rebuttal to liquefied coal article

Lowell Miller’s column arguing in support of liquefied coal as an energy source was disturbing and irresponsible.

Mr. Miller claimed that carbon sequestration has rendered concerns over liquid
coal’s pollution obsolete. That is simply untrue. Carbon sequestration is not reliable technology on a commercial scale.

Some climate experts say we have ten years to stabilize, then reduce, greenhouse gas emissions in order to avoid the worst consequences of global
warming. Subsidizing coal to liquid technology would be a giant step in the wrong direction.

According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, every gallon of liquid coal burned would generate twice the carbon emissions generated by a gallon of gasoline derived from petroleum.
If we want our children to have a chance at inheriting a planet without melted polar ice caps, coastal flooding, unpredictable weather patterns and
the chaos and poverty this entails, we must vote now for energy policies that strive for energy independence created by clean, alternative energy technologies such as wind, solar and bio-diesel power.

A future based on clean energy independence means a future of better global health and security. I am proud of leaders like Gov. Martin O’Malley, who has recently formed a commission to reduce Maryland greenhouse gas pollution 15 percent per capita by 2015 .
This necessary goal is achievable if we are willing to make voluntary changes to reduce our carbon footprint and demand legislative changes that move us toward an energy policy based on clean, renewable energy.

Katherine Hinckley
Towson

Decoupling 101

Decoupling essentially works like this: The profits a utility company receives are separated (un-coupled) from the amount of kilowatt hours produced. Right now in Maryland (and most states) power companies earn more money the more energy they produce (the more coal they burn, the more kilowatt hours they push onto the grid). Therefore, the companies make more money when more energy is consumed. Clearly, this is not going to usher in a new era of energy efficiency.

With Maryland energy bills hitting record-highs recently, it’s time for Maryland to consider something new. In 1999, lawmakers passed a degregulation bill. They capped utility rates for seven years at pre-1999 levels and hoped that competition among energy providers would drive down prices. But, when the caps expired last year, Constellation Energy (which owns Baltimore Gas and Electric) proposed a 74% increase- and the Maryland Public Services Commission approved it! And now, people are demanding action on energy policy like they never have before.

Recently, the Public Services Commission decided to try decoupling to increase Maryland’s energy efficiency. Decoupling would remove the disincentive for the utilities to pursue and encourage energy efficiency projects. Instead of having profits that are dependent upon total kilowatt hour produced, the power company rates profits of a certain amount are guaranteed by the state. If Maryland consumers use less energy, the power companies would make up the difference with a flat distribution charge. So, this means a few things: 1) Rates will not change much. Marylanders will not experience the 75% rate hikes- rates will remain relatively stable. 2) Efficiency projects, that in the past meant less kilowatt hours produced and therefore lower projects, can occur more readily without disrupting the profits of the company. In fact, power companies realizing that they can earn more by producing less may even embrace energy efficiency projects everywhere- saving homeowners and power companies money.

There are a lot of problems with the way our energy system is managed today. Can decoupling be part of the solution? O’Malley seems to think so. What do you think?

For more information and a more in depth analysis of the issue, see this daily kos post by A Siegel. Continue reading

BCAN and CCAN Unite on YouTube

Watch how the forces have come together in Maryland to use grassroots activism in the fight against global warming. Keep up the great work CCAN members!

FACT: Wind farms will have zero impacts on migratory bird populations

Among the many colossal falsehoods routinely espoused by the media and misguided activists about wind power is the canard about how wind farms threaten bird populations. People how make this claim, who say birds are at risk in Appalachia from existing and proposed wind farms, have zero — ZERO — data to back up their claims.

On the other hand, there’s now an enormous body of scientific evidence, backed up by radar studies, showing the opposite: that bird populations are in no way threatened by wind power development in our region.

Please see below and here an essay I posted on the CCAN website in March 2006. This is thoroughly documented stuff, not hot-headed rhetoric. Here’s the truth: global warming is the single biggest threat to all the planet’s bird and bat populations. And wind power can and already is a safe and responsible part of the solution to global warming.

Read the essay>>

Global Warming: Seven Generations, not Seven Years …

We live in a “time of consequences.” We, as individuals and collectively, are setting the path which will determine the living conditions for millenia to come. This time of consequences is both long term and quite immediate.

This is true for the individual. Do you invest in an energy efficient future life? Will you unplug the computer before going to sleep?

And, it is true for society. What is the transportation infrastructure we want 30 years from now? And, what is the legislation that will emerge in coming weeks and months related to energy, farming, and Global Warming?

We live in a Time of Consequences. And, we can chose to live through this time, buffeted by the consequences, or we can seek to act to drive change in a positive direction.

Continue reading

Putting Coal in Perspective

This was just passed onto to me from a friend and fellow climate activist. While some might find the piece a bit cynical, I think it affirms the need for a coal moratorium. Luckily, we just might have a little help.

Protect Your Efforts

Just when we thought we were making a difference…

Home Depot has funded the planting of 300,000 trees in cities across the US. Each tree will absorb and store about one-third of a ton of carbon dioxide (CO2) over its lifetime. In addition to the coal plants that already exist, there are now 151 new conventional coal-fired power plants in various stages of development in the US today. The CO2 emissions from only one medium-sized (500 MW) coal-fired power plant, in just 10 days of operation, would negate the Home Depot’s entire effort.

Wal-Mart, the largest “private” purchaser of electricity in the world is investing a half billion dollars to reduce the energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of their existing buildings by 20% over the next 7 years. “As one of the largest companies in the world, with an expanding global presence, environmental problems are our problems,” said CEO Lee Scott. The CO2 emissions from only one medium-sized coal-fired power plant, in just one month of operation each year, would negate Wal-Mart’s entire effort.

California, which makes up over 10% of the country’s new vehicle market, passed legislation to cut GHG emissions in new cars by 25% and in SUVs by 18%, starting in 2009. If every car and SUV sold in California in 2009 met this standard, the CO2 emissions from only one medium-sized coal-fired power plant, in just eight months of operation each year, would negate California’s 2009 effort.

In the US, approximately 5 billion square feet of residential, commercial and government buildings are renovated in a year. The US Conference of Mayors, American Institute of Architects, US Green Building Council and numerous states, counties and cities have adopted The 2030 Challenge to reduce the energy consumption of all renovated buildings by 50%. The CO2 emissions from just one 750 MW coal-fired power plant each year would negate this entire 2030 Challenge effort.

If every household in the U.S. changed a 60-watt incandescent light bulb to a compact fluorescent, the CO2 emissions from just two medium-sized coal-fired power plants each year would negate this entire effort.

The Campus Climate Challenge (CCC), a growing student movement in the US, states that global warming “is our problem, and it’s up to us to solve it, starting right here on campus, right now.” The challenge calls for all high school and college campuses in the US to go carbon neutral (reduce global warming pollution to zero). If the challenge were met, the CO2 emissions from just four medium-sized coal-fired power plants each year would negate the CCC’s entire effort.

Continue reading