Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Oh no . . . we're fracked!

What happens when you let Big Business regulate itself? – You get fracked.

Hydraulic fracturing — also known as fracking — is a controversial method of natural gas extraction that involves injecting a toxic chemical sludge into the surface of the earth until it rips open.

And it’s a case study in the dangers of letting giant corporations sidestep laws that protect our health, our investments and our environment.

Learn more about the risks of fracking, including how it could threaten your drinking water:

www.citizen.org/fracking-unsafe-unregulated

In 2005, then-Vice President Dick Cheney got fracking exempted from laws that keep our air and water clean. That exemption — known as the “Halliburton loophole” — allows oil and gas companies to force hazardous chemicals into underground water supplies.

As if that’s not enough, the Halliburton loophole is only one of seven exemptions for the oil and gas industries from major federal environmental laws like the Clean Air Act and National Environmental Policy Act.

The wholesale lack of federal tools to protect the public from fracking has created an inadequate patchwork of state regulations. As a result, companies are assaulting the environment and polluting drinking water supplies all over the country.

In Pennsylvania, a state with some of the most robust fracking regulations, one company — Chesapeake Appalachia LLC — racked up 149 environmental violations in just two and a half years.

While fracking is currently a hot-button issue, it is not a new practice. It was developed by Halliburton in the 1940s and has primarily been the scourge of communities in the Southwest.

The huge bump in fracking has been based on speculation that shale reserves in the Northeast could be the Saudi Arabia of natural gas. But even this is being challenged. The New York Times has recently reported that natural gas companies may be vastly overstating their reserves in what could be a giant Ponzi scheme.

To the credit of activists all over the country, the federal government has been forced to address fracking.

  • A number of lawmakers have sent letters to the Securities and Exchange Commission asking it to investigate whether the industry has provided accurate information about the productivity of natural gas wells, particularly those involved in fracking.
  • As part of President Obama’s “Blueprint for a Secure Energy Future,” the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (SEAB) is exploring recommendations to better protect public health and the environment from fracking.

Public Citizen will be giving public comment with a list of recommendations at a SEAB meeting later this week. We will be giving you an opportunity to contribute to the dialogue, too, so stay tuned!

But investigations are only the first step toward curbing this unsafe practice. In the near term, legislative action to close loopholes that exempt fracking from federal law is needed. Meanwhile, all fracking activity should be suspended. Moving forward, shifting away from dangerous and dirty fuels is the only solution.

We’ve blogged numerous times about the persistent heat and drought plaguing the Southern Plains (particularly Texas) this year. Much of Texas is off a June that ranks among the top five hottest in history. According to the National Climatic Data Center, Texas had their hottest June on record and of the six record hottest June cities, 5 were in Texas.

  • Record hottest June in Texas, surpassing June 1953!
  • Record hottest June cities: Lubbock, Midland, San Angelo, Houston, Galveston, Wichita Falls, and Columbus, Ga.

There has been no letup in July so far and the number of days with 100-degree temperatures continues to climb. Since the beginning of June to the beginning of July, Texas has seen the highest levels of drought — rated as “exceptional” — jump from  50.65 percent of the state to 72 percent of the state.

Dallas, Texas

  • 16 100-degree days through July 10 —the annual average is 18 days;
  • Most 100-degree days in a year: 69 in 1980.

Austin, Texas

  • 27 100-degree days through July 10 —more than double the annual average of 12 days;
  • Most 100-degree days in a year: 69 in 1925.

Even if you don’t believe in anthropogenic climate change, the last 10 years have been the hottest in the last 440,000 years, at least if the Vostok and Greenland ice cores are any indication.  And whether or not you think we can mitigate global warming, here in Texas we need to carefully consider one of our state’s most precious resources, WATER!

So when industries, like coal-fired power plants, nuclear plants, natural gas fracking – to name a few that use large amounts of water, are about to sign contracts with the water districts, or river authorities, we should all show up and demand that they show us we indeed will have water available for the people who live in the area.

An unnamed Republican campaign veteran told the Washington Post that Texas Governor Rick Perry has decided to run for President, though the official word from the Perry camp is still a definite maybe, stating that Mr. Perry has surveyed the field and decided to get in the race later this summer.  The thinking from republican sources  is that apparent front-runner Mitt Romney “does not reflect the Republican Party” and is therefore vulnerable to a credible challenge from the right, especially after Mr. Romney’s recent squishy remarks on global warming.  So the Texas governor is running as a climate change denier.

In a Stanford University report researches have found that “candidates running for office can gain votes by taking green positions and might lose votes by expressing skepticism about climate change.” A study entitled “The Impact of Candidates’ Statements about Climate Change on Electoral Success in 2010: Experimental Evidences,” reveals that taking a “green” position on global warming attracts votes from Democrats and Independents, while expressing skepticism about the warmist theory alienates those same voters. On the Republican side there was no significant impact either way, so it looks like Perry intends to look to his base.

