Wind Energy Layoffs, PTC Action, & Presidential Politics

Aug 9: A release from the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) indicates that layoffs are increasing in the U.S. wind industry manufacturing sector in the absence of a policy signal only Congress can provide: extension of the Production Tax Credit that has been the basis for rapid growth of U.S. jobs and manufacturing since 2005 [See WIMS 8/1/12]. On August 2, the Senate Finance Committee, Chaired by Max Baucus (D-MT), with Ranking Member Orrin Hatch (R-UT), approved the bipartisan Family and Business Tax Cut Certainty Act of 2012 by a vote of 19 to 5. The legislation includes many tax cuts for small businesses, working families, research and development and renewable energy, including the controversial Production Tax Credit (PTC) for wind energy projects. Congress is now on break until after Labor Day.

 

    AWEA reports that layoffs announced last week include: In Tulsa, OK, DMI Industries announced 167 workers will be unemployed by November; In West Fargo, ND, DMI Industries said 216 jobs stand at risk; In Little Rock, AR, LM Wind Power announced job reductions that will impact 94 full-time employees and 140 temporary workers and contractors; In Dallas, TX, Trinity Structural Towers said it will shift reposition resources away from wind turbine tower manufacturing.

 

    AWEA indicates that the recent layoffs add to a longer list that have already happened this year. Those include: Wind turbine manufacturer Gamesa furloughed 165 of its Pennsylvania-based workers (July 5, Bloomberg); Wind measurement technology manufacturer NRG Systems laid off 18 Vermont-based employees in May, and an additional 12 in July– the first time in 30 years the firm has had to make any layoffs (May 22, Windpower Monthly and July 18, Burlington Free Press); Wind turbine manufacturer Vestas laid off 182 employees (January 12, Huffington Post); Wind project developer Iberdrola Renewables laid off 50 U.S. employees, about half of whom were based in Oregon (January 25, North American Windpower); and Wind pattern analysis company Windlogics cut 10 of their Minnesota-based employees (July 2, Minnesota Public Radio)

 

    AWEA CEO Denise Bode said the four companies, all major wind component manufacturers, laying off employees last week "represent what is happening and will continue to happen across the country in the U.S. wind industry if these businesses are not provided the policy certainty they need to continue to invest in America and its workers. I'm deeply distressed that our wind industry colleagues are facing furloughs and layoffs due to lack of stable tax policy. Unfortunately the industry has begun letting workers go up and down our American manufacturing supply chain, which the industry has so proudly built up in support of the U.S. economy and made-in-the-USA manufacturing. Congress must act now to give wind energy a stable business environment to keep building this new industry and save 37,000 American jobs by the first quarter of next year."

 

    As WIMS has previously reported, an extension of the PTC enjoys widespread, bipartisan support from groups as diverse as the National Governors Association, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, Edison Electric Institute, the American Farm Bureau Federation, environmentalists, labor unions, and others. Members of the House and Senate from both parties have indicated their agreement that the PTC should be renewed.

    Despite the widespread support for the PTC extension, President Obama and Republican candidate Mitt Romney have sharply different views. President Obama and most Democrats support the extension; however, candidate Romney's campaign has indicated its desire to let the PTC expire at the end of the year [See WIMS 8/1/12]. The Romney campaign website indicates, "The 'green' technologies are typically far too expensive to compete in the marketplace, and studies have shown that for every 'green' job created there are actually more jobs destroyed. Unsurprisingly, this costly government investment has failed to create an economic boom."

    On August 13, House Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Henry Waxman released a Memo on Paul Ryan's Budget Cuts to Clean Energy, detailing cuts to key energy programs in the House Republican budget, which he authored and now the nominee for vice president on the Republican presidential ticket. The Ryan budget, which passed the House earlier this year with no Democratic support, would cut billions of dollars in funding for development of clean energy and eliminate programs that have helped support over 60,000 jobs. Rep. Waxman said, "The Ryan budget would reverse progress we have made to advance clean energy technologies. By cutting clean energy initiatives and jobs, while continuing to give billions of dollars in subsidies to oil and gas companies, the Ryan proposal would undermine American innovation and surrender the clean energy market to China.  That is not what the American people need."

    The Waxman memo highlights five areas in which the Ryan budget would have a significant impact on clean energy programs:  (1) it reduces support for energy efficiency and renewable energy initiatives; (2) it halts the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing (ATVM) Loan Program; (3) it removes funding for loan guarantees for energy efficiency and renewable energy projects; (4) it eliminates support for green transmission projects; and (5) it maintains nearly $40 billion in tax breaks for oil and gas companies.

    The Romney for President website, under its energy plan, indicates, "To begin with, wind and solar power, two of the most ballyhooed forms of alternative fuel, remain sharply uncompetitive on their own with conventional resources such as oil and natural gas in most applications. Indeed, at current prices, these technologies make little sense for the consuming public but great sense only for the companies reaping profits from taxpayer subsidies. . . As for job creation, studies show that "green" jobs might actually hurt employment more than they help it. Green energy is capital-intensive and tends to displace labor. Indeed, the track record in Europe shows that new "green" jobs came at a steep cost. . . The price tag in subsidies was exorbitant, rising to nearly $1.5 million per job in the wind industry. . . The failure of windmills and solar plants to become economically viable or make a significant contribution to our energy supply is a prime example."

    Yesterday (August 13), at a campaign stop in Boone, Iowa, President Obama said, "My opponent and I disagree when it comes to homegrown energy like wind. Wind power is creating new jobs all across Iowa. But Governor Romney says he wants to end the tax credit for wind energy producers. Now, America generates more than twice as much electricity from wind than when I took office. That's right. The wind industry supports about 7,000 jobs right here in Iowa. Without these wind energy tax credits, those jobs are at risk -- 37,000 jobs across the country would be at risk. So my attitude is let's stop giving taxpayer subsidies to oil companies that don't need them, and let's invest in clean energy that will put people back to work right here in Iowa. That's a choice in this election."

    Today (August 14) the Department of Energy (DOE) released a 93-page report -- 2011 Wind Technologies Market Report -- highlighting strong growth in the U.S. wind energy market in 2011, increasing the United States' share of clean energy and supporting tens of thousands of jobs, and underscoring the importance of continued policy support and clean energy tax credits to ensure that the manufacturing and jobs associated with this booming global industry remain in America. According to the report, the United States remained one of the world's largest and fastest growing wind markets in 2011, with wind power representing a remarkable 32% of all new electric capacity additions in the United States last year and accounting for $14 billion in new investment. According the report, the percentage of wind equipment made in America also increased dramatically. Nearly seventy percent of the equipment installed at U.S. wind farms last year -- including wind turbines and components like towers, blades, gears, and generators -- is now from domestic manufacturers, doubling from 35% in 2005.

 

    The report finds that in 2011, roughly 6,800 megawatts (MW) of new wind power capacity was added to the U.S. grid, a 31% increase from 2010 installations. The United States' wind power capacity reached 47,000 MW by the end of 2011 and has since grown to 50,000 MW, enough electricity to power 13 million homes annually or as many as in Nevada, Colorado, Wisconsin, Virginia, Alabama, and Connecticut combined. The country's cumulative installed wind energy capacity grew 16% from 2010, and has increased more than 18-fold since 2000. The report also finds that six states now meet more than 10% of their total electricity needs with wind power.

 

    Access a release with further details and links to related information from AWEA (click here). Access a release and link to the Memo from Rep. Waxman (click here). Access the Romney Energy Policy (click here). Access the President's Boone, IA speech (click here). Access a release from DOE and link to the wind energy market report (click here). Access an interactive map of U.S. wind manufacturing facilities(click here). [#Energy/Wind]

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

CBO Estimates Revenues From Opening All Fed Lands To Drilling

Aug 9: The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has issued a report analyzing a proposal requested by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, and now Mitt Romney's Vice Presidential running mate, Paul Ryan (R-WI) -- to immediately open most Federal lands to oil and gas leasing. CBO indicates that the proposal would open two categories of property now unavailable for development: (1) lands where leasing is statutorily prohibited, notably, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR); and (2) onshore and offshore areas that are closed to leasing under current administrative policies, including sections of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) and certain onshore areas in which oil and gas leasing is either restricted or temporarily prohibited. CBO estimates that about 70 percent of undiscovered oil and gas resources on federal lands are available for leasing under current laws and administrative policies.

CBO expects that opening ANWR to development would:

• Yield about $5 billion in additional receipts over the next 10 years, primarily in the form of bonus payments made by private firms for the opportunity to explore for and develop resources in particular areas.
• Increase royalties by roughly $2 billion to $4 billion a year during the 2023–2035 period if oil and natural gas eventually were produced from those lands. Those estimates are quite uncertain.
• Provide the state of Alaska between 50 percent and 90 percent of those federal receipts if the specifications in the authorizing legislation were similar to those in recent legislation.

    CBO anticipates that new legislation directing the Department of the Interior to immediately offer most other federal lands for oil and gas leasing without any restrictions would accelerate the collection of around $2 billion of future leasing receipts into the next decade. Most of that revenue would come from OCS leases, and a portion of the proceeds would be shared with state governments. CBO expects that state and local policies toward resource development, particularly in California, will play a major role in determining whether or when those resources are developed.

    CBO also estimates that under current laws and policies, the government's gross proceeds from all federal oil and gas leases on public lands will total about $150 billion over the next decade, 2012–2022. Neither Representative Ryan, or Budget Committee Ranking Member Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) responded to the report. An LA Times article on the report indicated that the CBO estimate of opening ANWR, parts of the Atlantic, Pacific and Florida coasts together would yield $7 billion over the next decade -- "less than 5% of the $150 billion the federal budget already stands to get over that period from oil and gas leases on federal land already open to drilling."   

 

    Access a summary from CBO (click here). Access the complete 9-page CBO analysis (click here). Access the LA Times article(click here). [#Energy/OilGas]

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

UN Launches Sustainable Development Solutions Network

Aug 9: United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon launched a new independent global network of research centers, universities and technical institutions to help find solutions for some of the world's most pressing environmental, social and economic problems. The Sustainable Development Solutions Network will work with stakeholders including business, civil society, UN agencies and other international organizations to identify and share the best pathways to achieve sustainable development. 

    According to a release from the UN, this initiative is part of the work undertaken in response to the mandate on post-2015 and the outcome of UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20), which took place in Rio De Janeiro, Brazil, in June. The Solutions Network will be directed by Professor Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University and Special Advisor to Secretary-General Ban on the global anti-poverty targets known as the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). It will operate in close coordination with the High-level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda.   

    Secretary-General Ban said, "The post-2015 objectives will help the world to focus on the vital challenges of sustainable development and the Sustainable Development Solutions Network will be an innovative way to draw upon worldwide expertise in the campuses, universities, scientific research centers and business technology divisions around the world."

    The High-level Panel will advise on the global development agenda beyond 2015, the target date for achieving the MDGs, and it will hold its first meeting at the end of September, in the margins of the annual high-level debate of the General Assembly. It is expected to submit its findings to the Secretary-General in the first half of 2013, and those findings will inform his report to Member States. The eight MDGs, agreed on by world leaders at a UN summit in 2000, set specific targets on poverty alleviation, education, gender equality, child and maternal health, environmental stability, HIV/AIDS reduction, and a 'Global Partnership for Development.'

    According to the news release, given that politics around the world too often focuses on short-term issues while governments often lack the timely information needed for long-term sustainable-development strategies, it is essential that scientists and technology experts outside of government support the development of long-term analyses, demonstration programs and development pathways. The SDSN is expected to provide an independent global, open and inclusive process to support and scale up problem-solving at local, national and global levels.

    Sachs said, "In the 20 years since the first Rio Earth Summit, the world has largely failed to address some of the most serious environmental and social problems pressing in on us. We can't afford business as usual. We need to engage the academic and scientific community, and tap into worldwide technological know-how in the private sector and civil society, in order to develop and implement practical solutions." Substantial emphasis will be placed on collaboration across countries to analyze common problems and learn from each other's experiences. The network will accelerate joint learning and help to overcome the compartmentalization of technical and policy work by promoting integrated "systems" approaches to addressing the complex economic, social and environmental challenges confronting governments.

    Ted Turner, global business leader, philanthropist and founder of CNN and the United Nations Foundation, will work together with other leaders in sustainable development to help guide and advise the network. Turner said, "We need development solutions based in science, and we need them now. The future of the planet and its people is at stake. The new Sustainable Development Solutions Network aims to promote smart and effective action ‐‐ before it's too late." said Turner.

 

    The SDSN website, which is scheduled to officially launch on September 1, notes that, "The scale of the global sustainable development challenge is unprecedented. The fight against extreme poverty has made great progress under the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), but more than 1 billion people continue to live in extreme poverty. Inequality and social exclusion are widening within most countries. With the world at 7 billion people and current annual GDP of US$70 trillion, human impacts on the environment have already reached dangerous levels. As the world population is estimated to rise to 9 billion by 2050 and global GDP to more than US$200 trillion, the world urgently needs a framework for sustainable development that addresses the challenges of ending poverty, increasing social inclusion, and sustaining the planet."

 

    Access a release from the UN (click here). Access the SDSN website for complete information (click here). Access a second release from the UN with additional information (click here). [#Sustain]

Rep. Waxman Wants Keystone XL EIS To Address Climate Change

Aug 8: House Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Henry Waxman (D-CA) sent a letter to Assistant Secretary Kerri-Ann Jones regarding the State Department's pending evaluation of the environmental impacts of TransCanada's revised Keystone XL pipeline proposal. In the letter Rep. Waxman writes, "The revised Keystone XL tar sands pipeline proposal presents the question of whether it is in the national interest of the United States to approve a project to significantly increase imports of one of the most carbon-intensive sources of transportation fuel in the world. Much of the intense public opposition to the pipeline stems from concerns about its effects on climate change. For these reasons, I again urge the State Department to conduct a thorough and meaningful analysis of how approval of this project might affect the threat of climate change."

 

    Representative Waxman said, "The most critical issue that the State Department must evaluate in the EIS is the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline's implications fro climate change. Extraction of tar sands bitumen requires far more energy than extraction of conventional oil, and over its lifecycle, tar sands bitumen produces substantially greater greenhouse gas emissions than conventional oil. For example, the final EIS highlights a DOE study indicating that tar sands crude produces 17% higher greenhouse gas emissions over its lifecycle compared to the U.S. 2005 average fuel, while other studies have somewhat higher or lower estimates."

 

    On June 15, 2012, the State Department published its Notice of Intent To Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) and To Conduct Scoping and To Initiate Consultation Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act for the Proposed TransCanada Keystone XL Pipeline Proposed To Extend From Phillips, MT (the Border Crossing) to Steele City, NE.

 

    TransCanada proposes to construct and operate a crude oil pipeline and related facilities from an oil supply hub near Hardisty, Alberta, Canada to the northernmost point of the existing Keystone Pipeline Cushing Extension at Steele City, Nebraska. The pipeline is anticipated to be 1,179 miles long (329 miles of that are in Canada) and has an initial capacity of 830,000 barrels per day. To connect the Canadian and U.S. portions of the pipeline project, TransCanada must first obtain a Presidential Permit from the Department of State authorizing the construction, operation, and maintenance of the pipeline and related facilities at the international border.

 

    Interestingly, the State Department Federal Register SEIS notice does not mention the word "climate" or "climate change." The notices indicates that, in the SEIS, the Department of State will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the construction and operation of the revised proposed project under these general headings: Geology and soils; Water resources; Fish, wildlife, and vegetation; Threatened and endangered species; Cultural resources; Land use, recreation and special interest areas; Visual resources; Air quality and noise; Socioeconomics; Environmental Justice; and, Reliability and safety.

 

    The State Department indicates on its website that, "We are cooperating with the state of Nebraska, as well as other relevant State and Federal agencies, in the review of the application. In June 2012, Governor Heinemann of Nebraska said that their review of the new proposed route will take six to ten months. Last November when we announced consideration of an alternate route through Nebraska, our best estimate on timing was that we would complete the review process in the first quarter of 2013. We will conduct our review in a rigorous, transparent and efficient manner, using existing analysis as appropriate." 

 

    The State Department also announced that it has selected Environmental Resources Management (known as "ERM") to serve as an independent third-party contractor for its environmental review of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline project. ERM will assist the Department in conducting a thorough analysis of both the new route in Nebraska (in cooperation with the State of Nebraska) and any relevant information that has become available. The Department will post a copy of the contract and organizational conflicts of interest disclosures on the State Department website as soon as possible after redaction of any confidential business information.

    Access the release from Rep. Waxman and link to the complete 5-page letter (click here). Access the Federal Register announcement (click here). Access the State Department website for the project (click here). Access the TransCanada hosted project website (click here). Access archived documents (click here). [#Energy/PipelineXL]

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

NAS Report On Identifying & Destroying Buried Chemical Munitions

Aug 6: The National Academy of Sciences' National Research Council has issued a new report indicating that the current approach for identifying and destroying buried chemical munitions and related chemical warfare materials uncovered during environmental remediation projects is neither reliable enough nor has the capability to efficiently tackle large-scale projects. An alternative or modified approach is needed to remediate the Redstone Arsenal and other such projects on active and former U.S. Department of Defense sites and ranges. The Redstone Arsenal facility in Alabama -- the site with the largest quantity of buried CWM in the U.S., and which has groundwater contamination -- is presented as a case study to show how issues raised in the report can be practically applied. 

   

    Following a 1985 directive from Congress, the Army has undertaken the monumental task of destroying the existing U.S. stockpile of chemical weapons. To date, 90 percent of the stockpile has been destroyed, and the remaining 10 percent is expected to be destroyed by 2022. However, during the early- to mid-20th century, chemical weapons and chemical warfare materiel were often disposed of by open pit burning and burial at approximately 250 sites in 40 states, the District of Columbia, and three territories. Remediation of this buried materiel, in addition to environmental cleanup of the burial sites, therefore poses significant challenges to the nation and DOD. The report examines important regulatory issues that ultimately affect the need, timing, and costs of remediating these sites. Federal and state environmental remediation policies address whether buried CWM must be excavated and destroyed or contained in place.

 

    Additionally, the report recommends that the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Army each select a single office to manage and fund recovered chemical warfare materiel (RCWM) remediation activities for DOD. Currently, authority and funding for RCWM activities depend on how and where the materiel is discovered, and could fall under multiple offices of either the secretary of defense or the Army Secretariat. The report indicates that the Army mission for RCWM remediation is turning into a much larger program that will rival those for conventional munition and hazardous substance cleanup and is expected to cost billions of dollars over several years. A clear organizational structure and long-term funding are needed.  

 

    The report calls for the secretary of the Army to establish a new position at the level of the senior executive service (civilian) or a general officer (military) to lead the RCWM program. The secretary should delegate full responsibility and accountability for RCWM program performance to this person, including for planning, budgeting, and execution and for day-to-day oversight, guidance, management, and direction of the program. 

 

    To destroy any intact chemical munitions uncovered during remediation efforts, teams will most likely use either the Army's Explosive Destruction System (EDS) or one of three commercially available technologies. The EDS is an effective and reliable technology, and the Army has an active research and development program under way to improve the throughput rate, or speed at which chemicals can be identified. The three commercially available destruction technologies have higher throughput rates, but reliability problems were encountered when one of these -- the Dynasafe Static Detonation Chamber -- was recently used to destroy a portion of stockpiled munitions in Anniston, AL. The report recommends ways to alleviate these problems and suggests alternatives to the EDS and commercial systems. Also explored is the potential use of robotic systems to access and remove buried CWM.

 

    The lack of an accurate inventory of buried munitions and of a reliable cost estimate for the RCWM program makes it difficult to establish precise, long-term budget requirements and draw up a funding plan for an RCWM program going forward that has the level of certainty typically associated with DOD project implementation. The report recommends as a "matter of urgency" that the secretary of defense increase funding for the remediation of chemical warfare materiel to enable the Army to complete the inventories of known and suspected buried chemical munitions no later than 2013 and develop a quantitative basis for overall funding of the program, with updates as needed to facilitate accurate budget forecasts. Pending establishment of a final RCWM management structure, this task should be assigned to the director of the Army's Chemical Materials Agency as chair of the provisional RCWM integrating office.

 

    Access a release from NAS (click here). Access the complete 144-page report and related information (click here). [#Remed, #Haz, #Water]

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

U.S. Settles With Gibson Guitar On Lacey Act Violations

Aug 6: The U.S. Department of Justice announced that Gibson Guitar Corp. entered into a criminal enforcement agreement with the U.S. resolving a criminal investigation into allegations that the company violated the Lacey Act by illegally purchasing and importing ebony wood from Madagascar and rosewood and ebony from India. The agreement was announced by Assistant Attorney General Ignacia S. Moreno of the Justice Department's Environment and Natural Resources Division, Jerry Martin, U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee and Dan Ashe, Director of the Department of the Interior's U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.

 

    According to a release, the criminal enforcement agreement defers prosecution for criminal violations of the Lacey Act and requires Gibson to pay a penalty amount of $300,000. The agreement further provides for a community service payment of $50,000 to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to be used to promote the conservation, identification and propagation of protected tree species used in the musical instrument industry and the forests where those species are found. Gibson will also implement a compliance program designed to strengthen its compliance controls and procedures. In related civil forfeiture actions, Gibson will withdraw its claims to the wood seized in the course of the criminal investigation, including Madagascar ebony from shipments with a total invoice value of $261,844.

           

    In light of Gibson's acknowledgement of its conduct, its duties under the Lacey Act and its promised cooperation and remedial actions, the government will decline charging Gibson criminally in connection with Gibson's order, purchase or importation of ebony from Madagascar and ebony and rosewood from India, provided that Gibson fully carries out its obligations under the agreement, and commits no future violations of law, including Lacey Act violations.

 

    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Ashe noted, "The Lacey Act's illegal logging provisions were enacted with bipartisan support in Congress to protect vanishing foreign species and forest ecosystems, while ensuring a level playing field for America's forest products industry and the people and communities who depend on it. We're pleased that Gibson Guitar Corp. has recognized its duties under the Lacey Act to guard against the acquisition of wood of illegal origin from threatened forests and has taken responsibility for actions that may have contributed to the unlawful export and exploitation of wood from some of the world's most threatened forests."

 

    Since May 2008, it has been illegal under the Lacey Act to import into the United States plants and plant products (including wood) that have been harvested and exported in violation of the laws of another country. Congress extended the protections of the Lacey Act, the nation's oldest resource protection law, to these products in an effort to address the environmental and economic impact of illegal logging around the world.

 

    Gibson Guitar CEO, Henry Juszkiewicz commented on the settlement saying, "We felt compelled to settle as the costs of proving our case at trial would have cost millions of dollars and taken a very long time to resolve. This allows us to get back to the business of making guitars. An important part of the settlement is that we are getting back the materials seized in a second armed raid on our factories and we have formal acknowledgement that we can continue to source rosewood and ebony fingerboards from India, as we have done for many decades."

    The Gibson release states, "Despite the fact that, '...the government acknowledges that Gibson has cooperated with the Government and the investigation conducted by the Fish and Wildlife Service', Gibson was subject to two hostile raids on its factories by agents carrying weapons and attired in SWAT gear where employees were forced out of the premises, the production was shut down, goods were seized as contraband, and threats were made that would have forced the business to close."

    Juszkiewicz continued, "We feel that Gibson was inappropriately targeted, and a matter that could have been addressed with a simple contact a caring human being representing the government. Instead, the Government used violent and hostile means with the full force of the U.S. Government and several armed law enforcement agencies costing the tax payer millions of dollars and putting a job creating U.S.manufacture[r] at risk and at a competitive disadvantage. This shows the increasing trend on the part of government to criminalize rules and regulations and treat U.S. businesses in the same way drug dealers are treated. This is wrong and it is unfair. I am committed to working hard to correct the inequity that the law allows and insure there is fairness, due process, and the law is used for its intended purpose of stopping bad guys and stopping the very real deforestation of our planet."

    Gibson published the full agreement and an attached Statement of Facts that both the Government and Gibson agreed and a list of possible questions and answers from the company. Gibson invited anyone to "independently draw their own conclusions."

    Representatives Edward Markey (D-MA) and Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) issued a release applauding the settlement. Rep. Markey said, "Gibson's admission of wrongdoing is a win for the Lacey Act, a win for US jobs and a win for consumers who can be assured that illegally trafficked 'blood wood' won't be used to make their guitars. Gibson, the Tea Party and House Republicans attempted to gut the Lacey Act by changing the law in Congress before the case against the guitar maker was resolved. I commend the hard and deliberate work of the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Justice Department to bring this case to a close. I thank the U.S. hardwood and paper industries, who stood up for keeping jobs in America, rather than allowing cheap, illegal wood products from other countries to flood the market. I would also like to praise Sting, Dave Matthews Band, and Guster, along with the multitude of musicians and other individuals who stood up for the Lacey Act and who pledged to use legal, sustainable musical instruments. Let's keep the good tunes on good wood coming." 

 

    Rep. Blumenauer said, "This is another example of the Lacey Act working to protect valuable natural resources and positively reforming the global market for timber products. Not only has Gibson agreed to pay a penalty and forfeit its ill-gotten wood from Madagascar, but this case sends a message to other companies who think they can ignore the laws: The Lacey Act is on the job. The Lacey Act has been, and will continue to be, an effective tool in the fight to protect U.S. jobs and the environment." The Lacey Act was the focus of a House Natural Resources Committee hearing on May 8, 2012.

 

   Adam Grant, Senior Associate with World Resources Institute (WRI) issued a statement on the settlement saying, "This agreement closes an important chapter on the first major investigation and by far the most publicized cases under the 2008 amendments to the U.S. Lacey Act. The decision demonstrates that the Lacey Act has teeth. It shows that the law can be enacted with serious, but balanced penalties for violations. Fair enforcement of the Lacey Act, the world's first ban on the importation of illegally sourced wood, is important to ensure that the wood comes into the U.S. from legal sources. We are hopeful that this case will provide incentive to other wood product providers -- and their suppliers -- to engage in legal purchasing of wood and help protect endangered forests."

 

    Access a lengthy release with further details about the settlement (click here). Access the Gibson Guitar release, statement of facts, the full settlement language and list of Q&A's (click here). Access the statement from Reps. Markey & Blumenauer and link to the Pledge and musicians signing it (click here). Access the statement from WRI (click here). Access the House hearing on the Lacey Act with extensive testimony and a webcast (click here). [#Land, #Climate]

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

New NASA Study Links Extreme Weather & Climate Change

Aug 6: A new statistical analysis by NASA scientists, including Dr. James Hansen and colleagues, has found that Earth's land areas have become much more likely to experience an extreme summer heat wave than they were in the middle of the 20th century. The research was published today in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). According to a NASA posting, the statistics show that the recent bouts of extremely warm summers, including the intense heat wave afflicting the U.S. Midwest this year, very likely are the consequence of global warming. Noted climate scientists and lead author Hansen is with NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York.

    Hansen said, "This summer people are seeing extreme heat and agricultural impacts. We're asserting that this is causally connected to global warming, and in this paper we present the scientific evidence for that." Hansen and colleagues analyzed mean summer temperatures since 1951 and showed that the odds have increased in recent decades for what they define as "hot," "very hot" and "extremely hot" summers.

    The researchers detailed how "extremely hot" summers are becoming far more routine. "Extremely hot" is defined as a mean summer temperature experienced by less than one percent of Earth's land area between 1951 and 1980, the base period for this study. But since 2006, about 10 percent of land area across the Northern Hemisphere has experienced these temperatures each summer. In 1988, Hansen first asserted that global warming would reach a point in the coming decades when the connection to extreme events would become more apparent. While some warming should coincide with a noticeable boost in extreme events, the natural variability in climate and weather can be so large as to disguise the trend.

    To distinguish the trend from natural variability, Hansen and colleagues turned to statistics. In this study, the GISS team including Makiko Sato and Reto Ruedy did not focus on the causes of temperature change. Instead the researchers analyzed surface temperature data to establish the growing frequency of extreme heat events in the past 30 years, a period in which the temperature data show an overall warming trend. NASA climatologists have long collected data on global temperature anomalies, which describe how much warming or cooling regions of the world have experienced when compared with the 1951 to 1980 base period. In this study, the researchers employ a bell curve to illustrate how those anomalies are changing.

    A bell curve is a tool frequently used by statisticians and society. School teachers who grade "on the curve" use a bell curve to designate the mean score as a C, the top of the bell. The curve falls off equally to both sides, showing that fewer students receive B and D grades and even fewer receive A and F grades. Hansen and colleagues found that a bell curve was a good fit to summertime temperature anomalies for the base period of relatively stable climate from 1951 to 1980. Mean temperature is centered at the top of the bell curve. Decreasing in frequency to the left of center are "cold," "very cold" and "extremely cold" events. Decreasing in frequency to the right of center are "hot," "very hot" and "extremely hot" events.

    Plotting bell curves for the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s, the team noticed the entire curve shifted to the right, meaning that more hot events are the new normal. The curve also flattened and widened, indicating a wider range of variability. Specifically, an average of 75 percent of land area across Earth experienced summers in the "hot" category during the past decade, compared to only 33 percent during the 1951 to 1980 base period. Widening of the curve also led to the designation of the new category of outlier events labeled "extremely hot," which were almost nonexistent in the base period.

    Hansen indicates that this summer is shaping up to fall into the new extreme category. He said, "Such anomalies were infrequent in the climate prior to the warming of the past 30 years, so statistics let us say with a high degree of confidence that we would not have had such an extreme anomaly this summer in the absence of global warming."

    Other regions around the world also have felt the heat of global warming, according to the study. Global maps of temperature anomalies show that heat waves in Texas, Oklahoma and Mexico in 2011, and in the Middle East, Western Asia and Eastern Europe in 2010 fall into the new "extremely hot" category.

 

    In an Op-Ed, published in the Washington Post on August 3, Hansen said, "This is not a climate model or a prediction but actual observations of weather events and temperatures that have happened. Our analysis shows that it is no longer enough to say that global warming will increase the likelihood of extreme weather and to repeat the caveat that no individual weather event can be directly linked to climate change. To the contrary, our analysis shows that, for the extreme hot weather of the recent past, there is virtually no explanation other than climate change. . . These weather events are not simply an example of what climate change could bring. They are caused by climate change. The odds that natural variability created these extremes are minuscule, vanishingly small. To count on those odds would be like quitting your job and playing the lottery every morning to pay the bills.

 

    Access the NASA posting with video graphics and link to related information and data (click here). Access the Op-Ed (click here). [#Climate]

Senate Hearing On Climate Change Science & Local Adaptation

Aug 1: The Senate Environment and Pubic Works (EPW) Committee, Chaired by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), with Ranking Member James Inhofe (R-OK) held a hearing entitled, "Update on the Latest Climate Change Science and Local Adaptation Measures." Witnesses providing testimony included: Professors and researchers from Carnegie Institution for Science; University of Alabama in Huntsville; and Harvard University; as well as representatives from the Maryland Department of Natural Resources; American Council for Capital Formation; and National Association of County & City Health Officials. Senator Boxer is a strong believer in climate change science and greenhouse gas (GHG) regulatory controls, while Senator Inhofe is the most outspoken Congressional critic of the science behind climate change and regulation of GHG.

 

    In her opening statement, Senator Boxer said in part, "Climate change is real, human activities are the primary cause, and the warming planet poses a significant risk to people and the environment. To declare otherwise, in my view, is putting the American people in danger -- direct danger. The body of evidence is overwhelming, the world's leading scientists agree, and predictions of climate change impacts are coming true before our eyes. The purpose of this hearing is to share with the Committee the mountain of scientific evidence that has increased substantially over time: time that we should have used to reduce carbon pollution - the main cause of climate change. . .

 

    "Even some former climate deniers now see the light. Just this past weekend, Professor Richard Muller - a self-proclaimed climate skeptic - wrote the following in the New York Times: 'Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I'm now going a step further: Humans are almost entirely the cause.' . .

 

    "We cannot turn away from the mountain of evidence that climate change has already started to impact the planet and will only grow worse without action. Leading scientists who are testifying today on the latest science will reinforce that point. Taking action to address this serious problem will benefit us and future generations. I look forward to hearing from our witnesses."

 

    Senator Inhofe, in an opening statement said in part, "I must say it feels like we're back to the good old days. It may be hard to believe, but it was in February of 2009, during the height of the global warming alarmist movement, that this committee last held a hearing on global warming science. . . what drove the collapse of the global warming movement was that the science of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was finally exposed. For years I had warned that the United Nations was a political body, not a scientific body - and finally the mainstream media took notice. . . The Washington Post recently published a poll revealing that Americans no longer worry about global warming and one of the reasons is because they don't trust the scientists' motivations. . .

 

    "It must be very hard for my friends on the left to watch the President who promised he would slow the rise of the oceans posing in front of pipelines in my home state of Oklahoma pretending to support oil and gas. I imagine they are trying to keep quiet because they know President Obama is still moving forward with his global warming agenda - he just doesn't want the American people to know about it. . .

 

    "Today we should have a fascinating debate.  I want to thank climatologist Dr. John Christy for appearing before the Committee to provide his insights. I am also looking forward to the testimony of Dr. Margo Thorning, a noted economist who will discuss the economic pain of the Obama EPA's current regulations. . ."

    Dr. Christopher B. Field, Director, Department of Global Ecology, Carnegie Institution for Science; Professor of Biology and Environmental Earth Science Stanford University testified saying, "As the U.S. copes with the aftermath of last year's record-breaking series of 14 billion-dollar climate-related disasters and this year's massive wildfires and storms, it is critical to understand that the link between climate change and the kinds of extremes that lead to disasters is clear. Overwhelming evidence supports the conclusion in the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that, 'A changing climate leads to changes in the frequency, intensity, spatial extent, duration, and timing of extreme weather and climate events, and can result in unprecedented extreme weather and climate events.' . . .

 

    "In summary, there is no doubt that climate has changed and that changes will continue in the future, with human emissions of heat-trapping gases playing a major role. There is also no doubt that a changing climate changes the risk of extremes, including extremes that can lead to disaster. It is only by understanding those risks in the most clear-headed, objective way possible that we, as a nation, can make good decisions about the challenges of protecting and enhancing our natural legacy, our economy, and our people."

 

    Dr. John R. Christy, Distinguished Professor, Director of Earth System Science Center, Department of Atmospheric Science
University of Alabama in Huntsville delivered a lengthy 22-page testimony and said, "It is popular again to claim that extreme events, such as the current central U.S. drought, are evidence of human-caused climate change. Actually, the Earth is very large, the weather is very dynamic, and extreme events will continue to occur somewhere, every year, naturally. The recent "extremes" were exceeded in previous decades. . .

 

    "Coal use, which generates a major portion of CO2 emissions, will continue to rise as indicated by the Energy Information Administration's chart below. Developing countries in Asia already burn more than twice the coal that North America does, and that discrepancy will continue to expand. The fact our legislative actions will be inconsequential in the grand scheme of things can be seen by noting that these actions attempt to bend the blue curve for North American down a little, and that's all. So, downward adjustments to North American coal use will have virtually no effect on global CO2 emissions (or the climate), no matter how sensitive one thinks the climate system might be to the extra CO2 we are putting back into the atmosphere.

 

    "Thus, if the country deems it necessary to de-carbonize civilization's main energy sources, then compelling reasons beyond human-induced climate change need to be offered that must address, for example, ways to help poor countries develop affordable

energy. Climate change alone is a weak leg on which to stand to justify a centrally planned, massive change in energy production, infrastructure and cost."

 

    Access the hearing website for links to statements, testimony and a webcast (click here). [#Climate]

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

House GOP Report On Solyndra & DOE Loan Guarantee Program

Aug 2: The House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans released an extensive report detailing the findings of its investigation into the Department of Energy's (DOE's) management of its loan guarantee program. The 147-page report chronicles the committee's 18-month investigation into what Republicans called DOE's failed $535 million loan guarantee to Solyndra, which included the review of over 300,000 pages of documents, interviews with numerous individuals, and five committee oversight hearings. The report was released following the committee's approval yesterday of the "No More Solyndras Act," legislation authored by full Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) and Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Cliff Stearns (R-FL) to ensure taxpayers will never again be left on the hook for risky bets like Solyndra or other stimulus failures [See WIMS 7/13/12].

    The report states, "Now, after a thorough review of the record, the Committee is able to present a complete picture of the facts and circumstances surrounding the DOE's decision to award a loan guarantee to Solyndra, and the roles various Executive Branch agencies, including the White House, played in these events."

    According to a Republican release, the report details the evidence gathered during the course of the investigation and the committee's conclusions. "The evidence demonstrates administration officials knew Solyndra was a bad bet from the beginning, but the White House was determined to make Solyndra a stimulus success story at any cost. Despite repeated warnings that Solyndra was doomed to fail, the Obama administration went ahead in backing the solar company, cutting corners in the process, and rushed the loan guarantee out the door. The investigation also found DOE knowingly violated the law when it restructured the terms of the loan guarantee and subordinated taxpayers' interest to the interests of private investors.

    "Documents obtained by the committee exposed a startling relationship between Solyndra and another stimulus-backed project. The report details Solyndra's role as a supplier for Prologis' Project Amp, a solar panel installation project and the recipient of a partial loan guarantee for $1.4 billion. The White House was well aware of Solyndra's deteriorating financial condition when it allowed DOE to move forward with Project Amp.  DOE would later use the relationship between Project Amp and Solyndra as a key bargaining tool to push for a second restructuring while directly engaging in last minute negotiations between Solyndra and the Project Amp sponsor."

    The release also indicates that the report also gives an in-depth look into "the role played by one of President Obama's prominent backers in the administration's decision to issue the loan guarantee and the loan's restructuring that put taxpayers behind two private investors. Key decision makers at DOE, including head of the loans program office Jonathan Silver, knew of billionaire George Kaiser's influence and attempted to leverage it." According to the report, "Individuals connected to the George Kaiser Family Foundation (GKFF) -- whose primary investment arm, Argonaut, was Solyndra's largest shareholder -- played important roles in a series of critical discussions and negotiations with DOE. George Kaiser, whose fortune funds the GKFF, was closely involved in financial decisions related to Solyndra, often authorizing key disbursements and restructuring proposals, as well as in Solyndra's lobbying, public relations, and government procurement strategies in Washington."

    Chairman Upton said, "Solyndra will be remembered in the history books as a sad hallmark of a newly installed administration that felt it was above the rules, lusting for positive headlines rather than focused on delivering results. We now know the first domino of the Solyndra mess was DOE cutting the Treasury Department out of the approval process in the rush to send what will go down as the most expensive press release known to man. Now, Solyndra is a painful reminder of why the federal government should not be in the venture capital business. Our investigation revealed a shocking episode where politics were put before taxpayers and integrity was sacrificed for the sake of corporate favoritism. We discovered the problem, and now we reported legislation to correct the situation in The No More Solyndras Act to ensure that taxpayers will never again be the victims of the administration's blind political ambition and gross negligence."
 
    Representative Stearns said, "What was once the poster child for the administration's green energy spending plan, Solyndra is now a symbol of President Obama's failed stimulus economy. Our investigation uncovered a political saga starring key White House officials and big Obama donors. The story reaches a turning point when DOE subordinates taxpayers to outside funding and then Solyndra files for bankruptcy, laying off employees and leaving taxpayers on the hook for millions of dollars. While this may make for a great Hollywood drama, it is a disturbing truth for taxpayers. We must ensure that the Solyndra story is never repeated."

    Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA) issued a release saying, "Energy and Commerce Republicans today released their 'report' on their specious probe into the solar firm Solyndra. He said, "Mitt Romney and Republicans in Congress are trying to deliver a knockout blow to clean energy through this one-two punch of investigating solar companies and forcing wind companies to lay off 40,000 workers. At the same time, they are protecting tens of billions of dollars in handouts to the nuclear and fossil fuel industries that are supporting their campaigns. The Solyndra investigation hasn't uncovered a scandal, but instead has created a symbol for Republicans to appease their fossil fuel fundraisers and eliminate competition for oil, coal and nuclear energy."

 

    Rep. Markey indicated in a release that, "Republican hypocrisy over their stated goal of oversight and the picking of winners and losers in the energy market was put on display yesterday when [he] offered an amendment to the 'No More Solyndras Act' that was passed out of the Energy and Commerce Committee. His amendment would have eliminated the loan guarantee program entirely, unlike the Republican bill which grandfathers more than $100 billion in applications that are still in the pipeline for nuclear, coal and other energy projects. All but three Committee Republicans voted against the amendment."

 

    Rep. Markey also offered other amendments to prevent the Department of Energy from awarding loan guarantees to troubled nuclear projects favored by Republicans that were also defeated. He indicated that these included amendments to prevent loan guarantees from being awarded to companies threatened with delisting from stock exchanges (such as the United States Enrichment Corporation, which has a $2 billion loan guarantee application pending), companies whose net losses in the past year exceed the $535 million value of the Solyndra loan guarantee (such as the United States Enrichment Corporation) and companies whose projects are already more than $535 million over budget (such as Georgia Power Company, which has had its $8.3 billion nuclear loan guarantee application conditionally approved). He said Republicans also rejected an amendment to ensure that 75 percent of each project's loan guarantee funds are not used to outsource jobs, a charge levied by Republicans against the Obama Administration's clean energy programs.

 

    Access a Republican release with a summary of findings and link to the complete report (click here). Access a release from Rep. Markey (click here). Access the Republican Committee website on markup of the H.R.6213 and other bills including voting details, statements, videos, etc. (click here). Access the Democrats Committee website with similar information (click here). [#Energy/Solar, #Energy/Wind]

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

Obama & Romney Clear Differences On Wind Energy PTC

Jul 31: The Governors' Wind Energy Coalition (GWEC) issued a release highlighting that "Mitt Romney's presidential campaign came out yesterday (July 30) with its strongest opposition to date on extending a key wind industry tax credit, saying the presumptive Republican nominee will allow it 'to expire' and tying the issue to broader opposition to President Obama's support for renewable energy." GWEC said, "Romney had not shied away from criticizing Obama's support for renewable energy -- highlighting the loan guarantee to now-bankrupt solar panel manufacturer Solyndra, among other issues, at numerous campaign stops this year -- but the candidate until yesterday had avoided taking a firm position on the production tax credit [PTC] for wind, which is set to expire at the end of the year.

    According to the GWEC release, Romney's campaign said in a statement on July 30, "The President may believe that his economic plan 'worked' and that America wants to repeat the experience for another four years, but the facts don't back that up. Mitt Romney believes it is a time for a new approach to ensure our nation's energy independence. . . He will allow the wind credit to expire, end the stimulus boondoggles, and create a level playing field on which all sources of energy can compete on their merits. . . Wind energy will thrive wherever it is economically competitive, and wherever private sector competitors with far more experience than the President believe the investment will produce results." Member states of the GWEC include: AK, CA, CO, DE, HI, IL, IA, KS, KY, MD, MA, MI, MN, NT, NM, NY, ND, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, & WA.

    Regarding energy issues, the Romney campaign website indicates that, "As the Obama administration wages war against oil and coal, it has been spending billions of dollars on alternative energy forms and touting its creation of 'green' jobs. But it seems to be operating more on faith than on fact-based economic calculation. The 'green' technologies are typically far too expensive to compete in the marketplace, and studies have shown that for every 'green' job created there are actually more jobs destroyed. Unsurprisingly, this costly government investment has failed to create an economic boom."

    Earlier in the day on Jul 30, GWEC indicates the Obama campaign targeted Romney's lack of support for wind energy in a conference call with officials from Iowa, Colorado, Ohio and Pennsylvania -- all swing states -- and a memo outlining the industry's contribution to the economy, citing industry estimates that the credit's expiration will cost 37,000 jobs nationwide. The industry supports 7,000 jobs in Iowa, 5,000 in Colorado, 6,000 in Ohio and 3,000 to 4,000 in Pennsylvania, according to the Obama campaign memo. The memo indicates, "In our states, windmills aren't imaginary. Wind energy is a real job creator and energy producer. For states like ours with storied manufacturing supply chains, wind energy is an emerging industry that's producing next-generation good-paying, manufacturing, middle-class jobs."

    GWEC reports on the Congressional activity regarding the PTC indicating that members of the Senate Finance Committee, which is aiming to produce an "extenders" package, met again to negotiate what provisions would be included in such a bill. Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) said after the meeting that the members had continued to make progress toward a deal, but he would not say whether a bill would be marked up this week before the Senate adjourns for its August recess. Other reports indicate that the Senate is set to vote tomorrow on tax-extenders legislation that would keep the PTC in place, and keep the wind industry growing.

    The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) issue a release saying it was "disappointed that the Romney campaign has come out with an anti-wind stance, particularly in Iowa, the state that gets 20% of its power from wind and the state with more major manufacturing facilities than any other." AWEA said that according to a statement to the Des Moines Register, the presidential candidate supports letting the very popular and bipartisan wind industry Production Tax Credit expire at the end of this year. A poll, conducted by Public Opinion Strategies for the American Wind Energy Association, shows that "an overwhelming majority of Iowa voters would be less likely to support an anti-wind candidate for office." A summary of bipartisan support for the PTC prepared by AWEA on June 27, indicates:

• Supporters in both parties have been raising this issue since late last year as an urgent action item for Congress, including more than 100 cosponsors of HR 3307 (almost a quarter of them Republicans) and S 2201.
• The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers, American Farm Bureau, and Edison Electric Institute are among over 400 organizations and companies endorsing the PTC extension.
• A bipartisan coalition of 23 governors led by Gov. Terry Branstad (R-Iowa) supports extending the PTC. Gov. Branstad recently wrote The Wall Street Journal on its economic benefits.
• Republican, Democratic and Independent voters broadly support wind power and its expansion.
• Highlighting the bipartisan nature of wind power was a recent dialogue between Karl Rove, former senior advisor to President George W. Bush, and Robert Gibbs, former Press Secretary and advisor to President Obama at WINDPOWER 2012 in Atlanta, GA. As Rove stated, "You don't need moderates to get this done. You need conservative Republicans who say this means jobs to my district and a resource we've got plenty of. And you need Democrats to say this is a way to expand the range of options that we have as a country for energy."

    AWEA indicates that the 2.2 cents per kilowatt-hour PTC only applies to projects that succeed in putting electricity on the grid. It expires December 31, 2012, unless Congress extends it. The PTC has not been allowed to expire since 2005, when President George W. Bush signed it into law as part of the Energy Policy Act. This successful policy over the past five years has incentivized $15.5 billion a year on average in private investment in the U.S. U.S. domestic content has expanded from 25% to over 60% today. Wind has installed 35% of all U.S. electric generating capacity, a close second to natural gas.

    Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune released a statement saying, "We'd all heard Romney had a history of shipping American jobs overseas, but this is just proof that he's for eliminating them altogether. Even with tens of thousands of American jobs on the line in the very states he needs to win in November, Romney is more interested in padding the profits of his big polluter campaign donors than helping American workers stay in their jobs. Romney has billionaire polluters financing his campaign, calling the shots on his policies, and even serving as his surrogates. So, it's no surprise that he's siding with big oil and big coal, and turning his back on a bipartisan effort to keep tens of thousands of Americans at work in wind energy jobs that protect our air, our water, and the health of our families. By opposing the Wind Energy Production Tax Credit, Mitt Romney has made it abundantly clear: he is not serious about creating American jobs."

    Access the lengthy report from the GWEC (click here). Access the Romney energy plan (click here). Access a release and Iowa polling results from AWEA (click here). Access the summary of bipartisan support from AWEA and facts about wind energy (click here). Access the Sierra Club statement (click here). Access the AWEA website for more information (click here). [#Energy/Wind, #Energy/Renewable]

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

House Subcommittee Forums On Clean Air Act Issues

Jul 31: Representative Ed Whitfield (R-KY), Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Energy and Power, announced bipartisan forums on today (July 31), and on Thursday, August 2, to examine state, local, and Federal cooperation in the Clean Air Act. The forums are intended to provide an opportunity for members of Congress to hear a broad range of perspectives from experts about their experiences in implementing the Clean Air Act.

    Rep. Whitfield said, "During my time as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy and Power, we have had numerous hearings on specific rules under the Clean Air Act and we have passed a number of bills relating to those rules. The goal of these forums is not to talk about legislation or focus on any specific rule or provision of the Act, but rather to foster a broad, bipartisan discussion about the law. We will hear from experts who live with this Act every day, about their experience implementing the law and coordinating with the various levels of government that share responsibility for our nation's air quality."

    Today's forum began at 2:00 PM. The participants for today's meeting included representatives from: Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality; Indiana Department of Environmental Management; New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services; South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control; Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG); Imperial County Air Pollution Control District; Navajo Nation Environmental Protection Agency; and Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Additionally, a brief statement was submitted by a number of environmental groups including: Center for Biological Diversity; Conservation Law Foundation; Earthjustice; League of Conservation Voters; Natural Resources Defense Council; Sierra Club; and US Climate Action Network. Thursday's forum will also begin at 2:00 PM and includes representative from: AZ, TX, South Coast Air Quality Management District, DE, Dayton Regional Air Pollution Control Agency; OH, and Southern Ute Indian Tribe.

    Participant were requested to respond to a list of 6 questions including:

• In your agency's experience implementing the Clean Air Act (CAA), what is working well? What is not working well?
• Do state and local governments have sufficient autonomy and flexibility to address local conditions and needs?
• Does the current system balance federal, state, and tribal roles to provide timely, accurate permitting for business activities, balancing environment protection and economic growth?
• Does the CAA support a reasonable and effective mechanism for federal, state, tribal and local cooperation through State Implementation Plans? How could the mechanism be improved?
• Are cross-state air pollution issues coordinated well under the existing framework?
• Are there other issues, ideas or concerns relating to the role of federalism under the CAA that you would like to discuss?

    Access the Forum website and link to the today's Participant responses, the environmental group statement, and a video at the conclusion (click here). Access a list of Participants and responses for the August 2 Forum (click here). [#Air, #MIAir]

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

DOI Announces Alaska Energy Management Decisions

Jul 30: Deputy Secretary of the Department of Interior (DOI) David Hayes announced two new efforts to further strengthen the role of science in resource management decisions regarding both onshore and offshore energy development activities in Alaska. The Administration, through the Interagency Working Group on Coordination of Domestic Energy Development and Permitting in Alaska, established by Executive Order in July 2011, will begin work to establish a centralized hub of scientific information to help inform decision-makers and the public. The Alaska Working Group will also prepare a framework for building a more integrated approach to evaluating potential infrastructure development in the Alaskan Arctic. The initiatives are outlined further in a memorandum (see link below).

    Hayes, who serves as chair of the Alaska Interagency Working Group said, "The federal government must take a comprehensive, science-based approach when addressing energy and other development issues in the Arctic -- one that recognizes both the region's enormous resource potential and its irreplaceable natural and cultural resources. Getting it right in the Arctic requires a transparent, disciplined and integrated approach so that we can make sound, long-term planning decisions. Today's efforts are important steps toward strengthening our scientific knowledge-base and opening up the lines of communication between the science community and decision-makers."

    First, according to a release, the Alaska Interagency Working Group will partner with the Arctic Research Commission and other members of the scientific community to develop a centralized and accessible database of scientific information and traditional knowledge relevant to resource management in the Arctic -- with special consideration to ensuring that cultural and traditional knowledge are fully integrated. The initiative will build upon existing data collections, such as the North Slope Science Initiative's Data Catalogue, Arctic ERMA, regional observing systems, private industry and the University of Alaska's Geographic Information Network of Alaska, and it will complement existing interagency efforts like the Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee, which is developing a five-year plan for Arctic research in FY 2013-2017.

    Fran Ulmer, Chair of the Arctic Research Commission said, "Pulling relevant Arctic science information together in a more accessible and consolidated portal is critical. I look forward to continuing to work with Deputy Secretary Hayes and the mix of scientists and policy-makers involved in the Alaska Interagency Working Group -- including my colleagues Dr. John Holdren, Dr. Jane Lubchenco, Dr. Marcia McNutt, Dr. Subra Suresh, and Dr. Alan Thornhill, among others – to make this happen."

    Second, the Alaska Interagency Working Group will prepare an initial report to address key elements of an "Integrated Arctic Management" framework for evaluating potential infrastructure development in the Alaskan Arctic. Working closely with the State of Alaska, Alaska Natives, local communities and the many agencies and stakeholders that have been focusing on specific projects or regions, the framework will pull together Arctic-wide information that is relevant to future decision-making, including: (1) ecologically and culturally important areas, natural resources and processes, and key drivers of environmental changes in the Arctic; (2) trends -- environmental and otherwise -- that affect these resources over time; and (3) commercial, societal, and governmental trends that could lead to future infrastructure related needs in the Arctic.

    As a member of the eight-nation Arctic Council, the United States has embraced the concept of using this type of an "ecosystem-based management" approach to assist in making sound decisions regarding potential future infrastructure development in the Arctic. It recognizes the importance of a comprehensive approach in the Arctic, rather than evaluating activities on a sector-by-sector, project-by-project, or issue-by-issue basis.

    DOI indicated that completion of these initial key steps will lay the foundation for a full dialogue in how best to develop and apply an Integrated Arctic Management approach when making important development decisions in the Arctic. The Alaska Interagency Working Group will engage with a wide variety of governmental entities and stakeholders, including the State of Alaska, Alaska Natives, local communities, industry, and conservation groups on these efforts and expects to present a report to President Obama on the initial efforts by December 31, 2012.

    Access a release from DOI (click here). Access the Memo on the initiatives (click here). Access more information on the initiative from a White House blog posting with links to further details (click here). [#Energy, #Lands]

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

Major DOE Report On Renewable Energy Potential By State

Jul 26: A new study of renewable energy's technical potential, by the Department of Energy (DOE), National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), finds that every state in the nation has the space and resource to generate clean energy. NREL's study, U.S. RE Technical Potential, looks at available renewable resources in each state. It establishes an upper-boundary estimate of development potential. Economic or market restraints would factor into what projects might actually be deployed. NREL is the U.S. Department of Energy's primary national laboratory for renewable energy and energy efficiency research and development. NREL is operated for DOE by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.

    According to a release, the report is valuable for decision-makers and utility executives because it compares estimates across six renewable energy technologies and unifies assumptions and methods. It shows the achievable energy generation of a particular technology given resource availability -- solar, wind, geothermal availability, etc. -- system performance, topographic limitations, and environmental and land-use constraints. The study includes state-level maps and tables containing available land area (square kilometers), installed capacity (gigawatts), and electric generation (gigawatt-hours) for each technology.

    NREL's Anthony Lopez, a co-author of the study said, "Decision-makers using the study will get a sense of scale regarding the potential for renewables, and which technologies are worth examining. Energy modelers also will find the study valuable." NREL's Donna Heimiller, another co-author added, "This is intended to be a living document. We'll be frequently updating the information as we get more data."

    According to the report, it is unique in unifying assumptions and application of methods employed to generate comparable estimates across technologies, where possible, to allow cross-technology comparison. Technical potential estimates for six different renewable energy technologies were calculated by NREL, and methods and results for several other renewable technologies from previously published reports are also presented.

    The report presents the state-level results of a spatial analysis calculating renewable energy technical potential, reporting available land area (square kilometers), installed capacity (gigawatts), and electric generation (gigawatt-hours) for six different renewable electricity generation technologies: utility-scale photovoltaics (both urban and rural), concentrating solar power, onshore wind power, offshore wind power, biopower, and enhanced geothermal systems. Each technology's system-specific power density (or equivalent), capacity factor, and land-use constraints were identified using published research, subject matter experts, and analysis by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). System performance estimates rely heavily on NREL's Systems Advisor Model (SAM) and Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS), a multiregional, multi-time period, geographic information system (GIS) and linear programming model. This report also presents technical potential findings for rooftop photovoltaic, hydrothermal, and hydropower in a similar format based solely on previous published reports.

    The report notes, ". . .as a technical potential, rather than economic or market potential, these estimates do not consider availability of transmission infrastructure, costs, reliability or time-of-dispatch, current or future electricity loads, or relevant policies. Further, as this analysis does not allocate land for use by a particular technology, the same land area may be the basis for estimates of multiple technologies (i.e., non-excluded land is assumed to be available to support development of more than one technology)."

    Access a release from NREL with links to related information (click here). Access the complete report (click here). [#Energy/Renewable] 3