Sign up for the lastest information from the IBEW!


IBEW Joins AEP to Propose Global Warming Bill Summer 2007, IBEW Journal After years of debate, a global consensus is forming that recognizes that the earth is slowly heating up. The IBEW and an IBEW-represented utility, American Electric Power, have teamed up to sponsor an innovative solution that uses trade as an incentive for rapidly-industrializing countries to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. In February, International President Edwin D. Hill co-wrote an editorial with Michael G. Morris, CEO of AEP, calling for an agreement to curb global warming. In the pages of the trade industry publication The Energy Daily, the two described their idea, a new-and-improved worldwide climate agreement similar to Kyoto that would compel developing countries to limit their emissions or face penalties for the gases released in the production of their imports. As the headline of the op-ed says, “Trade is the key to climate change.” “We are calling on the United States to change its policy both on greenhouse gas emissions and trade in the interest of responsible environmental stewardship,” President Hill said. Kyoto is a United Nations pact ratified by 160 countries intent on reducing greenhouse gases. Nations who are party to Kyoto – which do not include the United States, China or India – commit to reducing carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. But Kyoto, which expires in 2012, only applies to nations who signed it. The Hill-Morris plan would apply to everyone who trades with signatory nations. Today, even with Kyoto in place among most Western countries, nations like China can emit as much carbon dioxide as they produce into the atmosphere without penalty. In China, pollution runoff in rivers and streams and unending black smoke billowing overhead are the downsides of nation’s swift rise as a global manufacturing powerhouse. Experts predict that China could surpass the United States as the globe’s top producer of greenhouse gases as soon as this year. “We must address the soaring greenhouse emissions of major emitting nations in the developing world,” said a joint statement by the IBEW and AEP. “To unilaterally cap America’s emissions, while ignoring other nations, is a fatally flawed approach that will seriously harm the global environment while compromising our competitiveness and jeopardizing American jobs.” Labor and industry generally agree that any new, effective emissions-reducing law should not interfere with the American economy or trade, said IBEW Utility Department Director Jim Hunter. The IBEW/AEP idea has garnered widespread attention since it was first proposed, and has found a potential home in a Senate climate change bill being prepared by Energy Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.). Here’s how it would work: Once the bill is enacted – if it is passed by Congress and signed by the president – the IBEW/AEP proposal recognizes it would take five years to write the regulations and establish procedures to cap carbon dioxide emissions through the use of advanced technology. Five years after that, its provisions would take effect. At that time, if trading partners do not have similar greenhouse gas-limiting protocols in place, they must purchase carbon dioxide credits to sell their products in the United States and other participating nations. “The real issue is not that we want them to buy credits, we want them to cap their emissions,” Hunter said. “This simply becomes a stick to force them to the table.” Depending on the scope of imports, the proposal could have a significant and serious impact on nations like China and India. Unions for Jobs and the Environment, a coalition comprised of 12 labor groups including the IBEW, the Boilermakers, the Mine Workers, the Food and Commercial workers, among others, also support the IBEW/AEP proposal. The AFL-CIO is also interested. “An inappropriate legislative response to climate change could threaten the loss of millions of American jobs, impair our international competitiveness, raise energy prices to unprecedented heights and do little to change future global temperatures or sea levels,” said the UJAE June newsletter. The well-intentioned Kyoto pact, while reducing carbon dioxide emissions among member countries, could actually add to the pollution problem under certain scenarios. Right now under Kyoto, a factory owner in France, which depends largely on nuclear power for electricity, could decide to close his plant and sell his credits, only to re-open in China and be subject to no emissions limits. “As far as global warming is concerned, that is the worst thing that could happen,” Hunter said. Hill and Morris consulted with experts to help them develop a plan designed to be compliant with the World Trade Organization, which mediates trade among nations. A tax on polluting countries, for example, is not likely to be WTO compliant, Hunter said. “This is a realistic plan that forthrightly deals with climate-changing emissions arising from fast-developing nations like India and China while complying with U.S. international trade obligations,” Hill said in a letter to Bingaman. “This provision is absolutely essential to America’s working men and women, and IBEW support for the bill is contingent upon inclusion of this language.” “Our nation must lead, but we must be certain that our trading partners follow,” said a letter to Bingaman from the Boilermakers union. “Otherwise, domestic industries that must compete in the global economy would be unfairly disadvantaged and the goal of global emissions reductions unmet.” Coal-burning generating plants are the lifeblood of AEP, one of the largest electric utilities in the United States. While delivering electricity to more than 5 million customers in 11 states, 80 percent of AEP’s load is coal. AEP is the biggest coal consumer in the Western Hemisphere. “AEP is not sticking its head in the sand,” Hunter said. “They are saying that global warming needs to be addressed, and the sooner the better. They don’t want to have a situation that is detrimental to their consumers and the U.S. economy.” This proposal is not the only action AEP has taken to reduce its carbon footprint. Over the past 10 years, it has undertaken several voluntary actions to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 31 million metric tons by planting trees, adding wind power, increasing power plant generating efficiency and retiring less efficient units. “The United States may be a latecomer to the worldwide discussion on global warming, but I am proud that the IBEW and one of our employers are among the first to propose a proactive, realistic solution,” President Hill said. “I am heartened that so many on Capitol Hill are taking a hard look at our proposal.” Return To Working Green News...

After years of debate, a global consensus is forming that recognizes that the earth is slowly heating up. The IBEW and an IBEW-represented utility, American Electric Power, have teamed up to sponsor an innovative solution that uses trade as an incentive for rapidly-industrializing countries to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

In February, International President Edwin D. Hill co-wrote an editorial with Michael G. Morris, CEO of AEP, calling for an agreement to curb global warming. In the pages of the trade industry publication The Energy Daily, the two described their idea, a new-and-improved worldwide climate agreement similar to Kyoto that would compel developing countries to limit their emissions or face penalties for the gases released in the production of their imports. As the headline of the op-ed says, “Trade is the key to climate change.”

“We are calling on the United States to change its policy both on greenhouse gas emissions and trade in the interest of responsible environmental stewardship,” President Hill said.

Kyoto is a United Nations pact ratified by 160 countries intent on reducing greenhouse gases. Nations who are party to Kyoto – which do not include the United States, China or India – commit to reducing carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. But Kyoto, which expires in 2012, only applies to nations who signed it. The Hill-Morris plan would apply to everyone who trades with signatory nations.

Today, even with Kyoto in place among most Western countries, nations like China can emit as much carbon dioxide as they produce into the atmosphere without penalty. In China, pollution runoff in rivers and streams and unending black smoke billowing overhead are the downsides of nation’s swift rise as a global manufacturing powerhouse. Experts predict that China could surpass the United States as the globe’s top producer of greenhouse gases as soon as this year.

“We must address the soaring greenhouse emissions of major emitting nations in the developing world,” said a joint statement by the IBEW and AEP. “To unilaterally cap America’s emissions, while ignoring other nations, is a fatally flawed approach that will seriously harm the global environment while compromising our competitiveness and jeopardizing American jobs.”

Labor and industry generally agree that any new, effective emissions-reducing law should not interfere with the American economy or trade, said IBEW Utility Department Director Jim Hunter.

The IBEW/AEP idea has garnered widespread attention since it was first proposed, and has found a potential home in a Senate climate change bill being prepared by Energy Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.).

Here’s how it would work:

Once the bill is enacted – if it is passed by Congress and signed by the president – the IBEW/AEP proposal recognizes it would take five years to write the regulations and establish procedures to cap carbon dioxide emissions through the use of advanced technology. Five years after that, its provisions would take effect. At that time, if trading partners do not have similar greenhouse gas-limiting protocols in place, they must purchase carbon dioxide credits to sell their products in the United States and other participating nations.

“The real issue is not that we want them to buy credits, we want them to cap their emissions,” Hunter said. “This simply becomes a stick to force them to the table.”

Depending on the scope of imports, the proposal could have a significant and serious impact on nations like China and India.

Unions for Jobs and the Environment, a coalition comprised of 12 labor groups including the IBEW, the Boilermakers, the Mine Workers, the Food and Commercial workers, among others, also support the IBEW/AEP proposal. The AFL-CIO is also interested.

“An inappropriate legislative response to climate change could threaten the loss of millions of American jobs, impair our international competitiveness, raise energy prices to unprecedented heights and do little to change future global temperatures or sea levels,” said the UJAE June newsletter.

The well-intentioned Kyoto pact, while reducing carbon dioxide emissions among member countries, could actually add to the pollution problem under certain scenarios. Right now under Kyoto, a factory owner in France, which depends largely on nuclear power for electricity, could decide to close his plant and sell his credits, only to re-open in China and be subject to no emissions limits. “As far as global warming is concerned, that is the worst thing that could happen,” Hunter said.

Hill and Morris consulted with experts to help them develop a plan designed to be compliant with the World Trade Organization, which mediates trade among nations. A tax on polluting countries, for example, is not likely to be WTO compliant, Hunter said.

“This is a realistic plan that forthrightly deals with climate-changing emissions arising from fast-developing nations like India and China while complying with U.S. international trade obligations,” Hill said in a letter to Bingaman. “This provision is absolutely essential to America’s working men and women, and IBEW support for the bill is contingent upon inclusion of this language.”

“Our nation must lead, but we must be certain that our trading partners follow,” said a letter to Bingaman from the Boilermakers union. “Otherwise, domestic industries that must compete in the global economy would be unfairly disadvantaged and the goal of global emissions reductions unmet.”

Coal-burning generating plants are the lifeblood of AEP, one of the largest electric utilities in the United States. While delivering electricity to more than 5 million customers in 11 states, 80 percent of AEP’s load is coal. AEP is the biggest coal consumer in the Western Hemisphere.

“AEP is not sticking its head in the sand,” Hunter said. “They are saying that global warming needs to be addressed, and the sooner the better. They don’t want to have a situation that is detrimental to their consumers and the U.S. economy.”

This proposal is not the only action AEP has taken to reduce its carbon footprint. Over the past 10 years, it has undertaken several voluntary actions to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 31 million metric tons by planting trees, adding wind power, increasing power plant generating efficiency and retiring less efficient units.

“The United States may be a latecomer to the worldwide discussion on global warming, but I am proud that the IBEW and one of our employers are among the first to propose a proactive, realistic solution,” President Hill said. “I am heartened that so many on Capitol Hill are taking a hard look at our proposal.”

Return To
Working Green News...

Related Articles

IBEW Joins AEP to Propose Global Warming Bill

IBEW Joins AEP to Propose
Global Warming Bill