Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Energy’ Category

Wind Energy – Happy Environment, Happy Wallet

Posted in Consumers, Energy, Renewables, Utilities, wind, tagged , , , , on March 3, 2014 |

In a recent blog post, I reported on the completion of a large amount of CREZ transmission lines – infrastructure that incentivizes the production of wind energy – here in Texas. While the discussion around wind energy is usually around environmental responsibility, it is important not to overlook some of the more salient effects of wind energy – namely, consumer savings.

Photo from Renewable Energy Magazine

Photo from Renewable Energy Magazine

A recent report by the American Wind Energy Association notes that states that get more than 7% of their energy from wind have seen electric rates go down by .37% over the last five years, whereas all other states have seen a 7.79% increase in electric rates. Luckily, Texas is one of these 11 states that get more than 7% of its energy from wind, along with Wyoming, Oregon, Oklahoma, Idaho, Colorado, Kansas, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota and Iowa.

There’s still more good news to come – as more wind develops in Texas, your electric bill could be lowered even more. Some reports show that when wind provides 14% of electricity, prices drop 10%, and when it reaches 24%, prices decline 15% .

Wind’s not just good for the environment, it’s good for your wallet, too.

Read Full Post »

Fracking Boom Pours Toxic Cloud Over South Texans

Posted in Air Quality, Climate Change, Energy, Fracking, Global Warming, Health, natural gas, Safety, TCEQ, Toxics, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , on March 1, 2014 |

Oil drilling site, with pond for fracking water, Cotulla, TX Photo by Al Braden

Oil drilling site, w/ pond for fracking water, Cotulla, TX
Photo by Al Braden

The Eagle Ford Shale play in south Texas is the 400-mile-long area that has become home to one of the country’s biggest energy booms in the past six years. The thousands of oil and gas wells producing in the region have brought dangerous air pollution to residents.

The Center for Public Integrity, InsideClimate News and The Weather Channel released a new exposé titled, “Fracking the Eagle Ford Shale: Big Oil & Bad Air on the Texas Prairie,” last week. Their eight month investigation reveals the dangers that come with fracking in the form of toxic chemicals released into the air as a result of the complicit culture of the government of Texas. In case you just want to read the highlights of the report, the team was nice enough to summarize their major findings:

  • Texas’ air monitoring system is so flawed that the state knows almost nothing about the extent of the pollution in the Eagle Ford. Only five permanent air monitors are installed in the 20,000-square-mile region, and all are at the fringes of the shale play, far from the heavy drilling areas where emissions are highest.
  • Anadarko Brasada Cyro Gas Plant, Phase 1 of 3, Cotulla, TX. Photo by Al Braden

    Anadarko Brasada Cyro Gas Plant, Phase 1 of 3, Cotulla, TX.
    Photo by Al Braden

    Thousands of oil and gas facilities, including six of the nine production sites near the Buehrings’ house, are allowed to self-audit their emissions without reporting them to the state. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), which regulates most air emissions, doesn’t even know some of these facilities exist. An internal agency document acknowledges that the rule allowing this practice “[c]annot be proven to be protective.”

  • Companies that break the law are rarely fined. Of the 284 oil and gas industry-related complaints filed with the TCEQ by Eagle Ford residents between Jan. 1, 2010, and Nov. 19, 2013, only two resulted in fines despite 164 documented violations. The largest was just $14,250. (Pending enforcement actions could lead to six more fines).
  • The Texas legislature has cut the TCEQ’s budget by a third since the Eagle Ford boom began, from $555 million in 2008 to $372 million in 2014. At the same time, the amount allocated for air monitoring equipment dropped from $1.2 million to $579,000.
  • The Eagle Ford boom is feeding an ominous trend: A 100 percent statewide increase in unplanned, toxic air releases associated with oil and gas production since 2009. Known as emission events, these releases are usually caused by human error or faulty equipment.
  • Residents of the mostly rural Eagle Ford counties are at a disadvantage even in Texas, because they haven’t been given air quality protections, such as more permanent monitors, provided to the wealthier, more suburban Barnett Shale region near Dallas-Fort Worth.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Where Are We Going, Austin Energy?

Posted in Austin Energy, Energy, Renewables, solar, tagged , , , , on February 27, 2014 |

Austin Energy Ratepayers Rally for a Transition to Affordable Renewable Energy Photo by Al Braden

Austin Energy Ratepayers Rally for an Accelerated Transition to Affordable Renewable Energy
Photo by Al Braden

Read this post, then click here if you want to submit comments online to Austin Energy.

With 2 stakeholder meetings behind us and the final one ahead this afternoon, a lot of people are wondering what the purpose of of updating the Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan is if we aren’t going to update the goals in it.

To be fair, Austin Energy has done a decent job of providing information about how it is progressing with achieving current goals, and giving people an opportunity to share their views and ask questions.

What is so disconcerting though, is that Austin Energy has attempted to craft the whole update to exclude what is arguably the most important elements of the Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan – setting new goals for carbon reduction and renewable energy.  We’re told we can submit proposals that will be analyzed and considered for some future update, but that there’s not enough time to update those goals now.  Not enough time?  We’re only 2 months in to 2014 and Austin Energy has been talking about this update since mid 2013.  Let’s hope Austin Energy is more nimble than its giving itself credit for.

