Showing posts with label GHG emissions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GHG emissions. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
Northeast and Western states to test carbon trading in regional markets
News Update: Ten Northeast states have launched the nation’s first cap-and-trade system, raising $38.5 million for renewable energy and efficiency. It applies to electric utilities and about 90% of the allowances will be auctioned. The goal of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (pronounced “Reggie”) is to cut CO2 emissions 10% between 2014-18. There is a problem, though. The cap, set several years ago as the plan was being developed, may be too high to make much difference. GHG emissions in the region have leveled off in recent years instead of growing as expected. So the cap is higher than current usage. Some say the states may need to set a new, lower cap. Meanwhile, in the West, 7 states and 4 provinces across Canada unveiled a blueprint for a similar plan. The Western Climate Initiative aims to cut emissions 15% below 2005 levels by 2020. The Western plan would be economy-wide, including industry, transportation and homes. In a concession to industry, it plans to auction only 10% of allowances, giving the rest free to polluters and causing concerns some businesses could make windfall profits, as happened in the initial European plan. While both regional plans seem to be imperfect, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said the states are moving ahead where the federal government had failed to act. (Sources: ClimateWire, New York Times, AP)
Sunday, February 03, 2008
Tar sands oil disaster for planet
A top Canadian official has asked the U.S. to go slow in plans to cut greenhouse gas emissions. What’s THAT about?
It’s about the Alberta tar sands, and the desire to keep us buying their synthetic oil made by a filthy, messy process that:
• destroys thousands of miles of pristine forests and wetlands
• releases 3 times the carbon dioxide into the air as conventional oil
• digs up 2-4 tons of earth to produce each barrel of oil
• burns enough natural gas each day to heat a million homes
• takes 3 barrels of water from the shrinking Athabasca River for each barrel of oil
• generates 2 barrels of toxic waste for each barrel of oil, stored in holding lagoons so big they can be seen from space
• leaves the land spoiled instead of reclaiming it
• smells like rotten eggs.
Matthew Simmons, author of “Twilight in the Desert” calls the process “atrocious.” Al Gore says it’s “truly nuts.”
The tars sands are Canada’s fastest growing GHG emissions source and one reason it’s not meeting its Kyoto targets.
Show me the money
Why would anyone make such a mess to produce oil? Money, that’s why. Tar sands became economically viable in 2003. Investors are piling on ($52 billion with much more expected), and the Canadian government stands to make $51 billion in taxes by 2020, while Alberta province will get $44 billion. Not surprising they haven’t done an impact assessment.
And we’re the enabler because we’re buying almost all their exports, to the tune of $73 billion a year. Why? To reduce our reliance on Middle East oil. Canada is now our biggest supplier, at 16% of our total. They want to sell us much more, and together the countries plan to increase production 5-fold.
To make matters worse, refiners here at home are trying to expand to refine the stuff and build pipelines to bring it in. The Sierra Club and other environmental groups have fought permits in several states, including Ill., Ind. (remember the row with Chicago over the Whiting plant?), Michigan, Ohio and Wis.
The basics
Tars sands, re-branded “oil sands” by the industry, is also found in Venezuela. About 20% is near the surface and mined in open pits by giant equipment. The remainder is far underground and recovered by injecting steam into the earth to melt the tar (or bitumen) so it’s thin enough to pump up. Then impurities are removed in an energy-intensive process. The Canadian government wants to replace the natural gas that powers the operation with 20 nuclear reactors.
Alberta is sitting on the second largest reserves in the world, after Saudi Arabia. It is producing 1.25 million barrels a day from its tar sands, an amount expected to triple by 2016. China, another likely market, has invested in two companies there.
But tars sands are not the only source of “unconventional” or synthetic oil. Oil shale and coal-to-liquid are other means to make a dirtier form of oil that produces more GHG and could tear up OUR landscape.
Why even mess with this stuff, when there are cleaner forms of energy like wind, solar, geothermal and cellulosic ethanol. We should be investing in those, as well as cutting waste and driving electric cars. But we’d better get busy. Because tar sands are clearly on a tear.
Note: "Highway to Hell" is a compelling account of work at the large Ft. McMurray tar sands in northern Alberta in OnEarth magazine online.
For more on tar sands, see Climate Progress
(Sources: Washington Post, OnEarth, PlanetArk, Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, World Watch Institute, E&E Daily, E&E News PM, Tar Sands Watch/Cleveland Plain Dealer and Oil Sands Truth)
(Photo of the Alberta tar sands courtesy of Flickr and photographer Gord McKenna)
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Good and bad about energy bill, Bali
Weekly Angst I: The Energy Bill is half-full
Half an energy bill was signed by the president today, after final House approval Tuesday (314-100). Gone are the mandate for renewable energy and money to support it. Left in are increased auto fuel economy and biofuel production.
The bill was stripped down after the Senate failed last week by just one vote to approve cloture (avert a filibuster) and send a stronger bill to the floor for passage. My question about that is: Where was McCain? His was the lone missing vote and could have made the difference. That’s the Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) who championed Global Warming legislation for the past three years. He’s also the same John McCain who’s trying to get the Republican nomination for president – so perhaps that weakened his resolve. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) reportedly was absent too, but gave her proxy to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and recorded a yea vote.
Press Secretary Dana Perino said Tuesday the White House should get much of the credit for the bill that passed, because it had pushed for both higher fuel economy and alternative fuels.
What we got … and didn’t
So, what did we get from the energy bill finally approved 86-8 by the Senate last week and then by the House Tuesday?
* Corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards of 35 mpg by 2020 (though actually a credit for flex-fuel cars brings it down just below 34 mpg). This is the first increase in 30 years.
* A renewable fuels standard (RFS) calling for 36 billion gallons of biofuels by 2022, with 21 billion in “advanced” fuels such as cellulosic, which is much cleaner than corn ethanol.
* Energy efficiency standards for buildings and appliances; phase-out of incandescent light bulbs.
* Training for “green jobs” and enhanced research into carbon capture.
The bill will reportedly cut oil use by 2.8 million barrels a day by 2020.
What we didn’t get was a requirement that investor-owned utilities get 15% of their power from renewable sources such as wind, solar and geothermal by 2020 (though actually it was only 11% because they could buy credits for 4%). We also didn’t get a $22 billion tax package, with $13 billion in new taxes for Big Oil and incentives for renewable sources of power and plug-in hybrids. Clearly the loss of those provisions will be a drag on the shift from fossil fuels to clean energy, which now provides just a tiny part of our power. Thankfully, about 20 states now have their own RES. It’s time for others to step up and fill in the gap. And Dem leaders say they will try again with RES and the tax package after the first of the year.
If you want to read the bill, go to http://www.thomas.gov and search by the number of the bill, which is H.R.6.EAS2.
Weekly angst II: Bali agreement half-empty
Well, we showed ‘em. We didn’t let those bullying Europeans and Chinese make us commit to industrialized countries aiming for a cut in greenhouse gases of 25-40% by 2020 and 50% by 2050. In the end, the agreement simply said everyone agreed there should be “deep cuts” in GHG emissions. But in return for that concession, we agreed – after being booed and hissed at by developing countries – to stop demanding a stronger commitment by those countries at this time. U.S. delegates made the decision under pressure, without checking with Washington.
By the next day, U.S. Press Secretary Dana Perino was backtracking. She said the administration had “serious concerns” about the global consensus reached by the 190 participating countries at the Bali conference, and that the largest developing countries (read China and India) must be willing to do far more if there is to be an international agreement in 2009. Those countries look for the developed countries to make the biggest cuts and to help them with technology.
At the conference, which went into overtime to craft any agreement at all, the U.S. delegation was joined by Canada, Japan and Russia in its desire to avoid specific targets and a specific timetable. In the final hours, amid boos, tears and threats, a Harvard-educated delegate from Papua New Guinea won applause when he told the United States to lead or “get out of the way.”
The administration position was countered at the conference by three American VIPs who called for stronger action – Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I) (is he running or not?) and former VP Al Gore (D), fresh from picking up his Nobel Peace Prize. Gore told the conference the U.S. position would change with the next election, so to work around President Bush over the next year.
What was accomplished?
There was general agreement at Bali that:
• A successor agreement to the Kyoto Protocol would be completed by 2009.
• There must be deep cuts in GHG emissions.
• Rich countries would provide money for adaptation to climate change in poor countries.
• Money would also go to preventing deforestation, cause of 20% of GHG emissions.
• New technologies would be transferred to developing countries to help them cut emissions.
(Weekly angst sources: E&E Daily, E&E News PM, Sunday Telegraph UK, The Guardian UK, New York Times, Sierra Club)
Take Action
Contact your Senators and either thank them for voting for cloture in order to try to pass a strong energy bill with clean energy tax incentives or express displeasure at their voting against cloture. All Democrats except Mary Landrieu (La.) voted for cloture, which would have blocked a filibuster and allowed the bill to go forward. Republicans voting for cloture were Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Richard Lugar (Ind.), Charles Grassley (Iowa), Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins (both Maine), Norm Coleman (Minn.), Gordon Smith (Ore.), John Thune (S.D.), and Orin Hatch (Utah). All other Republicans voted against it, except McCain, who was absent. Snowe, Collins, Coleman, Smith and Thune also voted for cloture the first time, when RES was included in the bill, so they deserve special thanks. Go on their individual Web sites or call the Congressional Switchboard at (202)224-3121.
News in brief
Earth may have reached a tipping point, NASA scientists say
Arctic summer ice may be gone by 2012, and the world’s ice sheets are now thawing so fast they may have reached a tipping point where significant melting and rising seas are inevitable, two NASA scientists told the American Geophysical Union last week. NASA data show Arctic summer ice shrank to less than half what it was last year and the Greenland ice sheet melted nearly 19 billion tons more than the previous record. There is also evidence of large-scale melting of the West Antarctic ice sheet. “If we stopped adding greenhouse gases today, we would still get large climate impacts, including a substantial sea level rise,” warned NASA’s James Hansen. NASA’s Josefino Comiso agreed, “It’s likely the tipping point for perennial ice has been reached.” A third scientist, Richard Alley of Penn State, was not sure a tipping point had been reached, but said it was not far off. (Sources: Greenwire, AP, International Herald Tribune)
Dem candidates lead Republicans in environmental voting
With the primaries looming, the League of Conservation Voters has released its 2008 candidates’ scorecard. Barak Obama leads, with a rating of 96 for his lifetime voting record on the environment, followed by Dennis Kucinich with 92; Hillary Clinton, 90; Joe Biden 84; Bill Richardson, 82; Chris Dodd 77, and John Edwards 59. Edwards was the first to come out with a strong Global Warming plan, however. Among Republicans, Ron Paul scored 30, John McCain 26, and Fred Thompson 12. Other candidates doing well in national polls -- Rudolph Giuliani, Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee -- have no voting record on the environment. Obama, Clinton, Edwards and Richardson discuss environmental issues on a daily basis with voters, as does McCain, said LCV president Gene Karpinski. To learn more about the candidates’ views, go to http://www.lcv.org/voterguide. (Source: PlanetArk)
DOE raises questions about FutureGen project in Illinois
Tuesday morning, Mattoon, Ill., was named site of the long-awaited FutureGen project to test whether coal can produce power without pollution. Tuesday afternoon, the Department of Energy – which was absent from the press conference where industry partners announced the site – said it would have to reassess the project because its cost had exploded to $1.8 billion from $1 billion at the time DOE committed to paying 74% of the tab. Implicit was the possibility the private partners might have to pick up more of the cost. The demonstration plant is scheduled to use a gasification system, with resulting CO2 liquefied and pumped deep underground. FutureGen’s main goals are to see if the CO2 can be safely kept underground and to find ways to reduce the cost, estimated at 20-40% above standard coal-burning. Mattoon was chosen because of its geological qualities and ample water resources. FutureGen was scheduled to start operating in 2012 and would power 150,000 homes. DOE concerns, however, may cause more delays for the project. The Sierra Club called for no new coal-fired plants until FutureGen proves coal can be used cleanly. (Source: E&E News PM, Chicago Tribune, Sierra Club)
Xtreme weather watch
The decade ending in 2007 is warmest yet, a UN group reports.
The years 1998-2007 make up the hottest decade yet recorded, the World Meteorological Organization said last week. Another report, from the UK’s Met Office, said 11 of the past 13 years were the world’s hottest on record. (Greenwire, PlanetArk)
2007 is on track to have the most natural disasters, which have increased nearly 20% over last year. As of mid-October, 410 disasters had been recorded, “consistent with the trend of rising numbers of climate change-related disasters,” the Red Cross said. There were 427 disasters in all of 2006, that number a 70% increase over 2 years earlier, 2004. Disasters in the past decade exceeded those in the previous decade by 40%, while deaths doubled to 1.2 million, the report said. (Agence France-Presse, Greenwire)
An unusual December storm caused death and destruction in the Caribbean last week.Tropical storm Olga caused flash floods, killing at least 19 in the Dominican Republic, with scores missing and 35,000 left homeless. Tropical storms are unusual in December, because they feed on warm water. (PlanetArk)
HAPPY HOLIDAYS TO YOU ALL!
Earthling Angst will return in 2008. (It’s getting closer to 2012, 2020 and all those other targets, isn’t it?)
Half an energy bill was signed by the president today, after final House approval Tuesday (314-100). Gone are the mandate for renewable energy and money to support it. Left in are increased auto fuel economy and biofuel production.
The bill was stripped down after the Senate failed last week by just one vote to approve cloture (avert a filibuster) and send a stronger bill to the floor for passage. My question about that is: Where was McCain? His was the lone missing vote and could have made the difference. That’s the Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) who championed Global Warming legislation for the past three years. He’s also the same John McCain who’s trying to get the Republican nomination for president – so perhaps that weakened his resolve. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) reportedly was absent too, but gave her proxy to Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and recorded a yea vote.
Press Secretary Dana Perino said Tuesday the White House should get much of the credit for the bill that passed, because it had pushed for both higher fuel economy and alternative fuels.
What we got … and didn’t
So, what did we get from the energy bill finally approved 86-8 by the Senate last week and then by the House Tuesday?
* Corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards of 35 mpg by 2020 (though actually a credit for flex-fuel cars brings it down just below 34 mpg). This is the first increase in 30 years.
* A renewable fuels standard (RFS) calling for 36 billion gallons of biofuels by 2022, with 21 billion in “advanced” fuels such as cellulosic, which is much cleaner than corn ethanol.
* Energy efficiency standards for buildings and appliances; phase-out of incandescent light bulbs.
* Training for “green jobs” and enhanced research into carbon capture.
The bill will reportedly cut oil use by 2.8 million barrels a day by 2020.
What we didn’t get was a requirement that investor-owned utilities get 15% of their power from renewable sources such as wind, solar and geothermal by 2020 (though actually it was only 11% because they could buy credits for 4%). We also didn’t get a $22 billion tax package, with $13 billion in new taxes for Big Oil and incentives for renewable sources of power and plug-in hybrids. Clearly the loss of those provisions will be a drag on the shift from fossil fuels to clean energy, which now provides just a tiny part of our power. Thankfully, about 20 states now have their own RES. It’s time for others to step up and fill in the gap. And Dem leaders say they will try again with RES and the tax package after the first of the year.
If you want to read the bill, go to http://www.thomas.gov and search by the number of the bill, which is H.R.6.EAS2.
Weekly angst II: Bali agreement half-empty
Well, we showed ‘em. We didn’t let those bullying Europeans and Chinese make us commit to industrialized countries aiming for a cut in greenhouse gases of 25-40% by 2020 and 50% by 2050. In the end, the agreement simply said everyone agreed there should be “deep cuts” in GHG emissions. But in return for that concession, we agreed – after being booed and hissed at by developing countries – to stop demanding a stronger commitment by those countries at this time. U.S. delegates made the decision under pressure, without checking with Washington.
By the next day, U.S. Press Secretary Dana Perino was backtracking. She said the administration had “serious concerns” about the global consensus reached by the 190 participating countries at the Bali conference, and that the largest developing countries (read China and India) must be willing to do far more if there is to be an international agreement in 2009. Those countries look for the developed countries to make the biggest cuts and to help them with technology.
At the conference, which went into overtime to craft any agreement at all, the U.S. delegation was joined by Canada, Japan and Russia in its desire to avoid specific targets and a specific timetable. In the final hours, amid boos, tears and threats, a Harvard-educated delegate from Papua New Guinea won applause when he told the United States to lead or “get out of the way.”
The administration position was countered at the conference by three American VIPs who called for stronger action – Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I) (is he running or not?) and former VP Al Gore (D), fresh from picking up his Nobel Peace Prize. Gore told the conference the U.S. position would change with the next election, so to work around President Bush over the next year.
What was accomplished?
There was general agreement at Bali that:
• A successor agreement to the Kyoto Protocol would be completed by 2009.
• There must be deep cuts in GHG emissions.
• Rich countries would provide money for adaptation to climate change in poor countries.
• Money would also go to preventing deforestation, cause of 20% of GHG emissions.
• New technologies would be transferred to developing countries to help them cut emissions.
