Feeds:
Posts
Comments

In a tweet on July 11th, 2013, Christi Craddick re-tweeted a link to a YouTube video entitled, “Let’s Build the Keystone XL.”  She then added to the link, “Let us know what you think!”  The Keystone XL is not in the interest of Texans or of the United States.  Send a tweet or a message to Commissioner Craddick letting her know that you do NOT approve of the Keystone XL in the State of Texas.  If you have a personal story of how it has negatively affected you, please share it with her.  Let her know that not only is the Keystone XL an environmental disaster, but in Texas we do not take too kindly to people taking our land.

So, tell Railroad Commissioner Christi Craddick, “No to the Keystone XL!”

Christi.Craddick@rrc.state.tx.us

According to an NBC News story, a study on human-induced earthquakes published today in Science, shows within the central and eastern United States, more than 300 earthquakes of magnitude 3 or greater were recorded from 2010 through 2012, compared to an average rate of 21 earthquakes per year from 1967 to 2000.

The hydrolic fracturing (fracking) technique used to produce natural gas and oil involves shooting several million gallons of water laced with chemicals and sand deep underground to break apart chunks of shale rock, freeing trapped gas to escape through cracks and fissures into wells has been linked to human-induced earthquakes, however this process produces earthquakes that are almost all too small to be felt — and the fracking industry is quick to use this fact to say fracking doesn’t cause earthquakes. Nevertheless, larger earthquakes are associated with injection of wastewater into underground wells, a technique used to dispose of the briny, polluted water that comes to the surface after a frack job is completed and a well is producing natural gas and oil, so one might say the industry is a bit too literal, since these activities would not occur if fracking wasn’t occurring.

Click here to read the NBC story.

In Texas, which has seen a dramatic increase in fracking activities in the Barnett and Eagle Ford shale regions, a recent quake registered a 4.8 in May of 2013 near Timpson, TX which sits in the drilling area of the Haynesville Shale.

According to an NPR StateImpact story, researchers have known for decades that disposal wells can cause quakes, but state regulators say they are waiting for more proof. The Texas Railroad Commission, the agency that regulates oil and gas drilling in Texas, is currently considering updated rules for disposal wells in the state, but it says it has no plans to include consideration of man-made earthquakes in that rule making. Click here to read the NPR story.

This begins to make sense when you see that 3% of the Flat Earth Society‘s membership is from Texas.

According to an article in the New York Times, in recent decades people living in the south of China are living five years longer on average than their northern counterparts. The reasons are because of the pollution from the widespread use of coal in the north, according to a study released Monday by The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, a prominent American science journal.

The study was conducted by an American, an Israeli and two Chinese scholars and was based on analyses of health and pollution data collected by official Chinese sources from 1981 to 2001. Click here to read the full story in the New York Times.

At the same time, NBC News reports that two studies release on Tuesday shows air pollution can cause lung cancer and seems to worsen heart failure.

Both studies show the more pollution, the more disease. One study looked at lung cancer cases across Europe; the other looked at hospitalization for heart failure in several countries, including the United States.

Dr. Ole Raaschou-Nielsen of the Danish Cancer Society Research Center said they couldn’t find a “safe” level of air pollution. The more pollution, the higher the risk, even at legally accepted limits.

The second study looked at 12 countries, including the United States. Nicholas Mills of the University of Edinburgh in Britain and colleagues combined data from 35 studies that assessed carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and ozone pollution, as well as particulate matter (often simply called soot) and looked at rates of being hospitalized for heart failure,.

About half of people with heart failure die within five years, according to the American Heart Association. This study found that one of the things that can throw heart failure patients into the hospital, or kill them, is breathing polluted air. Click here to read the NBC News story.

NPR’s State Impact reported this morning that Energy Future Holdings (formerly TXU) has “self-bonded” approximately $1 billion for future mining restoration in Texas in lieu of real cash bonds. Click here to hear the entire story.

In the transcript of the story it discusses the main concerns of Public Citizen and Sierra Club who have been investigating this issue for the past six months.

At the heart of the two groups’ (Public Citizen and Sierra Club) concern is what’s called “self-bonding.” Under federal law, mining companies must post bonds as a form of insurance to cover the cost of reclamation in case the companies run into financial trouble. Instead of using an outside company to provide the bonds, mining operators in Texas are allowed to self-bond. Some coal states don’t accept self-bonding.

Texas has approved Luminant Mining’s self-bonding. The self-bond’s “third party guarantor” is a sister company, Luminant Generation. It’s the power plant company that burns the coal from Luminant Mining.

The environmentalists say they’re worried that those power plant assets might also be claimed by other creditors, jeopardizing the funds Texas might recover to pay for reclamation.

Luminant’s parent company, Energy Future Holdings, has explained in annual reports to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission that the company faces creditworthiness requirements for different regulators in Texas, among them the Railroad Commission. For years,  the reports said that “we believe we will have adequate liquidity to satisfy such requirements” or “we believe we would have adequate liquidity capacity and/or financing capacity to satisfy such requirements.”

But then, in a 2012 report, that line disappeared.

“It was the smoking gun,” said Public Citizen’s Smitty Smith.

On page 100 of EFH’s 2008 10K filing, page 100 of EFH’s 2009 10K filing, page 98 of EFH’s 2010 10K filing, and page 93 of EFH’s 2011 10K filing, the following appears

The RRC has rules in place to assure that parties can meet their mining reclamation obligations, including through self-bonding when appropriate. If Luminant Generation Company LLC (a subsidiary of TCEH) does not continue to meet the self-bonding requirements as applied by the RRC, TCEH may be required to post cash, letter of credit or other tangible assets as collateral support in an amount currently estimated to be approximately $xxx (from a low of $600 million in 2008 to a high of 990 million in 2011) million. The actual amount (if required) could vary depending upon numerous factors, including the amount of Luminant Generation Company LLC’s self-bond accepted by the RRC and the level of mining reclamation obligations. . . .

In the event that any or all of the additional collateral requirements discussed above are triggered, we believe we would have adequate liquidity and/or financing capacity to satisfy such requirements.

On page 85 of EFH’s 2012 10K filing, only

The RRC has rules in place to assure that parties can meet their mining reclamation obligations, including through self-bonding when appropriate. If Luminant Generation Company LLC (a subsidiary of TCEH) does not continue to meet the self-bonding requirements as applied by the RRC, TCEH may be required to post cash, letter of credit or other tangible assets as collateral support in an amount currently estimated to be approximately $850 million to $1.1 billion. The actual amount (if required) could vary depending upon numerous factors, including the amount of Luminant Generation Company LLC’s self-bond accepted by the RRC and the level of mining reclamation obligations. . . .

appears, the followup statement, found in the previous 4 years 10K filings is conspicuously missing.

In the event that any or all of the additional collateral requirements discussed above are triggered, we believe we would have adequate liquidity and/or financing capacity to satisfy such requirements.

NPR’s story goes on to say “a media liaison for Energy Future Holdings, Allan Koenig, would not comment specifically about the line that disappeared.”  But that was followed up by an email from the company saying, “We fully satisfy the bonding requirements of the Railroad Commission of Texas for our coal mines, which means that our reclamation obligations are guaranteed.”

Well, yes they do satisfy the bonding requirements allowed by the RRC and their obligations are guaranteed by Luminant Generation, but it is all the same company and still at risk if the assets of the company, should a reorganization occur, be found insufficient to meet the bond amount currently estimated at $850 million to $1.1 billion.  EFH is telling the Railroad Commission ‘Trust us, we’re good for it’ even though the company debt is rated as junk status by the financial ratings agencies like Standard and Poor’s. What EFH is doing is like a family getting a second mortgage on a house and losing their jobs.  How can Texas regulators have any confidence that the assets of Luminant Generation will be protected from the bankruptcy process and available to cover future mining reclamation costs?

In a memo from the Railroad Commission (RRC) to Luminant Mining Company regarding Docket No C12-0006-SC-46-E, on the Oak Hill Mine application for replacement bond, it appears Luminant reassured the RRC that in their 2012 3rd quarter filing EFH’s liquidity amount (at that time) was $3.8B and that amount would be sufficient to cover all obligations including Luminant Minings reclamation needs.  However, we don’t know that this will still be the case 3 to 12 months from now should EFH file for bankruptcy.

We believe the RRC and Texas would be best served by requiring a more secure form of bonding for reclamation needs.

HB 2 by Laubenberg / Burkett / Harper-Brown / Bonnen, Greg / et al., – Relating to the regulation of abortion procedures, providers, and facilities; providing penalties. is scheduled to be heard on the House Floor tomorrow.  The House is scheduled to convene at 10 AM, and at this time HB 2 is the only item on the calendar.

The Senate Health & Human Services Committee is scheduled to take public testimony on SB 1 (Relating to the regulation of abortion procedures, providers, and facilities; providing penalties) starting at 10:00 AM on Monday, July 08, 2013.  The hearing will be in the Texas Capitol extension in room E1.036 (Finance Room) and they will start allowing witnesses to sign up outside the room starting at 9 am.

This is the Senate companion bill to HB2 which was heard in the House State Affairs Committee on Tuesday.  The House set a time limit on their hearing and in over 8 hours was only able to take oral testimony from 94 individuals.  While the notice for the Senate hearing does not have a hard end time and they are only allotting 2 minutes to each witness to maximize the committee’s ability to hear from as many individuals wishing to testify as possible, if 2,000 people register, it is unlikely they will be able to hear from everyone.  We have provided information below on how best to have your voice heard, whether you speak in front of the committee or not..

  • Get there as early as possible to register.  Witnesses are called at the discretion of the chair, but the earlier you register, the greater your chances are that you will be called.
  • Even if you are not prepared to stay all day to testify, or do not want to speak, show up to register.  You can indicate your position on the bill and that you are not testifying.  This will be included on the witness list.  You may only register for yourself and must do so in person.
  • If you can prepare your remarks in advance, please do so in writing.  Written testimony may be turned into the clerk to be distributed to members and even if you are not able to speak or have to leave before you are called, it becomes part of the public record.  You will need to supply 20 copies of the written testimony to the clerk with your name on each page.
  • Below is a simple sample format for written testimony.

Testimony of (your name here)

On behalf of (Organization name here) *optional

Against/On/For SB1

Before the Senate Committee on Health and Human Services

on July 8, 2013

 

Chairman Nelson and members of the committee, thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak before you.  My name is (your name here). I am here to speak (against/on/for) SB1.

State your concerns or reasons for your position.  If you agree with parts of a bill, state that up front and then tell the committee where you disagree.

Provide any data you wish the committee to have and be sure to provide your sources in the written materials.  You don’t have to take up your time stating them to the committee if speaking, but should have them in front of you in case the committee members ask where you got the information.

Tell your story.  Remember if you get to speak you only have 2 minutes and the more concise you are the less likely you will be cut off.  You can elaborate in your written testimony, but should also prepare something that will fit within the two minutes allowed you.

For those who showed up on Tuesday and stayed until midnight without getting the opportunity to speak, we hope you have that opportunity on Monday, but if not, these tips may still allow your voice to be heard.

NOTE: While I have my own position on this issue, our Texas office has not taken an official position, and that is why the sample written testimony format allows for all positions.

 

Senator Wendy Davis

Texas State Senator greeted enthusiastically by the crowds. by Karen Hadden

An estimated 5,000 demonstrators descended on the Texas Capitol today, with the majority expressing their opposition to new abortion restrictions that a Democratic filibuster led by state Senator Wendy Davis and raucous protests outside and inside the capitol derailed last week.

Today, Texas lawmakers convened a second special legislative session aimed at reviving the bill that would limit where, when and how women may obtain abortions in the state. Supporters say it will protect women’s health, while opponents say it is designed to shutter the majority of the state’s abortion clinics. Whatever is said about this law, the GOP dominated legislature is determined to pass it during this special session.

The session is also supposed to deal with a constitutional amendment for new highway funding and a juvenile justice measure that refines a no-parole provision for 17-year-olds convicted of capital murder in the wake of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last summer that outlawed such sentencing schemes.

A special session costs taxpayers more than $800,000. Each lawmaker is given a $150 per diem to cover food and living expenses per day during a regular or special session. The longer a special session goes, the more money will be spent. If the second special session takes a full 30 days, Texans could be paying legislators nearly $1.6 million.  But the leadership has indicated that they are confident this session will not last the full 30 days as they railroad these three measures through.

 

Hearing tomorrow
That being said, the house just posted a notice of public hearing to hear testimony on HB 2 by Representative Jodie Laubenberg – (District 89 R-Parker), Relating to the regulation of abortion procedures, providers and facilities. The hearing is scheduled in front of the House State Affairs Committee in the Capitol Extension room E2.030 at 3:30 pm tomorrow, Tuesday, July 2nd.

The committee will receive testimony upon convening, until 12:01 a.m., July 3, 2013, and witnesses will be given 3 minutes for oral testimony. Written testimony is encouraged and appreciated.  If you would like to provide the committee with written testimony, please bring 15 copies.

The committee will be using the electronic witness affirmation system developed for the regular 83rd legislative session, and is available at registration kiosks located throughout the Capitol Extension.  Registration must be performed the day of the hearing and within the Capitol Complex — however, you may create a profile in advance from any internet connection. Please visit: www.house.state.tx.us/resources/.

NOTICE OF ASSISTANCE AT PUBLIC MEETINGS:  Persons with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who may need assistance, such as a sign language interpreter, are requested to contact Stacey Nicchio at (512) 463-0850, 72 hours prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made.  Since the hearing is in 24 hours, I guess that means persons with disabilities are out of luck.

Despite the fact that the GOP leadership has told the world that this bill is going to pass, the spontaneous outpouring of support show by citizens from across the state has been a heartening display of democracy in action. The 83rd legislative session along with the two special sessions is a snapshot of how little our elected officials listen to what is important to Texans.  Perhaps this time, there will be consequences.

Check out these photos:

 

Thongs showed up

Thousands showed up #StandingWithWendy

A sea of orange in front of a pink granite capitol

A sea of orange in front of a pink granite capitol

Inside the capitol after the rally.

Inside the capitol after the rally.

James Montgomery, Associate Editor, RenewableEnergyWorld.com

Texas A&M University-Central Texas (TAMU-CT) is opening the doors for what it claims will be the planet’s biggest solar energy test facility, a 50-MW undertaking spanning both commercial demonstrations and testing, with an incubator program to shepherd newer technologies. The system also will produce all of the university’s power requirements (achieved via net metering), housing enough renewable energy to power the entire TAMU-CT’s campus.

Projected to cost nearly $600 million, the Center for Solar Energy will cover up to 800 acres in Bell County, TX, adjacent to the campus and neighboring Fort Hood. PPA Partners is developing the project, with “one of the 10 largest domestic electric contractors and renewable EPCs” handling installation of all the PV systems. The project will be built out in stages, or “blocks,” according to Bruce Mercy, executive director of the CSE. One financier (choosing to remain anonymous for the next 90 days or so) has already committed $25 million to build out the first block; another has been tentatively lined up and will be announced a few weeks after that, he said. Groundbreaking will begin shortly thereafter.

If any of this sounds familiar, perhaps it’s because PPA Partners and its CEO Bruce Mercy were behind a similar project at Arizona Western College (AWC), which compares five different solar technologies totaling 5 MW. There’s another connection: Marc Nigliazzo, president of TAMU-CT, was president at AWC when it devised and built out its evaluation project.

The plan for this solar center is far bigger in scale, though. Besides the 50-MW solar tech evaluation, the CSE also will be home to a National Photovolatic Innovation Competition and a Next-Generation Solar Technology Business Incubator, to identify and support early-stage solar technologies at or near the prototyping stage, with the goal to bring the best of them from concept to market within two years. Participants, selected by a combination of faculty and industry leaders, will receive a 30-KW site for their systems and support (e.g. monitoring equipment, staff & resources). Over 12 months they’ll be tested, graded, validated, and rated against the baseline of the entire 50-MW multi-technology site. Best-performing technologies will advance to a different demo site where data consisting of product grading, rating, etc. will be made public. TAMU-CT will provide support for business plan development, financial analysis, and installation analysis including costs, balance-of-system design, and performance validations such as UL testing. They’ll also help connect winners to VC and manufacturing interests. The University and CSE will “retain a minimal percentage” of IP rights licenses from any technology that goes through the program.

And the school has even bigger dreams for the center beyond the technology — accelerate research and curriculum development within various disciplines from tech to business development, extend collaboration to various partners within the TAMU system (a network of 11 universities and nine state agencies), and regional community college partners and school districts, said Nigliazzo.

