EDITOR’S NOTE: This is going to be one of our ongoing series on climate change and how we can all make a personal impact. Since today is World Vegetarian Day, I think this is an appropriate way to kick things off.
With various climate change proposals circulating on Capitol Hill, and the Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen right around the corner, we are all reminded that legislative action and global cooperation are needed in order to protect our planet. While it is the responsibility of our leaders to work out an effective agreement, we must not forget that normal people like us can also make a big difference in reducing greenhouse gases. The Green-up your life! blog series will discuss the many ways in which we can all make a difference, just by making small changes in the way we live. Today, it is about what’s for dinner.
Many discussions about climate change are full of scientific jargon and are political in nature, making them hard to follow. We hear about increasing wind and solar power, implementing cap and trade, and reducing industrial carbon emissions. For those of us who want to personally contribute to the effort, we might switch to more fuel-efficient vehicles, or install solar panels on our homes. In addition to these large (and sometimes expensive) personal changes, there are many little things we can all do on a daily basis to make our planet healthier. One thing we can all do to decrease global warming is not always on the top of the list: eat less meat and dairy.
So, does the agricultural industry really contribute that much to climate change? Yup. Meat production accounts for a whopping 18% of total global greenhouse emissions–more than all forms of transportation put together. About 9% of anthropogenic (read: derived from human activity) carbon dioxide emissions are attributed to agriculture. In addition, methane, the smelly heat-trapping gas emitted from both ends of livestock, warms the world 20% faster than carbon dioxide. Almost 40% of methane in the U.S. is generated from enteric fermentation (which takes place during a ruminant animal’s digestion process) related to animal husbandry. Beyond carbon dioxide and methane, agriculture is responsible for 65 % of the greenhouse gas nitrous oxide. Nitrous oxide only accounts for 5% of total greenhouse gases, but has heat trapping effects 310 times more powerful than carbon dioxide.
Unfortunately, that’s not all. More than 37% of the earth’s land is used for agricultural purposes, and as the global demand for meat increases, the creation of more grazing land is a major contributor to deforestation, especially in Latin America, where 70 % of previously forested land in the Amazon is used as pasture, with the remaining 30% largely used for growing feed crops.
Beef is the largest culprit, but there are similar stories for all farm animals, including seafood. There is no doubt that agricultural practices contribute to global warming, both directly through emissions created from all levels of production, and indirectly through deforestation. Beyond this, it is just plain inefficient (as tasty as it might be) to get our calories this way. While most grains, fruits, or veggies require 2 calories of fossil fuel energy to create 1 calorie of food, this ratio grows up to 80:1 for beef!
When breaking bad news, honesty is the best policy. Nobody really wants to hear it, (and the agricultural industry most certainly doesn’t want to tell it), but as responsible stewards of our planet, and as daily consumers of food, one of the best things we can do is to eat less meat and dairy products. (Cutting down just on meat, but not dairy, will not make a big difference, because dairy cows burp and produce manure too). The silver lining is that what is better for the earth is also better for our health. Studies show that veggie-based diets decrease the chance of suffering from numerous types of cancers, heart disease, obesity, and diabetes. When we do choose to eat meat, buying from local ranchers who raise pasture grazing livestock will ensure that we are limiting our impact on the earth. It appears more expensive to buy meat this way – but not when all the hidden costs are accounted for.
Nobody is asking that we all take up a diet of strictly brussels sprouts and brown rice, but if we all spend a little more time learning about the impact that our food systems have on the planet, a greener diet may just start to look more appealing. Stay tuned for next time, when, sticking to the topic of food, the importance of purchasing organic products will be discussed.
Posted in Consumers, Global Warming | Tagged climate change, consumer, food, Global Warming, Texas |
This just in from EPA:
LOS ANGELES – U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson will announce today in a keynote address at the California Governor’s Global Climate Summit that the Agency has taken a significant step to address greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under the Clean Air Act. The Administrator will announce a proposal requiring large industrial facilities that emit at least 25,000 tons of GHGs a year to obtain construction and operating permits covering these emissions. These permits must demonstrate the use of best available control technologies and energy efficiency measures to minimize GHG emissions when facilities are constructed or significantly modified.
The full text of the Administrators remarks will be posted at www.epa.gov later this afternoon.
UPDATED: that text is now available here.
