Energy execs ahead of the curve

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

In another sign that the energy industry is preparing for the inevitable crackdown on emissions, the CEO of Duke Energy, Paul Anderson, announced today that the time has come for the US to adopt a mandatory nationwide carbon dioxide tax—a move which has some shareholders a bit perplexed. To quote Anderson:

You can imagine the reaction I get when I say ‘carbon tax’ in the hall’s of Duke Energy. One employee wrote me that as a shareholder, he couldn’t fathom why I would advocate a position that would discourage use of our product by potentially increasing its price.

Even so, there have been other signs that energy companies feel compelled to act, as many in the financial community feel that the time has come to hedge their bets against impending CO2-reduction standards in the future. With the passage of the Kyoto Protocol earlier this year, many shareholders of energy corporations are already demanding to know how their companies are preparing to meet requirements and protect their investments against lawsuits and fines.

According to Anderson, although a national tax would mean bigger utility bills and higher gas prices, unless the industry takes the lead, the long-term outcome could be even more disastrous:

“If we (the energy industry) ignore the issue, we would be the easy target,” he said, referring to lawsuits against the industry. “The worst scenario would be if all 50 states took separate actions and we have to comply with 50 different laws.”

As we’ve seen recently with mercury emissions reduction passages, inadequate federal rules—or the lack of them—can spur states into taking action of their own. Already, nine states have sued the EPA over its mercury plan, and are looking ahead to creating stricter plans of their own. Anderson acknowledged that the U.S. is not likely to see a carbon tax until we see a new president, but that the time has come to be proactive and help shape policy at the federal level.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend