Recap and Look Forward: Governor McAuliffe’s Energy Plan

Yesterday, Governor Terry McAuliffe formally unveiled his highly-anticipated energy plan for Virginia. The nearly 500-page document was officially released two weeks ago, but the administration presented the plan with analysis for the first time before a room of 200 interested clean energy advocates, utility representatives, business associates, and the general public.
Speaking on the plan, Governor McAuliffe spoke passionately about his desire to catch up to neighboring states in renewable development. Specifically, McAuliffe stated affirmatively that “climate change exists and humans contribute to climate change.” He also declared that “it’s time for the commonwealth to lead on solar and wind generation.” I couldn’t agree more.
The details of the Virginia Energy Plan offer some glimpses into exactly how the governor will accomplish his pledge to use renewables to “diversify and build a new Virginia economy.” Although none of the recommendations in the energy plan are binding in any way, the plan provides an opportunity to lay forth a strong vision for clean energy. On the whole, the plan is fairly strong with some notable exceptions. Without further ado, here’s a recap on the Virginia Energy Plan and a look forward into Virginia’s near future.
A Recap on Renewables
Grow. Strength. Diversity. Those three words were the self-described “hallmarks” of McAuliffe’s energy plan. McAuliffe pledged to make solar a priority and that is evident in his plan. The first set of recommendations deals mostly with solar and calls for the increase of this zero-emitting resource. Among several recommendation, the plan calls for an increase from 1% to 3% in the net-metering program cap. Tripling the total limit would be great if we were anywhere close to the existing 1% cap on net-metering.
(note: the 1% program cap refers to a limit of the percentage of customer-owned net-metering energy in Virginia. Currently, the max is 1% of peak-load from the previous year)
As you know, one of the reasons why Virginia hasn’t sniffed the 1% net-metering limit is because utilities have moved heaven and earth to stop the growth of customer-owned solar dead in its tracks. Current laws place onerous standby charges on solar homeowners and place limits on the size of systems that residents and businesses may install and net-meter on their own property.
But Governor McAuliffe has a solution to at least one of these problems. His energy plan proposes doubling the allowed maximum net-metered system size for both residential and non-residential customers, from 20 kw to 40 kw for residential and 500 kw to 1 MW for non-residential customers.
Additionally, the energy plan recommends the creation of a Solar Energy Development Authority to facilitate the development of 15 MW of solar on state and local government facilities and an additional 15 MW of solar on commercial, industrial, and residential facilities by July of 2017.
These are terrific ideas, but I would’ve taken them a few steps further. The net-metering non-residential project cap should be increased to 2 MW rather than the 1 MW proposed in the plan. Both Maryland and Florida for instance have similar project caps at 2 MW. Although our neighbors to the south, North Carolina, has a 1 MW cap similar to McAuliffe’s proposed new limit, it’s worth mentioning that North Carolina has a very generous state tax credit which is helping to drive solar in the state (Virginia was denied this opportunity by our General Assembly last year and this needed solution is not recommended in the plan). North Carolina also has a mandatory RPS with a solar carve-out (Virginia was denied this opportunity by our utilities and our General Assembly virtually every year and this needed solution is also not recommended in the plan.)
Georgia has a project cap less than Virginia, but benefits significantly due to their state Public Service Commission recently issuing an order mandating the state’s largest utility to increase its solar development by 525 MW by 2016. I can’t imagine our State Corporation Commission doing the same to Dominion Virginia Power.
And while we’re talking total megawatts installed, having an energy plan that specifically calls on 30 MW of additional solar in a state that only has about 15 MW installed may sound great if it were not for the fact that North Carolina has 627 MW of solar currently installed and Maryland has 161 MW. If the governor wants to truly play catch-up to our neighbors, we should set more ambitious goals. All that being said, the eagerness of this administration to grow solar in the state is fairly evident in the plan.
By now you may be wondering why this section summarizing renewables within the energy plan so heavily focuses on solar and not, for instance, offshore wind. Well, that’s because concrete recommendations for offshore wind in the energy plan are hard to come by. The plan mentions the need to develop offshore wind in the 112,000 acres Dominion exclusively leased in September of last year, but there’s no actionable recommendation to be found.
The administration could have, and should have, specifically recommended that Dominion develop this resource as soon as possible and include offshore wind in their 15 year Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) mandated by the SCC. But the plan doesn’t go “there”.
A Recap on Coal, Oil, and Natural Gas
The plan encourages more coal exports. The plan endorses offshore oil and gas drilling. The plan doubles-down on increasing natural gas pipelines like Dominion’s behemoth 550-mile pipeline that is generating so much controversy. How can a governor, who so passionately talks about the need to address climate change, endorse the three-headed monster of coal, oil, and gas expansions?
Well, the administration will tell you that it’s a part of the governor’s “all of the above” energy strategy, although the governor assures the environmental community that he is serious about addressing climate change. For what it’s worth, I have zero doubt about Governor McAuliffe’s sincerity in fighting the climate battle, but the mixed message is tough to ignore.
I’ll let others explain how we can encourage Virginia companies to export coal products abroad so other countries can burn it there while stressing the need to address global climate change. It’s akin to a father asking his child to clean his room but allowing the child to shovel clothes under the bed. Out of sight out of mind? Unfortunately climate change doesn’t work that way.
We all know the dangers of offshore oil and gas drilling. Racing to dig deeper and burn more fossil fuels is not the answer. Nor is supporting Dominion’s gas pipeline. But the McAuliffe administration got an earful from 30 or so protesters, mostly from Nelson County, who vented their frustration about the pipeline during his speech yesterday. That’s all I have to say about that.
A Look Forward to Efficiency
What can we expect in the immediate future as a result of the energy plan? That answer has to do with energy efficiency, which aside from solar, is easily the 2nd biggest component of the energy plan and topic that Governor McAuliffe seems most excited about pursuing. Virginia currently has a goal of reducing energy consumption 10% by 2022 according to 2006 levels. Of course the goal is voluntary for Virginia loves its toothless, voluntary targets.
The energy plan states that the governor will create a new Virginia Board on Energy Efficiency through executive order whose task will be to achieve the 10% reduction target by 2020, two years earlier than the original goal. The new Board will be convened quickly – the plan states by the end of the year. Fast action is necessary as Virginia has achieved less than 1% reductions to-date.
Governor McAuliffe took things one step further in the effort to make Virginia a “leader on efficiency” by stating in the plan that he will appoint a Chief Energy Efficiency Officer in his administration to oversee the aforementioned efforts and jumpstart crucial efficiency programs in state facilities.
As the governor said himself during his speech yesterday, “the cheapest energy is the energy we don’t use.” We need to aggressively explore our efficiency options which has the added benefit of saving homeowners money and creating thousands of new jobs in the state. Here the governor deserves unquestioned praise.
Summary
Virginia has incredible untapped potential in renewables and energy efficiency. While it’s disappointing the administration supports increases in fossil fuels generation and exploration, the level to which Governor McAuliffe openly talks about the need to address climate change is encouraging, and several of the policy proposals outlined in the plan are good steps in the right direction.

Appalachian Power Company Targets Two Solar Customers

On September 16th, Appalachian Power Company will ask the State Corporation Commission for permission to tax residential customers whose solar systems exceed 10kw in size. Some of you might be wondering how many APCo customers would be affected by the new tax. The answer? Two. That’s right, there are TWO people in APCo’s service territory who have solar systems larger than 10kw on their homes and the utility wants them to pay.
Prepare yourself as you try to follow their train of thought:
 

  • Solar customers lower their utility bills by powering their homes with the sun
  • However, these customers are still using the utility’s services when the sun isn’t shining and the solar panels aren’t generating electricity
  • The burden to provide power to these customers on a part-time basis is onerous and forces them to pass costs to other customers
  • The rest of APCo’s customers are unfairly subsidizing the “free-riders” who rely on the utility for power
  • Thus, to be fair to everyone else, APCo must tax the “free-riders” to recover the costs

To put it another way: APCo is trying to make the argument that the only two customers with significant solar installations in their Virginia service territory are increasing the utility bills of APCo’s other 447,426 Virginia residential customers so much that the utility has no choice but to slap a tax on these two moochers in order to cover the cost.
Allow me to share a few facts. APCo’s rates have more than doubled since 2005 and it has nothing to do with solar energy. In fact, solar owners actually provide a benefit to utilities by providing excess grid power during times of high demand. And speaking of benefits, the CEO of APCo’s parent company, American Electric Power, earned more than $10 million in salary and benefits in 2013. And yet, APCo is spending an untold amount of money in staff time and legal fees to petition the SCC for the right to tax their two customers who have solar panels in excess of 10kw in size.
Head-scratching for sure.
Let’s take a dive into a few details of APCo’s request.

  • The standby charges would apply to residential customers with solar installations between 10kw and 20kw in size (state law restricts residential customers from installing solar systems larger than 20kw)
  • According to the filing, APCo will ask for distribution standby charges of $1.94/kw and transmission standby charges of $1.83/kw, totaling $3.77/kw
  • Thus, homeowners with solar systems of 10kw would be taxed $37.70/mo in new standby charges, or $452.40/yr, with the potential for homeowners with the maximum-allowed 20kw solar systems of being taxed $75.40/mo or $904.80/yr

It goes without saying that taxing the sun is a silly idea. However, APCo is simply following the playbook first-written by Virginia’s utility behemoth Dominion Virginia Power. They’ve already successfully convinced the SCC to apply distribution and transmission standby charges to its customers who have similar-sized systems. Seeing this opportunity, APCo is seizing its moment to take advantage of its climate-conscious customers by imposing punishing taxes upon them.
Standby charges aren’t just a matter of economic fairness. They set a dangerous precedent that have the intention of suppressing the solar market. The state of Virginia is creating an environment that encourages the development of only the smallest of customer-owned solar systems. Homeowners who may wish to install large systems on their homes or property may think twice about crossing the 10kw threshold out of fear of being hit with taxes.
Standby charges send the wrong message during a time when the state needs to aggressively ramp up its solar energy mix. Solar prices are falling dramatically across the nation and as more citizens are educated about the benefits of solar, they are more encouraged than ever to make the switch from fossil-fuels to clean energy. Utilities everywhere are in a full-blown panic about the growth of customer-owned solar and are pulling out all the stops in order to stagnate its growth as much as possible.
The public comment deadline for APCo’s rate case is September 9th and the hearing is September 16th. Hopefully you will join CCAN in urging the SCC to not tax the sun and reject APCo’s proposed new standby charges.

Natural Gas in Virginia: Dominion’s proposed pipeline and how we can stand together to fight back

Update as of November 13th, 2014:On October 31st, Dominion Resources submitted a pre-filing request to FERC, the Federal Energy Regulatory Committee, which asks them to begin the environmental review of the pipeline. Landowners, community members, and activists around the state are continuing to mobilize and fight Dominion’s FERC requests at every step of the process. CCAN has partnered with local groups on the ground to launch a petition to Governor McAuliffe asking him to renounce his support of the pipeline. Our goal is 10,000 signatures–help us reach our goal and stop the Atlantic Coast Pipeline by signing here! 

As of November 12th, Dominion gave final notice and threat to sue the 189 landowners along the path of pipeline who have not issued permission for Dominion to survey their land. If you have received a letter from Dominion and need more information, please contact: info@augustacountyalliance.org.
 
As Virginians, we’ve been fortunate enough so far to be free of fracking—the dangerous process of hydraulic fracturing for natural gas.
But just because we aren’t on top of the Marcellus Shale or Utica Shale basins, doesn’t mean we’re not connected with our neighbors battling fracking wells in their backyards, or that the dangers of our nation’s natural gas boom aren’t already threatening Virginia.
Dominion Resources recently partnered with Duke Energy, Piedmont Natural Gas, and AGL proposed a $5 billion, 550-mile pipeline that would cross through Virginia to connect natural gas production in West Virginia to consumption in North Carolina.
Starting in West Virginia, Dominion’s Atlantic-Coast Pipeline (previously known as the Reliability Pipeline) would enter through Highland County, heading into Nelson County and across the Shenandoah Valley on its way to North Carolina. The pipeline would also have an extension connecting to Hampton Roads. The  proposed route would go through the George Washington National Forest and the backyards of Virginian families.
Leaks, explosions, and other accidents are not unlikely for a project of this scale, and hundreds of Nelson County residents raised their safety and environmental concerns last week at Dominion’s first public meeting in Nelson County.

Here’s a close up of the contested route, provided by groups helping to organize local residents to fight back:

The proposed route of Dominion’s Reliability Pipeline, a $2 billion, 450-mile pipeline that would cut through Virginia on its way from West Virginia to North Carolina.

I think a more reliable project wouldn’t include the risk of gas leaks and explosions. A smarter investment would be putting that $2 billion into energy efficiency, wind, and solar energy for our region.
Instead, it’s very clear that Dominion is moving too far, too fast towards natural gas, yet another dangerous fossil fuel — and one comprised mostly of methane, a powerful heat-trapping gas known to leak at high levels during the fracking process.
In fact, Dominion Virginia Power’s Integrated Resource Plan proposes 6-7 new fossil fuel plants in Virginia over the next 15 years, and Dominion Resources (DVP’s parent company) is fighting hard for a $3.8 billion liquefied natural gas export facility in Cove Point, Maryland. It’s clear that this pipeline is one major piece of Dominion’s region-wide push to keep us locked into climate-harming fracked gas for decades to come.
Unless we stop it.
Groups of concerned citizens across the Commonwealth are banding together to resist this pipeline—and to resist all dangerous, new natural gas pipelines and infrastructure that are a threat to our state.
Please check out the following organizations that are coordinating regional resistance to the pipeline and supporting homeowners along the proposed routes. Join their mailing lists for immediate updates on the pipeline routes as they continue to unfold:
Friends of Nelson County

Shenandoah Valley Network

  • Serves Augusta County, Frederick County, Page County, Rockingham County, Shenandoah County, Warren County
  • Working to protect and sustain the rural landscapes, communities, and ecosystems of the Shenandoah Valley by working with strong local citizens’ groups, promoting smart local land use, and effective land protection strategies
  • http://www.svnva.org/

Augusta County Alliance

Highlanders for Responsible Development

  • Highland County, VA
  • Highlanders for Responsible Development is a citizens’ group that promotes stewardship of Highland County’s unspoiled landscape, natural resources and exceptional quality of life. We support policies and activities that are based upon informed community discourse, democratic decision making, prudent land use and sustainable economic development.
  • http://www.protecthighland.org

Visit us back here for more updates as they unfold. CCAN will be keeping all eyes on the pipeline route and the proposal process to make sure we inform supporters with the first opportunity for public comments and other actions we can take statewide to stop the pipeline.
For updates on the pipeline project: http://www.nelsoncounty-va.gov/pipeline-information-and-updates/

VIRGINIA SEEKS PUBLIC COMMENT ON EPA’S CARBON REDUCTION PLAN

Virginia’s Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) has just wrapped up a series of listening sessions last week, eliciting public feedback on the EPA’s new draft rules for carbon reductions for existing power plants. These rules, known as the Clean Power Plan, or “111(d)” as policy wonks call them, are the signature components of the President’s Climate Action Plan and are designed to make America the leader in the fight against climate change by reducing the nation’s CO2 by 30% by 2030. (In case you’re wondering, 111(d) is the code section of the Clean Air Act which gives the EPA the authority to regulate CO2). Virginia’s specific carbon reduction target is 38% below 2012 levels by 2030.
The DEQ listening session took place in Henrico on Thursday night. Four speakers representing various co-operatives and the VA Chamber of Commerce spoke in opposition of the draft rules, a modest effort and fine showing if it were not dwarfed by the 24 citizens and environmental representatives speaking passionately about the need to support the rules and fight against climate change.
As expected, the dirty polluters spouted the familiar tired arguments: efforts designed to cut carbon pollution would increase rates, reduce jobs, and stymie economic productivity. These arguments fly in the face of numerous studies suggesting that smart investments in renewable energy and energy efficiency can actually provide a cool billion dollars in energy savings for Virginia customers, while adding 21st century jobs and providing a spark to the clean energy economy.
Further, reducing harmful carbon pollution from our environment has the added benefit of improving the public health of the commonwealth’s 8.2 million residents. While Virginia has much to be proud of, its capital city of Richmond winning the Asthma and Allergy Foundation’s “Asthma Capital” award not once but TWICE should be enough to give rule-makers pause.
If that weren’t enough, coal’s pollution has a well-documented disproportionate effect on many minority and other low-income communities. In fact, the NAACP recently released a stunning report highlighting that 68% of blacks in America live within 30 miles of a coal-fired power plant. Our friends at Virginia New Majority provided much-needed and oft-overlooked testimony to this disparity during the Henrico hearing on Thursday.
And oh by the way, rising seas, devastating storms, punishing droughts, and other climate disruptions will be mitigated by reducing carbon pollution in the environment. Added all up and the benefits v. harms of the Clean Power Plan are as lopsided as the 24-4 representation DEQ witnessed at its listening session in Henrico.
DETAILS ON THE CLEAN POWER PLAN
EPA outlined four “building blocks” for states to use in order to meet the carbon reduction goals. These four options are available for states to use and experiment with, allowing each state maximum flexibility in determining which mechanism, and to what extent, the state should use to achieve its goal. The building blocks are:
1)      Heat rate improvements at coal-fired power plants,
2)      Shifting dispatch from coal to natural gas,
3)      Increasing renewable and nuclear generation, and
4)      Increasing demand-side energy efficiency
Building block number two for the state’s consideration, swapping coal for natural gas, is akin to a Vicodin addict swapping the pills for a steady diet of Jack Daniels. Gone is the Vicodin addiction, as well as the pain temporarily, but the long-term effects of severe alcoholism can be equally as damaging, if not more-so, than the initial problem.
Our nation’s longtime dependence on coal has been a danger to climate stability. But a fast switch to natural gas as the solution to the coal dependency is not the answer. Methane leakage from the production, transport, and usage of natural gas accounts for nearly 10% of U.S. greenhouse gas pollution, ranking 2nd behind CO2. Over a 100 year period, methane emissions are more than 20 times more potent of a climate change pollutant than CO2, which makes a switch from coal to gas seem more like a dodge than a direct attempt to solve the climate problem.
Virginia has incredible untapped potential for efficiency, solar, and particularly offshore wind. These resources need to be fully tapped before other options are considered.
TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION
The draft EPA rules were first announced on June 2, 2014 and made official on June 18, 2014. Since then, DEQ has organized listening sessions to provide feedback on the rules. EPA asks that all entities (citizens, businesses, government agencies like DEQ, etc.) to submit comments back to EPA by October 16, 2014.
Thereafter, EPA will develop its final and binding carbon reduction rules to be released in June of 2015. Virginia will have one year, until June 30, 2016, to provide EPA with a detailed State Implementation Plan, outlining how the commonwealth will achieve its carbon reduction goals.
Virginia has the option of achieving the goals on its own, or by joining a multi-state collaboration like the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). If Virginia decides to join RGGI, a collaborative with proven success and one in which CCAN steadfastly urges the state to join, it will have until June 30, 2018 to do so and outline its intention to achieve the goals under the final rules proposed by EPA.
All states have until 2030 to achieve its state-specific carbon reduction goals – until 2032 to ensure the carbon reduction goals are met under three years averages for 2030, 2031, and 2032. CCAN will be there every step of the way to ensure Virginia makes the right decisions for our climate.

Join the Chesapeake Climate Cruisers

For the third year in a row, CCAN members and supporters will take part in the 300-miles-in-five-days Climate Ride from NYC to DC, September 20-24. CCAN Board member Cindy Parker and I are signed up and getting prepared for this challenging but very rewarding biking experience.
There’s still time to sign up as a member of CCAN’s Chesapeake Climate Cruisers team. You can do so by going to http://climateride.org, learn more about the ride and what’s involved and then sign up.
In addition to being a long-distance ride through some absolutely beautiful countryside, the Climate Ride is also a fund-raiser. Participants need to raise at least $2,800 to participate, a majority of which goes to the group or groups which you designate as beneficiaries. The Climate Ride organization has lots of tips and ideas to help you meet that goal. For each of the last two years, CCAN has received about $10,000 to help us do our important work.
I was not a long-distance bike rider before I did my first Climate Ride in the spring of 2012. I did do bike-riding, mainly as part of my exercise routine. I rode about 8 miles three times a week. But as a result of the riding I did in preparation, and as a result of that first ride, I fell in love with long distance biking. Ever since I ride about 70 miles a week, sometimes more, doing so usually in early morning. I enjoy the rising of the sun, the singing of the birds, the animals, other bikers, runners and walkers I encounter and the good feeling that comes after a hard physical workout.
To begin to do this while in my 60’s has been like a special gift, something I would have never done if not for Mike Tidwell asking me if I wanted to join him on that ride.
I hope CCAN supporters who have not experienced the joys and the challenges of this sport, as well as those who are already avid bikers, will seriously consider joining Cindy and me this September.
I’m available if you have questions; you can contact me at ted@chesapeakeclimate.org.

Challenging Dominion & Tom Farrell face to face

Shareholder activists at Dominion's annual shareholder meeting presented their resolutions in front of the Board of Directions and CEO, Tom Farrell. This year's four resolutions each received an unprecedented 20% of the vote.

When I started working for CCAN almost two years ago, I never imagined that I would be shaking hands with Tom Farrell, Dominion’s CEO, and addressing the Board of Directors on the impact that climate change has on the Company. But that’s exactly what I did last week in Cleveland, Ohio, with a group of shareholders at Dominion Resources’ annual shareholder meeting.
This year was my first experience working on the inside to change Dominion’s energy portfolio, but Virginian shareholder activists have been submitting resolutions to Dominion Resources since 2011. Shareholders are people who own stock in Dominion Resources; unhappy shareholders are able to submit resolutions that seek to promote environmental, social, or governance changes from within a company. And for the past four years, Dominion shareholders have submitted resolutions pressuring the company to push towards clean, renewable energy, and to disclose more analysis on how climate change impacts the Company, customers, and investors.
Although a resolution itself can only be 500 words, the process that comes before presenting the resolutions at the annual meeting is a long, technical process, and often comes with facing Dominion’s legal team head on. Each resolution has to go through the official guidelines of the Securities and Exchange Commission–so for every resolution filed on climate change, we submitted supporting statements, rebuttals to counter Dominion’s challenges, and other documents hoping to convince the SEC to rule in our favor and persuade investors to vote for change.

While activists inside the meeting presented resolutions to increase Dominion's commitment to clean energy, protestors outside drew attention to Dominion's contribution to Climate Change and the risky business of the proposed liquified natural gas export facility, Cove Point.
While activists inside the meeting presented resolutions to increase Dominion’s commitment to clean energy, protestors outside drew attention to Dominion’s contribution to Climate Change and the risky business of the proposed liquified natural gas export facility, Cove Point.

And, I’m happy to report that all of the hard work this year paid off! At this year’s meeting, we received record-high support for each of our four climate-related resolutions. Here’s a rundown of the climate change resolutions, with the final vote counts:

  • Financial Risks to Dominion Posed by Climate Change, 24%: Report to shareholders describing the financial risk to Dominion posed by climate change, specifically including the impact of more frequent and more intense storms, as well as any actions planned to address these risks.
  • Methane Emissions, 21%: How is Dominion Resources is measuring, mitigating, setting reduction targets, and disclosing methane emissions? While Dominion Resources operates one of the largest natural gas storage and transportation systems in the U.S. and plans to significantly increase its investments in natural gas assets, the company has no system for reporting on, or thus minimizing, the risks to shareholders or the environment from its methane emissions.
  • Environmental and Climate Change Impacts of Biomass, 21%: What are the environmental and climate change impacts of the company using biomass as a renewable energy and climate mitigation strategy?
  • Quantitative Goals for Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 20%: Adopt quantitative goals for reducing greenhouse-gas emissions, taking into account International Panel on Climate Change guidance, from Dominion Resources Inc.’s products and operations.

 
In the past four years, shareholder activists have never seen across the board double digits of support. To put these numbers into perspective, the Climate Risk resolution, which received 24% of the vote, represented 80,695,951 votes. If you multiple that by $70 per share (the current cost of Dominion stock), that’s $5.65 billion worth of shares supporting the resolution.
As we’re coming off our celebratory high of this year’s meeting, we’re also planning on how to earn even more support, and make an even bigger imprint for next year’s meeting.
Do you own shares in Dominion or know someone who does? If so, and if you want to take part in changing corporate business models that disrupt our climate, email me at: Emily@chesapeakeclimate.org

Virginia: Crossover 2014

What an incredible few weeks it’s been in Virginia’s General Assembly! I’m pleased to report we’ve been successful on many of our priority bills this session. Wednesday is officially “crossover” which means that each chamber can only hear bills that survived in the other chamber. Think of it as the political equivalent of “halftime”. So with that, let’s recap the first half of session to date.
Continue reading

Repeal of Reviled Hybrid Tax Passes Both Houses of Va. Legislature

Responding to grassroots backlash, a bipartisan House majority joins the Senate in voting to repeal the arbitrary $64 tax on fuel-efficient vehicles

RICHMOND— On Thursday, the Virginia House of Delegates voted overwhelmingly for legislation (HB 975) to repeal the hybrid car tax. The bipartisan 89-9 vote follows a 35-3 vote in the Senate earlier this week, all but ensuring that the repeal legislation will become law as Governor McAuliffe has committed to signing it.
Continue reading

Safe Coast Conference Launches Bigger, Bolder Coastal Climate Movement

On Saturday, November 16th, more than 120 Virginians came together in Norfolk to launch the next phase of grassroots action to protect Virginia’s coastal communities from climate change. The science is clear: rising sea levels and more powerful storms – driven by our burning of fossil fuels – are already causing frequent flooding and disrupting lives, business and critical civilian and naval infrastructure up and down the coast.
As DeLevay Miner, a local resident featured in the documentary premiered at the conference, Sea of Change, said, “You cannot depend on the history before because everything is changing.”
If this urgent reality was what motivated so many to spend their Saturday at the “Safe Coast Virginia” conference (see pictures here), the question of what we can and must DO about it was the theme that charged the day.
Here are three big takeaways from the conference that will galvanize our action moving forward:
Continue reading