Energy Policy

This is Kind of a Big Fucking Deal

by John Cole| February 3, 201412:18 am| 66 Comments

This post is in: Energy Policy, Nobody could have predicted, OLD MAN YELLS AT CLOUDS

China’s Communist state is hardly known for its transparency. So when environmental groups appealed to the government last year to disclose official data on air pollution, they were not expecting much.

“Way beyond our expectations, the government actually said yes,” said Ma Jun, head of the Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs in Beijing. “I am quite amazed.”

Since Jan. 1, the central government has required 15,000 factories — including influential state-run enterprises — to publicly report details on their air emissions and water discharges in real time, an unprecedented degree of disclosure that is shedding light on the who, what, when and where of China’s devastating environmental problems.

The reporting requirement is part of a striking turnaround by China’s government, which is also publishing data on the sootiest cities and trying to limit the use of coal. The country’s appalling air is blamed for more than a million premature deaths a year, for producing acid rain that damages the nation’s agriculture, for driving away tourists and even for encouraging the brightest students to study abroad. Perhaps just as important, Beijing’s bad air has been making its Communist leaders lose face.

I have a number of thoughts about this, first and foremost of which is that is if China decides to start limiting imported American and other coal, you can fully expect the current hysterical equation of mild EPA efforts to regulate the air to turn into even more heated plaintive wails about communism and Obama and the war on coal and socialism and WHY THE FUCK DO STUPID PEOPLE HAVE SO MUCH INFLUENCE? On the upside, I am tired of the imagined fever dream Muslim Obama, so maybe Mao Obama will at least be new for a while. Or Che Obama. It’s all good.

The second thought is that if China does decide to kill the market for coal, and while no economist, if they transition off it or make mention of transitioning off of it, I would bet they could totally disrupt the market, create a glut and a total fucking mess in the commodities markets, and kill off coal mines all over America with a vengeance that would give every Greenpeace member in the world a sizable erection. Additional, they are perfectly positioned to be the new green energy leaders of the globe, since they are already kicking our ass in solar and if you mention clean energy in Ameriduh you get my Senator Joe Manchin shooting a rifle at something while fellating a brick of coal and a thousand wingnut websites all scream SOLYNDRA in unison so that it is the first fucking thing talked about on Morning Joe or, well, every other cable news broadcast.

Hi, my name is John Cole and I am cranky for some reason.

This is Kind of a Big Fucking DealPost + Comments (66)

I may have to go and help her with GOTV

by Kay| November 21, 201311:58 am| 40 Comments

This post is in: Domestic Politics, Don't Mourn, Organize, Election 2014, Energy Policy, Free Markets Solve Everything, Fuck The Middle-Class, Fuck The Poor, How about that weather?, Kochsuckers, Decline and Fall, Our Awesome Meritocracy

This is a plea from Michigan – from valued commenter HillaryRettig:

Dear Juicers,

Greetings from southwest Michigan, where the landscape is flat, the people are darned nice, and the football teams and the beer kick ass. (Plus, we just got an Alamo Drafthouse – yeah, us!)
Plus, we progressives have a GREAT candidate, Paul Clements, who’s got a real shot at winning our 6th district House seat next year, unseating the noxious Republican incumbent Fred Upton.
Like many other Repubs, Upton is a former moderate who’s recently swung hard right due to Tea Party Terror Syndrome(tm). You can judge him by his friends/donors, who include all the wrong people: Koch Industries, Halliburton, the Petroleum Marketers Association, and Altria Group (formerly Philip Morris).They love him because of his apparent willingness to do whatever foul thing they ask, be it deny climate change, severely restrict pretty much every non-rich person’s access to health care and preventative medicine, or undermine the Clean Air Act.

You can also judge Upton by his enemies, who include a vast array of unions, women’s groups, human rights groups, and environmental groups. He got “0” ratings from: CWE, AFSME, AAUW, NARAL, Middleclass.org, Alliance for Retired Americans, and Human Rights Campaign; and near-zero or failing ratings from the NEA, National Nurses United, NAACP, and the League of Environmental Voters, among many others. Upton is so, so very bad on environmental issues that the LA Times actually crowned him, “the #1 Enemy of the Planet Earth” in Congress.

Upton’s enemies also include lots of ordinary Michiganders, who are pissed because, despite his assiduous selling out, his record on bringing jobs home is dismal.
One more thing you should know is that Upton’s vulnerable. Paul’s team has run the numbers, and in a conservative-leaning district that nevertheless went decisively for Obama in 2008, this race is definitely winnable. And the Wingnuts are kindly helping us out by giving Upton a battle on his right flank.
The very worst thing about Upton is that he’s chair of the House’s powerful Energy and Commerce Committee—Henry Waxman’s old committee! As such, he’s had the opportunity to do real harm–and will continue to do harm until we get rid of him.

*Here he is, looking pretty smug and safe in that chair! Also: what’s wrong with his eye? Is that a wink?

As a child of privilege—Upton is an heir to the Whirlpool appliance fortune—who went almost directly into politics after college, and who now spends nearly all his time promoting the interests of corrupt corporations, Fred Upton embodies everything that’s wrong with the system.
Fortunately, Michigan’s got a GREAT alternative in Paul Clements. Think of him as the Luke Skywalker to Upton’s Emperor Palpatine.

* no winking at wealthy donors going on here:

Now, as an economist and professor of political science at Western Michigan University, Paul’s research specialty is—get this!—evaluating the effectiveness of social programs. In other words, he’s an expert on effectiveness and accountability—two elements sorely lacking in our current Congress.
Of course, Paul is also a super nice guy and a great progressive, who will advocate for all the right things. He recently brought environmental activist Bill McKibben to speak at WMU.
So, c’mon, Juicers: jedi up and donate to Paul’s campaign! Think how good it’s going to feel, next November, when we send “Emperor” Upton packing, and replace him with someone who cares both about people and good governance.
CONTRIBUTE TO PAUL’S CAMPAIGN HERE
Shout Out to Howie Klein at DownWithTyranny, who has also done a terrific job documenting Upton’s many malevolences.

I admire what she’s doing here because it is difficult to remove an incumbent (but so much fun to win!) so help her (and all of us) out if you can.

I may have to go and help her with GOTVPost + Comments (40)

More Nukes Now

by @mistermix.bsky.social| November 4, 20137:47 am| 125 Comments

This post is in: Energy Policy

A group of climate scientists, including former NASA scientist James Hansen, are calling for more nuclear power to address climate change:

Renewables like wind and solar and biomass will certainly play roles in a future energy economy, but those energy sources cannot scale up fast enough to deliver cheap and reliable power at the scale the global economy requires. While it may be theoretically possible to stabilize the climate without nuclear power, in the real world there is no credible path to climate stabilization that does not include a substantial role for nuclear power

We understand that today’s nuclear plants are far from perfect. Fortunately, passive safety systems and other advances can make new plants much safer. And modern nuclear technology can reduce proliferation risks and solve the waste disposal problem by burning current waste and using fuel more efficiently. Innovation and economies of scale can make new power plants even cheaper than existing plants. Regardless of these advantages, nuclear needs to be encouraged based on its societal benefits.

All the nuclear technology near my house is 40+ years old, of the same vintage (not the same design) as the Fukushima reactors. In general, utility operators aren’t building new nuclear plants, so I don’t see how adding more nuclear capacity could happen without a major government initiative, and that would be socialism.

More Nukes NowPost + Comments (125)

(Not) liberal enclaves on the coasts

by Kay| July 26, 201312:03 pm| 75 Comments

This post is in: David Brooks Giving A Seminar At The Aspen Institute, Energy Policy, Grifters Gonna Grift, Blogospheric Navel-Gazing, Good News For Conservatives, I Reject Your Reality and Substitute My Own

We talked about a small local project involving wind turbines here:

When the Archbold and Pettisville school districts brainstormed ways to reduce their electricity bills during the mid-2000s, they arrived at a common solution: wind power.
Students, teachers, and school officials celebrated Wednesday the completion and operation of identical 750-kilowatt wind turbines at each community’s main school complex with back-to-back dedication ceremonies that, in part, recognized the two districts’ cooperative effort
Both turbines were heavily funded by federal “stimulus” grants — funding that didn’t exist when Pettisville and Archbold began exploring their wind-turbine possibilities in 2005 and 2006, respectively. So far, the turbine has cut the district’s power bill by about $9,000 monthly, he said.

Now solar. 2011:

Bryan Municipal Utilities broke ground this week for a $7.42 million, 2-megawatt solar array.
“We have been investigating solar power for more than a year,” said Steve Casebere, director of utilities. “As the prices for solar panels came down and the incentives for solar energy increased, the solar option became not only viable but also attractive.”
The project will use primarily Ohio materials, contractors and labor. Rudolph/Libbe Inc., of Walbridge, will develop, design and build the array. First Solar, of Perrysburg, will supply the 24,000 solar modules. Nextronex, of Toledo, will manufacture the inverters, and API, Inc. of Ridgeville Corners, will provide the racks for the modules.
The project will create about 60 construction jobs and will sustain another 300 manufacturing jobs in Ohio. The solar array will be complete in February 2012.

2012:

Just 10 weeks after breaking ground, construction of Bryan Municipal Utilities’ solar generation project has been completed, and power is being supplied to Bryan’s electrical grid.
BMU broke ground for the $7.42 million solar array in early December 2011. By mid-January 2012, all 23,530 solar modules were in place, and by the first week of February, the solar plant was fully operational.
“The solar arrays are producing just as expected, and we have seen them perform up to the maximum capacity of 1.8 megawatts on sunny days,” said Steve Casebere, director of utilities.
As of February 13, the solar field has produced 100 MWh, which means it has also produced 100 solar renewable energy credits. BMU sold 2,500 solar RECs produced in 2012 to American Electric Power and Duke Energy for $606,500.
In addition to the power and energy credits, what the solar plant does not produce is valuable. With the energy produced to date, the solar field has saved 76 tons of carbon dioxide and 3.6 tons of methane gas emissions.

Interesting, because these two examples are in very politically conservative areas. Are we looking at the beginnings of a national/local disconnect on energy, where the national lobby shops, paid pundit corps and conservatives in political leadership at the state and national level reflexively OPPOSE anything that could be construed as remotely “green” or “alternative” but people on the ground start to see this stuff in action so become comfortable with it? May be difficult to continue to portray an energy approach as “job killing” when the jobs are right down the road.

Does this sort of destructive initiative by DC conservative lobbyists and libertarian billionaires become less politically viable as “facts on the ground” are quietly established?

The ALEC bill, HB298, dubbed the “Affordable and Reliable Energy Act” was introduced by ALEC member Rep. Mike Hager and repeals the renewable energy standard that barely made it out of committee when two sane Republicans voted against it. One Republican from Charlotte, Ruth Samuelson, said the RES had helped develop a renewable alternative energy industry that benefitted rural communities and created 1,100 clean energy companies that contributed $3.7 billion in annual revenue, created over 21,000 jobs, and lowered residential energy bills by $173 million. In fact, North Carolina’s RES lifted the state to fifth place in the nation forsolar power development and was closing in on fourth place this year leading the CEO of FLS energy to claim “It’s an extraordinary success story that there’s an industry that hardly existed several years ago,” but the Koch brothers mean to destroy the industry with a “filled-in” template courtesy of ALEC.

(Not) liberal enclaves on the coastsPost + Comments (75)

Romney and the RNC confuse the timeline

by DougJ| September 12, 201210:26 am| 50 Comments

This post is in: Energy Policy, Republican Stupidity

Jake Tapper has a very good, and aptly titled, piece on some Republicans’ criticism of Obama over the attacks in Libya. It points out that, as mistermix said, the embassy’s statement came out before the violence began, and it ends by calling a lie a lie.

Romney wasn’t the only one — Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus tweeted ”Obama sympathizes with attackers in Egypt. Sad and pathetic.”

The evidence that the president “sympathizes with attackers in Egypt” was not immediately apparent, likely because it does not in any way exist.

Kudos to Tapper for spelling it out carefully…why isn’t this done more often? Why can’t an article just say that someone’s claims are not true in any way?

Romney and the RNC confuse the timelinePost + Comments (50)

Weird Scenes Inside the Coal Mind

by John Cole| August 18, 20126:11 pm| 37 Comments

This post is in: Election 2012, Energy Policy, Clown Shoes

These babies are popping up all over the northern panhandle and southwestern PA:

Because we are in the middle of a post truth and post accountability election, I have no idea where the signs are coming from. There are no paid for markings on the signs, so I just have no clue. Could be the Romney campaign, could be a super pac that is anti-Obama, could be the Friends of Coal, or it could be just one wingnut owner of a coal company like Don Blankenship. What’s depressing, though, is it just keeps pushing the fals narrative that Obama is somehow killing coal. Hell, Obama has spent the last couple years blowing sloppy kisses at the ludicrous notion of “clean coal,” enraging environmentalists. At any rate, as we have stated over and over and over again, what is killing coal is natural gas:

Energy-related carbon dioxide emissions in the United States from January through March were the lowest of any recorded for the first quarter of the year since 1992, the federal Energy Information Administration reports. The agency attributed the decline to a combination of three factors: a mild winter, reduced demand for gasoline and, most significantly, a drop in coal-fired electricity generation because of historically low natural gas prices. Whether emissions will continue to drop or begin to rise again, however, remains to be seen, experts said Friday.

“While this is a positive step, we shouldn’t just say, ‘Oh, we’ve got plenty of natural gas, we can just switch to that, problem solved,’ and move on,” said Jay Apt, the director of the Carnegie Mellon Electricity Industry Center, who was not involved in compiling the study.

Carbon dioxide emissions from energy consumption totaled 1.34 billion metric tons in the first quarter, down nearly 8 percent from a year earlier, the Energy Information Administration said.

Although natural gas is a more efficient fossil fuel than coal, burning it still produces carbon dioxide emissions. One of its strengths lies in that it produces more kilowatts of power than the equivalent amount of coal and it provides more energy for each carbon dioxide molecule emitted into the atmosphere. This so-called carbon efficiency is one of the key equations that scientists use to project carbon dioxide emissions, with more efficient energy sources contributing less to global warming than the more inefficient emitters.

Claiming there is a war on coal is akin to claiming that Henry Ford declared war on horses. At any rate, if there was a war on coal, I wouldn’t say it is completely over, but troops friendly to natural gas are massing near Waterloo.

Weird Scenes Inside the Coal MindPost + Comments (37)

How To Give A Damn About Climate Change

by Elias Isquith| July 29, 20124:56 pm| 15 Comments

This post is in: Energy Policy, Politics, Green Balloons

When it comes to the politics of climate change, there’s one question I’ve never been able to answer satisfactorily: Where’s the outrage?

It’s not entirely missing. I remember the Keystone Pipeline protests, the largest act of civil disobedience at the White House since Vietnam. But, impressive a display as it was, the Keystone protests were dwarfed by Occupy; and worse still the pipeline’s proponents may yet win the war.

My point is not to criticize those who’ve worked to force our political system to seriously address the climate crisis — far from it, in fact. I don’t blame them for the public’s indifference. It’s not their fault; it’s mine. Or at least people like me. I know my bit about climate change, but I confess that I approach the subject in much the same way I would a doctor’s physical or a plate of steamed cabbage. I do it so I can say I’ve done it. It’s passionless. A weak foundation for effective action, to say the least.

Obviously, I’m not the only person who feels this way. So I hope a new paper by two University of Oregon professors “Climate Change and Moral Judgment,” which I found via Dave Roberts of Grist, gets some attention. The paper’s an examination of just why it is that folks like me (and those who are even less inspired) struggle to care about climate change in a personal way. According to the authors, the reasons are multiple (screen grab courtesy of Roberts):

Nature climate moral judgment1

If you want more, you can either fork over $32 to buy the article or you can be cheap like me and read Roberts’ great synopsis instead. But do try to give this one a go, even if you’re the kind whose eyes glaze over once the charts and graphs start a-flying. As Roberts concludes, “Climate change is not only the economic and ecological crisis of our time, it’s also a moral crisis. What we are doing to our descendants is a moral crime. Finding ways to help people get that, feel it in their guts the way they would if someone threatened their own families, is a precondition for serious, sustained action.”

Update: In the comments, the estimable Sir Nose’D shares a free and easy way to read the article.

How To Give A Damn About Climate ChangePost + Comments (15)

“The defense has a certain level of trust in defendant that the government does not.”

Marge, god is saying you’re stupid.

I was confident that someone would point it out and thought why not me.

Conservatism: there are people the law protects but does not bind and others who the law binds but does not protect.

They’re not red states to be hated; they are voter suppression states to be fixed.

We are aware of all internet traditions.

The revolution will be supervised.

Nikki Haley, who can’t acknowledge ‘slavery’, is a pathetic shill.

Dear media: perhaps we ought to let Donald Trump speak for himself!

Come on, man.

Sadly, there is no cure for stupid.

Republicans don’t lie to be believed, they lie to be repeated.

If senate republicans had any shame, they’d die of it.

Something needs to be done about our bogus SCOTUS.

You are so fucked. Still, I wish you the best of luck.

Jesus, Mary, & Joseph how is that election even close?

Narcissists are always shocked to discover other people have agency.

Good lord, these people are nuts.

Even though I know this is a bad idea, I’m off to do it anyway!

Impressively dumb. Congratulations.

How any woman could possibly vote for this smug smarmy piece of misogynistic crap is beyond understanding.

Never forget that he train is barreling down on Trump, even as he dances on the tracks.

Incompetence, fear, or corruption? why not all three?

I conferred with the team and they all agree – still not tired of winning!