Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Global Warming’ Category

Today the Dallas County Medical Society filed a petition with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality asking the agency to adopt rules to reduce the pollution from three old coal-fired power plants that contribute disproportionately to high ozone levels in Dallas-Fort Worth and East Texas.

“Evidence is overwhelming that our high ozone levels are causing increasing numbers of area children to develop asthma, and are contributing to the many asthma attacks, chronic lung disease exacerbations, and heart attacks we see every day in our emergency rooms, clinics and hospitals,” said Robert Haley, MD, a Dallas internist and epidemiologist. “A large body of medical research shows that more people of all ages develop respiratory illnesses and die prematurely in cities with high ozone levels, and we have among the highest ozone levels in the country.”

To address this issue, DCMS and the Texas Medical Association sponsored a study by Daniel Cohan, PhD, an environmental engineering scientist at Rice University, to review all the scientific information about ozone pollution in North Texas and identify ways to reduce ozone levels without compromising the state’s energy grid or jobs. Click here for study. 2013 white paper august 1 2013

“The Cohan Report identified these three very old coal-fired power plants south and east of Dallas, built in the 1970s, that have never been required to meet current emission limits and which contribute disproportionately to ozone levels in the Dallas-Fort Worth area,” according to Cynthia Sherry, MD, DCMS president. “With the impending bankruptcy of the plants’ owner, Energy Future Holdings, the plants likely will change hands.” The petition asks that the TCEQ require these plants to meet the same low emission levels for ozone-forming gasses that are required of the company’s two newer lignite-fired power plants. “This is the time to require that the plants lower their emissions to protect the health of North Texans,” Dr. Sherry said.

The three power plants are Big Brown near Fairfield, Martin Lake near Longview, and Monticello near Mount Pleasant.

“Because of their age, these three plants emit large amounts of pollution for a relatively small amount of electricity produced,” said   Cohan, the report’s author. “Today’s technologies offer economically more attractive alternatives that would be far less polluting.”

According to the report, a combination of natural gas, geothermal, coastal wind, and solar production could replace the energy production capacity — and the East Texas jobs — of the three old coal plants at equivalent prices to Texas ratepayers. East Texas, where the three coal plants operate, has uniquely amenable geologic characteristics that make geothermal power generation unusually attractive.

Energy Future Holdings, an investment group that purchased the power plants from TXU, is facing bankruptcy because the drop in energy prices from the boom in natural gas production has reduced the profitability of coal. It also faces new requirements to control mercury emissions, and the Environmental Protection Agency is formulating additional requirements for controls on CO2 emissions.

“The financial press is predicting bankruptcy or restructuring of Energy Future Holdings,” according to Tom “Smitty” Smith of Public Citizen’s Texas office.  “The petition by the physicians and environmental groups will put the company or new owners on notice that they can’t keep running these old, polluting plants without investing in new pollution controls. Concerned citizens can add their names to the petition by visiting PETITION WEB SITE.”

The petition can be found at http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/tceq-please-clean-up-northeast-texas/

To comment on the petition, go to  http://www10.tceq.state.tx.us/epic/efilings/ . To submit comments, use Docket No. 2013-1612-RUL, which was assigned to this Petition for Rulemaking (Dallas County Medical Society Petition: EPA-Compliant Pollution Control on Old Coal Plants).

The scientific report can be found at www.dallas-cms.org/news/coalplants.pdf.

“Bad air day: Report details power plant dangers,” Texas Medicine, June 2013, pp. 45-49, accessed at: http://www.texmed.org/Template.aspx?id=23977

 

Read Full Post »

Residents and environmental activists in Plaquemines Parish, LA, filled the community center auditorium during Wednesday night’s permit hearing for the RAM coal export terminal proposed for the Lower Mississippi River just outside New Orleans.

Local residents turn up to a hearing on a proposed coal export terminal in Belle Chase, Louisiana.  120 strong compared to 12 the previous year.

Local residents turn up to a hearing on a proposed coal export terminal in Belle Chase, Louisiana. 120 strong compared to 12 the previous year.

Plaquemines Parish, a long strip of wetlands and small communities banked by the Mississippi, is already home to much industrial activity, including two coal export terminals, where coal sits in immense uncovered piles. Speakers at the hearing urged Louisiana’s Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to deny a coastal use permit for a third coal export terminal for various reasons.

Speakers said the RAM terminal that Missouri-based Armstrong Energy has proposed would add to the coal-dust pollution that already burdens nearby communities, as well as bring train traffic to the area. They said the terminal would undermine state efforts to restore disappearing wetlands by employing the Myrtle Grove Sediment Diversion, a project, still in planning stages, to deposit river sediment in the wetlands.

They said coal exported through the terminal would contribute to climate change, pointing out that low-lying Plaquemines Parish and the entire New Orleans area are particularly vulnerable to the extreme weather and rising sea levels that global warming and climate disruption brings. They also pointed out that the community would be buying into a shaky financial proposition by allowing the coal terminal to be built, since Armstrong Energy is amid deep economic problems.

In response to pressure from Plaquemines residents, officials scheduled a second permit hearing for Thursday at 6 pm in Belle Chasse, Louisiana.

“I am definitely in opposition to this terminal,” said Plaquemines Parish Councilman Burghart Turner, who represents Ironton and Myrtle Grove, communities adjacent to the location proposed for the RAM terminal. “With the IMT (International Marine Terminals coal facility) already just south of the community of Ironton, and with this additional coal facility north of Ironton, we would be choking out that community,” he said, referring to the pollution from coal dust and other industrial sources that burden the area.

“The folks in the Pacific Northwest have already said ‘no’ to these types of coal terminals, because they know the problems they present,” said Devin Martin, an organizer for the Sierra Club who lives nearby in New Orleans. “The coal companies are looking to the Gulf of Mexico because they believe we’ll be an easy target. They believe our political leaders won’t stand up – that they’ll be happy to have a dirty industry in their neighborhood, that communities don’t have the kind of voice to stand up to these kinds of projects. But communities in the area are already overburdened with pollution from coal dust and other industrial activity, and they have spoken up repeatedly that they don’t want any development if they can’t be assured it won’t degrade the air, water and quality of life.”

During the hearing, Martin also presented 600 petitions gathered from Louisiana residents, pointing out that opposition to the RAM terminal is present throughout state.

“The financials for Armstrong Coal, the parent company for the RAM terminal, are extremely shaky,” said Hillary Corgey, a researcher for Public Citizen Texas. According to the company’s prospectus, she said, “Their debt increased from 2010 to 2011 from $139.8 million to $244.8 million, and their revenue plummeted from 2009 to 2011 from $10.4 million to $3.4 million. Armstrong’s bond rating is considered a junk bond. That is from both Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s.”

In a joint letter submitted to the DNR during the hearing, state and national environmental groups urged the agency to deny the coastal use permit sought by Armstrong because the RAM terminal is in conflict with a state and federal program to build vital wetlands by depositing sediment from the Mississippi River.

The letter noted that the RAM Terminal could undermine the success of the Myrtle Grove Sediment Diversion by “polluting the water going into the wetlands” with coal and petcoke; both contain heavy metals, sulfides, and other toxic constituents that would harm aquatic species and impede the ability of marsh plants to take root in the newly restored wetlands.

The letter was signed by representatives from Louisiana Environmental Action Network (LEAN), Gulf Restoration Network, Lower Mississippi Riverkeeper, Sierra Club and Public Citizen.

“Our position is that DNR must deny this permit, as it’s inconsistent with the state’s master plan for coastal restoration,” said Scott Eustis, a coastal wetlands specialist for the Gulf Restoration Network.

“The Myrtle Grove Sediment Diversion is a $300 million project, the state’s premier coastal restoration project. There have been years of planning and engineering and there will be at least five to 10 more years of planning. DNR cannot permit a ship terminal in the location where the engineer for the sediment diversion says a barge is inconsistent. DNR has a chance to stand up for coastal restoration. We think that they must.”

Under Louisiana state law, the Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority (CPRA) must find that the RAM terminal is consistent with the state’s coastal management plan before the DNR approves construction of the facility. The CPRA, which expressed concerns about the terminal’s impact on coastal management in 2012, has not yet altered that opinion to find the terminal consistent.

Read Full Post »

Today, I had the privilege of addressing citizens in San Antonio, Texas that attended the Organizing for Action Climate Change Event at Congressman Lamar Smith’s office.  Here is a transcript of my speech:

“Congressman Lamar Smith, who chairs the House Committee on Science, has recently said he didn’t want to act on climate change because of ‘uncertainties on how much human activity is causing climate change’  He should hold hearings in Texas to hear from scientists and citizens about how the ‘uncertain climate’ is effecting his home state.

There is no longer any uncertainty over climate change. Ninety-seven percent of the credentialed scientists who have studied this issue recognize the clear linear relationship between increased carbon emissions and human activity

A blanket of carbon dioxide keeps our earth warm enough to live on, but when that blanket is thickened by carbon emitted by our power plants, factories, cars and trucks, the earth overheats, resulting in increased uncertainty for Texans due to more severe droughts, heat waves, wildfires, tornados and hurricanes.

The ‘uncertainty’ now centers on how much or how fast the climate will change.  No responsible scientist is saying we shouldn’t act now to reduce carbon.

Changing our energy sources is the fastest and cheapest way to do that. Two public utilities in the Congressman’s district, CPS and Austin Energy, are leading the nation in renewable energy and energy-efficiency programs that work, reduce carbon and costs.

Also, Congressman Smith should stop promoting the Keystone Pipeline and acknowledge that emissions from mining, refining and using this tar like substance are far more damaging than conventional crude, and will affect central Texans.

We ask Congressman Smith to hold hearings in Austin and San Antonio, away from the oil and coal company lobbyists of Washington, D.C., so his constituents and local scientists can tell him how climate change is creating uncertainty in their lives and livelihood.

As Congressman Smith’s fellow Republicans expressed in the New York Times Opinion Pages on August 1st, 2013, ‘The only uncertainty about our warming world is how bad the changes will get, and how soon.  What is most clear is that there is no time to waste.  Mr. Obama’s plan is just a start. More will be required. But we must continue our efforts to reduce the climate-altering pollutants that threaten our planet.'”

Unfortunately, similar speeches were having to be given at over 100 U.S. Represenatives and Senators offices today. Politians that are climate change deniers are out of the mainstream of both American thought and scientific fact. After the speeches were given, we presented Congressman Smith with a “Climate Change Denier Award.” This is one award that Rep. Smith, as well as the many others that recieved it, should not be proud of.

 

Read Full Post »

President Obama’s Statement that Keystone XL Will Create 2,000 Jobs is Consistent with Cornell Study and State Department Analysis

In an interview with the New York Times July 27, 2013, President Obama asserted that construction of the Keystone XL pipeline would create approximately 2,000 jobs. The President’s claim is consistent with both the findings of the Cornell Global Labor Institute’s 2011 study on the job impacts of the project and the State Department’s latest assessment (SDEIS, March 2013).

“President Obama’s statement that the Keystone XL pipeline has relatively limited job creation potential is entirely correct,” said Sean Sweeney of the Cornell Global Labor Institute and co-author of the study. “TransCanada and the American Petroleum Institute have argued that the project will create tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of jobs, and our data revealed that these assertions were false and the job numbers highly inflated and based on flawed methodology. Cornell’s more careful and comprehensive study, as well as the State Department’s analysis, revealed that the construction of the pipeline will produce far fewer jobs than TransCanada has claimed – only about 2,000 direct construction jobs a year for the two-year life of the project.”

The Cornell report showed that the pipeline would create approximately 2,500 direct construction jobs per year over the two-year life of the project. This number was affirmed in March 2013 when the State Department used TransCanada’s own numbers to analyze the job impacts of the pipeline, based on the current project definition for Keystone XL (Canada to Steele City, NE plus two new pumping stations in KS). The State Department found that the project would employ 3,900 full-time workers for one year, or less than 2,000 workers per year, spread out over the expected two-year construction period. Nearly all of the jobs related to the project would last less than one year – 4 months, 6 months, or 8 months. Therefore, average annual employment is based on the number of construction workers multiplied by the construction period in weeks divided by 52 weeks in a year.  The President’s numbers were therefore correct.

Both Cornell’s and the State Department’s job assessments also found that only 10 – 15% of the construction workers would be hired locally – in the states where the pipeline is being constructed, and that the number of permanent jobs related to the project would be minimal – 35 permanent employees would be required for Keystone XL’s operation.

In addition to the direct construction jobs that would be created by the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, the Cornell Global Labor Institute also found that TransCanada significantly inflated the number of indirect and induced jobs that the project would create by inflating the overall project budget.  TransCanada has claimed it is a $7 billion project. It arrived at this number by including money that will be spent in Canada and funds that had already been spent in the U.S. at the time when its own commissioned study was released.

“A much smaller project budget means a lot less jobs,” says Lara Skinner, co-author of the Cornell study. “The U.S. is facing a serious unemployment problem and this problem should not be trivialized by TransCanada Corporation vastly overestimating the number of jobs that will be created by Keystone XL. I’m pleased that the President is aware of the actual job creation potential of the project, and recognizes that the minimal employment potential of the project should not be a determining factor in the decision to approve or disapprove Keystone XL.”

The Cornell Global Labor Institute study, Pipe Dreams? Jobs Gained, Jobs Lost by the Construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline, is available here:
http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_012312_FIN.pdf

Ian Goodman and Brigid Rowan of the Goodman Group, Ltd., partnered with Sweeney and Skinner in the production of the Cornell report.

Read Full Post »

This morning 29 environmental, religious and public interest groups released a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry asking him to restart the Keystone environmental review process, take action against the contractor ERM for lying on its conflict of interest disclosure form, and request a new Inspector General investigation.

Speak up to make sure that the current draft environmental review does not become the basis for his final decision.

Press release: Attached is a press release that has just been sent out. It’s also up on our website here. Please feel free to adapt and send it to your own contacts.

Letter to Kerry: A link can be found here.

Action Alert: If you have not already done so it would be great if you could write to Kerry reinforcing the call for the review to be tossed out and action taken against ERM.  Click here to take action.

Read Full Post »

 

Newly Confirmed EPA head, Gina McCarthy

Newly Confirmed EPA head, Gina McCarthy

The Senate approved Gina McCarthy to be the new head of the Environmental Protection Agency on a 59-40 vote Thursday, ending a lengthy battle over the post.

President Obama nominated Ms. McCarthy, a longtime top official of the EPA, to replace Lisa Jackson, who served in the post in the president’s first term. Republicans have complained both about the agency’s policies under Ms. Jackson and the transparency with which she deal with Congress.

Ms. McCarthy was the latest nominee of President Obama to be approved following a deal earlier this week to curb GOP filibusters of executive branch nominees.

Read Full Post »

As you may or may not know, Governor Rick Perry has vetoed the funding for the Public Integrity Unit, the group charged with enforcing ethics standards for public officials, as well as insurance fraud and motor vehicle tax fraud.  This veto could not have come at a more questionable time.  On the back of other ethics veto’s, Perry has brought to light his true feelings about the ethics laws in Texas.  To read more about this veto and Perry’s conflict of interest, read our op-ed that has run in the Houston Chronicle as well as the Burnt Orange Report.

http://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/Smith-Get-ready-to-hold-your-nose-4666902.php

http://www.burntorangereport.com/diary/13775/was-governor-perrys-veto-of-public-integrity-unit-funding-linked-to-investigations-of-corruption

Read Full Post »

StateImpact Texas, a reporting project of local public media and NPR, has provided us with an excellent overview of the continuing drought in Texas.

Today, 12.2% of the state is in exceptional drought (the highest level of drought under the US Drought Monitor reporting)  This is the map for September 13, 2011 - at this time 87.3% of the state was in exceptional drought.

Today, 12.2% of the state is in exceptional drought (the highest level of drought under the US Drought Monitor reporting) This is the map for September 13, 2011 – at this time 87.3% of the state was in exceptional drought.


In October 2010 the current drought began and Texas endured the worst single-year drought in its history in 2011. While the situation has improved, do not be fooled, the drought is far from over — and the conditions that caused it aren’t going away anytime soon.

NPRs StateImpact shows us the the cost to Texas, to date, as well as some dire considerations the state will have to make as we move forward.

Click here to see their report.

Read Full Post »

In a tweet on July 11th, 2013, Christi Craddick re-tweeted a link to a YouTube video entitled, “Let’s Build the Keystone XL.”  She then added to the link, “Let us know what you think!”  The Keystone XL is not in the interest of Texans or of the United States.  Send a tweet or a message to Commissioner Craddick letting her know that you do NOT approve of the Keystone XL in the State of Texas.  If you have a personal story of how it has negatively affected you, please share it with her.  Let her know that not only is the Keystone XL an environmental disaster, but in Texas we do not take too kindly to people taking our land.

So, tell Railroad Commissioner Christi Craddick, “No to the Keystone XL!”

Christi.Craddick@rrc.state.tx.us

Read Full Post »

According to an NBC News story, a study on human-induced earthquakes published today in Science, shows within the central and eastern United States, more than 300 earthquakes of magnitude 3 or greater were recorded from 2010 through 2012, compared to an average rate of 21 earthquakes per year from 1967 to 2000.

The hydrolic fracturing (fracking) technique used to produce natural gas and oil involves shooting several million gallons of water laced with chemicals and sand deep underground to break apart chunks of shale rock, freeing trapped gas to escape through cracks and fissures into wells has been linked to human-induced earthquakes, however this process produces earthquakes that are almost all too small to be felt — and the fracking industry is quick to use this fact to say fracking doesn’t cause earthquakes. Nevertheless, larger earthquakes are associated with injection of wastewater into underground wells, a technique used to dispose of the briny, polluted water that comes to the surface after a frack job is completed and a well is producing natural gas and oil, so one might say the industry is a bit too literal, since these activities would not occur if fracking wasn’t occurring.

Click here to read the NBC story.

In Texas, which has seen a dramatic increase in fracking activities in the Barnett and Eagle Ford shale regions, a recent quake registered a 4.8 in May of 2013 near Timpson, TX which sits in the drilling area of the Haynesville Shale.

According to an NPR StateImpact story, researchers have known for decades that disposal wells can cause quakes, but state regulators say they are waiting for more proof. The Texas Railroad Commission, the agency that regulates oil and gas drilling in Texas, is currently considering updated rules for disposal wells in the state, but it says it has no plans to include consideration of man-made earthquakes in that rule making. Click here to read the NPR story.

This begins to make sense when you see that 3% of the Flat Earth Society‘s membership is from Texas.

Read Full Post »

NPR’s State Impact reported this morning that Energy Future Holdings (formerly TXU) has “self-bonded” approximately $1 billion for future mining restoration in Texas in lieu of real cash bonds. Click here to hear the entire story.

In the transcript of the story it discusses the main concerns of Public Citizen and Sierra Club who have been investigating this issue for the past six months.

At the heart of the two groups’ (Public Citizen and Sierra Club) concern is what’s called “self-bonding.” Under federal law, mining companies must post bonds as a form of insurance to cover the cost of reclamation in case the companies run into financial trouble. Instead of using an outside company to provide the bonds, mining operators in Texas are allowed to self-bond. Some coal states don’t accept self-bonding.

Texas has approved Luminant Mining’s self-bonding. The self-bond’s “third party guarantor” is a sister company, Luminant Generation. It’s the power plant company that burns the coal from Luminant Mining.

The environmentalists say they’re worried that those power plant assets might also be claimed by other creditors, jeopardizing the funds Texas might recover to pay for reclamation.

Luminant’s parent company, Energy Future Holdings, has explained in annual reports to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission that the company faces creditworthiness requirements for different regulators in Texas, among them the Railroad Commission. For years,  the reports said that “we believe we will have adequate liquidity to satisfy such requirements” or “we believe we would have adequate liquidity capacity and/or financing capacity to satisfy such requirements.”

But then, in a 2012 report, that line disappeared.

“It was the smoking gun,” said Public Citizen’s Smitty Smith.

On page 100 of EFH’s 2008 10K filing, page 100 of EFH’s 2009 10K filing, page 98 of EFH’s 2010 10K filing, and page 93 of EFH’s 2011 10K filing, the following appears

The RRC has rules in place to assure that parties can meet their mining reclamation obligations, including through self-bonding when appropriate. If Luminant Generation Company LLC (a subsidiary of TCEH) does not continue to meet the self-bonding requirements as applied by the RRC, TCEH may be required to post cash, letter of credit or other tangible assets as collateral support in an amount currently estimated to be approximately $xxx (from a low of $600 million in 2008 to a high of 990 million in 2011) million. The actual amount (if required) could vary depending upon numerous factors, including the amount of Luminant Generation Company LLC’s self-bond accepted by the RRC and the level of mining reclamation obligations. . . .

In the event that any or all of the additional collateral requirements discussed above are triggered, we believe we would have adequate liquidity and/or financing capacity to satisfy such requirements.

On page 85 of EFH’s 2012 10K filing, only

The RRC has rules in place to assure that parties can meet their mining reclamation obligations, including through self-bonding when appropriate. If Luminant Generation Company LLC (a subsidiary of TCEH) does not continue to meet the self-bonding requirements as applied by the RRC, TCEH may be required to post cash, letter of credit or other tangible assets as collateral support in an amount currently estimated to be approximately $850 million to $1.1 billion. The actual amount (if required) could vary depending upon numerous factors, including the amount of Luminant Generation Company LLC’s self-bond accepted by the RRC and the level of mining reclamation obligations. . . .

appears, the followup statement, found in the previous 4 years 10K filings is conspicuously missing.

In the event that any or all of the additional collateral requirements discussed above are triggered, we believe we would have adequate liquidity and/or financing capacity to satisfy such requirements.

NPR’s story goes on to say “a media liaison for Energy Future Holdings, Allan Koenig, would not comment specifically about the line that disappeared.”  But that was followed up by an email from the company saying, “We fully satisfy the bonding requirements of the Railroad Commission of Texas for our coal mines, which means that our reclamation obligations are guaranteed.”

Well, yes they do satisfy the bonding requirements allowed by the RRC and their obligations are guaranteed by Luminant Generation, but it is all the same company and still at risk if the assets of the company, should a reorganization occur, be found insufficient to meet the bond amount currently estimated at $850 million to $1.1 billion.  EFH is telling the Railroad Commission ‘Trust us, we’re good for it’ even though the company debt is rated as junk status by the financial ratings agencies like Standard and Poor’s. What EFH is doing is like a family getting a second mortgage on a house and losing their jobs.  How can Texas regulators have any confidence that the assets of Luminant Generation will be protected from the bankruptcy process and available to cover future mining reclamation costs?

In a memo from the Railroad Commission (RRC) to Luminant Mining Company regarding Docket No C12-0006-SC-46-E, on the Oak Hill Mine application for replacement bond, it appears Luminant reassured the RRC that in their 2012 3rd quarter filing EFH’s liquidity amount (at that time) was $3.8B and that amount would be sufficient to cover all obligations including Luminant Minings reclamation needs.  However, we don’t know that this will still be the case 3 to 12 months from now should EFH file for bankruptcy.

We believe the RRC and Texas would be best served by requiring a more secure form of bonding for reclamation needs.

Read Full Post »

kevin-fowler-slide

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality along with Texas Parks and Wildlife has launched a new campaign to encourage everyone to Take Care of Texas’ environment.  A new website contains materials that range from general information about environmental programs to specific, step-by-step instructions that address common environmental situations.  To learn about ways to get involved, click here.

Read Full Post »

Asian Tiger Mosquito - Aedes Albopictus

Asian Tiger Mosquito – Aedes Albopictus

There’s a new pest invading many American towns, the Asian tiger mosquito.

According to NBC Science, this mosquito is as menacing as it sounds since it is effective at transmitting more than 20 diseases, and its success at spreading throughout the world is due to a warming climate, with eggs tough enough to survive a cold winter.

Click here to read the article.

Read Full Post »

There’s a lot to like in the president’s plan that he announced today, but there is a lot that falls short, too. Certainly on the most important measure, reducing coal-burning plant emissions, the president is a day late and a dollar short. The lack of specificity on the standard eventually to be issued makes it impossible to know how far reaching it will be.

But Texas shows how it can be done!  See below.

Associated Press/Charles Dharapak - President Barack Obama wipes perspiration from his face as he speaks about climate change

Associated Press/Charles Dharapak – President Barack Obama wipes perspiration from his face as he speaks about climate change

Catastrophic climate change poses a near-existential threat to humanity. We need a national mobilization — and indeed a worldwide mobilization – to transform rapidly from our fossil fuel-reliant past and present to a clean energy future. We need a sense of urgency – indeed, emergency – with massive investments, tough and specific standards and binding rules which are missing from the president’s plan.

The administration is finally using the authority ratified by a conservative Supreme Court to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. The Administration will re-write rules for new plants and develop rules for all existing power plants. This is the most important tool the Administration has, and if the rules are written the way they should be, it will go a long way towards protecting consumers and our climate. This initiative builds on the successful and strong automobile tailpipe standards that have already been successfully rolled out. The downside is that the late 2015 final rule date is far off in the future, and will likely see lengthy legal challenges.

The plan also, helpfully, builds on existing programs and plucks some low-hanging fruit to reduce carbon emissions: Increasing renewable targets and efficiency on federal land, in the federal government’s operations, in the Pentagon, and in federally-assisted housing.

The Administration set the table recently by increasing the estimated cost of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to society, from $23.80/ton to $38.

Targeting oil industry subsidies, as the Administration proposes here, is also commonsense, and much needed policy.

However, there is no mention in the plan of using a uniform, strong climate change impact assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act, which would require the costs and impacts of GHG in every federal environmental impact statement. The failure to utilize NEPA for GHG assessment is a huge oversight.

Reserving the troubled loan guarantee program for “clean coal” is a taxpayer boondoggle waiting to happen. A case in point is the Obama-backed Kemper IGCC coal plant owned by Southern Co, which has seen costs balloon from $2.4 billion to $4.2 billion, with costs still rising further.

In general, the President’s embrace of an “all of the above” strategy, including oil and gas expansion, is a disaster. His focus on fossil fuel exports — including the explicit promotion of LNG (liquefied natural gas) and his failure to curtail coal exports – threatens to undo any positive elements of the plan. By promoting LNG, the Administration is moving full-speed-ahead on fracking – with no mention of how to control fugitive emissions, water contamination and other environmental problems posed by the controversial process. And while the proposed EPA rules over existing and new coal power plants will result in significant GHG reductions here at home, all of that will be negated (and more) if we ramp up our coal exports to China. Using NEPA and other statutes to ensure that the emissions of coal exports – and the fugitive emissions of fracked gas – are included in the environmental impact study (EIS) for export projects is essential.

The same goes for Keystone XL. Awaiting approval by the State Dept, the Keystone XL pipeline’s EIS is fatally flawed. The Administration has a chance to re-write the EIS to take into account the true GHG impact of the tar sands, which would require this gas-price boosting project to be rejected.  And Obama’s welcome announcement on KXL won’t affect the southern segment of the line being built from Oklahoma to Houston, nor will it stop the conversion of existing pipelines to carry tar sands. These are the back door ways that tar sands and its carbon pollution will leak into the international markets

At the end of the day, it would be helpful if the Administration would lend its support to an existing climate bill – the Climate Protection Act of 2013. This legislation places a price on carbon, sending revenues back to families and into investments for a sustainable energy economy (not to mention regulating fracking and repealing oil industry subsidies).

“Texas Shows How It Can Be Done”

The good news is that the solutions to global warming from the energy sector are within reach — and Texas shows how it can be done. We can power our state with renewable energy, energy efficiency demand side management and energy storage technologies and techniques that exist or are being developed right now.

“Here’s what Texas has shown in recent years:

  • In 1999 Texas adopted renewable energy goals – partially to reduce global warming. Now Texas leads the nation in production of wind energy, which is now so cheap that it is reducing consumers bills;
  • Renewable energy is now employing more people than coal plants and coal mines are  in Texas;
  • If we were to  develop more solar and geothermal, and employ energy  storage, we could meet our energy needs around the clock without relying on coal;
  • With the combination of those tools we could phase out and shut down our 22 climate killing coal plants;
  • Adopting building energy codes has reduced statewide carbon emissions by as much a coal plant would produce.”

Read Full Post »

wind_turbine_aalborgProbably not overall, but the City of Houston has made a historic commitment – to buy half its power from renewable sources.

Houston was built around the oil and gas industries and has long suffered the consequences of being home to many of the nation’s most polluting refining and chemical manufacturing facilities.  Purchasing clean energy for the City’s facilities won’t change all that, but it does represent a significant change in mindset.

In the absence of federal legislation to address the increasingly pressing problem of climate change, local action has become essential.  At the very least, the energy used in public buildings – that taxpayers pay for – should be clean energy.  Houston is taking a huge step in that direction.

Wind energy is already one of the cheaper energy sources in Texas and solar energy is becoming competitive, especially as prices increase with higher energy demand.  These trends will be helped by large-scale investments like the one Houston is making.

Moving away from energy from coal-fired power plants will also help keep jobs growing in Texas.  Luckily, this isn’t an issue of jobs vs. the environment.  It’s an easy choice of supporting both.  Kudos to Houston to for recognizing an opportunity to take a leadership role.

Talk to your local elected officials about using clean energy to power your public buildings.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »