From Energy and Policy Institute <[email protected]>
Subject Tom Fanning Floats Misleading Updated Greenhouse Gas Goal
Date April 17, 2020 12:01 PM
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
** Tom Fanning Floats Misleading Updated Greenhouse Gas Goal ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------
By Daniel Tait on Apr 16, 2020 11:05 am
Southern Company CEO Tom Fanning floated a potential update to the company’s maligned “low- to-no carbon” greenhouse gas goal in a company podcast aired ([link removed]) on December 19, 2019. The updated greenhouse gas (GHG) goal, as described by Fanning, would allow Southern Company to claim “net-zero” emissions by taking credit for transportation electrification, despite the company’s continued use of fossil fuels like coal and gas.

Southern Company’s current “low- to-no carbon” goal has come under scrutiny for sleights of hand that allow the company to increase its use of fossil fuels and remain ([link removed]) among the highest carbon-polluting utilities in the country by 2050. Fanning’s GHG bonus plan, unveiled ([link removed]) in 2019 and updated ([link removed]) in 2020, currently allows him to earn up to $2 million annually without transitioning the company out of fossil fuels. Changes to Fanning’s bonus structure appear to make it easier for him to receive a GHG bonus, even as Southern adds substantial gas infrastructure to its generating fleet.

Southern Company is slowing down its decarbonization, according ([link removed]) to an analysis by the Energy and Policy Institute. Southern’s slow action on clean energy poses risks to investors and is likely causing it to miss out on earnings opportunities from the transition, analysts at Morgan Stanley noted ([link removed]) . The investment firm stated, “the company [Southern] has exhibited a slower than average pace in its decarbonization strategy.”


** “We can take credit”
------------------------------------------------------------

In response to a statement from the podcast host about a Virginia Natural Gas pledge, Fanning spoke about a potential update to Southern’s “low- to-no carbon” goal whereby the company would count emissions reductions from consumers switching to electric transportation toward its GHG goal. He claimed, “in fact we can take credit for and have a little more flexibility really in hitting no [carbon], by changing transportation fuels and advancing electric transportation.”

Fanning’s statement about an updated GHG goal counting electric transportation belies the reality of how emissions work for utilities and the grid. As consumers switch to electric transportation from gasoline and diesel, overall emissions drop, as studied and reported ([link removed]) by the Union of Concerned Scientists. However, the switch to electric transportation does not obviate a utility’s need to decarbonize. For utilities to reduce emissions in accordance with decarbonization pathways that would avoid the worst impacts of climate change, experts say that they must fully power the new electrified transportation sector with clean sources and still decarbonize its existing fleet.


** Full decarbonization of electricity needed to keep global warming to 2 degrees Celsius or less
------------------------------------------------------------

Fanning’s GHG proposal is inconsistent with the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) pathways to limit global warming to 1.5° or even 2° Celsuis. The latest report ([link removed]) from the IPCC spells out what that means for carbon emissions: global carbon emissions must be cut in half by 2030 and reach net-zero by 2050 to have even a 50 percent chance of reaching the 1.5° scenario.

The IPCC report gets more specific when it comes to electricity, noting ([link removed]) that “A robust feature of 1.5°C-consistent pathways […] is a virtually full decarbonization of the power sector around mid-century, a feature shared with 2°C-consistent pathways.”

In other words, whether U.S. utilities are setting plans consistent with 1.5° or 2° scenarios – a difference ([link removed]) that equates to extreme heat and sea level rise for hundreds of millions more people, full coral reef extinction, greater tipping point risks, etc. – either case requires all global electricity to reach zero carbon by 2050.

Limiting global warming to 2°C or below hinges not only on electrifying transportation but doing so into a fully decarbonized power sector. Southern Company, however, is projected to emit approximately 60 million tons of carbon dioxide annually in 2040 should it continue with business-as-usual operations, according to a study ([link removed]) by Synapse Energy Economics. Southern has added 3,400 megawatts (MW) of gas ([link removed]) capacity since 2012, and is planning to add 2,400 MW of gas ([link removed]) , according to integrated resource plans filed with regulators.

Gas is a fossil fuel that emits carbon dioxide when burned.


** Fanning’s updated GHG bonus omits key details
------------------------------------------------------------

Southern Company unveiled ([link removed]) a new GHG bonus plan for CEO Tom Fanning in 2019. The bonus plan, however, did not incentivize ([link removed]) new behavior by the company or necessarily lead to emissions reductions. Instead, it provided Fanning a bonus for already planned actions according to filings and announcements made by Southern at or around the time of the bonus plan becoming public. The bonuses were hinged to coal retirements and clean energy and nuclear additions – it ignored gas, a greenhouse gas-emitting fossil fuel in which Southern is currently investing.

In its 2020 proxy statement ([link removed]) , Southern tucked away vague updates to Fanning’s GHG bonus plan for years 2020 to 2022. While the company disclosed a new “threshold” for when the company would pay Fanning a bonus, it did not disclose the new “target” for when the company would pay out 100% of the bonus. The company only disclosed only that its “stretch” goal was 60% higher than the undisclosed 100% payout goal. Southern’s omission of the 100% GHG target hinders the ability of investors to independently evaluate Fanning’s performance.

Operating company CEOs in Alabama, Mississippi, and Georgia are not compensated for their performance toward Southern’s “low -to -no carbon” goal. The Energy and Policy Institute has previously reported that Alabama Power ([link removed]) , Georgia Power ([link removed]) , and Mississippi Power ([link removed]) are not considering Southern’s goal in their respective planning processes.

The post Tom Fanning Floats Misleading Updated Greenhouse Gas Goal ([link removed]) appeared first on Energy and Policy Institute ([link removed]) .
Read in browser » ([link removed])
[link removed] [link removed]




** Recent Articles:
------------------------------------------------------------
** Caught in patchwork of policies and pledges, some utility customers may still be awaiting electricity restoration or racking up fees ([link removed])
** Energy companies in U.S. Chamber silent as Chamber opposed use of Defense Production Act to produce medical supplies for COVID-19 ([link removed])
** Energy Harbor reveals money, risks involved in Ohio bailout ([link removed])
** Coal mining companies and state of Wyoming secretly funded “Independence Institute” campaign to keep Colorado coal plant running ([link removed])
** Reports find Vectren customers can save millions if renewables replace coal, but utility continues with coal investments ([link removed]

============================================================
** Facebook ([link removed])
** Twitter ([link removed])
** Website ([link removed])
Copyright © 2020 Energy and Policy Institute, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at our website via our Contact Us page.

Our mailing address is:
Energy and Policy Institute
P.O. Box 170399
San Francisco, CA 94117
USA
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.
Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp
[link removed]
Screenshot of the email generated on import

Message Analysis