House, Senate both extend renewable energy tax credits, but are still at odds

Washington Report: At long last, both House and Senate have extended the renewable energy tax credits due to expire at years’ end. The House passed its bill Friday, the Senate its earlier in the week. But they passed different versions and now have to reconcile them, which seems to be a problem. At issue are:
*The addition of tax credits for oil shale and tar sands refineries and coal-to-liquid in the Senate bill.
*Failure to pay for all credits in the broader Senate bill, which goes beyond energy credits with other business and individual tax credits.
House Dems and environmentalists strongly object to the introduction of credits for fossil fuels. Rep. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.) called oil shale “enormously environmentally damaging.” So are tar sands and coal-to-liquid fuel. On the second point, Blue Dog (conservative) Democrats in the House don’t want to see anything passed that isn’t 100% paid for. The White House favors the Senate bill, despite some taxes on oil, and says it would veto a final bill that looks like the House version. So now the two chambers have to resolve the conflict. Inslee said he thinks that is possible, since a large majority favors the extensions. The Senate Bill passed 93-2. House Dems have passed renewable tax credit extensions without fossil fuels 8 times. (Sources: E&E Daily, E&E News PM)

Big Oil wins this round; offshore ban is gone

(Photo of offshore oil platform from Flickr and photographer absolutwade/Beau Wade)

Washington Report: Big Oil has won, at least for now. After spending millions on lobbying, and taking advantage of the rise in gas prices to win over two powerful advocates, President Bush and John McCain, it has two-thirds of the country believing we need to drill offshore – and drill now. Not to mention those omnipresent American Petroleum Institute ads of an annoying woman of indeterminate age in a black pantsuit who strides across the U.S. map as if she owns it, telling us Congress has put most of the oil reserves in the U.S. off bounds. Well, they aren’t anymore. For the first time in 26 years, Congress has let the moratorium on offshore drilling expire. Starting Oct. 1 oil rigs technically could spring up just 3 miles offshore, except within 150 miles of Florida’s Gulf Coast, which was placed off-limits by a 2006 law. Also gone is the ban on oil shale in the West. It’s a huge step backward for the environment and a win for fossil fuels. Not satisfied, some lawmakers continue to push their drilling agendas. Republicans want to give the states a portion of the royalties (which some gulf states had and lost) and speed up leasing and permitting. Democrats from Massachusetts want to make sure to protect the Georges Bank fishing grounds (“shellfish, not Shell Oil”) and national marine sanctuaries from drilling. A new president and Congress could reinstate the ban. (E&E News PM)

Carbon dioxide cuts in California will boost economy, Air Resources Board analysis says

(Photo of wind farm near Palm Springs from Flickr and photographer dbking)

News Update: California is leading the country on measures to stem climate change. So it’s encouraging to all of us that a new analysis from the California Air Resources Board says the state’s ground-breaking 2006 global warming law, A.B. 32, will help the state’s economy and generate jobs. The board, CARB, predicts that the law, which mandates cutting greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by 2020, will increase economic development by $27 billion, raise the gross state product by $4 billion, and produce 100,000 jobs, compared with continuing business as usual. Consumers will save an estimated $48 billion by using less energy and will be able to spend that money on other things. New jobs will be in sectors like agriculture, forestry, finance, insurance, real estate and mining, as well as the export of clean technology, the analysis says. Utilities will take a hit and lose about 9,000 jobs, as will the retail gasoline sector as people use less gas. Environmental groups generally approve the analysis, while business groups are skeptical. The GHG cuts are due to go into effect in 2012. The Board will vote in November on its so-called Scoping Plan to carry it out. (Sources: ClimateWire, Christian Science Monitor)

Permafrost melt under Arctic Ocean could release huge amounts of greenhouse gas methane

(Photo of Arctic Ocean from Flickr and photographer MarmotChaser)

News Update: If there’s anything scarier than carbon dioxide bringing our planet to a boiling point, it’s methane, which is 20 times more potent. Now comes word that massive methane deposits under the Arctic Ocean are starting to bubble up as water temperatures rise from global warming and the undersea permafrost melts. International researchers, working from a ship along the Siberian continental shelf, report finding intense concentrations of methane in several areas over thousands of square miles. The amount of methane under the seabed – likely there since the last ice age – is believed to exceed global coal reserves, and was thought to be contained by a “lid” of permafrost. But methane in the air and water has been measured by researchers and last week, for the first time, they reported seeing it bubbling up, suggesting that small holes have formed in the undersea permafrost. These are preliminary findings of the International Siberian Shelf Study 2008 and are being prepared for publication by the American Geophysical Union. (Source: The Independent UK )

GE, Google partner for ‘smart’ electricity grid

(Photo of electric grid from Flickr and photographer Mark , Sardella)

News Update: If you google “Google GE smart grid” you will find stories about a new agreement between Google and GE to develop a more advanced electricity grid. But I’ll save you the trouble and summarize here. Recognizing the grid hasn’t changed much since Thomas Edison built the first power plant, the two behemoths are combining their brain power and finances to develop an expanded grid that can support plug-in cars and renewable energy sources – and even help consumers who want to generate power and sell it to the grid. The CEOs of both companies agreed last week to lobby for a “21st century” grid that lets utilities and end users manage electricity more efficiently. An initial goal is to accommodate power from renewable sources that may be removed from the existing grid. The two partners also will develop enhanced geothermal systems, which can serve as a steady backup for intermittent sources like wind and solar. And they said they may look at co-financing wind or solar development in the future. (Source: Greenwire)

Chicago Climate Action Plan here after long delay, calls for massive community effort to cut GHG

(Photo of Chicago skyline from Flickr and photographer Atelier Teee/Terrence Faircloth)

Weekly Angst: Finally, the long-awaited Chicago Climate Action Plan is here. Mayor Daley unveiled it last week, apparently after convincing the power structure in the city to go along with it.

In many ways it is very ambitious. The goal is to reduce greenhouse gases 80% below 1990 levels by 2050, with an interim marker of 25% reduction by 2020. But success will depend on the actions of business, labor, civic leaders and individual residents, so buy-in is important. And someone will need to be pushing the agenda.

CCAP is more comprehensive than many city plans, covering everything from retrofitted buildings to biking to roof gardens to power plants and beyond. Yet it is sparse on numbers.

The plan calls for a 30% increase in mass transit ridership and suggests some ways that could happen, but offers no dollar amounts or specific numbers. Likewise it calls for more efficient motor vehicle fleets, but gives no specifics – unlike New York City, which seeks a total turnover of taxis to hybrids in 5 years.

There are some numbers in the plan, and I’ll list some of them here. I like numbers because you can measure progress against them.

Strategies to reduce GHG
Overall, the 4 strategies for reducing greenhouse gases call for:
• 30% of the savings to come from making buildings more energy efficient
• 34% to come from clean and renewable energy sources
• 23% from transportation and
• 13% from reduced waste and industrial pollution.

Some other numbers
The plan calls for the following:
• Retrofit 50% of the commercial and industrial building stock (that’s huge if you think about it)
• Improve efficiency at 50% of residential buildings (also major, in a city of 3 million people)
• Upgrade or re-power 21 power plants
• Procure enough renewable energy to reduce electricity emissions 20%
• Double household-scale renewable electricity
• Increase roof gardens to cover 6,000 buildings and plant 1 million trees
• Recycle 90% of waste by 2020.

This last – recycling – is a sore point for Chicago. The blue bag system never worked well and is slowly being shifted over to a suburban-type blue cart system, ward by ward. The plan calls for all blue carts by the end of 2011, and in the meantime, there will be communal recycling boxes throughout the city, within a mile of any residents who don’t yet have blue carts. The plan also touts the city’s toxic and electronic waste center, which is open three days a week for disposal.

City government plans to upgrade building codes and have energy audits for its 500-plus buildings, including schools, with the goal of reducing energy costs 30-40%. The Department of Water Management will put solar panels on the filtration plant and Park District employees will be taught to install solar panels.

Programs and tools
The plan emphasizes tools and programs to help businesses and individuals retrofit their buildings and take other steps to cut emissions. Among them are a “one-stop shop” for financing and technical assistance in retrofitting buildings. The city and CTA have a task force to encourage transit-supportive neighborhoods. Businesses will compete with one another to reduce CO2. And a Chicago Offset Plan will invest in renewable energy, trees and retrofitting.

Do it yourself
The plan also lists steps businesses can take to reduce their emissions, including (a favorite of mine) turning off the lights when they’re not in use, switching to efficient CFL bulbs, lowering the thermostat 3 degrees in winter and raising it 3 degrees in summer, turning off electronics in off-hours, reducing auto trips and driving the most fuel-efficient cars available, using videoconferencing instead of travel, buying green products and recycling.

There’s also a list for residents, which includes: switching to public transit (getting rid of a car could save $400/month) or at least keeping your car tuned up and tires inflated, re-using shopping bags, using CFLs and turning off lights and unplugging electronics when not needed, and planting or adopting a tree.

The plan, available for download at http://chicagoclimateaction.org, includes information about current emissions, expected impacts from climate change and a strategy for adaptation to extreme weather and ecosystem changes that are inevitable.

All-in-all it’s a good blueprint for reduction of greenhouse gases. Now it needs to be implemented. That will require a huge community effort by business, labor, government and residents -- and most of all, leadership from the mayor, just as Mayor Bloomberg is pushing for major change in New York City. A powerful mayor should be able to make it happen.

‘Gang of 10’ bill dead for now; tax credit extensions likely for renewable energy

(Photo of wind farm from Flickr and photographer lamusa/Jennifer)

Washington Report: The Gang of 10 bipartisan Senate energy package is over, at least until after the election. The 20 supporters apparently couldn’t reach agreement and pulled the bill Friday. Pressure to expand offshore drilling after a more generous Democrat bill passed the House, as well as a fast-tracked bipartisan bill to extend renewable energy tax credits contributed to the decision. The financial crisis also promised to bump an energy debate as a top priority. But it was unclear Friday whether the offshore drilling ban would be allowed to expire Sept. 30 or would be extended in a resolution to continue government spending till year’s end. Meanwhile the Finance Committee’s bill on tax credit extensions is likely to come up next week. That bill would, among other things:
• Extend production tax credits for wind 1 year.
• Extend investment tax credits for solar energy 8 years.
• Extend credits for energy efficient buildings for 1 year.
• Add credits for small residential wind turbines and geothermal pumps.
• Add credits for new advanced coal and coal gasification, and to industry for capture and storage of CO2
• Add consumer credits for plug-in vehicles
• Limit but not repeal tax breaks for oil companies.
A coalition of industry and environmentalists warned Thursday that failure to extend renewable tax credits could cost 100,000 jobs and billions in investments. (Sources: Greenwire, E&E PM, E&E Daily)

House approves energy bill with off-shore drilling, tax credit extensions for renewables, RES

(Photo of Capitol Building from Flickr and photographer seansie/Sean Hayford O'Leary)

Washington Report: The House on Tuesday voted 236-89 to pass a comprehensive energy package that allowed for more off-shore drilling but at the same time rolled back oil tax breaks to fund renewable energy and efficiency. HR 6899 would:
• Allow drilling more than 100 miles of both coasts and, if states said OK, drilling 50 miles off their shore; maintained the ban on drilling within 125 of the west coast of Florida; protected Georges Bank fishing grounds off New England from drilling.
• Create a renewable electricity standard (RES) mandating 15% of electric power come from renewable sources by 2020, though one-fourth of the mandate could be met with efficiency.
• Roll back $18 billion in oil tax breaks to fund renewable energy and conservation.
• Extend investment tax credits for solar energy 8 years, production tax credits for wind 1 year, and other renewables like geothermal and wave energy 3 years.
• Make $1 billion in tax credits available for coal plants that use carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology.
• Lift a moratorium on oil shale leasing in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming, though the states must pass laws to permit it.

The politics behind the bill
Environmental groups, while liking the renewable provisions, objected to the bill’s offshore drilling, oil shale and CCS provisions. Democrats said they backed down on offshore drilling because public opinion favors it and they wanted to give cover to moderate Dems in tough re-election fights. They also noted the offshore drilling ban expires at the end of September, which would permit drilling as close as 3 miles offshore if Congress doesn’t act. They added CCS and oil shale at the last minute to garner more support. GOP leaders, who wanted much broader offshore drilling, complained they had no input into the bill and said it would not add to domestic oil production because states would have no financial incentive to allow drilling off their shores. The White House threatened to veto the bill, based on the rollback of oil tax breaks and the RES. (Sources: Congressional Quarterly, E&E Daily,
thedailygreen.com)

Sarah Palin gets numbers wrong on Alaska’s share of U.S. energy supply

(Photo of Sarah Palin from Flickr and photographer sloomis08.)

News Update: Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin told ABC’s Charles Gibson that Alaska is responsible for 20% of the U.S. energy supply. But according to the Washington Post’s “Fact Checker” column, Alaska is only the 9th largest energy supplier in the U.S., with just 3.5%, and has relatively little natural gas, very little coal and no nuclear power -- not to mention wind or solar. Palin later amended her statement at a campaign appearance, to say as governor she oversaw “nearly 20% of the U.S. domestic supply of oil." Data from the Energy Information Administration show Alaska accounted for just 7.4% of the country’s U.S. oil and gas production in 2005, and oil output has fallen since then. Today Alaska produces about 13% of domestic oil (though it was 18% back in 2005, before she was governor). GOP presidential candidate John McCain has touted Palin as the most knowledgeable person in the U.S. on energy issues and she says energy would be one of her responsibilities as vice president. (Sources: ClimateWire, Washington Post)

Europeans fear climate change more than they do terrorism, survey shows

News Update: Europeans see climate change as a bigger threat to the world than international terrorism, according to a recent study by the European Commission. Survey results showed:
• 62% said climate change was the most serious problem facing the world
• 53% said terrorism was
• 76% said industry was not doing enough to battle climate change
• 64% said their government was not doing enough about it
• 61% had taken personal action to reduce greenhouse gases.
30,000 people in 30 countries were surveyed. Only the Czech Republic, Italy and Portugal did not see climate change as a serious threat. In Greece and in Cyprus (where water shortages are severe), 90% said climate change is a big problem. Many of those surveyed said they did not know enough about causes of global warming and what could be done about it, leading officials to say more education is needed. The Number 1 global concern was poverty and the lack of food and water. (Source: ClimateWire)

Environmental Defense Fund lists 'high quality' carbon offsets on new Web site

(Photo of methane capture in landfill from Flickr and photographer meaduva.)

News Update: Thinking about buying carbon offsets to make yourself carbon neutral? After thorough examination, the Environmental Defense Fund has approved 11 projects that offer real reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. The projects, listed on carbonoffsetlist.org, are an effort by ED to provide “high quality offsets” for businesses and individuals who want to counter their carbon footprint by purchasing offsets in the $50 million unregulated carbon market that is often unreliable and sometimes fraudulent. The list is the result of hours of investigation and examination of reams of paperwork and features projects such as capture and combustion of landfill methane. No wind or forest projects are included, perhaps because of the difficulty of measuring the exact savings of GHG. ED said other projects will be added in the future. (Sources: ClimateWire, The Daily Green, Environmental Defense)

Would new green economy and renewable energy really deliver more good jobs for U.S.?

(Photo of solar panel installers from Flickr and photographer utt73/John Utter)

Weekly Angst: You hear a lot about how clean energy will bring us more jobs. But will it really do more than just replace the jobs lost as fossil fuels are phased out?

Yes, says a new report, just out from the Center for American Progress and Political Economic Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst.

A $100 billion investment in clean energy and efficiency would result in 2 million new jobs in 2 years, whereas a similar investment in old (fossil fuel) energy will only create about 542,000 jobs, says the report. That’s a 3-to-1 difference.

Why is that? Well, green energy and efficiency are more labor intensive and less reliant on machinery and supplies, according to the report, “Green Recovery.”

The new jobs would be created in the following categories:

Retrofitting buildings: All publicly owned buildings, including schools and libraries, would be retrofitted for energy efficiency and Congress would encourage people and businesses to do likewise, using existing programs and tax credits. Any investment would be returned in 3-5 years through smaller utility bills. Jobs created would include electricians, heat and air conditioning installers, carpenters, roofers, insulation workers, truck drivers and building inspectors.

Mass transit and freight rail: While serious expansion of light rail service would take longer than two years, jobs could be created quickly by expanding service on existing bus and subway lines by subsidizing fares. Jobs would include civil engineers, track layers, electricians, welders, metal fabricators, engine assemblers, bus drivers and locomotive engineers.

Smart grid: Investment in energy grid efficiency and expansion would produce jobs over time, and pilot programs could be ramped up with more money in federal matching grants. Jobs would include computer software engineers, electrical engineers, machinists, construction laborers, operating engineers and line installers and repairers.

Renewable energy: If Congress extends investment and production tax credits for alternative energy like wind, solar and next-generation biofuels, those industries will boom here and produce thousands of jobs, including environmental engineers, steel workers, machinists, electrical equipment assemblers, truck drivers, production managers, electrical engineers, installers, chemical engineers, chemists, agricultural workers, purchasing managers and inspectors.

A stimulus to the economy
The report points out that this would be a type of stimulus package, to jump-start a flagging economy, but one that keeps on giving, by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and cutting energy bills.

The last economic stimulus package cost $168 billion and once people spent their checks it was over. This would cost less and produce lasting effects.

The plan is endorsed by the Sierra Club, United Steel Workers and Natural Resources Defense Council. It is similar to Barack Obama’s $150 billion 10-year plan for sustainable energy and green jobs.

Other countries, especially in Europe and Asia are pumping up their green economies and supplying most of the solar panels and wind turbines the world demands. So we have an added incentive to stoke up our green economy. If we don’t, the jobs and economic advantage will go overseas.

Join a call to action
Sept. 27 will be a National Day of Action, co-sponsored by many organizations, to call attention to the need for Green Jobs. Hundreds of events will be held across the nation to send a message to Congress to tackle the climate problem and build a green economy with job-intensive solutions like weatherizing homes, installing solar power and engineering a better mass transit system. To find an event near you, go to Green Jobs Now.
(Sources: ClimateWire, Green Recovery report)

House Dems back down on offshore drilling

(Photo of drilling platform off Santa Barbara that caused big spill in 1969 from Flickr and photographer Doc Searls)

Washington Report: Facing the threat that the ban on offshore drilling will be allowed to expire Sept. 30, House Democrats are expanding the drilling provision in their new energy package to include drilling 100 miles offshore and as close as 50 miles off the east and west coasts if states want it. Their ace in the hole is that they haven’t included royalties for the states, which makes it less likely states will opt in. The plan maintains a ban within 125 miles of Florida’s gulf coast until 2022. Also, in an effort to bring coal-state reps onboard, the plan now would spend $10 billion over 10 years on carbon capture and storage technology. A third new item is more vehicles using natural gas as fuel. The package also includes:
• A renewable electricity standard (RES) of 15% by 2020, one-fourth of which can be met with efficiency
• Extension of tax credits for renewable energy and efficiency
• Pressure on oil companies to drill where they have existing leases, such as Alaska
• Repeal of Big Oil tax breaks and royalty subsidies
• Release of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve
• More money for public transit

The package is expected to go to the Rules Committee Monday and be voted on as early as Tuesday. The GOP has its own bill – The American Energy Bill – which calls for much wider offshore drilling, drilling in ANWR, and more use of oil shale and nuclear plants, as well as expanded renewables and efficiency.

In the Senate, the “Gang of 10” bill picked up 4 more sponsors this week: Susan Collins (R-Me.), Amy Kobluchar (D-Minn.), Elizabeth Dole (R-N.C.) and Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), doubling the original 10. That bill is also expected to come up next week, along with two alternatives. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said he'd like to vote first on the tax credit extensions before bringing up broader bills. For more on the “Gang of 10” and background on the House bill, see EarthlingAngst’s Sept. 5 post. There is an urgency to pass something before the end of the month, when the offshore moratorium expires, allowing drilling within 3 miles of shore. With elections at hand and public sentiment buying the argument that drilling is the answer, it’s clear that science is not winning out this time. (Source: E&E Daily)


•

Climate change to make Great Lakes muddier

(Photo of Lake Erie with ice from Flickr and photographer kuddlyteddybear2004/Mark K.)

News Update: Global warming, if allowed to continue, will change the climate of the Midwest so it feels like the Deep South, according to a researcher at the University of Illinois. And as temperatures go up – in summer, between 5 and 15 degrees – the Great Lakes, which hold 20% of the world’s fresh surface water – will shrink. Without ice cover, for example, Lake Erie’s level could go down 1.2 feet by 2050, said atmospheric scientist Don Wuebbles. As water evaporates and levels go down, it will not only interrupt shipping but increased algae and sediment will make the waters muddier, he said. For one who lives on the Great Lakes, this is distressing news. I won't be here in 2050 but my grandchildren will. The lakes are a wonderful resource, not only for the ever-shrinking water supply, but for beauty, boating, fishing, swimming and a shipping economy. Let's not lose them. (Sources: Greenwire, Sandusky Register)

Wind farms are looking to put down stakes offshore just like oil drillers are`

(Photo of offshore wind farm in Britain from Flickr and photographer phault/Phil Hollman)

News Update: Oil companies may have competition for the offshore continental shelf as a source of energy. Wind companies are looking offshore as well. The Interior Department is just now ending a comment period on a plan to lease large areas of offshore property to harvest wind, which is stronger in the ocean than it is on land. So far, the states have been leading the way and they met in Delaware this week to discuss their prospects and problems. The biggest threat right now is the failure of Congress to agree on extending the production tax credit wind companies depend on to keep their businesses competitive. Other obstacles are government red tape, an inadequate grid and citizen objections. The Catch-22 is if they build close to shore, in state water, people living along the shore object. If they go far out into federal water, they have to wend their way through a series of regulations that can take years. Delaware, seen as a leader in offshore wind here, has signed an agreement with Bluewater Wind to buy power from a farm to be placed 11 miles off its coast. But they are still awaiting federal approval. The most interest in offshore wind is in the Northeast, where there are large population centers near the coast. Rhode Island and New Jersey are among the states taking a serious look. And Massachusetts is still waiting to resolve the controversy over Cape Wind off Nantucket. (Sources: ClimateWire, Greenwire)

Rain barrels help counter drought, water shortage

(Photo of rain barrels from Flickr and photographer fireballsedai)

News Update: What can you do to help conserve an increasingly scarce resource – water? Well, growing numbers of people are setting out rain catchers to collect water to use on their lawn and plantings, and for things like flushing toilets and doing laundry. With severe droughts and water shortages in the Southwest and Southeast, catching rain can give some relief from water restrictions. The average American uses 101 gallons a day for their home and yard. Agricultural and industrial use per capita drives that up to 1.430 gallons/day. In addition to providing a scarce resource, rain barrels help prevent run-off from paved areas in downpours that can flow quickly into rivers instead of seeping into the soil. Storm surges, at their worst, cause flooding or rush to sewers, sometimes causing raw sewage to flow into lakes and oceans. Rain barrels may become more common as global warming causes more erratic weather, droughts and downpours. (Sources: MSNBC, Greenwire)

Is natural gas the right solution to getting off oil? See EarthlingAngst's answer to Pickens' plan

(Photo of metro bus in Washington, D.C., running on natural gas from Flickr and photographer Kathy Doucette)

Weekly Angst: You’ve no doubt heard a lot about natural gas lately. There’s a rush to drill in shale and T. Boone Pickens’ much publicized plan recommends wind energy to power 20% of electricity plants, freeing up the natural gas that runs them and using that gas to replace some gasoline. His goal is to cut oil imports by a third in 10 years (and to make some money in the process). Sounds good, but it's not the answer to global warming.

Natural gas does have several advantages, as Pickens points out:
* It’s plentiful
* It’s cheaper than gasoline
* It’s cleaner than oil or coal
* And it’s American.

Natural gas now powers 20% of the nation’s electricity. It’s also used for cooking, heating and the chemical industry. And some motor vehicles are beginning to use compressed natural gas (CNG) as a fuel.

It’s plentiful
Natural gas production peaked here in 1973. Reserves began to dry up in the ‘90s, and production declined until 2005. By then new technology allowed horizontal drilling into shale, and there are plentiful shale gas reserves in 33 states. Some reports say there are enough in North America to last a century.

A rush to drill has ensued. Pennsylvania, for example, is on its way to issuing 7,000 gas and oil drilling permits this year. Louisiana just had a record natural gas lease sale of $93.8 million. More than 4,400 miles of gas pipeline have been laid in the U.S. this year and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin just signed a bill to award TransCanada Corp. a license to build and operate a gas pipeline to run from the North Slope to a hub in Canada. Most of the reserves on the North Slope are leased by BP, Exxon and ConocoPhillips. So the oil companies are hedging their bets with gas.

Price encourages drilling but it’s cheap for autos
Another incentive to drill was the rising price. In 1999 natural gas was less than $2/thousand cubic feet. This summer it hit $13 before a sharp decline. Yet the end product, for automobiles, is much cheaper than gasoline derived from oil. In Utah, where compressed natural gas is plentiful and there is an infrastructure of filling stations, people with cars converted for CNG are paying less than $1 a gallon. To see prices and where CNG pumps are, go to cngprices.com.)

It emits less CO2
Natural gas emits 30% less carbon dioxide than gasoline, 23% less than diesel and 50% less than coal. It’s also more efficient than coal for power plants, as it loses less energy in the process.

It’s local
Nearly all (98%) of the natural gas used in the U.S. comes from North America. Very little needs to be imported, as long as supply here can keep up with demand.

The arguments against natural gas
Although natural gas is cleaner than oil and coal, it still emits 70% of the CO2 gasoline does and half what coal does. Pickens' plan, which shifts gas over to replace some oil but leaves most power plants running on coal is not going to get us to the needed reduction of greenhouse gases. And too much focus on natural gas will only delay progress in that direction.

Pickens touts natural gas as a “temporary” solution, a transition until everyone can drive electric cars in what he sees as 20-30 years. Well we're going to be driving plug-in cars way before that unless, of course, subsidies and infrastructure send auto companies in the direction of CNG instead of electric cars. And then we'll just be replacing oil with another -- though somewhat cleaner -- fossil fuel.

Some environmental leaders endorse Pickens' plan, in large part because it pushes a huge increase in wind power, from less than 2% to 20% in a decade. With "drill, baby, drill" ringing in our ears, that sounds like a pretty good program. Until you stop and think how close it will get us to our goal of stopping global warming. Not very. Not very at all.

EarthlingAngst’s plan
Pickens’ plan says nothing about solar energy, which is abundant in the West, or wave power or geothermal energy. Why not aim for 20% solar in 10 years as well? And instead of replacing natural gas, let wind, solar and geothermal replace the dirtier coal in producing electricity, and use cellulosic ethanol and electric cars or plug-in hybrids for transportation – and more mass transit. Also put a serious focus on efficiency. We waste as much energy as we use. Then perhaps we really could put a dent in both oil and coal in 10 years.

What a tragedy we have wasted so many crucial years arguing about this stuff. We need to take giant steps, not baby steps, to shift away from fossil fuels (not just foreign oil) to renewable energy sources, and we need an administration and Congress that realizes that.

Take action
Meanwhile, you can call your Senators and Congressman (212-224-3121) Tuesday during National Call-in Day and tell them to vote for renewable energy, green jobs and efficiency, not for more drilling. That’s the way to get more energy more quickly and help the economy and planet as well.
(Sources: ClimateWire, E&E Daily, E&E News PM, Greenwire, pickensplan.com, PlanetArk, American Gas Assn., New York Times)

House Dems have new energy bill, adding renewable electricity standard and tax credits

(Photo of Speaker Nancy Pelosi from Flickr and Talk Radio News Service)

Washington Report: Rallying back after being caught off-guard on offshore drilling, Nancy Pelosi and the House Democratic leadership plans to bring a new energy package to the floor when Congress returns next week. Emphasizing renewable energy, green jobs and efficiency, the Democratic package will include some expansion of offshore drilling, because it has become so popular with the public. But most of the emphasis will be on renewables. One important element will be the oft-tried extension of renewable tax credits, due to expire the end of the year. Large wind and solar projects are at risk because of the delay in extending the credits, held up by Republicans in the Senate (with John McCain refusing to vote many times, including once when a yes vote from him would have done the trick). While the new House bill is a work in progress, it is expected to include:
• A renewable electricity standard (RES), which has passed the House but not in the Senate.
• An energy efficiency standard
• Repeal of big oil tax breaks
• Help for mass transit
• Some relaxation of the off-shore drilling ban, with safeguards
• Extension of renewable and efficiency tax credits
Republicans are already calling the bill a gimmick and say the RES (which would mandate a percentage of electricity come from renewable sources) is a deal-breaker. A vote could take place as early as Sept. 12.

And in the Senate
Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) says he will call for a vote on the “Gang of 10” bipartisan energy bill soon after Congress reconvenes. Over the August break, six more Senators signed on – Republicans John Warner (Va.), John Sununu (N.H.) and Norm Coleman (Minn.) and Dems Tim Johnson (N.D.), Ken Salazar (Colo.) and Tom Carper (Del.) Their proposal, which environmentalists says is too reliant on old fossil fuels, would:
• Allow off-shore drilling up to 50 miles off Florida in the Gulf of Mexico
• Allow the Carolinas, Georgia and Virginia to decide if they want drilling 50 miles from their shore and giving them some of the royalties.
• Repeal billions in tax breaks for oil companies to help fund renewable energy and conservation
• Set a goal to wean 85% of autos off oil-based fuels in 20 years
• Extend renewable and efficiency tax credits until 2012
• Give tax credits for extremely efficient vehicles
• Fund next-generation biofuels and loan guarantees for coal-to-liquid plants that can capture carbon dioxide.

How they differ
The Senate “Gang of 10” proposal (details still unknown) would not include a renewable energy standard (RES) or energy efficiency standard. The House proposal (also few details) would include no coal-to-liquid provision. Presumably the Senate proposal will do less for renewables than the House package and will allow more offshore drilling. Once the details are known it will be more clear what the differences are. Original sponsors of the “Gang of 10” proposal are all pro-drilling. They are Sens. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), Saxby (R-Ga.), John Thune (R-S.D.), Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), Mary Landrieu (D-La.), Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) and Mark Pryor (D-Ark.).

The White House view
A spokeswoman for President Bush said Friday he wants Congress to give him a "clean" energy bill (not to be confused with "clean energy" bill) that expands offshore drilling, removes limits on oil shale leasing and extends the renewable tax credits. Apparently his idea of a "clean" energy bill is one that doesn't have all that other stuff in it.

The urgency
If agreement isn’t reached soon, renewable tax credits will expire, putting a stop to many wind and solar projects. Also the moratorium on offshore drilling will die if it’s not renewed by Congress. But more important, going into this election season, is that the voters are worried about gas prices and want to see some action taken. Will Republicans be able to win out with their “drill now” mantra? Or will Democrats prevail with an emphasis on renewable energy and green jobs? Both claim their plans will further energy independence. The maneuvering will be interesting – and disturbing – to watch. Whatever they do won’t help gas prices and – more important – won't do as much as is needed to fight against global warming.

How you can help
Join the Sierra Club, Physicians for Social Responsibility and other groups Tuesday, Sept. 9 for National Call-in Day. Call your senators and representatives (Congressional switchboard is 212-224-3121) and tell them the emphasis should be on renewable energy, efficiency and green jobs, not offshore drilling and more fossil fuels. Also write a Letter to the Editor to that effect. Help shape the debate.

(Sources: Greenwire, E&E PM, Sierra Club)

Rising seas on Delaware coast lead to study

(Photo of Delaware coast with two WWII towers from Flickr and photographer m wms)

News Update 1: Sea levels along 25 miles of Delaware coastline are rising at the rate of about 1 foot per century. Thermal expansion from global warming, along with erosion, settling and sediment blockage by man-made structures, have caused problems for some time. A historic lighthouse at Cape Henlopen fell into the sea in 1926 and two WWII towers are surrounded by water during heavy storms or extremely high tides. After a storm and flooding in May, state environmental officials are concerned about what the future holds as far as storm frequency and intensity, wetlands loss, rainfall, flooding, erosion and changes in groundwater aquifers. So they are working with NOAA over the next two years to map the land under the sea with a new technology called LiDAR, which uses digital photography to identify and find solutions to impending problems. (Sources: delawareonline, Greenwire)

Pacific islands could be engulfed by global warming

(Photo of Tuvalu from Flickr and photographer Jay)

News Update 2: Pacific island states, meeting at a forum, said the region should negotiate for international assistance for damage already done by climate change. Rising seas levels and severe cyclones already are causing people along the coast to relocate in 4 of the states – Vanuatu, Kiribati, Tuvalu and the Cantaret Islands in Papua New Guinea. In Kiribati, two uninhabited islands disappeared under the sea in 1999. “The evidence is quite clear that climate change is already wreaking havoc here,” said Pacific Island Forum Chair Toke Talagi, who is also premier of Niue, where the forum was held. The islands will ask the UN Security Council next week to address climate change as a threat to international peace and security. The international organization Avaaz is collecting signatures on a petition to support their request. (Sources: ClimateWire, Independent Online), Aavaz)

Lake Tahoe ecosystem undergoes climate change

(Photo of Lake Tahoe from Flickr and photographer Jeroen Elfferich)

News Update 3: Another body of water, Lake Tahoe in Nevada, is showing the effects of climate change. The water isn’t rising, but the area has seen a temperature increase of 4 degrees since 1910 and algae in the lake is growing 5 times as fast as in 1959. Summer nights are warmer, freezing days are fewer and there is less snow, according to the annual Tahoe State of the Lake report, by researchers from the University of California at Davis. The average surface temperature of the frigid lake has risen from 41.7 to 42.6 degrees since 1970. The region is cited by some as a barometer of how climate change is transforming whole ecosystems. (Source: ClimateWire)

Sarah Palin's views on Big Oil and the environment are a threat to all earthlings

(Couldn't resist this cartoon-photo on Flickr from earthpro/harold)

Weekly Angst: EarthlingAngst is back early from vacation because her angst level has gone way up over the selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as the GOP vice presidential candidate. Just when we were beginning to think things would have to get better for global warming with the next administration – whoever won – comes a candidate whose views on the environment are worse than George Bush’s.

Sarah Palin:
• Is skeptical that global warming is the result of human activities.
• Questions the science behind predictions of Arctic ice melt.
• Fought designation of the polar bear as threatened under the Endangered Species Act and now has filed suit against the Interior Department to de-list it.
• Favors drilling in ANWR and has tried to persuade Sen. McCain to take the same position, inviting him to visit the area.
• Favors off-shore drilling.
• Opposed a state initiative to stop metal mining pollution of streams where salmon spawn – the measure failed last week.
• Approves of shooting wolves and bears from airplanes.
• Opposes a federal windfall profit tax on oil, though she taxes them at the state level.

Alaska loves oil
Palin “embodies a distinctly Alaskan perspective” on oil and gas, which provides 85-90% of the state’s budget, according The Daily Green, a Hearst Web site.

Environmental groups were quick to pan the choice of Palin as McCain’s running mate. She’s a candidate who repeats Big Oil’s talking points, said Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club.

She would continue the destructive Bush policies and is to the right of Bush on the polar bear, said the Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund.

With her support for drilling, she would continue the failed policies of Bush-Cheney and their Big Oil friends, League of Conservation Voters president Gene Karpinski said.

EarthlingAngst shudders at the thought that she could be a heartbeat away from a president in his 70s, or even have a strong influence on him. And her main support base is the extreme right social conservatives. (Her other views, in case you missed them, include overturning Roe v. Wade and teaching creationism in school alongside evolution.)

Biden’s environmental record
Is Democrat V.P. candidate Joe Biden better? Yes.

He has a lifetime environmental score of 83% with the League of Conservation Voters. According to LCV, he has been a leader on global warming issues, chairing Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings on the national security implications of climate change and co-authoring a resolution telling President Bush to negotiate seriously on the international level for a post-Kyoto agreement. He has sponsored bills to decrease reliance on foreign oil and to increase fuel economy in cars. He’s against drilling in ANWR and voted to reduce oil usage 40% by 2025.

(Sources: McClatchy Newspapers, thedailygreen.com, League of Conservation Voters, Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund, Sierra Club.)

Kids shortchanged when subject is climate change

(Photo of book one teacher used to try to understand the complex issue of climate change from Flickr and photographer runswithscissors/Ken)

Weekly Angst: One of the state legislatures just passed a law adding climate change to the scientific topics that must be taught in public schools. Then the governor of the state, (drum roll, please) Arnold Schwarzenegger, vetoed it. What was THAT about?

The Governator said he opposed attempts to mandate “specific details or events into areas of instruction, ” but state Sen. Joe Simitian (D-Palo Alto), the bill’s sponsor, denied that the bill “specified exactly how climate change would be taught and would simply have added to 7 others topics the state already requires – issues of such overwhelming importance as "integrated pest management."

Cynthia Thomashow, president of the Center for Environmental Education at Maine’s Unity College, told ClimateWire she suspects adding global warming and the human causes of it is tough for some politicians to swallow. “It means we have to change.”

Thomashow estimates 20-30% of elementary school students in America learn about climate change in any comprehensive way, and maybe 40% of high school students.

There’s not much help from text books. Three top companies, McGraw-Hill, Pearson Prentice Hall and Houghton Mifflin, cover it only in a vague, passing way. And with no emphasis on testing for lessons learned it gets little attention unless teachers or department chairs take the lead.

John Whitsett, president of the National Science Teachers Assn., notes that textbook companies are in business to sell books and “some parts of the country aren’t interested in teaching climate change.”

It was Whitsett’s organization that in 2006 refused to help distribute 50,000 free copies of “An Inconvenient Truth” to schools. He himself told ClimateWire, “We should be teaching the fundamentals of climate, not necessarily this topic.”

The state of California buys about 12% of the nation’s textbook. A change in policy from them could have made a difference in what textbook companies do. But California wasn’t ready to make the leap, so what chance is there with states that won’t teach evolution?

Maybe all is not lost. Textbooks do tend to be out-of-date. It could get 5 degrees hotter before they get it right. But I’m not sure kids pay all that much attention to books now anyway. They’re into movies, TV, videogames and iPods. So we need other tools to teach them what we’re doing to their world and what life will be like when they’re grown up. “An Inconvenient Truth” would have been a good start.

Several government agencies and non-profits are working on materials and curricula of their own.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration unveiled a slick new brochure this spring called “Climate Literacy: The Essentials of Climate Science.” It’s for adults too – something to educate the public about the calamity facing us. But NOAA wants to get the brochures into schools too. So far, it’s distributed just 27,000 copies – that’s less than 1% of the nation’s science teachers. So they’ve got a long way to go. Both NOAA and NASA have grant programs to encourage innovative approaches to teaching climate change.

The non-profit National Wildlife Federation is also working on a booklet and lesson plans. And of course there are plenty of resources on the Internet. One of the best appears to be climatechangeeducation.org.

It looks as if it will be up to teachers and parents to push for our children to be properly educated about this issue. Clearly we can’t leave it to the bureaucracy. Teach climate change at home but also push to get information into the schools. Some people’s children won’t get it at home.
(Special thanks to ClimateWire and reporter Lydia DePillis, the main source for this posting)

Offshore drilling battle could lead to government shutdown Oct. 1

(Photo of Capitol Building from Flickr and photographer seansie/Sean Hayford O'Leary)

Washington Report: Republicans and Democrats may be headed for a showdown in Congress that could shut down government, halting paychecks and benefits and causing layoffs. Unable to reach agreement on an energy bill, Dems may add the yearly extension of the offshore drilling moratorium to a short-term government funding bill that will be needed at the end of September, which 3 dozen GOP senators have vowed to “fight vigorously.” Offshore drilling is an issue Republicans think could work for them politically if Dems continue to oppose it. Both parties’ leaders have agreed to an Energy Summit when Congress returns Sept. 8, but details have yet to be worked out. Democrats’ answer to high gas prices is release of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, a requirement that oil companies drill on the 68 million acres they have under lease before bidding on new leases, and curbs on energy futures speculation. They also want repeal of oil tax breaks, a renewable energy standard of 15% by 2020 and extension of renewable tax credits. The Republicans’ fossil-fuel-heavy plan calls for repealing the offshore drilling moratorium on the east and west coasts, drilling in ANWR, oil shale extraction in the Rockies, increased incentives for nuclear energy, extension of credits for wind, solar and hydrogen, new tax breaks for coal-to-liquid, tax breaks for electric cars and speeding up permits for oil refineries. “The Gang of 10,” a bipartisan group of senators, came up with a compromise bill just before the August break, which might have a chance of breaking gridlock, so long as one side doesn’t see a political advantage in stalling. But it’s going to be hard to get agreement when the parties are so far apart, and the petroleum industry opposes it. Main provisions include:
• Drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico
• Drilling offshore from 4 Southeast states – Virginia, Georgia, North and South Carolina – if the states agree
• Repeal of billions in oil company tax breaks
• Extension of tax credits on renewable energy sources like wind and solar
• New loan guarantees for coal-to-liquid
• Speeding of permits for nuclear plants
• Billions for R&D for advanced biofuels and batteries
To read more see the Grist blog. (Souces: Greenwire, San Francisco Chronicle)

Undisturbed forests store more carbon than logging plantations to help fight global warming

(Photo of old growth eucalyptus tree from Flickr and photographer Tony from Sidney)

News Update 1: A new Australian study says natural forests, with their taller trees and larger canopies, store 60% more carbon than plantation, or industrial, forests. They also store more than the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimated in its 2007 report. Researchers at Australian National University found that in addition to growing larger, untouched trees grew older and stored carbon longer than trees cut down on a rotating basis. Biomass and soil store about 3 times as much carbon as that in the atmosphere, the report said, and 35% of the CO2 in the atmosphere came from past deforestation, while 18% of annual carbon emissions now are from deforestation. (Source: Reuters)

New London mayor undoes earlier steps to curb greenhouse gases, including driving charge

(Photo of London traffic congestion from Flickr and photographer gerdragon)

News Update 2: New London Mayor Boris Johnson, in office less than 100 days, has eliminated the emissions-based congestion charge for drivers and canceled contracts for a fleet of zero-carbon hydrogen powered cars, vans and motor bikes. He also is considering increased flights in and out of the city by 50% and building another airport in the Thames estuary. Angry green groups complain he has no environmental expert on the London Development Board and see his actions as harmful to the city’s goal of cutting CO2 emissions 60% by 2025. Johnson had campaigned on a promise of making London the greenest city in the world. (Sources: The Guardian, E&E News)

More people taking the train due to high gas prices; Amtrak likely to break record

(Photo of Amtrak coach cars from Flickr and photographer J.H. Gray)

News Update 3: Amtrak is on track to carry a record 28 million passengers this fiscal year, compared with 25.8 million last year. July service was up nearly 14% from last July. As high gas prices drive more people to trains, they have become overcrowded and are showing their age. Congress recently OK’d a 33% increase in Amtrak’s budget, starting in October, and will provide grants to states to expand rail service. (Source: Greenwire)

Will China become a Green Dragon when it comes to clean energy to fight climate change?

(Photo of wind power in China from Flickr and photographer drs2biz/David Schroeter)


Weekly Angst: All eyes are on China this week. That’s because of the Olympics, but there’s a far more important reason to China-watch. As the world’s fastest-growing economy it has great power for good or evil – when it comes to global warming.

China has passed up the U.S. as the largest emitter of greenhouse gases, releasing 24% of the world’s total, and it’s building an average of one coal-fired power plant a week. That’s scary.

At the same time, it’s leading the world in hydropower, is a major producer of photovoltaic solar panels, and will likely soon lead in making wind turbines.

Its autos are required to have 40% greater fuel economy than ours and it has mandated 15% renewable energy by 2020 – something our own Congress failed to pass.

A report released Aug. 1 by The Climate Group, an independent nonprofit, pulls together information about “China’s Clean Revolution”:
* It leads the world in total installed capacity of renewable energy.
* It is second to Japan in solar photovoltaic production.
* It is likely to be the largest exporter of wind turbines by 2009.
* It has 60% of the world market in solar water heaters.
* It’s the third largest ethanol producer.
* It leads the world in hydroelectric power and is 5th in wind power.
* It spent $12 billion on clean energy last year, second only to Germany, which spent $14 billion (they have similar-sized economies) and more than the United States. For shame.

In 2005, China enacted fuel-economy standards for autos and new-building efficiency design codes that would cut energy use in half. In 2006, in passed a Renewable Energy Law, mandating the purchase of wind, solar and biomass for power plants, and a tax of up to 20% on SUVs.

Seizing green economic advantage
“China’s beginning to unleash a low-carbon dragon,” said Steve Howard, CEO of The Climate Group, which advises government and businesses on how to combat climate change, and co-author of the report.

Clean-energy demand has given the Chinese economy an opportunity and they are forging ahead of us. Tens of thousands of companies are making everything from solar panels to electric bicycles to energy-efficient appliances to wind turbines. The 6 largest solar companies have a market value of $15 billion.

One city, Rizhao, has set out to become a carbon-neutral showcase and is half-way there, according to a recent story on ClimateWire. Highrise buildings will collect solar power during the 260 days of sunshine in the oceanside city, which plans to close down cement, paper and steel businesses that use coal. Rizhao shares this goal with a small number of other cities: Arendal, Norway; Vancouver, Canada; and Vaxjo, Sweden.

Coal still main energy source
All is not blue skies though. Fossil fuels provide most of the power, and if trends continue, 70% of China’s new electric power by 2030 will come from coal, the Climate Group report said. So by that year China will be adding an estimated 4 billion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere, more than the European Union’s total now.

But China realizes it can’t sustain the kind of dirty industrial development the West had and must look for a better, cleaner way. Motivation comes from the enormous air-pollution problem and shortage of natural resources in a country trying to lift its population (one-fifth of the world) out of poverty.

China depends heavily on imports, and the high cost of fuel has made renewable energy far more attractive, The Climate Group’s China director, Changhua Wu, told the BBC.

“In China we are concerned about the speed of growth of emissions. It’s really scary,” Wu said. The government wants to stabilize emissions by 2020, mainly through efficiency, renewable energy and electric cars, she said, but more policy incentives are needed.

As a growing world power, and leading emitter of greenhouse gases, China will be one of the most important countries in seeking an international solution to climate change. But China has taken the position that the developing world, which was responsible for the overwhelming majority of greenhouse gases until recently, must show its sincerity and ability to cut its own GHG before expecting new economies to do likewise.

“If they are not able to do it with the technology available to them, then is it reasonable to expect China and India to do it?” asked Wu.
(Sources: The Climate Group, BBC News, ClimateWire, Reuters)

Ice chunk the size of Texas melts in Arctic's Northwest Passage; heat floods Canadian park

(Photo of hikers in Auyuittuq National Park from Flickr and photographer Peter Morgan

News Update 1: Strong southerly winds have melted a piece of Arctic ice in the Beaufort Sea the size of Texas, making it likely the Northwest Passage will be navigable for the second summer in a row. While end-of-summer ice melt is not expected to surpass last year’s record, it is likely to be a close second and Beaufort is open further north than ever before, one-third of the way from Alaska to the North Pole. The melting of the large chunk of ice is a sure sign of global warming, said Mark Serreze, of the National Snow and Ice Data Center. Elsewhere in the Arctic, record high temperatures forced closure of most of Auyuittuq National Park on Canada's Baffin Island. Melting permafrost, erosion and flooding led to evacuation by helicopter of 21 park visitors. Temperatures reached into the 80s for two weeks. The July average is usually 57. (Sources: Greenwire, Anchorage Daily News,PlanetArk )

Soot’s contribution to climate change bigger than reported last year by IPCC

(Photo of coal plant emissions from Flickr and and photographer hAdamsky)

News Update 3: A new study from Texas A&M suggest that soot, once it reaches the atmosphere, combines with other chemicals, especially sulfuric acid from power plants, and then inhibits the formation of clouds. It also helps form a brown haze that acts as insulation and keeps temperatures warm at night. The study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, said the interference with cloud formation could mean as much as 20% less rain in Houston, Texas. This study follows one in March, from California and Iowa scientists, that said soot could be the second only to CO2 as a contributor to global warming and adds 4 times as much as reported last year by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (Sources: Greenwire, Houston Chronicle

VC investment in clean tech soars in down quarter

(Photo of photovoltaic solar panels from Flickr and and photographer Dale 331)

News Update 3: Venture capital investment in clean tech jumped 41% this quarter to a record $961.7 million, in a period when VC generally slumped 8%, according to Ernst & Young. The investment amount was a record for the clean-tech sector. Solar photovoltaics and other energy-generating companies took more than half the money, with efficiency coming in second with 20%. Smart energy meters were popular as an example of investment with a quick payback. Two major solar deals occurred during the quarter, April-June. SunEdison in Maryland got $131 million and eSolar in California $130 million. (Source: Greenwire)

Unregulated ships spew greenhouse gases into atmosphere and untreated waste into ocean

(Photo of Chinese freighter from Flickr and photographer fusionpanda/David Grant)

Weekly Angst: When I was on an idyllic cruise in French Polynesia eight years ago, I was astounded at how clear the water was. I’d never seen anything like it. Imagine my dismay to learn our ship was dumping all kinds of waste in the water, befouling this pristine sea. Cruise ships continue to use the ocean as a dumping ground and that’s a huge problem addressed by Friends of the Earth in its latest magazine (see summary below).

But there’s another problem – one I wasn’t aware of in 2000 when I marveled at the clear waters off Bora Bora and Moorea.

Ships help cause global warming.

Shipping worldwide released 1.12 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide last year, according to the International Maritime Organization. That’s equivalent to the CO2 given off by 205 million cars (more than all the cars in the U.S.).

Shipping emits 3% of all CO2 emissions. If it were a country, it would rank No. 6, between Japan and Germany.

With world trade expanding, shipping has grown about 5% a year for the past 3 decades and is likely to continue to do so, according to a new report by Oceana , an international advocacy group. Ships carry 90% of all trade, with more than 90,000 vessels plying the seas, the report says.

Ships don’t just release carbon dioxide, they also spew black carbon (soot), nitrogen oxides and nitrous oxide, all of which add to climate change. The emissions are especially damaging to the fast-warming Arctic, and problems will likely accelerate as the Northwest Passage opens up to more shipping. Soot, for example, absorbs sunlight and can speed the melting of snow and ice.

No regulations
With virtually no regulation, ships are using the cheapest and dirtiest kind of fuel and doing little to become more efficient. Some quick and easy fixes could help the situation, says the Oceana report.

Switching from the worst fuel available, residual oil, to marine diesel or marine gas oil, could reduce CO2 and nitrogen oxides about 5%, particulate matter 63% and nitrous oxide 91%, the report says. Better fuel would also allow for placement of emission controls that would further reduce GHG.

Just slowing down could make a big difference. Ships burn fuel based on speed rather than weight, so cutting back 10% on speed would save 23% in fuel emissions, the report says.

The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach have financial incentives for reducing speeds within 20 nautical miles of the ports and are getting 80% compliance. With 100% compliance they figure they could cut particulates (including black carbon) in half and reduce nitrogen oxides 37%.

Ships also could cut off their diesel engines when in port and hook up to power lines on shore to furnish electricity.

The industry also could work on more efficient designs for both the vessels and their engines, the report says.

And there is now some experimentation with adding sails or kites to capture wind power on the high seas. That could provide a carbon-free energy boost.

Oceana calls for the EPA to regulate ship emissions within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone and the International Maritime Organization to regulate worldwide shipping, because of the substantial impact ships have on climate change.

A coalition of states, environmental groups, government agencies and New York City has served notice to the EPA that it plans to sue the agency for failure to regulate greenhouse gas emissions coming from ships and airplanes. The action follows petitions last October and December that were ignored.

Earthjustice will represent the coalition in the lawsuit against the EPA. Coalition members include Oceana, Friends of the Earth, the Center for Biodiversity, the states of Connecticut and New Jersey, the California Air Resources Board, the California Southern Coast Air Quality Management District and the Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental Protection.

Other cruise ship problems
In addition to emitting heat-trapping gases, the world’s cruise ships are using the oceans as dumping grounds. As long as they are 3 miles offshore they can and do dump raw sewage directly in the water. When you flush on a ship, that’s where it goes. Within 3 miles they are supposed to use a rudimentary treatment device, but there is little monitoring. They also dump wastewater from sinks, showers, galleys and laundries; oily bilge water; and hazard waste from dry-cleaning and photo processing as well as batteries, paints and fluorescent lights.

How much waste do cruise ships discharge? According to Friends of the Earth, a large ship in one week generates approximately:
• 210,000 gallons of blackwater (human waste)
• 1 million gallons of graywater (showers, galleys, etc.)
• 25,000 gallons of oily bilge water
• More than 130 gallons of hazardous waste.

If that outrages you and you want to take action to help get this dumping under control, call your reps in Washington and tell them to support the Clean Cruise Ship Act of 2008 (more likely to pass in 2009), spearheaded by Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Rep. Sam Farr (D-Calif.)

Somehow, it’s easier to get exorcised over the dumping – something we can see – than greenhouse gases, which we can’t see. But they’re both a problem for our planet, our oceans, and ultimately ourselves.
(Sources: Greenwire, E&E News PM, Oceana, Friends of the Earth)

'Gang of 10' Senate proposal gets Obama backing

(Photo of offshore drilling from Flickr and photographer absolutwade/Beau Wade)

Washington Report 1: The Senate “Gang of 10” drew support from Barack Obama Friday for a bipartisan compromise energy package that would relax restrictions on some offshore drilling, while repealing some tax breaks on the oil industry and funding renewable energy and conservation. Obama had previously opposed more offshore drilling but said he favored some of the other provisions in the bill and compromise was needed to get anything passed. The proposal, led by Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) and Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) was the result of many meetings to craft a bill that would satisfy voters upset over high gas prices and reduce dependence of foreign oil. It will likely come to the floor after the August break. It would:
• Reduce the no-drilling area in the eastern Gulf of Mexico to 50 miles off the Florida coast from 150 miles offshore (both Florida senators strongly objected).
• Allow drilling offshore from four Southeastern states -- Virginia, Georgia, North and South Carolina -- if the states agree, and share some revenue with the states.
• Repeal tax breaks worth $30 billion for oil companies, which made record profits this quarter (see below).
• Extend renewable energy tax credits, due to expire this year, until 2012, to encourage development of wind, solar and other renewable sources.
• Give incentives to coal-to-liquid plants that can capture and store carbon.
• Fund R&D on advanced batteries and help automakers retool.
• Develop and demonstrate next-generation biofuels.
• Give tax credits for highly efficient cars and those that use non-petroleum fuels. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) gave the proposal luke-warm praise as a starting point for some agreement on energy. The American Petroleum Institute opposed the repeal of some oil tax credits (calling it "tax increases), saying it would discourage domestic drilling. (Source: Greenwire)

Oil companies earn record quarterly profits

(Photo of pump prices in May from Flickr and and futureatlas.com)

Washington Report 2: While drivers were paying high prices at the gas pump over the past few months, oil companies were raking in profits. The major oil companies all announced record 2nd-quarter profits in the past week:
• Exxon Mobil: $11,680,000,000
• Shell: $11,600,000,000
• BP: $9,460,000,000
• Chevron: $5,980,000,000
• ConocoPhillips: $5,439,000,000
And that’s just for 3 months. All those zeros kind of take you aback, don’t they? (Source: Greenwire)

LCV adds Stevens to ‘Dirty Dozen’ list to defeat

(Photo of Sen. Ted Stevens (left) after committee hearing from Flickr and U.S. Army photographer Staff Sgt. Jim Greenhill)

Washington Report 3: The League of Conservation Voters has added indicted Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) to its list of targets for defeat in the coming election. Stevens has an LCV lifetime voting record of 14% on bills to protect the environment and has consistently voted for billions in breaks for oil companies, LCV said. Others on the list:
• Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), who has the worst voting record on the environment among Dems running for re-election.
• Rep. Stevan Pearce (R-N.M.), a congressman running for an open senate seat against Rep. Tom Udall (D-N.M.). Pearce’s lifetime percentage on the environment is 1%, compared with Udall’s 96%.
• Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), minority leader of the Senate who has been a roadblock to clean energy and global warming legislation.
• Former Rep. Bob Schaffer (R-Colo.), who left the House to work for an oil company and is now challenging Rep. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) for an open senate seat.
• Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), former chair of the Environment Committee, who has said global warming is a “hoax.”
• Rep. Joe Knollenberg (R-Mich.), one of the biggest opponents to progress on global warming and clean energy.
The final 5 in the dozen are yet to be named . LCV helped oust two of its targets in 2006, former Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.) and former House Natural Resources Chair Richard Pombo (R-Calif.) (Sources: Greenwire, LCV)