DANNY EYRE
Perspective

The current rapid run up of gasoline and diesel prices has everyone concerned about high energy costs. The increase in our fuel bills has put a strain on individuals and businesses alike. Yet most people are unaware of proposals currently being considered by national policymakers, the impact of which could make the current fuel inflation seem mild by comparison -- especially to those of us living in the Intermountain West.

With the goal of reducing man-made carbon emissions, Congress is currently considering climate change legislation which will lead to severe restrictions on energy production and large increases in energy costs. As with gasoline prices, these impacts will ripple through the economy and cause unnecessary inefficiencies at every stage of the energy supply chain. All of this adds up to even greater financial burdens being placed on the American taxpayer.

Although there have been several plans introduced, the leading proposal to curb carbon emissions is Senate Bill 2191 -- America’s Climate Security Act of 2007, better known as the Lieberman-Warner Bill. Even in today’s highly regulated economic environment, this bill elevates the regulatory control and the intrusion of the federal government to unprecedented levels. Its impact on the generation of electricity would be especially devastating.

This legislation is being considered at a time when supplies of electric capacity are growing critically low. Rick Sergel, CEO of the North American Reliability Council (NERC) was recently quoted by the L.A. Times: "We’re very close to the edge. We operate under very tight conditions more often than ever. We need action in the next year or two to start on the path ... to having electricity 10 years from now."

The lead time required to plan, permit, and construct new electric generation sources is often 10 years or more. NERC projects that electric resources will drop below target capacity margins in nearly all of the western half of the country and most of New England by next year, and in the upper Midwest in 2010.

Despite this critical need, Congress is considering legislation which will make the generation of electric energy more difficult. Rather than taking steps to encourage increased electric generation, they are proposing actions to make electric generation more expensive and more scarce. Households and businesses will be hit with a double whammy. At best electric prices may double or triple -n at worst electricity may not be available at any price in some areas of the country.

Because Wyoming is so heavily dependent on coal for electric generation, it is estimated that the effective annual "tax" imposed by Lieberman-Warner’s cap-and-trade scheme would amount to $6,300 per household in Wyoming.

Proponents of the global warming theory maintain that this economic disruption, possible electric shortages, and large cost increases are all necessary. They argue that the cost of doing nothing is much greater; that the negative impacts of global climate change caused by man-made carbon emissions are far worse. But a rational and careful examination of their own scientific analysis indicates otherwise.

Much of the impetus for global climate change legislation has come from the United Nations Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC has issued four assessment reports, which purport to show that man-made carbon dioxide emissions are a major contributor to global warming. There are thousands of credible climatologists who disagree with the conclusions of the IPCC.

However, using the IPCC’s own questionable scientific theories, and assuming that all coal-fire electric generation in the U.S. was shut down, the resulting change in global temperatures would be less than .07 degrees F. The change in global temperatures resulting from the incremental reduction of carbon emission from coal-fired plants as mandated by Lieberman-Warner would be a small fraction of .07 degrees, or in other words too small to be even measurable.

So we would receive no "gain" in terms of global temperatures for all of the economic "pain" that S. 2191 would inflict.

So far in this debate, your interests as an energy user have been largely ignored. The negative impacts would be especially difficult for those living on fixed incomes and those on the lower end of the economic scale. Please let your voice be heard. We strongly urge you to contact your representatives and senators and let them know of your concerns. We need to let them know that this and all similar legislation must be stopped.

(If you visit the Web site www.ourenergy.coop, there is a quick link to generate an e-mail letter to your specific legislators regarding this issue.)

Danny Eyre is general manager of the Bridger Valley Electric Association. E-mail him at deyre@bvea.net.