“Wow” would be an understatement. This on the heels of the release of Senator Kerry and Boxer and their climate bill. Here’s my statement on that subject:
Sept. 30, 2009
Reaction to Boxer-Kerry Climate Change Discussion Draft
Statement of Andy Wilson, Global Warming Program Director, Public Citizen’s Texas Office
The Boxer-Kerry draft includes some important measures to address climate change and create new green jobs, but it is simply not sufficient to solve climate change or create the green jobs revolution we need. While an improvement in some ways over Waxman-Markey and its billions in giveaways to polluting special interests, the discussion draft put forth by Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and John Kerry (D-Mass.) still punts on many of the most contentious issues, such as how and to whom emissions allowances will be allocated or auctioned. Waxman-Markey started off similarly strong and vague but was weakened as it went through the committee hearing process. Sen. Boxer must work to strengthen the bill as she guides it through her Environment and Public Works Committee hearings.
The discussion draft calls for a 20 percent reduction in greenhouse gas pollution from 2005 levels by 2020. This is a slight improvement over the 17 percent called for by Waxman-Markey, but is far short of the goals our best science tells us we need to make. Specifically, the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change tells us in order to avoid the worst of global climate catastrophe, we need to cut our pollution levels 25 to 40 percent below 1990 levels.
Japan will cut its emissions 25 percent by 2020; the EU has signaled it may meet or beat that goal. Why would we set ourselves to lag behind the rest of the world? We must win the technology races in manufacturing advanced energy technology so we do not replace importing oil with importing solar cells.
The draft should be applauded for including strong language to protect consumers and protect the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) authority to regulate emissions in the future.
Among the changes we recommend to the draft are alterations to address these problems:
Allowances should be auctioned 100 percent. President Obama’s budget continues to show revenues from a 100 percent auction and EPA analysis of Waxman-Markey found this to be the least regressive method of implementation.
Subsidies for nuclear should be removed. Despite recent findings by Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Commissioner Jon Wellinghoff that the United States will never need to build another traditional power plant, the bill spends considerable space on (Subtitle C, Sec 131) and would allocate significant resources to nuclear power. Nuclear is neither as carbon-free nor as safe as the draft language claims. Neither is it cost-effective. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has estimated half of all federal loan guarantees for nuclear loan guarantees will fail, meaning any extension of these guarantees is a pre-emptive bailout of the nuclear industry leaving the taxpayers on the hook for up to half a trillion dollars.
The draft still relies on more than two billion tons in offsets – actually expanding permitted offsets from the Waxman-Markey language. This has huge potential consequences. It means that despite the intent of the draft, we could conceivably end up having failed to reduce emissions at all – and with major questions about whether alleged offsets were even achieved. While the offset oversight language is considerably better than in Waxman-Markey, it still is troubling that we are relying on offsets rather than actually decreasing our pollution.
The draft does nothing to improve vague language in Waxman-Markey, which could effectively grandfather more than 40 proposed coal-fired power plants, including up to a dozen in Texas alone. These proposed plants would be exempted from new performance standards in the bill, while a plant built just three years from now will have to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by half.
With Kerry-Boxer maintaining EPA’s right to regulate CO2 as a pollutant, this sets the table nicely to try to get a bill passed which will both solve climate change and create the new energy economy we need. We just need to improve the ground of the special-interest-riddled Congress. Tip of my hat to Paul Krugman and Tom Friedman for their articles on this earlier this week about the severity of the problem that faces us and the relatively lame responses by our government. As a palate cleanser, please to enjoy this 15 second video from [adult swim] about what the REAL problem may be:
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUAUnjhB7l4]
Posted in Coal, Energy, Global Warming | Tagged ACES, cap and trade, Carbon Dioxide, CEJAPA, Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, climate change, Coal, coal plant, Congress, EPA, Global Warming, green jobs, Kerry-Boxer, Nuclear, Nuclear Power, senate, solar, Texas, waxman-markey |
September 30, 2009 by Public Citizen Texas
Great news about the legal fight against STP.
The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel admitted four more of the contentions (all water related) brought by SEED Coalition, bringing the grand total to 5 contentions admitted for a hearing with 7 still pending.
This is more than anywhere else in the country.
This increased uncertainty *should* make CPS and San Antonio City Council think twice about going forward.
Look! A Press Release! (fully continued after the jump if you want to get into all the legal contentions) As always, for more info go read everything at NukeFreeTexas.org
For Immediate Release: September 30, 2009
Contacts: Karen Hadden, SEED Coalition,
Susan Dancer, South Texas Association for Responsible Energy
Robert V. Eye, Attorney for Intervenors
Citizens Gain Ground in STP Intervention Over Water Concerns
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Admits
Four Additional Water Related Contentions for a Hearing
Citizen opposition to two proposed nuclear reactors at the South Texas Project (STP) continues with another success. Yesterday the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) Panel ruled that South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC) had failed to adequately analyze the environmental impacts of radioactive contaminated water and water availability, issues or “contentions” raised by concerned citizens in their Petition to Intervene in the proposed expansion at STP. The Order is of national significance since STPNOC is the first in the nation to request licensing in 30 years.
“Citizens intervening in the South Texas Project’s licensing process gained significant legal ground yesterday when the ASLB Panel ruled that four additional contentions be admitted for a hearing,” said Karen Hadden, Executive Director of the SEED Coalition, one of the Intervenors. “Intervenors now have a total of five admissible contentions, with seven contentions related to fires and explosions and losses of large areas of the plant still pending.” The licensing process is likely to be delayed as a result of additional contentions. It was delay and construction problems that led to the first reactors at STP coming in six times over budget.
SEED Coalition, Public Citizen and the Bay City based South Texas Association for Responsible Energy (STARE) are Intervenors in the case. Attorney Robert V. Eye went before the ASLB Panel in June and argued the admissibility of 28 contentions challenging the license application for two additional reactors, Units 3 and 4, at the South Texas Project.
Continue Reading »
Posted in Nuclear | Tagged CPS, CPS Energy, Nuclear, Nuclear Power, San Antonio, SEED Coalition, South Texas Project, STP, Texas |
In case you didn’t catch our editorial in the San Antonio Express News this summer, it’s worth repeating.
By Matthew Johnson – Express-News Guest Voices
CPS Energy announced its cost estimate for two more nuclear reactors at the South Texas Project near Bay City last week. The $13-billion price tag is the latest estimate in a sustained and systemic low-balling by utilities wishing to receive government subsidies.
CPS’ partner, NRG Energy, recently pegged the cost of units 3 and 4 at $10 billion, a figure that has jumped nearly 50 percent from its original estimate of $5.4 billion.
Other analyses, however, have estimated the cost of two new reactors to be nearly 100 percent higher than the CPS estimate. Former Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel official Clarence Johnson recently estimated the cost of STP expansion to be $20 billion to $22 billion, while nuclear engineer and president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research Dr. Arjun Makhijani estimated a cost of up to $17.5 billion in 2008.
A new study by Mark Cooper, of the Vermont Law School, analyzed numerous cost estimates of the so-called nuclear renaissance beginning around 2001. He discovered that early estimates of new nuclear reactors were made predominantly by industry and academics and were optimistic and eager to rejuvenate the industry.
Since then, utilities’ estimates have shown similar wishful thinking, but continue to rise. Independent analysts and Wall Street, Cooper shows, offer the most realistic estimates that are much higher.
The history of the STP expansion effort follows this pattern. CPS and NRG have been attempting to gain support in federal, state and city government since they submitted their application to build two new reactors to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2007.
Wall Street estimates also place a similar and continuously rising price tag on new reactors. The bond-rating agency Moody’s predicted $5,000-6,000 per kilowatt for new reactors almost two years ago, which translates to $16.2 billion for STP expansion, and recently indicated that it could downgrade bond ratings on utilities constructing new nuclear reactors.
The federal government established an $18.5 billion subsidy to back loans taken out to construct new reactors. STP expansion advocates brag about being on the short list for part of these loan guarantees, but proponents and opponents agree that more reactors won’t be built if the feds don’t pony up the dough.
The reason is simple. Investors are squeamish to lend money for projects with such a high risk of defaulting on repayments. Delay and cost overruns increase risk. STP’s original reactors took eight years longer than planned to complete and costs soared six times over original estimates.
CPS Energy has faster and cheaper alternatives. Their recent announcement on the 27 megawatt solar plant in West Texas, the Mission Verde plan to develop 250 megawatts of solar and new wind contracts plus their goal to save 771 megawatts through energy efficiency by 2020 are shining examples of the path they should focus on to keep rates stable and low in the future. This path also creates more local jobs.
City Council will soon have to decide on San Antonio’s involvement in new reactors. It must vote no on nuclear to protect San Antonians from bearing the overwhelming economic burden of building costly, dangerous and unnecessary nuclear reactors.
Matthew Johnson is an energy policy analyst for Public Citizen’s Texas office.
Posted in Energy, Nuclear | Tagged CPS, matthew johnson, Nuclear, nuclear reactors, Public Citizen, South Texas Project, STP, Texas, too expensive |
Dallas Morning News journalist Elizabeth Souder shares the Six things economists wish journalists knew about greenhouse gas reduction on the DMN’ Energy and Environment Blog. They sound a lot like the 6 things EVERYONE should know about greenhouse gas reduction, so I thought I’d share them. Kudos to Elizabeth Souder, and be sure to keep up with her work on the Energy and Environment Blog.
I’m attending the McCormick Energy Solutions Conference for journalists this week at Ohio State University. Andy Keeler, an economist with the John Glenn School of Public Affairs here at the university, offered six things journalist should know about greenhouse gas reduction.
1. It makes economic sense to reduce greenhouse gases. Even though doing so costs money, it will end up costing us even more if we do nothing. Dealing with the effects of global warming, of seeing Texas and the Southwest become a dustbowl, could be financially devastating.
2. Cap and trade, which is the method Congess is considering to regulate greenhouse gases, does two distinct things. By issuing tradable allowances for greenhouse gas emissions, the system raises the price of energy produced from greenhouse gas-heavy fossil fuels. It also generates revenue for the government by selling those allowances, and the money can be used for anything.
“Criticism of cap and trade which mixes these two together is deliberately misleading,” Keeler said.
3. Cap and trade creates broad and efficient incentives. Using market signals as part of our response to climate change risk is good public policy.
4. Who gets the money the government makes by selling allowances is a public expenditures question, not an environmental question.
5. A carbon tax and a cap and trade program have strong similarities. But the details of the program are more important than the choice between the two.
Keeler concludes that, even though economists tend to agree that a tax is cleaner and more elegant than a system of trading allowances, the current bill includes reasonable goals. Therefore, rather than starting from scratch and renegotiating the cap, which leads to a 20 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 and an 80 percent cut by 2050, Keeler prefers to stick with the current bill.
6. Trade and competitiveness concerns exist, but are neither broad nor large. The bill could have significant effects on the iron, steel, aluminum, cement and paper industries, but those problems could be solved with targeted rules, rather than broad regulations.
“It’s not to belittle the problem for people in these industries, but it’s misleading to cast it as an overall disaster from a trade point of view,” he said.
Posted in Global Warming | Tagged cap and trade, carbon tax, climate change, Dallas Morning News, elizabeth souder, Energy, environment, fossil fuels, Global Warming, greenhouse gasses, public policy, Texas |
Tonight at 6 pm is the final CPS hearing regarding the proposed nuclear reactors. The trustees will vote at their next meeting, Oct. 5th, on whether to participate in the proposed two additional nuclear reactors and spend an additional $400 million. This could be the last chance for citizens to directly address CPS on this extremely important issue.
Nuclear reactors come with serious financial, health and security risks, and are not the answer to San Antonio’s energy needs. We are increasingly concerned about the misinformation, spin and fuzzy math used by CPS to defend its risky nuclear proposal. CPS Energy knows that safer, more affordable options already exist today. These better energy choices could build green jobs locally.
WHEN: Today – Monday, September 28th at 6 pm (Come at 5 pm to sign up to speak)
WHERE: Lobby of Villita Assembly Building, 401 Villita Street, San Antonio
Hope you can make it out!
For more info visit: www.Energiamia.org
Energía Mía includes members of Esperanza Peace and Justice Center, Southwest Workers Union, Sun Energy, Former San Antonio City Council members, Project Verde, Alamo Group of the Sierra Club, Highland Hills Neighborhood Association, Jefferson Heights Neighborhood Association, Texas Drought Project, Green Party, San Antonio Area Progressive Action Coalition, SEED Coalition, and Public Citizen.
Posted in Nuclear | Tagged CPS, CPS Energy, Energia Mia, nuclear reactors, San Antonio, South Texas Project, STP, Texas |
As early voting for the November elections looms on the horizon, the Texas Progressive Alliance says good-bye to September and hello to another weekly blog roundup.
BREAKING NEWS: Natural Gas Development Brings “amazing and very high” Levels of Carcinogens and Neurotoxins to Barnett Shale area! Take a deep breath before you read this study because the findings will take your breath away! TXsharon at Bluedaze: DRILLING REFORM FOR TEXAS broke this story and the study evaluation by MacAuthur (Genius) Award winner, Wilma Subra.
This week Left of College Station, Teddy reports on why the anti-choice movement is not about abortion but about the oppression of women. Also, guest blogger Litia writes about asking non-tradition questions about Texas A&M traditions; Litia writes a weekly guest blog for College Station about a liberal teaching in Aggieland. Left of College Station also coves the week in headlines.
Neil at Texas Liberal writes that Socialist candidate for Mayor of Houston Amanda Ulman should run a serious campaign or not run at all. There once was a solid base of socialist voters in Texas and the U.S. Who says that cannot someday happen again?
McBlogger takes aim at people who think that adjusting to climate change is just something that will unfairly hurt the poor.
Off the Kuff contemplates the possible entry of Farouk Shami into the Governor’s race.
The old Easter Lemming has a useful post on voting for the Constitutional Amendments in his area.
The Texas Cloverleaf looks at the 22 year high TX unemployment rate. What recession? We’re in one?
Agriculture commissioner Todd Staples opened his mouth and out fell a big wad of stupid. Stupid so ignorant that it topped anything Rick Perry or John Cornyn or even Glenn Beck could manage this week. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs has it — if you can stand it.
WhosPlayin followed up on an open records request for internal emails related to Lewisville ISD’s decision to ban President Obama’s speech to children. The emails, including a racially charged email from a board member to the superintendant, do not paint a pretty picture..
WCNews at Eye On Williamson posts on money, energy, and the economy in the Texas governor’s race, Perry’s cap and trade photo op.
CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme notes Rick Perry does his best George Bush cowboy imitation with Ranger Recon.
Over at TexasKaos, boadicea, Warrior Queen, is seeking a pulse, any pulse over at the Tom Schieffer campaign, as she opines that Tom Schieffer Needs Something Original to Offer. It seems that lifting policy ideas from Hank Gilbert is the best he can do right now. Read the rest at TexasKaos.
Posted in Global Warming, Uncategorized | Tagged Barnett shale, carcinogens, climate change, college station, drilling reform, easter lemming, economy, Energy, farouk shami, glenn beck, hank gilbert, john cornyn, lewisville isd, natural gas, neurotoxins, obama, Rick Perry, Texas, texas a&m, texas liberal, tom schieffer |
If you’re interested in the San Antonio South Texas Project nuclear issue and haven’t been reading Greg Harman’s work for the San Antonio Current, you are seriously missing out.
His latest story is a cover feature titled “Nukes Mean Mines” and part of a life cycle analysis of the South Nuclear Texas Project. First things first: where does that fuel (uranium) come from, and what is the impact of uranium mining? That answer can be found right here in Texas, and Harman’s investigative reporting brings the story of those mines to life.
Keep “cued” in to the QueQue blog as well, where you’ll find even more background and reporting on nuclear power in Texas and its toxic legacy.
Posted in Nuclear | Tagged Greg Harman, Mining, Nuclear, nukes, nukes means mines, SA Current, San Antonio, South Texas Project, Texas, Uranium |
Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) has circulated a draft amendment to the Interior Appropriations bill—the Environmental Protection Agency’s annual spending bill—calling to prevent the Agency from regulating stationary sources of greenhouse gases, despite a mandate from the US Supreme Court two years ago to do just that.
The amendment would ignore worldwide scientific consensus that indicates carbon dioxide emissions from both stationary and mobile sources as a major threat to public health and welfare. Logic, science, and the law agree! Global warming pollution from power plants and oil refineries is just as harmful as that from cars and other passenger vehicles. According to major scientific bodies, such as the U.S. Global Change Research Program and the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, carbon dioxide emissions—no matter what its source may be—are warming the planet, as well as threatening public health and the welfare of our citizens.
Furthermore, the Murkowski amendment would severely undermine the Clean Air Act’s provisions to protect public health and the environment. Oil refineries and coal plants are among the biggest global warming polluters in the nation. The amendment would let these big players off the hook, delaying any momentum our nation has in transitioning to sources of clean energy. If the amendment is rejected, our ongoing shift toward solar and wind energy will drastically benefit our nation, providing a continuous and cleaner supply of energy that will only get cheaper over time, while creating millions of clean energy jobs.
The United States is the single largest producer of harmful gases, with China and India following closely behind. China has even surpassed the US at times in CO2 emissions, although with the current economic recession it’s tough to know who is winning, or should we say losing, the carbon pollution race. Our nation alone contributes nearly 25 percent to global greenhouse gas emissions each year. It is feared that the amendment would make a loud statement heard across the world; one that says the U.S. is not serious about reducing and controlling its global warming pollution, giving developing countries a ‘get out of jail free’ card when it comes to reducing their own carbon emissions. This could be devastating to international negotiations slated to take place in Copenhagen in December to create a framework to follow up to the Kyoto Protocol.
Lastly, the Murkowski amendment could inevitably prevent the EPA from preparing to implement climate legislation. The Agency would be prohibited from collecting information and expertise it may need to effectively implement climate change legislation, such as the carbon-capture-and-sequestration bonus allowance program, free allowances for energy-intensive manufacturers, or early-offset programs.
If Murkowski gets her way, we could see a vote this week. This is the wrong message for our Senators to send, who should not be trying to overturn a Supreme Court ruling and impede international climate negotiations through dirty tricks playing with the budgets of federal agencies.
Click here to see a general action alert by the Sierra Club and more reporting on this by the New York Times.