“My challenge to Bruce in Arizona was to reduce the cost of electricity, strengthen [AWC’s] programs and the economy of the region [that was] suffering greatly from the recession,” Nigliazzo told the audience assembled at TAMU-CT. “The success of that is the basis of what is being announced today in Texas.”

kevin-fowler-slide

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality along with Texas Parks and Wildlife has launched a new campaign to encourage everyone to Take Care of Texas’ environment.  A new website contains materials that range from general information about environmental programs to specific, step-by-step instructions that address common environmental situations.  To learn about ways to get involved, click here.

Asian Tiger Mosquito - Aedes Albopictus

Asian Tiger Mosquito – Aedes Albopictus

There’s a new pest invading many American towns, the Asian tiger mosquito.

According to NBC Science, this mosquito is as menacing as it sounds since it is effective at transmitting more than 20 diseases, and its success at spreading throughout the world is due to a warming climate, with eggs tough enough to survive a cold winter.

Click here to read the article.

There’s a lot to like in the president’s plan that he announced today, but there is a lot that falls short, too. Certainly on the most important measure, reducing coal-burning plant emissions, the president is a day late and a dollar short. The lack of specificity on the standard eventually to be issued makes it impossible to know how far reaching it will be.

But Texas shows how it can be done!  See below.

Associated Press/Charles Dharapak - President Barack Obama wipes perspiration from his face as he speaks about climate change

Associated Press/Charles Dharapak – President Barack Obama wipes perspiration from his face as he speaks about climate change

Catastrophic climate change poses a near-existential threat to humanity. We need a national mobilization — and indeed a worldwide mobilization – to transform rapidly from our fossil fuel-reliant past and present to a clean energy future. We need a sense of urgency – indeed, emergency – with massive investments, tough and specific standards and binding rules which are missing from the president’s plan.

The administration is finally using the authority ratified by a conservative Supreme Court to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. The Administration will re-write rules for new plants and develop rules for all existing power plants. This is the most important tool the Administration has, and if the rules are written the way they should be, it will go a long way towards protecting consumers and our climate. This initiative builds on the successful and strong automobile tailpipe standards that have already been successfully rolled out. The downside is that the late 2015 final rule date is far off in the future, and will likely see lengthy legal challenges.

The plan also, helpfully, builds on existing programs and plucks some low-hanging fruit to reduce carbon emissions: Increasing renewable targets and efficiency on federal land, in the federal government’s operations, in the Pentagon, and in federally-assisted housing.

The Administration set the table recently by increasing the estimated cost of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to society, from $23.80/ton to $38.

Targeting oil industry subsidies, as the Administration proposes here, is also commonsense, and much needed policy.

However, there is no mention in the plan of using a uniform, strong climate change impact assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act, which would require the costs and impacts of GHG in every federal environmental impact statement. The failure to utilize NEPA for GHG assessment is a huge oversight.

Reserving the troubled loan guarantee program for “clean coal” is a taxpayer boondoggle waiting to happen. A case in point is the Obama-backed Kemper IGCC coal plant owned by Southern Co, which has seen costs balloon from $2.4 billion to $4.2 billion, with costs still rising further.

In general, the President’s embrace of an “all of the above” strategy, including oil and gas expansion, is a disaster. His focus on fossil fuel exports — including the explicit promotion of LNG (liquefied natural gas) and his failure to curtail coal exports – threatens to undo any positive elements of the plan. By promoting LNG, the Administration is moving full-speed-ahead on fracking – with no mention of how to control fugitive emissions, water contamination and other environmental problems posed by the controversial process. And while the proposed EPA rules over existing and new coal power plants will result in significant GHG reductions here at home, all of that will be negated (and more) if we ramp up our coal exports to China. Using NEPA and other statutes to ensure that the emissions of coal exports – and the fugitive emissions of fracked gas – are included in the environmental impact study (EIS) for export projects is essential.

The same goes for Keystone XL. Awaiting approval by the State Dept, the Keystone XL pipeline’s EIS is fatally flawed. The Administration has a chance to re-write the EIS to take into account the true GHG impact of the tar sands, which would require this gas-price boosting project to be rejected.  And Obama’s welcome announcement on KXL won’t affect the southern segment of the line being built from Oklahoma to Houston, nor will it stop the conversion of existing pipelines to carry tar sands. These are the back door ways that tar sands and its carbon pollution will leak into the international markets

At the end of the day, it would be helpful if the Administration would lend its support to an existing climate bill – the Climate Protection Act of 2013. This legislation places a price on carbon, sending revenues back to families and into investments for a sustainable energy economy (not to mention regulating fracking and repealing oil industry subsidies).

“Texas Shows How It Can Be Done”

The good news is that the solutions to global warming from the energy sector are within reach — and Texas shows how it can be done. We can power our state with renewable energy, energy efficiency demand side management and energy storage technologies and techniques that exist or are being developed right now.

“Here’s what Texas has shown in recent years:

  • In 1999 Texas adopted renewable energy goals – partially to reduce global warming. Now Texas leads the nation in production of wind energy, which is now so cheap that it is reducing consumers bills;
  • Renewable energy is now employing more people than coal plants and coal mines are  in Texas;
  • If we were to  develop more solar and geothermal, and employ energy  storage, we could meet our energy needs around the clock without relying on coal;
  • With the combination of those tools we could phase out and shut down our 22 climate killing coal plants;
  • Adopting building energy codes has reduced statewide carbon emissions by as much a coal plant would produce.”

wind_turbine_aalborgProbably not overall, but the City of Houston has made a historic commitment – to buy half its power from renewable sources.

Houston was built around the oil and gas industries and has long suffered the consequences of being home to many of the nation’s most polluting refining and chemical manufacturing facilities.  Purchasing clean energy for the City’s facilities won’t change all that, but it does represent a significant change in mindset.

In the absence of federal legislation to address the increasingly pressing problem of climate change, local action has become essential.  At the very least, the energy used in public buildings – that taxpayers pay for – should be clean energy.  Houston is taking a huge step in that direction.

Wind energy is already one of the cheaper energy sources in Texas and solar energy is becoming competitive, especially as prices increase with higher energy demand.  These trends will be helped by large-scale investments like the one Houston is making.

Moving away from energy from coal-fired power plants will also help keep jobs growing in Texas.  Luckily, this isn’t an issue of jobs vs. the environment.  It’s an easy choice of supporting both.  Kudos to Houston to for recognizing an opportunity to take a leadership role.

Talk to your local elected officials about using clean energy to power your public buildings.

Texas Capitol - north viewWith the regular session behind us and energy and environmental issues not likely to find a place in the special session, it’s a good time to look at what we accomplished.

Our wins came in two forms – bills that passed that will actually improve policy in Texas and bills that didn’t pass that would have taken policy in the wrong direction.

We made progress by helping to get bills passed that:

  • Expand funding for the Texas Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP) by about 40%;
  • Create a program within TERP to replace old diesel tractor trailer trucks used in and around ports and rail yards (these are some of the most polluting vehicles on the road);
  • Establish new incentives within TERP for purchasing plug-in electric cars; and
  • Assign authority to the Railroad Commission (RRC) to regulate small oil and gas lines (these lines, known as gathering lines, are prone to leaks); and
  • Allows commercial and industrial building owners to obtain low-cost, long-term private sector financing for water conservation and energy-efficiency improvements, including on-site renewable energy, such as solar.

We successfully helped to stop or improve bad legislation that would have:

  • Eliminated hearings on permits for new pollution sources (the contested case hearing process is crucial to limiting pollution increases);
  • Eliminated additional inspections for facilities with repeated pollution violations;
  • Weakened protections against utilities that violate market rules and safety guidelines;
  • Eliminated property tax breaks for wind farms, while continuing the policy for other industries;
  • Granted home owners associations (HOAs) authority to unreasonably restrict homeowners ability to install solar panels on their roofs; and
  • Permitted Austin City Council to turn control of Austin Energy over to an unelected board without a vote by the citizens of Austin.

We did lose ground on the issue of radioactive waste disposal.  Despite our considerable efforts, a bill passed that will allow more highly radioactive waste to be disposed of in the Waste Control Specialists (WCS) facility in west Texas.  Campaign contributions certainly played an important roll in getting the bill passed.

We were also disappointed by Governor Perry’s veto of the Ethics Commission sunset bill, which included several improvements, including a requirement that railroad commissioners resign before running for another office, as they are prone to do.  Read Carol’s post about this bill and the issue.

With the legislation over and Perry’s veto pen out of ink, we now shift our attention to organizing and advocating for a transition from polluting energy sources that send money out of our state to clean energy sources that can grow our economy.

We’re working to:

  • Promote solar energy at electric cooperatives and municipal electric utilities;
  • Speed up the retirement of old, inefficient, polluting coal-fired power plants in east Texas;
  • Protect our climate and our port communities throughout the Gulf states from health hazards from new and expanded coal export facilities;
  • Fight permitting of the Keystone XL and other tar sands pipelines in Texas;
  • Ensure full implementation of improvements made to TERP; and
  • Develop an environmental platform for the 2014 election cycle.

Our power comes from people like you getting involved – even in small ways, like writing an email or making a call.  If you want to help us work for a cleaner, healthier, more sustainable future, email me at kwhite@citizen.org.  And one of the best things you can do is to get your friends involved too.

Texas’ governor is at it again.  Just 15 minutes ago, dozen’s of bills went down in flames under the governor’s veto pen.  This included a bill essential to providing more efficient enforcement of ethics violations in the Texas political process: the Ethics Commission sunset bill (SB 219), which passed by 97 percent in the House and 94 percent in the Senate.

Why veto such an overwhelmingly popular bill? It is because of a provision in the bill that would require members of the Railroad Commission to step down if they announce their candidacy for another office. This again demonstrates that the governor is more interested in protecting powerful politicians than protecting Texas residents.

Members of the Railroad Commission frequently seek higher office. Recently, two commissioners ran against each other for the same U.S. Senate seat. The commissioners, who serve more like judges than elected state officials, oversee complex oil and gas cases that require familiarity with the law and impartiality. When commissioners use their position as a springboard to run for another office, they often go absent from the commission, and the demands of campaigning reduce their ability to do their job.  This portion of the legislation could have been used as a model for how to adequately reform the Railroad Commission, but instead the governor shot it down.

It is worth noting that 81-93 percent of the total campaign donations to the commissioners come from the oil and gas industry, which is overseen by the Railroad Commission. Perhaps that’s why in 2012, despite handling 82 contested cases, the commission didn’t deny a permit to an oil and gas company even once. Clearly, the industry doesn’t want to risk losing members of the Railroad Commission who have been carefully cultivated.

It is a bad sign for democracy when a single person can veto the will of almost an entire legislature, and when a sunset bill for an entire state agency is sunk because of just one provision that would inconvenience the oil and gas industry.

Click here to see other bills vetoed by the governor and his justification for some of them.

Fire season started early in California this year because the winter rains that usually tide this area over until July or August, barely materialized. Last year, the focus was on wildfires in Colorado and New Mexico. In 2011, Texas was a hotbed of drought and wildfire.  Now, all signs point to a destructive 2013 season, given how parched the earth is in the southwest and west, and we are starting to see that materialize.

Typically, this would be the height of the wildfire season in the southwest – New Mexico, Arizona, parts of Colorado, but despite how dry it is and how hot it’s been, a lot of the region had been spared until the big fire started in Colorado this week near Colorado Springs.

According to several scientists on a Climate Nexus panel on Tuesday (Climate Nexus is a strategic communications group dedicated to highlighting the wide-ranging impacts of climate change and clean energy solutions in the United States), major wildfires could occur across the Southwest this year, including in Texas.  Now that Texas is in its third year of drought, the state is likely to experience a longer fire season as a result of dry conditions and rising summer temperatures. High fire risk conditions raise the concern that Texas could again experience severe wildfires. Fires on Labor Day weekend in  2011 destroyed more than 1,600 Texas homes

A draft report by the federal National Climate Assessment and Development Advisory Council (NCADAC) shows that in recent decades, the frequency of large wildfires and the length of the fire season have increased substantially.  Earlier spring snowmelts and warmer spring and summer temperatures have increased the risk of fire in the Southwest. Fire models predict that more wildfires will occur in the future, with increased risks to communities throughout the region.

US wildfires May to June 2013

US wildfires May to June 2013

To see this interactive map click here