Utilities to Cut Carbon Dioxide Emissions 20% : Pollution: Southern California Edison and the DWP cite greenhouse-effect evidence. Other industries oppose such a move, but environmentalists applaud the effort.

In a major break with other U.S. industries, the Southland’s two largest electric utilities Monday announced ambitious plans to reduce their emissions of carbon dioxide--thought to contribute to global warming--by 20% in the next 20 years.

Both Southern California Edison and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power said they will adopt programs to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 10% by the year 2000 and another 10% by 2010 through conservation programs and use of cleaner technologies to generate power.

Carbon dioxide, a product of combustion, is thought by many scientists to contribute to the greenhouse effect, which traps excessive heat in the earth’s atmosphere. Cautious utility executives stopped short of accepting global warming as a scientific fact, but nonetheless declared it sensible to take steps to control carbon dioxide emissions.

“Taking prudent steps today to reduce CO2 emissions will ensure we have no regrets later if scientific research confirms that CO2 and other greenhouse gases in fact do cause global warming,” Edison President Michael R. Peevey said at a news conference at Griffith Park.

Environmentalists and others applauded the moves as the first by polluting U.S. industries to deal directly with the issue of greenhouse gas emissions.

“To me, it’s a real breakthrough,” said James Gustave Speth, president of the World Resources Institute, a nonprofit environmental policy research group. “No other company in the U.S. has made a comparable commitment to global climate protection like this, and I think it will be seen as a turning point.”

But the announcement puts the two utilities at odds with the Bush Administration and the bulk of U.S. industry, which oppose international efforts to impose strict standards for carbon dioxide emissions. They argue that research is inconclusive and that money should be spent first on more studies.

“Dramatic reductions in carbon dioxide . . . involve tremendous costs to society that are not fully appreciated and (also mean) . . . not only significantly higher energy prices, but an impact on the U.S. competitive position in the sphere of international trade,” said Thomas G. Lambrix, a Phillips Petroleum Co. executive who is chairman of the Global Climate Coalition, a group of 80 major companies and trade groups. “Any steps required to achieve major reductions in CO2 we believe are extremely premature.”

Edison and the DWP pointed to a recent study by the National Academy of Sciences that concluded that the threat of global warming is sufficient to justify action now.

“We’re saying that there is a preponderance of evidence indicating that (CO2) may be a source of global warming . . . and we have concluded the prudent thing to do is reduce our CO2 emissions,” said Eldon A. Cotton, DWP’s assistant general manager for power.

Edison put no cost figure on its reduction program. The DWP estimated that it would cost $12 million to cut emissions by 1.8 million tons by the end of the decade, with a similar cost per ton to double the reduction to 3.6 million tons by 2010.

Both utilities said the costs will not result in significant rate increases for customers.

Observers pointed out that many of the programs outlined by the two utilities Monday were already in effect or would soon be required under new anti-smog rules proposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District and the California Air Resources Board or recent amendments to the federal Clean Air Act.

But officials for each utility said their programs would extend beyond current or proposed programs to cut air pollution. CO2 is not now considered a pollutant and is not regulated by pollution agencies.

The DWP’s program includes:

* Phasing out the use of fuel oil to become a 100% natural gas-fired utility within the Los Angeles basin.

* Implementing a $500-million, 10-year program to add emission controls to some power-generating plants and to update others.

* Proceeding as lead agency in an electrical vehicle program that would have 10,000 vehicles on the road by 1993.

* Stressing development of renewable energy sources, including geothermal and solar.

* Investing millions of dollars in consumer conservation programs.

* Promoting reforestation, including urban tree-planting programs. Additionally, the DWP is exploring the possibility of purchasing tracts of endangered rain forest in Latin America and elsewhere.

* Instituting a program, similar to a Unocal Corp. undertaking last year, that would pay owners of older, more-polluting cars about $700 each to junk them.

Edison’s plan includes:

* Increasing the use of renewable energy, including solar and geothermal.

* Improving the efficiency of about 1,500 megawatts--or 7.5%--of its generating capacity in the next decade by updating old plants.

* Phasing out use of fuel oil in favor of cleaner-burning natural gas.

* Encouraging conservation and increased energy efficiency for consumers and businesses, including incentives to home developers and rebates for the purchase of energy-efficient light bulbs.

Cutting Down on Carbon Dioxide Under plans jointly announced by Southern California Edison and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, the Southland’s two largest utilities intend to reduce their emissions of atmosphere-warming carbon dioxide 10% by the year 2000 and 20% by 2010. Chart shows emissionsfor the baseline year of 1989, projected emissions if no cuts were achieved and intended emission levels under the joint program. Sources: Southern California Edison, Department of Water and Power