2014-02-26-Front-Page-Austin American-Statesman

Read the excellent coverage we got in the Austin American-Statesman yesterday.

When it comes to solar energy, this idea that no new goals will be set is especially frustrating because the issue has been postponed for 2 years now.  Increasing Austin Energy’s solar goal was on the table during the 2012 rate case, but Austin Energy wanted the issue studied.  So City Council established the Austin Local Solar Advisory Committee (LSAC) to study options for a way forward for solar in Austin.  The LSAC recommended several changes, including doubling the 2020 solar goal to 400 megawatts.   It’s important to note that the LSAC analysis showed that increasing the goal would actually result in net savings to Austin Energy ratepayers, as well as a net of $300 million in economic benefits to the Austin area.  When we tried to get that recommendation adopted in 2013, Austin Energy said it would be best taken up in the 2014 Generation Plan update, so City Council split the difference and passed a resolution recommending that the goal be adopted.  Now Austin Energy says that it doesn’t intend to update any of it’s goals as part of this process.  I’m starting to feel like the kid in the car on a long road trip and mom and dad just keep saying “we’re almost there.”  After you hear that a few times, you just stop believing.

When it comes to the overall renewable energy goal, Austin Energy’s resistance to increasing it as part of this process makes even less sense for 2 reasons.  First, renewable energy has become cheap energy.  Wind is our cheapest energy option and solar is now competitive with natural gas, but without the risks of rising fuel costs and pollution.  Second, Austin Energy has contracts that will allow it to meet it’s current 35% renewable energy goal 4 years early in 2016.  They should build on that success and expand the goal to 50% for 2020 and 60% for 2024.

For anyone who isn’t stuck at work or class from 1pm to 3pm today, I suggest going to the last of Austin Energy’s 3 scheduled stakeholder meetings.  Just don’t let them box you into a corner where the important issues are off the table.  Tell the leadership and staff there that you want all of the goals updated over the next few months.

If you can’t go, then click here to submit comments online to Austin Energy.

Read Full Post »

I Bet You Actually Care About Austin Energy’s Generation Plan

Posted in Air Quality, Austin Energy, Climate Change, Coal, Coal Plants, drought, Energy, Fracking, geothermal, Global Warming, green jobs, Health, Jobs, natural gas, Renewables, solar, Water, wind, tagged , , , , on February 25, 2014 |

Updating the the Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan to 2020 to become the Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan to 2024 probably doesn’t sound super exciting, but there’s almost certainly some aspect of the choices that will soon be made on your behalf that you care about.

IMG_48691. Climate Change: I’m not going to try to convince anyone reading this that our planet’s climate is changing and that humans are largely responsible for that change.  Nor am I going to try to convince you that those changes are going to be largely detrimental to human prosperity.  But if you already recognize those two basic truths, then you will definitely want to listen up.  Austin Energy is proposing to not only run Austin’s portion of the Fayette coal plant until 2025, but also to dramatically increase its use of natural gas by adding a new 800 megawatt gas plant to its energy portfolio.  That’s bigger than Austin’s portion of Fayette.  And although natural gas emits less carbon dioxide per kilowatt hour of energy production than burning coal, once the substantial impact of the roughly 3% of gas that leaks into the atmosphere during extraction, processing and transportation is accounted for, natural gas is almost as harmful to the climate as coal.  That’s because the primary component of natural gas, methane, is 87 times more powerful of a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide over 20 years.  Although many people focus on the 100 year time frame when talking about climate change, we can’t afford to ignore our more immediate future.  Central Texas has already experienced its share of climate impacts over the past few years in the form of drought, wildfires and floods.  We must stop those impacts from worsening at a greater rate than they already will be.  Natural gas isn’t going to save us.  Even without the massive problem of leaking methane, burning gas instead of coal only decreases our climate impact by about half, so it’s not a long term solution anyway – the best it could have been was a stopgap.  Instead of investing in infrastructure that won’t get us where we need to be, we can make better decisions now.

Attend one of Austin Energy’s stakeholder meetings this week and ask the staff to consider the full climate impacts of energy sources.

2. Jobs: Developing renewable energy sources creates 3 times as many jobs as developing fossil fuel energy sources per dollar invested.  Whereas a large chunk of the cost connected to a coal plan or a gas plant is for the coal and gas, the wind and sun are free.  So, instead of paying for the privilege of burning a limited resource, we can pay people to harness the energy from free and unlimited resources.

Across the U.S., solar energy jobs grew 20% from 2012 to 2013, compared to average job growth across all industries of 1.9%.  A large percentage of that growth was in Texas, but Texas still ranks 44th in solar jobs per capita.  Increasing Austin Energy’s solar goal will bring more jobs to Texas, but it’s increasing the local solar goal that will have the most impact on local job creation.  The Austin Local Solar Advisory Commission unanimously recommended that Austin Energy’s solar goal for 2020 be increased from 200 megawatts (MW) to 400 MW.  It also recommended that at least half of that solar development be local and at least half of that local solar be customer controlled (that’s what you see on residential and business rooftops and yards).  According to the LSAC’s calculations done using the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) Jobs and Economic Development Impact (JEDI) model, the $60 million it would take to develop that amount of local solar would bring the Austin area a net of $300 million in local economic benefits – wages, taxes, etc.  If Austin Energy adopts policies to give preference to local companies who hire local workers, our community can benefit even more.  On the other hand, we are currently sending $80 million to Montana each year for the coal we burn in the Fayette coal plant.

Tell Austin Energy that you support growing local jobs by increasing our solar goals, including the local and customer owned solar goals.

3. Water: If you live in central Texas, I don’t need to tell you that water is a huge issue – in fact it’s just a big issue for Texas that the Legislature, with voter approval appropriated $2 billion dollars to fund water projects, with 20% of those funds to be used on water conservation efforts.  We can’t make it rain more, so we are going to have to make some choices about what we want to use water for.  The Fayette coal plant, which Austin Energy owns one third of, needs about 5 billion gallons of water per year to operate.  And lest you start thinking natural gas plants are the answer, know that over 39 billion gallons of water was used in fracking jobs in Texas between January 2011 and May 2013.  Producers in the Eagle Ford Shale play are especially wasteful, using an average of 4.4 million gallons of water per well.  That’s water that can’t be used for domestic, commercial, industrial, agricultural, or ecosystem uses.

Tell Austin Energy to focus investment on drought proof energy sources like wind and solar.

4. Health: Air pollution from burning coal and extracting natural gas are taking a real toll on human health in Texas.  The Fayette coal plant is responsible for over $55.5 million in health impacts from air pollution.  Those impacts include asthma attacks, chronic bronchitis, heart attacks and the associated hospital visits and deaths.  Even so, Austin Energy has proposed running its portion of Fayette until 2025.

Lack of regulation over the natural gas industry, which has operations strewn across vast areas has resulted in a tragic disregard for human well being.  If you haven’t already, read this excellent piece of investigative journalism about how your fellow Texans are being assaulted with toxic chemicals in the Eagle Ford Shale area.  Instead of building a large new gas plant to drive up demand for dangerous fracking, Austin Energy should focus on growing its renewable energy portofolio with more wind and solar and perhaps some geothermal energy.

Air pollution is much more than an environmental issue – it’s a public health issue.  That’s why you find medical professionals and health advocates supporting a transition to clean energy.

Sign up for one of Austin Energy’s stakeholder meetings and ask them to give up their plans for a giant new gas plant and to examine more options for retiring the Fayette coal plant in an affordable way.

5. Affordable Energy: Wind and solar energy are competitive with coal and natural gas already.  Meanwhile, electricity from coal plants is going to get more expensive because of various regulations to limit pollution.  Natural gas prices are low now, but have fluctuated greatly over time, making a big bet on natural gas risky.  When natural gas prices go up, Austin Energy raises our fuel charge to recover those costs.  Since affordable wind and solar are available now and can assure us a predictable price for 10-20 years, why would we not make those energy sources our priority?  Austin Energy has done a great job getting good wind contracts to keep customer rates low and is set to achieve its 35% renewable energy goal 4 years early in 2016.

Tell Austin Energy to keep up its momentum by expanding the renewable energy goal to 50% for 2020 and 60% by 2024.

Take Action:

Austin Energy is holding 3 stakeholder meetings to gather public input on the Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan update to 2024.

  • Tuesday, February 25: 10 am – 12 pm (noon)
  • Tuesday, February 25: 6 pm – 8 pm
  • Thursday, February 27: 1 pm – 3 pm

This is your chance to help determine how the money you pay for your electric bills is invested by our publicly owned utility.

Please sign up to attend one of the meetings.

Read Full Post »

Natural Gas Climate Change Impact Almost as Bad as Coal Because of Methane Leakage

Posted in Climate Change, Energy, Fracking, Global Warming, natural gas, tagged , , , , , , , on February 23, 2014 |

While we’ve all grown accustomed to seeing the words “natural”, “healthy” and “environmentally-friendly” thrown around in advertisements for a variety of consumer goods, it’s important to remember that household items are not the only things capable of being greenwashed – case in point, natural gas.

The word “natural” has been used to connote things such as ‘green’, ‘healthy’, ‘non-toxic’. Many people’s cursory understanding of natural gas is that if it’s “natural”, it must be good, right? Unfortunately the truth about natural gas is more complicated. While it is true that natural gas emits far less CO2 than coal upon combustion, there are a host of other ‘fine-print’ problems that come along with the switch, most notably, fugitive emissions.

Leaky pipes and valves allow methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, to escape into the atmosphere. Photo by Kevin Moloney, NYT

Methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, escapes from wells and leaky pipes and valves into the atmosphere.
Photo by Kevin Moloney, NYT.

Fugitive emissions are the emissions not intended to take place and that usually result from pressurized equipment leaks. While these leaks are relatively tiny, when expanded to a large enough scale the amount of methane being leaked into the atmosphere can have a large impact on climate. While the EPA originally reported that average leakage rate in natural gas production was somewhere around 1.5%, a collaborative study by scientist from several universities and government agencies released this past October revealed that the figure should be much closer to 3%. Even worse, there have been reports of methane leakage upwards of 12% at some production sites.

Many climate change mitigation plans focus on reducing CO2 emissions, but methane and its effects should not be overlooked. The IPCC has reported that over a 100-year period, methane is 35 times more potent of a heat-trapping gas than CO2. When looking at the effects of methane over 20 years, this figure jumps to 87. Suddenly, that comparatively small amount of methane being leaked out of wells, pipes and valves is incredibly important. In other words, 1 ton of methane being released into the atmosphere has the same heat-trapping effect over a 20 year period as releasing 87 tons of CO2.

20 Year Climate Impact of Natural Gas vs CoalWhile the CO2 emissions from burning natural gas are about half what is produced by burning coal plant to produce the same amount of power, after accounting for fugitive emissions and converting leaked methane into CO2 equivalent (using the IPCC 87x factor referenced earlier), natural gas climate change impact is almost as bad as coal.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Enbridge’s Toxic Record is Keeping its Tar Sands Pipeline Permit Tied Up at State Department

Posted in Climate Change, Energy, Global Warming, pipelines, Tarsands, tagged , , , , , , , , , , on February 21, 2014 |

Enbridge storage tank - photo from Dan Riedlhuber, Reuters

Enbridge storage tank – photo by Dan Riedlhuber, Reuters

A second Canadian pipeline company has its permit tied up in the State Department’s approval process. Enbridge, Canada’s largest pipeline company, is trying to expand its Alberta Clipper line, but is now facing delays.

Enbridge started up its first phase of the line, which has a capacity of 450,000 barrels per day (bpd), in 2009, after obtaining a U.S. federal permit from the State Department. Enbridge is now looking to expand its capacity, but the State Department says it needs to do further environmental analysis before granting Enbridge the go ahead to expand its Alberta to Wisconsin pipeline.

Enbridge is not looking to build another pipeline; rather, they are trying to increase capacity by 120,000 bpd for a total of 570,000 bpd. Beyond that, they would like to expand from 570,000 bpd to 800,000 bpd in the near future, which is almost as much tar sands oil as the proposed Keystone XL would carry.

“Obviously, things take longer in this environment that we’re in. I don’t think we want to draw any conclusions about the political environment. It’s not something that we can control. What we control is the fullness of our application,” CEO Al Monaco told reporters and analysts on a conference call to discuss the company’s fourth-quarter results, which included a net loss. “In this case, this is a fairly routine matter. The pipeline’s already in the ground, so we’re hoping that we move this along as quickly as possible.”

Another Canadian pipeline company, TransCanada, has been seeking U.S. approval of their Keystone XL pipeline since 2008. The Keystone XL would cut across the heartland of America bring up to 830,000 bpd of Canadian tar sands into the U.S. The Keystone XL has become highly politicized with many environmental groups lobbying and taking direct action against the pipeline.

Although Enbridge has managed to escape the same level of scrutiny as their competitor TransCanada, they have still faced opposition from activists in Canada and Michigan.

Enbridge is also the company behind the largest on-shore oil spill in U.S. history. Enbridge spilled more than one million gallons of diluted bitumen (dilbit, or tar sands oil) into Talmadge Creek in Marshall, MI, which then flowed 30 miles downstream into the Kalamazoo River in the late summer of 2010. Enbridge has spent nearly a billion dollars trying to clean up the spill over the last three years, but latest reports confirm that there is still oil in the Kalamazoo River.

Enbridge also owns several other tar sands pipelines aroung the country, including the Seaway pipeline system in Texas. Enbridge is currently expanding the Seaway pipeline system by the process of twinning. The new twin Seaway line will be a 30-inch diameter pipeline, and havea capacity of 450,000 bpd. Company officials are expecting a service date in 2014.

Read Full Post »

World’s Largest Solar Thermal Power Project Creates Clean Energy and Contributes to a Competitive Global Economy

Posted in Energy, Renewables, solar, tagged , , , , , , on February 19, 2014 |

Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System

1 of 3 Power Towers at the 392 MW Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System in California

Late last week, NRG Energy, Inc. announced that Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System is in operation after six years of construction.  Located in the Mojave Desert, 300,000 software-controlled mirrors and three 450-foot towers at full capacity can produce up to 392 megawatts of solar power.  That will provide solar electricity for 140,000 California homes and will avoid 400,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide per year. The Ivanpah project received a guaranteed loan of $1.6billion from the US department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office, which became a joint investment made up of NRG Solar, Google and BrightSource Energy.

“Cleantech innovations such as Ivanpah are critical to establishing America’s leadership in large-scale, clean-energy technology that will keep our economy globally competitive over the next several decades,” said Tom Doyle, president, NRG Solar. Ivanpah accounts for nearly 30 percent of all thermal energy currently operational in the US and is the largest solar project in the world. This solar power tower technology is the first Ivanpah project to be used to produce electricity for company’s signed contracts with PG&E and Southern California Edison.

Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System - Credit BrightSource Energy Flickr

Heliostats at Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System
Photo from BrightSource Energy Flickr

Solar thermal power plants use solar mirrors to heat water in boilers thus produce steam to turn the electricity generating turbines. This creates usable electricity by using large-scale magnification. The technology used in the Ivanpah plant comes from Bright Source and includes 173,500 heliostats that follow the sun’s trajectory, solar field integration software and a solar receiver steam generator.

Although solar thermal plants do require the use of water, as opposed to solar photovoltaic panels, this project utilizes dry cooling technology, which vastly reduces the amount of water needed. As Energy Secretary, Ernest Moniz says, “This entire facility will use roughly the same amount of water as two holes at the nearby golf course.”

Ivanpah produces solar power on a large scale rather than on rooftops.  While some solar thermal power plants can store the sun’s thermal energy in the form of molten salt to produce energy when the sun isn’t out this project does not store energy after dark. BrightSource does plan to incorporate thermal storage in future next-generation designs.

Read Full Post »

Take Action: Last Chance to Submit Comment to State Department to Oppose Keystone XL

Posted in Climate Change, Diesel, Energy, Global Warming, green jobs, Gulf Coast Ports, Jobs, pipelines, Property Rights, Safety, Tarsands, tagged , , , , , , , , , on February 12, 2014 |

KXL Climate ChangeWith the release of the State Department’s Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) on the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, there has been a lot of buzz about the project. The report concluded that Keystone XL could create carbon pollution equivalent to nearly six million cars, or eight coal-fired power plants. Last Week the State Department began accepting comments from the public, and with only a few weeks (until Mar 07, 2014 11:59 PM ET) left the need for citizens to weigh in has never been more urgent. Now is the time to tell Secretary of State John Kerry that this dirty pipeline is not in our national interest.

This is our final opportunity to officially weigh in on the decision. Submit a comment right now to tell the Obama Administration that the “game over for the climate” Keystone XL pipeline is NOT in our national interest.

Here are some facts to consider including in your comment to Secretary Kerry and the State Department:

  • The evidence is clear that Keystone XL could increase production levels of tar sands oil in Alberta, and therefore significantly add to carbon emissions. The massive investment would lock us into dependence on this dirty fuel for decades, exacerbating carbon pollution just when we need to go in the other direction.
  • Beyond the effects on our climate, this dangerous pipeline would also put the water supply of millions of Americans at risk, including the precious Ogallala Aquifer, Platte and Niobrara rivers, and hundreds of individual families’ wells. After a year in which many communities were harmed by spills from existing pipelines, we cannot allow any more of the dirtiest, most toxic oil on earth to spill into our lands and waterways.
  • The jobs numbers touted by industry are exaggerated. Oil industry lobbyist and pro-pipeline politicians claim that the Keystone XL would create 20,000 to half a million jobs, but these jobs numbers are grossly exaggerated. Construction of the Keystone XL pipeline will only create about 3,900 jobs over a two year period, and after that the project would only provide jobs for 35 permanent employees and 15 temporary contractors.
  • The Keystone XL is an export pipeline. According to presentations to investors, Gulf Coast refiners plan to refine the cheap Canadian crude supplied by the pipeline into diesel and other products for export to Europe and Latin America. Proceeds from these exports are earned tax-free. Much of the fuel refined from the pipeline’s heavy crude oil will never reach U.S. drivers’ tanks. Therefore, not reducing gas prices for Americans.

This is our last chance to voice concerns to the State Department before the public comment period ends on March 7. We need to get our message across to Secretary Kerry, because what he says could be one of the biggest determining factors in President Obama’s decision.

Submit your comment: Keystone XL is NOT in our national interest.

In addition to submitting your comment electronically, comments may also be mailed directly to:

U.S. Department of State
Bureau of Energy Resources, Room 4843
Attn: Keystone XL Public Comments
2201 C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20520

#NoKXL

Read Full Post »

Texas CREZ Project Completed and Already Responsible for Expanded Wind Energy Development

Posted in Energy, Renewables, wind, tagged , , , , , , , , on February 10, 2014 |

“CREZ will turn out to be the most visionary thing this state has ever done electricity-wise,” predicts Jeff Clark, executive director at the Wind Coalition, a regional partner of the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA).

201-02-06 - Wikipedia

Wind turbines in west Texas

Only a few days ago, the final segment of Texas’s $6.8 billion, 3,600 mile Competitive Renewable Energy Zone (CREZ) transmission build-out was completed. The project, which has been in the works for over eight years, could signal the beginning of another era of wind power development in Texas.

In 2008, the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT) identified five competitive renewable energy zones (CREZs) – geographic areas ideal for wind farms – in the Lonestar State . However, in order to get the energy generated in these CREZs to the areas that need energy most (Dallas-Fort Worth, Austin, Houston and San Antonio), transmission lines needed to be built. Instead of waiting for wind developers to come to Texas, and then begin the multi-year, multi-billion dollar project, the PUCT decided to put in the lines beforehand to entice developers to take advantage of the already existing infrastructure.

The new transmission lines, which will be able to transmit up to 18,500 megawatts of power across the state, will increase the wind capacity in Texas by over 50%, which will be three times as much as any other state in the nation. The large amount of potential wind energy in Texas, along with the new infrastructure, has already resulted in more wind developers coming to Texas, including a project in the panhandle by Pattern Energy Group that broke ground back in October.

All in all, the completion of the Texas CREZ Project is a huge step forward to moving our state towards absolutely clean, renewable energy. Instead of waiting for developers, PUCT has been proactive in creating a better future for our state.
(more…)

Read Full Post »

Up to 82,000 Tons of Toxic Coal Ash Spill Into North Carolina River

Posted in Climate Change, Coal, Coal Plants, Energy, Global Warming, Health, Right to know, Safety, Toxics, Water, tagged , , , , , , on February 6, 2014 |

Duke Energy said on Monday afternoon that between 50,000 to 82,000 tons of coal ash and up to 27 million gallons of water were released from a pond at its retired coal fired power plant in Eden, NC, and spilled into the Dan River.

2014-02-04 Re-enforcing and patching the berm to the ash basin at the Duke Energy Dan River Steam Station in Eden, N.C.Joseph Rodriquez - News & Record

Re-enforcing and patching the berm to the ash basin at the Duke Energy Dan River Steam Station in Eden, N.C.
Photo by Joseph Rodriquez, News & Record

Duke said a 48-inch stormwater pipe beneath the unlined 27-acre ash pond broke Sunday afternoon, and tens of thousands of tons of coal ash and water drained into the pipe before spilling into the Dan River. Duke Energy says that the dam along the river remains secure and has not been affected.

Duke did not issue a press release to inform the public until Monday afternoon, more than 24 hours after the spill occurred.  Duke said it notified local emergency managers and the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources on Sunday afternoon. Duke says the leak has been temporarily stopped and they are working on a permanent solution. Duke has 14 coal fired power plants in the state, seven of which have been retired.

The closest community downstream from the spill is Danville, VA, which takes its water from the Dan River only six miles from the pond. Officials are saying that water samples confirm that the water leaving the city’s treatment facility meets public health standards.

“All water leaving our treatment facility has met public health standards,” said Barry Dunkley, division director of water and wastewater treatment for Danville Utilities. “We do not anticipate any problems going forward in treating the water we draw from the Dan River.”

Coal ash, the toxic waste material left after coal is burned, contains arsenic, mercury, lead, and more than a dozen other heavy metals. Studies from the EPA have found that people living within one mile of unlined coal ash ponds can have a 1 in 50 risk of cancer.

This coal ash spill is the third-largest in U.S. history. In 2008, more than a billion gallons of coal ash slurry spilled at the Tennessee Valley Authority’s Kingston coal plant in Tennessee.

The Dan River coal ash spill is the latest in a string of industrial accidents that have jeopardized the environment and health of citizens downstream.

Read Full Post »

Rally Tonight to Protest Keystone XL

Posted in Climate Change, Energy, Global Warming, pipelines, Property Rights, Tarsands, tagged , , , on February 3, 2014 |

Stop Keystone XL ObamaNow is the time to stand up and tell President Obama that the Keystone XL pipeline fails his climate test and he must reject it. People from across the country have mobilized to plan more than 230 vigils in 47 states to protest Keystone XL.  Join us tonight, Feb. 3rd, in Austin.

With the release of the State Department’s final environmental impact statement last Friday, this is a vital moment to speak out against the Keystone XL pipeline. A 30-day public comment period begins on February 5, 2014 and will close on March 7, 2014. Let’s do all we can to make our voices heard.

What: Tell President Obama to reject Keystone XL
Where: Pickle Federal Building, 300 East 8th Street, Austin, TX (click here for MAP)
When: Tonight – Monday, February 3rd, 6 PM
RSVP

If we do not stop it, Keystone XL pipeline will cut through the breadbasket of America and transport 830,000 barrels of tar sands diluted bitumen (tar sands) everyday for 50 years or more. In addition to the climate impact it will have, the pipeline will ruin some of the last habitat for endangered species like the whooping crane and swift fox. It will cross the Ogallala Aquifer, which provides water to farms in eight states, accounting for a quarter of the nation’s cropland, as well as drinking water for millions of people. For the people living along the route of the pipeline it is all risk and no reward.

This is our moment to say “No Keystone XL.” Please join us tonight. Be sure to bring candles, signs and noise-makers.

The No KXL protest vigils are organized by CREDO, Rainforest Action Network, and the Sierra Club, and supported by 350.org, The Other 98%, Center for Biological Diversity, Oil Change International, Bold Nebraska, Energy Action Coalition, Natural Resources Defense Council, The Hip Hop Caucus, Overpass Light Brigade, Environmental Action, League of Conservation Voters, Waterkeeper Alliance, Friends of the Earth, Forest Ethics, Forecast the Facts, Public Citizen, Environmental Texas and others.

#NoKXL

Read Full Post »

President Obama Tries to Have it Both Ways in State of the Union

Posted in Climate Change, Coal, Energy, Fracking, Global Warming, natural gas, pipelines, Renewables, solar, Tarsands, tagged , , , , , , , on February 1, 2014 |

During Tuesday’s State of the Union address, President Obama pledged to have it both ways on climate change and energy – taking action on climate change while touting an “all of the above” energy strategy.

Obama SOTU - credit Larry Downing,AP

President Barack Obama delivers the State of Union address before a joint session of Congress in the House chamber Tuesday, Jan. 28, 2014.
Larry Downing/AP

On the one hand, President Obama renewed his commitment to reducing carbon emissions and battling climate change. But on the other hand, he pushed for the expansion of domestic fossil fuel extraction and pledged his support for natural gas as part of his “all of the above” energy plan. He said, “The ‘all the above’ energy strategy I announced a few years ago is working, and today America is closer to energy independence than we have been in decades.”

The president threw his weight behind natural gas, saying, “If extracted safely, it’s the bridge fuel that can power our economy with less of the carbon pollution that causes climate change.” He promised to “cut red tape” to spur the construction of natural gas fired factories and fueling stations for cars and trucks.

