An Associated Press story says proposed legislation by two Oklahoma state lawmakers would require a statewide vote of the people before any out-of-state sale of Oklahoma water. Sen. Jerry Ellis of Valliant and Rep. Eric Proctor of Tulsa said the legislation, dubbed ”The People’s Water Act”, would give Oklahomans the final say in deals with other states.

The Tarrant Regional Water District has waged a multi-year legal battle to obtain water from Oklahoma that has so far been unsuccessful. Ellis, who is based in water-rich Southeastern Oklahoma has been one of the most vocal opponents of water sales to Texas and said the future of Oklahoma water should not be decided in private meetings between politicians and Texans.

In the 1870s to 1881 recurrent friction and eventual violent conflict over water rights in the vicinity of Tularosa, New Mexico, involving villagers, ranchers, and farmers were well documented.  As the region deals with this extended drought, which some say could be the region’s new norm, could we be looking at more conflicts over water, not only along groundwater sources inside the state, between industrials, urban areas and agriculutural regions, but between Texas and its neighbors?

Read more here: http://blogs.star-telegram.com/politex/2012/01/bill-would-give-oklahomans-the-right-to-vote-on-any-texas-water-sale.html#storylink=cpy

In October of this year, the EPA announced new regulations (called the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule or CSAPR) to reduce air pollution from industrial facilities like coal-fired power plants on downwind communities. Prior to the release of this new rule, TXU/Luminant, the largest power generating company in Texas, blamed the impending EPA regulations for job losses and subsequently announced it would be shutting down two of its coal units at Monticello.

Three Texas Luminant plants (Monticello, Martin Lake, and Big Brown) are some of the dirtiest coal plants in the country, and would be impacted by any new air pollution rules the federal government might impose.  But compared to other coal plants, these three plants alone are:

• 46.8% of all Texas coal plant      emissions (19 existing coal plants)
• 41.5% of all Texas coal plant SO₂      emissions
• 36.0% of all Texas coal plant PM-10      emissions
• 30.6% of all Texas coal plant NOx      emissions
• 71.7% of all Texas coal plant CO₂      emissions

and by all
rights should clean up their act or shut down.  However, a report from TR Rose Associates shows in detail how Luminant’s shuttering of these coal plants is most likely due to poor financial management rather than regulation of their air quality emissions.

Right now in Texas, the drought and the expected heat wave next summer is far more of a problem than U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules for water intensive plants like coal and nuclear electric generation plants.  If we are to keep the lights on next summer, the Governor, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and the Public Utility Commission of Texas should develop a plan to use energy more wisely and efficiently during the summer and not worry about the shuttering of dirty old coal plants.

After receiving notice that Luminant, had filed a Notification of Suspension of Operations for Monticello Units 1 and 2, ERCOT – the grid operator – had to make a determination about whether it was okay for Luminant to retire the units rather than idle them so that ERCOT could call on them to run in a grid emergency.  This is what ERCOT calls a “Reliability Must Run” (RMR) status determination.  An RMR status for the old Monticello units would have meant that Luminant might have been getting paid a premium to run these units at full capacity next summer, with almost no limits placed upon the type or amount of emissions during that activity, the implications for Dallas/Ft Worth’s air quality would probably have been significant.

According to a release by ERCOT, “As required by Protocol Section 3.14.1(1), ERCOT has completed its analysis and determined that Monticello Units 1 and 2 are not needed to support ERCOT transmission System reliability (i.e., voltage support, stability or management of localized transmission constraints under first contingency criteria). ERCOT, in coordination with Oncor, has identified Pre-Contingency Action Plans (PCAPs) and Remedial Action Plans (RAPs) which will be used to ensure transmission security without the need for RMR Agreements associated with these Resources. . . Based upon this final determination, the Resources may cease or suspend operations according to the schedule in their Notice of Suspension of Operations.”

So to recap:

• Luminant threatens to shut down its two old units at Monticello coal-fired generating plant and blames the new EPA Cross State Air Pollution Rules.
• A report from TR Rose Associates shows Luminant’s shuttering of these coal plants is most likely due to poor financial management rather than regulation of their air quality emissions.
• ERCOT determines that these Monticello units are NOT needed to maintain grid stability.

Luminant 0 : State of Texas 2

Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, involves pumping pressurised water, sand and chemicals underground to open fissures and improve the flow of oil or gas to the surface.

The EPA found that compounds likely associated with fracking chemicals had been detected in the groundwater beneath the Wyoming community of Pavillion where residents say their well water reeks of chemicals.

Health officials advised them not to drink their water after the EPA found hydrocarbons in their wells.

The EPA announcement has major implications for the vast increase in gas drilling in the US in recent years. Fracking has played a large role in opening up many reserves.

The industry has long contended that fracking is safe, but environmentalists and some residents who live near drilling sites say it has poisoned groundwater.

The EPA said its announcement is the first step in a process of opening up its findings for review by the public and other scientists.

“EPA’s highest priority remains ensuring that Pavillion residents have access to safe drinking water,” said Jim Martin, EPA regional administrator in Denver. “We look forward to having these findings in the draft report informed by a transparent and public review process.”

At this time, the EPA is emphasising that the findings are specific to the Pavillion area. The agency said the fracking that occurred in Pavillion differed from fracking methods used elsewhere in regions with different geological characteristics.  Further studies need to be done in specific areas and the finding of this report should not be extrapolated to other areas of high activity.

This feels a bit like the EPA is hedging their bets and is scant consolation to those folks in other parts of the country who have the sideshow ability to light their water taps on fire.  Nevertheless, this finding may make it easier for other communities to have their voices heard when they express concerns about pollution of their water supplies.  This will be particularly important in Texas which is looking at a multi-year, record breaking drought in their future.

The fracking occurred below the level of the drinking water aquifer and close to water wells, the EPA said. Elsewhere, drilling is more remote and fracking occurs much deeper than the level of groundwater that anybody would use.

In Colorado, regulators are considering requiring oil and gas companies to publicly disclose the chemicals used in fracking

The public and industry representatives packed an 11-hour hearing on the issue on Monday. They all generally supported the proposal but the sticking point is whether trade secrets would have to be disclosed and how quickly the information would have be turned over.

Industry representatives say Colorado and Texas are the only states to have moved to consider disclosing all fracking chemicals, not just those considered hazardous by workplace regulators.

Just as important, TCEQ is considering revising language and definition for waste of international origin, acceptance criteria, reporting of inventory and liability coverage as well as the issued TCEQ waste water permit.

TCEQ is accepting public comments and requests for a public meeting.  These can be submitted by mail to:

the Office of the Chief Clerk
MC 105
TCEQ
P. O. Box 13087

or electronically at www.tceq.state.tx.us/about/comments.html by December 17th.

If you need more information about the license application or the licensing process, please call the TCEQ Office of Public Assistance at 1-800-687-4040.

We will post the link to the amendment applications as soon as we are able to find them.  TCEQ recently migrated its database and the links no longer work.  Makes finding materials to base written comments on a bit more complicated.

And if that wasn’t enough, the dry weather came with brutal heat.  So brutal, that seven cities recorded at least 80 days above 100°F (Austin logged 90 days and Wichita Falls had 100 days over 100°F, 12 of which were over 110°F).  This left air conditioners around the state straining to keep up, shattering records for the state’s electricity demand, topping 68,000 megawatts in early August. This combination of dry weather and excessive heat, and high electric demand suddenly made state planners begin to take notice of the water-intensive nature of coal plants.

Most electricity power plants require large amounts of water. Coal-fired plants alone account for 67 percent of freshwater withdrawals by the power sector and for 65 percent of the water completely consumed by it. Newer plants include air-cooling or “dry cooling” technologies, but so many plants rely on water-cooling that they accounted for 41 percent of the withdrawals of freshwater in the United States in 2005, according to the United States Geological Survey.

In Texas this summer, one plant had to curtail nighttime operations because the drought had reduced the amount of water available and that which was available was too hot to bring down the temperature of water discharged from the plant. In East Texas, other plant owners had to bring in water from other rivers so they could continue to operate and meet demand for electricity.

Proposed plants were also facing scrutiny around their water use.  The White Stallion coal plant, near Bay City south of Houston, was opposed by a wide variety of Colorado River water users and the LCRA ended up pulling the proposed plant’s 25,000 acre-feet/year water permit from its agenda indefinitely. Citizens of Sweetwater in west Texas were outraged upon hearing that the city was secretly negotiating sale of water rights for a so-called clean coal project.

If the drought persists into the following year (and the State Climatologist has predicted that it is likely much of the state will still be in severe drought through next August with even worse water shortages), the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT – the operators of the electricity grid) has warned that power cuts on the scale of thousands of megawatts are possible.

Texas Water Development Board warns that the state’s water shortage is structural. A structural water shortage is a permanent water shortage that can only be addressed through a structural change such as a reduction in agriculture, population or firm water users (such as traditional power plants) or, increasing water supplies by creating lakes (like we did after the 1950s multi-year drought), setting up desalination plants on the coast or piping water in from another state.  All of these options are dramatic and expensive.

As of this writing, the state needs 18 million acre-feet of water, and it has 17 million acre-feet available to it. By 2060, the state is expected to need 22 million acre-feet but only have 15.3 million acre-feet available to it. Because some dry areas simply can’t have water piped, the total shortfall is projected to be 8.3 million acre-feet. Roughly, Texans will have 2 gallons of water available for every 3 gallons they need.

Adding new coal plants or other intense water use generators to this mix is not part of a sane water policy for a state facing a structural water shortage.  Even ERCOT is taking a closer look at coastal wind generation and solar to provide power during peak energy periods (You know, that time of the day - from 3 to 6 or 7 pm – when the temperatures are the hottest and the air conditioners strain to keep us cool).  This current weather pattern may be the push the state needs to move toward a new energy future for the state.

TransCanada is attempting to outsmart the State Department and bypass federal blocks by using two existing pipelines of poison after the State Department and President Obama delayed approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline permit amidst concerns about bias, conflicts of interest, and environmental issues,  If implemented the pipeline of poison will pose serious threats to Texas water resources that supply 12 million in East Texas and the Dallas/Fort Worth and Houston metropolises, and our climate.  The groups are urging Texans to contact their local and state officials and ask them to stop the pipelines of poison.

“TransCanada is attempting to mislead the public and circumvent the regulatory mandates of Presidential approval, environmental review and public participation,” said Tom “Smitty” Smith, director of the Texas office of Public Citizen.  “They are now proposing to connect their Gulf Coast Segment (from Cushing, OK to Port Arthur and Houston, TX) into the end of their existing Keystone 1 pipeline.  Make that foreign tar sands corporations – 1: the United States – 0.”

“We also believe that Enbridge also plans to do the same by connecting their proposed Wrangler pipeline that runs from Cushing, OK to Houston TX to their existing Spearhead pipeline system that runs from Canada to Cushing, OK. It would be a serious mistake to allow these pipelines to carry toxic tar sands across Texas land,” continued Smith.

Threats to Texas Water Sources

These two pipelines of poison – TransCanada’s Gulf Coast Segment and Enbridge’s Wrangler – would pose serious threats to Texas water resources, including aquifers, drinking and agricultural water resources for up to 12 million Texans in Dallas, Houston and East Texas.

TransCanada’s pipeline would cross the Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer, the Trinity Aquifer and the Gulf Coast Aquifer.  It would traverse 16 large rivers several of which are listed as sensitive and protected, and cross over more than 130 designated floodplain areas in Texas.  These rivers and drainages feed 21 lakes and municipal reservoirs, including Pat Mayse Lake, Lake Tyler and Lake Cypress Springs.

“TransCanada’s Keystone 1 pipeline has already leaked 14 times in its first year,” said Chris Wilson, a chemical engineering consultant for opponents of the pipeline.  “How can we trust them to build it better and not endanger the waterways in Texas?”

In 2011, one of Enbridge’s pipelines leaked over 1 million gallons of tar sands into the Kalamazoo River in Michigan.  Clean-up efforts have cost over $700 million, it’s still not cleaned-up and people and animals are sick and communities are poisoned.

“Sadly, this is what happens when there are no federal pipeline safety regulations and effective cleanup procedure for toxic tar sands spills,” continued Ms. Wilson.  “Tar sands are not like crude oil which floats on water, they are heavier and they sink, making cleanup much more difficult if not impossible.  Congress should protect the public and put an immediate halt on all tar sands pipelines until studies are completed, safety regulations are enacted and effective spill remediation procedures are put in place.”

Other Threats to Texas

“Despite the fact that TransCanada and Enbridge imply that they might not have to undergo environmental review our analysis has identified several major environmental hazards and key red flags to the project that are cause for concern and require addressing,” said Karen Hadden, Executive Director of the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition.  “These include:

• Toxic spills that would threaten drinking and agricultural water resources for up to 12 million Texans in Dallas, Houston and East Texas;
• Exposure to benzene, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons(PAH’S) and heavy metals;
• Increases in toxic refinery emissions, greenhouse gases, climate change and associated Environmental Justice issues in the end of market refinery communities in Texas;
• Increases in refinery wastewater toxicity, toxic solid waste volume and spent catalyst toxicity ;
• Lack of federal safety pipeline standards and spill remediation standards for tar sands pipelines;
• Drought and wildfire in Texas;
• Lack of Emergency Response Plans for volunteer fire departments to address pipeline fires; and
• Eminent domain abuses, threats and bullying of TX landowners.”

Threats to the Health of Texans

The crude oil that would flow through the pipeline is known as diluted bitumen, or dilbit.  Federal safety officials don’t know precisely which chemicals TransCanada mixes with bitumen to create dilbit, including the levels of benzene used in the diluents. And even industry groups can’t say exactly how corrosive dilbit is.

“The U.S. EPA raised serious health risks over benzene in the diluents in a June 2011 letter to the U.S. State Department based on ambient air data at the Kalamazoo river spill”, stated Dr. Neil Carman, Clean Air Program Director of the Sierra Club Lone Star Chapter.  “In a tar sands pipeline spill Benzene easily volatilizes into the air at ambient temperatures allowing inhalation exposure to occur, its toxicity results in immediate health effects in the low parts per billion range.  Benzene also poses a water contamination risk at low concentrations.”

“These characteristics make benzene the most dangerous chemical to human health in a tar sands pipeline spill because it is a known human carcinogenic agent,” Carman emphasized.  “Short-term benzene exposures may cause a variety of health effects, including nausea, vomiting, dizziness, narcosis, reduction in blood pressure, and central nervous system depression as reported in Michigan from the Kalamazoo tar sands spill in July 2010 where high levels (15,000 parts per billion) were measured in the air.”

Finally, Carman noted that, “Tar sands bitumen contains 11X more sulfur and nickel, 5X more lead, and higher levels of other toxic substances (arsenic, chromium, vanadium, boron, and zinc) compared to conventional crude oil.”  Carman concluded, “The higher toxicity of tar sands bitumen will result in increased toxic emissions in refinery communities already overburdened with too much air pollution where environmental justice issues have been ignored by the state and the oil firms.”

Threats to Air Quality and Climate Change

NASA’s James Hansen, a leading climate scientist who rang the first alarm bells nearly 30 years ago, has called the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline “game over” for the climate.

According to a recent US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) assessment, tar sands emissions are approximately twice those of conventional oil, making tar sands well-to-tank emissions approximately 82% higher than conventional oil.

“Tar sands oil is far dirtier than conventional crude oil,” said Tom “Smitty” Smith, director of Public Citizen’s Texas office.  “This will significantly increase emissions from Houston and Beaumont refineries, which will further put the region beyond the ability to meet federal air quality standards.”

“The DFW area won’t fare much better as pumps are situated at 20- to 100-mile-intervals along the length of the pipeline to “push” the tar sands crude,” continued Smith. “Pipeline pumps may be powered by burning diesel or natural gas, or by using electricity (which may come from burning natural gas or coal at power plants that feed the area).  This will add to the emissions blowing into the DFW area.”

What Can Be Done If Foreign Corporations Circumvent U.S. Regulatory Process

Texans should contact their elected officials regarding their concerns about TransCanada’s Gulf Coast and Enbridge’s Wrangler proposed tar sands pipelines and they should ask their elected officials to join together to protect Texans from the dangers of toxic tar sands pipeline spills and impacts to end-of-market refinery communities.  The Texas Legislature needs to study tar sands, hold interim hearing about tar sands and work together with their constituents to assure that Texans water, air, land and health are not harmed by toxic tar sands.

Cites:

• EPA paper by Ralph Dollhopf and Mark Durno, US EPA Region 5 Chicago,Kalamazoo River\Enbridge Pipeline Spill 2010, presented March 17, 2011 at2011 International Oil Spill Conference:  http://www.iosc.org/papers_posters/IOSC-2011-422-file001.pdf
• EPA’s TransCanada Keystone XL Pipeline comments June 6, 2011 letter to U.S. Department of State: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/keystone-xl-project-epa-comment-letter-20110125.pdf
• Toxicological Profile for Benzene by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (August 2007):  http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp.asp?id=40&tid=14 .

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) approved the permit over the objections of the Texas Railroad Commission (whose commissioners are elected) and every state and local official representing Montgomery County, and in spite of an administrative law judge’s recommendation to deny the permit because the well might pollute groundwater.

Perry’s presidential campaign opponents have criticized him for “crony capitalism,” the appearance of a pay-to-play culture that gets favorable state government treatment for his campaign donors. Perry also has been criticized for state environmental regulation that appears to put business ahead of environmental quality and safety.

All those issues are raised in the environmental commission’s actions on the permit sought by TexCom  Inc. of Houston and its investors with close ties to Perry.

Major investors in the injection well include Texas A&M University System Regent Phil Adams and Barry Switzer, a former football coach for the University of Oklahoma and the Dallas Cowboys.

Adams is a friend of Perry’s from their days as students at A&M. He has donated almost $300,000 to Perry’s state campaign fund, and at one time or another he has employed both of Perry’s children in his Bryan insurance agency. Another Adams investment became controversial in Perry’s gubernatorial re-election campaign last year when it was revealed that the company received a $2.75 million grant from the state’s Emerging Technology Fund.

Switzer raised more than $57,000 for Perry’s 2010 re-election and attended Perry’s primary election victory party. This August, Switzer hosted a fundraiser for Perry’s presidential campaign that took in $273,500.

Adams and Switzer are investors in a subsidiary of TexCom Inc. The company fought for five years to obtain the permit for a Montgomery County site for an injection well for industrial waste, mostly generated by the oil and gas industry. TexCom has reported that the site has the potential to generate $20 million a year in revenue.

Switzer became involved with TexCom in 2006 when he led investors to put $6 million into the company. Then in 2007, Switzer and two other Oklahoma investors founded Foxborough Energy Co. LLC and Montgomery County Environmental Solutions, which together bought at least a 60 percent share of the TexCom subsidiary that was seeking the Montgomery County well permit.

Adams’ state financial disclosure reports have shown him as an investor in the two Oklahoma companies since 2008.

Texas Ethics Commission undergoing Sunset Process

The Texas Ethics Commission (TEC) has responsibility for civilly enforcing our state’s campaign finance laws. In the agency’s Self-Evaluation, they reported that in in 2009 they received 274 complaints from the public and there were zero initiated by the agency.  In 2010, they received 374 complaints from the public and again, zero initiated by the agency.  If the TEC is to be an effective enforcement agency, it must be restructured so that it operates like all other civil state law enforcement agencies.

Those concerned about the appearance of pay-to-play politics should ask the Sunset Commission to recommend the legislature make changes to the Texas Ethics Commission that:

• Prohibit any contributor of more than $100 from being appointed to any board commission or office or contracting with the state  for 2 years after the contribution is made
• Prohibit state agencies from contracting or giving grants to contributors of the Governor, Lt Governor or Speaker of the House.

Any community could fall victim to “crony capitalism” and Texans have an opportunity to ask their representatives to make it stop!

The Lower Colorado River Authority received the first Texas Greenhouse Gas permit as it upgrades a 37-year-old generating unit in Llano County to a more efficient natural gas-powered unit, federal environmental regulators announced Thursday.

LCRA, which is making improvements to its Thomas C. Ferguson Power Plant, is the first company in Texas to complete a greenhouse gas permit application and obtain the final permit, a process that took about eight months, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

“The LCRA plant will use improved environmental controls and install modern high efficiency equipment,” said EPA Regional Administrator Al Armendariz. “LCRA is leading the way by providing Texans an efficient and reliable source of clean power.”

EPA granted the first Texas greenhouse gas permit and is reviewing 10 others for Texas companies. Under EPA’s final national regulations, projects beginning on Jan. 2, 2011 that “increase greenhouse gas emissions substantially” require the air permits.

While the EPA said it thinks states are “best equipped” to oversee the permitting process, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has refused to do so.

In an Aug. 2, 2010 letter to the EPA, the Texas Attorney General and TCEQ explained, “The State of Texas does not believe that EPA’s suggested approach comports with the rule of law” and that would “preclude TCEQ from declaring itself ready to require permits for greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources as you request.”

Under the LCRA permit, the electric cooperative plans to replace an old 440-megawatt electric generating boiler with a new, 590-megwatt combined cycle gas-fired plant.

“We appreciate EPA’s work on our project,” said LCRA General Manager Becky Motal. “The region will benefit from the latest environmental controls and our customers will benefit from our ability to better manage costs with a plant that will use about 35 to 40 percent less fuel than traditional gas-fired plants.”

The TCEQ released a statement saying it is pleased LCRA’s project is morning forward, but “we see no need for – or any environmental benefit from – EPA’s greenhouse gas permit. The TCEQ authorized the project on Sept. 1, 2011 after careful review that determined the permit was protective of the environment and fully compliant with all state environmental regulations.”

TCEQ’s greenhouse gas letter to the EPA is here.

EPA’s letter to permit holders and the public is here.

At the moment, the world is going in the wrong direction in terms of climate change.  Governments around the world have put increasing energy efficiency at the top of their to-do lists, but efficiency has worsened for two years in a row now in spite of the fact that the world has the technology to tackle the problem — just not the political will.

Rather than providing incentives to reduce consumptions, incentives to consume more have risen: The report said subsidies for fossil fuels have risen past $400 billion.  Only when “dirty” fuels become more expensive, will governments follow through on their commitments to increase energy efficiency.

Energy efficiency is generally considered the easiest way to reduce consumption since it has a price-incentive built in. It has become even more important since Japan’s nuclear accident sparked a rethinking of the use of atomic technology previously seen as key to cutting emissions.  In Texas, which is still in the grip of a record setting drought, efficiency may be the difference between rolling blackouts and keeping the lights and air conditioners on next summer.

This is a decision that came quickly on the heels of the U.S. State Department’s Inspector General’s announcement that they were launching an investigation into the alledged bias and conflict of interest citizen’s had complained about in the hearing process.  Click here to read our earlier blog.  At the hearing in Austin, after speakers who had been there for hours were cut off, one man was arrested for complaining about the process (Click here to read that blog post) and many at that hearing were questioning the facilitators about who they were and what exactly was their relationship to the State Department.

“The U.S. State Department’s contractor Cardno Entrix had severe conflicts of interests and their bias showed. They ignored the potential damages to our drinking water, air safety and climate in the Texas section of their environmental impact statement. The hearings they held on the plan were unfair and biased against opponents. Instead of fair hearings – opponents were cut off, the hearings were ended before the witnesses were heard, and those who objected were arrested,” said David Daniel, a land owner whose property lies along the pipeline route through Texas.

“Texas will be the state most endangered by leaks from the pipeline and the pollution from refining. We don’t need this pipeline or any additional proposed diluted bitumen pipeline, Texas refinery communities are already over-burdened by toxic refinery pollution and environmental justice concerns arise from further burdens to these end of market refinery communities in Texas,” said Chris Wilson, a chemical engineer working with Public Citizen in opposing the pipeline.

Ms. Wilson continued, “We don’t need this pipeline, and shouldn’t be running the risk for the temporary jobs it will create. This pause will allow us to rationally review the risks.”

Political experts are postulating that the Obama administration, the Canadian government and TransCanada made the mistake of glossing over the environmental issues in their haste to push this project through.

However, as the political pressure on his administration grew and consious that they didn’t want environmentalists staying home on election day, Obama himself acknowledged the health and environmental risks.

“Folks in Nebraska, like all across the country, aren’t going to say to themselves, ‘We’ll take a few thousand jobs if it means our kids are potentially drinking water that would damage their health,’” Obama said in Nov. 2 interview with Nebraska TV station KETV. “We don’t want, for example, aquifers to be adversely affected.

The delay is an opportunity for a more “sober” and“rigorous” assessment of the pipeline on all sides, outside of the politicized climate of a presidential election campaign and we think it needs to made clear here that that any costs this puts on TransCanada are their own fault for lobbying to diminish oversight and cut corners in the permitting process. They took a chance hoping it would reduce their costs and it ended up backfiring because the corner cutting was too egregious and caused thus delay.

The risks taken by TransCanada were not the government’s concern, the health and well being of its citizens are their concern. In free markets risks are sometimes punished and sometimes rewarded.

The investigation was announced by the inspector general in Washington on Tuesday, November 8th, and was prompted by a Congressional request headed by U.S. Senator Bernard Sanders (D-Vermont) and U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn).

Environmental critics are particularly interested in the state department’s hiring of Cardno Entrix of Texas to help prepare an analysis of the environmental impact of the project and facilitating the public hearings around the country. The company had a preexisting business relationship with the pipeline’s builder, Trans Canada.

The inspector general’s memorandum and the Congressional request for the investigation can be read by clicking here.

Dallas-Fort Worth now has the distinction of beating the Bayou City as the former longtime state champ, and one that has been contending for years for the worst smog problem in the country.

The release of the 2011 ozone season stats has been met with little concern by those in positions of power.

The Texas leadership keeps telling Texans that the feds are out to get us with their onerous and unnecessary environmental rules and regulations. But as the ozone readings reveal, the state isn’t troubling itself with meeting even basic standards.

North Texas and Houston are still exceeding the now-outdated ozone limit of 85 parts per billion and are nowhere near complying with the new standard of 75 ppb.  We all pay for failing to meet this bar with public health consequences — more respiratory illnesses, hospital visits, lost work days and premature deaths.

Texas is under federal mandate to reduce ozone levels. The state is required to submit and to abide by plans to improve air quality — but too many deadlines have been missed, and too many plans have been little more than Band-Aids.

The story the numbers tell is, not enough has been done to bring North Texas into compliance. The metropolitan area needs a more aggressive clean-air plan, but it also needs state environmental officials to lead the way to reduce pollution from sources outside the cities’ purview – like coal-fired power plants – that blow into these urban areas making it even more difficult to meet air quality standards.

San Antonio is trying to marry investment in renewables with economic development in an effort to keep the cost of electricity as low as possible while getting as many jobs as possible, but the city has had a learning curve in this process, yet they remain confident that this vision can come to fruition.

Thirty two companies initially submitted 111 proposals several months ago. The utility then re-opened the bidding process and expected to make a decision by Sept. 1. Even as CPS Energy zeroed in on two finalists, Lewis said, other companies around the globe approached the utility with their own ideas and CPS Energy officials decided to end negotiations and open a third round of bidding after rewriting the specifications of what it wants.

So the problem lies not with no takers, but with many and new ideas coming forward to possibly make this move by San Antonio more profitable.  What this Central Texas metroplex does with this process could set the trend for the country and remains an experiment to watch.

Currently much of the chemical-laced water and sand that Texas companies blast into shale formations to release oil and gas is later pumped back underground for disposal.

“It’s going to be an issue next session. I continue to tell the industry they’ve got to get aggressive about water reuse,” Fraser, a Republican from Horseshoe Bay in the Central Texas Highland Lakes region, said during a joint interim hearing on drought held by the Natural Resources and the Senate Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committees.

“In a drought situation, it’s starting to be a problem, a big problem in some areas,” Fraser added of the millions of gallons of water used in fracking. “I’ve been projecting for multiple months that this is coming and we’ve got a crisis out there.”

When asked about the water recovery program and how much water is being recovered from fracking, the industry representative responded that he did not have a specific number of how many companies recycle frack water but added that TXOGA has requested data from its members. He noted that while some companies do have significant recovery operations, others do not.

“Significant,”said Fraser. “That implies a lot.”  But the numbers from the industry were not there to back that implication up.

Fraser said he’d like to see more efficient water reclamation by cities, manufacturers and refiners as well, but he also took aim at the electric power industry.

“Long-term the power industry is going to hear me talking about figuring out a way to convert and get that technology,” he said. “We can’t continue to use the amount of water that we’ve used in the past. The way we are treating our water right now is not sustainable.”

John Fainter, president of the Association of Electric Companies of Texas, said everyone in the state needs to learn more and do more about conserving and saving and reusing water, but he added a threat of his own.  “There is a cost, and the public needs to be aware of that, just like the environmental requirements we’re facing,” he said.

Click here to watch the hearing.

A soon to be released report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change marks a shift in climate science from focusing on subtle changes in average temperatures to concentrating on events that grab headlines, hurt economies and kill people, saying that extremes caused by climate change could eventually grow so severe that some areas will become “increasingly marginal asplaces to live.”

The final version of the report will be issued in a few weeks. The draft says there is at least a 2-in-3 probability that climate extremes have already worsened because of human-made greenhouse gases.

By the end of the century, the intense, single-day rainstorms that typically happen once every 20 years will probably happen about twice a decade, the report said.

The opposite type of disaster – a drought such as the stubbornly long dry spell gripping Texas and parts of the Southwest – could also happen more often as the world  warms.

The Texas State Climatologist John Nielsen-Gammon, taking a cue from the state leadership is not is not committing to how much the current drought, Texas’ worst single-year  one on record, is connected to climate change.  But he does acknowledge that the drought is caused by a lack of rainfall and record heat; and at least part of the heat is due to global warming.

In the future, climate change will make droughts even more severe, with higher temperatures causing more evaporation and thus putting a greater strain on water resources.

The report does say scientists are “virtually certain” – 99 percent – that the world will have more extreme spells of heat and fewer of cold. Heat waves could peak as much as 5 degrees higher by midcentury and even 9 degrees by the end of the century.

In the United States this year, we set 2,703 daily high temperature records, compared with only 300 cold records during that period, making it the hottest summer in the U.S. since the Dust Bowl of 1936, according to Weather Underground.

The report’s summary chapter didn’t detail which regions might suffer extremes so severe that they become only marginally habitable, but we may learn more once the report is released.

Where: Ascension Lutheran Church Family Life Center
6420 Hart Lane,  Between 2222 and Far West Blvd., west of Balcones Dr.

 The meeting is free and open to the public.

Caught in the grip of a heat wave that fed on the drought – where sunlight hit the ground, evaporated any moisture in the soil and raised the temperature of the soil, making the ground a virtual hot plate – Central Texas saw 90 days of 100 plus degree days.  And while the scorching heat finally broke at the end of September, the drought is far from over and is expected to have a ripple effect that will spread beyond the region in the months ahead, impacting the one place Americans do not need to feel the hurt: their pocketbooks.

From beef prices to the cost of a pair of socks to the price of bread, the Texas drought of 2011 will leave its mark on family budgets.

In Texas, losses, so far, are estimated at over $5 billion.  The state lost a little over half of its cotton crop.  Acres of drought parched and wildfire blacken fields are reminiscent of the dust bowl of 1933.

Texas produces 55% of the U.S. crop and two-thirds of America’s yield is exported to mills outside of the country where cheap clothing is manufactured and shipped back to US retail shelves.  Now with shrinking supplies, cotton prices are surging and the price of those inexpensive t-shirts could be going up.

The effects go beyond this year’s cotton harvest. Ranchers are selling off cattle in historic numbers, including breeding stock that ranchers can no longer feed and water. The state has also lost an entire hay crop, making winter feeding an expensive proposition. While that may mean lower beef prices in the short run as plenty of newly slaughtered cattle hit the marketplace, it likely will mean higher prices down the road since valuable breeding stock is being sold off.

Business & Commerce Committee

• Assess the impact of extreme drought conditions on electric generation capacity.
• Identify those regions of Texas that will be most affected by a lack of capacity.
• Analyze response plans and make recommendations to improve and expedite those plans.

Natural Resources Committee

• Review water resources and conservation measures included in the State Water Plan.
• Evaluate methods to enhance existing water resources and promote water conservation across the state at all times, not just in case of severe drought conditions.

Agriculture & Rural Affairs Committee

• Review the impact of the drought on the Texas agricultural and ranching industry.
• Develop methods and legislative recommendations to minimize the effects of drought and respond to the challenges for farmers and ranchers.

Economic Development Committee

• Assess the economic impact of long-term drought on all sectors of the Texas economy.
• Include additional analysis of economic consequences of wildland fires.
• Develop a compendium of federal, state, and local funding and other assistance alternatives for reducing the long-term economic consequences of the drought.

Intergovernmental Relations Committee

• Analyze ways to better coordinate existing federal, state and local housing resources to increase access to affordable housing following a disaster.
• Review best practices for fulfilling emergency short-term housing needs and developing long-term housing opportunities using existing tools, such as land trusts, land banks and other available incentives.
• Review housing and development codes, and guidelines for structures in areas prone to natural disasters, and make recommendations on how these structures can be “hardened” to avoid loss.
• Make recommendations to educate and enable private landowners to use best practices in fire risk mitigation, fuel reduction and urban forest management to reduce exposure to wildland fires.

Subcommittee on Flooding & Evacuations

• Investigate and evaluate communication options during evacuations and make recommendations for legislative action.

Transportation & Homeland Security Committee

• Review state, local and federal emergency preparation and response efforts as they pertain to protecting lives, property and natural resources from wildland fire.
• Consider ways to facilitate better communication, collaboration and response between all state agencies and stakeholders involved in wildfire prevention, mitigation and control.
• Review training of emergency responders to ensure that they have the appropriate skills to respond to wildfire events.
• Review best practices in urban forest management and fuel reduction policies, both regulatory as well as voluntary, to promote safe firefighting operations.

The worst drought in more than 50 years in Texas is expected to continue as a weak La Nina weather pattern is predicted to strengthen this winter.  Drought has already reduced cooling water needed by coal-fired power plants and may limit electric output from power plants next summer, an official from the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT – the grid operator)  reported.

At this time, only one small generating unit is currently curtailed due to a lack of adequate cooling water, however a continuation of the severe drought in Texas could result in as much as 3,000 MW being unavailable next summer, Kent Saathoff, vice president of ERCOT grid operations told the board last week.

The drought has lowered the water level at nearly every reservoir in the state, according to the Texas Water Development Board. A lack of cooling water limits the ability of a power plant to operate at full capacity.

Texas’ hottest summer on record pushed power consumption to record levels, straining the state’s electric resources on many days in August.

Grid officials and lawmakers are worried that the drought will compound existing issues that impact the state’s power supply: looming environmental regulations that will curtail output from coal-fired power plants and a lack of new power-plant investment.

ERCOT predicts about 434 megawatts would be unavailable next summer if Texas gets about half its normal rainfall over the winter and spring months and if there is no significant rainfall, as much as 3,000 MW could be unavailable by May.

Power plant owners are taking steps to increase access to cooling water by increasing pumping capacity, adding pipelines to alternate water sources and securing additional water rights.  Some water authorities have already curtailed new “firm” water contracts, so it may be harder for plants to secure additional water.