Stay Curious. Stay Connected.
MailNewsletters♡Donate Now
Sign up
*Password must be at least 8 characters and contain one uppercase letter, one lowercase letter, one number and one symbol.
Already have an account?
By submitting, you consent that you are at least 18 years of age and to receive information about MPR's or APMG entities' programs and offerings. The personally identifying information you provide will not be sold, shared, or used for purposes other than to communicate with you about MPR, APMG entities, and its sponsors. You may opt-out at any time clicking the unsubscribe link at the bottom of any email communication. View our Privacy Policy.
Sign in to your profile
Forgot Password?
New to MPR News?
Welcome back
to news
for you
Reset Password

Enter the username on file and we'll send you a code to reset your password.

Still require assistance or not sure what your User Name is?
Welcome back
to news
for you
Email Verification

A verification code has been emailed to

Still awaiting the code?
Elizabeth Dunbar

Cap and tradeoffs: Introduction

Go Deeper.

Create an account or log in to save stories.

Log inCreate a free Account

Like this?

Thanks for liking this story! We have added it to a list of your favorite stories.

Show me!

Many of the world's leaders believe cutting greenhouse gas emissions is the key to addressing global warming, and they're gathering in Copenhagen this month to work out an agreement on reductions.

President Obama is setting goals for the United States: By 2020, emissions blamed for global warming would be reduced to about 17 percent below 2005 levels. By 2050, greenhouse gas emissions would be reduced to 83 percent below 2005 levels.

Reducing emissions could change many aspects of everyday life in Minnesota, including how we use energy in our homes and businesses, commute to work and manage our farmland. This week, MPR News will examine some of those possible changes.

Many of the specific details about how to reach the targets that Obama is proposing are under debate in Congress, but a picture of how it might work is starting to emerge.

The legislation would mostly target the biggest polluters, including energy-intensive industries and the utilities that supply electricity and natural gas to homes and businesses. Those polluters would have to gradually reduce their emissions by switching to clean energy alternatives or by capturing their emissions. While making the reductions, the polluters could emit more than the government allows by buying credits from others whose emissions fall below the required level.

The legislation's cap and trade program could result in big changes for Minnesota, where most of our electricity is generated by burning coal and where mining and manufacturing remain important sectors of the economy. On the other hand, the state's farmers and foresters who use methods that capture carbon dioxide could make money by selling offsets.

Minnesotans could also see changes in energy use that would affect life at home, work and on the road. Congress wants to promote energy efficiency and conservation through steps like creating infrastructure for electric cars, implementing new building rules and upgrading to electricity transmission systems that save more energy.