Morgan Stanley: Aggressive Obama emission target would hurt coal


Morgan Stanley analysts are convinced Pres. Obama's plan for cutting carbon emissions from existing power plants will call for a greater than 17% reduction when it is unveiled early next week, meaning the impact on coal demand would be “substantial” in the long term.

In 2009, Obama called for a 17% cut in emissions from 2005 levels by 2020; if he were to stick to that target, the industry might not feel too much pain since lower coal plant output already has cut U.S. power-sector carbon emissions by ~11% since 2005.

NYT reported this week that Obama will use his authority to cut emissions from coal-fired power plants by up to 20%, in turn spurring the creation of a state cap-and-trade program.

ETFs: XLE, XLU, TAN, ERX, KOL, IDU, VDE, OIH, ERY, FCG, VPU, DIG, GASL, DUG, IYE, GASX, PXJ, FENY, RYE, UPW, FUTY, RYU, FXN, FXU, DDG, SDP

From other sites
Comments (10)
  • wigit5
    , contributor
    Comments (4365) | Send Message
     
    Rip West Virginia and Kentucky you were good states but we have moved on
    30 May 2014, 10:56 AM Reply Like
  • Electric Horseman
    , contributor
    Comments (22) | Send Message
     
    Is the headline intentionally funny?
    30 May 2014, 11:00 AM Reply Like
  • haaggus
    , contributor
    Comments (78) | Send Message
     
    Typical democrat. Glad to have us freeze to death in the winter if it removes carbon from the air. Doesn't he know food production is at all-time highs because of the carbon in the atmosphere? Plants breathe CO2, dummies. What do democrats think powers the nation? Hugs and rainbows? Anyway the number one greenhouse gas is methane so unless you want cows to stop farting you're not going to make a dent in that.
    30 May 2014, 11:52 AM Reply Like
  • Rainmon
    , contributor
    Comments (179) | Send Message
     
    I hope we continue to reduce the use of coal, the concept of "clean coal" is an oxymoron. We also need to direct more funds to develop more solar power and mass transit. We need to build cities where people can walk to places they need to go or ride a train without everyone owning cars. Where I live now I can walk to the beach, the mall, buy groceries, see a doctor, drink beer at strip joints and almost everywhere I go unless I have to go to the airport near Bangkok. We still have a lot to learn in America and voting Republicans, Libertarian types and Tea Party neanderthals out of congress would really help.
    1 Jun 2014, 05:35 AM Reply Like
  • Rainmon
    , contributor
    Comments (179) | Send Message
     
    Methane comes in as the number three worst offending greenhouse gas. The IPCC freely admits that it does not fully understand the methane cycle, and identifies methane release as coming from natural sources like swamps and termites, and from man-made sources like landfills and cow farms. Source from Popular Science: http://bit.ly/1u48dRL
    1 Jun 2014, 06:01 AM Reply Like
  • Rainmon
    , contributor
    Comments (179) | Send Message
     
    Plus we need get rid of greedy CEO's who make millions whose salaries are 400 times that of average worker's and redistribute that money into generating jobs and social programs with free education up to the doctorate level for technology and medicine.
    1 Jun 2014, 06:21 AM Reply Like
  • wigit5
    , contributor
    Comments (4365) | Send Message
     
    Rainmon,
    "Clean Coal" as a concept isn't an oxymoron, the day we start labeling concepts oxymoronic is the day we stop innovating altogether.

     

    Today's current technology passing as 'clean coal' is definitely oxymoronic; however as I've said in several other posts there is currently research that was tested small scale and was successful that extracts energy from coal with absolutely 0 emissions (it doesn't burn the coal to extract energy). A larger power station is being built to test this same method on a more industrial size scale to see if it will be possible commercially. I'd have to look up again but I think it was Ohio State U.
    1 Jun 2014, 09:17 AM Reply Like
  • wigit5
    , contributor
    Comments (4365) | Send Message
     
    your dream of everyone living in a place where they dont need a car is unrealistic unless we build homes on top of each other (either upward ie skyscrapers, or downward underground living). As well as convince people that they don't need as much space as they do now...

     

    an alternative is you would need a crap load of malls/beaches/grocery stores built every 15-20 miles.
    1 Jun 2014, 09:20 AM Reply Like
  • wigit5
    , contributor
    Comments (4365) | Send Message
     
    haaggus no one will freeze to death global warming will keep us alive hehe
    1 Jun 2014, 09:21 AM Reply Like
  • nemonemo
    , contributor
    Comments (337) | Send Message
     
    Such rules can't be enforced unless economically viable. We don't yet have dictatorship unless we are all mentally retarded.
    30 May 2014, 04:22 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Hub
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs