Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Tom “Smitty” Smith’

smoke-menaceResidents Who May Be Affected by Plant’s Pollutants Should Tell the Judge

AUSTIN – Next Monday marks the last chance to register as legal opponents to the White Stallion power plant proposed near Bay City, and Public Citizen is urging people to attend. Opponents have organized a group called the No Coal Coalition around concerns for air quality, water use, the health effects of increased pollution and the plant’s potential contribution to global warming.

The White Stallion Energy Center is slated for construction just 10 miles south of Bay City. The State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH) will conduct a preliminary hearing on the White Stallion Energy Center at 10 a.m. Monday, April 20, at the Bay City Convention Center.

Anyone with concerns or who anticipates being affected by air contaminant emissions from the facility may attend Monday’s hearing and request to be a party to the case. A SOAH judge will decide who will be eligible to participate in the case; the actual contested case hearing, which will be in about six months, will be a legal proceeding similar to a civil trial in state district court.

“We are extremely concerned about the White Stallion plant,” said Robert M. Malina, Ph.D, a Bay City resident representing the No Coal Coalition and a professor emeritus with the Department of Kinesiology and Health Education at the University of Texas at Austin.”  If built, White Stallion would emit thousands of tons of pollution, which could have serious health consequences for a large number of people and the environment. Emissions from coal plants can complicate asthma, cardiac pulmonary disease, and many other circulatory and respiratory conditions. Mercury and lead, both emitted in large quantities from coal and petroleum coke plants, accumulate in our bodies and the environment and are associated with serious developmental problems in children. Simply stated, the White Stallion plant should not be built.” (more…)

Read Full Post »

3400399050_de63905770We’re already getting push-back from coal industry on account of the ReEnergize Texas Rally at the capitol Monday morning.  When the coal industry’s “clean coal” PR machine is running scared and feels the need to release official press releases… you’re doin’ it right.

Original post found at Burnt Orange Report:

This weekend 170+ students from more than 25 colleges and five high schools descended on Austin for the ReEnergize Texas Summit to demand bold clean energy solutions.

The students held a rally at the Texas Capitol Monday morning and followed up with more than 50 visits to their legislators. Students rallied behind calls to end dependence on coal and nuclear power and to create new green jobs with investments in wind, solar and energy efficiency.

While the event went largely unnoticed by the media, the coal industry was apparently watching. The American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity issued a statement following the event:

“The Re-energize Texas Summit rallies behind laudable goals including the continued development of renewable energy sources and increased energy efficiency measures; however the group’s support of legislation to place a moratorium on new coal plants in Texas is misguided, economically unfeasible and environmentally unnecessary,” said Joe Lucas, Senior Vice President of Communications at ACCCE.

The ACCCE statement appears to come in response to the students’ support of legislation placing a temporary moratorium on coal-fired power plants without carbon capture and sequestration (SB 126, sponsored by state Sen. Rodney Ellis and its companion bill HB 4384, sponsored by Rep. Allen Vaught).

According to the National Wildlife Federation’s Praween Dayananda:

“Halting the construction of proposed coal plants will help curb climate change and protect local communities from dangerous health impacts. Texas has incredible potential to produce renewable energy, clean up its skies, and become a leader in the new energy economy.”

Speakers at the rally that scared the coal industry were Senator Leticia Van de Putte, Representative Tara Rios Ybarra, Doug Lewin from Senator Ellis’ office and Public Citizen’s own Director Tom “Smitty” Smith.

For more information about the summit, visit www.reenergizetexas.org.

Check out more photos from the rally and more from the ReEnergize Texas Flickr photo pool.

Read Full Post »

no-new-coal1Yesterday morning we held a press conference to highlight the importance of the proposed coal moratorium bill, SB 126, sponsored by State Sen. Rodney Ellis, and its companion bill in the house, HB 4384, sponsored by Rep. Allen Vaught.

SB 126 , which went into committee late Tuesday night, would put a temporary moratorium on authorizations for new coal-fired power plants that do not capture and sequester their carbon emissions.  If all of Texas’ 12 proposed coal plants were built, they would emit an additional 77 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.  Top climate scientists, most notably James Hansen, have advocated for a coal moratorium as one of the top priorities to address climate change.

This legislation would also give Texas time to take a breath, see what federal carbon legislation will come down from Washington, and re-evaluate our energy plan.  We expect carbon emissions to be given a price as a result of a federal climate change bill, and this would make the energy from coal considerably more expensive.

Floor Pass, the Texas Observer’s legislative blog, reports:

Environmentalists support these bills, but some feel they could be stronger. Both bills grant exceptions to facilities that capture and sequester some of the carbon dioxide they produce. Vaught’s bill mandates that a minimum of at least 60 percent of the carbon dioxide must be captured and sequestered in order for the exemption to apply. Ellis’ bill does not specify the amount.

“We definitely would support 100 percent reduction of carbon dioxide,” says Karen Hadden, director of Sustainable Energy and Economic Development Coalition. “We should not be adding carbon dioxide to our air at this point in time. It’s too risky in terms of climate change. Companies can do it, and they should.”

Representatives from communities currently fighting coal plants were on hand to discuss how this legislation will protect their families from dangerous health effects such as asthma and increased autism rates and improve local air quality.  It was really moving to hear community members telling their own stories of how proposed coal plants would affect their lives.  If you’re interested in hearing their stories, check out the video feed from the press conference. Look for March 25, Press Conference: Senator Rodney Ellis.  That’s us!

The story got picked up in a couple other media outlets.  All the news that’s fit to link:

“Foes take power plant fight to Austin” by Denise Malan, Corpus Christi Caller Times

“Texas coal opponents call for a temporary moratorium on new plants” by Barbara Kessler, Green Right Now

And if you STILL WANT MORE, check out our press release after the jump.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

lightbulbThe Houston Chronicle ran an Op-Ed Sunday entitled An energy winner: Big savings are possible by upgrading efficiency goals. Authors: Public Citizen’s Tom “Smitty” Smith and Matthew Johnson.  Check it out:

In the world of energy, there’s one clear winner when it comes to cost, cleanliness and speed: energy efficiency.

Although regulated utilities in Texas, with few exceptions, met or surpassed all energy efficiency goals set by the Legislature in 2007, this is not the time for Texans to get complacent.

Rather, it’s time to increase our energy efficiency goals and give utilities more tools to achieve new, more aggressive targets. In this time of economic uncertainty and out-of-control utility bills, homes and businesses across Texas deserve more action.

Last year, the Public Utility Commission of Texas completed a study of the state’s energy efficiency potential. Conducted by the independent firm Itron, it concluded that there’s room for Texas to reduce its energy use by 18 percent. We could save even more during times of peak demand. The study also reported that if the Texas Legislature sets higher goals for energy savings, consumers could save $4 billion to $12 billion on utility bills over the next 10 years. (more…)

Read Full Post »

nrgprotest10Last Friday two administrative law judges refused to hear testimony on the impact of carbon dioxide emissions during the permitting process for the NRG Limestone coal-fired power plant. The contested case hearing for NRG’s air quality permit application will be going on all week long, but testimony on the proposed plant’s contribution to global warming will not be allowed.  The judges decided that the TCEQ has adopted clear policies that they would not consider testimony on the issue, even though the Supreme Court ruled in 2007 (EPA vs Massachusetts) that the EPA had the authority to regulate CO2 as a pollutant under the Clean Air Act. If built, the plant will emit 7.4 million tons of carbon dioxide every year.

NRG has acknowledged that climate change is a serious environmental issue, and has agreed to offset a portion of its greenhouse gas emissions from the proposed new plant. Yet, lawyers for the company maneuvered to strike all references to CO2 or climate change from the week-long hearing.

nrgprotest4In protest, local environmentalists gathered for an 8:30 a.m. protest Monday Feb 22 outside the State Office of Administrative Hearings. Groups supporting the protest included: Public Citizen, SEED Coalition, Environment Texas, Clean Water Action, Re- Energize Texas, and the Texas Climate Emergency Campaign.

Some of the protest’s participants made the following comments in a press release: (more…)

Read Full Post »

Ever wonder what Public Citizen is telling your Austin City Council members?  Wish, granted!

scroll1Feb 11, 2009

Dear Council Member,

Will Austin remain a renewable energy leader or will it fade into the background as San Antonio, the Texas Legislature, and the Federal government move ahead to turn crisis into opportunity? Decision makers from all levels of government recognize that investing in clean energy projects will not only stimulate the economy but also combat climate change and localized pollution. Why would Austin pass this up?

We urge City Council to act now to approve the Webberville solar plant. We recognize the fact that the city faces an anemic budget this year due to reduced sales tax revenue. Since Austin Energy operates on a separate budget, it is in an advantageous position to keep its solar plans intact and on time.

Solar energy’s benefits far exceed its costs even during these uncertain economic tifcmes when you consider several factors: (more…)

Read Full Post »

A message from our director, Tom “Smitty” Smith:

efficient-homeToday the House and Senate are working to reconcile their different versions of the long-awaited economic stimulus package. The stakes are now higher than ever for Texans, who stand to gain from billions that could go toward developing renewable energy and efficiency in the state, reducing pollution from diesel engines, and cleaning up abandoned nuclear waste sites.

But as much as the state needs that massive investment in our energy future, there is a troubling side to the senate version of the stimulus package: Senators amended the stimulus bill to include $50 billion in loan guarantees for new nuclear plants in Texas and elsewhere in the nation.

If Congress needs a reminder why this is a bad deal, it should just ask Wall Street why it doesn’t loan money for nuclear reactors. According to the Congressional Budget Office, nuclear loans default at a rate of 50%. Banks learned long ago that these plants simply can’t be built on budget and aren’t viable without massive taxpayer subsidies. Texans are still paying for the last generation of over-budget nuclear plants each month in a hidden charge on their electric bills. (more…)

Read Full Post »

hourglassHey Look!  A press release from SEED Coalition and Public Citizen:

60 Day Clock For Nuclear Opponents Starts Ticking;
Luminant Moves Forward Toward Expansion of Comanche Peak Nuclear Plant
Reactor Design Not Ready for Primetime

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission posted notice today on the federal register of Luminant’s application to build two reactors at the Comanche Peak nuclear plant site, southwest of Fort Worth. Citizens now have only 60 days to prepare and present their legal case in opposition.

The reactor design (US-APWR) has not been approved by the NRC and it has never been built anywhere in the world. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. submitted the US-Advanced Pressurized Water Reactor (US-APWR) for design certification on December 31, 2007, but the review will take the NRC at least until 2011 to complete.

“This fast-tracked combined construction and operating license process was rationalized based on the assumption that new reactors would only use pre-certified designs, but the Comanche Peak reactor design is not approved yet. Not only does this put a huge burden on the public to quickly learn what’s happening and become involved within only 60 days, but it also puts pressure on the NRC to rubberstamp designs that should have extra scrutiny,” said Smith.

“The streamlined process is designed to cut citizens out and limit public involvement in the licensing of two reactors that could cost $22 billion before cost overruns,” said Karen Hadden, executive director of the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition. “It makes the fast-tracking of TXU’s coal plants in Texas look slow.”

Comanche Peak Unit One ran ten times over budget and was years late coming online. An untested reactor design increases the likelihood of similar problems occurring again and soaring rate hikes that would result.

“If safety was a real concern, the three processes all occurring simultaneously would be take one at a time. This rush increases risks of safety oversight and problems from faulty design and construction” said Hadden. “Reactor designs should be analyzed first, and if and when the NRC deems them adequate, a construction license application should be allowed. If the plant has no major construction flaws after completion, then the operating license should be decided.” (more…)

Read Full Post »

Hey, look! A joint press release from Public Citizen Texas, the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club, and the SEED Coalition:

An NRC Environmental Scoping Meeting will be held on Jan. 6th in Glen Rose, Texas to take comment on the environmental impact study for two nuclear reactors proposed for the existing Comanche Peak site. A coalition of environmental and consumer groups and their members will be telling the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Luminant (formerly TXU) that nuclear plants are “too risky, too expensive and too dangerous” to help Texas meet its power needs, and makes no sense when clean, safe, affordable options exist. The coalition of groups said they
only learned of the hastily called public meeting to seek input on environmental issues on December 24th.

“We’ve been down this road before,” noted Cyrus Reed, Conservation Director of the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club. “The utility industry sold Texas on Comanche Peak and the South Texas Project and consumers have been paying the ‘stranded’ costs ever since, even as valuable water resources are expended and radioactive waste piles up on-site.”

Luminant proposes to build two more nuclear reactors at the existing Comanche Peak nuclear site near Glen Rose, in Somervell County, using an unproven, untested technology known as USAPWR. “The design of the reactors has not been certified and has never been builtanywhere in the world. Why should Texas serve as guinea pigs for a dangerous radioactive experiment?” asked Karen Hadden, Executive Director of the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition. “Design problems as well as human error led to numerous problems and shutdowns of Comanche Peak reactors in the past. The competence and character of Luminant need to be examined closely since the history of the existing reactors is disastrous. In the past, there was a chance to fix nuclear reactor construction problems before an operating license was issued, but that safeguard is gone with the new licensing process.” (more…)

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts