Cap-and-Trade System Might Cost Less Than Critics Say

October 21, 2009

Email this story Print this post Add your comments

The financial impact of regulating coal-fired power plants that produce carbon dioxide emissions under a cap-and-trade system is much less than previously projected, and a carbon capture and storage (CCS) option could keep the price of carbon credits low, according to new research. Opponents of the U.S. climate bill’s proposed cap-and-trade system claim it will be a financial burden on both energy consumers and companies.

A key finding reveals that the price of electricity for consumers could rise as much as 23 percent, but researchers said this is significantly less than others have projected. In addition, because of the way the energy industry is regulated in the U.S. consumer pricing would rise much more slowly — over 30 years — than in unregulated markets.

The study (PDF), conducted by Stanford Graduate School of Business Professor Stefan Reichelstein and doctoral student Ozge Islegen, measures and quantifies the price associated with regulating carbon emissions.

The researchers focused on three key questions:

At what price for emission permits would fossil fuel power plants, in particular coal-based plants, invest in the new clean CCS technologies rather than buy such permits on the open market?
Will CCS technologies keep the market price of emission permits reasonable?
How far are electricity prices likely to rise in the case where two scenarios are both fulfilled: (1) if power generators are required to obtain emission permits; and (2) if CCS technology is available on the terms currently projected by engineering cost studies?

Although CCS technology has been documented in a number of pilot projects, it has yet to be proven for large commercial installations, say the researchers. FutureGen, an Illinois-based partnership of private firms and the U.S. government, is investing in CCS technology for a commercial-sized coal-fueled power plant. If this is possible, then the cost savings possible by implementing CCS should scale well, they said.

The report finds that for coal-fired plants the break-even price for the adoption of CCS technology is just $25 to $30 per ton of carbon dioxide emissions. Once the price of emission permits moves beyond that range, operators of coal-fired power plants would find it advantageous to invest in CCS technology rather than buy emission permits, according to the report.

Researchers said this finding stands in contrast to the conclusions of a widely quoted 2007 McKinsey & Co. study, Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions: How Much at What Cost?, that predicted the price of permits would have to reach $50 per ton before power plants would convert to CCS.

The emissions level from coal-fired power plants in the United States and other parts of the world, particularly China, implies that the CCS option could keep the market price of emission permits relatively low, according to the report.

Email this story Print this post Add your comments

Advertisers

Stay competitive through sustainability.

Find out how at the SAP Sustainability Resource Center. >>

Unclear about the EPA's new GHG Rule?

Learn how it could affect your business. >>

EPA mandatory emissions reporting starts Jan 1st

CSA Standards can help your organization get ready for compliance. Find out how. >>

Product Environmental Compliance Best Practices

How to achieve compliance at a significantly lower cost. Download the full report. >>

Join the Discussion

Reader Comments

CCS has not been proven for large commercial installations. We “hope” it will work, but can’t say for sure. We are basing large scale, potentially economically catastrophic legislation on “hope.” There needs to be more testing and more discussion. Visit http://tiny.cc/pxIgi to voice your concerns to Congress.

DCTJ | October 22nd, 2009

Recent Daily News [ see all ]

11/20/2009
11/19/2009
11/18/2009

Charts [ see all ]

European Paper Industry Cuts CO2 Emissions by 42% since 1990

S. America Takes Most Urgent View of Copenhagen Talks

Nike Tops Annual Climate Action Scores

Oceans May Trap more Carbon than Forests

Jobs

View All Jobs >> Post a Job >>

Comments and Discussions

Trade Association on Trade Group on EPA Chemical Regs: ‘If Everything is a Priority, Then Nothing is a Priority’
"Seriously… that..."

Gary Markowitz on Supermarkets Tackle Emissions Reductions, Fuel Efficiency
"Supermarkets waste over 10 percent of their energy through improper..."

peter in ireland on Ontario May Follow California’s Lead on TV Energy Efficiency
"Governor Schwarzenegger is shooting himself in the foot! 1...."

Environmental Leader on S. America Takes Most Urgent View of Copenhagen Talks
"The survey respondents (the PDF report mentions 4,000 respondents in 38..."

Jake on UPS Trying New Hydraulic Hybrid Trucks
"A point of clarification: the Reuters press release referenced herein reports that 20 UPS will purchase..."

Custom Organic Shirts on S. America Takes Most Urgent View of Copenhagen Talks
"90% of North Americans believe it is urgent to get a global climate..."

peter dublin on California City’s Green Building Ordinance Applies to Commercial Buildings
"Why energy efficiebnt regulation on buildings –..."

Environmental Leader