CO2 Does Not Pollute: But Kyoto's Demise Won't End Debate

 

A gas industry leader says Bush got it right, yet admits the worth of carbon abatement.

By now, the press has had its day with the saga of Christine Todd Whitman, the new Administrator of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) - how she sought to treat carbon dioxide (CO₂) as a pollutant and then cap CO₂ emissions, but without any regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act, its 1990 Amendments, or its legislative history.

Supposedly, EPA's action stemmed from a campaign promise by George W. Bush. But the President wisely withdrew it in view of the spreading California power crisis. As I see it, the President's new policy stands up well, not only in terms of regulatory law, but also as a matter of common sense for U.S. energy and economic policy.

All the same, however, I continue to favor a move toward minimizing CO₂ emissions, both for the U.S. and for the global energy system. Such a policy can be shown to be prudent and feasible. Yet, there is much misinformation. Much of it can be blamed on those responsible for interpreting the findings of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Any worthwhile discussion of the Kyoto Protocol, fossil fuels, CO₂, and electric generation cannot begin without a full grasp of the costs and capabilities of gas exploration and production, and the consequences of any increased reliance on gas-fired, combined-cycle turbines. And it ought to start with the clear understanding that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant.