Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Business leaders, environmentalists and low income advocates are behind a push to get Austin to increase its solar energy goal to 400 megawatts by 2020 and expand solar programs to meet that goal.

A diverse group of community leaders appointed to the Local Solar Advisory Committee (LSAC) by City Council examined solar opportunities in Austin and unanimously recommended that we double our 2020 solar goal, creating an estimated $300 million in net economic benefits and staying well within our current affordability goals.

“The Austin Energy leadership is saying we can’t afford to do this now,” says Tom “Smitty” Smith, director of Public Citizen’s Texas office.  “But they are only looking at replacement power costs.  The value of solar is far more than replacing wholesale power.  It increases revenue for the city from off system sales of peak power we won’t need at home. Expanding solar goals will mean reduced costs for peak power, fuel, hedging, insurance, maintenance and transmission, as well as reduced water use and pollution.  The LSAC looked at all of those factors and that’s why the business, solar and environmental community all agreed that we should expand our goals now.”

2013-08-06 400MW Solar is 5.2-6 Percent of Austin Energy Demand by 2020 (sun pie graph)The LSAC report shows that expanding the solar goal to 400 MW by 2020 – which would meet 5.2-6% of Austin Energy’s electric demand – would be affordable.  Current affordability limits are set at 2% of anticipated utility revenue and the solar program would never go beyond 0.31% – likely less, according to the LSAC report and would reduce costs by 2020.  The affordable nature of the plan is what got low income advocates to support it.

Susan McDowell, executive director at Lifeworks supports the expansion of Austin’s solar goals.  “Keeping up with rising electric bills is a struggle for many working families, especially in the summer.  Solar is cheaper over the long run and can ease that pressure.  We need more solar programs geared toward working families, including those who rent.”

Instead of embracing the recommendations, Austin Energy has proposed a 42% cut to its solar rebate program for fiscal year 2014, from $7.3 million to $4.2 million.  Supporters of the LSAC recommendations are asking City Council to move in the opposite direction and expand the solar budget to $10 million dollars.

We need a solar budget large enough to meet demand. This year, Austin Energy reduced the solar rebate to avoid running out of money before the year was over.  Solar is becoming more popular and we should take advantage of that.

While the LSAC did envision an eventual reduction and end to solar rebates, the Committee recommended investing more now to establish the industry in Austin and take advantage of a 30% federal tax credit for solar installations.

“Low solar prices, coupled with the 30% federal tax credit, give us the opportunity to get more solar installed for each dollar spent than ever before,” says BJ Stanbery, CEO of Heliovolt.  “And unlike most of the other energy sources we rely on, our investment in solar feeds into our local economy.  The time to establish the Austin solar business cluster is now because the 2016 federal ITC reduction from 30% to 10% is setting the timeline for industry maturation.”

The solar industry has already created hundreds of jobs in Austin, many of them in installation.  Solar installation companies are small, locally owned business and the jobs they create can’t be outsourced.

Carey Ibrahimbegovic, president and CEO of Greenbelt solar says, “We’re working hard to bring solar to as many families and business as we can and we’re creating good local jobs as we do that.  Austin area solar companies already employ over 600 people and meeting a 400 MW solar goal will create an estimated 420 new local direct and induced jobs each year from 2013 to 2020, with an average increase in local annual payroll of over $10 million.”

 

Winonah Hauter

Winonah Hauter

Wenonah Hauter grew up on a family farm that her husband runs today as a Community Supported Agriculture Project (CSA), which is part of the growing local food movement. Yet, as one of the nation’s leading healthy-food advocates, Hauter believes that the local food movement is not enough to solve America’s food crisis and the public health debacle it has created. In Foodopoly, she takes aim at the real culprit: the control of food production by a handful of large corporations—backed by political clout—that prevents farmers from raising healthy crops and limits the choices that people can make in the grocery store.

Foodopoly-200pxBlending history, reporting, and a deep understanding of American farming and food production, Foodopoly is the shocking and revealing account of the business behind the meat, vegetables, grains and milk that most Americans eat every day, including some of our favorite and most respected organic and health-conscious brands. Hauter also pulls the curtain back from the little-understood but vital realm of agricultural policy, showing how it has been hijacked by lobbyists, driving out independent farmers and food processors in favor of the likes of Cargill, Tyson, Kraft and ConAgra. Foodopoly demonstrates how the impacts ripple far and wide, from economic stagnation in rural communities at home to famines overseas. In the end, Hauter argues that solving this crisis will require a complete structural shift—a change that is about politics, not just personal choice.

Author and healthy food advocate Wenonah Hauter will be in Austin for a book signing and Q&A session on Wednesday, August 7th.  Join her from 7-8:30 pm at the Austin public library branch location at 5500 Manchaca Rd.

Click here for more information about the book.

In the midst of the 2013 Texas drought, many towns and communities have suffered disastrous blows, either completely running out of water or coming close enough to warrent desperate measures. Some of have made significant headlines, including Spicewood Beach, Barnhart and Brownwood.

According to TCEQ, 665 water systems have implemented mandatory restrictions. 10 have been placed in a state of emergency in the last year, which means they could run out of water within 45 days or less.

Spicewood Beach drought

Spicewood Beach, TX

Spicewood Beach was the first Texas town to run out of water in early 2012, when low lake levels resulted in the well failure, and the community is still waiting for a solution. Since last year, the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA) has been trucking in about 32,500 gallons of water per day and an additional 6,500 gallons on weekends to serve the town’s more than 7,500 residents. The community is under stage 4 water restrictions, meaning residents cannot perform any outdoor watering; water is only for essential uses. The LCRA Board unanimously approved construction of a $1.2 million water treatment plant, which will be built by the Vancouver based private company Corix Utilities. The LCRA had hoped they could end stage 4 restrictions by completing the plant by the end of the summer, but Corix does not expect to finish construction until November. The company’s Texas-based operations manager Darrin Barker stated that obtaining permits from the necessary agencies like TCEQ, LCRA, and US Army Corp of Engineers will add up to three months to the process.

The West Texas community of Barnhart, about 50 miles west of San Angelo, suffered a disastrous fate on June 4 when they officially ran out of water. The town’s sole public well source stayed dry for nearly 3 days. Residents point to the local economy’s reliance on oil and gas drilling as a contributing factor to the problem. “This is Texas industry. This [oil and gas] is what makes Texas money, and yes, we have to have it, but not at this expense,” said Barnhart resident Glenda Kuykendall. On June 6, TCEQ released a statement, saying that “the water system issued a boil water notice as a precautionary measure due to the low water pressure.” However, as of June 18, the agency has only listed Barnhart in stage 3 and as an area of “concern,” meaning they could run out of water in 180 days or less. Barnhart has only 112 residents, which could mean that the potential well capacity exceeds the consumer demand, giving them a higher window of time before a potential outage threat after mitigating the problem.

Brownwood’s primary water source, Lake Brownwood, dropped 17 feet during the 2011 drought and came close to running out of water. The drought still lingers here, a major concern for Brown County Water Improvement District General Manager Dennis Spinks. The District hopes to drill and tap two aquifers 3,000 feet down, but if they fail, the backup plan is to turn treated sewage into drinking water, sending it directly back into the city pipes and eliminating the lake as the middle man. The city obtained a permit from TCEQ and funding from the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) that would allow such a strategy. Brownwood has approximately 20,000 residents and is currently under stage 3 watering restrictions. However, the Water District board members have debated entering stage 4 and are closely monitoring lake levels to determine whether or not it will be necessary.

Texas is a state that is abundant with clean and renewable sources of energy. From the booming wind industry, to the emerging solar sector, Texas is primed to be a clean energy leader. And now thanks to the SMU Geothermal Laboratory, Texans have one more reason to go green.

Research from SMU has shown that there are substantial geothermal resources all along the East I35 Corridor. Geothermal power stations work by harnessing the heat trapped deep within the Earth, and would utilize the ample number of active and plugged wells from the oil and gas industry. “There are currently over 200,000 active wells in Texas. That is 200,000 potential sources of cost-competitive, renewable, baseload, clean energy to Texans.”

Given that geothermal in Texas would most likely be small distributed generation systems of 250 kw to 1 MW per well, a realistic Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) potential for Texas is 318,652 exajoules (EJs). To put that in perspective, that is enough to power the entire industrial sector for over 500 years at the 2008 Texas electrical consumption rate of 32,525 thousand megawatt-hour (MWh).

Tapping into these resources would provide a clean source of energy, while invigorating rural economies with jobs growth and investments. And since geothermal uses existing wells, it could be rapidly deployed to create a clean energy boom for East Texas.

A few months after the deadly explosion at a fertilizer plant in West, Texas, President Obama signed an executive order aimed at increasing safety and oversight at chemical plants across the country. We challenge the state of Texas to go further over the interim session to insure communities have the information they need for their Local Emergency Planning Commissions (LEPCs) to develop adequate plans for dealing with accidents at chemical facilities located within their jurisdiction.

The executive order is included below:

EXECUTIVE ORDER

– – – – – – –

IMPROVING CHEMICAL FACILITY SAFETY AND SECURITY

 

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Purpose. Chemicals, and the facilities where they are manufactured, stored, distributed, and used, are essential to today’s economy. Past and recent tragedies have reminded us, however, that the handling and storage of chemicals are not without risk. The Federal Government has developed and implemented numerous programs aimed at reducing the safety risks and security risks associated with hazardous chemicals. However, additional measures can be taken by executive departments and agencies (agencies) with regulatory authority to further improve chemical facility safety and security in coordination with owners and operators.

Sec. 2. Establishment of the Chemical Facility Safety and Security Working Group. (a) There is established a Chemical Facility Safety and Security Working Group (Working Group) co-chaired by the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Secretary of Labor or their designated representatives at the Assistant Secretary level or higher. In addition, the Working Group shall consist of the head of each of the following agencies or their designated representatives at the Assistant Secretary level or higher:

(i) the Department of Justice;

(ii) the Department of Agriculture; and

(iii) the Department of Transportation.

(b) In carrying out its responsibilities under this order, the Working Group shall consult with representatives from:

(i) the Council on Environmental Quality;

(ii) the National Security Staff;

(iii) the Domestic Policy Council;

(iv) the Office of Science and Technology Policy;

(v) the Office of Management and Budget (OMB);

(vi) the White House Office of Cabinet Affairs; and

(vii) such other agencies and offices as the President may designate.

(c) The Working Group shall meet no less than quarterly to discuss the status of efforts to implement this order. The Working Group is encouraged to invite other affected agencies, such as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, to attend these meetings as appropriate. Additionally, the Working Group shall provide, within 270 days of the date of this order, a status report to the President through the Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality and the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism.

Sec. 3. Improving Operational Coordination with State, Local, and Tribal Partners. (a) Within 135 days of the date of this order, the Working Group shall develop a plan to support and further enable efforts by State regulators, State, local, and tribal emergency responders, chemical facility owners and operators, and local and tribal communities to work together to improve chemical facility safety and security. In developing this plan, the Working Group shall:

(i) identify ways to improve coordination among the Federal Government, first responders, and State, local, and tribal entities;

(ii) take into account the capabilities, limitations, and needs of the first responder community;

(iii) identify ways to ensure that State homeland security advisors, State Emergency Response Commissions (SERCs), Tribal Emergency Response Commissions (TERCs), Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs), Tribal Emergency Planning Committees (TEPCs), State regulators, and first responders have ready access to key information in a useable format, including by thoroughly reviewing categories of chemicals for which information is provided to first responders and the manner in which it is made available, so as to prevent, prepare for, and respond to chemical incidents;

(iv) identify areas, in collaboration with State, local, and tribal governments and private sector partners, where joint collaborative programs can be developed or enhanced, including by better integrating existing authorities, jurisdictional responsibilities, and regulatory programs in order to achieve a more comprehensive engagement on chemical risk management;

(v) identify opportunities and mechanisms to improve response procedures and to enhance information sharing and collaborative planning between chemical facility owners and operators, TEPCs, LEPCs, and first responders;

(vi) working with the National Response Team (NRT) and Regional Response Teams (RRTs), identify means for Federal technical assistance to support developing, implementing, exercising, and revising State, local, and tribal emergency contingency plans, including improved training; and

(vii) examine opportunities to improve public access to information about chemical facility risks consistent with national security needs and appropriate protection of confidential business information.

(b) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Attorney General, through the head of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), shall assess the feasibility of sharing data related to the storage of explosive materials with SERCs, TEPCs, and LEPCs.

(c) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall assess the feasibility of sharing Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) data with SERCs, TEPCs, and LEPCs on a categorical basis.

Sec. 4. Enhanced Federal Coordination. In order to enhance Federal coordination regarding chemical facility safety and security:

(a) Within 45 days of the date of this order, the Working Group shall deploy a pilot program, involving the EPA, Department of Labor, Department of Homeland Security, and any other appropriate agency, to validate best practices and to test innovative methods for Federal interagency collaboration regarding chemical facility safety and security. The pilot program shall operate in at least one region and shall integrate regional Federal, State, local, and tribal assets, where appropriate. The pilot program shall include innovative and effective methods of collecting, storing, and using facility information, stakeholder outreach, inspection planning, and, as appropriate, joint inspection efforts. The Working Group shall take into account the results of the pilot program in developing integrated standard operating procedures pursuant to subsection (b) of this section.

(b) Within 270 days of the date of this order, the Working Group shall create comprehensive and integrated standard operating procedures for a unified Federal approach for identifying and responding to risks in chemical facilities (including during pre-inspection, inspection execution, post-inspection, and post-accident investigation activities), incident reporting and response procedures, enforcement, and collection, storage, and use of facility information. This effort shall reflect best practices and shall include agency-to-agency referrals and joint inspection procedures where possible and appropriate, as well as consultation with the Federal Emergency Management Agency on post-accident response activities.

(c) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Working Group shall consult with the Chemical Safety Board (CSB) and determine what, if any, changes are required to existing memorandums of understanding (MOUs) and processes between EPA and CSB, ATF and CSB, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and CSB for timely and full disclosure of information. To the extent appropriate, the Working Group may develop a single model MOU with CSB in lieu of existing agreements.

Sec. 5. Enhanced Information Collection and Sharing. In order to enhance information collection by and sharing across agencies to support more informed decisionmaking, streamline reporting requirements, and reduce duplicative efforts:

(a) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Working Group shall develop an analysis, including recommendations, on the potential to improve information collection by and sharing between agencies to help identify chemical facilities which may not have provided all required information or may be non-compliant with Federal requirements to ensure chemical facility safety. This analysis should consider ongoing data-sharing efforts, other federally collected information, and chemical facility reporting among agencies (including information shared with State, local, and tribal governments).

(b) Within 180 days of the date of this order, the Working Group shall produce a proposal for a coordinated, flexible data-sharing process which can be utilized to track data submitted to agencies for federally regulated chemical facilities, including locations, chemicals, regulated entities, previous infractions, and other relevant information. The proposal shall allow for the sharing of information with and by State, local, and tribal entities where possible, consistent with section 3 of this order, and shall address computer-based and non-computer-based means for improving the process in the short-term, if they exist.

(c) Within 180 days of the date of this order, the Working Group shall identify and recommend possible changes to streamline and otherwise improve data collection to meet the needs of the public and Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies (including those charged with protecting workers and the public), consistent with the Paperwork Reduction Act and other relevant authorities, including opportunities to lessen the reporting burden on regulated industries. To the extent feasible, efforts shall minimize the duplicative collection of information while ensuring that pertinent information is shared with all key entities.

Sec. 6. Policy, Regulation, and Standards Modernization. (a) In order to enhance safety and security in chemical facilities by modernizing key policies, regulations, and standards, the Working Group shall:

(i) within 90 days of the date of this order, develop options for improved chemical facility safety and security that identifies improvements to existing risk management practices through agency programs,

(ii) within 90 days of developing the options described in subsection (a)(i) of this section, engage key stakeholders to discuss the options and other means to improve chemical risk management that may be available; and

(iii) within 90 days of completing the outreach and consultation effort described in subsection (a)(ii) of this section, develop a plan for implementing practical and effective improvements to chemical risk management identified pursuant to subsections (a)(i) and (ii) of this section.

(b) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Secretary of Labor, and the Secretary of Agriculture shall develop a list of potential regulatory and legislative proposals to improve the safe and secure storage, handling, and sale of ammonium nitrate and identify ways in which ammonium nitrate safety and security can be enhanced under existing authorities.

(c) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Administrator of EPA and the Secretary of Labor shall review the chemical hazards covered by the Risk Management Program (RMP) and the Process Safety Management Standard (PSM) and determine if the RMP or PSM can and should be expanded to address additional regulated substances and types of hazards. In addition, the EPA and the Department of Labor shall develop a plan, including a timeline and resource requirements, to expand, implement, and enforce the RMP and PSM in a manner that addresses the additional regulated substances and types of hazards.

(d) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall identify a list of chemicals, including poisons and reactive substances, that should be considered for addition to the CFATS Chemicals of Interest list.

(e) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Labor shall:

(i) identify any changes that need to be made in the retail and commercial grade exemptions in the PSM Standard; and

(ii) issue a Request for Information designed to identify issues related to modernization of the PSM Standard and related standards necessary to meet the goal of preventing major chemical accidents.

Sec. 7. Identification of Best Practices. The Working Group shall convene stakeholders, including chemical producers, chemical storage companies, agricultural supply companies, State and local regulators, chemical critical infrastructure owners and operators, first responders, labor organizations representing affected workers, environmental and community groups, and consensus standards organizations, in order to identify and share successes to date and best practices to reduce safety risks and security risks in the production and storage of potentially harmful chemicals, including through the use of safer alternatives, adoption of best practices, and potential public-private partnerships.

Sec. 8. General Provisions. (a) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law, including international trade obligations, and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(b) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to a department, agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of OMB relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
August 1, 2013.

President Obama’s Statement that Keystone XL Will Create 2,000 Jobs is Consistent with Cornell Study and State Department Analysis

In an interview with the New York Times July 27, 2013, President Obama asserted that construction of the Keystone XL pipeline would create approximately 2,000 jobs. The President’s claim is consistent with both the findings of the Cornell Global Labor Institute’s 2011 study on the job impacts of the project and the State Department’s latest assessment (SDEIS, March 2013).

“President Obama’s statement that the Keystone XL pipeline has relatively limited job creation potential is entirely correct,” said Sean Sweeney of the Cornell Global Labor Institute and co-author of the study. “TransCanada and the American Petroleum Institute have argued that the project will create tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of jobs, and our data revealed that these assertions were false and the job numbers highly inflated and based on flawed methodology. Cornell’s more careful and comprehensive study, as well as the State Department’s analysis, revealed that the construction of the pipeline will produce far fewer jobs than TransCanada has claimed – only about 2,000 direct construction jobs a year for the two-year life of the project.”

The Cornell report showed that the pipeline would create approximately 2,500 direct construction jobs per year over the two-year life of the project. This number was affirmed in March 2013 when the State Department used TransCanada’s own numbers to analyze the job impacts of the pipeline, based on the current project definition for Keystone XL (Canada to Steele City, NE plus two new pumping stations in KS). The State Department found that the project would employ 3,900 full-time workers for one year, or less than 2,000 workers per year, spread out over the expected two-year construction period. Nearly all of the jobs related to the project would last less than one year – 4 months, 6 months, or 8 months. Therefore, average annual employment is based on the number of construction workers multiplied by the construction period in weeks divided by 52 weeks in a year.  The President’s numbers were therefore correct.

Both Cornell’s and the State Department’s job assessments also found that only 10 – 15% of the construction workers would be hired locally – in the states where the pipeline is being constructed, and that the number of permanent jobs related to the project would be minimal – 35 permanent employees would be required for Keystone XL’s operation.

In addition to the direct construction jobs that would be created by the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, the Cornell Global Labor Institute also found that TransCanada significantly inflated the number of indirect and induced jobs that the project would create by inflating the overall project budget.  TransCanada has claimed it is a $7 billion project. It arrived at this number by including money that will be spent in Canada and funds that had already been spent in the U.S. at the time when its own commissioned study was released.

“A much smaller project budget means a lot less jobs,” says Lara Skinner, co-author of the Cornell study. “The U.S. is facing a serious unemployment problem and this problem should not be trivialized by TransCanada Corporation vastly overestimating the number of jobs that will be created by Keystone XL. I’m pleased that the President is aware of the actual job creation potential of the project, and recognizes that the minimal employment potential of the project should not be a determining factor in the decision to approve or disapprove Keystone XL.”

The Cornell Global Labor Institute study, Pipe Dreams? Jobs Gained, Jobs Lost by the Construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline, is available here:
http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_012312_FIN.pdf

Ian Goodman and Brigid Rowan of the Goodman Group, Ltd., partnered with Sweeney and Skinner in the production of the Cornell report.

Solar Excellent Resource for Meeting High Demand for Energy

You’ve probably heard how solar and wind are intermittent energy sources that aren’t always available, but that’s not the whole story, or necessarily the most important part.

DoD Energy

DoD Energy

When an energy source is available is a critical piece of the puzzle.  We don’t need nearly as much electricity in the middle of the night as we do at 5 pm on a week day when people get home from work and turn down their air conditioning and start cooking dinner, watching TV and doing laundry – often all at the same time.

And now the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) – the entity responsible for keeping the lights on in most of Texas –  is officially recognizing that solar energy is available right when we need it the most – on sunny afternoons – and that wind resources are able to contribute far more than was once believed to meeting our energy needs at those times as well.

ERCOT has no special love for renewable energy – protecting public health and the environment isn’t a factor in its decisions – but it has studied the issue and decided to give solar and wind generators the credit they actually deserve.  Solar facilities up to 200 MW (that’s like a gas plant) will be given a 100% capacity value, although larger solar facilities will have a somewhat lower rating.  Coastal wind will have a 32.9% capacity value.  Coastal wind blows more during the day than West Texas wind, which blows mostly at night, but even non-coastal wind will now get a 14.2% capacity value.  Capacity value corresponds to how likely it is for an energy source to be available during peak energy demand – typically a hot, summer afternoon.

Wind has become a real contributor to the Texas energy portfolio and we can look for solar to make an even larger contribution in the years to come.  This policy change at ERCOT will help us move in that direction.

This morning 29 environmental, religious and public interest groups released a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry asking him to restart the Keystone environmental review process, take action against the contractor ERM for lying on its conflict of interest disclosure form, and request a new Inspector General investigation.

Speak up to make sure that the current draft environmental review does not become the basis for his final decision.

Press release: Attached is a press release that has just been sent out. It’s also up on our website here. Please feel free to adapt and send it to your own contacts.

Letter to Kerry: A link can be found here.

Action Alert: If you have not already done so it would be great if you could write to Kerry reinforcing the call for the review to be tossed out and action taken against ERM.  Click here to take action.

In the midst of Texas’ worst drought since the 1950s “drought of record,” we face serious issues regarding water consumption and waste, water rights, and how conservation efforts can be integrated into public policy. Texas’ population is projected to double by 2060. So how can we sustainably plan to serve the water needs of an estimated 52 million people by then? Water conservation, management strategies, and planning were the top environmental issues put on the table during the 83rd Texas Legislative Session.

Several water conservation bills were passed into law this session. HB 4, introduced by Rep. Allan Ritter (R-Nederland), marked the most significant and impactful among those he signed. The bill allocates $2 billion toward a new State Water Implementation Fund for Texas (SWIFT) from the state’s “Rainy Day Fund,” pending voter approval in the November 5th election. If approved, SWIFT will be used to fund water-related projects, infrastructure, and conservation projects with loans. The bill requires that 20% of funding go toward conservation and re-use, with another 10% toward agricultural water projects.

Faucet dripping Earth dropThree bills passed that will address the problem of wasted water. HB 857, by Rep. Eddie Lucio (D-Brownsville), requires water utilities to conduct annual water loss audits. HB 1461, from Rep. Jimmie Don Aycock (R-Killeen), requires customer notification of audit results. Rep. Lon Burnam’s (D-Fort Worth) HB 3605 requires utilities to use a portion of state financial assistance funds to repair municipal water main leaks, which would save an estimated 20 billion gallons annually.

Austin’s Democratic Sen. Kirk Watson got his SB 198 signed into law as well. It makes it illegal for homeowners associations to prohibit members from utilizing xeriscaping and drought-resistant landscaping. Watson noted that residential lawns are commonly made up of St. Augustine and Kentucky bluegrass, both of which require extensive watering. This is a significant problem in arid regions like west Texas. It takes much less water to grow native plants like yuccas, creosote, and Texas sagebrush, all of which are favorable for lawn aesthetics. An increase in drought-tolerant plants as opposed to traditional lawn grasses could save 14 billion gallons of water by 2020.

Other water-related bills signed into law include SB 385, 654, 700, and 1870. SB 385 created the Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) program, which authorizes collaboration amongst municipalities, counties, commercial lenders, and landowners to develop improvement projects that will reduce water and energy consumption. SB 654 gives municipalities the power to enforce water ordinances through civil action instead of filing criminal lawsuits. SB 700 requires that the State Energy Conservation Office (SECO) draft a template for state agencies to use in developing comprehensive water management and conservation plans, which they must annually update. It also requires SECO to biennially submit a progress report to the Governor and publish it on their website. Finally, SB 1870 created the West Fort Bend Water Authority and outlined its powers.

At the intersection of Loop 410 and Military Drive on Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, Texas lies the Texas Cryptology Center. It’s a huge and intimidatingly bland building, covered in massive A/C units and shrouded in secrecy. Operated by the NSA, the general function of this spy center was unknown until fairly recently. In fact, one of the only public statements released from the center was in response to signals emanating from the building which were interfering with garage door openers.

Photo: Maryland NSA Headquarters

NSA Headquarters

Then in early 2013, the purpose of the Texas Cryptology Center and several other of the NSA’s behemoth computing centers started to become clear. The now infamous NSA contractor Edward Snowden revealed that the agency had created, through use of the Patriot Act, a vast and sophisticated network of surveillance under the code name PRISM. This program allows the collection of personal data from some of the internet’s most frequented sites. Companies such as Google, Yahoo, Facebook, Microsoft, and Skype are all participants. It later broke that the NSA was also monitoring vast quantities of phone calls. All this was done under the guise of national security, and preventing terrorism.

NSA officials initially attempted to calm the frenzied media reaction by saying that only data from international communications was being collected. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper was asked at a hearing whether the National Security Agency collects any data on millions of Americans. “No sir … not wittingly,” Clapper responded, acknowledging there are cases “where inadvertently, perhaps the data could be collected.” It turns out that this statement was dangerously close to a blatant lie. In reality, “The National Security Agency is currently collecting the telephone records of millions of US customers of Verizon, one of America’s largest telecoms providers, under a top secret court order issued in April.” To the NSA’s defense, supposedly only “metadata” is being collected. That is the NSA only records the location, duration, and identities of two callers, but not the content. However, it seems plausible that if the NSA officials lied about not collecting Americans data, then they maybe lying about the kind of data being collected. This is currently just speculation, but it wasn’t long ago that people who were paranoid about Big Brother spying on them were labeled as crazies.

In fact, it’s not just American citizens or international terrorist that should be worried about NSA snooping. While Snowden fled to Hong Kong, and then to Russia seeking political asylum, it was leaked that the NSA had bugged the offices of European Union officials. “The leaked documents suggest the aim of the bugging exercise against the EU embassy in central Washington is to gather inside knowledge of policy disagreements on global issues and other rifts between member states.” While governments spying on each other is nothing new, it’s seems quite brazen for the U.S to treat some of its closest allies with the same lack of respect as suspected terrorist.

