Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Original blog from Coal Block

I just try to lay out the facts.

Tones of Equilavent Carbon per Capita

Tones of Equilavent Carbon per Capita

Those were the words of Tom Mullikin (lawyer and nationally known speaker) at a talk he gave sponsored by the Kansas Chamber of Commerce to a “crowded hall full of business and political leaders from across the state,” as printed in the Wichita Eagle. Mr. Mullikin went on to talk about how local efforts to curb the effects of coal plants on the environment are useless, listing “facts” about how man-made emissions only comprise 5.5 percent of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and that “Kansas homes, factories, cars, livestock and power plants… contribute just 0.013 percent of all greenhouse gases floating in the world’s atmosphere.”

This is not the first time I’ve heard these statements about percentages, and they are irrelevant. It is not the overall percentage of greenhouse gases represented by human activity that matters – what matters is how much the overall amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere increases, and 5.5% is a significant amount. Just think of blood alcohol levels, or a glass of water filled to the brim – one more drop will make it overflow.

The other glaring piece of misinformation provided by Mullikin is the idea that changes and efforts on a local scale to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is futile. This notion is not only totally incorrect, it is irresponsible, and Mr. Mullikin should be ashamed for touting such nonsense.

Continue Reading »

On Monday, various people including representatives from City Public Services, various county commissioners including Tommy Adkisson, commissioner candidate Chip Haass, Laurence Doxsey of HUD , Bill Sinkin of Solar San Antonio, and representatives from the Mayor Phil Hardberger’s office gathered to discuss energy efficiency with the Citizen’s Energy Coalition, SEED Coalition and the Alamo Group of the Sierra Club.

Arjun Makhijani, head of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, presented his preliminary findings on energy efficiency potential for San Antonio. I enjoyed the dialogue that came out of his speech. From most people I heard that Dr. Makhijani’s speech hit the right note of pushing CPS to do more while simultaneously congratulating them for their current energy efficiency and renewable goals.

Continue Reading »

NRC Night at the Dome

Never been built

General Electric's ESBWR: Not ready for prime time

Turnout was high at the NRC’s public meeting in Victoria on Thursday about the future of nuclear power in the area. Tara Bozick of the Victoria Advocate estimated 400 people showed up. There was so much going on it might warrant a second post.

The NRC attempted to quell concerns about the fact that Exelon plans to build the Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR), despite the fact that they have not yet certified it. In fact, the application for design certification was filed in 2005. Who knows when or if it will be certified, but Exelon’s application to build two of them in Victoria County puts added pressure on the NRC to approve the design.

It was publicly stated by the NRC last night that the ESBWR has never been built before. Why they would consider a combined operating license (COL) at the same time as they are reviewing revisions to the reactor design application is perplexing to say the least. So much for a streamlined process.

Matt

A Small Measure of Hope

Original Blog from http://www.coalblock.org

August 9, 2008

I’ll be heading back to Austin soon where we hope to regroup and move on to the next steps in our efforts to stop coal plants. All in all I consider this Arkansas trip to be a large success. We had 77 people come out for the screening in Fayetteville and had over 150 in Little Rock. Many Arkansans are eager to unite and stop these coal plants in order to promote and move towards renewable energy generation.

Here in Hope, however, my spirits were a bit lower. We distributed thousands of fliers at the Watermelon Festival in


the “hope” of drawing people out to the screening and getting folks involved in the fight. We were unsuccessful, however, and the only folks who showed up to the screening were the local hunting club guys who had been fighting this plant since the beginning. We were unable to get any new local interest in opposing the plant.

It is in these local towns, closest to the plants, where the hardest fight lies. Many, if not most, of the locals see the plant as an economic boon, since the few of them who get jobs with the company are usually getting the best job they’ve ever had. Concerns about public health, environmental degradation, and long-term economical impacts are ignored or justified in the light of some industry, any industry, willing to invest in the local community.

As Upton Sinclair said, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon him not understanding it.” This was true a hundred years ago, and it is still true today – both for men and women. And as long as the majority of people in this country are kept beneath a yoke of low wages and corporate consumerism, the will of the people to acknowledge, much less fight, the ills of our age will be greatly weakened.

This is not just an American dilemma, consider this Chinese coal plant situation:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoBv9FC7WAM]

The companies who build these plants know this. This is why they choose economically challenged or depressed sites and communities for their projects. It is also why it is so important to find those few locals who are willing and eager to speak against the crowd and stand up for their health, the environment, and a stable and sound energy future.

With that thought in mind we are networking the few dedicated souls in Hope with the rest of the great volunteers throughout Arkansas in our efforts to stop these coal plants. With the momentum we’ve gathered I think we have a great chance of achieving the change we seek.

As with Pandora, all it takes is a faint glimmer of Hope.

This Tuesday I spoke at the PUC’s public hearing on Project 34890, which is charged with deciding on a net metering and interconnection policy for the deregulated markets in Texas. If that description sounds arcane and confusing to you, that’s because it is. In fact, in calling around to several investor-owned utilities last week, most of the people I spoke to had not a clue what I was talking about when I asked if they allowed net metering.

But the gist of it is this: if the rule proposed by the PUC passes, guaranteed incentives for individuals to invest in small renewable energy (putting solar panels on their roof, for example) will disappear.

Continue Reading »

This was by far the most flamboyant activity I have done this summer while interning at Public Citizen. I went to Netroots to promote a talk hosted by the Sierra Club, Lightbulbs to Leadership. I got a little too into character at times. I might have even jigged a bit. The most interesting moments for me were talking with Go Left TV, various bloggers and a radio station. One tried to play “stump the environmentalist” by asking me about nuclear. Which was more than fine by me since I just spent the last couple months researching and organizing around the topic. One of the misconceptions that I got to clear up was the fact that producing nuclear energy does produce green house gases, at least three times more than renewables such as wind.
It was a riduculous and effective way of getting out our message: energy efficiency and renewables can meet our energy needs.
-Melissa K. Seal
Clean Energy Girl vs Dirty Coal Monster

Gas prices are abominably high. The good news? It’s time to kick the oil habit. When i lived in New York City and the price of cigarettes went up to $10, my smoker friends took the hint and kicked the butt.

We face the same problem with gas prices, and with the overwhelming sentiment to “Drill here! Drill now!” overtaking our debate on national energy policy, I’m reminded again of my smoker friends. What if they had simply decided that it was time to start buying their cigarettes in bulk from New Jersey or Connecticut? They would have missed the added health benefits of quitting smoking.

STOP SMOKING NOW!

STOP SMOKING NOW!

Global Warming is coming to a crisis point, and we are already seeing the effects: flooding along the Mississippi, record-breaking heat and drought across Texas, and increasing food prices due to lower crop yields are only the leading edge of a climate disaster if we do nothing. Unfortunately, offshore drilling is worse than doing nothing. The saying goes that when you find you are digging yourself into a hole, STOP DIGGING! By increasing production of oil we can only guarantee that we will put more pollution into the atmosphere and hasten the arrival of catastrophic climate change.

But proponents say we have to bring down the price of gas. True– my family is hurt by having to spend $50-$60 every time we fill up our car. But according to the Bush Administration’s Department of Energy, offshore drilling will not affect gas prices at all. It will be 8-10 years before we see any real production out of these wells. Further, the amount they would produce would not help make us more energy independent, as the relatively small supplies would be gobbled up by international demand. Their quote is “Because oil prices are determined on the international market, however, any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant.”

But that hasn’t stopped Congress from “acting.” Congressman Gene Green (D-Houston) announced a bi-partisan energy plan that includes more drilling, co-sponsored by Ruben Hinojosa (D-Corpus Christi), Solomon Ortiz (D-Corpus Christi), Charlie Gonzalez (D-San Antonio), Ciro Rodriguez (D-San Antonio), Henry Cuellar (D-Laredo), and Nick Lampson (D-Houston). Considering the proximity to the Gulf Coast of most of these districts, I would think these Congressmen would be more concerned about offshore oil spills ruining the coastlines or about the sea level rise, even a small amount of which would put Galveston, South Padre Island, and the Houston Ship Channel under water.

Since our oil problem is essentially one of increased demand driving up prices, the best answer to decrease oil prices is to demand less by using less. So, offshore drilling means more global warming, and no easing of the pain at the pump. Efficiency means less global warming, lower prices, and we’re using less gas to begin with. That way, if we did manage to tackle climate change and wanted to drill decades from now when oil is $300 / barrel, we will have left that resource to our children and grandchildren instead of simply greedily drinking that milkshake now.

Sounds like a no-brainer: the type of solution no one in Washington DC would ever consider.

Researchers at MIT have developed a fuel cell which could revolutionize not only how we get energy but how we think about it. The old model has always been to hook up your home to a power grid and an electric utility which buys electricity from coal and gas-burning power plants (and to a lesser degree nuclear and in the last few years some wind).

[blip.tv ?posts_id=1297&dest=-1]

With this breakthrough, we can conceivably turn our homes into “power plants… and gas stations” according to MIT’s Daniel Nocera.

How the solar fuel cell storage would work - from MIT

How the solar fuel cell storage would work - from MIT

With Daniel Nocera’s and Matthew Kanan’s new catalyst, homeowners could use their solar panels during the day to power their home, while also using the energy to split water into hydrogen and oxygen for storage. At night, the stored hydrogen and oxygen could be recombined using a fuel cell to generate power while the solar panels are inactive.

This is an important breakthrough that will lead to lower energy prices for us, but we have to act quickly. We need to deploy smart meters in our cities and start getting ready for plug-in hybrids or fully electric vehicles. Bring it up with your Congressman, Senator, State Legislator, City Councilmember, or electric Co-op board member and get ready for the next generation in energy.

An 8 mile chunk of ice broke off from the arctic icecap according to satellite photos of the region. This is truly disturbing as we come closer to a summer where the Arctic icecap completely disappears. The ice cap is not only an indicator of global warming, but a feedback mechanism as well: ice reflects heat and without our “white cap” the ocean and surrounding land will absorb more heat, increasing the greenhouse effect significantly.

We must immediately work to change the trajectory of our greenhouse gas emissions so that we don’t do any further damage. Otherwise we will very soon face an arctic with no ice. This would lead to more and faster global warming, sea level rise of several feet from other land-based glacier melt, and a severe threat to our water supplies, agriculture, and way of life.

Oil in the Arctic!

We are like a child picking up sea shells on the exposed shoreline preceding a tsunami. Our eyes gloss over and the glint of the pretty thing shines in our eyes, and heedless of the gathering mountain of water we rush to gather as much as we can, ignoring the consequences of missing the bigger picture.

There is oil in the arctic, and it seems half the world is interested in getting it out of the earth (and into the atmosphere) as soon as possible. No one seems to care that the whole reason this oil is going to be accessible is because of global warming – caused in part by the very same fuel. For decades now we’ve been irresponsibly burning everything we can dig up, ignoring the scientists who have been warning us (for just as long) that this is going to have dire consequences.

Meanwhile, our amazing sun beats down its free energy all around us, in the form of direct solar and in the indirect form of biofuels. The wind continues to blow (mostly unharnessed), energy efficiency measures are minor and insubstantial, and geothermal and wave energy potential continues to be ignored by the energy companies.

In 1915, Nikola Tesla said “If we use fuel to get our power, we are living on our capital and exhausting it rapidly. This method is barbarous and wantonly wasteful, and will have to be stopped in the interest of coming generations.”

We are now addicted to fossil fuels, and like any addict with any addiction it will eventually kill us, unless we break the habit. The needed alternatives exist, but as long as we focus primarily on how to find more fossil fuels, the incentives to develop renewable energy resources will continue to be delayed. If we want any hope of continuing something resembling our current civilization we must abandon fossil fuels as soon as possible and replace them with renewables.

If not, the changing climate will give us a world in which our civilization cannot exist.

Are you just slightly skeptical of people who bashed France 5 years ago, yet hold them up as a paragon of energy planning for having so much nuclear power?

From the folks at Beyond Nuclear:

The French Nuclear Medusa: Beyond Nuclear’s Linda Gunter has just returned from a fact-finding mission in France where she also spoke at a rally of 5,000 demonstrators in Paris on July 12 calling for a nuclear-free world. Watch for new updates on France on the French Connection page on our Web site. French speakers can also view videos of the rally here. During Linda’s visit, there were coincidentally – but not inappropriately – two accidents at nuclear sites both operated by Areva. Continue Reading »

An op-ed in the New York Times yesterday by O. Glenn Smith, a former NASA employee, suggests what is certainly a “thinking outside the box” kind of solution to our nation’s energy woes: solar panels…in outer space.

Smith recommends building large solar panels that would orbit the earth and send energy back to us via wireless radio waves. Apparently, the technology already exists, and the pro column reads something like this:

  • not hampered by weather
  • works 24 hours a day (the sun never sets in space)
  • environmentally friendly
  • cost-competitive with other renewables
  • makes use of the United States’ hefty investment in space travel

While I’m always glad to hear about innovations that will help our globe move toward a sustainable energy schema, I’m a little skeptical about the way Smith holds up this technology as the way of the immediate future. He opens his piece with this:

As we face $4.50 a gallon gas, we also know that alternative energy sources — coal, oil shale, ethanol, wind and ground-based solar — are either of limited potential, very expensive, require huge energy storage systems or harm the environment.

This quick dismissal of the alternative energy sources we know and love (except…how is coal alternative?) is questionable. For starters, I have a hard time believing that any energy system that must be installed and maintained outside our atmosphere will be less expensive than one based here on the earth’s surface.

Smith also ignores the benefits that energy sources like wind and ground-based solar provide that space-based solar does not. One of the great benefits of investing in wind and solar power is the creation of thousands of jobs, especially in rural areas. The fact that the handymen for these solar panels in space would have to also be astronauts prevents space-based solar from becoming a solution to the dearth of quality manufacturing and other blue-collar jobs in this country.

Some day, I hope we will see space-to-earth solar energy. But for now, let’s focus on all the untapped renewable energy potential here on terra firma before we pull a Buy N’ Large* and run to outer space in search of the answers.

But if the idea of space-based solar intrigues you, you can read more about it on this blog dedicated to the topic.

*obligitory (in my opinion anyway) Wall-E reference

-Natalie Messer

The effect of deregulation has been harmful to Texans of all social backgrounds and economic levels across the state. It has turned the idea of competition on its head—people have a choice now, but it’s not cheaper. Essentially, deregulation has replaced forcing people to buy cheaply from public sources with forcing people to pay higher prices from a private company of their choosing.

Today, the state average cost for residential electricity is 12.86 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh), according to the most recent data from the U.S. Department of Energy.

Whether or not residential electricity bills in Texas are actually higher now than before deregulation, and whether or not most Texans have access to and actually use the state’s PowerToChoose website are questions that have been debated. But some harmful effects of deregulation on Texans are undeniable.

Electricity deregulation is the state action of allowing private companies to sell electricity. The Texas retail electric industry became deregulated in most parts of the state in January 2002.

When it was introduced in Texas in the mid 1990s, the stated goal of electricity deregulation was for Texans to benefit from lower electricity prices. Low prices would result from private electricity sellers (Retail Electric Providers/REPs) competing for customers. Residents could choose which company to buy from on the state’s website, PowerToChoose.com.

“To convince lawmakers and the public of deregulation’s merits, Enron and its allies promised that restructuring would offer Texans lower prices and consumer choice. In 1996, (one Enron executive) told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram that the statewide average of about 6 cents per kilowatt-hour was an ‘absurdly high’ price for electricity. ‘There’s nothing in this market that suggests we won’t see the same savings of 30 to 40 percent we’ve already seen elsewhere,’ he said,” wrote Forrest Wilder in a 2006 Texas Observer article entitled, “Overrated: Deregulation was supposed to lower Texans’ electric bills”.

Here are some of the problems with electricity deregulation in Texas:

Problem 1: Among states in which residents use about as much electricity in their homes each month as those in Texas do:

  • Texans pay more per kWh of electricity than residents of any other state;
  • Texas residential electricity rates are higher than every other state, except Florida, by 3.1 cents to 6.6 cents per kWh. Texas rates are 1.5 cents higher per kWh than in Florida.

For example, Texas homes use an average of 1,161 kWh of electricity each month. Similarly, residents of Georgia use an average of 1,158 kWh of electricity each month. However, the average retail price of electricity in Georgia is about 8.91 cents per kWh, while the price in Texas is about 12.86 cents per kWh.

All of the above is based upon the most recent figures available from the U.S. Department of Energy’s “U.S. Average Monthly Bill” tables available online.

Problem 2: Texans (whether of higher or lower income status) living in areas where electricity deregulation took effect pay more for their electricity than their fellow Texans who live in areas where electricity is provided by an investor-owned utility, a city, or a co-op.

For example, based on price rates posted on each entity’s website, Texas’ residential monthly average 1,161 kWh of electricity costs from about $52 to $132 for those who receive their electricity from non-private providers like, Xcel Energy in Amarillo, the City of Austin and Pedernales Co-op.

However, based on the rates offered on the websites of some of the private companies listed on the PowerToChoose, the cost for Texans who must buy from a private company (people who live in areas like Garland, Houston, Waco and McAllen) might pay anywhere from $154 to $232 for the same amount of residential electricity.

Problem 3: Aside from high prices, consumers have complained of ill treatment by power companies in the deregulated market. The Ft.Worth Star Telegram recently reported that complaints against three of the four recently failed electric companies jumped about 2,400 percent, from about 20 complaints at the beginning of the year to 508 in May.

Problem 4: Under current state law, political subdivisions, like counties, schools and hospital districts can easily aggregate power needs to get the cheapest rates for their buildings, but cities cannot easily aggregate so that individuals can get the cheapest rates for their homes.

One method of easing the problems described above would be to amend state law to allow cities to more easily aggregate residents’ electricity purchases. This could be achieved with Opt-Out aggregation. Opt-Out aggregation allows a city to pool the power needs of its residents and buy electricity under a single contract from an REP, without the affirmative approval of each resident (what Texas law currently requires). Under Opt-Out aggregation, any residents could notify the city if they did not want to participate.

Opt-Out aggregation has worked well in the deregulated markets of both California and Ohio. California allows for Opt-Out aggregation across the board. Ohio, on the other hand, allows each city to choose whether or not to adopt Opt-Out residential electricity aggregation in a resolution by the city council. The city of Kent Ohio, in a draft of a resolution adopting Opt-Out aggregation, recognized the Ohio Consumer’s Council’s labeling of Opt-Out as the “jewel” of Ohio electric deregulation.

Although, in May, TXU took voluntary action to reduce penalties and payments for low-income Texans and Texans aged 62 or older, the Texas competitive electricity market leader’s approach does not address the problems stated above. All Texans, not just those over age 62 and those who have low incomes, deserve to pay truly competitive electricity prices.

While the Statesman covered the hubbub around the PEC Board’s agreement to cut their salary more than 40%, that wasn’t the only news from the first meeting of the new Board yesterday.

Ric Sternberg of PEC4U, et al, delivered over 4000 letters and postcards to the new Board from Pedernales members demanding more conservation, efficiency, and renewable energy.

Sternberg, Smitty, and David Foster from Clean Water Action held a press conference beforehand.

[youtube=http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=6F5Uo1OAk50]

Public Citizen is a national sponsor of this year’s Netroots Nation conference, and as the Austin Texas office of Public Citizen is happy to play host. We’ve met so many great people and been in so many excellent meetings. We’re also proud that we launched this, our Texas blog, in concert with NN08. Today has been incredibly busy and wonderful, so let me fill all of you in who weren’t here.

Continue Reading »