THE NATION’S NEWSPAPER

Collegiate
Case
Study www.usatodaycollege.com

Candidates talk of alternative

fuels, different goals
Climate Change
The issue of global climate change includes environmental, political and eco-
By Martha T. Moore nomic ramifications. Today these effects are being addressed at many levels,
................................................................................5-6 from world climate change forums to local grassroots initiatives. Investing in
renewable fuels and energy are among some of the ways to lower greenhouse
gas emissions; however, implementing these approaches can be costly. This case
Global warming a hot spot for study explores the various efforts being made to combat global warming and the
costs associated with them.
investors
By Adam Shell and Matt Krantz
................................................................................7-9

Fixing climate carries big cost

By Dan Vergano
...........................................................................10-11

Catch a wave, throw a switch

By Paul Davidson
...........................................................................12-14

Critical inquiry
Discussion and future implications
........................................................................................15

USA TODAY Snapshots®

Rise in books on global warming
New books classified as “global warming” being
published, year by year:

2005
39

2004
36
2003 Photo illustration by Dixie D. Vereen and Web Bryant, USA TODAY
15
2002
12 By By Patrick O’Driscoll and Dan Vergano
USA TODAY

Source: Compiled by
Andrew Grabois,
A major international analysis of climate change due Friday will conclude that
Books-in-Print humankind's reliance on fossil fuels — coal, fuel oil and natural gas — is to blame for
By Adrienne Lewis, USA TODAY global warming, according to three scientists familiar with the research on which it is
based.
© Copyright 2007 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co., Inc. All rights reser ved.
AS SEEN IN USA TODAY’S NEWS SECTION, JANUARY 31, 2007
The gold-standard Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report
represents "a real convergence
happening here, a consensus that this is a
total global no-brainer," says U.S. climate
scientist Jerry Mahlman, former director
of the federal government's Geophysical
Fluid Dynamics L aborator y in New
Jersey.
"The big message that will come out is
the strength of the attribution of the
warming to human activities," says
researcher Claudia Tebaldi of the National
Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)
in Boulder, Colo.
Mahlman, who crafted the IPCC
language used to define levels of
scientific certainty, says the new report
will lay the blame at the feet of fossil
fuels with "virtual certainty," meaning
99% sure. That's a significant jump from
"likely," or 66% sure, in the group's last
report in 2001, Mahlman says. His role in
this year's effort involved spending two
months reviewing the more than 1,600
pages of research that went into the new
assessment.
Among the findings, Tebaldi says, is
that even if people stopped burning the
fossil fuels that release carbon dioxide,
the heat-trapping gas blamed most for
the warm-up, the effects of higher
temperatures, including deadlier heat
waves, coastal floods, longer droughts,
worse wildfires and higher energy bills,
would not go away in our lifetime.
"Most of the carbon dioxide still would
just be sitting there, staring at us for the
next century," Mahlman says.
"The projections also make clear how
much we are already committed" to
climate change, Tebaldi says, echoing the
comments of more than a dozen IPCC
scientists contacted by USA TODAY. Even
if every smokestack and tailpipe stops
emissions right now, the remaining heat
makes further warming inevitable, she
says.
Reprinted with permission. All rights reser ved.
The report will resonate worldwide
because the current debate over global
warming has been more about what is
responsible — people or nature? — than
about whether it is happening.
President Bush only recently has
acknowledged the link, mentioning
global warming in last week's State of the
Union address. It was the first time he
has included climate change in the
annual speech before Congress. Bush
called for developing renewable and
alternative fuels.
The IPCC was established in 1988 by
the World Meteorological Organization
and the United Nations Environment
Program. This will be its fourth climate
assessment since 1990. The last one, in
2001, predicted average global
temperatures would rise 2.5 to 10.4
degrees by the end of this century. The
rise from 1901 to 2005 was just 1.2
degrees.
The report is the work of more than
2,000 scientists, whose drafts were
reviewed by scores of governments,
industry and environmental groups. The
document is based on research
published in the six years since the last
report.
The analysis comes at a time when
awareness of global warming in the USA
and efforts to combat it are more intense
than ever. Former vice president Al
Gore's climate-change documentary An
Inconvenient Truth scored two Oscar
nominations last week. Meanwhile, some
states and hundreds of American cities
are taking steps to curb emissions that
intensify the heat-trapping "greenhouse
gases" in the atmosphere.
Leaks about droughts, floods
Officially, the panel's 2007 findings are
still under wraps, but details have been
leaking out for a year, particularly in
recent weeks.
News accounts have featured
projections of more droughts, floods,
shrinking glaciers and rising sea levels.
There is so much media attention now,
"I almost think there won't be any
surprises compared to six years ago,"
says Steve Running, a University of
Montana ecologist. "When the report
came out (in 2001) it was all 'new' news.
This time, I think everybody will say,
'Well, yeah, that's already what we've
been hearing about.'"
Michael MacCracken, chief scientist for
the Climate Institute, a Washington, D.C.,
think tank, says the studies underlying
the report make the broad conclusions
clear anyway. A 2005 Nature magazine
study, for example, narrowed the 2001
estimate of warmer temperatures to an
increase from 2.7 to 8.1 degrees by the
year 2100.
Similarly, two Science magazine studies
in 2005 of satellite and balloon
measurements of temperature
confirmed the Earth's atmosphere is
warming exactly as predicted from
human-caused increases in carbon
dioxide.
Wave of new initiatives
What will be released this week is the
first of three par ts of the repor t: a
scientific synthesis of global warming's
physical manifestations that includes
measurements and projections of
temperature, precipitation, storms, wind,
polar melting and sea levels. New this
time is a chapter on paleoclimatology,
the study of climate change from fossils
and the reconstruction of data and clues
going back hundreds of thousands of
years.
In addition to the extensive scientific
conclusions, which MacCracken says
have been settled, a short "summary for
policymakers" is still being hammered
out and will be released Friday in Paris.
Page 2
AS SEEN IN USA TODAY’S NEWS SECTION, JANUARY 31, 2007

Effects of warming may reshape weather, economy

A major report on climate changes was released by a United Nations-sponsored panel. The report draws heavily upon
evidence and projections from published articles. Some projections from those studies for this century.

Projections What it means Possible effects

Temperature — Globally, average
temperatures may rise by 2.7 to
8.1 degrees
Heat waves — Heat waves
become more severe in southern
and western North America
U.S. temperatures rise the most in
Upper Midwest and Mountain
West, perhaps by 7 degrees
About three more heat waves
that last three days or more in a
typical year
u Higher air-conditioning bills
u Ski resorts relocate north as
snow pack melts
u Wheat belt and other crops
shift north
u Heat-related deaths and
blackouts as power grids overload

Precipitation — Rain and snow About 6 inches less rain for the u Drought and flash floods
increase in the nation’s northern Southwest and 6 more inches for u More and larger wildfires
states overall and decrease in the Northeast in a typical year
drier regions

Frost days — Fewer days that At least 50 days a year, on average, u Longer growing season
cross the freezing point, that never fall below 32 degrees u Relocation of crops to match
particularly in northern states in the Pacific Northwest plant needs with new climate

Seal level — Level may rise by 20 Coastal cities and towns see more u Barrier islands, New Orleans
inches or less by 2100; ice-sheet flooding and erosion as and South Florida inundated
collapses may add more. development raises vulnerability u Owners of coastal homes
to storm surges unable to get flood insurance
Sources: Nature, Science, National Center for Atmospheric Research, National Park Service, EPA, Energy Department, Climate Institute

The second phase of the report is on
the effects of those measured and
projected changes and is due in April. A
third group's work on ways to try to
lessen those impacts is to be released in
May.
The IPCC report lands amid a rush of
climate-change developments. Sharing
the spotlight:
u Congress. After winning a majority
in the House and Senate in November's
election, Democrats have climate-
change bills in the works. House Speaker
Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is creating a
special committee on climate change.
Next week, the House Science and
Technology Committee will discuss the
IPCC report.
u S t a t e s . More than 12 states are
taking steps to reduce greenhouse gases.
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger
this month ordered the world's first
low-carbon limits on passenger-car fuels
in the most populous state. The new
standard would reduce the carbon
content of transportation fuels at least
10% by the year 2020.
u Cities. More than 375 mayors who
have signed pledges since 2005 to cut
greenhouse-gas emissions in their
communities launched a drive last week
for major climate legislation in Congress
this year. They represent 56 million
people in all 50 states. The day after the
State of the Union address, the U.S.
Conference of Mayors announced global
warming is No. 1 on its top-10 list of
priorities.
u I n d u s t r y . Ten major companies,
including industrial giants General
Electric, Alcoa and DuPont, joined four
environmental and climate groups last
week to demand swift passage of federal
legislation to cut emissions that worsen
warming. Their U.S. Climate Action
Partnership says further delay only
"increases the risk of unavoidable
consequences … at potentially greater
economic cost and social disruption."

Reprinted with permission. All rights reser ved. Page 3

AS SEEN IN USA TODAY’S NEWS SECTION, JANUARY 31, 2007
In their own studies, Tebaldi and her
colleagues at NCAR found broad
agreement in climate projections for
North America by 2100, including a rise
in average temperatures from 3 to 9
degrees.
That could lead to more frequent heat
waves and more warm nights when
daytime temperatures linger longer after
sundown, especially in the South and
West, Tebaldi's group concluded. NCAR
also says increasing rain would soak
northern states but bypass the already
dry Southwest, where drought would be
more common except when torrential
rains bring flash floods.
The IPCC report is likely to reflect
climate uncertainties and disagreements,
too. Scientists have strongly debated the
last two years, without resolution,
whether global warming intensifies
hurricanes.
Rising sea levels are a huge concern for
the USA because more than half the
population lives within 50 miles of the
coastlines, according to the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. The 2001 repor t
contained a wide estimate of the rise this
centur y — from 3.5 inches to 34.
MacCracken says that projection has
fallen to about 20 inches or less.
Such a drop in the top estimate alarms
glacier experts such as John Turner of the
British Antarctic Survey, who was quoted
in the United Kingdom's Guardian
newspaper as saying the low projection
is "misleading." He says the low number
accounts only for the heat-related rise of
Reprinted with permission. All rights reser ved.
sea level and slow trickles from ebbing
glaciers, and it ignores potential ice-
sheet collapses in Antarctica or
Greenland.
"Greenland is just a relic of the last Ice
Age, after all, just jutting out into the
Atlantic, frozen at latitudes further south
than anything else," MacCracken says.
"What might happen when it gets
warmer?"
Are reports too cautious?
MacCracken contends past IPCC
reports have been too conservative,
partly by design, in warning about the
dangers of climate change, especially sea
level rise.
"Scientists don't like to be wrong, so
they tend to discount the most uncertain
things," MacCracken says. "And that's
good, but policymakers and risk
managers usually want to know the
worst case, as well as the middle one,
when they plan for things."
Ever y IPCC repor t has been
controversial. When the 1995 report's
economic analysis estimated that the
worth of a human life in a developing
nation is less than in developed ones, it
triggered protests and sit-ins.
In 2005, federal hurricane researcher
Chris Landsea resigned from the IPCC,
suggesting its hurricane warnings were
too overblown and "politicized."
Climate scientist Roger Pielke Sr. of the
University of Colorado at Boulder has
suggested that development and
deforestation, rather than the burning of
fossil fuels, are the main drivers behind
global warming. He says on his climate-
science website that the IPCC should
recognize the importance of these other
factors.
In contrast, Australian scientist Tim
Flannery has complained in his 2005
book The Weather Makers: How Man is
Changing the Climate and What it Means
for Life on Earth that IPCC estimates
downplay the impact of warming.
In Paris this week, the process of
negotiating and revising the shor t
summary is painstaking and "line by
line," says Kevin Trenberth, one of the
lead authors and climate analysis chief at
the National Center for Atmospheric
Research. More than 100 of the panel's
193 member nations are taking part in
the negotiations on the summary, he
says.
"They'll do a lot of rewriting. It's all
going to change to cover the concerns of
each nation," whether it's monsoons in
India or polar bears in Canada, says
MacCracken, who helped lead the USA's
involvement in the IPCC in 1995 and
2001. The summar y also must be
translated in six official U.N. languages.
In 1995, MacCracken says, negotiations
at the meeting in Madrid stretched from
8 a.m. to an hour past midnight.
"But luckily, it was Madrid," he adds,
"so the restaurants were still open at 1
a.m."
Page 4
AS SEEN IN USA TODAY’S NEWS SECTION, SEPTEMBER 28, 2007
Candidates talk of alternative
fuels, different goals
Democrats and GOP
take separate paths
on renewable energy
By Martha T. Moore
USA TODAY
When Democratic and Republican
presidential candidates push renewable
energy from wind farms, solar cells and
biofuels, one might think they're all
talking about the same thing.
They're not. Democratic candidates
talk about renewable energy as a way to
cut greenhouse gases that cause global
warming. Republican candidates talk
about renewable energy to reduce the
use of foreign oil or, as they call it, to
achieve "energy independence."
What's being proposed to achieve one
doesn't necessarily help the other.
Global warming is at the top of the
agenda this week at the United Nations,
where Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon
convened a special debate on the topic
Monday, and in Washington, where the
Bush administration Thursday gathered
representatives from the 15 largest
economies to discuss how to tackle
climate change after the 2012 expiration
of the Kyoto Protocol.
In the presidential campaign,
Democratic candidates support "cap and
trade" systems to reduce global warming
by cutting carbon dioxide emissions. The
idea would set a limit (or cap) on the
amount of carbon dioxide emissions
For more educational resources,
Reprinted with
nationally but let industries trade
permits that allow certain levels of
pollution.
Legislation to create a national cap and
trade system is in the Senate. Europe has
a similar system, and a 10-state
Northeast regional program is set to
begin in 2009.
ELEC
T
2008ION
USA TODAY
"We have a crisis on this planet and
that crisis is global warming," former
senator John Edwards said in a speech in
June when he called for capping carbon
emissions, auctioning carbon permits
and investing the proceeds in renewable
energy.
Democratic candidates also want an
increase in average fuel efficiency for an
automaker's fleet. They suppor t an
increase to as much as a standard of 50
miles per gallon from the current 27.5
mpg. And they support requiring utilities
to obtain power from renewable sources,
a measure already in effect in 25 states.
Sen. Chris Dodd and former senator
Mike Gravel also support a tax on carbon
emissions. A carbon tax is less appealing
to environmentalists than the cap and
trade system, says Tony Kreindler of
Environmental Defense, an advocacy
group, because it doesn't specify the
amount of carbon emissions that would
be reduced.
visit http://education.usatoday.com
permission. All rights reser ved.
Republican candidates don't go as far.
Only Sen. John McCain supports a cap
and trade system. Former New York City
mayor Rudy Giuliani and former
Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney
stress the need to invest in alternative
fuels as a way to reduce U.S. reliance on
oil but don't support a cap on emissions.
Romney says he'd consider a cap only if
other countries joined in. "We don't call
it America Warming, we call it global
warming," he said during a campaign
appearance in South Carolina in August.
"Primarily, he would just dramatically
increase federal spending on research,
development and demonstration
projects," says Melissa Davis, a Romney
adviser.
Increasing use of ethanol, nuclear
power, wind and solar "would help with
global warming," Giuliani said in a radio
interview in Florida in April. "Even more
importantly, they'd help to make us
energy independent so we wouldn't
have to be sending money to our
enemies."
To some environmentalists, the
Republicans' rhetoric is only partially
acceptable. "Almost all the Republicans
acknowledge that global warming is real
and that humans are causing it," says
Gene Karpinski of the League of
Conservation Voters, a group that tracks
candidates' positions on climate change.
"The bad news is that, with the
exception of Sen. McCain, none of them
support mandatory programs that are
necessary to get the job done."
To reduce dependence on oil, Giuliani
7
Page 5
AS SEEN IN USA TODAY’S NEWS SECTION, SEPTEMBER 28, 2007

and Romney support nuclear power and
the use of liquid coal, a process of
turning coal into auto fuel. That puts
them at odds with some Democrats,
because although coal is plentiful in the
USA, creating and using liquid coal
causes more greenhouse-gas emissions
than using oil, according to the Natural
Resources Defense Council.
Democrats are split on liquid coal.
Edwards, for example, calls it "a terrible
idea," and opposes it, as do Sens. Joseph
Biden and Dodd. Sens. Barack Obama
and Hillary Rodham Clinton are less
definitive: Both say they favor using
liquid coal if it can be made to emit less
carbon dioxide than oil.
One conflict between energy
independence and reducing global
warming lies in coal. It's cheap and
plentiful in the USA, but the leading
source of carbon emissions. Half of U.S.
electricity comes from coal-fired power
plants, and almost 30% of carbon
emissions.
For those who want to reduce the
USA's dependence on imported oil, "coal
is just fine," says Judi Greenwald of the
Pew Center for Climate Change. "It's just
really bad for the climate."
A solution, a process called "carbon
sequestration," in which carbon
emissions are captured and pumped
underground, isn't yet fully developed for
power plants, Greenwald says.
For that reason, Democrats including
Edwards and New Mexico Gov. Bill
Richardson would ban new coal-fired
power plants until they are able to
capture carbon dioxide emissions.

Reprinted with permission. All rights reser ved. Page 6

AS SEEN IN USA TODAY’S MONEY SECTION ON FEBRUARY 27, 2007

Climate issues change

the economic landscape
By Adam Shell and Matt Krantz
USA TODAY

Droughts. Hurricanes. Rising

temperatures. Melting glaciers. In a
world abuzz with talk about global
warming, climate change is elbowing
aside tech and biotech as the major
investment theme of the future.

Wall Street's savviest analysts are

devising ways to cash in on crazy
weather, just as they did in response to
the profound changes brought on by
the dawn of the digital age,
globalization and the graying of
America.

Discussions about what interest rates

mean for stocks are giving way to
chatter about what a 1-degree rise
each year in temperature would do to
profits at businesses ranging from
carmakers to solar companies.

Global warming has emerged as a

major market-moving force that
represents a generational shift likely to
influence how people invest for
decades. The world's biggest financial
services firms are investing massive
amounts of time and brainpower
trying to pinpoint what stocks and
sectors will benefit — and be hurt — by
changes in Earth's weather patterns.

"We are approaching a tipping point

when it comes to climate change," says
Edward Kerschner, a strategist at
Citigroup.

Kerschner should know. He spent

nine months researching "Climatic
Consequences," a 120-page report that
zeroes in on 74 companies in 18
countries well-positioned to profit
from changing weather patterns. "The
By Suzy Parker, USA TODAY interest in this repor t is
unprecedented," says Kerschner. He
says presentations to clients are
booked through the fall.

Reprinted with permission. All rights reser ved. Page 7

AS SEEN IN USA TODAY’S MONEY SECTION ON FEBRUARY 27, 2007
Similarly, UBS released a 97-page tome,
"Climate Change: Beyond Whether." And
Lehman Bros., with input from analysts
in London and Tokyo, this month
published a 143-page paper, "The
Business of Climate Change." The well-
being of the planet, the report concludes,
has gone from a "fringe concern" of
scientists and activists to a "central topic"
for CEOs and investors.
"Global warming is likely to prove (to
be) one of those tectonic forces that —
like globalization or the aging of
populations — gradually but powerfully
changes the economic landscape," writes
John Llewellyn, senior economic policy
adviser at Lehman.
And California's Calpers, the nation's
largest public pension plan and
considered a trendsetter among giant
money managers, is committing $800
million to invest in clean technology in
emerging markets of Eastern Europe,
Latin America and Asia.
Earlier this month, the United Nations'
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) concluded that it was
more than 90% likely that human activity
is causing global warming. Former vice
president Al Gore came to a similar
conclusion in his film, An Inconvenient
Truth, which Sunday won the Academy
Award for best documentary feature.
The IPCC says temperatures around the
globe could rise 2 to 12 degrees
Fahrenheit by 2100. Likely result: more
intense heat waves, more powerful
tropical storms and a rise in sea levels
that could swamp low-lying cities.
From an investors' standpoint, it
doesn't matter if people believe global
warming is real or if greenhouse gases
are to blame, Kerschner says. What does
matter is if consumers, regulators,
governments and corporations "react to
the perceived threat." That is what
creates investment opportunities — and
risks, he says.
So here is what Wall Street's cool,
Reprinted with permission. All rights reser ved.
calculating minds say are some potential
winners and losers from increasingly
volatile weather.
Agriculture. Ethanol, which is made
mainly from corn, has been the talk of
the farm since President Bush pushed for
greater ethanol use in his January State
of the Union address.
The biggest ethanol producers, Archer
Daniels Midland, Aventine Renewable
Energy, Pacific Ethanol and VeraSun,
seem obvious places for investors. The
problem is, investments that are obvious
rarely pan out. Ethanol plays, at least in
the short run, have been no exception.
These stocks have all tumbled as corn
prices have soared, making the main raw
ingredient used to make ethanol
prohibitively pricey.
Corn, as a feed for ethanol, is limited,
says Michael Hoover, managing director
at U.S. Trust. If ethanol were to provide
just 10% of the nation's automotive fuel
needs, it would consume 35% of the
nation's corn crop. And 25% of all food
prices are affected by corn prices, he
says: "You've got a food-vs.-fuel issue."
But that doesn't mean there's no
money to be made on the farm. There
are high hopes about cellulosic ethanol,
which is made from farm leftovers
ranging from grasses to empty corn
husks and beets. The trouble is, it takes
more energy to extract starches from
this "biomass" than it produces.
Companies such as Diversa are working
on developing enzymes that could be a
cheap way to extract parts from biomass
to create fuel.
Cashing in on the food boom requires
thinking more creatively. For one thing,
as in most gold rushes, the companies
selling the picks and axes often cash in.
That's why Kerschner thinks tractor-
maker John Deere could benefit as
farmers look to handle bigger crops more
efficiently. Citing strong demand for
tractors because of rising corn prices,
Deere issued a bullish outlook for 2007,
and analysts say the ethanol boom is just
getting started. Similarly, Monsanto is
working on crops that are more resistant
to drought.
Alternative energy. Windmills. Fuel
cells. Solar panels. Those global warming
plays pop into most investors' minds.
There's no shor tage of companies
working on these technologies. Energy
Conversion Devices and SunPower, for
example, are developing types of clean
solar panels with the hope of rivaling oil
and coal, deemed "dirty" by scientists.
Don't count on making big-time dough,
says Robert Wilder, CEO of WilderShares,
a company that creates stock indexes
that track eco-friendly companies. He
says the technology is too immature.
Wilder is skeptical about how soon
these technologies will make meaningful
contributions. Solar, for instance,
provides only one-tenth of a percent of
the world's energy. Even if production
were ramped up tenfold, it would
provide 1% of current demand.
Alternative energy plays, he believes,
are not the best route to profits. He
prefers technology that makes dirty
energy sources, such as coal and oil,
cleaner. Fuel Tech, for example, makes
devices that help factories reduce the
dangerous carbon spewed out of
smokestacks. "Ironically, people
interested in benefiting from climate
change should look at the really dirty
stuff, not the clean stuff," Wilder says.
Another potential play: nuclear power
generators. While disposing of nuclear
waste is problematic, the actual
generation of nuclear energy is clean and
doesn't produce carbon, he says. FPL
Group is a play on both nuclear and
alternative energy because it produces
nuclear power in addition to being the
nation's biggest producer of wind power,
Wilder says.
Automotive. Seems like people are
pouring just about anything into their
gas tanks. There's ethanol, hydrogen,
clean diesel and biodiesel. Each hold
Page 8
AS SEEN IN USA TODAY’S MONEY SECTION ON FEBRUARY 27, 2007
promise and any could be part of the
solution, says Ron Cogan, editor and
publisher of Green Car Journal.
Cogan lists hybrid technology as a
can't-miss investment. Hybrid cars are
powered by an intelligent system that
knows when to run on liquid fuel and
when to switch to electricity. Hybrid
technology works with all the fuels to
make them more efficient. Toyota,
Honda, General Motors and Ford are the
leaders, in that order, he says.
Another way to profit is to invest in
companies that make the parts used to
build hybrid vehicles. International
Rectifier, for instance, makes many of the
components that end up in hybrids
made by General Motors and Ford.
Energy Conversion makes the batteries.
F i n a n c i a l s e r v i c e s . One potential
beneficiary, analysts say, is the Chicago
Mercantile Exchange (CME), a futures
exchange with an already-broad
weather-related product lineup and
plans to create markets. Last year, the
CME traded 797,508 weather contracts
valued at $21 billion, up nearly tenfold
from $2.2 billion in 2004. Those options
and futures enable insurance, energy and
utility companies to hedge potential
losses related to weather. Similarly, the
CME recently launched "hurricane
contracts" that enable insurers to transfer
risk to financial markets. "Companies are
becoming increasingly aware that
climate is closely tied to profits," says
Felix Carabello, CME's director of
alternative investment products.
"Investors are always looking for new
asset classes" to diversify portfolios.
Stock investors seeking broad exposure
to "green" investments could consider
mutual funds offered by Domini Social
Investments. All Domini holdings
promote "the enrichment of our natural
environment."
Infrastructure. While the Earth may
be choking on contaminants, the world's
demand for energy is only accelerating as
Reprinted with permission. All rights reser ved.
economies in places such as China and
India enjoy growth spurts. And that's
why heavy construction and engineering
companies that build power plants will
be busy, U.S. Trust's Hoover says.
But the enlightened ones that build
ecologically sensitive plants will steal
market share. Case in point: McDermott
International. It builds and designs
everything from coal-fired boilers to
power-generation systems in 90
countries and nuclear steam generators.
The company is finding ways to make
these plants more efficient and cleaner.
One technology, clean coal, puts devices
in smokestacks that pull the carbon out
of the exhaust and plow it back into the
soil. "It's about taking the harmful things
out of the stack," Hoover says.
R e a l e s t a t e . In a post-Hurricane
Katrina world, many folks may rethink
their dream of buying or remaining in
coastal homes with coveted water views,
David Lereah, chief economist at the
National Association of Realtors, writes in
his upcoming book, All Real Estate Is
Local. Lereah cites global warming as a
"megatrend" and notes that people have
an "increasing aversion to locations on
the water" and are avoiding "severe-
weather-prone" areas.
He predicts households will "move
from oceanfront properties to homes
several miles away from the water."
Many folks, he notes, are fleeing Florida
in favor of the Smokey Mountain region,
which includes Georgia, Tennessee and
western North Carolina. "They feel more
secure in the mountains," says Lereah.
Red Lyons, a Georgia Realtor, confirms
a stream of buyers, many from Florida,
are moving to the mountain region: "It's
without a doubt weather-related."
Skyrocketing insurance premiums are
also affecting property values. "Higher
premiums come directly out of the
asking price," says Dean Baker, co-
director at the Center for Economic and
Policy Research.
T e c h n o l o g y . Small par ts and
components that go into everything from
washers and dryers to fighter jets and
elevators could play a gigantic factor in
curbing energy use. Technology that
exists right now could reduce the world's
power use by 30% overnight, says Alex
Lidow, CEO of advanced control maker
International Rectifier. About 11% of the
savings could be achieved with efficient
electric motors inside washing machines,
conveyor belts and other motors that use
half the energy of older technology,
Lidow says. Another 11% could be saved
in transportation uses including hybrids.
The last 8% can be saved with energy-
efficient fluorescent bulbs.
Making devices that go into bulbs,
hybrid cars and electric motors is paying
off for International Rectifier. It gets a
third of its business, which is growing at
an annual 25% clip, from such energy-
saving devices. Those businesses focused
on energy efficiency are also the
company's most profitable.
Despite the forward-looking mind-set
of Wall Street analysts, profiting from
climate change is still in its infancy.
Citigroup's Kerschner learned that
firsthand at a recent meeting with
wealthy clients in Florida, a state known
for both its beautiful beaches and run-ins
with deadly hurricanes.
Says Kerschner: "I asked them, 'How
many of you are aware of global
warming?' Virtually everyone raised
their hand. Next I asked, 'How many of
you are concerned about global
warming?' Most kept their hands up.
Finally I asked, 'How many of you have
adjusted your investments due to climate
change?' Sheepishly, most put their
hands down."
At that moment, Kerschner says, he
knew most investors hadn't even started
to think about how to profit from
changes in the Earth's weather patterns.
Page 9
AS SEEN IN USA TODAY’S LIFE SECTION MAY 3, 2007
Fixing climate costs carries big costs
Report: Environment,
economy will benefit
By Dan Vergano
USA TODAY
Global warming's demands on human
ingenuity, and pocketbooks, will take
center stage Friday in the latest
international report on climate change.
Whether humans bury greenhouse
gases, blunt them with new technology
or buy them off with tax incentives,
banishing the emissions responsible for
global warming will take quick action,
exper ts conclude in advance of the
report.
The latest International Panel on
Climate Change report, "Mitigation of
Climate Change," examines fixes — or
"mitigation" in climate lingo — to global
warming, both technological and
economic. The report will underline the
environmental and financial benefits of
quick action to cut emissions, says report
co-author John Drexhage of Canada's
International Institute for Sustainable
Development.
But fixes also come with costs explored
in the repor t. If governments, for
example, impose fees on carbon dioxide
emissions, it would raise the price of
electricity for businesses and
homeowners alike. For that reason, the
USA and China, major users of coal, have
objected to calls in the panel's draft
report for quick action on just such a
move, says Tony Kreindler of
Environmental Defense, an
environmental research and advocacy
organization.
Problematic visions of the future
In the first of two reports earlier this
Reprinted with permission. All rights reser ved.
Mitigation' glossary
u Adaptation. Spending money to live with the consequences of climate
change. For example, building higher sea walls.
u B i o f u e l s . Energ y sources, such as ethanol, made from far ming
byproducts or crops.
u Cap-and-trade. A mandatory limit on carbon dioxide emissions that
provides companies with incentives to reach that "cap" at the lowest
possible cost.
u C a r b o n s e q u e s t r a t i o n . Underground storage of smokestack carbon
dioxide releases.
u Carbon sink. Anything that naturally reduces the concentration of
carbon in the atmosphere, such as a growing forest, is a sink.
u Carbon tax. Charging businesses and individuals a price to emit carbon
dioxide.
u Fuel switching. Moving from fuels that emit lots of carbon dioxide, such
as coal, to ones using less, such as nuclear or natural gas.
u Tragedy of the commons. Individuals overexploiting a resource, such as
the environment.
u Wedge strategy. Proposal to deploy any seven of 15 "wedges," existing
technology fixes such as increased biofuel use or solar panels, which would
bring greenhouse-gas emissions under control by 2050.
Sources: Princeton Environmental Institute, National Commission on Energy Policy, Carbon Tax
Center, Congressional Budget Office
year, the World Meteorological adaptation or suffering," says Harvard's
Organization-sponsored panel, which John Holdren, co-chair of the National
features thousands of climate scientists Commission on Energy Policy. "And we
reviewing studies, included a best are already starting to do a little of each
estimate that average surface one."
temperatures will rise roughly 3 to 7
degrees this centur y. In the second A summary of the third and latest
repor t, the panel concluded that repor t's scientific chapters will be
environmental impacts of warming were released in Bangkok after review by
already apparent in migrating species, political representatives of more than
earlier springtimes and sea-level rise. The 100 nations, including the United States.
summar y warned of a future of
increased droughts, floods and species The key debate in Bangkok, Drexhage
extinctions. says, will center on a simple chart. The
chart shows ways that fast economic
"We have three choices: mitigation, moves worldwide, both in technology
Page 10
AS SEEN IN USA TODAY’S LIFE SECTION MAY 3, 2007
and in imposing taxes or fees on
emissions, would limit global warming.
The key goals are keeping this century's
average surface temperature rise roughly
below 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit, he adds.
That's the point where many dangerous
impacts, such as declining grain yields in
Africa and the spread of tropical diseases
toward the poles, almost certainly loom.
The report evaluates mitigation from a
number of angles:
u Technologies ranging from better
building design to nuclear power to
carbon sequestration, which shunts
greenhouse gases from smokestacks into
underground rock formations.
u Future emission "scenarios," ranging
from a "business as usual" world in
which fossil fuel use continues unabated
to ones with strict limits on greenhouse
gases.
u Economic estimates from
combinations of technologies, policies
and scenarios.
Reprinted with permission. All rights reser ved.
A 'monumental' task
"The truth is we are facing a
monumental challenge in climate
change" tied to humanity's widespread
reliance on fossil fuels for energy, says
Vicki Arroyo of the Pew Center on Global
Climate Change. Combined with cement
production, which requires heating
immense amounts of limestone in a
process that releases carbon dioxide, that
dependence adds more than 6 billion
metric tons of carbon to the atmosphere
annually. The next climate report, Arroyo
says, "will make clear there are costs of
not acting, and there are costs of acting,
to deal with it."
Money, not science, becomes the point
of debate over climate change with the
release of the mitigation report, says
report co-author Anthony Patt of Boston
University.
On one side, Patt suggests, some will
take the position outlined in February by
Newsweek pundit Robert Samuelson
that significantly changing emissions
"would be costly, uncertain and no doubt
unpopular." Others will agree with last
year's Stern Review, an economic review
of global warming's implications headed
by the United Kingdom's chief
economist, which argued that reducing
carbon dioxide emissions would lower
economic growth modestly this century,
while inaction would trigger global
recession by 2050 because of the
environmental effects of runaway
climate change.
"In my view, I think the report will
make plain that a lot of avenues exist" for
addressing climate change, Patt says.
No one technology or policy will
address climate change by itself, Holdren
says. The energy commission he co-
chairs, for example, released an April
report calling for charging businesses a
steadily rising price per ton on carbon
emissions, combined with government
incentives and technology developments
to lower emissions. "People are starting
to notice climates changing, see it in their
real lives," he adds. "It's too late to stop
global warming. The real question is
whether we can prevent catastrophic
(man-made) interference with climate."
Page 11
AS SEEN IN USA TODAY’S MONEY SECTION APRIL 19, 2007

Catch a wave, throw a switch

Marine power projects take advantage of waves, tides and Football field,
currents to create energy used to generate electricity. Here is one endzone to endzone
of the the technologies used to harness wave and tide power.
360 feet
Waves generate power:
492 ft.
Offshore wave energy converters consist of four half–submerged linked
1 cylinders that ride ocean waves, and work in groups. The converters’ hinged
joints constantly flex up and down and left to right with each wave.

Wave movement is converted

2 to(diagram
electricity by a pump.
below)

11.5 ft. diameter

Underground
power cable

Cylinders are anchored to the sea floor by a

series of cables and moored in water 165 to 200
750 kilowatts of electricity is sent
Source: Ocean
Power Delivery,
Edinburgh, Scotland
3 by cable to shore and is enough to
feet deep. Cables allow the machine to swing
and face oncoming waves head–on.
power about 500 homes.

Anchor
weights

By Paul Davidson
USA TODAY How pump works
A) Waves flex the converter’s
Any wiped-out surfer knows all too hinged joints, forcing hy-
well the back-breaking power of the draulic fluid into hydraulic
ocean's waves. motors.
B) Hydraulic motors turn,
Now, a fledgling industry is harnessing generating electricity.
the incessant motion of waves, tides and C) Electricity is transmitted
to shore.
currents to create the world's newest
form of renewable energy. Source: Ocean Power Delivery Graphics by Robert W. Ahrens, USA TODAY

success. Developers are using an array of

After sputtering along for nearly a
decade, marine power appears poised to
join the alternative energy juggernaut,
though the technologies are still in the
early stages and have no guarantee of
contraptions -- from spinning turbines to The world's first commercial wave
bobbing buoys and undulating, snakelike farm is scheduled to launch this summer
cylinders -- to convert ocean or river off Portugal's coast. The first pilot tidal
movements into electricity. generator in the USA revved up in New

For more information, log on to www.usatodaycollege.com Page 12

AS SEEN IN USA TODAY’S MONEY SECTION APRIL 19, 2007

York City's East River last December. And
the USA's first utility-scale wave project,
off Oregon beaches, won preliminary
federal approval this year. All told, the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
has cleared 21 preliminary permits, and
about 35 are pending for wave and tidal
projects, largely off the West Coast and
shores of Florida and New England.
Widespread use of marine energy is
about a decade away, says Roger Bedard,
ocean energy leader for the Electric
Power Research Institute. In 50 years or
so, he says, 20% of offshore wave energy
could be tapped practically. That,
Powered by water
Other electricity–producing devices that use the energy
of currents or waves:
PowerBuoy
What it is: A floating buoyike structure with
an onboard electrical generator and a
computer that monitors wave severity and
controls electricity output.
How it works: A pistonlike device at the
buoy’s bottom rises and falls with ocean
waves. The piston’s movement drives a
generator that produces electricity, which
is sent by cable to shore.
Power generation: 40 kilowatts, enough to
power 31 homes; larger units are planned.
Placement: Designed for mooring in water
100 to 200 feet deep, 1 to 5 miles offshore.
Deployed: Tests in Atlantic City; Oahu,
Hawaii; Santona, Spain; Reedsport, Ore.
Company: Ocean Power Technologies,
Pennington, N.J.
sometimes-mammoth machines that
harness wave energy bounce on the
ocean's surface, they are barely visible
several miles offshore. By contrast, some
environmental groups have opposed
wind farms as an eyesore.
Developers have wave power down to
a science. In Oregon, for instance, wave
heights average about 111/2 feet in the
winter, enough to generate sufficient
electricity per yard of wave-crest length
to power about 38 homes. Waves, and
power potential, are higher on the West
Coast than the East Coast.

combined with tidal energy, could
constitute 10% of all U.S. power sources.
Prototype wave-power machines have
been around for a century, but interest in
marine energy picked up during the
1970s oil embargo, only to recede when
oil prices fell. Driving the new push is a
scramble for green energy, such as wind,
solar and biomass, amid growing
concerns about global warming and
expected federal limits on fossil fuel
plants' carbon dioxide emissions. About
half the states require utilities to mix
traditional power with some alternative
energy.
Marine energy has some distinct
advantages over its chief rival, wind
power. Water is 850 times denser than
air, allowing tidal turbines, for instance,
to produce about 40 times more power
than windmills with similar gear. That
will ultimately mean smaller equipment
at lower costs, Bedard says.
And though tidal, wave and wind
strengths all fluctuate, marine energy is
far more predictable than wind. Tidal
flows —bay or river currents that shift
several times daily based on the moon's
gravitational pull — can be forecast years
in advance. Satellite images foretell wave
heights, which trace wind patterns, days
ahead. That lets utilities use generators
more efficiently.
"If I know it's not always there, I can
make certain other plants are there to
Underwater turbine In December, Verdant Power placed a
What it is: Underwater windmill that uses water turbine on the bed of New York's
currents to produce electricity. East River. Tidal flows of about 6 feet per
How it works: Flowing water rotates the
turbine blades, which turn the generator second spin the turbine blades, which
that produces electricity, which is cabled to turn a shaft that powers a generator.
shore. The turbine can swivel to take
advantage of incoming/outgoing tides. Blades Cables along the river floor connect the
rotate about 32 times per minute. devices to the power grid.
Power generation: 35 kilowatts; A 10–
megawatt field would power approximately
7,600 homes1. The 35-kilowatt turbine is generating
Deployed: One unit tested in New York’s
East River, near Roosevelt Island. electricity for a small grocery store and
Company: Verdant Power, New York, N.Y. parking garage on nearby Roosevelt
Wave Dragon Island. Four more turbines are scheduled
to be added this month. After an 18-
month trial, Verdant hopes to install
What it is: An offshore floating platform with an some 200 turbines that will produce up
“overtopping-type” energy converter.
How it works: Ocean waves are channeled over a barrier to 10 megawatts of electricity, enough to
and into a reservoir. Water is released through outlets power 7,500 homes, says Verdant Chief
with turbines that spin and generate electricity, which is
sent by cable to shore. Financial Officer Kevin Lynch.
Power generation: Three models: 4, 7, and 11 megwatts
Deployed: Platform to be tested off the coast of Wales
this year. Ocean Renewable Power plans a much
Company: Wave Dragon, Copenhagen, Denmark larger turbine array in the Gulf Stream off
1 — units are intended to work in fields, not as a stand-alone single unit. the Florida coast. Unlike tidal flows, an
They are clustered together in tens or hundreds to form a field. Deeper or
faster water currents yield higher power generation per unit. ocean current is constant and can host
Source: The companies By Robert W. Ahrens, USA TODAY
enough turbines to power a few hundred
thousand homes, says company CEO
back it up," says Hal LaFlash, Pacific Gas Chris Sauer.
& Electric's renewable-energy director.
Others are testing the harsher waters
PG&E this year filed applications to of the open seas. Early next year, Ocean
study wave power off the California Power Technologies plans to install a 50-
coast, becoming the first major U.S. ton buoy in 150-foot-deep waters off the
utility to do so. It's also considering a tidal coast of Reedsport, Ore. As waves knock
project in the strait under the Golden the buoy to and fro, hydraulic fluid is
Gate Bridge. pumped through a cylinder, which drives
a generator. If the test is successful, 13
Another selling point for marine buoys will be added by late 2008. Plans
energy is its low profile. Water turbines call for an array of some 300 eventually,
moored to the seabed are hidden from generating electricity to power nearly
nearby communities. And while the 40,000 homes.

Reprinted with permission. All rights reser ved. Page 13

AS SEEN IN USA TODAY’S MONEY SECTION APRIL 19, 2007
"As a young guy in Australia, I did a lot
of surfing, and you get used to the
mechanical force in the waves that toss
you around, and you realize there's an
enormous amount of energy out there,"
says CEO George Taylor.
Portugal project
Ocean Power Delivery of Scotland has
tested a much larger device in the
Orkney Islands. Its 380-foot-long "sea
snake" contains seven cylinders linked by
hinges that undulate with the waves'
motions, tripping hydraulic pumps that
turn motors. It plans to install three
machines, at about $13.5 million, this
summer near northern Portugal, and
eventually an array of 30 to light 15,000
Por tuguese homes. PG&E plans to
consider the device for California.
Unlike wind power, which must be
zapped from states such as Wyoming
and Kansas to larger cities, clogging
transmission lines and losing energy
along the way, marine energy farms can
be near coastal population centers.
"Because of its location, it will be
relatively easy to integrate into our
system," says Kevin Watkins, vice
president of the Pacific Nor thwest
Generating Cooperative, which has
agreed to buy power from Ocean Power
Technologies.
Europe is further ahead than the USA.
It's testing a variety of prototypes,
Reprinted with permission. All rights reser ved.
including a "wave dragon" that scoops
water into a basin, then releases it to turn
turbines. Even big players are jumping in.
General Electric has taken a small stake
in Ocean Power Delivery.
"We've done our due diligence, and we
think this has promise," says Kevin
Walsh, who heads renewable energy for
GE Energy Financial Services.
Yet, marine energy also faces choppy
waters. Projects cost about 13 cents to 35
cents per kilowatt hour of
electricity, at least twice the
cost of wind. Mass
production, Bedard says,
eventually should drive
down costs below wind.
"It's about where wind
was 25 years ago,"
Bedard says, adding that
water turbines will develop
more quickly, having borrowed
from the advances of windmills.
Regulatory obstacles
Equipment has yet to be tested for long
periods in punishing surroundings, says
analyst Brandon Owens of Cambridge
Energy Research Associates. Ocean
Power Technologies had to suspend a
trial in Hawaii to install more durable
shock absorbers. The company, which is
preparing its initial public offering of
stock, lost $7.1 million on $1.7 million in
revenue last year, according to a filing
with the Securities and Exchange
Commission.
"It's a harsh environment, and these
things are difficult to build and maintain,"
Owens says.
There are also regulatory hurdles. It
took Verdant Power four years to get
approvals for its New York pilot program
from agencies such as FERC, the Coast
Guard and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Getting a commercial license
takes eight years. Verdant must spend
more than $2 million on sonar gear to
study the turbines' effect on fish. Lynch
says there is none because the blades
rotate at just 32 revolutions per minute.
PG&E plans to study the effect of wave
devices on kelp farming, crabbing, even
surfing. The machines do rob energy
from waves, but the effect on wave
heights is minuscule, Bedard says.
The Ocean Renewable Energy
Coalition's Sam O'Neill says agencies are
unfairly subjecting marine energy to the
same scrutiny as hydroelectric dams.
A bill to be introduced by Rep. Jay
Inslee, D-Wash., would streamline
approvals, earmark $50 million a year for
marine energy research, and provide the
same tax credits as other renewables.
"We have to give them a level playing
field," he says. "This is the most
concentrated energy on the planet."
Page 14
 1. Make a list of the approaches being taken by US cities to
CRITICAL INQUIRY
fight global warming. Find current articles in USA
TODAY that describe additional initiatives and add them
to the list. Choose one of the initiatives from your list and compose a letter to your city’s or town’s planning
commission explaining why it should be adopted.

2. Make a two-column chart with one column labeled “Pros” and one “Cons.” Then list the forms of renewable energy
and fuels described throughout the case study, filling in the pros and cons associated with implementing each one.
When you are done, place a check mark next to those you feel are most viable and share your ideas with a partner.

3. As reported in the case study, energy audits, while still relatively new, are becoming more and more popular as home-
owners look for ways to reduce their utility bills and also reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Create a chart to show the
costs and savings of the various energy audit recommendations listed in the article and rank them in order of what
you think are most beneficial to least.

1. Using current articles from USA TODAY, compose an

update on the International Panel on Climate Change
FUTURE IMPLICATIONS
Report article and current efforts by countries to combat
global climate change since the release of the report. In your update include your evaluation of the response from
the international community thus far.

2. Find current articles in USA TODAY to learn more about what individuals are doing to combat global warming.
Make a list of these efforts and add to it by surveying people in your own community. Do you feel these efforts are
adequate or not? Prepare a presentation to share with the class that includes your findings and opinion.

3. Do you believe global warming poses an imminent global environmental threat? What changes do you foresee in
the next 50 years if nothing is done to limit the levels of carbon dioxide emissions? Use current issues of USA
TODAY to support your stance and list facts to back your opinion. As a class activity, divide into two opposing sides
and debate the issue. Alternatively, debate the issue with a partner and report your findings to the class.

Additional Resources
v The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) v EPA Energy Star Program
www.ipcc.ch www.energystar.gov

v The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design v The Ocean Renewable Energy Coalition (OREC)
www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CategoryID=19 www.oceanrenewable.com

v The U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Page

www.usmayors.org/climateprotection

For more information, log on to www.usatodaycollege.com Page 15