energy

Natural gas utility to spend $6.6 million on conservation and efficiency efforts

This is cool news:

December 23, 2008 -- The Virginia State Corporation Commission (VSCC) today approved the Virginia Natural Gas (VNG) proposed conservation and ratemaking efficiency plan.

The plan calls for new energy conservation programs, coupled with a revenue adjustment mechanism, designed to assist customers in managing their energy costs.

As part of the plan, VNG will provide $6.6 million over three years in new conservation initiatives. VNG projects that customers who participate in these new programs, set to begin rolling out in early 2009, can significantly reduce their monthly natural gas usage.

This is via NRDC, who shares this very cool map of decoupling programs across the nation:

Battery makers come begging to Congress

American lithium-ion battery makers, including giants like 3M, are banding together to try to extract a few billion dollars from Congress so they can build a shiny battery manufacturing plant that, for whatever reason, they aren't willing to spend their own money on. This latest handout request is a fairly dubious idea that is nevertheless likely to appeal to a lot of people on grounds of both economic nationalism and a vague aura of environmental goodness.

Whatever you think of the request, though, let's at least all agree not to put up with this:

"We don't want to go from being dependent on Middle East oil to Asian batteries."

- Jeff Depew, chief executive of Imara, a start-up that makes lithium-ion batteries

Oil is a viscous substance, finite in quantity, concentrated in hard-to-reach pockets in certain corners of the globe. These properties allow a relatively small handful of countries to exert some imperfect control over its supply. Batteries differ from oil in just about every important way.*

Depew has an obvious interest in promoting American battery manufacturers. But surely savvy outsiders understand that a competitive, low-cost industry, whether centered in Asia or anywhere else, is good for everyone who needs batteries?

Recently, Andrew Grove, former chairman of Intel Corp., began urging the chip maker to explore whether it could play a role in battery manufacturing. Mr. Grove and others say U.S. companies must step up efforts to produce advanced batteries for the country's car industry or America will end up trading its dependence on foreign petroleum for dependence on foreign-made batteries.

Oh, well. The industry consortium is organized by Jim Greenberger, a lawyer specializing in clean tech. In case you're not scared enough yet of the Asian battery menace, Greenberger spells it out:

Michigan governor on verge of important announcement on coal and clean energy?

For several years Michigan has been pursuing a dual-track energy strategy: more coal plants and more clean energy. But as forecasts show demand slacking, energy imports draining the budget, and power plant costs rising, the calculus may be shifting.

Keith Schneider reports that Gov. Jennifer Granholm is on the verge of a big announcement:

Senior Granholm administration officials declined to be specific about what they said would be a "major statement," but indicated the governor might support a moratorium on approving new coal plants while the state formulates CO2 regulations--something coal opponents around the state have pushed for with lawsuits, petitions to the governor, and a steady barrage of press and grassroots events for more than a year. Or, some officials said, the governor might announce an outright ban on new coal plants.

Putting Rust Belt states in the vanguard of the clean energy shift is a powerful thing, symbolically, politically, and economically. Let's hope Granholm goes big.

Despite continued shenanigans, prospects looking up for Mass. wind project

The final environmental impact statement on Cape Wind was supposed to hit the press in December, but it's been put back another month thanks to the delay tactics of the 'antis' in Congress, this time notably Rep Jim Oberstar (D-Minn) who was recently singled out in Grist as an outstanding advocate for progressive stances on energy and transit, but only in Minnesota, I guess. The Providence Journal takes him and those he probably acted on behalf of to task here:

This is another win for the Kennedys, who have summer houses on Nantucket Sound, and Bill Koch, a fossil-fuel billionaire and a hardball political player and paymaster, and the leader of the anti-wind-farm group the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound ... That the vast majority of Massachusetts residents support Cape Wind seems not to matter at all ...

The FEIS is expected to be very positive on the proposal, opening the way to who knows what next hurdle the Alliance will erect, 7 years now after Cape Wind was first proposed.

World's biggest solar power tower to open in Spain

The world's biggest solar tower will open early this year in Spain. The race for leadership in the next generation of solar power is taking off.

The U.K. Guardian reports that in the desert 20 miles outside Seville, the Spanish company Abengoa will be deploying over 1,000 sun-tracking mirrors -- each "about half the size of a tennis court" -- to superheat water to 260°C to drive a steam turbine and generate 20MW of electricity.

Concentrated solar power (CSP) technology, as it is known, is seen by many as a simpler, cheaper and more efficient way to harness the sun's energy than other methods such as photovoltaic (PV) panels.

Spain is placing a huge bet on CSP to meet their renewable energy and carbon targets:

Regulation and public investment are more efficient means to reduce GHGs than emissions pricing

When I sat down to write about why so-called "command and control" methods are often the most effective and efficient means of fighting climate chaos, I found that Kevin Drum had posted exactly the argument I wanted to refute.

After conceding that it will take more than emissions pricing to lower greenhouse gas emissions, and that response to price signals tends to be small and slow, Drum argues that a price mechanism should be the primary means to fight climate chaos: "Still, generally speaking, taxes and carbon trading are more efficient regulatory mechanisms than command and control, so the more you can rely on them the better."

I think this default conventional wisdom is just plain wrong. Not only is elasticity low, but there are also simple standards by which we can measure energy and greenhouse-gas efficiency. Further, suitable means for increasing efficiency and lowering emissions are known. Given these three conditions, price is not the most efficient way to change behavior.

As examples, consider weather and duct sealing. It's widely acknowledged that sealing buildings yields fast paybacks -- two years or less. Yet most buildings remain under-sealed, with leaky frames and ducts. How do we change this? Well, we can raise the price of energy until people become desperate and seek out contractors. But since we already have quick paybacks, any amount we raise the price is far beyond the cost of saving the energy.

If, as I have suggested in surveys of the literature, demand response to price increases is around -.5, that means it will require $200 in emissions charges to motivate each $100 of consumer investment in energy efficiency. In contrast, investing public funds could insure that a nice woman working for an energy-efficiency utility could seal your home for around $100, plus a bit for administration. Even if that $100+ came from regressive taxation, it would still cost consumers less than a primarily price-driven policy. And if the payback is really two years or less, the government could use its ability to borrow to provide low interest financing, thus bringing the cost to consumers down below the business-as-usual price.

An open letter to the president and first lady from the nation's top climate scientist

 

29 December 2008
Michelle and Barack Obama
Chicago and Washington, D.C. United States of America

Dear Michelle and Barack,

We write to you as fellow parents concerned about the Earth that will be inherited by our children, grandchildren, and those yet to be born.

Barack has spoken of "a planet in peril" and noted that actions needed to stem climate change have other merits. However, the nature of the chosen actions will be of crucial importance.

We apologize for the length of this letter. But your personal attention to these details could make all the difference in what surely will be the most important matter of our times.

Jim has advised governments previously through regular channels. But urgency now dictates a personal appeal. Scientists at the forefront of climate research have seen a stream of new data in the past few years with startling implications for humanity and all life on Earth.

Yet the information that most needs to be communicated to you concerns the failure of policy approaches employed by nations most sincere and concerned about stabilizing climate. Policies being discussed in national and international circles now, which focus on 'goals' for emission reduction and 'cap and trade,' have the same basic approach as the Kyoto Protocol. This approach is ineffectual and not commensurate with the climate threat. It could waste another decade, locking in disastrous consequences for our planet and humanity.

The enclosure, "Tell Barack Obama the Truth -- the Whole Truth" [PDF] was sent to colleagues for comments as we left for a trip to Europe. Their main suggestion was to add a summary of the specific recommendations, preferably in a cover letter sent to both of you.

There is a profound disconnect between actions that policy circles are considering and what the science demands for preservation of the planet. A stark scientific conclusion, that we must reduce greenhouse gases below present amounts to preserve nature and humanity, has become clear to the relevant experts. The validity of this statement could be verified by the National Academy of Sciences, which can deliver prompt authoritative reports in response to a Presidential request¹. NAS was set up by President Lincoln for just such advisory purposes.

Science and policy cannot be divorced. It is still feasible to avert climate disasters, but only if policies are consistent with what science indicates to be required. Our three recommendations derive from the science, including logical inferences based on empirical information about the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of specific past policy approaches.

Who will be the next victims?

A couple weeks ago an earthen damn holding back billions of gallons of coal sludge broke and let loose a torrent of toxic filth.

 

Wonder how long this one is going to hold.

Did the coal industry create its own PR nightmare?

The press coverage of the Tennessee sludge spill has been nothing short of astonishing. Barely a week has passed since the accident and already a Google search for the phrase Tennessee spill produces 2,280,000 results!

Compare that to 1,740,000 for Three Mile Island and 708,000 for Exxon Valdez. In little more than a week, this has become one of the biggest environmental stories in recent decades.

Obviously, the naked fact of being the biggest coal spill in history (100 times larger than the Valdez spill) is reason itself for the intensity of the coverage. But is it also possible that the level of press interest would not be quite so massive were it not for the tens of millions of dollars spent by the coal industry on its "clean coal" advertising campaign?

In international affairs, this is what they call "blowback." The can of "water" that you thought you were throwing on a small fire turns out to be gasoline, and you suddenly find yourselves engulfed in flames.

I wonder what the folks at the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity are thinking about all this. Can they keep running the ads as if nothing had happened? If they do run the ads, will people just be reminded of all those icebergs of fly ash floating west of Knoxville?

Just checked on the ACCCE website: silence. Not a word on the Tennessee spill.

Must be in meetings. Or maybe working on the lyrics for next year's clean coal carols.