Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Efficiency’ Category

Also cross-posted at our Energy Blog:

President Obama announced this morning he was putting the government on a low carbon diet. Through a series of initiatives, he hopes to decrease energy consumption through efficiency and switching to alternative energy that is less carbon intensive.

As the single largest energy consumer in the U.S. economy, the Federal Government spent more than $24.5 billion on electricity and fuel in 2008 alone. Achieving the Federal GHG pollution reduction target will reduce Federal energy use by the equivalent of 646 trillion BTUs, equal to 205 million barrels of oil, and taking 17 million cars off the road for one year. This is also equivalent to a cumulative total of $8 to $11 billion in avoided energy costs through 2020.

“As the largest energy consumer in the United States, we have a responsibility to American citizens to reduce our energy use and become more efficient,” said President Obama. “Our goal is to lower costs, reduce pollution, and shift Federal energy expenses away from oil and towards local, clean energy.”

Fun fact 1: The US government uses approximately as much energy as the entire country of Austria.

Fun Fact 2: Similar initiatives made by states have netted huge results. The state government of Utah, led by governor Jon Huntsman (who Obama named ambassador to China, you may remember), invested $1.5 million in energy efficiency for government agencies expecting a 10 year payback. They made it back in 3– and now they save over half a million dollars in energy costs a year. Efficiency is an economy of scale– and I’m willing to be the entire government of Utah would not even fill in one of the large federal agency buildings around DC.

Fun Fact 3: Texas has its own “No Regrets” greenhouse gas reduction strategy in accordance with the passage of SB 184, which Public Citizen supported: don’t forget that Sunday is the last day to submit your energy efficiency ideas to the state comptroller’s office. For more info see: www.TexasNoRegrets.org

I think this is a domestic spending freeze everyone can get behind.

Read Full Post »

San Antonians should be proud today, when Mayor Castro will dedicate the Mission Verde green jobs training center and demonstration lab at the former Cooper Middle School on the west side.

The center will bring together sustainability education and the City’s green jobs ambitions by teaching students weatherization techniques and offering on-the-job training.  The project will “provide jobs that lift up the neighborhood“, offer “a 21st-century education in one of the poorest neighborhoods in San Antonio” and will give a new lease on life to a previously abandoned school building.  The center’s centerpiece is a zero-energy, solar powered house that students at Texas A&M built modularly for the 2007 Solar Decathalon competition.

The Mission Verde Center is an exciting step towards San Antonio’s vision of decentralized, local power and an accessible, inclusive green economy strong enough to lift all boats. As Greg Harman, environmental reporter for the San Antonio Current, put it

Community green-power centers like the Cooper Center, when hitched to a soon-to-be established city program expected to allow all income levels to receive loans for solar power and energy efficiency upgrades — loans which can in turn be paid off through the energy savings realized by the homeowner — have the potential to forever change the way San Antonio is powered.

Projects like this represent, in my opinion, one of the most exciting aspects of the climate movement.  In our switch to a cleaner,greener America, we have the opportunity to simultaneously tackle job losses, social inequality, public health, and environmental degradation. Kudos to the city of San Antonio for taking steps to create an inclusive green economy that would make Dr. Martin Luther King proud.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

Now that the ball’s dropped, toasts made, fireworks popped and black eyed peas consumed, we’re feeling reflective today.  Faced with that eternally annual question, “Should Auld Aquaintance Be Forgot?“, I’m moved to such mental poetry as “Heck no, this year was too much fun!”

We’ve had a hell of a year here at Texas Vox.  In such a short span we’ve gone from a humble policy blog, primarily read internally and by our own interns, to stake our claim as a top climate and energy blog in the state, with a national and even international reach.  And you, dear citizen-readers, are not the only ones to take notice: from responses we’ve received over the year it is clear that we’re also on the radar of agency commissioners, legislators, city council members and even the office of the governor.  Not too shabby for 12 month’s time, and an exciting place to be as we enter a new decade and crucial political time.

So here’s the first segment of our “Year in Review” series: the Top Texas Vox Stories of 2009.

1. Energy Citizens

Remember when, way back in August, your intrepid friends at Texas Vox boogied down to Houston to crash the American Petroleum Institute’s astroturf “Energy Citizens” rally?  This was the first of several rallies across the nation that API staged to make it look like there was a strong, ground-up movement against a federal climate change bill.  But it turned out that the event was more of a company picnic than a grassroots campaign; they blocked our entry and wouldn’t even let in the “real” anti-cap and trade grassroots, as organized by folks like Freedomworks — no American flags either! But never fear, your own Citizen Sarah was able to sneak past their burly guards and interview a few of these so-called Energy Citizens — who we found out say the darndest things (like that they don’t really know much of anything about the climate and energy bill and are there because or their employers)!

API’s antics didn’t end in Houston, either — in North Carolina, they even locked out the state representative of the district where the rally was held! After a few more rallies, it quickly became clear that on top of being funded by the American Petroleum Institute and stocked with energy company employees, the majority of them were also organized by oil-industry lobbyists. But by that point, no one was buying API’s story anymore.  Way to bust ’em, Netroots!

2. The 2009 81st Legislative Session

Activists had high hopes for the 2009 81st Legislative Session.  With the new Obama administration, fear of pending federal climate legislation, and a new Speaker of the House to break the Craddickocracy, it seemed almost certain that good bills would pass to move Texas closer to a clean energy future.

Two weeks into the session, Public Citizen Texas’ legislative package (which included such lofty goals as significant climate change legislation, a major update of state energy efficiency programs, a non-wind renewable portfolio standard (RPS), and a bill to create incentives for solar power) was in the best shape it had ever been, and the session looked to be one of the most productive in history.  At this point, all of the bills Public Citizen’s Texas office supported had made it out of committee, been passed by either one chamber or the other, and had made it out of Calendars committee and were scheduled for debate.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of our legislation was calendared behind an incredibly contentious Voter ID bill which would have required Texas voters to present a valid driver’s license to vote.  In order to block this bill, House Democrats adopted the “chubbing” tactic — talking bills to death — to avoid getting far enough down the bill list to have to vote on the Voter ID bill.

This stalling technique cut five days from the end of the session deadline and killed a tragically long laundry list of bills that were scheduled after Voter ID.  As an example, SB 16, an omnibus air quality bill which would have provided funding for TERP, plug-in hybrids, and a diesel emissions reduction plan, was directly after Voter ID on Calendars.  Our solar incentives bill was also on the same page, and the non-wind RPS bill was scheduled to be discussed the following day.  It was a very disheartening end to an otherwise shining legislative session — kind of like a great interception and full field run that ended in a trip just shy of the 1 yard line.

But there were still some great victories in there. These major wins included:

  • Funding for the Texas Emissions Reduction Program (TERP) for areas in non-attainment status of the federal Clean Air Act (CHB 1796)
  • A carbon dioxide registry to address the state’s contribution to global warming (CHB 1796)
  • A “green fee” bill allowing the governing board of public colleges and universities to institute an environmental service fee (once approved by student body election)
  • A bill to create municipal solar districts that would allow local governments to provide low-cost loans to consumers to install solar on roofs (HB 1937)
  • A “no regrets” strategy for greenhouse gas reduction in the state.  This bill will require the State Comptroller to examine the state’s energy use in order to find ways to reduce our emissions and save money at the same time (SB 184)
  • A green fleets bill to promote low emissions and plug-in hybrid vehicles for fleets of major state agencies (HB 432)

For the full text, all-green-groups wrap-up number, read the press release Texas Legislature Advances Clean Power and Green Jobs, but Loses Steam in Political Wranglings.

Check back with us tomorrow for more fun stories from 2009!

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, cleaner cars, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

Sixty seconds doesn’t seem like a lot of time; however, there are lots of things that can be done in sixty seconds or less.  For instance, an average adult can type 38 to 40 words and blink between ten and 30 times every sixty seconds (sometimes simultaneously).  Furthermore, an elite distance runner can run about 180 steps every sixty seconds and the world’s fastest rappers can recite over 723 syllables in even less time.

There are a lot of things an average person can do in sixty seconds or less in their everyday life that will, more or less, benefit the earth.  So here it goes…

  • Switch out your light bulbs to ones that are more energy efficient.

Remember that every time you turn on a light in your home or office you send a message to the power grid, demanding more energy.  In America, 301 million people share the same power grid.  That’s five percent of the world’s population, inevitably sucking up a quarter of the earth’s energy. Over half of the grid is powered by coal plants alone, which are the nation’s number one culprit for greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants.  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that, for every kilowatt hour of electricity generated by a coal-fired plant, 1.43 lbs of greenhouse gases are released into the atmosphere.  In Texas, 144 lung cancer deaths and 1,791 heart attacks a year are attributed to pollution from power plants. Switch to energy efficient light bulbs and cut the amount of energy you use by two-thirds.

  • Conserve water by turning off your faucet when brushing your teeth or taking less time in the shower.

The average American family consumes around 300 gallons of water everyday. This works out to be 495,000 gallons per person every year.  What boggles my mind is the fact that there are about 1.2 billion people in the world who don’t have access to clean, portable water and here we are overestimating the frugality of our supply.  We have to realize that water is fast becoming the world’s ultimate commodity, and water conservation is the most cost-effective way to reduce our demand for it.

There are several quick and easy things you can do in your home or change in your daily routine to conserve water.  First, you can simply cut your shower time by 60 seconds or more.  If every member in your family does the same, you can end up saving 200 to 300 gallons a month.  Also, if you are a fan of hot showers and hate the first 60 seconds or so of cold water that first escapes the showerhead, you can use a container to catch the cold water and save it for when you want to water plants or rinse your vegetables.  Second, turn off your faucet when you are brushing your teeth or shaving, and don’t leave the water running when you’re washing dishes—fill one of your sinks for rinse water instead.  These simple acts can save three gallons of water in one day alone.

  • Read your product labels.

The production and distribution of all kinds of clothing have a tremendous impact on the environment.   Wool comes courtesy of sheep, whose herds are known to burp and err… otherwise emit methane—a greenhouse gas that is almost 20 times more powerful than carbon dioxide. In countries like New Zealand, methane is fast becoming the most potent greenhouse gas.  Researchers for the United Nations now believe that livestock industries are a major contributor to climate change—being responsible for more greenhouse gas emissions than cars are.  Furthermore, the method of growing cotton is extremely petrochemical-intensive.   About ten percent of all agricultural chemicals in the United States are used to produce cotton, which is grown on just one percent of all major agricultural land.  The process of growing cotton requires 110 pounds of nitrogen fertilizer per acre.  At the end of the day, the use of these synthetic fertilizers and soil additives can wreak havoc on our soil, water, and air supply–leading to oxygen-less deadzones or even acid rain.  Some popular fashion outlets like H&M are now carrying lines of eco-friendly garments, including those made from organic cotton.  Green is the new black; be aware of where your clothes come from and how they are made.

As for the ever popular subject of organic food…

One may enjoy biting into the more conventional, juicy fuji apple—truly nature’s candy, and some say the sweetest apple in town; however, the organic gala apple is just as good as the former, but better for you and for the environment.  It’s true that organic food products are almost always more expensive than the more conventional fruits and vegetables; although, it would only be fair to point out that organic farming is a major player in the effort to combat global warming.  Birthed during the organic movement of the 1930s and 1940s, today organic farms cover a mere 0.8% of the total farming area in the world. Many people don’t realize the great benefits organic farming offers to our land, lives, and livelihood.  Aside from its major contribution of reducing carbon dioxide emissions (done by sequestering carbon in the soil), organic farming also (1) cuts production cost by 25% to 30% for farmers, (2) reduces soil erosion by up to 50%, (3) has a positive effect on the ecosystem and groundwater supplies, and (4) preserves the original nutritional content of food, giving consumers a healthier and fresher substitute.

  • Reuse and Recycle: refill your water bottles and separate your trash.

Ever buy a bottle of water before working out at the gym, or have a bottle of water with your lunch?  Have you ever contemplated the existence of that bottle of water and how it can affect the environment, even after you have used it?

The United States is the largest consumer of bottled water in the world, with Americans chugging a little less than seven billion gallons in 2004 alone.  It takes one and a half million barrels of oil a year to produce the part polyethylene terephthalate plastic bottles made in the U.S.  That’s enough oil to fuel 100,000 cars commuting into downtown Austin daily (this is also another issue that needs to be tackled).  Globally, it takes more than two and a half million tons of plastic per year to make water bottles.  This is a process that requires a whole lot of energy and, in the end, leaves us with heaps of unwanted plastic waste worldwide. Now, I’m not saying to boycott bottled water.   I am just saying that if you do purchase bottled water—and do so frequently, don’t throw the bottle out right away.  You can reuse the bottle—refilling it with water from the tap or water fountains.

Furthermore, by taking 60 seconds to put your newspaper, tuna can, or salsa jar into a separate recycling bin you can ultimately save humanity years in environmental damage.  About 60% of the household trash thrown away everyday can potentially be recycled.

  • Say something!

Probably one of the simplest things an individual can do to bring awareness to green issues and hopefully effect change is to speak up and say something.  You can talk to the manager of your local supermarket and ask that they carry more organic products.  You could call or email your local representative to speak about environmental issues that affect your family, neighborhood, city, or state.

60secondsWhy not take 60 seconds out of your day to save the earth?

Yours truly,

Ashlie Lynn Chandler

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, cleaner cars, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

By Kirsten Bokenkamp

Happy Holidays! Just saying those words is enough to evoke joyful images of families gathered in the kitchen preparing a succulent holiday meal to be enjoyed together, or excited and wide-eyed children opening gifts next to a beautifully decorated Christmas tree. When I close my eyes, I can almost taste the cinnamon-spiced hot apple cider. Yum. Unfortunately, for some of us, the holiday season also means traveling long distances to be with our loved ones; fighting the crowds at busy stores as we endlessly try to find the perfect gifts; and paying higher energy bills resulting from our holiday lights and all of our cooking.

Amidst all the holiday cheer, sometimes it is inconvenient to think about how our activities might contribute to climate change. The purpose of the Holiday Edition of Green-up Your Life! is to give easy ideas about how to have the lowest impact on the earth while still enjoying the holiday season.

Time to Travel

With all the crowds and delays, flying during the holiday season can be really frustrating. And what about those 4 to 8 hour drives? Unfortunately for many of us, flying or driving are often the only options – for now. The future, however, looks bright. President Obama is already in support of investing in the high-speed national rail service, as it would reduce traffic congestion, cut dependence on foreign oil and improve the environment. It would also create many new green-jobs, something that we desperately need to jump-start the economy. What can you do? Click here to tell your Representatives in Congress that you are in favor of appropriating government funds towards the creation of a national high-speed passenger rail system. I have to admit, there is something romantic about taking the train home for the holidays.

The Gift of Giving

Giving gifts makes us feel good; it is a way to let our loved ones know we are thinking about them; and it is a token of appreciation of being part of another person’s life. Too often, though, we get caught up in the act of giving a gift, without thinking about the repercussions. By following some simple guidelines, you can keep your gifts environmentally friendly, and socially responsible.

  • Skip anything that you plug in, or that requires batteries.
  • Buy from local vendors when you can. I can think of many gift ideas, from hats and scarves, to food, to jewelry, to artwork, that you can buy from an artisan in your own community.
  • Think outside the box: Give a gym membership, a haircut, a massage, or tickets to a game or a concert.
  • Combine errands, or better yet, leave the car in a parking spot and walk from store to store.
  • Skip the wrapping paper: Use an old newspaper or a paper bag instead. Same goes for a card: Unless it is a private message, write something right on what ever material you wrap the present in.

Do you need a gift for people who already have everything they could ever want? Buy them something from Oxfam. A gift such as soap, purified water, manure, seeds for a garden, a cooking stove, a bicycle, or a dozen chicks will be delivered to somebody in the world who needs it, and your friend will get a card thanking them for their contribution. This kind of gift can be more thoughtful than yet another sweater, and it is a nice way to to contribute to those in need during the holiday season.

In the kitchen and around the house

One of the best things you can do, even though it defies tradition, is to skip the meat (or at least, if possible, buy it from a local organic rancher). Why is this important? Refer back to earlier blogs in this series – Eat Less Meat, and Go Organic. While I wish more people would do this, I do recognize that not everybody will. So, thankfully there are also other, less drastic, measures we can take in the kitchen. For instance, if you are slow roasting something, there is no need to preheat the oven. Also, each time you open the oven door, the oven temperature decreases by about 25 degrees. If you have an oven light, use that instead. When your oven is on, try to fill it up by baking multiple things at once. As long as there is still room for air to circulate, your food will be just as delicious. A helpful hint for stovetop cooking is to match the size of the pan to the size of the burner. According to California’s Consumer Energy Center, using a smaller pan on a larger burner wastes 40% of the energy!

Other hints around the kitchen include only running your dishwasher when it is completely full, and if it has an energy saver mode – use it! Try to limit the amount of times you open and close the refrigerator. Each time that door opens, the fridge needs to work overtime to keep the temperature at its setting.

Do your wallet & the earth a favor...no need to go overboard!

Holiday lights outlining the frames of homes and around the tree are beautiful, and are such a classic mark of the season. They also raise energy bills and are not all that good for the environment. One thing you can do is replace old lights with LED (light emitting diode) bulbs. They are more expensive, but because they are 90% more efficient than your average light bulb, they can start saving you money within the first year of purchase, quickly making up for the upfront costs. Another thing to do is turn off the lights in the day time when it is hard to see them anyway, and put them on a timer at night, so they automatically turn off once everybody has fallen fast asleep.

Happy New Year!

With many New Year’s resolutions in the air, it is a great time to make a commitment to living a greener life. When you think about it, actions that we take during the holiday season can be taken throughout the year. We have so many things to be thankful for, not least for the earth that sustains us. With that gift, comes the responsibility of doing our part to ensure that our families can celebrate for generations to come.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, cleaner cars, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

I got an email from my brother thanking me for the Zoolander references in yesterday’s blog post about the “Faces of Coal” Astroturfing. His only complaint is that there wasn’t more Mugatu.

Well, after reading Bjørn Lomborg’s nonsense in today’s WSJ, I can honestly say:

Mugatu and Lomborg

I FEEL LIKE I’M TAKING CRAZY PILLS!

Lomborg may classify me as an alarmist, but when I listen to him it makes my head want to explode because he wants to have it both ways.  He says climate change is not a pressing crisis, but one that can be solved through middling, weak policies and technology research. But then he says solving climate change will be beneficial and cheap. Not to be crude, but WTF?

This is the most backwards thinking since Exxon was named Forbes’ “Green company fo the Year” (BTW, Forbes says Exxon is “green” because of its support of natural gas! Again–WTF?!?)

Lomborg claims that climate change will not be serious and damaging– it might even be beneficial! His argument? Loss of agricultural productivity, etc, in one area will be offset by gains in another.  Just tell us that while we in Texas are suffering under the worst drought and hottest temperatures ever– our loss is North Dakota’s gain?  I’m sure Texas will be glad that our farming and cattle operations will move to Oklahoma and Nebraska– and we can just bake in the sun with no water.

But then he advocates radical geoengineering policies like cloud-seeding to have clouds’ albedo effect shelter the earth from more direct sunlight.  (Too bad Lomborg, not a scientist, hasn’t kept up with the scientific debate, or else he would’ve read that increased water vapor and clouds would actually speed up global warming) He then claims that doing this to “Solve” global warming could save $20 TRILLION dollars.

So,let me make sure i understand this correctly:

Argument 1: Climate Change won’t be Costly

Argument 2: Solving warming will save $20 Trillion Dollars.

Any disconnect here?  On what alternate plane of existence does $20 Trillion Dollars not amount to a @#$%load of money? (And here I was under the delusion that Lomborg was an economist)

Lomborg completely ignores the real solutions here: energy efficiency and renewables.  According to McKinsey and Company, we can cut our greenhouse gas emissions 35-40% as a country at a net cost savings using technology already in hand. Already in Texas, we see the effect that having wind as part of our electrical generation reduces costs, as evidenced by lower electrical rates in the West ERCOT zone where the wind is, over areas relying more on oil, gas, coal, and nuclear.

Lomborg has not only missed the boat– he’s not even anywhere near the shore.  Solving climate change will bring Texas millions of new green jobs and spur a technology revolution that will change how we live in the same way the Internet and computer revolution has– and all of those changes are for the better.  But you don’t have to take my word for it:  read a transcript of a debate between Lomborg and Jeffrey Sachs, Director of the Earth Institute at Colombia University from Fareed Zakaria GPS a few months back.  Also read here someone who spend their time cataloging the ways that Lomborg misrepresents the facts in his writings.

Read Full Post »

While at Netroots Nation a few weeks back, I had the opportunity to listen in on a panel discussing climate change, Texas’ energy future, and energy security featuring Houston Mayor Bill White (you might have also heard he is running for US Senate).

Mayor White gave very measured, political answers. Throughout the panel, never did the words “Cap and Trade” leave his lips, but he did remain skeptical of anyone who claimed to have it all figured out and that their answer would be easy and painless. He also showed legitimate concerns about the impacts of renewable energy mandates done wrong on low-income consumers. As a representative from a consumer advocacy organization, it is refreshing to hear White’s commitment to protecting our most vulnerable even as we chart a new energy future.

Mayor White’s stated goals are to become more energy independent for basic security reasons and to be in control of our energy future. To do so, he maintains that we must reduce our pollution based on sound science, and do so in a way which does not burden low-income households. He proposes three main mechanisms to meet these goals:

  1. Cut the amount of fuel we use in vehicle travel without impinging on people’s ability to travel freely– specifically by increasing our efficiency per mile traveled.
  2. Cut the amount of energy consumed in buildings. Why drive up the cost of business by paying for electricity?
  3. Decrease the amount of power we get from coal and substitute that power with cleaner sources

Despite some skepticism, Mayor White certainly showed that our energy future could have our cake and eat it too, namely through increased efficiency in building codes, fuel efficiency standards for vehicles, and use of cost-effective renewables. See the edited video here:

[vimeo 6300204]

Public Citizen does not and would never endorse candidates. Even if we could, it’s hard to get an exact read on Mayor White and how he would act as the next Senator from Texas on the issue of federal climate policy — so even so we could offer little endorsement other than a candid analysis of his words and his record.

When asked off-camera about how he would vote on the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES), the climate bill which passed in the House in June and due up for debate in the Senate over the next 2-3 months, he remained committed to energy efficiency but overall rather vague. White showed skepticism as to large long term goals rather than smaller but gradually increasing cuts in emissions. His version of the bill, he said, would have strong building code mandates, a renewable energy efficiency standard (which is it, Bill?) with a price cap on renewables to protect consumers, and change dispatch priorities to wean the nation off of coal fired power. He did not, however, indicate whether or not he would support implementing a federal cap on carbon dioxide emissions or the cap and trade mechanism.

This is a question likely to come up in the next few months when ACES comes to a Senate vote, and hopefully Mayor White will have a clearer answer prepared when that time comes. But if the final answer is no on ACES, would he have some specific policy solutions about how to improve the bill, or would he just cast the same “no way, never” vote that we’ll likely get from John Cornyn or Kay Bailey Hutchison?

That being said, it is refreshing to hear a candidate speak so fluently about energy policy. Mayor White’s record on energy as Deputy Secretary of Energy stands on its own, as does his impressive work on making Houston a national leader on energy efficiency. We may still be uncertain as to where he stands on ACES, but we certainly know his feelings on energy efficiency both in word and deed – which is nothing to sneeze at.

Read Full Post »

I came across this article recently in the Express-News’ Northwest Daily and had to share.

Boerne, population c. 9,400, located about 30 miles northwest of San Antonio, will soon establish a framework for the development of distributed generation.

Under the terms of an ordinance that passed a first reading on July 28, each single-family residence or business could generate solar or wind power for its own use, then send excess energy back to the electric grid, ultimately saving the amount of electricity the city would have to buy from wholesalers.

“This is an opportunity to add renewable power to the electric utility,” said Don Burger, assistant director of Public Works.

Sounds good to me.  Several questions remain though.

  1. What, if any, will the buyback rate be for electricity put back onto the grid from someone’s rooftop solar system or small wind turbine, for example?
  2. Boerne currently buys all of its electricity from LCRA, which gets most of its power from coal and gas, and is also contracted for 200 MW of the new Sandy Creek coal plant under construction near Waco.  Will Boerne adopt a progressive power provision similar to the one adopted by Pedernales Electric that allows PEC to generate up to 35% of its electricity from local sources like energy efficiency and renewable energy?
  3. Will Boerne set up energy financing districts?  HB 1937 (Villareal) passed the Legislature earlier this year. It allows cities to set up districts wherein the city may issue bonds to cover the costs of major energy efficiency improvements or renewable energy projects for homes and/or businesses. The loan would then be repaid by a special voluntary tax assessment on the property.

Boerne is a publicly-owned utility, which means it is accountable to the people of Boerne, not some power company who may not have residents’ interest at heart when making decisions on power. If you live in Boerne, take a moment to express your support for local renewable energy development to mayor Dan Heckler and city council.

Read Full Post »

Tomorrow from 8am till noon, Public Citizen and ReEnergize Texas will be at the Rosewood Zaragoza Community Center in East Austin handing out free compact fluorescent focos and registering community residents for free energy efficiency upgrades. ¡Gratis! Free low flush toilets, insulation and windows and doors to keep your hogar cool in the summer and calientito in the winter. Si habla español no se preocupe, Public Citizen estará ahí para ayudarle llenar las formas necesarias. All of these efforts will result in you owning a low flush toilet que conservara agua y su dinero. Also, a house with good insulation will save you money on your facturas de electricidad.

Public Citizen and ReEnergize Texas want y’all to know that there are programs out there right now. Que usted puede ser la diferencia in whether or not we conserve our resources and survive the current economic environment. So come on down bright and early mañana en la mañana and let us help you sign up for these amazing programs.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt-PJayE8vw]
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySeOw4j_dJA]

Read Full Post »

After CPS Energy unveiled its optimistically low $13 billion proposal for South Texas Project reactors three and four, I decided to look into the history of the construction of the first two reactors. What I found was troubling, but it seemed to be pretty much in line with my understanding of problems with nuclear projects during the 70s and 80. Here is a brief time line:

1971: Houston Lighting and Power presents proposal for South Texas Nuclear Project, with an estimated cost of 1 billion dollars for the entire project.

1973: Construction begins, with contractor Brown and Root. A $1 billion cost is agreed upon and the first reactor is projected to be finished by 1980 and the second by 1982.

1979: Brown and Root Inspector Dan Swayze gives interview with CBS Magazine, discussing his decision to stop inspecting concrete pours after a 1977 incident at STP in which concrete workers at STP threatened his life and physically assaulted another inspector. “They beat the hell out of him” -Swayze

1979: Estimated costs rise to $2.7 Billion and completion of the reactors is postponed

to 1984 for the first and 1986 for the second.

1979: Three Mile Island accident. San Antonio reevaluates its role in the project.

1980: After 3,000 complaints reports of work deficiencies, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission issues a report citing 22 violations and fines HL&P $100,000 and issues a “show cause order” requiring the company to explain why the project should be allowed to continue.

1980: HL&P voluntarily stops work after problems are discovered in the welding and concrete. The projected is rated below average by Ralph Nader’s Critical Mass Energy Project. It is ranked among the top 4 worst ongoing projects.

1981: HL&P fires original contractor Brown and Root (who had no previous experience with nuclear reactors) and replaces them with Bechtel Corporation. Estimated completion costs increase to $4.5 billion.

1985: Brown and Root looses a $750 million law suit, filed by Houston Lighting & Power, San Antonio City Public Service, Central Power, Light of Corpus Christi and the city of Austin. At the time this was the largest cash legal settlement in U.S History.

1987: HL&P receives low-power operating license for Unit 1 nuclear reactor.

1988: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission conducts last minute inspection of facility after hundreds of allegations of poor construction, over 50 of which were made by plant workers through the Government Accountability Project. Among the allegations was a claim that roughly 20% of the plant’s safety valves were installed backwards. This was never corrected after it was concluded that the plant could still function with backwards safety valves.

1988: Completion is announced 7 years late and 500% over budget.

1989: City of Austin files lawsuit against Houston Lighting and Power for unexpected expenses and delays during the construction of STP. Texas Court in Dallas Rules in HL&P’s Favor.

Since 1990: STP and other nuclear plants spend an average of $45 million each year disposing of waste. To clarify that is average is per plant.

CPS energy is giving an optimistically low estimate of the total cost of the project.  Estimates that consider the cost overruns and construction delays that plagued STP and similar projects last time  peg the plant at no lower than $17 billion. This look at STP’s history provides a good example of what can happen when we don’t recognize the likely additional expenditures an expensive project like this will have and operate on an unrealistic time frame.  San Antonio is on the verge of repeating many of the mistakes of the past, and it is the citizens that will have to pay.

The Disappointed Environmentalist

Read Full Post »

By: Citizen Brem

rick-perryEven though Texas leads the nation in greenhouse gas emissions, Governor Perry balks at making any major stand on producing reliable renewable energy.

“Are the Democrats willing to say we’re fixing to raise everyone’s cost of living in America, on science yet to be solidified?” said Rick Perry several weeks ago.  Perry has vowed to veto any legislation with the phrase, “Global Warming” present in bill, while Republican members in Congress continue to protect the oil industry.

It is important to understand the rhetoric being proposed by representatives such as Perry.  They are siding with big oil and manufacturing lobbyists; who argue renewable energy would increase electric bills.  However, the latest studies have shown renewable energy and energy efficiency can dramatically decrease energy consumption.  This decrease in electric bills will be especially helpful for low-income families, who could save up to 30% on future electric bills.

Rick Perry claims, “renewable energy would be devastating to Texas economy,” but research indicates otherwise.  A recent study done by the University of Massachusetts has declared renewable energy and energy efficiency programs would, “save low-income families 4% for their annual income, and the programs would pay for themselves in three years due to the savings by each family.”

Global warming is a real, scientifically confirmed problem, despite what governor Perry would like to believe — and our best answer to this global problem is renewable energy and energy efficiency programs.  Renewable energy and energy efficiency programs have been dramatically effective in Europe and other states through the United States. It is time to examine these successes and find an energy solution right for Texas.

Explained in a report by Green for All, “The most powerful way in which clean-energy investments will expand economic opportunities is through the channel of job creation, especially by increasing the availability of jobs for people with relatively low formal credentials.”

The renewable energy industry can provide thousands of jobs for Texans, which should be welcomed during a time of economic uncertainty.  However, we need to invest in the future of renewable energy before it is too late.  The renewable energy market, from research to production, is a prime opportunity for economic development in Texas.  We must not let Texas be out-competed by states such as California and Vermont, which is sure to happen if Texas does not chose to invest in renewable technology.

Governor Perry’s claim renewable energy will hurt the Texas economy is completely off base.  With renewable energy proving to be a reliable and affordable alternative for energy production, now and in the future, it is time we make active steps towards developing renewable energy in Texas.

Read Full Post »

You are invited to learn about and provide input to the Austin Pecan Street Project tomorrow, June 23 from 4 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. at the Capital Area Workforce Board, 6505 Airport Blvd., Suite 101-E (please enter from the Highland Mall side of the building).

The Pecan Street Project is an initiative charged with exploring the challenges Austin faces in building a modern energy system, including a smart grid.  On September 25, 2008, the Austin City Council adopted a resolution directing the city to work with Environmental Defense Fund and other community stakeholders, to conduct an analysis of system improvements, technology advances, and business models that would enable Austin Energy to more fully develop its capacity for the distributed generation of clean energy.

Attendees will be provided information about the project, followed by an invitation to participate in breakout sessions encouraging discussion and soliciting feedback about the project’s technology, system design, financial and economic development aspects.

The project is a partnership among the City of Austin, Austin Energy, University of Texas, the Greater Austin Chamber of Commerce and Environmental Defense Fund. The project has already garnered 11 corporate partnerships, including Dell Inc., IBM Corporation, Intel, Cisco Systems and others.

For a primer on just what a “smart grid” is, check out the following video.  Hope to see you at the meeting tomorrow!

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrcqA_cqRD8]

For more information on the Pecan Street Project, check out their YouTube channel and watch a couple of their videos.

Read Full Post »

While I’m still a little grumpy and out of sorts because the Lege didn’t pass any major energy efficiency legislation this session, I feel a little better after our office got some solar tint put on our windows on Thursday.  My office used to be a heat box.  The tint is really impressive.  I can feel the difference already.

Window Tint 6-4-09

Andy and Sarah's office, After & Before

Our utility bill will go down now, because we’re using less energy to keep the office cool.  It will also make our office more comfortable until we take the ultimate step in worker productivity: business hammocks.

If your business is in Austin, Austin Energy has a rebate for solar film or solar screens.  CPS Energy in San Antonio’s got ’em too.  Check to see if your utility offers a rebate.  If they don’t, maybe someone should tell them their customers want one, eh?

Read Full Post »

A message from Public Citizen, SEED Coalition, and Environment Texas:

Your help is needed right away to put energy efficiency into place!

Please call or email your city councilmember today to tell them you support STEP – the new energy efficiency program for San Antonio!

Tomorrow, San Antonio City Council will decide on how CPS Energy can fund their energy efficiency programs known as STEP (Save for Tomorrow Energy Plan). CPS Energy has set a goal to save 771 Megawatts of power through energy efficiency programs by 2020.  This would be one of the most aggressive efficiency goals in the country and we support it!

Energy efficiency is the cheapest energy resource CPS Energy can invest in.  By spending money on weatherizing low income homes and providing rebates for people to purchase high efficiency appliances, CPS avoids having to purchase more expensive energy that would cost everyone more. In addition, people who take advantage of these programs will begin saving money on their utility bills immediately, offsetting the cost of the programs!

Call or email your city councilmember today to tell them:

-I support energy efficiency and urge you to approve STEP

-I want public accountability for these programs through quarterly reporting including information such as the amount of money spent on and energy saved from each program

-I want to be sure that CPS spends the money they collect for STEP on energy efficiency and solar rebates, not for other purposes like coal or nuclear plants!

Mayor   Phil Hardberger (210) 207-7060   phardberger@sanantonio.gov

District 1   Mary Alice P. Cisneros (210) 207-7279   district1@sanantonio.gov

District 2   Sheila D. McNeil (210) 207-7278   district2@sanantonio.gov

District 3   Jennifer V. Ramos (210) 207-7064   district3@sanantonio.gov

District 4   Philip A. Cortez (210) 207-7281   district4@sanantonio.gov

District 5   Lourdes Galvan (210) 207-7043   district5@sanantonio.gov

District 6   Delicia Herrera (210) 207-7065 district6@sanantonio.gov

District 7   Justin Rodriguez (210) 207-7044 district7@sanantonio.gov

District 8   Diane G. Cibrian (210) 207-7086 district8@sanantonio.gov

District 9   Louis E. Rowe (210) 207-7325 district9@sanantonio.gov

District 10   John G. Clamp (210) 207-7276   district10@sanantonio.gov

If you don’t know who your councilmember is, find out here.

If you are able to, show up at City Hall tomorrow and talk to City Council about STEP.  It is agenda item #5 and should be up before lunchtime.  If you would like to speak, though, you have to sign up in person between 8-9 AM (114 W. Commerce).  If you can’t sign up in time, come by and be there for support!

Read Full Post »

Carson, California was recently on the path to becoming home to a pet-coke power plant, situated conveniently next door to the BP Carson refinery. The project, though touted as the “cleanest and greenest of energy plants possible,” would really have been an environmental and possibly a public safety nightmare. Luckily the project was scrapped, largely due to the activities of the Wilmington Coalition for a Safe Environment and other grassroots organizers.

Pet-coke, short for Petroleum Coke, is a petroleum by-product that can be burned to produce energy in a manner similar to coal. The proposed plant, which would have been built by BP America in conjunction with Edison International, would burn pet-coke as a means of producing energy — hydrogen. 90% of the carbon dioxide used would be pumped into the Wilmington oil field (This is a common method of enhanced oil recovery. The CO2 pushes the oil closer to the surface, making recovery more economic), which is a massive oil field stretching through Los Angeles county from San Pedro Bay to Long Beach. Needless to say, much of the land above this oil field is heavily populated with Los Angeles residents.

Recently I was able talk with Jesse Marquez, founder and Chief Director of Wilmington Coalition for a Safe Environment, about his victory over BP and Occidental and why this proposal was such a bad idea. (more…)

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »