| |
| News Room |
| |
|
This article shows another example of how politicians have overestimated the ability of wind energy, and the opportunity costs that might result if they keep doing so. Increased reliance on wind energy in Texas has resulted in higher costs at a time when consumers can least afford it.
Click here to read the full article. |
 |
 PACE to Conference: Regulatory Approach Could Be “Extremely Costly”
Speaking Friday to the Annual Meeting of the Southern Section of the Air and Waste Management Association, PACE Executive Director Lance Brown told attendees that the regulatory approach to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions could be “extremely costly.” The annual meeting took place in Mobile, Alabama.
“In recent months, momentum for legislative approaches to climate change has slowed, and some might interpret that as a good thing for consumers,” said Brown. “However, the regulatory approach to greenhouse gases by the EPA represents a far greater threat to working families and businesses.”
In particular, Brown focused on pending regulations by EPA that would classify coal ash as a hazardous substance. Coal ash is a natural by-product of coal combustion that is normally stored on-site at power plants. Much of the coal ash produced, about 40% in fact, is used beneficially to make concrete and other building materials.
“Although coal constitutes half of America’s energy portfolio, EPA’s approach to coal ash threatens to remove coal as a viable source of American power,” remarked Brown. “That approach is tantamount to outlawing guns by outlawing bullets.”
Brown also pointed to new ozone regulations by EPA that could greatly restrict industrial growth in the Southeast. By simply lowering the ozone limit from .075 to .070 ppm, EPA’s regulations would force a number of Southeastern cities into non-attainment. This would result in prohibitions against industrial development.
“While the media is largely focused on renewable energy mandates and cap-and-trade, regulators are quietly setting the stage for a future in which consumers pay a heavy toll,” explained Brown. “In the worst case, we’ll have an energy system that is unaffordable, unreliable, and threatens to place America’s economy into gridlock.”
Joining Brown on a panel devoted to GHGs were Mack McGuffey, an attorney with Troutman Sanders LLP in Atlanta who specializes in environmental law, and Dr. Ken Mitchell, Senior Climate Change Advisor with the EPA. |
|
|
The rapid growth of wind farms, whose output is hard to schedule reliably or even predict, has the nation’s electricity providers scrambling to develop energy storage to ensure stability and improve profits.
As the wind installations multiply, companies have found themselves dumping energy late at night, adjusting the blades so they do not catch the wind, because there is no demand for the power. And grid operators, accustomed to meeting demand by adjusting supplies, are now struggling to maintain stability as supplies fluctuate.
On the cutting edge of a potential solution is Hawaii, where state officials want 70 percent of energy needs to be met by renewable sources like the wind, sun or biomass by 2030. A major problem is that it is impossible for generators on the islands to export surpluses to neighboring companies or to import power when the wind towers are becalmed.
On Maui, for example, wind generating capacity over all will soon be equal to one-fourth of the island’s peak demand. But peak wind and peak demand times do not coincide, raising questions about how Hawaii can reach its 70 percent goal. For now, the best option seems to be storage batteries.
In New York and California, companies are exploring electrical storage that is big enough to allow for “arbitrage,” or buying power at a low price, such as in the middle of the night, and selling it hours later at a higher price. In the Midwest, a utility is demonstrating storage technology that can go from charge to discharge and back several times a minute, or even within a second, bracing the grid against the vicissitudes of wind and sun and transmission failure. And in Texas, companies are looking at ways of stabilizing voltage through battery storage in places served by just one transmission line.
Renewable goals can be met, many in the industry insist. But if the energy source is intermittent, “you can’t do that without batteries of some sort,” said Peter Rosegg, a spokesman for the Hawaiian Electric Company.
His company has agreed to buy electricity from a wind farm on the northern shore of Oahu, where the Boston-based power company First Wind has just broken ground.
The spot is one of Hawaii’s best wind sites, Mr. Rosegg said, but the supply is gusty and erratic. What is more, it is at the farthest point on the island from the company’s main load center, Honolulu, and does not even lie on its high-voltage transmission backbone.
So the 30-megawatt wind farm, which will have enough power to run about 30 Super Wal-Marts, will have Xtreme Power of Austin, Tex., install a 15-megawatt battery.
Computers will work to keep the battery exactly half-charged most hours of the day, said Carlos J. Coe, Xtreme Power’s chief executive. If the wind suddenly gets stronger or falls off, the batteries will smooth out the flow so that the grid sees only a more gradual increase or decrease, no more than one megawatt per minute at some hours of the day.
The Hawaii installation is designed to succeed at a crucial but obscure function: frequency regulation. The alternating-current power system has to run at a strict 60 cycles per second, and the battery system can give and take power on a micro scale, changing directions from charge to discharge or vice versa within that 60th of a second, to keep the pace steady.
The battery system can also be used for arbitrage, storing energy at times when prices are low and delivering it when prices are high. It can hold 10 megawatt-hours, which is as much energy as a 30-megawatt wind farm will produce in 20 minutes if it is running at full capacity. That is not much time, but it is huge in terms of storage capacity.
Neither First Wind nor Xtreme Power would say what the project cost, but publicly disclosed figures put the project in the range of $130 million, with about $10 million for the battery. The Energy Department has provided a $117 million loan guarantee.
Across the country, it is proving hard to predict the cost and the value of power storage to consumers. The electricity stored in off-peak hours could be quite low in cost, and prices at peak hours could be quite high. If the reliance on renewable energy reduces the need to burn coal and natural gas, that would yield an additional advantage.
Mr. Coe estimated the battery system’s round-trip efficiency—that is, the amount of electricity the batteries could deliver per megawatt-hour stored in them—at over 90 percent. If that figure is borne out, it would be a significant advance from the largest form of energy storage now in general use, pumped hydropower, whose efficiency is put at 70 to 85 percent.
At a pumped hydro plant, off-peak electricity is used to pump water from a reservoir at a low elevation to one at a higher one. At hours of peak demand the water flows back down through a turbine, creating electricity.
Electric companies are using other strategies for storage and frequency regulation. In Stephentown, N.Y., near Albany, a Massachusetts company, Beacon Power, is building a bank of 200 one-ton flywheels that will store energy from the grid on a moment-to-moment basis to keep the alternating current system at a strict 60 cycles.
Atop each flywheel is a device that can be a motor at one moment and a generator the next, either taking energy and storing it in the flywheel or vice versa. The Energy Department provided a $43 million loan guarantee to assist in the $69 million project.
The Energy Department is also supporting storage projects that rely on compressed air. Surplus electricity is used to pump air into an underground cavity; when the electricity is needed, the air is injected into a gas turbine generator. In effect, it acts as a turbocharger that runs on wind energy captured the previous night, instead of natural gas burned at a peak hour.
The department is contributing to two projects explored by PSEG Global, an affiliate of Public Service Electric and Gas, based in New Jersey. It plans to provide $30 million of the $125 million estimated price of a 150-megawatt project envisaged in upstate New York, perhaps at an abandoned salt mine, and $25 million toward a $350 million, 300-megawatt project to be built in Northern California.
Both will be used to store power made in off-peak periods and deliver it in peak times, when prices are higher, said Paul H. Rosengren, a spokesman for P.S.E.G.
In Presidio, Tex., American Electric Power and MidAmerican Energy Holdings have just completed a four-megawatt battery system that is not tied to any particular wind farm but is intended to improve reliability in the town, served by only one major transmission line. American Electric Power already has smaller batteries working in Ohio and Indiana to provide more stability in its distribution systems there. |
|
|
In a commentary published by the Washington Post today, Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council President and CEO Karen Kerrigan wrote that a national RES would hurt small businesses: “A federal renewable energy mandate would require that a percentage of a state’s energy be produced from ‘renewable’ sources. The federal government would arbitrarily decide what sources are considered ‘renewable.’ The mandate does not take geography into account and fails to consider that many states do not have access to affordable renewable energy sources. This means the legislation is inequitable; it will punish small-business owners in states where renewable sources are limited.”
Kerrigan noted that renewable energy, generally being more expensive to generate, would force costs to rise. And if energy costs increase for “businesses, consumers and workers will bear the burden through higher prices and stagnant wages. For many small businesses, raising prices is not a competitive option. Therefore, business owners will have fewer dollars to invest in new jobs, higher wages and benefits for existing employees, or new equipment and technologies.” Kerrigan wrote that comprehensive energy policy was “critical for our nation, but it cannot come at the expense of the small-business sector, the backbone of our economy. President Obama and congressional leaders say they want to help small businesses create jobs and grow, but the RES mandate along with other intrusive regulations that will raise costs are non-starters.” |
|
Study Finds $700B in Costs for Switching From Coal to Gas Generation
By Matthew Bandyk
The American Public Power Association released a study July 7 that examines the infrastructure and investment impediments to switching from coal-fired power plants to natural gas-fired plants. The study, “Implications of Greater Reliance on Natural Gas for Electricity Generation,” assumes that natural gas demand will be much higher than many previous studies have estimated.
That assumption was by design, lead author and Aspen Environmental Group senior associate Catherine Elder said at a July 7 news conference in Washington, D.C. “We’re going into uncharted territory with natural gas demand,” she said. Most studies on the future of gas generation have had a “wide range” of scenarios for demand, but “by and large, the assumptions don’t knock your socks off,” Elder said.
The study found that current demand for natural gas is about 23 Tcf, compared to 22 Tcf in 1972. But if existing coal-fired generation capacity were to be replaced with natural gas-fired capacity, the demand would increase to 36 Tcf.
“We’re not suggesting that all coal will be replaced, but a significant number of coal plants will be affected by regulations that have nothing to do with CO2,” APPA President and CEO Mark Crisson said at the conference. The study notes that regulations of a number of conventional pollutants, such as SO2, NOx, particulate matter, coal ash and mercury, are all pending from now until 2017.
Elder explained some of the barriers to meeting the increase in demand identified by the study. The overall cost of transitioning from coal to natural gas would be more than $700 billion today, the study found. Of that cost, $335 billion comes from the replacement of existing coal-fired units with combined-cycle gas units. “You have to be careful when you hear somebody talking about converting or retrofitting because usually they are really talking about replacing,” Elder said.
An additional $348 billion would come from new pipeline capacity. In the study’s scenario of complete transition from coal generation to gas generation, pipeline capacity would need to be increased to the point that it can handle 70 Bcf/d. Since 1990, the country has added 45 Bcf/d to pipeline capacity, Elder noted.
Additionally, storage capacity will need to increase by 1.4 Tcf at a cost of $12.5 billion, according to the study. Geology will limit the ability to add new storage facilities because many coal plants are not located near suitable gas storage facilities. “Adding storage turns out to be not as easy as adding new pipelines,” Elder said.
The study did not include estimates of fluctuations in natural gas commodity costs, “which I think will be undoubtedly higher,” Elder said.
She also expressed concerns about the ability of production levels to meet the increase in demand that would come with a transition to natural gas. The study found that over the past 10 years there has been a “pronounced” decrease in gas production per new well, and Elder said there is little sign of that trend stopping. “We’ve got these new shale wells, but they’re not big enough producers to change that trend per well,” she said.
At the conference, Crisson disagreed with questions that suggested the study is politically anti-gas. “The study is not intended as an advocacy piece,” he said. But, “all of these challenges should give policymakers pause” on the question of transitioning to natural gas, he added. “We need to look a little more closely before we leap down that path.” |
|
|
The developer of a hybrid biomass solar power plant to be built in California has abruptly canceled the project, underscoring the challenges the state faces in meeting its ambitious renewable energy goals.
Click here to view full article. |
|
|
In Friday's edition of The Daily Caller, PACE Executive Director Lance Brown discusses the often overlooked drawbacks and limitations of wind energy, using the United Kingdom as a recent case study.
Click here to read the full article. |
|
|
The Obama administration and a key player in Senate climate negotiations would consider a bill that caps greenhouse gas emissions from just the electric utility sector, which may face better political odds than an effort to cap emissions across the economy.
President Obama will likely discuss setting caps on the utility sector when he meets with senators this week, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel told the Wall Street Journal on Friday.
“The idea of a ‘utilities only’ [approach] will also be welcomed,” Emanuel said, noting that “a wide range of ideas will be discussed.” Obama is scheduled to meet with a bipartisan group of senators Wednesday as Democratic leadership plans its strategy for bringing an energy and climate package to the floor this summer.
Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.)—who is co-sponsoring a Senate climate and energy bill with Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.)—said he would also consider a power plant-only cap.
“Well, I would say we —yes, I would like to look at that,” Lieberman said yesterday on CNN’s “State of the Union” program. The Kerry-Lieberman bill would cap greenhouse gas emissions across multiple sectors of the economy.
A strong energy independence bill must include a cap on carbon emissions, Lieberman added. “But if we can all agree on a compromise proposal, as Rahm Emanuel said, that begins with the utilities sector of our economy pricing carbon in it, I think that’s a significant step forward to a better, safer country.”
The Kerry-Lieberman bill would begin limiting power plants’ emissions starting in 2013, followed in 2016 with restrictions for heavy manufacturing. Transportation emissions would face their own emission caps, but the industry cannot participate in any trading with the other industrial sectors.
To read the full story, CLICK HERE. |
|
|
According to the New York Times, Democrats will add a cap-and-trade program to an energy bill that they plan to offer up later this summer. Senator Chuck Schumer boasted that the proposal has “pretty broad support” from “environmental groups and the energy companies, etc.”
Let’s make sure the Senate understands that “etc” includes energy consumers, workers, and small business owners that can’t afford another price tag in this recovering economy. PACE applauds many of the bill’s incentives for energy diversity, but cap and trade will only punish—not encourage—fledgling business, and it may as much as double a family’s energy bills.
To read the full story, CLICK HERE. |
|
|
It’s getting difficult to keep track of all the energy proposals that are on the table. We’ve got Sen. Jeff Bingaman’s (D-NM) original American Clean Energy Leadership Act, as well as the Waxman-Markey American Clean Energy and Security Act that passed the House last year with a 20 percent renewable energy standard and ambitious emissions cuts. Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) released their CLEAR Act with a cap-and-dividends program shortly before Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) and Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) released their American Power Act with a cap-and-trade program. Not to mention, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is attempting to get in the game with greenhouse gas regulations, and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and others are attempting to stop them. Who can keep track of all the legislative proposals in the chaos?
As the energy debate continues, we’ve seen many impact-based studies from both the government and private institutions calculating the effects that cap-and-trade provisions and federal renewable energy standards will have on select interest groups. We depend on these studies so that consumers and lawmakers alike know what will happen to electricity rates and choices should any particular bill pass. In fact, according to Renewable Energy World, the American Power Act permits the EPA and the National Academy of Sciences to make policy changes every four years according to the latest climate science and technological advancements.
As the EPA and other organizations are analyzing the American Power Act—or any piece of legislation pertaining to energy—it is important that they keep an eye on the aggregate impact of the proposals on consumers, jobs, and the entire economy.
Why? These bills often contain very expensive provisions that would have a devastating impact on the already weakened economy. A study commissioned by the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and the American Council for Capital Formation (ACCF) found that H.R. 2454—the Waxman-Markey bill as approved by the U.S. House—would cost up to 2.4 million jobs by 2030. Is Congress aware of this fact?
The study also illustrates how energy prices would rise under the legislation, particularly in states dependent upon traditional sources like coal, oil, and gas. By 2030, for example, natural gas prices would increase between 56.3 percent and 73.5 percent, while electricity prices would rise by up to 50 percent (NAM/ACCF Study PDF Download ).
The NAM/ACCF study is one of many analyzing the impacts of the various energy proposals, and we need to get a clearer picture of the effects of comprehensive energy legislation. With families struggling to make ends meet, they need to know about the potentially drastic spikes they may see in their electricity bills.
The majority of energy experts and economists would likely agree that the key to affordable energy policy is to utilize the wide range of energy-generation sources found across the country, including renewable sources in states where they are affordable and accessible. The existing studies illustrate that by artificially bolstering demand for expensive sources like wind and solar energy, Congress will be putting the country on the path toward astronomical energy bills and job loss, whether our elected officials are aware of it or not.
The EPA needs to take account of the cost that proposals like a cap-and-trade program or a potential federal renewable energy standard will have on consumers, small businesses, and economic growth. The legislation introduced on May 12 did not include a renewable energy standard, but Senate leadership has given every indication that it could very well be tacked on the bill, should the bill ever get a debate. If and when this happens, the EPA and other organizations need to look carefully at the hidden costs so that the legislation can be fairly debated.
Just as we need a comprehensive energy policy to ensure the security of our energy future, we also need a comprehensive analysis of all the options on the table before anything becomes law. We know these provisions will have a high cost impact on consumers, but we don’t yet know just how high. The Partnership for Affordable Clean Energy applauds the EPA for its attention to the impact of such sweeping legislation, and hopes that American consumers and families are put first.
See the opinion piece online by CLICKING HERE. |
|
|
According to Ben Geman of E2 Wire, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has opened the door to moving a scaled-back energy bill rather than a broader climate change package if the climate bill can’t attract GOP support.
Read the full story HERE. |
|
|
In a March 15th letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, Ohio Governor Ted Strickland urges the agency to delay potential regulatory action on greenhouse gases. Strickland, a Democrat, expresses his “deep concerns with the Agency’s impending regulatory approach and the impact this approach will have on Ohio’s economy and working families.”
The letter comes amidst heavy criticism from PACE and others who believe that EPA regulation of greenhouse gases would mean higher electricity prices for consumers, more permitting requirements for businesses, and a circumvention of the democratic process. On January 25th of this year, PACE sent its own letter on the subject urging members of Congress to block EPA regulation of greenhouse gases. That letter was followed recently by a March 10th letter to the EPA from 20 state and territorial Governors, a bipartisan effort spearheaded by Governors Haley Barbour (R-MS) and Joe Manchin (D-WV).
Governor Strickland writes in his letter, “...I feel strongly that a regulatory approach, acted upon without legislative consideration of its effect on states that have a heavy industrial base and coal generated electric production, will be financially and economically devastating for Ohio.”
To read Governor Strickland’s letter, click HERE. |
|
PACE Tells Environmental Protection Agency Now is Wrong Time for Stricter Ozone Standards
On March 17th, PACE sent a letter to Administrator Lisa Jackson of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) urging the agency’s leader to halt a proposal to enforce stricter ozone standards.
Although states are currently undergoing efforts to meet new standards set by the agency just two years ago, the EPA has proposed to change the ozone standard again from .075 parts per million (ppm) to somewhere between .060 and .070 ppm. Two years ago, EPA restricted the standard from .080 ppm to the current level of .075 ppm. Counties that do not meet the standard are considered in “non-attainment” and are at risk of losing federal transportation and transit funding. Non-attainment counties also must enforce tougher permitting requirements that slow economic development and hurt industrial recruitment.
Read PACE’s letter by clicking HERE.
Read Dr. Charles Steele’s letter by clicking HERE.
Download your own sample letter HERE. |
|
Governors Speak Out on EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gases
Yesterday, a bipartisan group of 20 state and territorial Governors (18 GOP and 2 Democrat) sent a letter to Congressional leaders urging them to adopt legislation that would “stop harmful EPA regulation of greenhouse gas emissions.” The letter was addressed to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, House Minority John Boehner, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.
In their letter, the state leaders write, “As governors, we have the responsibility to protect jobs, promote economic growth, and mitigate any threats to financial stability in our states. We oppose EPA regulation of greenhouse gases that fails to account for these responsibilities.”
Similarly, Governor Rick Perry (R-TX) sent his own letter to Congress highlighting similar concerns about EPA’s planned regulations. In his letter (also attached) Governor Perry cited Texas’ legal challenges to EPA’s efforts and indicates that they intent to continue to challenge the regulations in court while encouraging members of Congress to adopt legislation to preempt EPA action.
Click HERE to read the Governors’ Letter
Click HERE to read Governor Perry’s Letter |
|
|
Two years ago, this gritty mining city hosted a brief 21st-century gold rush. Long famous for coal, Puertollano discovered another energy source it had overlooked: the relentless, scorching sun.
But as low-quality, poorly designed solar plants sprang up on Spain’s plateaus, Spanish officials came to realize that they would have to subsidize many of them indefinitely, and that the industry they had created might never produce efficient green energy on its own.
To read the full story, CLICK HERE. |
|
|
According to a story published by Politico.com, “Senate Democrats are calling for a suspension of a clean-energy program that has sent more than $1 billion in stimulus funds to foreign-owned companies.”
Politico reports that “Sens. Chuck Schumer of New York, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Jon Tester of Montana announced Wednesday a new initiative to require the ‘Buy America’ provision of the stimulus to be applied to all programs under the jurisdiction of the legislation, not just the government ones. A study done by the Investigative Reporting Workshop found that 79 percent of the $2 billion in clean-energy grants allocated since Sept. 1, 2009, has gone to foreign wind companies.”
To read the full story, click HERE. |
|
|
In a recent column in the Wall Street Journal, guest columnist Robert Bryce describes growing concerns over the effects of wind turbines being located nearer to populated areas. Bryce is the managing editor of Energy Tribune and recently published his fourth book, “Power Hungry: The Myths of ‘Green’ Energy and the Real Fuels of the Future.”
To read the full column, click HERE. |
|
|
On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Energy offered the first conditional loan guarantee for
new nuclear plant construction, keeping with comments made by President Obama in the
recent State of the Union address. The loan will help Southern Company build two new
nuclear reactors at Plant Vogtle in eastern Georgia. The Partnership for Affordable Clean
Energy (PACE) and Working People for Fair Energy (WPFE), two Southeastern-based
consumer groups, applauded the move.
Click here to read more. |
|
|
President Obama said today that he is willing to tack toward the center on climate and energy legislation following closed-door bipartisan talks with Capitol Hill leaders on how to move the administration’s domestic agenda during this election year.
“Bipartisanship can’t be that I agree to all the things that [Republicans] believe in or want, and they agree to none of the things I believe in or want and that’s the price of bipartisan,” Obama told reporters after a meeting with Republican and Democratic leaders from the House and Senate. “But that’s sometimes the way it gets presented.”
During the meeting, Obama said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) “said something very nice... on how he supports our goals on nuclear energy, and clean coal technology and more drilling to increase oil production.”
Taken from a report by Darren Samuelsohn, E&E senior reporter, (02/09/2010).
To read a similar story from the Wall Street Journal, click HERE. |
|
|
In a January 27th letter to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel, the Building and Construction Trades wing of the national AFL-CIO expressed that it was "deeply concerned that aggressive implementation of [greenhouse gas] mitigation options under the Clean Air Act would have severe negative consequences for our workers."
The AFL-CIO goes on to state that aggressive efforts to address greenhouse gases without effective technology could stunt America's economic recovery. While the national labor union has been on record endorsing cap-and-trade principles, the concern shown by the AFL-CIO regarding potential EPA involvement in greenhouse gas regulation is an important part of shifting the debate back to Congress.
To read the AFL-CIO's letter, click HERE. |
|
|
According to a report from Greenwire, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has vowed to minimize job losses from greenhouse gas emissions regulations that some have argued would threaten the health of the economy.
In the attached letter to Reps. Joe Barton (R-Texas) and Greg Walden (R-Ore.), EPA air chief Gina McCarthy wrote that EPA is "committed to fashioning any Clean Air Act rules in a manner that minimizes any job losses and enhances the U.S. economy's potential for job growth to the maximum extent allowed by law."
Click HERE to see the letter from McCarthy and EPA.
As reported by Robin Bravender of Greenwire on January 15, 2010 |
|
|
A week ago in Seattle, delegates to the 91st American Farm Bureau Federation annual meeting voted to oppose cap-and-trade legislation over the next eight years. The Bureau has maintained steady opposition to climate change legislation that would negatively affect farmers.
As part of the annual meeting, the delegates approved a special resolution stating that cap-and-trade legislation would raise farmers’ and ranchers’ production costs, and the potential benefits of agricultural offsets are far outweighed by the costs to producers. Due to these and other concerns, the delegates strongly opposed “cap and trade proposals before Congress” and supported “any legislative action that would suspend EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.”
To read the full press release from the American Farm Bureau, click HERE. |
|
|
In a December 16 letter sent to USDA Chief Tom Vilsack, Senator Mike Johanns of Nebraska questions statements made by USDA's Chief Economist about cap and trade legislation. In the letter, Johanns refers to a USDA prediction that cap and trade legislation backed by the agency would result in 59 million acres of cropland coming out of production by 2050.
In the letter, Johanns questions Vilsack's recent assertions that other studies might be more complete than USDA's own analysis, asking why the agency's findings would not be the definitive source for predicting the consequences to farmers of federal legislation.
To see the letter from Senator Johanns, click HERE. |
|
|
Just a day after PACE reported on the shut down of a landmark geothermal project in California and a large wind project in West Virginia, an article by the L.A. Times reports that a massive California solar project has been shelved, as well.
According to the L.A. Times,
"The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power announced Tuesday that it has shelved plans for a 970-acre solar farm near the Salton Sea, just as members of the City Council signaled that they were unprepared to support the project. The DWP's interim general manager, S. David Freeman, said he was troubled by the costs of the 55-megawatt project, which had been slated to go up on land purchased by the utility in 2006."
From L.A. Times, 12/16/09, Phil Willon and David Zahniser
To read the full story, click HERE. |
|
Farm Bureau Chief Stallman Speaks Out on EPA Climate Change Finding
In a statement released on December 7th. American Farm Bureau Chief Bob Stallman confronted the EPA decision on carbon dioxide and climate change, stating:
“The decision by the Environmental Protection Agency today to announce an endangerment finding on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases could carry severe consequences for America’s farmers and ranchers.
“We firmly believe any regulations dealing with global warming that could negatively affect our ability to produce food and fiber for our nation and the world should come through the legislative process. While more and more questions are being raised about the scientific validity of global warming models it is not the time to begin making sweeping policy decisions based on the projections offered by those climate models.
“We realize the EPA’s stated intention is to focus this finding narrowly on specific industries, using particular thresholds, but we believe there is no protection in the provisions that prevent them from being applied broadly across all sectors, including farm and ranch families who produce livestock. Due to the timing of the announcement, with the Copenhagen talks about to kickoff, we also believe this move could have more to do with political science than climate science.” |
|
|
Climate change skeptics have won the battle against cap and trade legislation, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) declared today.
Read the rest of the story HERE. |
|
|
Clear differences have emerged among the Democratic chairmen of the six Senate committees with jurisdiction over climate change legislation.
Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), chairman of the Commerce Committee, who both represent states with significant coal industries, would like to proceed cautiously.
“Most of the country doesn’t know what cap-and-trade is. They have no idea. I would say half the Senate have no idea what cap-and-trade is and could not explain it,” Rockefeller told The Hill on Tuesday.
He said climate legislation should not reach the floor before July of next year, putting the controversial bill on the schedule only months before Election Day.
“You have to get this stuff out to the American people before you change their lives, and we are not paying any attention to that,” Rockefeller said.
To read the full article, click HERE. |
|
|
California is likely to see 365 megawatts of new renewable energy capacity for 2009, but its utilities aren't likely to meet a state requirement to buy 20 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2010. To read the full story, click here. |
|
|
Having had time to study a new climate bill moving in the U.S. Senate, a number of national consumer groups are expressing concern that national climate legislation might offer little support to poor Americans. At the heart of their concerns is that the Boxer-Kerry bill offers fewer allowances aimed at helping consumers, as compared to its House counterpart, Waxman-Markey.
To read the consumer group letter, click here. |
|
|
A report from the National Research Council (NRC) calls for further investment in Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), stating that the emerging technology is key to meeting future energy demand and maintaining stable electricity prices. In a summary edition of "America's Energy Future: Technology and Transformation," the National Research Council finds that "Coal-fired plants with CCS could provide as much as 1,200 TWh of electricity per year by 2035 through repowering and retrofits of existing plants and as much as 1,800 TWh per year by 2035 through new plant construction. In combination, the entire existing coal power fleet could be replaced by CCS coal power by 2035."
To read the Summary Edition of NRC's report, click HERE. |
|
|
President Obama’s top climate and energy official said Friday that there was virtually no chance Congress would have a climate and energy bill ready for him to sign before negotiations on a global climate treaty begin in December in Copenhagen.
Click here to read the full New York Times’ article. |
|
|
September 30, 2009 — The Partnership for Affordable Clean Energy (PACE) announced today that the Alabama Agribusiness Council (AAC) has become its newest official partner in the fight for affordable and fair national energy policies. Both PACE and AAC have significant concerns over the way that proposed cap-and-trade policies would impact farmers and others who work in the agribusiness industry.
To read the official press release, click HERE. |
|
|
The Partnership for Affordable Clean Energy (PACE) announced today a new partnership with the Business Council of Alabama (BCA) as part of both organizations’ efforts to advocate affordable and fair national energy policies. Both PACE and BCA have remained active in past months in the national debate over energy issues such as renewable energy standards and cap-and-trade policies.
To read the official press release, click HERE. |
|
|
Chambers Statewide Throw Support Behind Coalition Committed to Economically-Friendly
Energy Policy
August 25, 2009 — The Partnership for Affordable Clean Energy (PACE) announced today that the Chamber of Commerce Association of Alabama (CCAA) has joined forces with the national coalition fighting for affordable national energy policies. The coalition encourages public officials to consider the economic impact of energy policy on businesses, workers, families and farmers.
Click here to read more. |
|
|
As part of an ongoing effort to educate electricity customers about the effects of national energy legislation, PACE hosted its first town hall meeting last night in Andalusia, AL. The meeting, which was hosted in conjunction with the City of Andalusia, drew local citizens and opinion leaders.
"We appreciate the efforts of Mayor Johnson and the City of Andalusia to host the first of our town hall meetings," said PACE Executive Director Lance Brown. "The meeting generated a rich discussion about how national energy policy can affect jobs and electricity rates in local communities."
Future town hall meetings are planned in Mississippi, Georgia, Florida, and Arkansas, occurring throughout August and into September when Congress reconvenes to consider HR 2454.
The town hall meeting was covered by the Andalusia Star-News and by WAAO radio in Andalusia. Read the the print story in today's edition of the newspaper by clicking HERE. |
|
|
This past Thursday, ten Senate Democrats called on President Obama to include a border adjustment mechanism and other trade protections in pending climate legislation. The letter is signed by Sens. Brown, Stabenow, Feingold, Levin, Bayh, Casey, Byrd, Specter, Rockefeller, and Franken.
"Climate change is a reality and the world cannot afford inaction," wrote the Senators. "However, we must not engage in a self-defeating effort that displaces greenhouse gas emissions rather than reducing them and displaces U.S. jobs rather than bolstering them.
To read the full letter, click here. |
|
|
In an incisive editorial, Wall Street Journal columnist Bret Stephens raises important points about the international dynamics of cap and trade legislation currently before the U.S. Congress. Can America truly afford to go it alone on climate change when the world's fastest growing economies flatly say no?
Click here to read the column. |
|
|
July 30, 2009 — The Partnership for Affordable Clean Energy (PACE) announced today that the Alabama Chapter of the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) has joined its growing national coalition to promote sound economic energy policy. The coalition advocates for consideration of economic impact of energy policy on businesses, workers, families and farmers.
To read the full letter, click here. |
|
|
Senator Mike Johanns of Nebraska spoke on the Senate floor today regarding the impact cap-and-trade legislation would have on American agriculture. In advance of a hearing to be held on Wednesday in the Senate Agriculture Committee, Johanns outlined how agriculture will be hammered with increased production costs as a result of cap-and-trade. He reiterated that state- and commodity-specific analyses of cap-and-trade are essential for a successful evaluation of the true costs and Administration-promised benefits.
To read prepared remarks by Johanns, click here. |
|
|
In a June 15th op-ed, Mississippi Poultry Association Mark Leggett explains why cap and trade proposals are a bad idea for the agriculture community. Leggett writes, "The increases in energy costs caused by the provisions of pending legislation represent a monumental tax increase on business and industry, and especially Mississippi consumers who would pay more at the pump for gasoline and more at home for electricity. Further, higher energy prices, fewer jobs and the loss of industrial production would seriously impede economic growth in our State."
To read the full op-ed, click here. |
|
|
The press is reporting that late last week, Chairman Waxman advanced a proposal that would establish a new USDA conservation program that would pay out $5-$10 billion over 10 years to farmers, ranchers and forestland owners for practices that reduce or sequester carbon emissions.
To read the full letter, click here. |
|
|
In a June 11th letter to Senator Barbara Boxer, Senator George Voinovich of Ohio expressed his growing concern with the Senate's process for considering landmark energy legislation. "This process in no way supports the development of a workable solution to the problem of climate change," writes Voinovich. The senator is one of several who have called into question the one-sided nature of the energy and climate debate in Washington, D.C. Voinovich adds, "We cannot afford to get this wrong."
Click here to see a full copy of Voinovich's letter. |
|
|
In a recent editorial, Eugene Robinson, Associate Editor and Columnist for the Washington Post, criticized the Obama administration for its proposed investment in carbon capture and storage. Robinson also blasted the administration for its support of clean coal technologies. PACE believes Robinson's view is fundamentally wrong and has submitted a response to national media, including the Washington Post.
To read Robinson's editorial, click here.
To read PACE's response, click here. |
|
|
In a May 23rd op-ed, Georgia PSC Commissioner and former SEARUC Chairman Stan Wise explains that national renewable energy mandates will disproportionately affect electricity consumers in Georgia. Wise calls for increased flexibility from Congress when defining renewable.
To read Wise’s op-ed, click here. |
|
|
On May 14th, regulators from eight states voiced strong concerns to Rep. Waxman about the cost impact of a national renewable mandate and carbon tax system on consumers. The letter states that a “one-size-fits-all, national mandate to restructure the energy economy could have many unintended consequences that could be devastating to the American people and our economy.”
To read the full letter, click here. |
|
|
Members of Alabama’s House Delegation today announced that they have sent a bipartisan letter describing the “negative impact” that proposed cap and trade legislation would have on energy prices and on the fragile state and national economy. All seven members of the delegation signed a letter to the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee expressing concerns about the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACESA), which is being marked up this week.
“The citizens of Alabama and our nation would be faced with large increases in energy prices due to the carbon cap and trade provisions of ACESA,” the letter stated. The letter was signed by Congressman Spencer Bachus, who is senior member of the delegation, and Representatives Robert Aderholt, Jo Bonner, Bobby Bright, Artur Davis, Parker Griffith, and Mike Rogers.
Read the full letter here. |
|
|
In a recent letter to the Southern Governors' Association, Alabama Governor Bob Riley raised concerns about the potential impact of a national renewable energy standard, asking the organization to demand energy laws that are fair and balanced... Read More
Click here to read a sample of
Governor Riley's letter.
|
|
|
Solar and wind will have their places, as will other renewables. Realistically, however, solar and wind will probably only provide a modest percentage of future U.S. power. Some serious realism in energy planning is needed, preferably from analysts who are not backing one horse or another. Op-Ed from Co-authors James Schlesinger and Robert L. Hirsch... Read More |
|
|
Repower America, a group associated with former Vice-President Al Gore that supports a national Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), has provided its own scenario for powering the nation’s electricity needs with 100% renewables. However, an analysis of that roadmap by PACE shows that the Southeast would not meet proposed RPS laws using the group’s assumptions about the nation’s energy mix.
Read More |
|
The Blue-Green Alliance and Repower America claim that proposed energy laws would jump start the economy. But the truth is that working families are likely to feel blue about the green they lose from higher electricity bills and industrial layoffs. Why are these organizations hiding behind hypothetical job creation, instead of debating the merits and costs of renewable energy and cap-and-trade?
Read More
|
|
|
The green experience in Spain has been cited by proponents of renewable energy standards in the U.S., including President Obama, as a model for the future of American energy. But a new study just released today by the Universidad Rey Juan Carlos shows the nation’s workforce lost 9 jobs for every 4 green jobs created... Read More
To read the full report, click here. |
|
|
Senator Richard Shelby recently weighed in on the Renewable Energy issue in an op-ed to Alabama newspapers. His assessment? One size does not fit all when it comes to national energy proposals...
Read More |
|
|
A recent analysis by House Ways and Means Ranking Member Dave Camp shows the state-by-state impact on electricity costs that would occur under a cap and trade system with a 100% auction...
Read More |
|
|
In a nationally televised prime-time press conference on Monday, March 24, 2009, President Barack Obama noted what he labeled ‘regional differences’ that exist when considering national energy policy... Read More |
|
|
Communicating to key policymakers is an important part of achieving fair and affordable energy policies. That's why PACE recently sent a letter to the newly formed Moderate Democrats Working Group, led by Senators Bayh and Carper... Read More
|
|
|
A renewable energy proposal in Washington, D.C., if passed into law, could have a major impact on jobs and electricity rates in Alabama. The proposal creates a national Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) that would require all states to produce 20% of their electricity from renewable sources by 2021. Renewable energy generation would have to begin immediately... Read More |
|
PACE Disputes Reports Claiming Renewable Energy Standards Easy to Meet
A recent report released by the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy claims that the Southeast has sufficient resources to meet a 20% Renewable Energy Standard currently being floated in Congress. A review by PACE, however, comes to an entirely different conclusion... Read More |
|
|
Renewable Energy Could Have Big Impact on North Carolina Jobs, Electricity Rates
A renewable energy proposal in Washington, D.C., if passed into law, could have a major impact on jobs and electricity rates in North Carolina. The proposal creates a national Renewable Portfolio Standard that would require all states to produce 20% of their electricity from renewable sources by 2021. Renewable energy generation would have to begin immediately... Read More |
|
|
WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, today raised serious concerns about the nation’s ability to meet a Renewable Electricity Standard (RES) requiring utilities to generate as much as 20 percent of their electricity from renewable energy by 2021... Read More
|
|
Partnership for Affordable Clean Energy • P.O. Box 70072, Montgomery, AL 36107 • A 501(c)(4) Organization |
|
|
|
