On Friday the EPA announced a “proposal to cap the amount of
heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions from new power plants. Coal-fired plants
-- unlike most natural gas facilities -- won't meet the standard without costly
technology to capture and store carbon emissions.”
The EPA argues that today’s coal powered electric plants
discharge a disproportionate amount of CO2 into the atmosphere. The industry argues that the technology
required is not tested and that the requirement is therefore unreasonable and
possibly a costly mistake. Finally, their
statement mentioned that added costs must be passed along to customers
resulting in “more pain at the plug than Americans have experienced at the
pump…" That’s certainly a colorful
way of phrasing what we all know – there’s no magic money tree.
As utility costs increase due to regulation, fuel costs, or for
any other reason, they must recover those costs from somewhere. They can lower dividends, but that will
likely drive the price of their stock down.
I personally own a small number of utility shares, as do many other
small investors. These dividends yield a
better return than savings accounts, but if they go down and the investment
becomes more risky, investors will be harder to find. Bankers will also be less inclined to make
loans or will do so at higher interest.
This may seem like their problem until they go to the regulatory board
and plead for rate increases to cover higher costs. Then we will see it in our bills and hear the
outrage of our neighbors. Doubtless the
media will have a field day covering stories of increased hardship just as they
do when gasoline prices spike.
The EPA and environmental advocates make a good case that
these costs are already out there – what economists call external costs – hidden
in the free discharge of CO2 and “sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and heavy
metals (such as mercury and arsenic) and acid gases (such as hydrogen
chloride), which have been linked to acid rain, smog and health issues.” These are health and quality-of-life
issues. But when those costs are
captured, it is the consumer or taxpayer who pays.
Headlines like this are easily ignored as unimportant. What’s in it for me? But economic understanding brings us to a
different conclusion. Even when the
changes are desirable and beneficial, it’s not the corporations or the
government that pays. The evidence is in the article: “Mississippi Power has raised rates 15% this
year and plans an additional 3% increase next year to help pay for the new
Kemper County plant [which employs this technology], whose price tag has risen
from an initial $2.4 billion to $3.8 billion…”
This will affect you each time you switch on a light or TV,
or recharge your phone, or your refrigerator or furnace snaps on. We have become so dependent on electricity, and there are few substitutes.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Click again on the title to add a comment