Despite the fact that all of this already resembles the plot of a spy movie, the type of revelations coming out now may be just the tip of the iceberg. It’s unclear how much insider information Snowden was able to retrieve about the NSA’s operations, or if he will leak anymore statements about the extent of the snooping. As of right now, business is booming for the NSA. Based on a study of property records, the San Antonio NSA campus “has grown by nearly 135,000 square feet, to almost 633,000 square feet. In 2008, the facility was worth $33.5 million; now it is valued at more than $72 million.” Clearly the NSA anticipates no slowdown in their operations. But if the leaks continue, the citizens of San Antonio might just gain some insight into the Texas Cryptology Center, and how their city plays a key role in the emergence of local and global surveillance.

 

Newly Confirmed EPA head, Gina McCarthy

Newly Confirmed EPA head, Gina McCarthy

The Senate approved Gina McCarthy to be the new head of the Environmental Protection Agency on a 59-40 vote Thursday, ending a lengthy battle over the post.

President Obama nominated Ms. McCarthy, a longtime top official of the EPA, to replace Lisa Jackson, who served in the post in the president’s first term. Republicans have complained both about the agency’s policies under Ms. Jackson and the transparency with which she deal with Congress.

Ms. McCarthy was the latest nominee of President Obama to be approved following a deal earlier this week to curb GOP filibusters of executive branch nominees.

UPDATE

NPR’s State Impact takes a look at where landowners stand against pipeline companies’ claims that they have the right to take land through eminent domain.

Click here to read part one of a three-part series devoted to looking at efforts to overhaul eminent domain in Texas and what may come next for landowners, pipeline companies, and the oil and gas industry.

Click here to read part two of this three-part series.

Click here to read the third and final part of this series of articles on pipelines, eminent domain and Texas courts

As you may or may not know, Governor Rick Perry has vetoed the funding for the Public Integrity Unit, the group charged with enforcing ethics standards for public officials, as well as insurance fraud and motor vehicle tax fraud.  This veto could not have come at a more questionable time.  On the back of other ethics veto’s, Perry has brought to light his true feelings about the ethics laws in Texas.  To read more about this veto and Perry’s conflict of interest, read our op-ed that has run in the Houston Chronicle as well as the Burnt Orange Report.

http://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/Smith-Get-ready-to-hold-your-nose-4666902.php

http://www.burntorangereport.com/diary/13775/was-governor-perrys-veto-of-public-integrity-unit-funding-linked-to-investigations-of-corruption

A local group of Solar advocates in Plano Texas has worked to put together a group purchase agreement to help reduce the costs of adding solar to your roof top if you live in Plano TX.

So far they have gotten 24 locals to commit to the project and hope that they can reach at least 50 by the time this round of purchases is made and the installations begin. With the current tax credit, and a local rebate, now is a great time to lock in a low rate for electricity for the next 30 years.

“In collaboration with Live Green in Plano, Plano Solar Advocates is pleased to announce a pilot program to help “Solarize Plano” homes. This program will connect residential homeowners that are ready to install solar, with local, qualified installers and will take advantage of generous local utility incentives that are available for a limited time.”

Give the folks at solarizeplano.org a call and get in while the time is right.

Rooftop solar installation

Rooftop solar installation

StateImpact Texas, a reporting project of local public media and NPR, has provided us with an excellent overview of the continuing drought in Texas.

Today, 12.2% of the state is in exceptional drought (the highest level of drought under the US Drought Monitor reporting)  This is the map for September 13, 2011 - at this time 87.3% of the state was in exceptional drought.

Today, 12.2% of the state is in exceptional drought (the highest level of drought under the US Drought Monitor reporting) This is the map for September 13, 2011 – at this time 87.3% of the state was in exceptional drought.


In October 2010 the current drought began and Texas endured the worst single-year drought in its history in 2011. While the situation has improved, do not be fooled, the drought is far from over — and the conditions that caused it aren’t going away anytime soon.

NPRs StateImpact shows us the the cost to Texas, to date, as well as some dire considerations the state will have to make as we move forward.

Click here to see their report.