Why Key Executives Are Warming To Legislation on Climate Change February 7, 2007; Page A10 WALL STREET JOURNAL
In Washington, business opposition to global-warming legislation is melting faster than the polar ice caps. That's not because of new science: There's been little of that in the past few years. Friday's update from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was mostly a yawn, rehashing with greater certitude previous findings that human activity is leading to slow warming of the planet. WSJ's Business columnist Alan Murray talks about why three top business executives have been pushing corporate America to understand the need for global-warming legislation. Ever since seeing Al Gore's movie, I've been eyeing beachfront property and wondering what a 40-foot rise in sea levels would do to it. But the United Nations-backed study predicts sea levels will rise only a couple feet over the next hundred years -- posing a threat to a few houses in Malibu, California, but not to most of us. Instead, the changed business climate on climate change reflects an unusual convergence of personal, practical and political considerations. These have come together with hurricane force in the first few months of 2007. On the personal front, three business leaders have played an extraordinary role in pushing this issue: General Electric's Jeffrey Immelt, DuPont's Chad Holliday, and Duke Energy's Jim Rogers. The three men were driving forces behind the group of 10 CEOs who called on President Bush last month to cap greenhouse-gas emissions. And their influence reaches far beyond that breakthrough cabal. Messrs. Immelt and Holliday have played important roles in leading the Business Roundtable, which lobbies on behalf of the largest U.S. corporations, to accept the need for global-warming legislation. Mr. Rogers is chairman of the Edison Electric Institute, the U.S. trade group for investor-owned utilities, and is nudging that group along as well. As a practical matter, Messrs. Immelt, Holliday and Rogers argue that limits on carbon-dioxide emissions are now inevitable. Indeed, they are already in place in Europe and coming soon to California and the Northeast. Better to get the federal government on board, they argue, so businesses can plan for the future. That's an especially potent argument for utilities, which have to make investment decisions today about serving customers 30 to 50 years down the road. Then, there's the political. The 2006 election was a wake-up call for business leaders, reminding them they won't always have a business-friendly government to protect them on this issue. "The probability is almost 100% that the candidates for president from both parties will be calling for some sort of regulation of CO2 in the next election," says Mr. Rogers. Business leaders who sign on early will likely have more influence in crafting the all-important details of any legislation, which could determine who wins and who loses. "A seat at the table would help," says Caterpillar CEO Jim Owens. In addition, CEOs are finding that a green hue helps keep them in good stead with employees, some activist investors and an environmentally conscious public. At a time when CEOs rank low in the public's esteem, many are happy for a chance to burnish their public profile. The about-face by American business on this issue has sparked a sudden excess of enthusiasm. At last week's World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, global warming was the subject of 17 separate panel discussions -- overshadowing discussions of terrorism, disaffection in the Islamic world and collapsing global trade talks. In Washington, global warming has been pushed to the front burner, with more congressional hearings scheduled for next week, bypassing critical national issues like health care and education. Conventional wisdom holds that long-term problems, like global warming, always get crowded off the agenda by more pressing short-term ones. Today, that wisdom has been turned on its head. If Congress seriously wants to enact legislation capping carbon-dioxide emissions, this is the time to act. The coal industry, the oil industry and a few others may drag their feet, but most of the business community will go along -- provided it's a market-based "cap and trade" solution that leaves business free to find the most efficient ways to reduce emissions. And while President Bush won't be at the forefront, he is unlikely to block legislation that has substantial business support. The problem is that it isn't clear Democratic leaders really want to act. Their eyes are fixed on the 2008 election, when they hope global warming will be a potent political issue. They are reluctant to pass any legislation that the president will sign. Instead, some Democrats apparently think they'd do better politically if they forced a veto. So the tables have turned. After years of resisting action, much of the U.S. business community wants legislation to cap carbon-dioxide emissions. And after years of calling for action, some Democratic leaders are now dragging their feet. That means the Earth probably will have to get a bit hotter and the oceans a bit higher before Washington finally joins the global-warming parade. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7 Experience Flex 2 & MX7 integration & create powerful cross-platform RIAs http:http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;56760587;14748456;a?http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=LVNU Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:227174 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
