Lynne Kiesling
Check out this interesting Wired article with some electric company executives on carbon policy. It indicates that there is not uniform agreement among utility CEOs regarding appropriate carbon policy, its timeline, its breadth, and its costs and benefits. There is an oblique reference to AEP's participation in the Chicago Climate Exchange, but no actual information about CCX (which, by the way, is now active in European carbon markets and also offering sulfur and carbon futures, how cool is that?).
Yeah, I would expect that certain executives might be for carbon limits:
1) CEO of Exelon. His power portfolio is like 90%+ nuclear. If energy markets become competitive, he can make his power more cost competitive by forcing a carbon tax on his fossil fuel competitors. This might also apply to any CEO with a large hydropower portfolio.
2) Any CEO of a distribution company. They don't produce power, so what do they care about a carbon tax? It's a way of appearing more green, which could have certain marketing advantages.
3) Any CEO of a company that is not in a competitive market. In a cost plus regulatory environment, who cares about a carbon tax? It might actually be good for some of these companies if it damps demand. Then they don't need to build any new plants.
The public stance of a CEO often has nothing to do with his/her beliefs. In general you must appear open minded and concerned about the environment. So you attempt to nudge decisions your way.
Who will oppose programs the government is tossing money at? These include carbon capture, clean coal, alternative fuels, and after a long lapse nuclear. There are so many ideas and subsidies that any large company can snag a share.
Here and there some CEO might point out that certain schemes aren't going to work - or at least won't work for decades. This is called 'evil'.
There is no reward for a sour puss. Come on in, grab a drink, and enjoy the party.