(Weekly angst sources: E&E Daily, E&E News PM, Sunday Telegraph UK, The Guardian UK, New York Times, Sierra Club)
Take Action
Contact your Senators and either thank them for voting for cloture in order to try to pass a strong energy bill with clean energy tax incentives or express displeasure at their voting against cloture. All Democrats except Mary Landrieu (La.) voted for cloture, which would have blocked a filibuster and allowed the bill to go forward. Republicans voting for cloture were Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Richard Lugar (Ind.), Charles Grassley (Iowa), Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins (both Maine), Norm Coleman (Minn.), Gordon Smith (Ore.), John Thune (S.D.), and Orin Hatch (Utah). All other Republicans voted against it, except McCain, who was absent. Snowe, Collins, Coleman, Smith and Thune also voted for cloture the first time, when RES was included in the bill, so they deserve special thanks. Go on their individual Web sites or call the Congressional Switchboard at (202)224-3121.
News in brief
Earth may have reached a tipping point, NASA scientists say
Arctic summer ice may be gone by 2012, and the world’s ice sheets are now thawing so fast they may have reached a tipping point where significant melting and rising seas are inevitable, two NASA scientists told the American Geophysical Union last week. NASA data show Arctic summer ice shrank to less than half what it was last year and the Greenland ice sheet melted nearly 19 billion tons more than the previous record. There is also evidence of large-scale melting of the West Antarctic ice sheet. “If we stopped adding greenhouse gases today, we would still get large climate impacts, including a substantial sea level rise,” warned NASA’s James Hansen. NASA’s Josefino Comiso agreed, “It’s likely the tipping point for perennial ice has been reached.” A third scientist, Richard Alley of Penn State, was not sure a tipping point had been reached, but said it was not far off. (Sources: Greenwire, AP, International Herald Tribune)
Dem candidates lead Republicans in environmental voting
With the primaries looming, the League of Conservation Voters has released its 2008 candidates’ scorecard. Barak Obama leads, with a rating of 96 for his lifetime voting record on the environment, followed by Dennis Kucinich with 92; Hillary Clinton, 90; Joe Biden 84; Bill Richardson, 82; Chris Dodd 77, and John Edwards 59. Edwards was the first to come out with a strong Global Warming plan, however. Among Republicans, Ron Paul scored 30, John McCain 26, and Fred Thompson 12. Other candidates doing well in national polls -- Rudolph Giuliani, Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee -- have no voting record on the environment. Obama, Clinton, Edwards and Richardson discuss environmental issues on a daily basis with voters, as does McCain, said LCV president Gene Karpinski. To learn more about the candidates’ views, go to http://www.lcv.org/voterguide. (Source: PlanetArk)
DOE raises questions about FutureGen project in Illinois
Tuesday morning, Mattoon, Ill., was named site of the long-awaited FutureGen project to test whether coal can produce power without pollution. Tuesday afternoon, the Department of Energy – which was absent from the press conference where industry partners announced the site – said it would have to reassess the project because its cost had exploded to $1.8 billion from $1 billion at the time DOE committed to paying 74% of the tab. Implicit was the possibility the private partners might have to pick up more of the cost. The demonstration plant is scheduled to use a gasification system, with resulting CO2 liquefied and pumped deep underground. FutureGen’s main goals are to see if the CO2 can be safely kept underground and to find ways to reduce the cost, estimated at 20-40% above standard coal-burning. Mattoon was chosen because of its geological qualities and ample water resources. FutureGen was scheduled to start operating in 2012 and would power 150,000 homes. DOE concerns, however, may cause more delays for the project. The Sierra Club called for no new coal-fired plants until FutureGen proves coal can be used cleanly. (Source: E&E News PM, Chicago Tribune, Sierra Club)
Xtreme weather watch
The decade ending in 2007 is warmest yet, a UN group reports.
The years 1998-2007 make up the hottest decade yet recorded, the World Meteorological Organization said last week. Another report, from the UK’s Met Office, said 11 of the past 13 years were the world’s hottest on record. (Greenwire, PlanetArk)
2007 is on track to have the most natural disasters, which have increased nearly 20% over last year. As of mid-October, 410 disasters had been recorded, “consistent with the trend of rising numbers of climate change-related disasters,” the Red Cross said. There were 427 disasters in all of 2006, that number a 70% increase over 2 years earlier, 2004. Disasters in the past decade exceeded those in the previous decade by 40%, while deaths doubled to 1.2 million, the report said. (Agence France-Presse, Greenwire)
An unusual December storm caused death and destruction in the Caribbean last week.Tropical storm Olga caused flash floods, killing at least 19 in the Dominican Republic, with scores missing and 35,000 left homeless. Tropical storms are unusual in December, because they feed on warm water. (PlanetArk)
HAPPY HOLIDAYS TO YOU ALL!
Earthling Angst will return in 2008. (It’s getting closer to 2012, 2020 and all those other targets, isn’t it?)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)