Today was the last day for the Texas Public Utility Commission (PUC) to pass the 500 Mw non-wind RPS rule.  After 6 years they failed to implement a provision by passed by the legislature setting aside a portion of the state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard for renewable technologies other than wind (like solar, geothermal, or storage).  Citing cost concerns, the PUC once again failed to provide guidance and support for a group of emerging industries that needs strong government policy to get them kicked off, much like the wind energy received back in 2005, during a time when Texas currently is experiencing some of the lowest price electricity in decades.

The PUC has consistently dragged its feet, sided with the large corporate interests, offered overly complicated rules and then fail to act.   So while our leadership is yelling foul at new EPA rules that will help clean up our air, and may force us to finally shut down dirty polluting 50-year old power plants that were grand fathered in under the clean air act and expected to close decades ago, the state has failed to encourage cleaner, renewable sources of power for Texans.  Other concerns that have been expressed were whether the industry would be able to supply the needed capacity to meet this tiny goal.  This concern was being aired at the same time municipal utilities like San Antonio and Austin and electric co-ops like the PEC were committing to build projects that combined exceed the states still unleashed goal.

Traditional Generators and other vested interests are trying to keep their antiquated highly polluting fleets running and are fighting new clean energy resources.  In this instance they appear to have gained an upper hand with this commission. With Chairman Smitherman’s resignation from the PUC to take a position at the Railroad Commission (which oversees the oil and gas industry) there is an opportunity for new leadership.  Will the new commissioner be able to get anything done, only time will tell?

In the meantime, the new energy economy is finding homes in China and India (and not because they are concerned about the environment, but because it makes economic sense, while Texas rides into the 21st century on the back of a fracking gold rush that continues to feed the same industries with billion dollar tax breaks.

The price of solar is sliding down at a rapid pace and annual job growth in all sectors of this emerging industry are being reported at over 26% per year.  So where is the leadership when we need it?  Where are those whose mantra has been “Jobs, baby jobs?”  Down in San Antonio  they are making things happen while the rest of the state goes on playing the same old song of “drill, baby, drill” as we listen to our children “wheeze, baby,wheeze” and our Governor whines “Why’s the EPA always Pickin’ on me“.

As I was reminded today by one of our coworkers it was here in Texas that JFK spoke the words,  “we do these not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win…”

In a state that made a name in energy as big as Texas through its intrepid vision,  we should be leaders.  This new era brought us the largest wind industry in the country, but its potential to disrupt the status quo is sending Texas sliding back from being in the energy “bidness” to going back to being in the oil and gas “bidness”.

So we start the dance all over again and hope that the PUC opens a new rule making – while time, the world and the opportunities for jobs and new industries pass us by us by.  We now look to our cities and co-ops for leadership and innovation.   PUC Project # 35792, I bid you adieu.  May we we meet again, somewhere, sometime.  And now the sun slowly sets on our bright Texas sky.

New EPA Safeguard will Improve Health & Lives of Millions of Americans

Earlier today, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)  announced a new Cross State Air Pollution Rule designed to protect Americans from dangerous air pollution from coal-fired power plants. The new protections will reduce power plant emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) in 27 states including Texas. SO2 and NOx form soot and ground-level ozone smog which contributes to poor air quality days and respiratory illnesses affecting millions of Americans.   Texas environmental groups Sierra Club, Public Citizen, and Environmental Integrity Project welcomed the EPA’s announcement.

Dr. Neil Carman, Sierra Club’s Clean Air Program Director in Texas, a chemist and former Air Control Board investigator celebrated the announcement:

The Sierra Club applauds EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson’s landmark Cross State Air Pollution safeguard announcement today.  EPA’s actions today will help save lives and reduce dangerous air pollutants from coal-fired power plants.  Air pollution does not respect state boundaries.  As a result, air pollution created in one state can burden surrounding states with harmful pollution.  Texas coal plants are known to produce pollution that has negative consequences for the health of people both in Texas and surrounding states, particularly in eastern Oklahoma and western Arkansas.  We are especially pleased with EPA’s decision to include Texas in its proposal and to include sulfur dioxide, as Texas coal plants are at the top of the list of worst polluters in the nation.

According to the EPA, in 2005, 17 Texas coal plants emitted 531,059 tons of SO2 and 134,234 tons of NOx. By 2014, the new safeguard will reduce from 2005 levels — 303,467 tons of SO2 or 57% of SO2 and 49,814 tons of NOx or 29% of NOx.  90% of these reductions will occur at Texas coal plants.  EPA Chief Administrator Lisa Jackson today said that this rule will prevent 670-1000 premature deaths in Texas beginning in 2014.

Carman concluded, “This will result in a leap forward in reducing ozone in Texas non-attainment areas where urban areas have been struggling to clean up the air.  People living near the coal plants will definitely enjoy living with cleaner and safer air.”

TEXAS ENERGY NEEDS COVERED & COST BENEFITS

Tom ‘Smitty’ Smith, Director of Public Citizen’s Texas office spoke about the economic implications of the new EPA safeguard saying,

Concerns about meeting Texas energy needs are unfounded.  ERCOT’s most recent state of the market report along with its 2011 Report on the Capacity, Demand, and Reserves in the ERCOT Region show that we have sufficient generating capacity to meet summer peaks.  With cost effective energy efficiency measures, we can meet the electrical demand and clean the air.  Concerns about costs of this protective measure are also unfounded.  EPA found that this protection will result in a less than 1% increase on electricity bills.

We believe – and, the Texas PUC’s own Itron report, the “Assessment of the Feasible and Achievable Levels of Electricity Savings from Investor Owned Utilities in Texas: 2009-2018” shows that we can cost effectively reduce the energy needed in Texas by 23% using energy efficiency measures that are far cheaper than the cost of burning coal.   Today Texans are paying almost $6 billion a year in health care costs resulting from power plant pollution, and the insignificant cost increases that might result to consumers will be more than made up in lowered medical costs for all.  It’s time the utilities do their fair share to clean the air. The emissions controls that the utilities will be required to use are very similar to those put on every new car since the 1970s. Besides health benefits, the EPA’s safeguard supports Texas transition to a clean energy economy and green jobs.

Texas officials should convene a panel to analyze the cost of pollution upgrades at the coal plants and look at whether there are more cost-effective ways to meet our energy needs in the future.

TEXAS TRANSITION TO CLEAN ENERGY JOBS

San Antonio’s public utility, City Public Service recently announced the phase-out of its dirty old coal plant, Deely in favor of clean energy solutions and just yesterday announced a call for bids for a 400 Megawatt solar power plant.

Smith concluded, “The costs of solar are plummeting as this clean renewable energy source comes to scale.  San Antonio is leading the way to Texas clean energy future and the rest of the State should get with the clean energy program.”

A recent report published in March of 2011 by the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy found that a significant investment in energy efficiency in homes and businesses and investments in new combined heat and power capacity within the industrial sector found that some 98,600 jobs would be created over the next 20 years in Texas. An American Center for Progress Report study found that a 25% renewable energy standard by 2025 coupled with increased spending in energy efficiency through the monies earmarked for Texas through the ARRA would produce some 150,000 jobs in Texas by 2030, while a 2009 Blue-Green Alliance study found that a nationwide Renewable Energy Standard would create 60,000 new jobs in Texas over the next 10 years, including 20,000 in solar energy.

Next week, Texas environmental groups will release new data that details pollution problems at existing coal plants and underscores the importance EPA’s inclusion of Texas in this new Cross State Air Pollution rule.. 

The Southwestern U.S. has dominated the world of utility-scale solar projects over the past few years, with news of deals being signed for solar-power plants as large as 1 gigawatt or more.  But now the Southeastern U.S. looks like it will soon be home to one of the world’s largest solar projects, a 400-megawatt photovoltaic farm being built by National Solar Power, LLC.

The next question is where.  The company has vetted a total of seven sites in three states, Florida, Georgia and North Carolina, as potential hosts for the ambitious project.  They say the sites must meet certain criteria:

1

Having enough undeveloped land to put this farm in (ideally 4,000 acres contiguously) but because the Southeast doesn’t have the same relatively unused land resources as the Southwest, the company is looking at a different approach.  Creating the world’s largest solar farm that could be made up of as many as 20 different fields.  

2

Appropriate economic development strategies, such as tax incentives that could include federal, state and local incentives, and financial partners.  

3

Community support, and  

4

A qualified work force.  

The five-year build out project is projected to cost roughly $1.5 billion.

The 1,000 megawatt Blythe Solar Power Project in California that broke ground last month is projected to create 1,000 direct jobs during construction phases and 200 permanent positions. It will also create 7,500 indirect jobs throughout the country.

So many of these opportunities are passing Texas by because the state had failed to provide incentives for them to come here.  Fortunately, Texas has some large cities with municipally owned utilities that are seeing the advantages to their communities both in terms of jobs, the ability to lure other associated industries (like PV manufacturing) to their cities, and the stablelization of their peak electric demand by investing in rooftop and utility scale solar and other renewable sources of power.

In an Austin American-Statesman editorial that ran last Saturday, July 2nd, the paper talked quite candidly about the lack of a level playing field in the Texas capital as pointed out by conservative East Texas republican freshman Representative David Simpson and liberal Austin-based Public Citizen director, Tom “Smitty” Smith.

The odd man from East Texas

Austin American-Statesman Editorial Board

July 2, 2011

For whatever reason and for whatever it says about their region, East Texans occasionally send us lawmakers who are just a bit different.

But difference, like diversity, can be good.

David Simpson

Representative David Simpson (R-Longview)

This year, the people of the Pineywoods sent us Republican Rep. David Simpson, who wears his Christian faith on his sleeve and is uninterested in being just another freshman eager to go along to get along.

“I guess I don’t know what a freshman’s supposed to do,” Simpson told the American-Statesman’s Tim Eaton in April.

Last Wednesday, in the special legislative session’s closing moments, Simpson showed he also doesn’t know what a freshman isn’t supposed to do by giving a blistering speech generally critical of legislative process and specifically critical of the death of his bill criminalizing invasive pat-downs by Transportation Security Administration agents.

Simpson’s “personal privilege” speech was odd, and many of his House colleagues consider him a bit odd. Be that as it may — and setting aside what we believe was his misguided war against the TSA — it should be noted that Simpson raised some basic and important questions about legislative process.

“We all, no doubt, were aware that when we came to these grand halls that there also would be within them duplicity and deceit,” he told colleagues. “The challenge, though, is not to succumb to it, not to go along to get along in order to be re-elected, not to be complicit with its corruption.”

Corruption is a strong word. If Simpson has first-hand knowledge of corruption, it is his duty to report it to the proper authorities. But Simpson also pointed to peculiarities of the legislative process that, while somewhere this side of corruption, can cause head-scratching, including the expedited handling of measures on the House Local and Consent Calendar that might not actually meet the requirements for streamlined handling.

He also raised good questions about the no-new-taxes state budget of which Gov. Rick Perry and other Capitol conservatives are so proud.

“Methinks we boast too much,” Simpson cautioned. “Some are touting that we have not raised taxes and have not used the rainy day fund. But let’s be honest about it. We are deferring $4 billion into the next biennium. Is that conservative? Is using tax speed-ups conservative?”

Simpson also noted shortfalls in Medicaid funding and the use of the rainy day fund to balance the current state budget. “And we have not kept up with the enrollment of our schools,” he said. “We are funding our schools a little bit more but not on a per-capita basis.”

“How can it be right to approve a half-billion dollars of handouts to special interests, including commercials for Fortune 500 companies? We put them before our children, before our students, before our coming workforce,” he complained.

Simpson was referring to state records that show subsidies (though not $500 million worth) for the production of commercials for Fortune 500 companies.

Simpson also discussed his support for abolishing the state’s Emerging Technology Fund that doles out dollars to promising business ventures. For his efforts, Simpson said he “was scolded and told (by a state leader) that if I wanted to come back … we’ve got to keep taking pork back to the district.”

“The majority in my district don’t want more pork, more handouts for special interests,” he said. “They want a level playing field.”

“Politics has a lot in common with fairy tales,” he said. “In both arenas, you have to suspend rational faculties in order to comprehend what’s going on.”

He is correct. At the Capitol, when House members flit about the chamber and cast votes for absent colleagues or to register an absent colleague as present, you do indeed have to suspend rational faculties to justify what you’re seeing. You also have to do that when a majority of the members of each chamber blatantly retreat into private to discuss the public’s business.

You also gaze in wonderment when important legislation, including bills that died during the process after lengthy deliberation, spring to life as below-the-radar amendments appended to related or semi-related or unrelated legislation in the session’s closing days.

Tom "Smitty" Smith - Director, Texas office of Public Citizen

It all gets back to what Tom Smith, director of Public Citizen Texas, an advocacy group that bills itself as “the people’s voice,” calls “the three really big lies about the Texas Legislature.”

  1. The first is that “ideas pass and fail on their merits, as opposed to whether they are going to protect the politicians that are in power.”
  2. The second big lie is that the rules are fair. “Anybody who has watched the Legislature knows the clocks don’t run on time and the rules get bent to benefit the people who are the insiders,” Smith said.
  3. The third big lie is that the budget is based on needs. Smith noted that economic development funds controlled by Gov. Rick Perry didn’t get cut, “but we cut budgets for those people who need it the most, whether it be state agency workers or school kids.”

Smith and Simpson probably are on the opposite sides of many issues of importance. But Smith praised Simpson for “calling out the basic lies that permeate the Texas legislative process.”

“He represents the kind of principled politician we all hope we elect every session to represent us,” Smith said.

Some see Simpson as odd. Smith sees something else.

“For me, he is a hero,” Smith said

We should all keep this in mind when we go to the polls to vote.  Kudos to the Statesman for editorializing on this.

In their ongoing effort to accomplish a cold shutdown by January, Tokyo Electric Power Co (Tepco), the beleaguered operator of the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear-power plant said it had resumed the use of recycled water to cool the reactor cores this weekend, a week after its first attempt was suspended due to leaks that developed within minutes of starting up the recycled water system.

Tepco has installed a tank to store 1,000 metric tons of decontaminated water to complete the recycling system, stabilizing the water source for cooling the Nos. 1-3 reactors, eliminating the need to use fresh water from an outside source to cool the reactors, and creating even more irradiated water, which then requires storage or disposal.

Establishment of a closed cooling system is essential to stabilizing the Daiichi reactors and getting the reactors to cold shutdown, which is defined as lowering the temperature of the fuel rods to below 100 degrees Celsius—water’s boiling point—and keeping it there.

If Tepco’s current efforts are successful, they hope to increase the flow of water and bring down the reactor-core temperatures, which currently hovers between 100 and 160 degrees Celsius.

Even if the recycling system works smoothly, Japan is still left with the problem of how to dispose of the radioactive sludge being created during the filtering process.  Japan, like Texas, has a disposal site for low-level radioactive waste, but there are no guidelines for disposing of the type of sludge now being created, which is expected to total 706 metric tons.

In the meantime, work at the complex is being hampered by the unseasonably hot weather.  There have been 17 reported cases of heatstroke at the plant in recent weeks.

And if that wasn’t enough

Tepco also faces other issues as senior members of Japan’s government developed secret plans to break up the nuclear plant operator, according to reports uncovered by Reuters.

The plan would bring nuclear operations of Tepco under government control, and force Tepco to sell its power distribution business.  Only the power-generation operations that use thermal and hydraulic power plants would remain as the company’s business cutting Tepco’s size to one third of its current operations.

I guess a really, really big mistake costs industry really, really big.

It appears that the fate for nuclear power in Japan following the Fukushima Daiichi disaster, could be decided by a local governor of an obscure prefecture of about 850,000 residents on the southernmost main island of Kyushu.

Governor Yasushi Furukawa of Saga Prefecture, must decide in coming days whether to support a request by Prime Minister Naoto Kan to restart two reactors at a local nuclear plant that have been shut down since last winter for regular maintenance.  If Governor Furukawa decides no, and other governors follow his lead, every nuclear reactor in Japan could end up idled in less than a year, turning Japan into a non-nuclear country faster than Germany.

Japan’s reactors are legally required to shut down every 13 months for routine maintenance. Thirty-five of the nation’s 54 reactors are now offline, some because of damage from the March 11 earthquake and tsunami, but most because of the maintenance requirement. Unless some of them are turned back on, the last reactor in Japan will be shut down by next April.  Currently nuclear reactors provide the nation with almost a third of its electricity.

Turning the reactors back on requires the central government’s approval, which has not been granted since the Fukushima accident. In the public backlash against nuclear power that has followed the disaster, the government is asking local political leaders to sign off on the restarts as well.

Mr. Furukawa is the first governor who is being called upon to make a decision. This has turned him into a reluctant leader of sorts on this nation’s nuclear future, as his decision will be closely watched by other local leaders, most of whom are on the fence about restarting reactors as they weigh issues of public anxieties about safety versus the threat of electricity shortages.

Recent Japanese opinion polls show an overwhelming majority — 82 percent in a survey conducted last month for Tokyo Shimbun — support getting rid of the nation’s reactors, but do not favor an immediate halt, prefering a gradual phasing out of nuclear power as alternatives are found.

Japan has a long history with nuclear power, and is the world’s principle manufacturer of some nuclear reactor components.  A pull back of their commitment to nuclear power could have a resounding affect on the future of nuclear power throughout the world, including those countries – the U.S., India, and Poland – who are still promoting the expansion of nuclear power.  The Saga Prefecture governor should make a decision in the next couple of weeks and we’ll update this blog at that time.

NOT THIS YEAR!

No oohs and aahs this Independence Day holiday in many Texas communities as months of severe drought have led to restrictions on fireworks across much of the state.

Not only are dozens of counties imposing restrictions on small pyrotechnics like firecrackers and bottle rockets, (even sparklers in some places), but cities like Austin, San Antonio, Amarillo, Lubbock, San Marcos, The Woodlands, Magnolia, Tomball, Rosenberg, Plainview, and Round Rock – to name a few – have canceled municipal Fourth of July displays because of the tinderbox conditions.

In Lubbock, temperatures remain in the triple digits without any sign of relief and wildfires this spring have already reached into the city limits and destroyed three homes.  Months without significant rain have left grasslands brown and dry, looking like the dead of winter (for our readers in the northern climes, Texas has a brown  Christmas rather than white).

Canceling the fireworks shows is causing a little bit of a stir in these communities, but it’s an extreme measure in the midst of an “exceptional” drought for the protection of the residents. One errant spark and there could be a major grass fire, as many of these communities have already experienced first hand.

Wildfires have scorched nearly 3.3 million acres of Texas since November, an area larger than the state of Connecticut. Authorities have banned outdoor fires in a record setting 235 of the state’s 254 counties.

Texas is the worst-hit of several states in a band of severe drought that stretches from Arizona to Florida. More than 90% of the state is suffering from “extreme” or “exceptional” drought conditions, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor.

The “exceptional” category — the most severe — covers 72% of the state, according to figures published Thursday. Only a small patch of northeast Texas, from roughly Fort Worth to the Oklahoma state line, has seen anything close to normal rainfall.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture on Wednesday declared disasters in 213 Texas counties due to the drought. The move comes after a loss of pasture, grain and forage crops of more than 30% in the affected district and opens the door to federal support for farmers.

The Texas agricultural extension service estimates that state farmers have suffered $62 million in losses to fires that includes buildings, crops, livestock — and more than 4,100 miles of fences, which can cost $10,000 per mile to build.

In the West Texas oil towns of Midland and Odessa, water is getting to be as valuable as crude oil. Reservoirs managed by the Colorado River Municipal Water District are running dry, forcing the cities to impose new restrictions on water use.  The district has cut Midland’s water allocation by 20% this year, and the city’s biggest water source, the O.H. Ivie Reservoir, is projected to run dry by December 2012 unless conditions change drastically

Suffering its worst drought in more than 50 years, the Llano River is perilously close to running dry. It is the sole source of drinking water for Llano, just 75 miles north of Austin.  As I drove through the town last weekend, the Llano river was a wide, shallow shining pool on the west side of the bridge where a small dam creates the Llano City Lake, and dry river bed on the east side of the bridge, vividly demonstrating the extend of the drought.  Scattered throughout the town were signs posted showing they had moved to Stage 4 water restrictions, which in Llano means no outdoor watering at all – no lawn sprinklers, landscaping, filling of pools, even washing cars. If conditions don’t improve, Llano will more than likely move to Stage 5 restrictions soon. In Stage 5 restrictions, residential customers are limited to half of their normal water consumption and a surcharge is applied to any over usage.

In April, Gov. Rick Perry called on “Texans of all faiths and traditions” to pray for rain. But the state remains parched.

So, throughout the state, this drought has been taking its toll, but as Stephen Colbert decried on his show last week, banning fireworks on the 4th of July is unpatriotic – after all, there’s nothing more American than losing a finger and setting your neighbor’s yard on fire with one bottle rocket. 

No fireworks withstanding, hope everyone has a safe and happy 4th of July.

According to the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), we’ve already seen eight billion-dollar weather disasters since January!   Before 2011, the most billion-dollar weather disasters recorded in one full year (since 1980) is nine in 2008. This was from a wide variety of weather events including tornadoes, floods, drought, wildfires and three hurricanes.

With half the year and the peak of the hurricane season ahead of us, it’s not out of the question that this undesirable record could be reached in 2011.

From 1980 to 2010 there has been a total of 99 billion-dollar weather disasters.

Use the link below to find out what disasters in 2011 have caused damages of more than a billion dollars. It all started with a colossal winter storm.

2011 billion-dollar weather disasters

Bashing Tokyo Electric Power Co. (Tepco), has become a regular habit in Japan over the past three months. While Tepco managers certainly bungled the response to the crisis at the company’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant following the March 11 earthquake and tsunami, Tepco wasn’t operating in a vacuum.  Indications are that failures of corporate governance policies and the regulatory entity’s cozy relationship with industry contributed to the environment that left the Japanese public angered at both the Fukushima Daiichi operators and their government in the wake of the nuclear disaster that befell their country.   Japanese policy makers still are pretending Tepco is simply one bad apple, while ignoring systemic problems and the Japanese public is intent on going after Tepco.

Protests outside TEPCO shareholder meeting

Protests outside TEPCO shareholder meeting

Angry shareholders of Japan’s Tepco slammed the company for its handling of the nation’s worst ever atomic accident after the March quake-tsunami, amid calls for the firm to abandon nuclear power.  Protests were held outside the shareholder meeting on June 28th.

In the meantime, here in the US policy makers are still debating the future of nuclear power while Mother Nature keeps sending gentle reminders of the risks. Flood waters from the Missouri River breeched a damaged berm around Nebraska’s Fort Calhoun reactor  over the weekend inundating the site under several feet of water. Meanwhile, at Los Alamos, the birthplace of the atomic bomb and home to 20,000 barrels of nuclear waste, wildfires are still raging.

But back at Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Gregory B. Jaczko, chairman of the NRC keeps telling Congress and the media that the probability of a nuclear disaster on U.S. soil similar to Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi meltdown is “very, very small.”  And the rest of the agency falls into line with federal regulators insisting that U.S. nuclear power plants are operating safely while they move forward with 12 applications for new nuclear power plans and five different reactor designs, as well as more and more applications for re-licensing of the 104 aging nuclear plants now operating. 

“At this time the agency considers that the existing emergency preparedness framework and regulations provide reasonable assurance of adequate protection of public health and safety in the event of a radiological  emergency at a US power reactor facility,” Jaczko submitted in written testimony to Congress on June 16.  But the results of a  special inspection of U.S. nuclear plants after the Fukushima disaster in Japan revealed problems with emergency equipment and disaster procedures that are far more pervasive than publicly described by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

The NRC ordered the inspection to conduct a fast check on the equipment and procedures that U.S. plants are required to have in place in the event of a catastrophic natural disaster or a terrorist attack in response to the March earthquake and tsunami that crippled Fukushima’s reactors. 

Agency officials unveiled the results in May, stating  “out of 65 operating reactor sites, 12 had issues with one or more of the requirements during the inspections.”  But an closer examination of the reports from those inspections by ProPublica found that 60 plant sites had deficiencies that ranged from broken machinery, missing equipment and poor training to things like blocked drains or a lack of preventive maintenance. Some of the more serious findings include:

While the deficiencies don’t pose an immediate risk and are relatively easy to fix, critics say they could complicate the response to a major disaster and point to a weakness in NRC oversight.

In a summary attached to the inspection findings even the NRC expressed some concern.

“While individually, none of these observations posed a significant safety issue, they indicate a potential industry trend of failure to maintain equipment and strategies required to mitigate some design and beyond design-basis events,” the summary says.

The special inspection covered equipment and procedures for use in disasters that are beyond the scope of the plant’s design — major earthquakes, tornadoes, floods, hurricanes and terrorist attacks.

The Fukushima accident has focused the NRC’s attention on the risk that a natural disaster or attack could knock out a plant’s safety systems for an extended period and lead to a radiation release.

Although all plants are designed to withstand natural disasters, U.S. nuclear facilities are aging. Recent studies have shown that earthquake risks are actually higher than they were predicted when some plants were built, although the NRC says reactors can still withstand the highest expected quake (but that’s what Japan thought). Now historic flooding on the Missouri River is testing design limits at two Nebraska plants.

So keep this in mind, like the reports coming from Tepco and the Japanese government after the problems started at the Fukushima Daiichi plant, NRC’s jargon-laden communiques freqently reflect what the operator has reported, and do little to shed light on any issues or events occurring at nuclear power plants throughout our country.  When the agency says that America’s 104 operating nuclear power plants are being inspected to deal with power loss or damage that might follow an “extreme” event, keep in mind the NRC’s loosening of standards over the years at the industry’s urging and the other policies put in place because of the agency’s cozy relationship with the industry.  The nuclear industry here in the US is not so different from Japan’s.  Whose heads will we want if there is some catastrophic failure at one of our own plants?

The full report of lessons learned from the Fukushima incident will arrive on July 19. For now, the world’s other 336 other radioactive reactors are also being pushed by the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to launch a series of national safety tests backed by international inspections.

Nowhere to run

In a series of investigative stories, the Associated Press (AP) has been reporting on the state of the US nuclear industry in the wake of the Fukushima disaster in Japan.  In this recent report, the AP found that as America’s nuclear power plants have aged, the once-rural areas around them have become far more crowded and much more difficult to evacuate.

Even as nuclear plants run at higher power, posing more danger in the event of an accident, populations around the facilities have swelled as much as 4½ times since 1980.  At the same time estimates of evacuation times have not been updated in decades.  Emergency plans would direct residents to flee on antiquated, two-lane roads that clog hopelessly at rush hour. And evacuation zones have remained frozen at a 10-mile radius from each plant since they were set in 1978.

With about 120 million people, almost 40 percent of all Americans, living within 50 miles of a nuclear plant (using 2010 Census data) this scenario smacks of human tragedy, for any nuclear accident in this country.

Click here to read this segment of AP’s investigative study of Nuclear Power in America.

Stephen Colbert and the FEC squared off today in Washington over the fake news anchor’s SuperPAC request. Colbert testified today in an FEC hearing in which he sought a media exemption so he can form his own Super political action committee. The Comedy Central host has been making fun of campaign finance laws for months and today was the moment of truth for the comedian. Colbert has brought attention to the controversial campaign finance laws and has been largely seen as showing how absurd the laws surrounding a SuperPAC can be.

Public Citizen’s Congress Watch (our colleagues in DC) sent a letter to the FEC urging them to deny Stephen Colbert’s request for a media exemption. Public Citizen’s own Craig Holman said that “This would carve out a gaping loophole in campaign finance laws, allowing any company involved in media to foot, in secret and without limit, the electioneering expenses of political committees. If the press exemption were to be so dangerously expanded by the FEC, the next request will be for media companies to directly finance unlimited candidate campaigns under the press exemption – an abuse that is already being advocated in some quarters.”  What does that mean?  Well, it means if Viacom resources can be used to produce ads for ColbertPAC, then Fox could possibly produce ads for their contributors, such as Karl Rove and his SuperPAC, CrossroadsGPS. It would be a terrible slippery slope and stretch our campaign finance laws to the breaking point.

The members of the FEC appeared to take notice of Public Citizen’s request, voting in favor of allowing Stephen Colbert to have a SuperPAC, but with the narrow media exemption we advocated. In a vote of 5-1, the FEC approved a modified version of the Colbert Advisory Opinion request that is fairly narrow and consistent with the current press exemption.

The FEC today has made a good decision in the minds of advocates for campaign finance reform. They have drawn a line in the sand between media companies and political action committees. They have also not been hypocritical in their decisions, and thus have allowed for a comedian to create a SuperPAC (much like the ones Karl Rove and Sarah Palin have created), who may as well be comedians because their campaign finance activities make us laugh because without laughing we’d cry. With the Supreme Court’s recent controversial ruling on public financing of elections, it’s nice to have some comic relief in the twisted world that is campaign finance.

Thanks to our friends at CREW who posted this video on their blog:

Colbert makes some good points here, but also does what we think is really necessary: by “kidding on the square“, he’s using humor to point out exactly how ridiculous our campaign finance laws are. Because when he starts running his ads, people will notice. And hopefully they’ll realize the real jokes are not Colbert, but the other superPACs out there.

Colbert put it best: “Some of you have cynically asked “Is this some kind of joke?” I, for one, don’t think participating in democracy is a joke… that wanting to know what the rules are is a joke. But I do have one federal election law joke.

Knock Knock

(who’s there)

Unlimited union and corporate campaign contributions.

(Unlimited union and corporate campaign contributions who?)

That’s the thing, I don’t think I should have to tell you.”

The joke is serious. Colbert is right. The Supreme Court with Citizens United have created the most absurd unintended consequences ever. We need real campaign finance reform, but we hope Colbert’s laughs will bring others to the cause.


photo by: Bob Daemmrich

In an interesting twist to what had been a post-session, pre-presidential run period of  crowds chanting “Run, Rick, Run!” everywhere he has shown up, probably reminiscent of the Governor’s A&M yell leader years, Rick Perry was subtly called to task for anti-immigrant efforts during both the regular and special session of the 82nd legislature, then shunned by San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, and left standing as dead air fell upon the room before someone stepped in to introduce the Governor as he addressed the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO).  Not a good sign from the hispanic community for someone who is considering a run for the presidency.  The San Antonio Current posted this update in thier QueQue blog.

Castro punks Perry

Fresh from his renewed push to dismantle so-called sanctuary cities at the Texas Lege, Governor Rick Perry addressed the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials to a subdued hostility last week. Harassed and derided by protesters on the street, Perry also took heat from none other than Mayor Julián Castro inside before reaching the podium. Referencing Perry’s effort to, not once but twice, push controversial immigration measures through the Lege, Castro said, “We’ve seen in the State of Texas the call for Arizona-type legislation. We have seen, in this legislative session, easily the most anti-Latino agenda in more than a generation, pursued without shame.” Castro left the stage without even introducing the governor. After an awkward five-minute pause, Republican convert and South Texas state Rep. Aaron Peña took to the mic, introducing Perry by praising him as a tax-cutting, experienced leader.

Protesters outside Perry’s speech scoffed at his presence at the NALEO luncheon, saying it was nothing more than a move to gauge support among Latinos while pondering a White House bid. “It’s insulting for us,” said Diana Lopez, an organizer with Southwest Workers Union. “He wants to run for president, that’s why he’s here. He wants to be seen with these people.” If Perry hopes to sway Hispanics, his San Antonio reception suggests he’s got a lot of work ahead of him. New projections from NALEO released last week estimate at least 12.2 million Latinos will turn out in the next presidential election, an increase of 26 percent from 2008. And Latinos in Texas, NALEO says, are likely to account for over 20 percent of the Latino vote.

If this is the response he got from hispanic leaders here in Texas, will the rest of the Latino’s in the U.S. soon be chanting “Run, Rick, Run – back home to Texas” if he pursues his candidacy for president?

Click here to read about an environmental justice issue for Latinos.