Skip to main content

Tracking RGGI

An area of intense focus for NEI is to generate better recognition of nuclear energy's role in promoting clean air. That's why NEI has been closely tracking the activities of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), an initiative of nine states in the Northeast and Midatlantic region who are working to develop a cap and trade program for CO2 emissions.

One of my colleagues, Mary Quillian, NEI's manager for environmental programs, attended a RGGI meeting in Vermont last week and passed along these details in a recent email:
The current recommendation from the RGGI working group to the state officials is to enact a program with a cap that holds CO2 emissions from the electric sector at today's level through 2015 and then requires reductions of 1% per year through 2024.

There are clearly discussions of earmarking some allowances for energy efficiency and renewable energy programs.

Energy efficiency programs will aim to reduce demand and demand growth. Renewable energy (wind, solar, hydro) generates electricity without emitting CO2, but so does nuclear energy. NEI continues to ask for equal treatment of all new non-emitting capacity. Increased capacity at existing nuclear plants and eventually new nuclear plants, should receive the same treatment in this RGGI program as renewable energy because both prevent CO2 emissions by supplying electricity without the CO2 byproduct.

How to deal with leakage (the importation of power from non-RGGI states that have no CO2 regulations) and how to dole out allowances to the states (apportionment) are two tough issues still left to be dealt with.

State officials and the RGGI Working Group continue to work toward agreement on the design of a regional CO2 cap-and-trade program through phone calls and meetings. The Working Group will hold another stakeholder meeting in Boston on September 21, presumably to give stakeholders an update on proposed program design and seek stakeholders' comments.
For more on RGGI, here's a story from the Reuters wire.

Technorati tags: , , , , ,

Comments

Anonymous said…
You realize of course that building the nuclear case on the fraudulent global warming case will ruin any credibility you have worked so hard to win.
Wait...

You're saying global warming is fraudulent? Or are you saying that nuclear power won't stop global warming? Or both?
Anonymous said…
The case for nuclear is already solidly built without any global warming involvement.

Since global warming is now mainstream journalism, mainstream politics, mainstream academia, mainstream science and mainstream environmentalism; it is not the credibility of nuclear power that is at stake.

It is the credibility of the above-mentioned mainstream groups that is at stake. But their credibility is alredy in question since they strongly assert that harmful global warming is already happening while they continue to disrespect nuclear energy.

Popular posts from this blog

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin