Clean Energy
Obama Establishes Enviro, Energy Targets for Federal Government
Published October 05, 2009 @ 05:48PM PT
The Obama administration today ordered federal agencies to aim for aggressive targets to reduce energy use, and incorporate environmental sustainability in federal government operations.
The executive order "Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance," signed today by President Obama, builds off an executive order signed by President Bush in 2007, as well as momentum created by clean energy and energy-efficiency measures funded by the stimulus act.
Under this new mandate, federal agencies must set 10-year energy reduction and environmental sustainability goals within the next 90 days. Clearly identified targets in the order include:
- 30% reduction in vehicle fleet petroleum use by 2020;
- 26% improvement in water efficiency by 2020;
- 50% recycling and waste diversion by 2015;
- 95% of all applicable contracts will meet sustainability requirements;
- Implementation of the 2030 net-zero-energy building requirement;
- Implementation of the stormwater provisions of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, section 438; and
- Development of guidance for sustainable Federal building locations in alignment with the Livability Principles put forward by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Department of Transportation, and the Environmental Protection Agency.
McCain's Gripe: Climate change bills don't include nuclear power
Published October 01, 2009 @ 04:25PM PT
Senator John McCain (R-Ariz.) used a morning yak with NBC's David Gregory to slam the Boxer-Kerry climate and energy bill, as well as the Waxman-Markey House bill that squeaked to passage in June, for not including nuclear energy in their mandates on "renewable," "clean" power.
Neither bill allows nuclear energy to count toward fulfilling mandated renewable energy generation goals, which arguably could dampen enthusiasm for nukes by states trying to meet these "renewable energy standards," or RES.
"It’s the left-wing environmental organizations that are not allowing us to move forward with nuclear power," groused the senator, at the "First Draft of History" forum sponsored by The Atlantic and the Aspen Institute.
Obama Administration Moves to Slash Smokestack Greenhouse Pollution
Published September 30, 2009 @ 04:16PM PT
The Environmental Protection Agency has released its first major rule proposal to slash greenhouse gas pollution from large industrial facilities and power plants around the country.
It's the first federal move toward regulating heat-trapping gases from stationary sources; tougher auto emissions standards were introduced earlier in the year. According to EPA, the rule fits in with its authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate air pollutants, and will stand up to legal challenges.
Under the new rule, new or significantly modified facilities would be required to get pollution permits if they emit 25,000 tons or more of carbon dioxide and five other climate-changing pollutants. These facilities would be required to use the "best available control technologies" (called "BACT" in enviro-wonkese) to filter their emissions.
This threshold, which would affect around 14,000 heavy industry and energy-generating facilities, is around 100 times greater than the regulatory triggers for other air pollutants known to hurt human health and the environment, such as sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide. It is large enough to effectively remove small and medium-scale businesses from the regulation's scope.
Critics of the regulations have been spinning "doomsday scenarios, with EPA regulating everything from cows to the local Dunkin' Donuts," said EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson at a press conference this afternoon."Let's be clear: That's not going to happen. We have carefully crafted the regulation to exempt most small and medium sized businesses," while targeting emitters where it will have the greatest positive impact on curbing global warming.
Gov't Fossil Fuel Subsidies More Than Twice Those to Clean Energy
Published September 29, 2009 @ 01:20PM PT
For every dollar that the federal government spent on renewable energies between 2002 and 2008, it put about $2.43 -- nearly two and a half times as much -- into subsidies for fossil fuels.
As detailed in a new report, "Estimating U.S. Government Subsidies to Energy Sources: 2002-2008," this enormously tilted playing field gives quite a marketplace advantage to companies that are already among the most lucrative on Earth.
These figures suck a lot of the oxygen out of the argument that renewables are "just too expensive" compared to fossil fuels. And they add some frisson to the sole, rather wonkish climate action that came out of last week's G20 Summit, where the heads of state agreed (albeit with no timeline yet established) to phase out fossil fuel subsidies.
If they follow through, it will be a move with climate benefits and more. "Fossil fuel subsidies act as a drag on the whole economy," Columbia professor Scott Barrett, an expert on natural resource economics, told me last week. "Get rid of them, and you can reallocate resources across whole economy," he said, "become more efficient, and ultimately [improve] the whole economy."
This graphic tells nearly the whole story; more detail of where those monies are going after the jump.
Climate at the G20: White House briefs bloggers on climate discussions
Published September 26, 2009 @ 05:25PM PT
Above: G20 Voice bloggers at a briefing by Michael Froman, Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor, at the end of the G20 Summit on Friday, Sept. 25. (Photo by Julie C. Roth; Courtesy G20 Voice.)
Climate activists were underwhelmed by what came out of this week's Group of 20 summit in Pittsburgh in the way of formal climate change commitments.
True, the heads of state of the 20 leading developed and developing economies agreed to phase out fossil fuel subsidies "in the medium term." But they couldn't come to a consensus on climate finance -- aid from richer nations to poorer, directed at adapting to and mitigating the impacts of global warming.-- which is what it takes for something to make it onto the summit's final statement.
Stronger pledges on climate had been part of a leaked draft of the summit communique earlier in the week, and climate activists from Oxfam, Greenpeace, US Climate Action Network and other groups were aggravated that they vanished from the final version.
The G20 are asking their finance czars to keep digging into the issue when they meet in Scotland, in November, according Michael Froman, Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor. Froman met with bloggers covering the G20 for a briefing, soon after President Obama's press conference late Friday afternoon.
The G20 "felt it is important that climate financing stays primarily in the UN context," said Froman -- the context of the UN's international climate treaty negotiations in Copenhagen in December -- where all developing as well as poorer nations will also be at the table to help forge the agreement. Although the G20 nations represent about 85% of the globe's economic output, there are over 160 additional countries involved in the Kyoto Protocol climate treaty.
According to Froman, there has been no decision made on whether President Obama will attend December's international climate treaty talks in Copenhagen.
NY Senate's Bipartisan Vote Jump-starts $5B Green Jobs/Bldg Plan
Published September 15, 2009 @ 06:23PM PT
Start spreading the news: A newly-passed law in New York State will use the proceeds from auctions of carbon emissions credits to fund a massive statewide weatherization-and-green-jobs-creation program.
And a Republican state senator bucked the party line to help pass the bill.
Last Friday, the State Senate passed Green Job/Green New York Act. The legislation will channel $112 million in proceeds from auctioning carbon emissions credits (at the market created via the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative) into starting up a $5 billion energy-efficiency program -- which will lower energy costs for New York households, cut the state's greenhouse gas pollution levels, and create thousands of jobs.
Republican State Sen. Thomas Morahan co-sponsored the bill with Democratic colleague Darrel Aubertine. Morahan's support led to a resoundingly bipartisan vote to pass the bill.
House Investigation Turns Up Forged Letter #14 Against Climate Bill
Published September 10, 2009 @ 06:11PM PT
Above: In this TV ad, funded by the VoteVets.org PAC, Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans ask the Senate to pass the Waxman-Markey climate and energy bill.
House investigators have discovered another forged letter sent to a Virginia representative in June, urging him to vote against the Waxman-Markey climate and energy bill.
As The Washington Post reports, this brings the total number of fakes up to 14 so far -- all coming from Bonner & Associates, the PR firm that was working for the pro-coal lobby group American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity in the run-up to the House vote.
Like the previous baker's dozen, this letter was made to look as if it were from a grassroots community organization. This time, rather than evoke sympathy for the concerns of the aging, or people of color, this letter pulled patriotic heartstrings, by appearing to come from a local American Legion post.
The letter lauded the continued use of coal-fired energy, and urged Rep. Tom Perriello (D-Va.) to vote against the Waxman-Markey bill.
