mr-able home design

Showing posts with label Virginia Utilities. Show all posts

What Energy Sources Do Your Tax Dollars Subsidize?

Republicans squawk about incentives for renewable energy because those are new & need approval, while dirty energy sources locked in their subsidies long ago - like, say, the tens of millions of dollars in tax breaks Virginia gives to dirty coal companies every year.

Why not eliminate all subsidies & put a simple price on carbon pollution? That's what truly terrifies dirty energy companies (and the politicians they fund).

From TheGreenMiles

Reposted from THE GREEN MILES

Dominion Virginia Power is spending $1.8 billion dollars worth of your electric bills to build a dirty coal-fired power plant in Wise County. How many jobs will that investment of our money deliver? Shockingly few, according to the Virginia Mining Association (PDF):

At the end of July, there were about 1,800 men and women employed in the construction of the 585-megawatt power station. The work force included about 600 people from the local area, accounting for 33.4 percent of total employment. The local area is defined as being within a 50-mile radius of the town of St. Paul, with Wise, Russell and Scott counties accounted for the majority of the local hires. Additionally, the staff that will operate the power station is being formed and trained. After Oct. 4 operations employment will stand at 34 with half of those hires coming from the local area.

Well hey, that's only $106 million of our money per permanent job for local residents. What a bargain!

Meanwhile, a Virginia State Corporation Commission analyst has testified (PDF)that, because the higher rates needed to pay for it, the plant will cost Virginia 1,474 jobs.

Now, apologists for this terrible deal will say, "But The Green Miles! They need every job they can get in Wise County!" By that rationale, why bother actually building the plant? As the Chesapeake Climate Action Network has pointed out, we could pay 75 Wise County residents $100,000 per year and give the county $6 million a year for the next 133 years with the $1.8 billion it will take to build the plant. And in that scenario, we wouldn't have to deal with the 5.4 million tons of carbon dioxide, thousands of tons of other air pollutants & dozens of pounds of mercury the plant will release.

All in all, a terrible deal for Virginia's economy & environment.

'Governor's" Conference on Energy

I just returned from the "Governor's" Conference on Energy and here are some highlights:

#1) Bob McDonnell claims this is the first of these conferences. Not true, people have been attending energy conferences on this weekend in Richmond for years!

#2) Bob McDonnell says Virginia should look at "all the above". But he starts with coal, natural gas, nuclear, off shore oil then wind, solar and biomass. He is proud of the fact that he was in line to be the first Governor to have big oil slide there long pipes in our wet and wind off shore areas. Virginia's off shore oil is extremely limited and very dangerous to extract. He is dead wrong on this and we should fight him on it.

#3) Bob McDonnell thinks the Uranium in southside should be dug up ASAP. Screw the peons who live there.

#4) There were a number of presentations that repeated the call for mandated renewable energy standards. It was repeatedly stressed that the lack of a mandate in Virginia, unlike our neighbor states, is hampering renewable development in the state.

#5) Unlike our neighbors, North Carolina, Maryland and DC, there is no state support for renewable alternative energy. This too is hampering a renewable industry in Virginia.

Bob McDonnell says he wants to make Virginia the Energy capitol of the east. Right now we import more energy than any other state except for California. It seems from his actions that what he wants is to make Virginia the fuel energy capital and and exploit our state's resources to sell to the highest bidder.

Bob McDonnell is a failure as an energy leader and will continue the lax regulation of our environment.

The conference was really a sad couple of days for Virginia.

Reposted from The Green Miles

Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell ran claiming to be a sensible moderate. But his governance record is clear -- from trying to privatize Virginia ABC stores at a massive loss to taxpayers to ignoring Metro's desperate need for funding, Bob McDonnell puts big business first & the little guy last.

Nowhere does that record become more stark than on environmental issues. McDonnell has made it clear that the agricultural interests like cigarette companies & pork processors that have given him over $1 million come first & the Chesapeake Bay comes last.

Now the Virginia Sierra Club has issued its Chesapeake Bay Report Card, making it clear that when it comes to the Bay, Bob McDonnell has been a total failure:

Human-caused climate change threatens to flood Jamestown, the first permanent European settlement in what became the American colonies and the United States, says a report Wednesday by environmental groups.

Jamestown Island, the site of the original 1607 settlement, is low enough to be inundated by rising seas and tidal waters -- even if the waters do not rise as much by 2100 as scientists predict, according to the report by Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the Colorado-based Rocky Mountain Climate Organization. [...]

"Climate change poses the greatest risk our National Parks have ever faced," says Theo Spencer, senior advocate of NRDC's Climate Center. He says Jamestown, along with two other parks, attracts six million visitors each year who spend more than $200 million and support 4,000 Virginia jobs.

The report (PDF) says the other two parks also face grave risks: Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge could lose its beach and Shenandoah National Park could see it brilliant fall colors muted by air pollution and encroaching pine trees.
Previous reports have made similar warning about threats to Virginia's coastal communities & wildlife habitats. And that's on normal days, never mind when a hurricane threatens to bring a storm surge.

Methane Hydrate Risk in our Pursuit of Energy

Here is an excerpt from Oil be Seeing You Blog.

Everyone knows business men are trustworthy. Hell, survey after survey shows that they are more trusted than the family doctor or your local banker or pharmacist or those bleeding-heart scientists writing global warming reports for the IPCC or, God forbid, that wacko environmentalist living down the street who keeps showing up at all those Greenpeace demonstrations. So, of course we can count on business men, these pillars of society, to protect the environment and do the right thing and make decisions in the best interest of "the little people", as Tony Hayward, CEO of BP, so eloquently put it.

And we can trust corporations, like BP, Exxon, Halliburton, Enron and Lehman Brothers, to monitor and police their own operations. If they find something wrong they will make sure it gets fixed, and quickly. So there is no need for us or our governments to hold them accountable. They will hold themselves accountable. After all, isn't BP voluntarily setting aside $20-billion to cover costs and claims resulting from the Gulf oil spill? And don't they have thousands of people on the beaches and on shrimp boats cleaning up the oil spill? Oh wait, they were strong-armed into all of that by President Obama. Well they would have done it anyway, right?

The reality is, in my opinion, that the inordinate faith and trust afforded business and industry leaders and executives is both misplaced and highly irrational in face of the evidence of the collateral damage of their profit-centred decisions and actions over the last several decades. The reality is that, despite the fact that in the beginning people were prone to exclaim, "what a terrible accident", this was no accident. Far from it. The disaster that befell The Deepwater Horizon was the result of very high-risk human decisions in the face of overwhelming evidence that should have caused them to turn back. But don't take my word for it.

For more click here.

Shale gas — the hydrofracking wars

By Dave Cohen

Published Jun 28 2010 by Decline of the Empire,

Josh Fox's film Gasland has stirred up a lot of controversy over the environmental damage caused by shale gas drilling. Shale gas reservoir rock lies many thousands of feet below the surface, with the depth depending on the location. In order to get the gas to flow up to the wellhead, operators drill down to the shale rock layer, and then apply a process called hydraulic fracturing to "open up" the rock. This requires injecting a fracturing fluid into the shale at very high pressure. This fluid is mostly water, but also contains hundreds of nasty chemicals.

Where do the gas, the chemicals, and the contaminated water end up? The best outcome says that all three 1) flow up to the wellhead, where they are captured or produced; or 2) stay trapped in the shale rock many thousands of feet below the surface. This description is over-simplified, but basically correct. The gas industry wants you to believe this story. Josh Fox wants you to believe that these gas or fluids get loose, flowing into the water table or the air, and thus polluting both.

Which story should you believe?

You should believe both of these stories. How many times in the last 40 years have we seen this narrative play out? The answer is too many times to count. Does drilling and hydro-fracking sometimes pollute the environment? Sure it does! Does a bear shit in the woods? On the other hand, shale gas production is perfectly safe most of the time. No one really knows how frequently drilling pollutes the environment in a serious way, which is really the immediate issue at hand.

But we need to step back and look at the Big Picture. Do we need the natural gas? Yes, indeed—see my Betting The House On Shale Gas. Do we want to further pollute the environment? No, of course not—see any story on the BP oil spill. This is the bed we have made, and now we have to sleep in it.

Where are the wind farms, and the solar concentrators, and the whatevers which are supposed to alleviate pressures to produce more & more natural gas? They don't exist! We could re-frame that question. Where are the natural gas vehicle fleets & infrastructure that could alleviate pressures to produce more & more oil? They don't exist! I could go on and on here, and the answer would always be the same: They don't exist!

OK, why don't they exist? Once again, we get into two narratives. The oil & gas industry will tell you that renewable energy is not up to the task of replacing fossil fuels. The environmentalists will tell you the political power of the oil & gas industry prevents us from implementing renewable solutions. I could write a book about this too, but take note: we are still trapped in the same old pointless conflict. People want a sustainably clean environment, but they also want their homes heated (or cooled) and their lights to come on when they flip the switch.

In other words, we want to have our cake and eat it too. How do we break out of this vicious circle? One way we could have escaped would been to have a coherent, universally agreed upon energy policy in place over the last 3 decades after the energy dislocations of the 1970s and early 1980s. That policy could have been amended as circumstances changed. But it was way too much for us to expect such a wise policy in Cowboy America. No can do—we'll just make it up as we go along.

So, we don't break out of this vicious circle. This infantile Fossil Fuels versus The Environment debate has gone on for about 40 years now. This noise will continue well into the future until all the Big Questions have finally been resolved. And that resolution will mean that sometime in the 21st century, we will have exhausted most of our exploitable fossil fuel resources, and we will have trashed the planet.

All because we wanted to have our cake and to eat it too.

OK VA it's your turn

Drilling for only six days' worth of oil is absurd

As discussed in the May 28 article "Va.'s hopes for offshore drilling dashed," the disaster transpiring in the Gulf of Mexico has given pause to the pro-drilling fervor of Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell. Unfortunately, McDonnell believes that investigation and temporary delay of proposed extraction off Virginia's coast is sufficient in addressing the failures of the oil companies like BP.

But as the spill in the Gulf enters its sixth week -- none of the efforts to contain the flow have succeeded -- it is clear that caution is not enough.

The Chesapeake Bay is especially vulnerable to the potential problems caused by offshore drilling. According to estimates, the oil contained off Virginia's coast would last for six days at the rate of U.S. consumption. The ecosystems and coastal economies must not be endangered nor sacrificed for less than a week's worth of energy.

I urge President Obama to take his actions further and ban offshore drilling in new areas such as the East Coast. Furthermore, the president should lead the charge for a clean energy economy and insist that Congress pass legislation to reduce America's unsustainable dependence on oil.

KATHRYN HARRIS
BLACKSBURG

By the green miles

Nobody can provide an accurate estimate for either one.

On the same day BP finally admitted its figure of 5,000 barrels per day lowballs the actual size of the spill, the Newport News Daily Press reported Gov. Bob McDonnell may be playing games with offshore drilling job creation estimates:
Even before the Defense Department made known its objections to offshore drilling in Virginia, Bob McDonnell raised eyebrows with a letter he sent to the Interior Department in December.

The letter cites a 5-year-old study that predicts offshore natural gas production alone would generate 2,578 jobs in 10 years. That the then governor-elect would quote the study surprised its author, former Old Dominion University President James Koch, who called the document a "flyover from 30,000 feet."

"I've told them they shouldn't make too much of something done over the weekend," Koch said. "I don't even put that on my [curriculum] vitae."
So how many jobs would offshore drilling create in Virginia? Let's ask Big Oil:
A 2009 [American Petroleum Institute] study found that Virginia would gain 130 drilling jobs, plus another 291 related to drilling, by 2020. The figures jump to 216 and 415, respectively, by 2030.
Only 415 jobs 20 years from now? At the cost of risking this off Virginia's coast?

Former Virginia governor & current Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine says the spill should prompt a fresh look at our energy priorities:

"You have to weigh environmental safety. You have to weigh the significant naval operations and NASA operations off Virginia's coast," he added. "I think a third thing you'd have to weigh in Virginia's case is opportunity cost -- would it be better to do offshore wind?

"The same place where you might want to do oil rigs off the coast of Virginia, there's actually pretty favorable wind conditions," Kaine said.

"So you would look at all the options and you would put them all on the table, including the environmental conditions. And certainly the need to be diligent about that has certainly been escalated dramatically by what we've seen in the gulf."
Tell Senators Mark Warner & Jim Webb it's time to stop letting Big Oil write our energy policies.

If you wish we had more wind energy on the grid, you no doubt have been frustrated by all the Nay Sayers who say; “Nah, wind will never work. And when it does blow in the wee hours of the mornings, nobody has any use for the power. You can’t store wind power.”
Not so fast. A very simple low-tech solution is being tested over the next few months on Vinalhaven Island in Maine, that last year installed its own 100% wind power and then discovered that they needed a way to store the extra power! Now they are testing a low tech “distributed” storage for that extra 3 AM wind power.
Even better, if it works, this very simple wind storage solution is one that WE can ALL help to supply. And it benefits us, by supplying clean, low-carbon heating.
You’ve heard of “distributed” energy, right.
If we supplied our electricity from solar spread out among all of our rooftops instead of coming from a centralized power station; that’s “distributed”.
This is a test of distributed storage:
Likewise distributed storage is also spread out among all of us, but instead of being on our roofs, wind power could be stored in boxes in our living rooms. We can use the “distributed storage” of wind power to make something else we need anyway: heating.
Using decades-old technology:
Thermal Electric Storage Heaters store enough electricity, in the form of heat, to warm a home for up to 24 hours by heating up to 1,200 degrees Fahrenheit. When you want to warm up your house you flip a switch and they start to release slow-release heat stored in very dense ceramic bricks. These have been around for at least 20 years. Because they can tap electricity at night at low night time rates, it is the cheapest form of heating.
Why we need storage now
But now that many states have Renewable Energy Standards requiring utilities to add more wind power, that cheap night time coal power is increasingly being displaced by cheap (or even sometimes actually free!) night time wind power. Excess wind power on the grid at night is such a problem that utilities sometimes have had to shut down wind farms at night because because there’s been nowhere to send the electricity. Till now.
What Maine is pioneering this spring
A test starting this week on Vinalhaven Island, Maine could be the future of renewable energy storage for people needing heat in the windy states: “distributed” energy storage.
By adding smart technology to the electric heating units, researchers will test smart grid control of Steffes Thermal Electric Storage heaters, turning them on or off from a remote location, based on wind generator output, grid demand, and the spot price of power (that fluctuates with the demand on the grid).
They will replace the oil heaters in six of the Vinalhaven Island residents’ homes with wind powered electric heaters that can store and safely transform electricity in the form of heat in extremely dense ceramic bricks – and slowly release the heat, on demand, for up to 24 hours.
Each unit stores enough electricity to heat up to 1,200 degrees Fahrenheit
The way that these heaters work is that electricity heats coils that radiate heat to extremely dense adjacent ceramic bricks that store the heat in a supercharged thermal mass. Once they reach their maximum core temperature, they won’t charge anymore. At that point, the heaters controls won’t accept more power from the grid.
To supply 24 hours of warmth on demand:
Now, I know what you’re thinking: Of course, no homeowner wants a raging hot house at 3 AM in the wee hours while the wind is howling outside. That doesn’t happen. Space-age insulation keeps the exterior from heating above 160 degrees F, and enough is stored inside the units to provide 24 hours of gradual warmth on demand.
New use of old technology:
Until recently, nobody has thought to use these specifically as a form of distributed energy storage option for wind power, by adding sensors to detect and absorb excess grid power. But people are starting to realize that we will need more storage as we add more renewable energy.
Reduces the carbon footprint and helps utilities add more renewable energy
Some states are even passing laws that we must add more storage, now that we need it because we are adding more renewable power. Well, here’s a nice warm way we can do just that, and seriously reduce our national carbon footprint to allow for more electric power on the grid and to supply clean energy heating at the same time! This is one energy efficiency technology that should be included in Cash for Caulkers.

Cross posted from TheGreenMiles.com

First, let's establish one thing: Virginia's government is doing nothing to address global warming. That's not me talking -- that's what a Virginia Department of Environmental Quality spokesman told the Newport News Daily Press. No, wait -- that's not quite right. Virginia is actively trying to obstruct action on global warming thanks to the war on science led by Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli & supported by Gov. Bob McDonnell & Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling.

Meanwhile, last month was the hottest March on record globally & broke a record for lack of cold locally. That's after 2009 was the 2nd-hottest year on record & the 2000s were the hottest decade on record. Oh, and remember the "oil crisis" in the 1970s? We import twice as much oil today as we did then.

The poll shows Virginians explicitly reject the McDonnell/Bolling/Cuccinelli clean energy & climate obstruction in three key areas:
Virginians want state government to act, not obstruct. 78% agree "Virginia’s government has to create policies that could address the issue of climate change and improve the state’s environment."
It doesn't matter if they don't buy the science. 91% agree "regardless of whether there is or isn’t climate change, it is still in Virginia’s best interest to develop new sources of energy that are cleaner, reliable, affordable, and safer."
Virginians are willing to pay a little more for clean energy. 81% agree "slightly higher energy costs today are worth the investment if they lead to energy that is cleaner, reliable, affordable, and safer down the road."
Oh, and the winter snowstorms that the Virginia GOP & Ken Cuccinelli said were proof global warming isn't happening? Only 5% of Virginia voters agree. Instead, 28% say the freakishly strong storms made them more concerned about climate change.

Overall? Only 38% give Virginia's environment an A or a B. That's down sharply from 45% just last year.

I'd say there was a huge opportunity for Virginia Democrats to go after McDonnell/Bolling/Cuccinelli & establish clear contrast in the eyes of voters. But from state-level candidates like Tim Kaine, Creigh Deeds & Jody Wagner to Senators Mark Warner & Jim Webb, Virginia Democrats seem to prefer instead to listen to Republican positions promoting polluting fuels & say "me, too!"

To get clear contrast, you have to go to the regional level -- House members like Tom Perriello, Jim Moran & Gerry Connolly, State Senators like Chap Peterson & Donald McEachin, or Delegates like Albert Pollard, Scott Surovell, Adam Ebbin & David Englin.

As Virginia Democrats plot strategy for 2010, 2011 & beyond, can they develop a statewide strategy for taking advantage of this opening -- the gaping canyon between voters' support for a new direction on clean energy & climate action and GOP candidates' obstruction to progress & shilling for polluting fuels?

As Not Larry Sabato points out, this is what the McDonnell/Bolling/Cuccinelli administration is working so hard to bring to Virginia:
Survivors of a thunderous blast aboard an oil platform off the Louisiana coast were being reunited with their families at a suburban New Orleans hotel early Thursday as the search for 11 missing workers continued.
But there's more! Via The Deadrise, if some senators get their way, Virginians would get no more of the revenue from drilling off our shores than would go to Iowans:
Three key Senate Democrats are urging their colleagues to reject a proposal in the emerging climate bill that would give a cut of oil and gas production royalties to states that allow offshore drilling.

Sens. Byron Dorgan of North Dakota, Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico and Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia called "revenue sharing" an ill-advised "giveaway" of money that belongs to all U.S. citizens.
All the risk, only a fraction of the rewards. I bet you didn't realize that when Bob McDonnell promised drilling revenue would fund transportation, he was referring to an expanded Route 20 to Sioux City, did you?

Cross-posted from BlueVirginia.us

Can Coal be Earth-Friendly?

Virginia Getting Ready to Split Over Climate Change

Think of this as a prediction and remember it for future reference. Below you will see a map of the US Geological Survey's assessment of the vulnerability of areas to sea level change. It turns out that Virginia's Hampton Roads is one of the most vulnerable areas in the country because of the combination of subsidence (sinking of land) and sea level rise.

As a state, Virginia seems ready to elect a governor who does not believe in evolution or climate change. If elected McDonnell will undoubtedly slow the meager progress towards meaningful regulatory change needed to combat climate change.

But wait, there is something that will happen to change this. As time goes on, maybe fall 2010 or 2011 or 2012, there will be a hurricane that floods large areas of a coastal city. Maybe in Virginia, maybe not, but it will awaken a sleeping conflict that will tear Virginia apart.

The policy makers in the coastal regions of Virginia are well aware of the predictions of the impact of even a small amount of sea level rise on their areas. While many hide their heads in the sand and fail to confront the issue head on mostly because of strong right wing nut opposition, the earth continues to warm and the sea continues to rise. So what will happen, I predict that sooner rather than later, there will be a natural disaster in the US that will finally push the state's eastern lawmakers to force the rest of the state to confront the challenges of climate change. My guess is that it will come under the reign of McDonnell & Griffith. If so, we will have a grand battle on our hands as the eastern right wing take on the western right wing.

Be prepared and stay tuned. It should be interesting.

What Energy Sources Do Your Tax Dollars Subsidize?

How Few Jobs Will Wise Co. Coal Plant Create?

'Governor's" Conference on Energy

Sierra Club Flunks McDonnell on Chesapeake Bay

New Report: Global Warming Threatens Jamestown, Chincoteague, Shenandoah

Methane Hydrate Risk in our Pursuit of Energy

Shale gas — the hydrofracking wars

OK VA it's your turn

More on Fossil Fuels and the Environment

Drilling for only six days' worth of oil is absurd

What Do BP Oil Spill & Offshore Drilling Jobs Have In Common?

Vinalhaven, Maine Shows Us How We Can Help Store Wind Power

Virginians: McDonnell/Bolling/Cuccinelli Wrong on Climate & Energy

Oil Drilling: Virginia Gets All the Risk, But Has to Share the Rewards?

Coal and you

Some good news.

A must watch for Virginians

Message from Greenbuild

Can Coal be Earth-Friendly?

Virginia Getting Ready to Split Over Climate Change