Plan on global warming criticized as expensive

A global-warming measure before Congress would drive up energy costs, analysts said at a conference in Henrico County yesterday.

The so-called cap-and-trade measure would limit the amounts of heat-trapping gases that power plants, refineries and other industries could release.

Those limits would make relatively cheap energy, such as that from coal -- a major source of greenhouse gases -- more expensive, analysts said.

By some estimates, the program could cost a family $3,000 a year, said Myron Ebell, director of energy policy for the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a Washington think tank dedicated to free enterprise and limited government.

"You may create some green jobs putting up windmills, but you're going to take money out of people's pockets," Ebell said.

The Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy, a Springfield-based think tank that supports limited government, held the conference at the Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden.

A House of Representatives committee is considering a cap-and-trade program. The conference took a critical look at the approach.

Meg Coady, field director for the Virginia Climate Initiative, an environmental group, said cap-and-trade is a good way to address global warming.

"Energy costs will rise to some extent, but it's going to be something everyone can handle," Coady said. She attended the conference but was not a speaker.

The congressional proposal would provide payments to low-income families to help offset rising energy costs, Coady said.

Environmentalists also say people can fight global warming and reduce costs simultaneously through efficiency programs such as weatherproofing homes.

In addition to putting a limit, or cap, on emissions, a cap-and-trade program creates a system of credits for polluters -- in effect, coupons that allow them to release specific amounts of greenhouse gases.

Industries that pollute less than allowed can sell their credits to those having trouble reducing emissions. That "trade" provision is intended as a financial incentive to clean up.

Kenneth P. Green, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative-leaning Washington think tank, said a carbon tax -- a fee on businesses such as power plants that release a lot of greenhouse gases -- would be a more straightforward way to reduce emissions.

Contact Rex Springston at (804) 649-6453 or .