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions could lead to a 12 percent rise in U.S. natural gas demand.
  • Renewables. Companies that make wind turbines or solar panels, or develop or operate wind and solar farms, could benefit a couple of ways. States may encourage or subsidize construction, and clean power may become more valuable in the market.
  • Electric technology companies. Companies that help make equipment and technology that helps the grid deliver power more efficiently or helps customers reduce their power could benefit. Those include ABB, Honeywell, Schneider Electric, Opower and Silver Spring Networks.

Losers

  • Coal miners. U.S. coal production has declined in recent years, especially in higher-cost regions such as Appalachia. A 10 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions will mean a decline of 180 million tons, or 18 percent, in U.S. coal production, according to Bernstein Research. That would hurt miners such as Peabody Energy, Alpha Natural Resources and Arch Coal.
  • Railroads. U.S. railroads depend on shipping coal for a significant percentage of their revenue. If utilities use less, railroads will ship less.
  • Coal generators. Companies such as NRG Energy and Dynegy that generate electricity with coal-fired powered power plants in unregulated markets may either have to pay for power plant upgrades or pollution allowances, which would reduce profits.
  • Electric customers. Power prices and power bills are influenced by many factors, but environmental regulations tend to push power prices up.

Could win, could lose

  • Regulated electric utilities. If, as expected, regulators allow utilities to charge customers for new equipment and technology needed to reduce emissions, regulated utilities that now rely heavily on coal could benefit. Among them: American Electric Power, PPL Corp., Ameren Corp., Southern Company and Duke Energy. But if the price increases are too extreme, customers would consume less electricity in response and the companies could lose revenue.
  • Unregulated electric utilities. As coal plants close or reduce their output, the lower power supply could lead to higher prices and revenues for utilities that sell power into competitive markets. However, if states help customers reduce demand for electricity with efficiency programs, or encourage the production of renewable power such as wind and solar, that could lower wholesale power prices.

MORE: Turkey Coal Mine Explosion

People mourn near graves of miners during a funeral ceremony on May 15, 2014, in the western town of Soma in the Manisa province after a devastating mine explosion. (BULENT KILIC/AFP/Getty Images)


Featured Blogs

African Wave 95L and Mexico's Tropical Storm Polo Little Threat

By Dr. Jeff Masters
September 20, 2014

Satellite loops show that a tropical wave (Invest 95L) off the coast of Africa, a few hundred miles southeast of the Cape Verde Islands, has a moderate degree of spin and heavy thunderstorm activity. The wave is under light wind shear and over warm waters of 28°C (82°F), conditions that favor development, but shear will rise to the moderate range, ocean temperatures will cool, and the air surrounding the storm will grow drier by Sunday, making development unlikely.

Incredible Rainstorm in Southern France

By Christopher C. Burt
September 19, 2014

Torrential rainfall Tuesday through Thursday morning (September 16-18) in the Languedoc Region of southern France has resulted in flooding that has killed at least four people with two others still missing. The rainfall rates during the storm were phenomenal.

Live Blog: Tracking Hurricane Arthur as it Approaches North Carolina Coast

By Shaun Tanner
July 3, 2014

This is a live blog set up to provide the latest coverage on Hurricane Arthur as it threatens the North Carolina Coast. Check back often to see what the latest is with Arthur. The most recent updates are at the top.

Tropical Terminology

By Stu Ostro
June 30, 2014

Here is some basic, fundamental terminology related to tropical cyclones. Rather than a comprehensive and/or technical glossary, this represents the essence of the meaning & importance of some key, frequently used terms.

2013-14 - An Interesting Winter From A to Z

By Tom Niziol
May 15, 2014

It was a very interesting winter across a good part of the nation from the Rockies through the Plains to the Northeast. Let's break down the most significant winter storms on a month by month basis.

What the 5th IPCC Assessment Doesn't Include

By Angela Fritz
September 27, 2013

Melting permafrost has the potential to release an additional 1.5 trillion tons of carbon into the atmosphere, and could increase our global average temperature by 1.5°F in addition to our day-to-day human emissions. However, this effect is not included in the IPCC report issued Friday morning, which means the estimates of how Earth's climate will change are likely on the conservative side.