Recs

9

What Will Carbon Caps Cost?

Watch stocks you care about

The single, easiest way to keep track of all the stocks that matter...

Your own personalized stock watchlist!

It's a 100% FREE Motley Fool service...

Click Here Now

The Environmental Protection Agency recently labeled carbon dioxide emissions "a danger to human health and welfare." For the sake of discussion, let's ignore the scientific and public policy debate and focus on the likely consequences that decision will have on your life.

Already, Congress is debating climate change legislation linked to capping the amount of carbon dioxide that can be generated, based on that same theory the EPA espoused. The current call is for an eventual 83% reduction from 2005 levels, though that will be phased in over a long time.

That's going to cost you!
Should such caps be implemented, the first place you'll likely see it is in your electric bill, especially if you live in a community served by coal, oil, or natural gas power. Portland General Electic (NYSE: POR  ) , for instance, warned of rate increases as much as 120% to meet carbon cap targets that may be enforced in Oregon. Similarly, Duke Energy (NYSE: DUK  ) CEO James Rogers warned that carbon cap and trade could raise the cost of electricity by 40% in parts of the country.

Even if you can afford higher energy costs, not everyone can. As people struggle to pay skyrocketing electric bills, they'll have to cut back elsewhere to make ends meet. Those cutbacks are likely to further damage an economy that's already suffering through a recession that has already lasted around a year and a half.

To make matters worse, anything that gets transported requires energy -- much of it carbon-based. According to the Department of Energy, oil products are being produced at a rate of around 18 million barrels per day in this country.

Although there's some reason to believe that hydrogen fuel cells may someday move vehicles at the equivalent cost of $2.00 per gallon of gasoline, the upfront costs to get there will be huge. For instance, Honda (NYSE: HMC  ) says that its hydrogen-powered FCX Clarity costs several hundred thousand dollars each to produce. The company is optimistic that mass production can bring those costs down to around $100,000, but that's still quite a price tag for a set of wheels.

As the cost of transportation increases in response to either higher carbon costs or the price tag for the replacement infrastructure, so too will the cost of everything that needs to be transported. Unfortunately, this means that you can reasonably expect that not only will electricity cost more, but so will virtually everything you buy.

Assuming you still have a job, that is ...
In what might be the biggest loss from carbon caps, energy-intensive industries are likely to move production overseas to escape the tremendous increases those caps will have on their costs. Even President Obama's Energy Secretary Steven Chu acknowledged that risk exists, and he's actively calling for carbon controls.

According to an analysis by The Wall Street Journal certain carbon-heavy industries would be most at risk of flight. Some of the ones hardest hit appear in this table:

Industry

Example Company

Total Employees

Steel

United States Steel (NYSE: X  )

49,000

Aluminum

Alcoa (NYSE: AA  )

87,000

Paper

International Paper (NYSE: IP  )

61,500

Cement

Eagle Materials

1,600

Chemicals

DuPont (NYSE: DD  )

60,000

Source: Capital IQ, a division of Standard and Poor's.

In total, the fallout will likely go beyond those industries themselves. As their business shift overseas, their suppliers will probably be forced to follow to maintain close operating ties. Plus, any companies that depended on the employees of those industries (like local restaurants near their major manufacturing centers) are likely to feel the pain, too.

Are there any winners?
If there are any businesses that stand to benefit from such a move, though, ocean shippers like A.P. Moller-Maersk might be near the top of the list. After all, to some extent, consumption may remain domestically even as production of those carbon heavy products flees overseas to escape high energy costs. Companies that are able to move those types of goods across the ocean just may be among the only ones to see an increase in their business as a result of any caps.

The Steve Jobs Betrayal
You may already know that in the final year of his life, Jobs revealed a stunning betrayal — and told his biographer, "I will spend my last dying breath... and every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank to right this wrong." What was it that made Jobs so irate — and why could it make a few in-the-know investors some major profits over the coming months and years?

Enter your email address below to find out what made Jobs so enraged!

At the time of publication, Fool contributor Chuck Saletta did not directly own shares of any company mentioned in this article, but his wife owned shares of Duke Energy. The Fool has a disclosure policy.


Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On May 09, 2009, at 9:55 AM, btukwh wrote:

    This is a similar argument that was used by the power generation industry when NOx was to be regulated and then again with sulfur. It wasn't true for those emissions and it won't be true for carbon either.

    The fact is we generate less pollutants today than at any other time in the industrialized world. Studies released by the EPA show that we have cleaner air and that the air is continuing to get cleaner.

    So why don't you hear about that? Because no one has an interest in promoting the fact that we use emissions controls and they work. The environmentalists need fear to drive their agenda. The end of the world is coming and we must act before it is too late. The electrical generation industry needs fear to drive their agenda as well. You will lose your job, this will destroy the economy, it will make America uncompetitive.

    In general, people are ignorant of the realities of emissions and power generation. They believe articles like this one that promote their fear of losing their jobs. They believe that global warming will destroy the world unless they act immediately. The reality is carbon can be controlled economically and efficiently. Carbon controls can also be implemented gradually and sensibly. Mercury controls as well. Just as other emissions controls have been added over the last fifty years.

    Shame on the author for spreading ignorance and fear.

  • Report this Comment On May 09, 2009, at 12:45 PM, bkpleng wrote:

    Carbon dioxide is the end product of using any carbon based fuel that we use. It is not a by-product that can be reduced by adjusting the process.

    What is needed is to improve the efficiency of systems to recover as much energy as possible. This saves money and reduces costs, whereas Cap and Trade adds cost and discourages growth.

  • Report this Comment On May 11, 2009, at 9:21 AM, pgaz wrote:

    The whole "science" behind global warming and CO2 is flawed. Back in the early 2000's there were only a handful of scientists who disagreed with the man-made global warming theory. Now the list of skeptics is growing daily. Al Gore and the UN's IPCC still rely on studies that have been since debunked, yet we are about to embark on a $trillion "behaviorial" modification based on these theories. I am 100% for a cleaner environment and energy independence from foreign oil. I am also 100% against using "fad" theories that force massive economic changes based on faulty science.

  • Report this Comment On May 14, 2009, at 1:21 PM, btukwh wrote:

    I've seen cap and trade work first hand. It gives the power generators an incentive to reduce emissions. Without that incentive they will do nothing. In my experience it is very, very effective.

    Carbon can be treated either at the stack by sequestration or through dispatch order choice. Dispatch the natural gas combined cycle units ahead of the coal fired ones and see a greater than 50% reduction in carbon emissions instantly. Eventually shift toward a lower carbon intensive generation mix. However, a mix it must still be. Generation efficiency and consumer efficiency must also play a role.

  • Report this Comment On May 14, 2009, at 1:44 PM, Melaschasm wrote:

    Obama estimates the carbon tax (cap & trade) to be around $1 trillion. That is likely to be very optimistic. I am guessing that it will be 3 to 5 trillion four years after the new system is implimented, with significant danger that I am underestimating its true impact.

  • Report this Comment On May 15, 2009, at 12:36 PM, roamabit wrote:

    Gullible people "educated" by a failed, agenda-laden educational system buy into junk science propaganda which advocates behavior-modifying "solutions" advanced by fear-mongering, self-serving politicians (like a certain former VP) which results in more government-dependent "sheeple" which results in more gullible people ... ad infinitum.

Add your comment.

Compare Brokers

Fool Disclosure

DocumentId: 895384, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 5/24/2012 5:24:50 PM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

Today's Market

updated Moments ago Sponsored by:
DOW 12,529.75 33.60 0.27%
S&P 500 1,320.68 1.82 0.14%
NASD 2,839.38 -10.74 -0.38%

Create My Watchlist

Go to My Watchlist

You don't seem to be following any stocks yet!

Better investing starts with a watchlist. Now you can create a personalized watchlist and get immediate access to the personalized information you need to make successful investing decisions.

Data delayed up to 5 minutes

Related Tickers

5/24/2012 4:01 PM
IP $29.62 Down -0.17 -0.57%
International Pape… CAPS Rating: ***
POR $24.97 Up +0.20 +0.81%
Portland General E… CAPS Rating: **
X $21.72 Down -0.31 -1.41%
United States Stee… CAPS Rating: ***
HMC $32.20 Down -0.28 -0.86%
Honda Motor Co., L… CAPS Rating: ****
AA $8.63 Up +0.02 +0.23%
Alcoa, Inc. CAPS Rating: ****
DD $48.66 Down -0.07 -0.14%
E.I. du Pont de Ne… CAPS Rating: ****
DUK $21.80 Up +0.20 +0.93%
Duke Energy Corp CAPS Rating: ****

Advertisement