Even though natural gas emits half as much carbon dioxide as coal when combusted, the primary component, methane, is also released into the atmosphere during production. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas and traps significantly more heat in the short term than carbon dioxide. New reports are concluding that fugitive methane emissions from extraction, processing and transportation could be much worse than previously thought. An article from OilPrice.com says, “If the latest figures are accurate, it could mean that the greenhouse gas advantage that natural gas has over coal could be a mirage.”

The president also gave a shout-out to solar energy, saying, “It’s not just oil and natural gas production that’s booming; we’re becoming a global leader in solar, too.” “The shift to a cleaner energy economy won’t happen overnight, and it will require tough choices along the way,” said Obama. “But the debate is settled. Climate change is a fact. And when our children’s children look us in the eye and ask if we did all we could to leave them a safer, more stable world, with new sources of energy, I want us to be able to say yes, we did.”

Although the president has made tremendous strides to address climate change, his administration is still encouraging the extraction of coal, oil and natural gas from our public lands and water. (Click here to see a report from the EIA: Sales of fossil fuels from Federal and Indian Lands) Fossil fuel industries are also looking to expand coal and liquid natural gas (LNG) export terminals. All of this on top of recent proposals to end a 40 year ban on crude exports extracted in America.

Sometime this year the proposed Keystone XL pipeline will come across the president’s desk. If approved, the Keystone XL pipeline will provide tar sands producers in Canada a supply line to refineries on the Texas Gulf Coast and an export strategy. Although the president made no mention of the pipeline in his speech, he will have to make a decision on the project later this year. He has said his decision will be based on whether or not the Keystone XL pipeline “significantly exacerbates” carbon pollution and is in the national interest. On Friday, the State Department released its environmental assessment that says the Keystone XL pipeline would cause minimal climate impact because the tar sands would get to market some other way without the Keystone XL pipeline – a strikingly fatalist position.

Both sides of the president showed up on Tuesday to address the nation. His “all of the above” energy side showed up to cheerlead the fossil fuel industry, while at the same time tossing a bone to environmentalists, pulling from his Georgetown Speech he made last summer. President Obama’s climate legacy still has yet to be shaped, and if wants be viewed by future generations as the president that made a firm commitment to fighting climate change, then he needs to quit talking out of both sides of his mouth.
(more…)

Read Full Post »

West Virginia Chemical Spill Rekindles Concern Over Lax Chemical Regulations

Posted in Coal, Energy, Health, Toxics, tagged , , , , , on January 15, 2014 |

The chemical spill into West Virginia’s Elk River, which left more than 300,000 people without water for over five days (many are still without water), comes in a state with a long history of lax regulatory standards over the coal and chemical industries that form a major part of its economy. The chemical spill is yet another example of how lax regulations are setting the stage for disasters, and the concerns are being felt all the way in Texas.

Photo Credit: www.flickr.com/photos/iwasaround

The chemical at the center of this disaster is 4-methylcyclohexane methanol, also known as MCHM, and it is used to wash coal. About 7,500 gallons of the chemical leaked from a storage tank, owned by Freedom Industries, and into the Elk River. The leak happened about one mile upstream from the West Virginia American water plant, which supplies drinking water to the local population. State officials are urging citizens to use bottled water for drinking, washing and cooking. Authorities say that at least ten people have been admitted into three hospitals, and 169 patients have been released from emergency rooms. Although MCHM is considered toxic, it is not lethal to humans. The effects on humans range from skin irritation, nausea, vomiting or wheezing.

West Virginia Governor Earl Ray Tomblin declared a state of emergency for nine counties, including the state capital of Charleston. President Obama also issued an emergency declaration. West Virginia has received water from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for its residents. It may be days before the water is safe enough for anything other than flushing a toilet or firefighting. Authorities are waiting until the chemical level meets 1 part per million, set by the federal Center for Disease Control and Prevention, before they lift the ban.

The coal and chemical industries, which make up a large part of West Virginia’s economy, exercise great political influence in the state. They have long railed against federal safety, health and environmental standards. The West Virginia chemical spill is yet another example of what can go wrong when you have an inept polity that is influenced by big business. Texas also suffers from a similar affliction as West Virginia, except in addition to coal, we also have the petroleum and chemical industries.

Texas has had its fair share of industry related disasters. An explosion last April at the West Fertilizer Co. in West, Texas killed 15 people. In 2005, an explosion at the BP refinery in Texas City killed 15 workers and left 170 others injured.

With the West Virginia chemical spill making national headlines, let us remember that this kind of disaster is preventable. What we need is stronger safety standards and improved enforcement to make for a safer environment.

Sign our petition asking EPA to improve chemical safety and protect our communities.

Read Full Post »

Fines, Follow Fun Filled Freeze

Posted in Coal, Energy, Global Warming, Right to know, Utilities, tagged , , , , , on December 18, 2013 |

Remember sitting at home during February 2 of 2011 as the temperatures dropped and the power kept getting turned off. As millions of Texas sat in the cold and dark Luminant, Texas largest power generator, wasn’t able to get its power plants running along with other generators.

Luminant Energy Company, LLC’s, recently was fined $750,000 as part of a settlement agreement with the Public Utility Commission of Texas stemming from the alleged failure of several Luminant power generating units on February 2, 2011 (when record low temperatures caused a spike in power demand and rolling blackouts were implemented throughout the state).

That February other generation companies saw the cold front coming and got their plants up hot and running keeping this cold snap from being an even bigger disaster than it was.

In ERCOT the state’s power grid operator generation companies are under an obligation to run their power plants and a $750,000 fine in an almost $30 billion dollar market is not much of a fine at all.

Now things are looking dark, gloomy and a bit chilly for EFH Luminants parent company. In November 2013, Energy Future Holdings (EFH) made a decision not to file for bankruptcy saying they believe the company can reach a deal with creditors next spring to avoid a contentious court fight. But with a looming balloon debt payment of $3.8 billion next fall, and a subsidiary of EFH, things are stacking up against the beleaguered Dallas based company.

Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) member and Sierra Club Conservation Director, Cyrus Reed weighed in on this development in a statement, saying, “Hopefully, this rather modest fine will send a message to Luminant and other coal and gas generators that when they are paid money by ERCOT to be available in times of emergency — such as the freeze of February 2011 — they must be available. This means utility companies like Luminant must properly maintain their generating units so that breakdowns and emergencies don’t take place when people need electricity the most, such as times of extreme temperatures.”

David Power, Deputy Director of the Texas office of Public Citizen and also an ERCOT member said, “As ERCOT and the PUC consider further changes to ancillary services and potentially to the wholesale energy market, they must make sure that those paid for performance can realistically perform, or face stiff penalties. Texas doesn’t need new, expensive power plants to meet our needs and power our economy, but we do need responsible utilities following the letter of the law and taking responsibility for its assets. What did perform well in both in February and August 2011 was demand response, a method of reducing electricity demand, by large and small industrial and commercial entities.  As Texas considers changes to our market we should prioritize resources like demand response that we can depend on.”

For it’s part, a representative of Luminant said in an email to FierceEnergy that “with this settlement, Luminant resolves all alleged violations of ERCOT protocols and PUC rules from the cold weather event in 2011.The agreement represents an amicable settlement of disputed issues in which Luminant admits no violations.”The email continues, “The severe unprecedented cold in February, 2011 was a trying yet learning experience for ERCOT, the PUC, state lawmakers, electric generators and transmission and distribution companies. Some 225 generation resources in ERCOT, more than 40 percent of the total generation, experienced a trip, failed start or derate. Since 2011, Luminant has joined other generators, electric transmission firms and state agencies to take measures to better prepare for future extreme weather.”

But trouble just seems to keep cropping up:

A prior and unrelated Department of Justice Clean Air Act complaint that was recently unsealed alleged that Luminant made major modifications to Units 1, 2, and 3 at their Martin Lake coal plant in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009 and continues to operate the plant without installing pollution controls for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. The complaint also alleges that Luminant has improperly withheld information from the government requested by EPA under Section 114(a) of the Clean Air Act.

According to the claims, Luminant made “major modifications” at its Big Brown and Martin Lake coal plants that increased sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions without updating air pollution permits or installing pollution safeguards. The Clean Air Act requires plants to obtain permits and install modern pollution controls before making modifications that will increase emissions.

In regard to the DOJ lawsuit, Luminant made this statement via email to FierceEnergy: “There’s no change in our position.  We firmly believe that we have complied with all requirements of the Clean Air Act for the Big Brown and Martin Lake Power Plants and our other generation facilities and look forward to proving this in court.”

The company contends that the complaint has not been unsealed, but appears to be playing a game of semantics, saying, “The DOJ simply filed a version of its complaint with information that we agree can be public.”

This prime example of Texas business just leaves us out in the cold.

Read Full Post »

Austin Energy Cutting Solar Credits

Posted in Austin Energy, Energy, Renewables, solar, tagged , , , , , , on December 6, 2013 |

Is Austin Energy joining the war on solar?

Bit by bit, our publicly owned, nationally renowned, supposedly green electric utility is trying to roll back programs that support customer owned solar.

Austin Energy is cutting the Value of Solar tariff, which compensates solar owners for the energy they produce, by 16 percent on January 1.

A lower solar tariff means fewer people will choose to purchase solar panels, which means our environment and local economy will suffer.

Tell the Austin City Council to stand up for clean energy and pass a resolution delaying reduction of the solar tariff.

Cutting the solar tariff isn’t the only attack under way. On January 1, Austin Energy will also confiscate all solar credits. Customers earned those credits by providing energy that the utility took and sold. Now Austin Energy is planning to take those credits away.

And just this week, the utility cut solar rebates for the second time this year. These cuts were reportedly made to keep the program from running out of funds, but Austin Energy could have asked for more funding for the solar rebate budget.

The Austin City Council governs Austin Energy, so it’s up to it to keep the utility honest.

Demand a resolution delaying the solar tariff change until after the public has had a chance to give input.

While other utilities are fighting to keep customers from generating their own electricity, Austin Energy should not play that game.

Austin Energy’s solar programs have given it and our city great publicity and helped to build a growing solar economy in the Austin area. Let’s not lose that momentum.

Our utility needs to start listening to us – the people who own it.

Send the Austin City Council an email right now.

We only have a few days to stop this attack before the City Council takes its winter break. Please help by sharing this post with friends, family and neighbors in the Austin area. If you work for a solar company, please forward this email to your customers.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »