Author Archives Laura Arnold

PRESS RELEASE

CONTACT: Robin Rich 219-881-6224 or 219-743-0624

INDIANAPOLIS (March 10, 2009) As legislators meet in Indianapolis, labor and environmental leaders came together today in the state’s capital to launch the Indiana Blue Green Alliance, a coalition of labor unions and environmental organizations dedicated to building a clean energy economy in Indiana that creates good jobs and helps to protect the environment.

“It’s time we reject the false choice between good jobs and a clean, safe environment,” said United Steelworkers District 7 Director Jim Robinson. “Working people want jobs, but we also want our kids to grow up in a clean, healthy environment, and we know that the solutions to global warming provide an opportunity to create good, middle-class jobs in Indiana. By coming together, we can build a green economy that protects the environment and works for working people.”

“The potential of a green economy provides solutions to two of our most pressing problems — global warming and unemployment,” said Tom Anderson, Director of Save the Dunes Council. “Building a clean energy economy will not only create jobs, it will help us to protect the environment. This coalition is built on the knowledge that we share the same concerns about the economy and the environment and this solution is key to our future.”

The “blue-green” coalition will advocate investments in the green economy, including a state renewable energy standard and updating residential energy codes to make buildings more efficient. The Indiana Blue Green Alliance brings together District 7 of the United Steelworkers, Sierra Club Hoosier Chapter, Save the Dunes Council, Communication Workers of America District 4, Indiana Laborers’ District Council, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and SEIU Indiana/Illinois State Council.

“The state of Indiana is well-positioned to benefit from investments in the green economy with a huge manufacturing base and the skilled workforce required to build wind farms, solar panels and the components of safe, clean energy,” said David Maidenberg, Indianapolis Director for the Sierra Club. “But our state is the only one in the Upper Midwest without a renewable energy standard, and as a result, we are missing a huge opportunity to create good, green jobs.”

“Building trades workers and our skills are key to building a green economy, particularly when it comes to retrofitting buildings to make them more efficient,” said Brian Short, Organizer for the Indiana Laborers’ District Council said. “Updating our residential energy code to make buildings more efficient will create energy savings and help to put people back to work in Indiana.”

“The major crises we face – our economy, energy and climate change – are inter-related, and we can only solve them if we address them together,” said Tina Noel, an Indiana spokesperson for the NRDC. “We need to act now to bring investments in clean energy to our state, which will boost job growth, reduce our dependence on foreign oil and stave off the worst effects of global warming.”

The Blue Green Alliance is a national partnership between labor unions and environmental organizations to expand the number and quality of jobs in the new, green economy. With the United Steelworkers, Sierra Club, Communications Workers of America (CWA), Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Laborers’ International Union of North America (LIUNA) and Service Employees International Union (SEIU), BGA unites more than six million people in pursuit of good jobs, a clean environment and a green economy.

For more information, visit www.bluegreenalliance.org.

March 7, 2009

New York Times Op-Ed Contributor

Home-Grown Power

By IAN BOWLES

Boston

PRESIDENT Obama has laid out an ambitious agenda for dealing with our energy needs and climate change: he proposes to double the supply of renewable energy within three years, establish a cap-and-trade program to reduce carbon emissions and use federal stimulus dollars to help homes, businesses and governments use energy more efficiently. This is the right blueprint for increasing the number of green jobs, encouraging economic growth, ensuring that the United States has the energy it needs at reasonable prices, and reducing the risk of global climate change.

But as Congress translates this grand plan into legislation, lawmakers should resist calls to add an extensive and costly new transmission system that would carry electricity from remote areas like Texas, the Great Plains and Eastern Canada to places with high energy demands like Boston, Chicago and New York. This idea is being promoted by energy companies and by elected officials who see it as an economic development opportunity for their particular state or region. Long-distance transmission lines are needed, they argue, to ensure that the president’s energy goals are met.

But there are better — and cheaper — ways to get more clean power flowing to the big cities.

Renewable energy resources are found all across the country; they don’t need to be harnessed from just one place. In the Northwest, the largest amount of green power comes from hydroelectricity. In the Northeast, the best source may be the wind over the ocean, because it blows harder and more consistently there than on land. Offshore wind farms have been proposed for Delaware, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island. In the Southwest, solar energy can be tapped on a large scale. And in the Southeast, biomass from forests may one day be a major source of sustainable power. In each area, developing these power sources would be cheaper than piping in clean energy from thousands of miles away.

Unlike our federal highway system, which is needed to transport goods across the country, or the “information superhighway” of the Internet, which is the fastest way to carry information around the world, long-distance transmission lines have no inherent value. On the contrary, the farther electricity is transported, the more of it is dissipated. “Line loss,” as this is called, gobbles up an estimated 2 percent to 3 percent of electricity nationally.

And of course, the longer the power line, the more expensive it is to build. In New England, we estimate the cost per mile at $2 million to $10 million. The closer electricity is generated to where it’s used, the better.

Another component of President Obama’s clean energy vision is the creation of a smarter power grid. But that has little to do with high capacity transmission lines that carry electricity in bulk over hundreds of miles. Building a “smart grid” means upgrading the local grid from a simple delivery system to an information system that can let consumers know the times when power is cheapest, thus enabling them to adjust their use to save money. This flattens out electricity loads and minimizes periods of peak demand. Smart grids will also be able to identify and fix power failures instantly, and someday may even send signals to specific household appliances like thermostats, washing machines and refrigerators to switch them on when demand is low or turn them off during times of peak energy use.

The cost of building transmission lines to connect new power plants to the grid ought to be covered the way we cover it in the Northeast, by folding it into the price of the power that the lines deliver. That allows the market to help keep prices as low as possible.

In Massachusetts, we get about 5 percent of our power from hydroelectric plants in Quebec. Our distribution utilities are negotiating to install a second transmission line for Canadian hydropower, which would be paid for through long-term power-purchase contracts approved by the New England states whose residents use that power. Developers of remote wind-power farms in eastern Canada have said they would also like to sell us electricity, but unless the combined cost of the power they could provide and its transmission is competitive with our other renewable energy choices, their projects won’t get approved. That’s the way it should be.

For a clean energy future, we need a smart grid and we need more renewable energy. The Obama administration is offering welcome support for both. Beyond that, what we need is a level playing field that enables energy providers to compete fairly with one another. The cost of transmission should be incorporated into the overall cost of bringing clean energy to market. Then let the chips fall — and wind turbines rise — where they may.

Ian Bowles is the secretary of energy and environmental affairs for Massachusetts.

No doubt the issue of an adequate transmission grid is important to the successful development of renewable energy projects in the U.S. What is not clear is how this proposed federal legislation would impact SB 201. The House sponsor of SB 201 is Rep. Win Moses, Jr. (D-Ft. Wayne). SB 201 has been assigned to the House Commerce, Energy, Technology and Utilities Committee chaired by Rep. Moses.

SB 201 allows a public utility that proposes to take, acquire, condemn, or appropriate land, real estate, or any interest in land or real estate for certain projects related to electric line facilities to obtain from the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC) a certificate of authority. It requires the IURC to hold a public hearing and to find that the public utility has demonstrated certain elements, and to encourage investment in electric line facilities by creating financial incentives that the IURC finds to be reasonable and necessary.

This bill modifies common law to provide that the owner of land against which eminent domain is initiated may object to the public purpose and necessity of the project only if the condemnor has not been issued a certificate of authority. It requires the IURC to allow the recovery of reasonable and necessary costs incurred by an energy utility in connection with a green infrastructure project that provides electric, steam, or gas service to or receives electric, steam, or gas service from an alternate energy production facility. It also provides that an energy utility may implement a rate adjustment if the IURC fails to act on an application.

The U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources has scheduled a committee hearing Thursday, March 12 beginning at 9:30 AM on Sen. Harry Reid's proposal called the Clean Renewable Energy and Economic Development Act. The committee website provides Archived Webcasts as well as an opportunity to watch live webcasts.

Mar. 06, 2009
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

Reid pushes bill to make renewable energy 'top national priority'

By STEVE TETREAULT
STEPHENS WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON -- Sen. Harry Reid introduced legislation Thursday to speed development of a green-powered electricity system, an effort he said was a big part of his vision of a nation that might someday run on renewable energy.

"Reforming our energy policies to build a cleaner, greener, national transportation system -- an electric superhighway -- must be a top national priority," Reid said as he submitted the bill, called the Clean Renewable Energy and Economic Development Act.

The measure sponsored by the Senate majority leader from Nevada is expected to receive a good deal of attention in Congress this year as lawmakers focus on President Barack Obama's goals to increase use of solar, wind and other renewable energy sources.

The Senate energy committee has scheduled a hearing on the bill; it is likely to be rolled into broad legislation the panel plans to write later this month.

The bill expands authority for federal electricity regulators to keep projects on track, a matter expected to spark debate on states' rights. The power to locate transmission lines traditionally has been guarded by the states.

But streamlined planning and utility line siting could save years, a Reid aide said. A high- voltage transmission project that normally would take eight to 16 years to build could be finished in three to five years under terms set by the measure.

Under the bill the government would designate zones that hold the potential to generate 1 gigawatt of electricity from geothermal, solar, wind or other natural sources, but that cannot be reached by the present grid.

It directs states, utilities and developers to cooperate in forming plans to integrate renewables into the current transmission system, to map new lines and conduct studies of what could be saved through new efforts at energy efficiency.

The government through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission would be authorized to step in "to keep things moving" if there are delays anywhere in the process, Reid said.

Scot Rutledge, executive director of the Nevada Conservation League, said several areas in Nevada with "excellent solar, wind and geothermal resources" could be designated special renewable energy zones.

"Right now, only a small percentage of Nevada's power comes from renewable energy because it's impossible to get energy from remote areas of Nevada, where it is generated, to the cities that need it," Rutledge said. "Sen. Reid's bill will encourage renewable energy development in Nevada, create thousands of new, green jobs, and put Nevada on the map as a leader in a clean energy economy."

State utility regulators were cautious on Reid's proposal.

Frederick Butler, chairman of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, said in a statement that the group hopes to work with Reid on the issue. "We are optimistic that our continued dialogue will produce a better outcome for consumers and the environment," he said of the proposal.

The Associated Press contributed to this report. Contact Stephens Washington Bureau Chief Steve Tetreault at stetreault@stephensmedia.com or 202-783-1760.

Find this article here.

Also see T. Boone Pickens new ad supporting a Renewable Electricity Standard (RES) and a new electricity grid. View ad.

How will this delay in enacting a federal Renewable Electricity Standard (RES) impact the efforts during the 2009 Indiana General Assembly to pass a state RES? Please share your thoughts.

Senate Dems to put energy, emissions bills in one package -- Reid (03/05/2009)

Darren Samuelsohn, E&E senior reporter

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) confirmed today that he will package energy and global warming measures together into one large bill for consideration later this year, a decision that should put to rest questions about whether Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill have different strategies for one of President Obama's top agenda items.

Reid gave only a one-word answer -- "yes" -- when asked whether he planned to wrap a cap-and-trade bill together with separate bills establishing a nationwide renewable electricity standard (RES) and promotion of a modernized grid that can improve energy efficiency, reliability and renewable energy management.

As recently as last week, Reid had spoken of splitting the energy and climate items up into at least three different bills, with the energy provisions moving forward first while holding back on the global warming measure for the late summer. Reid did not elaborate today on his change of plans, and his spokesman, Jim Manley, declined further comment.

But sources tracking the Capitol Hill climate debate said Reid's shift came after a month of intense lobbying for the one-bill strategy that originated with House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.).

Waxman first convinced House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on his approach. Pelosi, in turn, got approval from the Obama White House before pitching Reid the idea earlier this week during their weekly conference meeting.

Pelosi went public with her endorsement of Waxman's strategy Tuesday. "I would like to see one bill, which is the energy bill with the cap and trade and the grid piece," she told reporters. "They're the three elements that we have to pass more fully. I'd like to see it as one bill."

As far as timing, Pelosi and Reid have both promised floor votes this year on the global warming and energy measures, though they have been less clear about exactly when that may occur. Waxman has pledged a committee markup by Memorial Day, fueling speculation his measure could be handled by other committees that have jurisdiction on the issue and still be ready for the floor before lawmakers break for their summer recess in August.

Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill today would only point to Waxman's Memorial Day schedule.

In the Senate, Reid had previously said he wanted to hold a floor debate in the spring on energy, while holding back on the climate bill until later this summer.

"This is a big beast, you can't predict the timing," said one former Senate Democratic aide.

Different views on one-bill strategy

There is plenty of different opinions about the one-, two- or even three-bill strategy on and off Capitol Hill.

"Personally, I think they go hand in hand," Senate Foreign Relations Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.) said in an interview today. "I'm very comfortable putting them together."

Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va.) advocated for the combination strategy as well, saying it helps lawmakers grasp the entire picture of what they are voting on "You can adjust one in order to compensate for changes you might want to make in another," Boucher said. "It does create a broader opportunity for balanced legislating. So I think it's a better way to do it that way."

Anna Aurilio, director of the Washington office of Environment America, said the logistics of the energy and climate legislation should be secondary to passing a measure as fast as possible. That said, she backs a single bill. "We want to get it done," she said. "If it moves together, if it moves separately, we want to get it done. The urgency of solving the problem is paramount, so obviously enacting one bill is easier than enacting separate bills."

But not everyone is on the same page.

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) said earlier today that he wants to mark up the energy and "smart grid" legislation this month and he still has doubts whether a cap-and-trade bill can move within the same timeframe. "I hate to see all of that sort of held hostage until we can get agreement on a cap-and-trade bill," he told reporters today.

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), a critical swing vote for Democrats as they pursue Obama's agenda, said she was not aware of Reid's new position on combining energy and climate. Even so, she said she had some concerns with the approach. "I think you have to be careful not to make things such mega-bills," she said. "You give people plenty of reasons to vote against this."

And Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) also found fault in taking energy and climate change up in one package.

"It's an enormous undertaking," Kyl said. "And I don't think we're anywhere close to having the information necessary to pull all of this off. There's a great error being made here that we really know how to make all this stuff work. It's a bit like running the banking and financial institutions. If you're comfortable with the way we do that, well, then maybe you're comfortable with the way we run the energy system of the entire country I think not."

Reporters Ben Geman and Kate Ling contributed