Posted in Coal, Energy, Global Warming | Tagged carbon dioxide emissions, clean air act, Clean Energy, Environmental Protection Agency, Global Warming, Senator Lisa Murkowski, Texas |
Public Citizen Texas and the Sierra Club just closed out their first week on the Texas State-Wide Coal Plant Tour. After a quick break, the tour’s fight against grandfathering will continue next Monday, September 28 in College Station.
So far, the media tour has brought awareness to communities in Waco, Dallas, and Abilene in regards to nearby coal plants that are flying under the legal radar. These districts have been negatively impacted by the failure of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality(TCEQ) to enforce the law and control pollution.
The Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) recently rejected key aspects of the TCEQ’s air permitting plan, and called for proper enforcement of the Clean Air Act in Texas. The goal of Public Citizen Texas and the Sierra Club has been to stop the development of any new coal plants in Texas, as well as those that are currently being constructed. The proposed moratorium would last at least until the TCEQ cracks the whip and strictly enforces Clean Air regulations.
According to a clause under the American Clean Energy and Security Act, plants that are already under construction, near construction or were permitted before January 1, 2009, may escape new regulations. Around 43 new coal plants will be built on American soil within the next five years, with about a dozen of those in Texas alone. These provisions—which have come to be called ‘grandfathering’ clauses—and others like it, could allow all of these plants to escape recently set performance standards.
To put things into perspective, let’s take a minute to reflect on the original grandfather clauses. Birthed during the segregationist Jim Crow period that followed the Civil War, grandfather clauses restricted voting rights in several southern states. It stated that men, or descendents of men, who had voted before 1866 did not have to meet the educational, property, or tax requirements for voting then in existence; however, slaves could not legally vote before or during the Civil War. Therefore, most individuals were deemed ineligible. The Jim Crow laws were inevitably struck down, but the idea of the grandfather clause remained.
What’s the phrase? Oh, yes. It’s merely history repeating itself.
Congress’ initial decision to exempt existing coal plants from the stipulations listed under the Clean Air Act was to avoid causing any economic disruption. They assumed the older plants would be replaced with newer, cleaner ones; but instead, the grandfathering clause has encouraged utilities to just extend the lives of the old, high-polluting plants.
There is no reason why plants being permitted and built today should not be held to the new emission standards. The first step to combat this problem should begin at the state level. If you live in College Station, Corpus Christi, Bay City, or Houston, our clean energy trailer is coming to a venue near you. The remaining dates and times of the Texas State-Wide Coal Plant Tour are listed in a blog below.
###
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.
Posted in Global Warming | Tagged american clean energy and security act, clean air act, Coal Plants, Environmental Protection Agency, grandfather, public citizen texas, Sierra Club, Texas, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Texas State-Wide Coal Plant Tour |
Still not sure what to do this weekend, Sept 25 – 27th? Come on out to Fredericksburg and join Public Citizen Texas at the 10th annual Renewable Energy Roundup and Green Living Fair!
Over the past 10 years, this community and family oriented Green Living Fair has grown to be the largest “green show” in the South. You can see the latest in eco-friendly technologies, learn how to save and create your own energy, attend informative talks by the experts, and visit with vendors to see contemporary green living and sustainability practices. It’s fun, environmentally friendly, and a great place tolearn how you can make a difference!
Aside from meeting with your friends at Public Citizen, at the Roundup you’ll be able to learn about:
Solar – Wind – Geothermal – Water Use & Reuse – Energy Conservation – Rainwater Harvesting – Green & Sustainable Building – Organic Growing – Alternative Transportation – Straw Bale Construction – Exhibits – Recycling – Composting – Eco Friendly Products – Natural & Organic Cooking Demonstrations – Educational Family Activities – Veggie, Organic and Natural Food Court
The gate entry fee is $10 Friday, $12 Saturday, and $10 Sunday – or get a three day pass for just $20. Children under 12 can enter free of charge.
Show Hours are: Friday – September 25, noon to 6 pm; Saturday – September 26, 9 am to 6 pm; Sunday -September 27, 9 am to 3 pm
Representatives from Public Citizen and our sister group, the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition, will also be giving talks and presentations at the round up. Look for our director, deputy director, and the director of SEED at the following times:
Friday, 3:00 – 4:00: Karen Hadden – Why Efficiency & Renewables Are The Answer
Saturday, 3:00 – 4:00: Tom “Smitty” Smith – Creating New Energy Districts For Texas
Sunday, 10:00 – 11:00: David Power – Smart Meters & Net Metering
Hope to see you there!
Posted in Global Warming | Tagged Efficiency, energy districts, fredericksburg, net metering, public citizen texas, renewable energy, renewable roundup, SEED Coalition, smart meters, solar, Texas, wind |
September 21, 2009 by Public Citizen Texas
The fall is upon us, and so the Texas Progressive Alliance closes out another summer with some more hot blogging.
Halliburton was fracking for Cabot and … Oh Oops! We spilled some! TWICE! Deadly Hydraulic Fracture Fluid! Ironically, industry just released part of their $80 million propaganda campaign asking people to submit “Eureka” moments. From TXSharon at Bluedaze: DRILLING REFORM FOR TEXAS.
Congressman “Deer in the headlights” Pete Olson (R-TX) gets called out at his own town meeting and the police are called in!
The Texas Cloverleaf wonder when police departments will enter the 21st century. A San Antonio lesbian couple sues in federal court over blatant harrassment in their own home.
This week at McBlogger, Mayor McSleaze took the time out of his life to educate you people on some things going on around the country.
CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme notes Rick Perry won’t admit execution might have been a mistake. To be a Republican is never to say you’re sorry.
At Texas Vox, nuclear energy and economic experts explain just how much is at stake with the South Texas Nuclear Project expansion — the entire San Antonio economy.
Off the Kuff takes note of some hot judge-on-prosecutor action going on at the Court of Criminal Appeals.
Neil at Texas Liberal ran a one-minute video this week, filmed in front of hurricane remembrances in Galveston, Texas, in which he made a plea for folks to be aware of the past.
Kay Bailey has two purse boys, and Ricke Perry is unaware there is a recession. Sometimes the cluelessness and utter hypocrisy of Texas Republicans still amazes the cynical PDiddie at Brains and Eggs.
WhosPlayin had video of parents handing all kinds of hell to Lewisville ISD board and administration over banning the Obama pep talk. Perhaps the bigger story though is that like many other school districts in the state, the financial situation looks bleak for the coming year.
Over at Texas Kaos, Bulldog reminds us that health care, like national defense is NOT about profit, but about the security of the American people. She tells her story and does it well in Health Care Rambling.
Posted in Global Warming | Tagged south texas chisme, south texas nuclear project, Texas, texas cloverleaf, texas progressive alliance, Texas Progressive Alliance Weekly Round |
In 1977 Congress passed amendments to the Clean Air Act that provided exemptions to existing coal plants, allowing them to ignore the new emissions standards any new plants would have to adhere to. It was thought these plants would simply age and be retired quickly, but because these plants suddenly became much cheaper to operate (due to not having to meet stricter standards) the companies who owned them kept them operating for as long as possible. It wasn’t until almost 30 years later, in 2003, that this “grandfathering” loophole was finally closed and all plants had to come into compliance with the Clean Air Act.
Now that global warming legislation is on the horizon, there is a new rush to build an entire new fleet of coal plants throughout the country. The hope is to get similar “grandfathering” provisions into any climate change legislation so that these brand new coal plants (some already being constructed) will not have to adhere to the new CO2 emission standards. Already, language in the American Clean Energy and Securities Act has been added to try and exempt any plants from the new standards if they receive their permit before January 1, 2009. The new standard, as it is now in the pending legislation, would require all qualifying plants to reduce their CO2 emissions by half by 2025. If the current fleet of new plants being built across the country are grandfathered this will result in massive amounts of CO2 added to our atmosphere that would otherwise have been mitigated. The new plants in Texas alone (which has more coal and pet coke plants proposed than any other state), if grandfathered, would end up emitting about 38.5 million tons more CO2 every year that they would if forced to adhere to the new emission standards.
There is no reason why any of these modern plants being permitted and built today should be exempt from modern CO2 emission controls, especially when there are plenty of alternatives such as energy efficiency and renewables that can meet this need. These coal companies are simply trying to slip in under the wire and evade responsibility for their emissions. The people of Texas call upon Senators Kay Bailey Hutchinson and John Cornyn to not vote for or allow any provisions in any CO2 or climate change legislation that would allow such grandfathering of this new fleet of coal plants.
Please go to the following sites to email the senators. You can simply copy and past the following brief statement, put it in your own words, or both:
Dear Senator,
The American Clean Energy and Securities Act is intended to address the grave threat of global warming. To do this it is setting new emissions standards for CO2 releases from industrial power plants. There are currently exemptions, however, that would allow new plants being permitted and built today to escape these new standards, effectively “grandfathering” them similar to the way that existing plants were grandfathered under the Clean Air Act in 1977. There is no reason why plants being permitted and built today should not be held to the new emission standards. Please do not vote for, or allow to be added, any provisions or exemptions that would allow grandfathering of these plants.
To email Senator Cornyn go here.
To email Senator Hutchinson go here.
Posted in Global Warming | Tagged ACES, American Clean Energy and Securities, Coal, coal plant, cornyn, Global Warming, grandfather, hutchinson, john, kay bailey hutchinson, Public Citizen, senator, Texas, tour |
This week Public Citizen Texas and the Sierra Club are launching a statewide media tour of Texas coal plants.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently rejected key aspects of the air permitting plan of Texas’ regulatory agency — the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and called for proper enforcement of the Clean Air Act in Texas.
That’s why we’re launching a TEXAS STATE-WIDE COAL PLANT TOUR to visit communities that have been negatively impacted by the TCEQ’s failure to enforce the law and control pollution. We’ll be collecting postcards from citizens at the tour stops across Texas to deliver the messages to the EPA in support of the EPA’s recent announcement — and will have an action center here on the blog so that you can get involved as well.
If you live in Waco, Dallas, Abilene, College Station, Corpus Christi, Bay City, or Houston, keep an eye out for our clean energy trailer! You’ll find us in the following locations at these times:
Week One Tour Stops
Monday, Sept. 21, WACO, 10:00 am, Heritage Park, 3rd Street & Austin Avenue
Tuesday, Sept. 22 , DALLAS, 10:00 am, The 500 Block of Reunion Blvd East, across the street from the Dallas Morning News (32.774975,-96.807328 on google maps)
Wednesday, Sept. 23, ABILENE, 10:00 am, Lake Fort Phantom Hill, Sweetwater, Texas
Week Two Tour Stops
Monday, Sept. 28, COLLEGE STATION, 10:00 am, Location TBA
Tuesday, Sept. 29, CORPUS CHRISTI, 10:00 am, Location TBA
Tuesday, Sept. 29, BAY CITY, 4:00 pm, Steps of the Court House (1700 7th Street)
Wednesday, Sept. 30, HOUSTON, 10:00 am, Tranquility Park, 515 Rusk, across from the federal courthouse
To learn more about proposed and existing coal plants in Texas and the negative impacts that they bring to our state, check out The Threat from Coal is Far From Over.
Posted in Coal | Tagged clean air act, Coal Plant Permitting Process, coal tour, Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, pollution, public citizen texas, Sierra Club, TCEQ, Texas, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality |
Many of you have been clamoring for these videos of the clean tech forum that we attended on Wednesday, so here they are in streaming digital goodness.
[vimeo 6648744]
[vimeo 6649649]
Outside the event we caught up with two of the panelists from the forum, specifically the ones opposed to San Antonio investing in the new nuclear expansion. First, Craig Severance, a CPA by trade, who did a financial “due diligence” type of analysis on the proposed nuclear expansion at STP 3 and 4. Read about it in his blog at energyeconomyonline.com/San_Antonio_Debate
[vimeo 6648340]
We also spoke with Dr. Arjun Makhijani, a noted power expert, on the risks of nuclear expansion.
[vimeo 6648395]
It’s time to be hard-headed about this, folks. Investing in nuclear is an economic risk the City of San Antonio simply can’t afford to take.
Hungry for more? We have full footage of the “Risking San Antonio’s Economic Future, Nuclear Experts Explain Flaws and Risks of Pursuing More Nuclear Reactors” forum that was held later in the day at the UTSA Downtown Campus.
[vimeo 6660448]
[vimeo 6662900]
Here’s some of the press coverage from the event:
Energy leaders to debate nuke issue in S.A.By Tracy Idell Hamilton -Express-News
Nuclear forum highlights contrasting opinions – By Anton Caputo -Express-News
Nuke vote delayed; final hearing is set By Tracy Idell Hamilton -Express-News
Nuclear investment part of a viable energy portfolio By Patrick Moore
(please go here and leave snarky comments about what a corporate stooge sell-out Patrick Moore is)
http://johntedesco.net/blog/2009/09/16/fresh-from-twitter-debating-nuclear-power/
http://blog.barberassociates.com/2009/09/san-antonio-clean-technology-nuclear.html
http://www.ksat.com/news/20966023/detail.html
And last but certainly not least, for our Amigos who can habla espanol, please watch this video from Univision featuring our own Melissa Sanchez and David Power!
Posted in Nuclear | Tagged Arjun Makhijani, CPS Energy, Craig Sererence, economics of nuclear, no to nuclear, Nuclear, Nuclear Power, nuclear reactors, nuclear waste, Patrick Moore, San Antonio, south texas nuclear project, STP, Texas |
« Newer Posts - Older Posts »
